CANADA ECONOMICS

VENEZUELA

MRREE-Peru. 13 de febrero de 2018. Grupo de Lima. Declaración del Grupo de Lima. Declaración Conjunta 002 - 18
​


Lima, Peru - Los Cancilleres y representantes de Argentina, Brasil, Canadá, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, México, Panamá, Paraguay, Perú y Santa Lucía, frente a la decisión adoptada por el Consejo Nacional Electoral de Venezuela de convocar unilateralmente a elecciones presidenciales para el 22 de abril de 2018, sin haber alcanzado un acuerdo con la oposición, tal como se había comprometido el Gobierno, y, en concordancia con su Declaración del 23 de enero último, expresan lo siguiente:

1)    Su más firme rechazo a dicha decisión, que imposibilita la realización de elecciones presidenciales democráticas, transparentes y creíbles, con la participación de todos los actores políticos venezolanos, con observación y estándares internacionales, y reiteran que unas elecciones que no cumplan con esas condiciones carecerán de toda legitimidad y credibilidad.

2)    Exhortan al Gobierno de Venezuela a que reconsidere la convocatoria de las elecciones presidenciales de conformidad con lo señalado en el párrafo anterior y, apegándose a su propia normatividad, presente un nuevo calendario electoral.

3)    Subrayan que no puede haber elecciones libres y justas con presos políticos, sin la plena participación de los partidos políticos y líderes detenidos o inhabilitados arbitrariamente, con una autoridad electoral bajo el control del Gobierno, sin la participación de millones de venezolanos en el extranjero imposibilitados de votar, convocada originalmente por la asamblea constituyente, órgano carente de legitimidad y legalidad, cuya existencia y decisiones no reconocemos.

4)    Toman nota del informe de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos “Institucionalidad democrática, estado de derecho y derechos humanos en Venezuela”, que documenta el serio deterioro de la vigencia de los derechos humanos y la grave crisis política, económica y social que atraviesa Venezuela.

5)    Toman nota de la decisión comunicada por la Fiscal General de la Corte Penal Internacional de conducir un examen preliminar sobre la situación en Venezuela sobre crímenes de lesa humanidad ocurridos en las protestas de 2017.

6)    Ante el continuo y grave deterioro de las instituciones democráticas en Venezuela, y basándose en la Declaración de Quebec, adoptada en la III Cumbre de las Américas, en 2001, que a la letra dice “cualquier alteración o ruptura inconstitucional del orden democrático en un Estado del Hemisferio constituye un obstáculo insuperable para la participación del Gobierno de dicho Estado en el proceso de Cumbres de las Américas”, el Gobierno del Perú ha decidido reconsiderar la participación del Gobierno de Venezuela en la VIII Cumbre de las Américas, en Lima. Los miembros del Grupo de Lima respetamos esta decisión.

7)    Reiteran su preocupación por el creciente deterioro de la situación humanitaria y exhortan al Gobierno de Venezuela a que permita sin demora la apertura de un corredor humanitario que ayude a mitigar los graves efectos del desabastecimiento de alimentos y medicinas.

8)    Frente al incremento del éxodo de miles de venezolanos que huyen de la grave crisis que se vive en ese país, acuerdan coordinar esfuerzos para afrontar de una manera ordenada, solidaria y segura esta difícil situación.

9)    Su reconocimiento a la labor y esfuerzos desplegados por Chile y México, en su participación para alcanzar un acuerdo entre las Partes, en la negociación promovida por la República Dominicana.

Global Affairs Canada. February 14, 2017. Canada supports decision that President Maduro of Venezuela not welcome at Summit of the Americas

Lima, Peru - The Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement:

“Canada fully supports the announcement by Peru, as host of the upcoming Summit of the Americas, that Nicolás Maduro, the President of Venezuela, is not welcome to attend.

“President Maduro has demonstrated a flagrant disregard for democracy, a cornerstone of the Quebec Declaration signed by Venezuela in 2001. His regime is committing human rights abuses and refusing to allow much-needed humanitarian aid for the people of Venezuela. As Venezuela slides deeper into dictatorship, and as Venezuelans continue to suffer, Maduro’s participation at a hemispheric leaders’ summit would have been farcical. The Summit of the Americas is focused on strengthening democracy and improving the lives of people across the hemisphere; Maduro has shown no commitment to these shared regional objectives.

“I reiterate Canada’s full agreement with the Lima Group declaration issued yesterday. We maintain our demand that presidential elections be called with sufficient advance notice, that international observers participate, and that all Venezuelan political players be included in the election. With these conditions unmet, Venezuela’s elections will lack any legitimacy or credibility.”

OAS. IACHR. February 12, 2018. REPORT: Situation of Human Rights in Venezuela

There are serious restrictions on the exercise of political rights Venezuela, in the form of various types of harassment and persecution of the opposition. OAS/IACHR urge the Venezuelan State to take immediate measures to restore its democratic institutions, and protect the rights of freedom of expression and social protest.



FULL DOCUMENT: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Venezuela2018-en.pdf

NAFTA

The Globe and Mail. 14 Feb 2018. Canada’s lead NAFTA negotiator criticizes U.S. proposal as Freeland heads to Washington
STEVEN CHASE AND BARRIE McKENNA, OTTAWA 
ADRIAN MORROW, WASHINGTON

Canada has treated us very unfairly on timber and lumber.

DONALD TRUMP PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Canada’s lead NAFTA negotiator is taking public aim at American bargaining positions, saying the proposal for government procurement is the “worst offer ever” made by the United States at the trade table.

