(Metropolitan Corporate Counsel – Jesse Goldman and Milos Barutciski, Bennett Jones LLP)
Each and every day, $1.6 billion in trade crosses the U.S.-Canada border, making it the largest and closest bilateral economic relationship in the world. Bilateral trade between the two countries accounts for approximately 18 percent of U.S. trade, more than trade with China and Japan combined. Moreover, at a time when the U.S. economy is slowing down, where there is continuing concern about the loss of jobs to foreign locations, and 24/7 coverage of a presidential election focuses increasingly on a wobbly economy, there is no general commotion among the U.S. public about the extent of bilateral trade between the two countries. Even the persistent softwood lumber dispute seems to be relatively quiescent.
Much of this is easily explained by the nature of U.S.-Canada trade. Many North American companies, American as well as Canadian, have operations on both sides of the border. Bilateral trade is increasingly comprised of intermediate supply chain goods as the two countries’ business communities become more integrated in each others’ supply chains. This close relationship is hardly new. It dates back to various Defence Production Agreements in the post-WWII period, the 1965 Auto Pact that implemented free trade in the automobile sector, the 1989 U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement and the NAFTA in 1995. Each of these developments brought about a closer integration between businesses in the two countries. In short, trade with Canada is generally perceived in the U.S. as a mundane – even boring – matter. It is just part of the natural economic environment.
The benefits of this close relationship for both countries, however, are significant and well known in trade policy, business and political circles. Canada is the largest foreign trading partner for 37 of 50 states, and U.S.-Canada trade is directly responsible for 7 million American jobs. Go here for the complete article.
Monday, October 6, 2008
New Initiative Seeks to Expand Benefits of Free Trade in Western Hemisphere
(World Trade Interactive)
The U.S. and the 11 Western Hemisphere countries with which it has negotiated bilateral or regional free trade agreements launched a new Pathways to Prosperity in the Americas initiative September 24. The PPA appears to be an effort to maintain support for free trade policies in the region by recognizing that the benefits of those policies need to be more broadly shared by the region’s workers, farmers and consumers.
Meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, the leaders of the U.S., Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama and Peru said they focused their discussions on the region’s ability to achieve and sustain broad-based economic growth and development. They “acknowledged that macro-economic stability and trade liberalization are important tools in the fight against poverty” and therefore expressed support for initiatives like the Doha Round, the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific and efforts to promote economic integration in the hemisphere, including the Summit of the Americas process, the Latin America Pacific Arc Initiative, the Central American Economic Integration process and the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership. Read more. Additional information about the Pathways to Prosperity in the Americas initiative here.
The U.S. and the 11 Western Hemisphere countries with which it has negotiated bilateral or regional free trade agreements launched a new Pathways to Prosperity in the Americas initiative September 24. The PPA appears to be an effort to maintain support for free trade policies in the region by recognizing that the benefits of those policies need to be more broadly shared by the region’s workers, farmers and consumers.
Meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, the leaders of the U.S., Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama and Peru said they focused their discussions on the region’s ability to achieve and sustain broad-based economic growth and development. They “acknowledged that macro-economic stability and trade liberalization are important tools in the fight against poverty” and therefore expressed support for initiatives like the Doha Round, the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific and efforts to promote economic integration in the hemisphere, including the Summit of the Americas process, the Latin America Pacific Arc Initiative, the Central American Economic Integration process and the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership. Read more. Additional information about the Pathways to Prosperity in the Americas initiative here.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Unbounded Uncertainty
(Globe & Mail)
The following article was written by Thomas Homer-Dixon, the author of The Upside of Down: Catastrophe, Creativity, and the Renewal of Civilization, for “globeandmail.com”. Mr. Homer-Dixon is the keynote speaker at the CSCB Annual Conference in October.
There has been something deeply disconcerting about the negotiations of the past few days in Washington to bail out the U.S. financial system: The best and brightest of policy and economic elites have seemed out of their depth.
Congressional leaders, senior administration officials, top bankers and economists, even the Chairman of the Federal Reserve admit they don’t fully understand what’s happening or what to do. As the financial crisis deepened over the past year, most of these people consistently underestimated its severity. The responses by the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury - interest-rate cuts, injections of enormous amounts of liquidity into the financial sector, outright nationalization of troubled firms - haven’t reversed the slide. On the contrary, they have seemed increasingly desperate and ad hoc, sometimes veering from one extreme to another in a matter of days.
Such developments feed a deep existential fear of the unknown and the uncontrolled. Most of us want to believe that our institutions are rational, durable and fair, directed by experts who have a grip on bedrock reality and understand how things work, who will take care of severe problems when they arise. The possibility that no one knows enough to protect us is terrifying, almost unthinkable.
Now, as we’ve watched the deal-making in Washington, we’ve looked into the abyss of the unthinkable. The corporate titans, bond and derivative traders, the investment managers who inhabit the imposing towers in the hearts of our financial capitals - supposedly among the world’s smartest people - have led us into terra incognita. And the experts in Washington who are supposed to rescue us turn out to be mere mortals. Despite yesterday’s announcement of a deal in principle, in reality, it’s not clear they know the route out.
This terra incognita does, in fact, have a name: unbounded uncertainty.
Many commentators say the latest financial crisis has its roots in the implosion of the U.S. housing market, or in near-fraudulent asset rating by companies like Standard & Poor’s, or in lax oversight by regulators.
All of these factors have played key roles. But just as important are the financial innovations made possible by the combination of modern computer power, lightning-fast data communication and sophisticated mathematics, some originally developed to solve problems in physics. Financial firms have used these advances to create new types of securities of mind-numbing complexity. Take the example of collateralized debt obligations, which bundle small amounts of debt (such as individual mortgages) into packages, which are then sliced into pieces sold as bonds. Credit default swaps allow holders of assets, such as mortgage-backed bonds or standard corporate bonds, to pay someone else to assume the risk that the bond’s issuer might default. These devices are like insurance, except the firm or individual that’s paid to assume the risk - to provide insurance against default - isn’t legally obliged to have enough money on hand to cover default. They’re also bought and sold like regular securities and have become a way for speculators to bet on the demise of companies.
Both these devices progressively separate lenders from the risk associated with lending, and by doing so cause risk to be underestimated - “mispriced,” in business parlance. In the old days, a bank that lent money for a particular mortgage would have an ongoing relationship with the homeowner, and both the incentive and ability to track the homeowner’s performance in meeting his or her obligations. In other words, the bank could track the risk associated with the asset on its books. But in recent years, the bank may have sold the mortgage to a firm that packaged it into a CDO [Collateralized Debt Obligations]. The CDO’s bonds were then bought and sold again and again. Along the way, buyers purchased credit default swaps that allowed yet other parties to assume the risk on the underlying mortgage.
At the end of the day, no one really has a clear incentive - or even the ability - to determine the quality of the original mortgage. Because risk has been so fragmented and attenuated, investors are lulled into overconfidence in the value of debt and debt-related securities, which in reality are sometimes very insecure.
Here’s where lax regulation comes in. In 2004, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission loosened the rules governing the amount of debt major investment banks could assume in their trading activities.
Firms such as Lehman Brothers then borrowed staggering quantities of money to bet on these new types of securities, because the firms’ executives, managers, and traders - people with great technical intelligence but too little wisdom - believed their mathematical risk models were infallible.
And so, what once seemed like manageable risk has mutated into unbounded uncertainty. Corporate balance sheets far and wide are riddled with debt-related assets of unknown value. It’s virtually impossible to determine which firms, banks and investment funds are vulnerable to default, so lenders are holding on to their money. The credit meant to provide the oxygen for investment and growth has largely evaporated.
Because of deposit insurance, we’re not going to see a 1930s-style economic implosion, in which banks collapse and people lose their life savings overnight. But we may well see a slow-motion contraction of breathtaking proportions, as assets throughout our economies are repriced and wealth vanishes. People on fixed incomes derived from dividends are most vulnerable, but we’ll all feel the effects.
Next time, maybe we won’t be so eager to rely on experts to take care of us.
The following article was written by Thomas Homer-Dixon, the author of The Upside of Down: Catastrophe, Creativity, and the Renewal of Civilization, for “globeandmail.com”. Mr. Homer-Dixon is the keynote speaker at the CSCB Annual Conference in October.
There has been something deeply disconcerting about the negotiations of the past few days in Washington to bail out the U.S. financial system: The best and brightest of policy and economic elites have seemed out of their depth.
Congressional leaders, senior administration officials, top bankers and economists, even the Chairman of the Federal Reserve admit they don’t fully understand what’s happening or what to do. As the financial crisis deepened over the past year, most of these people consistently underestimated its severity. The responses by the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury - interest-rate cuts, injections of enormous amounts of liquidity into the financial sector, outright nationalization of troubled firms - haven’t reversed the slide. On the contrary, they have seemed increasingly desperate and ad hoc, sometimes veering from one extreme to another in a matter of days.
Such developments feed a deep existential fear of the unknown and the uncontrolled. Most of us want to believe that our institutions are rational, durable and fair, directed by experts who have a grip on bedrock reality and understand how things work, who will take care of severe problems when they arise. The possibility that no one knows enough to protect us is terrifying, almost unthinkable.
Now, as we’ve watched the deal-making in Washington, we’ve looked into the abyss of the unthinkable. The corporate titans, bond and derivative traders, the investment managers who inhabit the imposing towers in the hearts of our financial capitals - supposedly among the world’s smartest people - have led us into terra incognita. And the experts in Washington who are supposed to rescue us turn out to be mere mortals. Despite yesterday’s announcement of a deal in principle, in reality, it’s not clear they know the route out.
This terra incognita does, in fact, have a name: unbounded uncertainty.
Many commentators say the latest financial crisis has its roots in the implosion of the U.S. housing market, or in near-fraudulent asset rating by companies like Standard & Poor’s, or in lax oversight by regulators.
All of these factors have played key roles. But just as important are the financial innovations made possible by the combination of modern computer power, lightning-fast data communication and sophisticated mathematics, some originally developed to solve problems in physics. Financial firms have used these advances to create new types of securities of mind-numbing complexity. Take the example of collateralized debt obligations, which bundle small amounts of debt (such as individual mortgages) into packages, which are then sliced into pieces sold as bonds. Credit default swaps allow holders of assets, such as mortgage-backed bonds or standard corporate bonds, to pay someone else to assume the risk that the bond’s issuer might default. These devices are like insurance, except the firm or individual that’s paid to assume the risk - to provide insurance against default - isn’t legally obliged to have enough money on hand to cover default. They’re also bought and sold like regular securities and have become a way for speculators to bet on the demise of companies.
Both these devices progressively separate lenders from the risk associated with lending, and by doing so cause risk to be underestimated - “mispriced,” in business parlance. In the old days, a bank that lent money for a particular mortgage would have an ongoing relationship with the homeowner, and both the incentive and ability to track the homeowner’s performance in meeting his or her obligations. In other words, the bank could track the risk associated with the asset on its books. But in recent years, the bank may have sold the mortgage to a firm that packaged it into a CDO [Collateralized Debt Obligations]. The CDO’s bonds were then bought and sold again and again. Along the way, buyers purchased credit default swaps that allowed yet other parties to assume the risk on the underlying mortgage.
At the end of the day, no one really has a clear incentive - or even the ability - to determine the quality of the original mortgage. Because risk has been so fragmented and attenuated, investors are lulled into overconfidence in the value of debt and debt-related securities, which in reality are sometimes very insecure.
Here’s where lax regulation comes in. In 2004, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission loosened the rules governing the amount of debt major investment banks could assume in their trading activities.
Firms such as Lehman Brothers then borrowed staggering quantities of money to bet on these new types of securities, because the firms’ executives, managers, and traders - people with great technical intelligence but too little wisdom - believed their mathematical risk models were infallible.
And so, what once seemed like manageable risk has mutated into unbounded uncertainty. Corporate balance sheets far and wide are riddled with debt-related assets of unknown value. It’s virtually impossible to determine which firms, banks and investment funds are vulnerable to default, so lenders are holding on to their money. The credit meant to provide the oxygen for investment and growth has largely evaporated.