In an unusual intervention, Steve Verheul, an assistant deputy minister at the department of Global Affairs, spoke to an Ottawa audience Tuesday about the renegotiation of the North American freetrade agreement that began last August at the request of U.S. President Donald Trump.

“The U.S. offer on government procurement … is the worst offer ever made by the U.S. in any trade negotiation. It would leave us in a position where the country of Bahrain would have far better access to U.S. government procurement markets than Canada would, or Mexico would,” he told a Canadian Global Affairs Institute conference.

Washington has said it wants to cap the amount of work available to Canadian or Mexican companies at the sum total of what their governments make available for U.S. firms to bid upon. This could hurt Canada and Mexico because the U.S. government purchasing market is valued at more than US$500billion while the combined Canadian-Mexican market is about US$90-billion, the Washington-based Information Technology Alliance for the Public Sector has estimated.

International trade lawyer Larry Herman said Mr. Verheul’s public comments are not typical for a civil servant and he believes this was designed to send a message. “It is exceptional that a public servant would have been so blunt during the course of negotiations,” Mr. Herman said. He said he expects a senior official such as Mr. Verheul would have cleared such remarks beforehand with the Canadian government “and was intended to deliver a public comment on the difficult state of the negotiations.”

Mr. Verheul’s remarks came on the eve of Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland’s latest trip to Washington where she will meet on trade with members of the Trump administration and Senate – a visit that takes place as the threat persists that Mr. Trump may withdraw from the North American accord.

Ms. Freeland’s office said Mr. Verheul’s comments echo concerns previously raised publicly by the minister herself. Last October she told Global News the government procurement proposal from the U.S. was “really disappointing.”

Potential trouble spots continue to arise in the Canada-U.S. relationship. Mr. Trump has complained about Canadian trade and threatened a tax on foreign imports – he offered no details – and on Tuesday, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer made a point of saying NAFTA talks are going “particularly well with the Mexicans.”

A day after complaining that “Canada does not treat us right,” Mr. Trump on Tuesday repeated a call to penalize countries he says are mistreating the United States. “I say we should have reciprocal taxes,” he told a trade roundtable with members of Congress at the White House. “We have countries that are taking advantage of us.”

Mr. Trump continued: “They’re charging us massive tariffs for us to sell our product into those countries. And when they sell to us: zero. We charge them zero. We’re like the stupid people and I don’t like to have that any more.”

He also criticized Canada over trade disputes involving softwood lumber and ultrafiltered milk. “Canada has treated us very unfairly on timber and lumber,” he said. “And not easy on Wisconsin [dairy] farmers.”

The White House later played down the remarks, telling The Canadian Press “there is nothing formal in the works right now.”

The U.S. President’s threats are compounding the unease hanging over Canada’s export-dependent economy, adding to the uncertainty over the fate of NAFTA, a new U.S. advantage in business tax rates and much more aggressive enforcement of U.S. trade laws.

The weight of all that uncertainty is causing companies to “sit on their hands” or invest elsewhere, said Dennis Darby, president and chief executive of Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, a trade association. “We’re running our manufacturing output at 85-per-cent capacity, which is the point where you would normally add capacity,” Mr. Darby explained.

Toronto-Dominion Bank warned in a report Tuesday that the combination of U.S. tax cuts and uncertainty over NAFTA could lead to a “slow bleed” of investment from Canada to the United States. The marginal effective tax rate on investment in the United States is now 18.8 per cent versus 20.3 per cent in Canada, including federal and local taxes. As recently as 2016, Canada had an eight-percentage-point edge over the United States.

In January, the Bank of Canada warned that trade uncertainty may already be scaring away investment. In its latest Monetary Policy Report, the bank said new foreign direct investment into Canada has declined since mid-2016, especially from Europe but also from the United States – “a possible sign of the effects of the uncertainty around trade policy.”

And Bank of Nova Scotia has factored in a penalty of 0.2 of a percentage point into its 2018 growth forecast for Canada owing to “this prolonged period of uncertainty about the future of NAFTA.”

On Tuesday, the U.S. Commerce Department announced that it has launched an investigation into alleged dumping of large-diameter welded pipe in the U.S. market by Canada and five other countries. The Trump administration has now launched nearly 100 trade cases since taking office – several of them targeting imports from Canada. The case follows a string of earlier U.S. complaints involving Canadian lumber, newsprint, solar panels and aircraft, and the United States is contemplating duties on imported steel and aluminum.

In his speech, Mr. Verheul said the three NAFTA countries have made “fairly limited progress over all” after six rounds of negotiations – a result that is “less than we might have anticipated.”

He said a major factor is the lack of the Americans’ willingness to bend during negotiations – a situation he attributed to the Trump administration. Mr. Trump campaigned against NAFTA in the 2016 presidential race, threatening to tear it up if he couldn’t extract a better deal for U.S. workers.

“The main issue is we have seen limited U.S. flexibility even on fairly easy issues. They do not come to the table – our counterparts – with a lot of flexibility. This is being driven to a large extent from the top, from the administration,” Mr. Verheul said. “We could close a lot more chapters if the U.S. negotiators had more room to move.”

Mr. Verheul recounted how NAFTA countries have closed, or concluded, three chapters that deal with what he called peripheral matters such as small- and medium-sized enterprises, competition policy and anti-corruption. He said countries are “quite close” on other subjects such as telecommunications.

He said Canada and Mexico are facing “even more challenging” problems with what the Canadian government has described as extreme proposals from the Americans, including a “sunset clause” that would terminate the deal in five years unless all three countries agreed to keep it.