Because of deposit insurance, we’re not going to see a 1930s-style economic implosion, in which banks collapse and people lose their life savings overnight. But we may well see a slow-motion contraction of breathtaking proportions, as assets throughout our economies are repriced and wealth vanishes. People on fixed incomes derived from dividends are most vulnerable, but we’ll all feel the effects.
Next time, maybe we won’t be so eager to rely on experts to take care of us.
CBP Seeks Recruits For 10+2 System Test
(American Shipper)
U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials are urging importers and their agents to participate in an ongoing test of IT systems in preparation for a new cargo security rulemaking that will require businesses to submit a huge amount of data about their overseas suppliers and domestic customers.
The agency has developed a rule for an Importer Security Filing, commonly referred to as “10+2,” to be transmitted 24 hours prior to vessel loading at an overseas port. The controversial rule will require importers or their agents to electronically submit 10 data categories of data about their manufacturers, logistics providers, customers and cargo, and liner carriers to submit stow plans and status messages for containers in their custody…
In an address to the National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America’s mid-year conference in Washington, Ahern said the agency has received more than 55,000 proxy filings from volunteers participating in the Advance Trade Data Initiative, an 18-month test bed involving about 100 companies designed to figure out optimal formats and transmission methods for filing the required data.
Companies interested in signing up for ATDI should contact Peggy Rutledge at margaret.a.rutledge@cbp.dhs.gov.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials are urging importers and their agents to participate in an ongoing test of IT systems in preparation for a new cargo security rulemaking that will require businesses to submit a huge amount of data about their overseas suppliers and domestic customers.
The agency has developed a rule for an Importer Security Filing, commonly referred to as “10+2,” to be transmitted 24 hours prior to vessel loading at an overseas port. The controversial rule will require importers or their agents to electronically submit 10 data categories of data about their manufacturers, logistics providers, customers and cargo, and liner carriers to submit stow plans and status messages for containers in their custody…
In an address to the National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America’s mid-year conference in Washington, Ahern said the agency has received more than 55,000 proxy filings from volunteers participating in the Advance Trade Data Initiative, an 18-month test bed involving about 100 companies designed to figure out optimal formats and transmission methods for filing the required data.
Companies interested in signing up for ATDI should contact Peggy Rutledge at margaret.a.rutledge@cbp.dhs.gov.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
American Carriers Urge Financial Bailout
(Video: Reuters • Story: Today’s Trucking)
The Bush administration and Congress need to take quick and decisive action to ease the current financial crisis in the U.S., says the American Trucking Associations.
The country’s largest unified trucking lobby group urged Congress to quickly review and pass the Treasury Department’s $700 billion bailout proposal to rescue Wall Street and work with the Administration to approve a comprehensive plan to stabilize the U.S. financial system.
The bailout plan has been stalled by a group of Republicans. Instead, they proposed their own plan, which would force affected companies to buy premiums instead of having taxpayers foot the entire bill.
ATA President and CEO Bill Graves said the economy, including trucking companies of all sizes, would benefit if legislation to bring stability to the financial system can be agreed upon quickly.
“Without legislation, the credit crunch will continue to worsen for our members, making it difficult for even those carriers with good credit to receive funding for capital expenditures like trucks and other equipment,” Graves said. Read more here.
The Bush administration and Congress need to take quick and decisive action to ease the current financial crisis in the U.S., says the American Trucking Associations.
The country’s largest unified trucking lobby group urged Congress to quickly review and pass the Treasury Department’s $700 billion bailout proposal to rescue Wall Street and work with the Administration to approve a comprehensive plan to stabilize the U.S. financial system.
The bailout plan has been stalled by a group of Republicans. Instead, they proposed their own plan, which would force affected companies to buy premiums instead of having taxpayers foot the entire bill.
ATA President and CEO Bill Graves said the economy, including trucking companies of all sizes, would benefit if legislation to bring stability to the financial system can be agreed upon quickly.
“Without legislation, the credit crunch will continue to worsen for our members, making it difficult for even those carriers with good credit to receive funding for capital expenditures like trucks and other equipment,” Graves said. Read more here.
Prox Lane Can Suddenly Change to All-Traffic
(Doug Millroy — Sault Star)
On July 30, 2007, a press release from the International Bridge administration quoted General Manager Phil Becker as saying, in regard to the newly instituted Prox Card, which was designed to speed up traffic and make things easier for customers:
“Customers pass the new card within six inches of a card-reader device installed in the two dedicated automated lanes: the northbound and southbound lanes. The toll is automatically deducted from their accounts, a gate rises, and drivers are on their way.
“The staffed booths will accept Prox Cards, but these will be processed by a toll attendant, similar to the regular IQ Card. IBA staff will remind customers without Prox Cards to note the signs designating the lanes dedicated exclusively to Prox Card use.”
When Becker talked about dedicated automated lanes for Prox Card holders, I took this to be full-time and purchased one. I learned last week, much to my chagrin, that this is not the case. A lane can be changed from being dedicated to Prox Card holders to all traffic within the blink of an eye.
As a result, a transport truck and I ended up heading for the same toll booth. I suppose you could say I won, since I got there first, but I am also out a $500 insurance deductible to repair my rear right door and rear right fender.
Peter Petainen, finance officer with the International Bridge Authority, told me the Prox Card lanes are no longer dedicated 100 per cent of the time.
“We try to keep them open to the maximum extent possible but now we have variable message signs on the top of the canopy,” he said. “When we have a big influx of cash customers the on-duty shift supervisor has the ability to go to all-cash lanes if necessary.”
He said there are nearly always two Prox lanes for northbound travellers but southbound there is only a Prox lane “between 80 and 90 per cent of the time.” Read more here.
On July 30, 2007, a press release from the International Bridge administration quoted General Manager Phil Becker as saying, in regard to the newly instituted Prox Card, which was designed to speed up traffic and make things easier for customers:
“Customers pass the new card within six inches of a card-reader device installed in the two dedicated automated lanes: the northbound and southbound lanes. The toll is automatically deducted from their accounts, a gate rises, and drivers are on their way.