Difficult talks remain on auto rules of origin. Washington is proposing all vehicles made in Canada and Mexico contain 50-per-cent U.S. content, on top of boosting the required amount of North American content in NAFTA-zone autos to 85 per cent from 62.5 per cent.

Mr. Verheul said the Canadian government believes this proposal would backfire. “[It] would actually have the opposite effect to what the U.S. is looking to achieve. We think it would drive production offshore – out of North America – rather than improve it in North America.”

Asked how Canada believes it can best respond to U.S. intransigence, the NAFTA negotiator said the answer is to remain at the negotiating table as long as possible and keep pushing for a deal that benefits all countries, not just the United States.

“I don’t think we have any choice but continue to stay at the table, continue to put forward Canadian ideas, Canadian paths forward and impress upon the U.S that [it] cannot be a winner-takes-all agreement,” Mr. Verheul told reporters. “There is not going to be a lot in this for Canada or for Mexico if the benefits just go to the U.S.”

Mr. Verheul said Tuesday that Canada will take a wait-and-see approach to the tax mentioned by Mr. Trump. “Although the statements were made … we’re not necessarily seeing a lot of concrete action behind that. So we’ll wait and see whether there is anything real to that.”

Canada, Mexico and the United States will reconvene in Mexico City in late February for a seventh round of NAFTA talks.

BLOOMBERG. 13 February 2018U.S. Touts Nafta Progress as Republicans Urge Trade Caution
By Toluse Olorunnipa, Andrew Mayeda, and Josh Wingrove

• Lighthizer sees progress on Nafta, particularly with Mexico
• Canada criticizes U.S. inflexibility driven from the top

The Trump administration is signaling progress on Nafta talks, particularly with Mexico, as Republican lawmakers voice support for a trade deal President Donald Trump has threatened repeatedly to abandon.

The U.S. is making “headway” in its efforts to renegotiate the North American Free Trade agreement, Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said on Tuesday at a meeting with the president and a bipartisan group of lawmakers at the White House. He also downplayed the likelihood of a U.S. withdrawal. Talks are going well, “particularly with the Mexicans,” he said.

Lighthizer reserved his sharpest words for Canada at the last round of Nafta negotiations in January. He dismissed a Canadian proposal on cars as vague and sparred with Ottawa over data describing two-way trade flows. He also criticized a trade case filed by Canada against the U.S. at the World Trade Organization as a “massive attack” on American trade law.

Less than a week later, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in some of his most aggressive language yet, said he’d rather walk away from Nafta than accept a bad deal. Canada’s chief Nafta negotiator Steve Verheul also took aim at the U.S. on Tuesday, saying there’s been “fairly limited progress overall” and that some American proposals wouldn’t even be good for the U.S., let alone the other countries. “We have seen limited U.S. flexibility even on fairly easy issues,” he said. “This is being driven to a large extent from the top, from the administration.”

Nafta Warnings

Trump is increasingly hearing calls for caution, including from Republicans who support Nafta. At a speech in Ottawa on Tuesday evening, Representative Pete Sessions, the Texas Republican who chairs the House Rules Committee, urged Canada to stand firm in Nafta talks.

“This is my message to you tonight -- Canada should not yield to a bad deal,” he said, while also warning the Canadians not to include “extraneous” subjects into talks, which he did not specify. “We are not interested in a trade deal that would put you in second place and not be fair to Canada," Sessions added.

Trump said on Tuesday that Canada had acted poorly toward farmers in Wisconsin, only to later see one of that state’s senators, Republican Ron Johnson, defend the pact. “The fact of that matter is, Mr. President, Wisconsin operates a trade surplus with both Canada and Mexico, because we not only export manufacturing products but also agricultural products. And trade works very well for Wisconsin,” he said.

Representative Darin LaHood of Illinois, a Republican who sits on the Ways and Means Committee, said Tuesday that “pulling out of Nafta would be a grave mistake” and that the Trump administration’s trade policy has been misguided. “In my district, trade equals jobs and economic opportunities and so I think having a protectionist mentality is not going to work,” he said.

Surprising Turn

Kelly Craft, the U.S. ambassador to Canada appointed by Trump, said in Ottawa Tuesday evening that Trump has a clear mandate for change but that the administration didn’t want to leave Canada behind. “We want an updated Nafta to stimulate North America to be more competitive in the global economy,” Craft said.

Lighthizer’s warming tone on Mexico has been a surprising turn of events given that Washington initiated the Nafta revamp last year by saying it wanted to address its gaping trade deficit with Mexico, while only seeking tweaks to the trading terms with Canada. Relations between the U.S. and Mexico were frosty when the talks started last August as Trump kept insisting Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto’s government would pay for a southern border wall.

Mexico also appeared to be in the administration’s sights because of Trump’s goal to eliminate trade deficits. The U.S.’s second-biggest trade gap, after China, is with Mexico, with the deficit in goods expanding to $71.1 billion last year from $64.4 billion a year earlier.

Speaking at the same meeting on trade with Lighthizer and the lawmakers, Trump also struck out at Canada over trade. Canada has treated the U.S. “very unfairly” over lumber, Trump said. Lighthizer’s office said last week that the U.S. objective is to renegotiate Nafta on a trilateral basis.

Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland will visit Washington on Wednesday.

(An earlier version of this story corrected a transcription error in the quote from Steve Verheul in the fourth paragraph.)