“The staffed booths will accept Prox Cards, but these will be processed by a toll attendant, similar to the regular IQ Card. IBA staff will remind customers without Prox Cards to note the signs designating the lanes dedicated exclusively to Prox Card use.”
When Becker talked about dedicated automated lanes for Prox Card holders, I took this to be full-time and purchased one. I learned last week, much to my chagrin, that this is not the case. A lane can be changed from being dedicated to Prox Card holders to all traffic within the blink of an eye.
As a result, a transport truck and I ended up heading for the same toll booth. I suppose you could say I won, since I got there first, but I am also out a $500 insurance deductible to repair my rear right door and rear right fender.
Peter Petainen, finance officer with the International Bridge Authority, told me the Prox Card lanes are no longer dedicated 100 per cent of the time.
“We try to keep them open to the maximum extent possible but now we have variable message signs on the top of the canopy,” he said. “When we have a big influx of cash customers the on-duty shift supervisor has the ability to go to all-cash lanes if necessary.”
He said there are nearly always two Prox lanes for northbound travellers but southbound there is only a Prox lane “between 80 and 90 per cent of the time.” Read more here.
Harper to Limit Bitumen Exports
(Edmonton Journal)
Surprise environmental election promise puts federal Tories on collision course with Alberta jurisdiction, NAFTA rules
Prime Minister Stephen Harper made an election promise Friday to restrict the export of raw bitumen to countries with weaker environmental standards than Canada — a pledge that took the Alberta government by surprise.
Harper promised to halt the flow of bitumen, the tar-like heavy hydro-carbon that is removed from Alberta’s oilsands and upgraded into synthetic crude oil, to countries with weaker greenhouse gas emission reduction standards than Canada.
Harper said the measures would keep the oilpatch from skirting Canadian emission targets by exporting bitumen, while keeping oilsands revenues and jobs in Canada.
The announcement rankled the Alberta government and raised several constitutional questions about which level of government has authority over the oilsands.
Alberta’s resources are owned by the province, but analysts argue that Ottawa has full constitutional authority over exports, while environmental regulations are shared between the governments. Harper and Premier Ed Stelmach each have maintained their environmental regulations will trump those introduced by the other government.
But the federal Tory leader served notice again Friday that Ottawa has the authority to dictate the environmental regulations, and that he expects all provinces to “accept federal targets.”
Harper also insisted the federal government holds the trump card on trade, and can pull “two or three constitutional levers” in case of a fight with the province over who has authority over the oilsands. Read the complete article.
Surprise environmental election promise puts federal Tories on collision course with Alberta jurisdiction, NAFTA rules
Prime Minister Stephen Harper made an election promise Friday to restrict the export of raw bitumen to countries with weaker environmental standards than Canada — a pledge that took the Alberta government by surprise.
Harper promised to halt the flow of bitumen, the tar-like heavy hydro-carbon that is removed from Alberta’s oilsands and upgraded into synthetic crude oil, to countries with weaker greenhouse gas emission reduction standards than Canada.
Harper said the measures would keep the oilpatch from skirting Canadian emission targets by exporting bitumen, while keeping oilsands revenues and jobs in Canada.
The announcement rankled the Alberta government and raised several constitutional questions about which level of government has authority over the oilsands.
Alberta’s resources are owned by the province, but analysts argue that Ottawa has full constitutional authority over exports, while environmental regulations are shared between the governments. Harper and Premier Ed Stelmach each have maintained their environmental regulations will trump those introduced by the other government.
But the federal Tory leader served notice again Friday that Ottawa has the authority to dictate the environmental regulations, and that he expects all provinces to “accept federal targets.”
Harper also insisted the federal government holds the trump card on trade, and can pull “two or three constitutional levers” in case of a fight with the province over who has authority over the oilsands. Read the complete article.
B.C. Premier, Emerson Slam NDP for Promise to Negotiate New Softwood Deal
(Globe & Mail)
NDP Leader Jack Layton was roundly criticized Friday for proposing to tear up the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber agreement, with both B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell and former international trade minister David Emerson saying the idea is preposterous.
The B.C. Premier waded into the federal election campaign for the first time Friday, denouncing Mr. Layton’s stance on softwood. The deal, Mr. Campbell said, has been a lifeline for the hard-hit B.C. forest sector.
“You want to rip up the softwood lumber agreement? Give your head a shake,” Mr. Campbell said in a speech to municipal leaders in Penticton.
Mr. Campbell later acknowledged to reporters that Mr. Layton was the target of his comments
“I think Mr. Layton has shown a profound ignorance, both of the agreement and the impact his statements will have on British Columbia,” Mr. Campbell told reporters. “It would be significantly damaging to British Columbians ... that’s going to cause huge job losses at a time when forestry can’t afford any more challenges.”
Mr. Layton this week promised he would scrap the “sellout” deal, negotiate new lumber deals with the U.S., and restrict raw log exports to encourage local development. He says the deal needs to be reassessed because of mill closures and job losses in the industry despite the deal.
In an interview Friday, Mr. Emerson forecast permanent mill closures and job cuts if Mr. Layton was ever able to act on that idea, adding Canada would “get creamed in a negotiation today on softwood lumber.”
“What is [Mr. Layton] going to put on the table that is going to force the Americans, incent the Americans to come up with a better deal than we have today?” asked Mr. Emerson.
“What is it he’s going to give them? He may have some brilliant idea that has passed me by.”
Mr. Emerson said he expected Canada would end up with an inferior agreement if it took another shot at negotiating one. Read more here.
NDP Leader Jack Layton was roundly criticized Friday for proposing to tear up the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber agreement, with both B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell and former international trade minister David Emerson saying the idea is preposterous.
The B.C. Premier waded into the federal election campaign for the first time Friday, denouncing Mr. Layton’s stance on softwood. The deal, Mr. Campbell said, has been a lifeline for the hard-hit B.C. forest sector.
“You want to rip up the softwood lumber agreement? Give your head a shake,” Mr. Campbell said in a speech to municipal leaders in Penticton.
Mr. Campbell later acknowledged to reporters that Mr. Layton was the target of his comments
“I think Mr. Layton has shown a profound ignorance, both of the agreement and the impact his statements will have on British Columbia,” Mr. Campbell told reporters. “It would be significantly damaging to British Columbians ... that’s going to cause huge job losses at a time when forestry can’t afford any more challenges.”