— With assistance by Eric Martin, Anna Edgerton, and Greg Quinn

REUTERS. FEBRUARY 13, 2018. Canada, U.S. exchange barbs over NAFTA talks as stresses rise
David Ljunggren

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada and the United States exchanged barbs on Tuesday over sluggish negotiations to update NAFTA, reflecting mounting tensions over trade talks that appear unlikely to conclude on schedule.

The talks have effectively stalled as Canada and Mexico seek to address wide-ranging U.S. demands for changes to the North American Free Trade Agreement. The early March deadline for wrapping up the talks has been extended to at least early April, officials said. But participants have said privately it could take months longer than that.

Steve Verheul, Canada’s chief negotiator, told an Ottawa audience that the United States aimed to weaken Canada and Mexico rather than ensure that the $1.2 trillion trilateral trade pact benefited all three members.

A few minutes earlier, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer pointedly said in Washington that talks with Mexico over NAFTA were going well. He made no mention of Canada.

U.S. President Donald Trump frequently threatens to walk away from NAFTA unless big changes are made. He blames the pact for U.S. manufacturing job losses and his remarks about quitting have unsettled financial markets.

Verheul said the talks had achieved little progress on major issues so far and characterized U.S. negotiators as inflexible. His comments were easily the gloomiest public remarks about the talks yet by a Canadian official.

“The U.S. approach is to focus on the U.S. perspective only, rather than a North American perspective. So they are looking to strengthen the U.S. and by doing that weaken Canada and Mexico within the North American economy,” Verheul told a conference organized by the Canadian Global Affairs Institute.

Canada has made a number of what it calls creative proposals to address the U.S. insistence that the North American content of autos be raised. Washington also wants a clause that would allow any NAFTA member to pull out after five years.

Verheul said a U.S. demand that would slash the amount of government procurement contracts for Canadian and Mexican firms “is the worst offer ever made by the U.S. in any trade negotiation”.

Mexico has said the autos rule of origin would have to be toughened, but gave no details.

Verheul declined to directly address Lighthizer’s comment, telling reporters Canada would not walk away.

“We have no choice but to continue to ... impress on the U.S. that this cannot be a winner-takes-all agreement,” he said.

“It’s going to take a lot more time at the negotiating table to try to grind through these issues.”

Last week, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Canada “might very well be better off” not signing up to an updated version of the NAFTA trade pact rather than accepting a bad deal.

Reporting by David Ljunggren; Editing by David Gregorio and Andrew Hay

BLOOMBERG. 13 February 2018. Citigroup Says Everyone Gets Hurt If U.S. Abandons Nafta Accord
By Jennifer Surane

• Modern version of trade agreement needed, Fraser says
• With Citibanamex, Mexico is Citi’s largest foreign market

Citigroup Inc., owner of Mexico’s second-largest bank, said the Latin American nation would suffer along with the U.S. and Canada if the Trump administration abandons the North American Free Trade Agreement.

“We certainly hope it doesn’t happen because it’s a negative for all three countries and it has a material impact on manufacturing and supply chains,” Jane Fraser, chief executive officer of the bank’s Latin American unit, said Tuesday at a conference sponsored by Credit Suisse Group AG in Florida. “We hope that all partners remain at the table because I think there is a significant win-win from a modernized version.”

Without Nafta, Citigroup’s institutional-client business in Mexico could suffer as businesses opt against investing in the country, Fraser said. The firm has been helping corporate customers prepare in the event the agreement is abandoned. Mexico is Citigroup’s largest foreign market, and the New York-based company’s Citibanamex unit is the nation’s second-biggest bank.

The U.S. has threatened to ditch the treaty amid its attempts to renegotiate the agreement with Mexico and Canada. President Donald Trump’s administration signaled on Tuesday that talks are going better with Mexico than with Canada. The U.S. initiated the Nafta revamp last year by saying it wanted to address its trade deficit with Mexico.

BLOOMBERG. 14 February 2018. Trump’s Passion for Tariffs Faces Stiff Headwinds From His Party
By  Toluse Olorunnipa and Joe Deaux

• Concern penalties on steel and aluminum would hurt automakers
• Trade fight could rattle already-turbulent financial markets

President Donald Trump’s zeal for new a round of tariffs is running into cold, hard economic and political reality: lawmakers from his own party who think it’s a bad idea.

Twice this week Trump has raised the idea of trade penalties he calls a “reciprocal tax,” only to have White House officials insist there’s no plan in the works for such an action. During a televised meeting at the White House on Tuesday, Republican lawmakers told Trump the new tariffs he’s mulling for aluminum and steel imports would likely do more harm than good, costing greater jobs among automakers and manufacturers than they protect.

Penalties raising the cost of aluminum and steel imports alone could reverberate through the economy, hiking up prices for everything from aircraft to electrical wiring and beer cans.

The prospect of a trade war with other major economies could further rattle financial markets already unsteady over concerns about inflation and interest-rate increases. Trump has had to balance those realities with his own protectionist campaign rhetoric and calls from his political base for action that matches it.

“We have countries that are taking advantage of us. They’re charging us massive tariffs for us to sell our product into those countries. And when they sell to us, zero,” Trump said during the meeting in the Cabinet room. “We’re like the stupid people, and I don’t like to have that anymore.”

Special Election Looms

Trump has been making similar comments since his days on the campaign trail and throughout much of his time in office, frequently singling out countries such as China, South Korea, Mexico and Canada.

He may face fresh political pressure to act as a special election approaches in a Pittsburgh-area congressional district where Trump’s protectionist, pro-manufacturing messaging from the campaign trail boosted him to victory in Pennsylvania in 2016.