Mr. Layton this week promised he would scrap the “sellout” deal, negotiate new lumber deals with the U.S., and restrict raw log exports to encourage local development. He says the deal needs to be reassessed because of mill closures and job losses in the industry despite the deal.
In an interview Friday, Mr. Emerson forecast permanent mill closures and job cuts if Mr. Layton was ever able to act on that idea, adding Canada would “get creamed in a negotiation today on softwood lumber.”
“What is [Mr. Layton] going to put on the table that is going to force the Americans, incent the Americans to come up with a better deal than we have today?” asked Mr. Emerson.
“What is it he’s going to give them? He may have some brilliant idea that has passed me by.”
Mr. Emerson said he expected Canada would end up with an inferior agreement if it took another shot at negotiating one. Read more here.
Conservatives Go it Alone on Free Trade with Colombia
(Dawn Paley — The Dominion)
The Conservative candidate for Vancouver-Centre confirmed Thursday that his party is alone among the four major parties battling it out in Western Canada that supports a free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia.
Trade hasn’t been on the front burner during this campaign, unlike in the US where it is a hot issue. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has stated his opposition to a US-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, while Republican John McCain supports the deal.
Conservative hopeful Lorne Mayencourt said that the Canada-Colombia deal was negotiated in a way that is “beneficial to both countries,” and that free trade agreements “can lead to democracies that are really quite good.”
Mayencourt’s position differs from that of the other candidates, who rejected the deal in a morning debate at the University of British Columbia on Thursday.
“I’m not saying we shouldn’t trade with Colombia at all, I’m saying we need to look at the terms and the conditions of the negotiation that Mr. Emerson did with Colombia,” said Hedy Fry, the Liberal incumbent in Vancouver-Centre, echoing her party’s position on the deal.
Though the Liberals do not specifically mention the Canada-Colombia agreement in their platform, Liberal leader Stéphane Dion spoke against the deal earlier this week.
“The way it was negotiated by the Conservatives we have no guarantee at all that the basic rights will be respected through this agreement, the workers rights, and so on. It [sic] is why we can not accept it,” he said, speaking Tuesday night at the University of British Colombia.
“A free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia would lead to more displacement, more threats and more violence against unionists, Afro-Colombians and Indigenous peoples,” said George Heyman, past president of the BC Government and Service Employees’ Union, who visited Colombia with other Canadian union leaders in July.
The NDP has taken a strong stance against the deal, responding in part to concerns from the Canadian labour movement. Thirty-eight trade unionists have been killed in Colombia this year alone.
“There are some very serious human rights and labour rights issues in Colombia. The Colombian agreement was done without a view to those important concerns, and it should be renounced,” said Michael Byers, a UBC professor and rookie NDP candidate. Read the complete article.
The Conservative candidate for Vancouver-Centre confirmed Thursday that his party is alone among the four major parties battling it out in Western Canada that supports a free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia.
Trade hasn’t been on the front burner during this campaign, unlike in the US where it is a hot issue. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has stated his opposition to a US-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, while Republican John McCain supports the deal.
Conservative hopeful Lorne Mayencourt said that the Canada-Colombia deal was negotiated in a way that is “beneficial to both countries,” and that free trade agreements “can lead to democracies that are really quite good.”
Mayencourt’s position differs from that of the other candidates, who rejected the deal in a morning debate at the University of British Columbia on Thursday.
“I’m not saying we shouldn’t trade with Colombia at all, I’m saying we need to look at the terms and the conditions of the negotiation that Mr. Emerson did with Colombia,” said Hedy Fry, the Liberal incumbent in Vancouver-Centre, echoing her party’s position on the deal.
Though the Liberals do not specifically mention the Canada-Colombia agreement in their platform, Liberal leader Stéphane Dion spoke against the deal earlier this week.
“The way it was negotiated by the Conservatives we have no guarantee at all that the basic rights will be respected through this agreement, the workers rights, and so on. It [sic] is why we can not accept it,” he said, speaking Tuesday night at the University of British Colombia.
“A free trade agreement between Canada and Colombia would lead to more displacement, more threats and more violence against unionists, Afro-Colombians and Indigenous peoples,” said George Heyman, past president of the BC Government and Service Employees’ Union, who visited Colombia with other Canadian union leaders in July.
The NDP has taken a strong stance against the deal, responding in part to concerns from the Canadian labour movement. Thirty-eight trade unionists have been killed in Colombia this year alone.
“There are some very serious human rights and labour rights issues in Colombia. The Colombian agreement was done without a view to those important concerns, and it should be renounced,” said Michael Byers, a UBC professor and rookie NDP candidate. Read the complete article.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Milk Scandal Sparks Fear of Imports
(The Press Association)
At least nine countries - as far away as Kenya - have banned Chinese dairy imports in response to a widening tainted milk scandal that has claimed the lives of four Chinese babies.
Several more countries, from Canada to Australia, have increased their testing of Chinese food imports amid fears that compromised ingredients may have contaminated other products, like yoghurts, cookies and candies.
The scare has been most acutely felt in Asia, where worried parents on rushed their children to hospitals for check-ups after China said that formula laced with a toxic chemical had sickened 54,000 infants.
As the reports of sick babies multiplied — with at least five reported outside the mainland in the Chinese territories of Hong Kong and Macau — even countries that don't import Chinese dairy began sounding alarms.
The European Union, for instance, urged customs authorities to step up checks on imports of “composite products,” such as bread or chocolate, to ensure they contain no traces of contaminated milk.
The crisis was initially thought to have been limited to Chinese milk powder laced with melamine, an industrial chemical used to make plastics and fertiliser that can cause kidney stones and lead to kidney failure.
But recent testing found melamine in samples of liquid milk taken from 22 Chinese companies — including the country's two largest dairy producers, Mengniu Dairy Group Co. and Yili Industrial Group Co. — and prompted nationwide recalls of milk and dairy products.