But his talk has been bolder than his actions so far. He promised during the campaign to declare China a currency manipulator on “Day One,” but never has. He threatened to impose tariffs on companies that send jobs overseas and then ship their products back into country, but he’s not done so. He flirted last April with announcing a U.S. withdrawal from Nafta, and then backed down.

Cautious Lawmakers

At least seven Republican lawmakers at the White House meeting Tuesday urged Trump to be cautious about taking any action that could set off a trade war with China or other countries. Several warned that Trump’s proposals would raise prices for manufacturers dependent on those materials -- especially car companies -- and for consumers.

“I think we do need to be careful here that we don’t start a reciprocal battle on tariffs,” Senator Roy Blunt, a Missouri Republican told Trump.

At the same time, some Democrats from states Trump carried -- and the more populist voters who propelled him into office -- are pushing for actions that resemble the president’s trade threats.

Trump instructed the Commerce Department last year to probe whether imports of steel and aluminum represent a threat to U.S. national security, under the seldom-used Section 232 of a 1960s trade act. Trump, who has until mid-April to decide on any restrictions, said on Tuesday that he’s considering quotas and tariffs, among other options. The investigations are seen to primarily target China, which the U.S. blames for creating excess capacity and dragging down global prices.



One hurdle the administration faces in its 232 deliberation is the chasm between steel and aluminum producers versus the industries that make products from the raw metal. Trump’s push to expedite the investigations last year was met with opposition by aluminum and steel users that said a larger number of jobs would be lost if the U.S. placed tariffs on imports.

The argument is that parts producers of everything from automobiles to aircraft to wiring in homes and office buildings would pay a higher price for metal if they can’t procure material from foreign sources that could cost less. By putting tariffs on imports, it effectively raises the price of imports so that domestic steel and aluminum producers aren’t being undercut.

“The problem with putting quotas or tariff-rate quotas on the upstream products is that the damage is done to the downstream makers,” Kimberly Korbel, executive director of American Wire Producers Association, said by phone. Korbel wrote a letter on behalf of 15 steel-buying associations to Trump on Monday that said they represent about 1 million U.S. jobs. The American Iron and Steel Institute estimates that the steel industry directly employs about 140,000 people.

Higher Beer Prices

Last summer, Molson Coors Brewing Co. warned that consumers may have to pay higher beer prices if Trump imposes duties making it more expensive to procure aluminum. Anheuser-Busch Inbev NV and Coca-Cola Co. later were among food and beverage companies and associations that also wrote a letter to the president, urging him to limit any aluminum duties.

Other Republican lawmakers at the meeting in Washington on Tuesday described Trump’s protectionist approach to trade as out-of-date.

“232 is a little like old-fashioned chemotherapy,” House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady, a Texas Republican, told Trump. “It isn’t used as much because it can often do as much damage as good.”

Senator Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican, told the president that the manufacturing economy has shifted in the last 25 years, making his concerns less compelling. “It makes no sense for me to try and bring back high labor-content manufacturing to America,” he said. “We need to do the value-added things.”

Trade Reprisals

Republican Senator Pat Toomey, who represents Pennsylvania -- a state with storied connection to the U.S. steel industry -- told Trump the tariffs could “invite retaliation” and would be hard to justify on national security grounds.

Democratic lawmakers provided some of the strongest support at the White House meeting for harsher trade penalties against China and other countries through the 232 process.

“This really is a national security issue,” said Senator Bob Casey, a Pennsylvania Democrat.

The issue may boil over next week when Trump travels to Pennsylvania to stump for a Republican candidate running in a special election in a steel-sensitive district.

Republican candidate Rick Saccone is running in a special election to fill the U.S. House seat vacated by Republican Tim Murphy. While Trump carried Pennsylvania’s 18th congressional district by 20 percentage points in 2016, Democratic candidate Conor Lamb is running a competitive race, according to public polls.

Trump is planning to attend a campaign rally next week near the district and could use the opportunity to push for harsher trade actions.

— With assistance by Andrew Mayeda

G7

The Globe and Mail. 14 Feb 2018. The gender pay gap: How Canada can lead at the G7
EMANUELA HEYNINCK
SARAH KAPLAN

When women’s economic contributions are undervalued, there is a loss of productivity, as women are more likely to exit the work force and society loses the benefit of their diverse perspectives as employees and decision-makers.

By taking a note from Ontario’s equity legislation, the country can take advantage of its position and forward a progressive example for the world

Emanuela Heyninck is the Pay Equity Commissioner for Ontario.

Sarah Kaplan is distinguished professor and director at the Institute for Gender and the Economy at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management.

In June, Canada will lead the G7 meeting in Charlevoix, Que., and use its presidency of the Group of Seven to draw attention to gender inequality. One important indicator of the state of gender equality is the gender wage gap, which persists in all countries despite increased attention from governments and the private sector. The gap is different for different subsets of women and occurs in every sector.

Many of Canada’s like-minded global partners and competitors have prioritized closing the gender wage gap as a way to achieve gender economic equality. These measures include laws that prohibit employers from asking about previous salaries, employer reporting on a number of equality metrics and requiring some form of pay transparency. Iceland’s recent legislation to fine companies that did not achieve wage equality is the most recent to garner global attention. As yet, no country or jurisdiction has implemented a program that captures the full range of practices that would assure gender equality in the workplace, but Canada could be poised to set this agenda.

The gender wage gap has important impacts on the economy. In Ontario, a recent Deloitte report estimates that closing the gender wage gap could represent a 2.5-per-cent increase in Ontario’s GDP – the equivalent of the combined contribution of the automotive and auto-parts sectors. When women’s economic contributions are undervalued, there is a loss of productivity, as women are more likely to exit the work force and society loses the benefit of their diverse perspectives as employees and decision-makers. A wage gap also increases the likelihood that women will be living in poverty, both during their work years and in retirement.

Compensation practices can significantly contribute to workplace gender inequality. Requiring equal pay for equal work and equal pay for work of equal value (pay equity) are effective ways to remedy the undervaluation of women’s contributions and can help close internal gender wage gaps within workplaces.

What gets lost in some of the recent commentary is that Ontario has been a leader in tackling the gender wage gap by introducing pay-equity legislation in 1987, with Quebec following in 1996.

In Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s recent speech at the World Economic Forum, he outlined his government’s commitment to table pay-equity legislation in 2018. At the G7, there is an opportunity for Canada to take the lead internationally by advancing the case for pay equity. Based on the experiences of Ontario and Quebec, and on the extensive international research about the gender wage gap, this legislation should contemplate two key provisions. First, the definition of pay equity in the law should be sufficiently comprehensive to cover both equal pay for equal work and equal pay for work of equal value. Bringing these different, but related, aspects to gender pay equality could lead to more effective and efficient administration of the law.

Second, the law should provide for reporting by firms to an independent agency that is mandated with enforcing the law. Both Ontario and Quebec have independent enforcement bodies, but only Quebec requires reporting on outcomes. A reporting requirement can identify where problems exist and will enable the agency to develop tools to assist companies in analyzing and removing the gender bias that the law seeks to address. A reporting feature would level the playing field for businesses in every sector, eliminating any competitive advantage for those skirting the law’s requirements. Moreover, a reporting regime actually reduces administrative burdens on business as it regularizes the process of compliance and ensures attention to emerging problems that may become problematic if left unattended.

While such legislation could be an important step toward closing the gender wage gap, research suggests a focus on pay alone will not do the trick. There are a number of business practices that prevent women from achieving economic outcomes in the workplace equal to those of men. These include, unintentionally-biased hiring practices, unequal starting salaries, differences in training and advancement opportunities, lack of career sponsorship, unequal allocation of investment resources to male and female executives and, importantly, lack of adequate childcare support. And, in the era of #MeToo, it is clear that women’s experiences in workplaces have, for a very long time, forced them to move off of their career tracks into potentially lower-wage jobs when sexual harassment has made their work experiences too unpleasant to bear.

While businesses are responsible for making the necessary changes to their workplaces to address these inequalities, governments can create the necessary conditions to support these changes by establishing an effective regulatory framework and providing access to statistical, diagnostic and assistive resources. Tangible progress can be made if support is offered to employers to diagnose which of their practices contribute to generating a wage gap, to set benchmarks for improvement and to report on outcomes on a regular basis. Many of these initiatives have already been introduced in countries such as Germany, Britain, Switzerland and Australia.

As the host for the 2018 G7 summit, Canada has an opportunity to offer its experience and advance its existing commitment to gender economic equality by enacting robust pay-equity laws and by engaging with the business community in addressing other practices that can create a welcoming work environment for people of all genders.

ENERGY

StatCan. 2018-02-14. Supply and disposition of refined petroleum products, November 2017

• Refinery receipts of crude oil: 8.3 million cubic metres; November 2017; 5.8% increase (12-month change)
• Source(s): CANSIM table 134-0001: http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&retrLang=eng&id=1340001&&pattern=&stByVal=1&p1=1&p2=31&tabMode=dataTable&csid=
• Refinery production: 9.2 million cubic metres; November 2017; 3.9% increase (12-month change)
• Refinery domestic sales: 9.0 million cubic metres; November 2017; 4.2% increase (12-month change)
• Source(s): CANSIM table 134-0004: http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&retrLang=eng&id=1340004&&pattern=&stByVal=1&p1=1&p2=31&tabMode=dataTable&csid=

Refinery receipts of crude oil, production of refined petroleum products and domestic sales of refined petroleum products were up in November compared with the same month in 2016.

Refinery receipts up

Canadian refineries received 8.3 million cubic metres of crude oil in November, up 5.8% from the same month a year earlier.

Chart 1: Refinery receipts of crude oil and equivalent products

Imports to Canadian refineries were down 6.8% from November 2016 to 2.6 million cubic metres in November. Domestic receipts were up 12.6% to 5.7 million cubic metres over the same period.

Crude oil inventories held at refineries totalled 3.8 million cubic metres in November, down 9.3% from the same month in 2016.

Refinery production and sales rise

Refinery production increased 3.9% from November 2016 to 9.2 million cubic metres in November.

Domestic sales of refined petroleum products rose 4.2% to 9.0 million cubic metres. The main contributors to the increase in domestic sales were diesel fuel oil (+14.8%) and motor gasoline (+3.2%).

Chart 2: Domestic sales of refined petroleum products, by product

Imports down while exports up

In November, Canadian imports of refined petroleum declined 6.9% compared with the same month one year earlier, to 1.4 million cubic metres. This marked the seventh successive monthly year-over-year drop.

Meanwhile, Canadian exports, which tend to be volatile, were up 35.8% to 2.5 million cubic metres compared with November 2016. This was the eighth consecutive month of year-over-year increases.

Chart 3: Exports of refined petroleum products

Inventories down

Closing inventories of refined petroleum products held by refineries decreased 7.0% year over year, to 7.2 million cubic metres in November.