Growing public fears led some schools and stores to pull more products as a precaution. Even major international food makers such as Kraft Foods were hit by unconfirmed rumours of recalls of numerous snacks, including Oreo cookies and M&Ms.
At least nine countries - as far away as Kenya - have banned Chinese dairy imports in response to a widening tainted milk scandal that has claimed the lives of four Chinese babies.
Several more countries, from Canada to Australia, have increased their testing of Chinese food imports amid fears that compromised ingredients may have contaminated other products, like yoghurts, cookies and candies.
The scare has been most acutely felt in Asia, where worried parents on rushed their children to hospitals for check-ups after China said that formula laced with a toxic chemical had sickened 54,000 infants.
As the reports of sick babies multiplied — with at least five reported outside the mainland in the Chinese territories of Hong Kong and Macau — even countries that don't import Chinese dairy began sounding alarms.
The European Union, for instance, urged customs authorities to step up checks on imports of “composite products,” such as bread or chocolate, to ensure they contain no traces of contaminated milk.
The crisis was initially thought to have been limited to Chinese milk powder laced with melamine, an industrial chemical used to make plastics and fertiliser that can cause kidney stones and lead to kidney failure.
But recent testing found melamine in samples of liquid milk taken from 22 Chinese companies — including the country's two largest dairy producers, Mengniu Dairy Group Co. and Yili Industrial Group Co. — and prompted nationwide recalls of milk and dairy products.
Growing public fears led some schools and stores to pull more products as a precaution. Even major international food makers such as Kraft Foods were hit by unconfirmed rumours of recalls of numerous snacks, including Oreo cookies and M&Ms.
COOL: Ag Secretary Admits Changes Needed, Rule Set To Go Into Effect Sept. 30
(Cattle Network)
Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today joined a bipartisan group of 30 Senators in urging the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to make modifications to its interim final rule for implementing Country of Origin Labeling (COOL). COOL is slated to go into effect September 30. Harkin is Chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, the Committee that ushered the new farm bill into law.
“People want to know where their food comes from,” said Harkin. “Yet, USDA appears to be taking an overly broad approach to implementing this program, allowing certain food products to not be labeled as required by the farm bill. USDA’s rule also allows packers to just label all U.S. products jointly with other countries, limiting consumer choice. People are expecting to find meat labeled as exclusively U.S. product, not just hidden with everything else.
“I am encouraged by statements made by Agriculture Secretary Schafer that this implementation needed additional work, but with such a short amount of time left before this rule goes into effect, I am hopeful USDA will act quickly to implement these changes.” Find out more here.
Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today joined a bipartisan group of 30 Senators in urging the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to make modifications to its interim final rule for implementing Country of Origin Labeling (COOL). COOL is slated to go into effect September 30. Harkin is Chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, the Committee that ushered the new farm bill into law.
“People want to know where their food comes from,” said Harkin. “Yet, USDA appears to be taking an overly broad approach to implementing this program, allowing certain food products to not be labeled as required by the farm bill. USDA’s rule also allows packers to just label all U.S. products jointly with other countries, limiting consumer choice. People are expecting to find meat labeled as exclusively U.S. product, not just hidden with everything else.
“I am encouraged by statements made by Agriculture Secretary Schafer that this implementation needed additional work, but with such a short amount of time left before this rule goes into effect, I am hopeful USDA will act quickly to implement these changes.” Find out more here.
CN Found in Breach of Service to Grain Shippers
(Today’s Trucking)
Four out of six grain shippers have been vindicated in their cases against CN Railway, which they claim has not been providing a adequate and reasonable level of service for the movement of Western grain for crop in 2007 and 2008.
The Canadian Transportation Agency ruled that CN did not fail to meet its obligations under the Canada Transportation Act for services to Canadian Wheat Board and Providence Grain Group Inc.
However, the CTA did side with North East Terminal Ltd., Paterson Grain, Parrish and Heimbecker Limited, and North West Terminal Ltd. in similar complaints.
“Our grain terminals are now struggling to get rail cars when we need them for our markets because CN’s program requirements have been so rigid and unworkable for us,” said GNP Transportation & Logistics manager Perry Pellerin. “As a result, none but the largest grain handlers with multiple elevators could fit within CN’s service model, which strongly favored those who can ship in large rail car blocks, week after week, to a single destination.”
In its ruling, the quasi-judicial agency determined that a performance benchmark should be applied as a basis for determining whether CN is providing the shippers proper levels of service, including the confirmation of the number of rail cars requested by the shipper, as the timeliness and predictability of railcar delivery. Read more here.
Four out of six grain shippers have been vindicated in their cases against CN Railway, which they claim has not been providing a adequate and reasonable level of service for the movement of Western grain for crop in 2007 and 2008.
The Canadian Transportation Agency ruled that CN did not fail to meet its obligations under the Canada Transportation Act for services to Canadian Wheat Board and Providence Grain Group Inc.
However, the CTA did side with North East Terminal Ltd., Paterson Grain, Parrish and Heimbecker Limited, and North West Terminal Ltd. in similar complaints.
“Our grain terminals are now struggling to get rail cars when we need them for our markets because CN’s program requirements have been so rigid and unworkable for us,” said GNP Transportation & Logistics manager Perry Pellerin. “As a result, none but the largest grain handlers with multiple elevators could fit within CN’s service model, which strongly favored those who can ship in large rail car blocks, week after week, to a single destination.”
In its ruling, the quasi-judicial agency determined that a performance benchmark should be applied as a basis for determining whether CN is providing the shippers proper levels of service, including the confirmation of the number of rail cars requested by the shipper, as the timeliness and predictability of railcar delivery. Read more here.
Canada Enjoys Global Advantage From Financial Turmoil: BoC Governor
(The Canadian Press)
The Canadian economy may get shaken by turmoil gripping the United States, but the stronger financial system here may prove to be a global advantage, the country’s top central banker said Thursday.
Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney said loans by Canadian banks have remained surprisingly robust, while foreign banks have been forced to restrict their leverage.
“Canadian banks could modestly increase leverage by growing their lending relative to their current capital base and this flexibility give our economy a rare advantage,” Carney said in an afternoon speech.
The stronger financial position of Canadian banks means they can borrow on capital markets at considerably lower rates than their American counterparts, he said.
Carney said the cleansing nature of the “ferocious storm” and a decisive policy response from the U.S. government could mark the beginning of the end of the crisis that has gripped the global financial system for 14 months.
He said the “bold and timely” US$700-billion bailout of the U.S. financial sector could reduce lost output and employment in the United States and minimize the spillover to the rest of the world.
“Nonetheless, the months ahead will bring more financial losses, significant consolidation in the financial industry and further increases in the cost of capital. The eventual reordering of the financial system will be historic.” Read more here.
The Canadian economy may get shaken by turmoil gripping the United States, but the stronger financial system here may prove to be a global advantage, the country’s top central banker said Thursday.
Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney said loans by Canadian banks have remained surprisingly robust, while foreign banks have been forced to restrict their leverage.
“Canadian banks could modestly increase leverage by growing their lending relative to their current capital base and this flexibility give our economy a rare advantage,” Carney said in an afternoon speech.
The stronger financial position of Canadian banks means they can borrow on capital markets at considerably lower rates than their American counterparts, he said.
Carney said the cleansing nature of the “ferocious storm” and a decisive policy response from the U.S. government could mark the beginning of the end of the crisis that has gripped the global financial system for 14 months.
He said the “bold and timely” US$700-billion bailout of the U.S. financial sector could reduce lost output and employment in the United States and minimize the spillover to the rest of the world.
“Nonetheless, the months ahead will bring more financial losses, significant consolidation in the financial industry and further increases in the cost of capital. The eventual reordering of the financial system will be historic.” Read more here.
Growing Majority of Canadians Agree with Obama: Renegotiate NAFTA
(CNW Telbec)
The Council of Canadians has found that 58% of Canadians agree with U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama that NAFTA should be renegotiated to include enforceable labour and environmental standards, in a poll commissioned from Environics. The finding follows those of earlier polls and demonstrates a steady growth in Canadians' support for renegotiating NAFTA - from 45% in March to 52% in July (Angus Reid).
“Whichever parties win the U.S. and Canadian elections, the concerns of Canadians over the impact of NAFTA on jobs and the environment aren't going away,” says John Urquhart, Executive Director of the Council of Canadians.
“Canadians need to think very carefully before October 14 about who will best represent their concerns on the environment and jobs, should Barack Obama become U.S. president and new NAFTA talks begin in 2009,” he added. “And, even more urgently, Canadians need to think about who should represent our interests in talks with the European Union that are scheduled to begin a mere three days after the election, on October 17.”
“The fact that Stephen Harper hasn't uttered a single word about this new proposed Canada-EU trade deal before or during this election, and which promises to be more sweeping than NAFTA, should raise serious doubts in Canadians’ minds about his appropriateness to lead us in new international trade talks," adds Maude Barlow, national chairperson of the Council of Canadians. “He sees nothing wrong with NAFTA, which most Canadians want renegotiated. And NAFTA is exactly the wrong model on which an EU-Canada trade deal should be negotiated. It will only worsen the impact on jobs, the environment and public services, especially health care.” Read more here.
Update: Following is a video of Democratic Senate challenger Bob Conley speaking to a group of taxpayers in Greenville, SC yesterday about free trade agreements.
The Council of Canadians has found that 58% of Canadians agree with U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama that NAFTA should be renegotiated to include enforceable labour and environmental standards, in a poll commissioned from Environics. The finding follows those of earlier polls and demonstrates a steady growth in Canadians' support for renegotiating NAFTA - from 45% in March to 52% in July (Angus Reid).
“Whichever parties win the U.S. and Canadian elections, the concerns of Canadians over the impact of NAFTA on jobs and the environment aren't going away,” says John Urquhart, Executive Director of the Council of Canadians.
“Canadians need to think very carefully before October 14 about who will best represent their concerns on the environment and jobs, should Barack Obama become U.S. president and new NAFTA talks begin in 2009,” he added. “And, even more urgently, Canadians need to think about who should represent our interests in talks with the European Union that are scheduled to begin a mere three days after the election, on October 17.”
“The fact that Stephen Harper hasn't uttered a single word about this new proposed Canada-EU trade deal before or during this election, and which promises to be more sweeping than NAFTA, should raise serious doubts in Canadians’ minds about his appropriateness to lead us in new international trade talks," adds Maude Barlow, national chairperson of the Council of Canadians. “He sees nothing wrong with NAFTA, which most Canadians want renegotiated. And NAFTA is exactly the wrong model on which an EU-Canada trade deal should be negotiated. It will only worsen the impact on jobs, the environment and public services, especially health care.” Read more here.
Update: Following is a video of Democratic Senate challenger Bob Conley speaking to a group of taxpayers in Greenville, SC yesterday about free trade agreements.
EU-Canada Free Trade Could Change U.S.-Canada Relations
(Matthew Little — Epoch Times Toronto Staff)
Canada is moving toward a far-reaching free trade agreement with the European Union that advocates say will end a long-standing dependency on the U.S. market.
While the specifics of the agreement haven’t been discussed, Canadian and European officials could begin negotiating as soon as October 17, just three days after Canada’s federal election.
Canada’s Trade Minister, Michael Fortier and his staff have been in talks with EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson and European government officials for the past two months. Recently a senior EU official involved said the talks aimed at starting “deep economic integration negotiations,” reported the Globe and Mail.
If the deal goes ahead, Canada would be the first developed country outside the EU to have the kind of access to those markets normally reserved for EU members.
“Its one of the best things we could do, the best thing we could do for our country,” said Jason Langrish, executive director of the Canada Europe Roundtable, a group working to promote Canada-Europe trade.
While critics of NAFTA, the free trade agreement Canada already has with the U.S., may denounce the agreement as only furthering the interests of large corporations, Langrish said that opposition will likely be less than there was to NAFTA.
“This is a very good way for us to offset our relationship with the U.S.” Read the complete article.
Canada is moving toward a far-reaching free trade agreement with the European Union that advocates say will end a long-standing dependency on the U.S. market.
While the specifics of the agreement haven’t been discussed, Canadian and European officials could begin negotiating as soon as October 17, just three days after Canada’s federal election.