FULL DOCUMENT: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/180214/dq180214b-eng.pdf

The Globe and Mail. REUTERS. 14 Feb 2018. Surge in global oil supply may overtake demand this year, IEA says
AMANDA COOPER

The rise in global oil production, led by the United States, is likely to outpace growth in demand this year, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said on Tuesday.

The Paris-based IEA raised its forecast for oil demand growth in 2018 to 1.4 million barrels per day, from a previous projection of 1.3 million bpd, after the International Monetary Fund upped its estimate of global economic growth for this year and next.

Oil demand grew at a rate of 1.6 million bpd in 2017, the IEA said in its monthly market report.

However, the rapid rise in output, particularly in the United States, could well outweigh any pick-up in demand and begin to push up global oil inventories, which are now within sight of their five-year average.

“Today, having cut costs dramatically, U.S. producers are enjoying a second wave of growth so extraordinary that in 2018, their increase in liquids production could equal global demand growth,” the IEA said.

“In just three months to November, [U.S.] crude output increased by a colossal 846,000 bpd and will soon overtake that of Saudi Arabia. By the end of this year, it might also overtake Russia to become the global leader.”

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), along with other exporters such as Russia, have agreed to maintain a joint restriction on crude supply for a second year running in 2018, to force inventories to drain and support prices.

Oil inventories across the world’s richest countries fell by 55.6 million barrels in December to 2.851 billion barrels, their steepest one-month drop since February, 2011, the IEA said.

For 2017 as a whole, inventories fell by 154 million barrels, or at a rate of 420,000 bpd. By the year-end, they were only 52 million barrels above the five-year average, with stocks of oil products below that benchmark, the IEA said.

“With the surplus having shrunk so dramatically, the success of the output agreement might be close to hand. This, however, is not necessarily the case: Oil-price rises have come to a halt and gone into reverse and, according to our supply/demand balance, so might the decline in oil stocks, at least in the early part of this year.”

Oil production outside OPEC members fell by 175,000 bpd in January to 58.6 million bpd, but was still 1.3 million bpd higher than January last year, predominantly because of the 1.3-millionbpd year-on-year increase in U.S. output.

AVIATION

The Globe and Mail. BLOOMBERG. 14 Feb 2018. Delta wants to fly Boeing’s new jetliner first. Atlanta-based carrier recently tangled with the plane maker in an international trade case, ordered Airbus jets
MICHAEL SASSO

Delta is actively engaged with Boeing on this and we will continue a healthy dialogue with them as the program matures.

MORGAN DURRANT, DELTA SPOKESMAN

Delta Air Lines Inc. is showing no hard feelings after its recent trade spat with Boeing Co.

The No. 2 U.S. carrier wants to be one of the first to fly a potential new mid-sized jetliner from Boeing, Delta chief executive officer Ed Bastian said. That’s a vote of confidence from one of the most influential aircraft buyers as Boeing decides whether to build the plane, dubbed the 797 by analysts.

“You’re going to see us participate in Boeing’s middle-of-themarket campaign,” Mr. Bastian said. “I hope that we’re going to be a launch customer on that program as well.”

The employee message shows how Delta is looking to play an active role in the development of Boeing’s first all-new jetliner since the 787 Dreamliner. The Atlanta-based carrier recently tangled with the plane maker in an international trade case involving smaller planes and placed a US$12.7-billion order last month for Airbus SE’s A321neo – one of the toughest aircraft competitors to Boeing’s next new plane.

The airline calls Boeing’s proposed jet “an interesting concept,” spokesman Morgan Durrant said. The plane would be a potential replacement for Delta’s aging fleet of Boeing 757s and 767s on long domestic routes and mid-range international flights.

“Delta is actively engaged with Boeing on this and we will continue a healthy dialogue with them as the program matures,” Mr. Durrant said.

A Boeing representative said the company doesn’t disclose details of customer discussions.

The cost of developing what Boeing calls the “New Midmarket Airplane” probably would run from US$10-billion to US$15billion, Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst at Teal Group, said recently.

Boeing has been in talks with more than 50 potential customers as it refines its design for the NMA and executives build a business case for the plane maker’s board.

The company is targeting the market gap between the largest narrow-body and smallest widebody aircraft. One would seat 225 travellers and fly about 5,000 nautical miles – from the midwestern U.S. to Europe, for example. A larger sibling would seat 275 and cruise about 4,500 nautical miles.

Mr. Bastian’s employee message should relieve concerns that Delta’s dispute with Boeing in an international trade case will push the carrier into Airbus’s camp for the long term.

Boeing last year persuaded the U.S. Commerce Department to slap duties of almost 300 per cent on a new jet from Bombardier Inc., called the C Series. The Canadian plane maker sold 75 of the new planes to Delta at well below cost, Boeing alleged. The U.S. International Trade Commission ruled last month that the sale of the C Series isn’t harming American industry and blocked the duties from being imposed.

While Mr. Bastian has said the trade case wouldn’t affect Delta’s fleet orders, its decision in December to order 100 Airbus A321neo jets over Boeing’s competing 737 Max 10 fueled industry speculation about whether Delta might shun Boeing for some period. The new Airbus jets will replace at least some of Delta’s older 757s, as well as McDonnell Douglas MD-90 and older A320 aircraft.

Boeing’s new 797 would give Delta better range than the A321neo and additional capacity to haul cargo, which is more important for international flights than for domestic ones, said George Hamlin of Hamlin Transportation Consulting in Fairfax, Virginia.