Canada’s Trade Minister, Michael Fortier and his staff have been in talks with EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson and European government officials for the past two months. Recently a senior EU official involved said the talks aimed at starting “deep economic integration negotiations,” reported the Globe and Mail.
If the deal goes ahead, Canada would be the first developed country outside the EU to have the kind of access to those markets normally reserved for EU members.
“Its one of the best things we could do, the best thing we could do for our country,” said Jason Langrish, executive director of the Canada Europe Roundtable, a group working to promote Canada-Europe trade.
While critics of NAFTA, the free trade agreement Canada already has with the U.S., may denounce the agreement as only furthering the interests of large corporations, Langrish said that opposition will likely be less than there was to NAFTA.
“This is a very good way for us to offset our relationship with the U.S.” Read the complete article.
Proposal to Eliminate Some MFN Duty Rates – Deadline Tuesday
(IE Canada)
The Government of Canada’s Department of Finance has proposed that Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) duty rates on almost 240 items in the machinery and equipment sector be eliminated. In proposing this change, the government’s stated goal is to help Canadian manufacturers remain competitive in the global economy.
The items selected for possible tariff elimination were chosen based on the following criteria: (1) whether the goods covered by these tariff items are used in the production of other goods; (2) whether tariff elimination could reduce the cost of imported machinery and equipment; and (3) whether the proposed tariff eliminations could impact Canadian businesses producing similar or substitutable goods.
The government is soliciting feedback – in writing – on its proposal from interested parties, and the submission deadline is September 30, 2008.
The Government of Canada’s Department of Finance has proposed that Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) duty rates on almost 240 items in the machinery and equipment sector be eliminated. In proposing this change, the government’s stated goal is to help Canadian manufacturers remain competitive in the global economy.
The items selected for possible tariff elimination were chosen based on the following criteria: (1) whether the goods covered by these tariff items are used in the production of other goods; (2) whether tariff elimination could reduce the cost of imported machinery and equipment; and (3) whether the proposed tariff eliminations could impact Canadian businesses producing similar or substitutable goods.
The government is soliciting feedback – in writing – on its proposal from interested parties, and the submission deadline is September 30, 2008.
Draft D-Memorandum 17-1-5: Registration, Accounting and Payment for Commercial Goods
(CBSA)
The Canada Border Services Agency has redrafted D-Memorandum 17-1-5: Registration, Accounting and Payment for Commercial Goods as part of the Business Simplification Initiative (Paper Business Reduction Initiative).
Copies of the draft memorandum in English (30 page PDF) and French (33 pages PDF) are attached. Please send your comments on the draft memorandum to Amesika Baeta at IE Canada by Wednesday, October 1, 2008 at abaeta@iecanada.com.
The Canada Border Services Agency has redrafted D-Memorandum 17-1-5: Registration, Accounting and Payment for Commercial Goods as part of the Business Simplification Initiative (Paper Business Reduction Initiative).
Copies of the draft memorandum in English (30 page PDF) and French (33 pages PDF) are attached. Please send your comments on the draft memorandum to Amesika Baeta at IE Canada by Wednesday, October 1, 2008 at abaeta@iecanada.com.
Canadian Truckers Oppose Carbon Tax
(Employment Crossing News • Global TV)
A nationwide carbon tax proposed by the Liberal Party of Canada is strongly opposed by the transportation industry, farmers and fishermen. Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper has called the plan “crazy” given the current downturn in the economy.
The Green Shift, an environmental and economic policy strongly backed by federal Liberal leader Stéphane Dion, is a key policy plank for the Liberal Party in the upcoming October national election.
The trucking industry claims the carbon tax, which affects industries that burn oil-based fuels for transportation, will spur the loss of tens of thousands of jobs.
Liberals have offered an olive branch to the plan’s opponents — $900 million in tax breaks to farmers, fishermen and truckers. They have also proposed a $250-million fund for fisheries and transportation firms to help deal with the impact of the proposed carbon tax.
A nationwide carbon tax proposed by the Liberal Party of Canada is strongly opposed by the transportation industry, farmers and fishermen. Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper has called the plan “crazy” given the current downturn in the economy.
The Green Shift, an environmental and economic policy strongly backed by federal Liberal leader Stéphane Dion, is a key policy plank for the Liberal Party in the upcoming October national election.
The trucking industry claims the carbon tax, which affects industries that burn oil-based fuels for transportation, will spur the loss of tens of thousands of jobs.
Liberals have offered an olive branch to the plan’s opponents — $900 million in tax breaks to farmers, fishermen and truckers. They have also proposed a $250-million fund for fisheries and transportation firms to help deal with the impact of the proposed carbon tax.
Bailing Out Wall Street
(Real News)
According to economist and historian Michael Hudson, the bailout is a “once in a century rip-off” that will cause hyperinflation and dollar collapse...
According to economist and historian Michael Hudson, the bailout is a “once in a century rip-off” that will cause hyperinflation and dollar collapse...
Portal Tests Must Justify Costs
(HS Today)
The US Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) should conduct more rigorous testing of its next generation of radiation portal monitors and make better use of simulations in determining their effectiveness, congressional investigators reported Thursday.
The new advanced spectroscopic portal (AS) monitors would replace nuclear detection equipment in use at US ports of entry. DNDO is testing new portals to gain improvements in the detection of nuclear material and to trigger fewer false alarms.
But the cost of the ASPs is significantly higher and the testing requirements set by DNDO do not necessarily justify those costs, said Gene Aloise, director of Natural Resources and Environment at the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
DNDO expects to complete ASP testing and certify successful portals in November. Read more here.
The US Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) should conduct more rigorous testing of its next generation of radiation portal monitors and make better use of simulations in determining their effectiveness, congressional investigators reported Thursday.
The new advanced spectroscopic portal (AS) monitors would replace nuclear detection equipment in use at US ports of entry. DNDO is testing new portals to gain improvements in the detection of nuclear material and to trigger fewer false alarms.
But the cost of the ASPs is significantly higher and the testing requirements set by DNDO do not necessarily justify those costs, said Gene Aloise, director of Natural Resources and Environment at the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
DNDO expects to complete ASP testing and certify successful portals in November. Read more here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