“Delta needs both Boeing and Airbus,” Mr. Hamlin said. “If it becomes beholden to one, that doesn’t give it much leverage in negotiations.”

BUDGET

Department of Finance Canada. February 13, 2018. Minister Morneau Sets Budget 2018 Date for February 27, 2018

Ottawa, Ontario – The Government of Canada is taking the next steps in transforming the economy so that it works for the middle class by ensuring everyone has the opportunity to succeed.

Today, Minister Morneau announced in the House of Commons that the Government will table its federal budget on February 27, 2018.

Through Budget 2018, the Government will take the next steps towards equality, and a more competitive, diverse and inclusive Canada, where everyone can have a real and fair chance at succcess. In doing so, it will reward curiosity and foster the kind of creativity that will allow us to innovate and maintain our competitive edge in the fast-paced and increasingly global economy.

The budget will build on the Government's plan to invest in people, communities and the economy. Thanks to the hard work, ingenuity and creativity of Canadians, Canada has created nearly 600,000 jobs since November 2015, and the unemployment rate is near its lowest level in 40 years. Since the beginning of 2016, Canada has had the fastest-growing economy of the Group of Seven (G7) countries.

Minister Morneau's announcement follows record participation in the annual pre-budget consultations, where more than 1.5 million people were reached, and nearly 38,000 submissions and ideas were received.

Quote

"Our plan is working. But there is work to do. We are building on a solid plan by making further investments in our people and our communities and by making sure that everyone, no matter their gender, will have an equal opportunity to succeed. This is how we will continue to target smart investments into key areas that create good, well-paying jobs, and make us all more competitive in the global economy of tomorrow."

- Bill Morneau, Minister of Finance

THE GLOBE AND MAIL. FEBRUARY 13, 2018. OPINION. Budget will show how far Morneau will go to put money where Trudeau’s mouth is
CAMPBELL CLARK, Columnist

OTTAWA - Finance Minister Bill Morneau is planning a gender budget, putting federal money behind Justin Trudeau's declaration that he's a feminist prime minister.

It will include money to pay the costs of agenda-setting pay-equity legislation for employees in the federal government and federally regulated sectors, and will go beyond that into measures to encourage the participation of women in the workforce, in leadership roles and in science, a government source indicated.

Just how far Mr. Morneau will go to to put government money where Mr. Trudeau's mouth is won't be known until Feb. 27, when the Finance Minister delivers his third budget.

But it is intended to carry a common political thread that Mr. Trudeau's government will stick with through 2018. The Prime Minister declared a focus on gender issues at a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January. In July, he is to host the G7 summit of major industrialized nations, which is to revolve around five themes including "gender equality and women's empowerment."

In between, Mr. Morneau's budget is to include a package of measures that are supposed to portray gender measures as the next phase in the Liberal economic agenda – the agenda they have sold as "inclusive" growth aimed at improving the lot of the middle class.

In 2018, with economic growth in Canada strong but uncertain, Mr. Morneau might have chosen several other themes. Some economists and business leaders are pushing him to cut Canadian taxes to keep them competitive with the United States after President Donald Trump and Republican allies pushed through a bill to slash taxes for corporations and high-income individuals.

Mr. Morneau isn't planning to go there just yet – instead he is expected to signal that Finance Department officials will watch how the U.S. cuts impact the economy, and investment in Canada, to determine if there is a need to respond.

Politically, the Liberals have made a decision to steer left, to appeal to a "progressive" political audience by underlining inclusion and gender equality, rather than trying to mirror Mr. Trump's cuts or to slash the deficit. The emphasis on gender is also in line with the Liberals' electoral calculations: they consistently hold a lead in opinion polls because of much higher support among women than the second-placed Conservatives.

While there will be many other elements in the budget, gender will be a thread through several sections, according to a source.

There will, for example, be measures to promote women in science, according to one source – and science in general will be another theme of the budget. A government-appointed panel headed by former University of Toronto president David Naylor last year called for a revamp of research funding and an additional $1.3-billion in spending.

In his speech in Davos, Mr. Trudeau argued that increasing women's equality can be a key driver of economic growth, citing a study by McKinsey & Co. that concluded that measures to advance the place of women in the economy could add $150-billion to GDP in the year 2026, or 0.6 per cent to annual GDP growth. The Prime Minister also promised to deliver legislation "to ensure equal pay for work of equal value at the federal level."

That won't directly cover most Canadian women, because most employment law comes under the jurisdiction of the provinces, but it is intended to set a pay-equity agenda that pressures others to follow. Because of the cost, including a study to determine what work is of equal value to other work, and pay increases for underpaid employees, the legislation can't really go ahead without money in this month's budget.

That legislation alone isn't likely to make a major impact on the so-called gender gap, which sees Canadian women earn 87 cents for every $1 earned by men. Mr. Trudeau suggested as much in his Davos speech that it wasn't just an issue of mandating equal pay for similar work.

"When we peel back that outer layer, we see that there are a whole host of barriers facing women in the workplace," he said then. "Removing these barriers will take effort, leadership and a willingness to change the nature of work as we know it."

There's no way the treasury allows for that kind of sweeping change. It's unclear how far Mr. Morneau will go to fund social policies to encourage greater participation of women in the work force. Last year's budget set aside $540-million to expand child-care spaces, so it seems unlikely there will be more this year, though some argue a national daycare program is key to increasing the workforce participation of women. But Mr. Morneau, and Mr. Trudeau's Liberals, have picked the budget's political message.

________________

LGCJ.: