CANADA ECONOMICS

AVIATION

The Globe and Mail. REUTERS. JUNE 20, 2018. Bombardier wins Delta order for 20 regional jets
NICOLAS VAN PRAET

Bombardier's CRJ900 airliner is shown in this undated handout photograph.

HANDOUT/THE GLOBE AND MAIL

MONTREAL - Bombardier Inc. won a new order for 20 Canadair regional jets from Delta Air Lines Inc., a welcome bump to its backlog as it tries to rekindle customer interest in its aging regional aircraft.

The Canadian plane-and-train maker said Wednesday it signed a purchase agreement with Atlanta-based Delta for 20 CRJ900 models. The value of the planes at list prices is US$961-million, although discounts are common for larger orders.

Bombardier shares rose 1.6 per cent to $5.16 in morning trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange. They’ve now been above $5 for three straight sessions, the first time they’ve reached that level since late 2013.

The deal marks early vindication for Bombardier after it took a decision last fall to spend an undisclosed sum updating its turboprop and regional jet (CRJ) lines. The CRJ aircraft had been largely neglected in recent years as the company concentrated resources to bring its flagship C Series jet airliner to market, fuelling long-standing criticism against the planes that their cabins were inferior to that of Embraer SA’s E-Jet family.

Delta will be the first airline to fly the updated CRJs. The improvements to the aircraft include more room in the overhead bins, wider entranceways for easier boarding and washrooms that are 60 per cent bigger than previous versions, with better access for passengers with reduced mobility and parents with children. Inspired by designs in the luxury auto market, the new cabin design is branded “Atmosphère” by Bombardier.

Celebrated as the planes that launched Canada into commercial aircraft manufacturing, Bombardier’s regional jets are today used by more than 100 airlines operating about 200,000 flights a month. In North America alone, they account for one in every five jets taking off. The plane maker has won firm orders for about 1,950 CRJ aircraft since the planes came to market in the early 1990s.

Orders have slowed in recent years, falling from 19 units in fiscal 2016 to 16 in 2017. Backlog for the regional jets stood at 42 planes still to be built at the end of last year.

“This is a strong statement on the continuing longevity of the CRJ program,” said Ernie Arvai of boutique aerospace consultancy AirInsight. The Delta deal will give Bombardier more than 20 years of additional aftermarket and service revenue and showcase the new CRJ interiors to other potential customers, he said.

Delta is one of the biggest carriers operating Bombardier CRJ aircraft. It will fly the new planes under its Delta Connection brand in a two-class configuration with 70 seats, Bombardier said. The first plane from this order is expected to be delivered in late 2018.

REUTERS. JUNE 20, 2018. After surrendering CSeries, Bombardier pushes regional plane revival
Allison Lampert

MONTREAL (Reuters) - As Bombardier (BBDb.TO) surrenders hopes of securing a top spot in commercial aviation with the sale of its money-losing CSeries jet program to Airbus (AIR.PA), the Canadian company is now drawing up plans to breathe new life into its older regional planes.

Bombardier is shoring up its loss-making regional jets and turboprops with a mixture of hard-sell, cost-cutting and outsourcing. It is also growing its line of business jets after a cash squeeze and production delays forced it to cede a majority stake in its high-tech CSeries which aims to break into the market for mainline jets dominated by Airbus and Boeing.

The company will now “sharpen the focus” on its remaining commercial planes, with Bombardier Commercial Aircraft President Fred Cromer recently expanding the leadership team for the division which has combined orders in hand for just for over 100 planes, according to an internal memo seen by Reuters.

Bombardier also plans to showcase its CRJ regional jets, which recently had a cabin upgrade with more overhead bin space to appeal to business travelers, at the industry’s flagship Farnborough Air Show in July, an event it previously used to market the CSeries, two sources familiar with the company’s thinking said.

The company’s regional jet initiative won a boost from Delta Air Lines (DAL.N), which on Wednesday announced orders for 20 CRJ 900s with the new interiors, valued at around $961 million by list prices, as it and other U.S. carriers replace aging 50 and 70-seat planes with new regional jets.

According to the memo and sources familiar with the situation, the company is now moving forward with a plan to lower its regional Q400 turboprop’s costs by outsourcing its wings and cockpit from Toronto to lower cost countries, although specific locations were not named.

In 2016, Bombardier expected to move the cockpit to China and the wings to Mexico with the union’s agreement, but Bombardier failed to carry it out because the program’s volumes were previously too low, both sources said.

Bombardier said in the memo it also aims to reap more profits by promoting aftermarket services for its over 2,000 regional planes already in the air, which is part of a broader strategy the company is using for its business jets.

In a sign that Bombardier will push harder on servicing existing planes, the company plans to hire a separate executive to head customer service for its regional planes, a position currently filled by the same person who heads the Q400 program, the second source said.

All of the sources spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss Bombardier’s private strategies.

HEADWINDS

For Bombardier, the challenge is to erase losses and generating $1.5 billion in revenues by 2020. But the turnaround strategy faces headwinds.

Bombardier’s efforts to revive regional plane sales, which it sees as a $240 billion market between 2017 and 2036, come as some forecasters are expecting limited near-term sector growth.

“Demand for regional aircraft will remain weak relative to large commercial aircraft,” said Moody’s in a recent note. It predicted that regional aircraft deliveries, including the CSeries, would grow by over 4 percent in 12-to-18 months, compared with an 8-to-10 percent rise in larger aircraft. The 110-130-seat CSeries overlap regional and mainline passenger jet markets.

Bombardier is also tasked with winning orders for its regional Q400 turboprop, which sources say the company considered selling. The plane holds barely a quarter of a market that is dominated by ATR, a prop-making joint venture between Airbus and Italian group Leonardo.

Such a disparity in sales can turn into a nightmare for the losing planemaker as its adversary benefits from higher volumes to bring down unit costs, which in turn help it sell more.

Bombardier’s Cromer has appointed an executive to pursue its plan to outsource the Q400’s cockpit and wings from Toronto, which would make the prop more competitive with lower-cost ATR, the memo said.

“We’ve got a backlog now so that allows us to evaluate all the outsourcing possibilities,” the source said.

The Q400 will continue to be produced at a plant in Canada’s largest city Toronto, which was recently sold by Bombardier but remains under lease for 3 to 5 years, until a new site can be located.

Bombardier said in a statement that is “constantly looking at strategic options for all our businesses.”

The company will also step up marketing campaigns in India and Africa, aiming to persuade airlines to pick the longer-range Q400s to connect cities with secondary destinations which either do not have service or are served by jets that have higher operating costs.

India has emerged as a fast-growing market for turboprops, benefiting both ATR and Bombardier, which won its largest single order to date for the planes last year from Indian low cost carrier SpiceJet.

Bombardier Inc
5.19
BBDB.TOTORONTO STOCK EXCHANGE
+0.14(+2.77%)
BBDb.TO

BBDb.TOAIR.PADAL.N

Promoting the Q400 for underserved markets in Africa also helped win a recent order from Ethiopian Airlines..

But the African market also has risks, with Angola’s president recently telling Euronews that a domestic airline startup was a “fictitious company,” casting doubt on its order of 6 Q400s.

Editing by Tim Hepher and Edward Tobin

BOEING. REUTERS. JUNE 20, 2018. Boeing sees 2025 for potential new jet but won't rush decision: executive

PARIS (Reuters) - The head of Boeing (BA.N) jetliner sales said on Wednesday he was confident a new mid-market jet could enter service in 2025 if Boeing took the decision to launch the new plane but stressed the U.S. planemaker would not be rushed into a decision.

Ihssane Mounir, senior vice-president for commercial sales and marketing at Boeing, told French journalists Boeing would “protect” the targeted 2025 date for entry to service, which some analysts see as ideal for planned replacement cycles.

He declined to say when Boeing could make a decision on the possible twin-aisle plane, which has been the source of speculation among airlines and investors for around two years.

“We will take the time to do this right,” Mounir told the AJPAE French aerospace journalists’ association.

Mounir, who has led Boeing sales since Oct 2016, said “conservative” estimates showed global demand for 4,000 to 5,000 middle-of-the market jets over a 20-year period.

European rival Airbus disagrees with the forecast.

Mounir dismissed latest reported plans by Airbus to enhance its best-selling A321 single-aisle jet, saying it would still not cover the same range or be able to compete economically.

Reuters reported this week that Airbus is considering adding extra endurance to the longest-range version of its A321 jet in a potential new variant dubbed A321XLR.

Mounir also said talks with Brazil’s planemaker Embraer (EMBR3.SA) over a possible commercial aerospace venture were “advanced”.

An eventual deal would exclude Embraer’s defense division and possibly its business jet unit, the two planemakers said last month, but Boeing insists it is not a “must-do” deal.

Boeing Co
343.58
BA.NNEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE
+2.46(+0.72%)
BA.N

BA.NEMBR3.SABBDb.TO

Embraer’s 70- to 130-seat E-Jets, which compete with the CSeries program designed by Bombardier Inc (BBDb.TO), account for about 60 percent of the Brazilian firm’s revenue and nearly all of its operating profit.

Reporting by Cyril Altmeyer; Writing by Matthias Blamont and Richard Lough

CANADA - US

The Globe and Mail. 20 Jun 2018. Shingle makers cut output over U.S. tariffs. Shingles: U.S. demand has dropped since duties kicked in
BRENT JANG, VANCOUVER

Canadian makers of cedar shakes and shingles say they have been forced to scale back production or even temporarily shutter mills because of new U.S. tariffs on the wood roofing materials.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection recently added Canadian shakes and shingles to the type of wood products subject to U.S. tariffs.

The duties average 20.23 per cent against most Canadian softwood lumber sent south of the border.

The newly formed Shake and Shingle Alliance is asking the U.S. Department of Commerce to review the scope of products that fall under the softwood file, arguing that cedar shakes and shingles (CSS) should be excluded.

“This scope issue is having an immediate and significant deleterious economic impact on the CSS industry,” the alliance said in documents submitted to the commerce department.

“Mills are already curtailing or shutting down production, and sales are being lost.”

Hugh Farris, a sales representative at Best Quality Cedar Products Ltd. in Maple Ridge, B.C., said times have been tough for the company’s mill since the U.S. tariffs on wood-roofing materials took effect on March 15.

The privately owned mill about 50 kilometres east of Vancouver began a fourweek shutdown in mid-May. It reopened last week, but the 55 employees are nervously watching the forestry battle, because the mill sells 99 per cent of its output to U.S. customers, Mr. Farris said. Since the duties kicked in, U.S. demand has fallen sharply. “The market for shakes and shingles has shrunk quite dramatically for us,” he said in an interview. “It almost went dead for a while. We had to shut down for a month because all of a sudden, our product went up more than 20 per cent in price.”

Mr. Farris, an industry veteran, recalls the battle over tariffs the United States imposed on Canadian shakes and shingles three decades ago. He fears the latest dispute will last through the summer and perhaps toward the end of 2018. “We still have a fair whack of inventory here. If we can’t sell enough, we will have to shut down again,” he said.

The 12-member Shake and Shingle Alliance, which includes Best Quality Cedar Products, said in the documents to the commerce department that U.S. producers are also suffering because some send their shakes and shingles for drying in Canadian kilns.

“Numerous U.S. manufacturers of CSS, mostly small and family-owned businesses, have signed letters of opposition to the application of [anti-dumping and countervailing duties],” the alliance said.

The final combined tariffs against Canadian lumber work out to a weighted average of 20.23 per cent, consisting of 14.19 per cent in countervailing duties and 6.04 per cent in anti-dumping levies. They took effect on Jan. 3 on most Canadian lumber exporters. U.S. Customs and Border Protection advised Canadian makers of shakes and shingles on March 15 that the materials had been added to merchandise subject to the softwood tariff.

“The U.S. is really stretching the scope of what they are claiming to be the injury,” Keta Kosman, publisher of Vancouverbased industry newsletter Madison’s Lumber Reporter, said in an interview. “Cedar shakes and shingles are for roofing and also siding. It’s not lumber for construction framing.”

The alliance is trying to persuade the commerce department the cedar products are thin enough to warrant tariff exemptions, and should not be confused with lumber. Five of the group’s members are based in British Columbia, four in Quebec and three in New Brunswick.

The Globe and Mail. 20 Jun 2018. Can the U.S. Congress stop the President from killing NAFTA? Congress: ‘It’s not a good place for any party to end up, with a cult-like situation’
ADRIAN MORROW, WASHINGTON, U.S. CORRESPONDENT

In the opening weeks of Donald Trump’s presidency, his advisers came to the government department responsible for trade negotiations with a question: How could they pull the country out of NAFTA?

Lawyers in the Office of the United States Trade Representative, according to a former official who was close to the discussions, told them it was complicated because Congress may have the power to block such a move.

Over a period of weeks, the career civil servants at USTR dissuaded Mr. Trump’s most nationalistic aides, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, from trying to terminate the trilateral trade pact with Canada and Mexico, the official said.

The administration determined to renegotiate the North American free-trade agreement instead. The power of lawmakers to rein in Mr. Trump has loomed large over his increasingly aggressive trade agenda during his 17 months in office.

The President has ignored the pleas of his free-trading Republican (GOP) caucus, sticking with protectionist NAFTA demands and imposing hefty tariffs on Canadian and Mexican steel and aluminium.

Now, one GOP senator is leading a legislative push to stop Mr. Trump’s metal tariffs. The move has divided caucus and raised two crucial questions, with more than $1-trillion in annual trade hanging in the balance: Can Congress stop the President from tearing the world’s largest freetrade zone asunder? And does it want to?

The U.S. Constitution’s commerce clause gives Congress the power to regulate trade. Congress has delegated some of this power to the President through various pieces of legislation. One is the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section 232 of which Mr. Trump has used to bring in the steel and aluminium tariffs. Another is the Trade Promotion Authority of 2015, which gives him the ability to negotiate trade deals.

For more than a year, the GOP and business leaders have tried to use the power of persuasion to talk Mr. Trump out of his trade protectionism. Republican members of Congress have cajoled him in private and written open letters, while Corporate America – most vocally the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – has publicly condemned his moves. Mr. Trump, however, has charged ahead.

Earlier this month, Senator Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican who chairs the foreign relation committee, tabled legislation to give Congress the ability to veto Mr. Trump’s Section 232 tariffs. It was tacked on as an amendment to an unrelated bill, but GOP leaders stopped it from coming to a vote: Even though they largely agreed with the measure, they did not want to anger Mr. Trump or his base ahead of congressional elections in the fall.

“I don’t think this is a time to pick a fight with the President,” Senator John Cornyn, the No. 2ranked Republican in the Senate, told reporters.

Mr. Corker has vowed to find another way to get similar legislation passed, even as he vented his frustration at fellow Republicans for abandoning the party’s freetrade ideals to stay on Mr. Trump’s good side.

“It’s almost becoming a cultish thing, isn’t it?” he said last week. “It’s not a good place for any party to end up, with a cult-like situation as it relates to a president that happens to be, purportedly, of the same party.”

Laurence Tribe, a Harvard University constitutional law expert, said Congress could amend the Trade Expansion Act to take away or restrict Mr. Trump’s ability to levy tariffs under Section 232. But legislators cannot give themselves the power to block individual tariffs imposed by the President, because of a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court ruling on an immigration case, which removed Congress’s ability to veto decisions by the executive branch of government.

“Congress could at any time repeal or limit the application of Section 232, but it cannot retain for itself a legislative veto over presidential determinations of what he claims to be national security exemptions under that section,” Mr. Tribe wrote in an e-mail.

So far, Mr. Trump has held back from his more extreme threat of tearing up NAFTA. If he does try, the legal complications would be even tougher to sort out than the tariff fight.

Even the USTR office remained unsure about Congress’s power to stop the President from unilaterally pulling out of the deal, after studying the question for Mr. Bannon and Mr. Navarro. The former insider, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the NAFTA deal itself and the Trade Promotion Authority appear to say two different things. While the pact on its own gives the President the power to end the deal, the TPA suggests Congress must be involved.

Messier still is the NAFTA Implementation Act, which was passed by Congress to put the provisions of the deal into effect. The act directly implements some pieces of the deal, including the Chapter 19 dispute-resolution system, but also delegates power to the President to implement others, such as setting some specific tariff rates. This means that, if Mr. Trump pulled out of NAFTA, he could unilaterally reverse some of the deal while other portions of it would stay in effect unless Congress repealed the act.

“The President can withdraw under the agreement, but that legislation would still be in place,” said Thomas Bollyky, a Georgetown University law professor and former trade negotiator. “No one wants to arrive at that point where you have a zombie NAFTA.”

Congress’s broad constitutional jurisdiction over trade means it could pass legislation curbing Mr. Trump’s power, he said – the question is more political: “I don’t think we’re there politically, yet, where the majority wants to take those actions. But they certainly have the ability to.”

Businesses and other outside groups, for their part, are stepping up the pressure. One political action committee called Republicans Fighting Tariffs aired ads on Fox Business and CNBC last week calling on Congress to step up. “These tariffs are terrible for our businesses, for our consumers, for our workers and for our economy,” an announcer intoned.

Scott Lincicome, a trade expert at the libertarian Cato Institute who is advising the group, said pressure from the forces of free trade may have failed to completely hold Mr. Trump back but argued they have at least mitigated the damage, such as by stopping him pulling out of NAFTA.

“Nobody would say that we’re in a good place on trade, but the business community has had some success in making sure we don’t go off the cliff,” he said. “We’re still standing with our toes on the edge.”

The Globe and Mail. 20 Jun 2018. How Canada can out-Trump Trump in dairy negotiations. Were Canada to signal a willingness to entertain a tariff-free dairy market, it could provide the kind of shock necessary to change underlying trade narratives among the President’s base.
TIRTHA DHAR, Associate professor and chair of the department of marketing and consumer studies at the University of Guelph’s College of Business and Economics

It is time to outdisrupt the disrupter and be more Trumpian than Donald Trump. The U.S. President has been complaining about high tariffs on dairy products and the inaccessibility of Canada’s market for U.S. dairy producers. Our opening position should be to propose a fully competitive market without any tariff and government regulations (i.e. remove supply management in Canada). This may seem like an impractical starting point, but this position would change the underlying narratives within the United States and, more importantly, among Mr. Trump’s supporters. Here’s why:

The global dairy industry is highly regulated. In almost all cases, these regulations evolved long before global trade liberalization, which started with the Uruguay round of trade negotiations in the late 1980s. Regulations are mainly driven by unique supply and demand relationships, rather than by the desire to protect domestic markets. In the dairy industry, supply takes a long time to respond to changes in demand. If left to market forces, milk markets tended to fluctuate between gluts or shortages. As a result, governments across the world have been using regulations to steady the supply of milk for consumers. Both Canadian and U.S. dairy markets are highly regulated – albeit using very different tools.

In Canada, we use supply management, while the United States uses an administered price set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture – Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMOs). FMMOs set the price of fluid milk after considering regional cost differences. The entire FMMO system can also be thought of as a type of cartel. By establishing the relationship between minimum prices across regions, the FMMO system creates a certain distribution of producer benefits across regions. These administered regional pricing differences help the United States maintain viable dairy farming across the country. To manage excess demand or supply in the U.S. market, the government also intervenes through subsidized production insurance and purchases of dairy products. Canada, under supply management, regulates both prices and the volumes to be produced.

Now, if we insist on removing all government regulations as a bargaining position, then certainly Canadian dairy farmers will be adversely affected – but so too would U.S. dairy farmers. Milk production in the United States would move from high-cost states to low-cost states in the south and west of the country. Wisconsin dairy farmers certainly do not like tariff and non-tariff barriers imposed at Canada’s border, but they would hate the idea of losing the protection of FMMOs.

Globally, the U.S. dairy sector is not as competitive as the Trump administration would have us believe. Currently, both countries allow for dairy product imports up to predetermined amounts under low-tariff quotas (TRQs). Anything above the quota limits faces prohibitive tariffs. As such, both economies have significant trade barriers to foreign dairy products. So, a proposal to abolish tariffs will hurt both sides and change the political support among dairy farmers for the U.S. proposal. In fact, if we add the remaining Group of Seven countries, European Union dairy farmers will be the key beneficiaries under dairy trade liberalization. Reciprocity in tariffs and removal of trade barriers may not be as beneficial as Mr. Trump thinks − and, in many cases, will adversely affect the President’s voter base.

It is possible that a counter argument from the U.S. side would be that Canada should dismantle its supply-management system and adopt the United States’ seemingly market-driven administered-pricing system. But we can also suggest the U.S. dairy sector will do better with a supplymanaged system. Given current hardships and gluts in the market, it is likely Wisconsin dairy farmers, for example, would overwhelmingly support such a move.

It is difficult to predict exactly where we will end up, but being aggressive with our initial negotiating position will challenge the current Trump narrative that the U.S. dairy industry is an open and competitive sector. In his view, allies such as Canada take advantage of this openness and dump products to hurt U.S. dairy farmers. And at the same time, we put up trade barriers to deny access to our market. Most U.S. farmers almost certainly prefer more government regulation going beyond FMMOs. On the other hand, our highly inefficient supplymanagement system needs to change, otherwise the dairy sector will always be the weakest link in our future trade negotiations.

If both sides can harmonize regulations then we can in fact create an environment for what Mr. Trump trumpets as “fair trade.” On both sides of the border, dairy sectors need optimum regulations, and not complete and unconditional dismantling of regulations.

FED. REUTERS. JUNE 20, 2018. World's biggest central banks fret over impact of escalating trade war

SINTRA, Portugal (Reuters) - A developing trade war between the world’s biggest economies is already weighing on business confidence and could force central banks to downgrade their outlook, the world’s most powerful central bank chiefs argued on Wednesday.

The United States has levied punitive tariffs on a number of its top trading partners, prompting retaliatory moves that threaten to spiral into a full fledge trade war, likely pushing up costs and reducing profit margins for businesses.

Sitting side by side in a rare policy panel, the heads of the U.S. Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, the Bank of Japan and the Reserve Bank of Australia all took a gloomy view on the escalating conflict, arguing that consequences could be significant.

“Changes in trade policy could cause us to have to question the outlook,” Fed Chair Jerome Powell told a central banking conference in Sintra, Portugal.

“We have a very wide range of contacts in the business world in the United States and around the world, and as we talk to them they continually and increasingly express concern about trade developments,” Powell said. “For the first time we are hearing about decision to postpone investment, postpone hiring, postpone making decisions.”

He added that such a deterioration of business confidence is not yet factored into forecasts and does not appear yet to be impacting the performance of the economy.

Such a trade war would come at an especially sensitive time for central banks as they try to move past crisis-era unconventional measures and build policy buffers for any potential downturn at the end of the current business cycle.

Speaking alongside Powell, ECB chief Mario Draghi said he had little reason to be optimistic.

“It’s not easy and it’s not yet time to see what the consequences on monetary policy of all this can be but there’s no ground to be optimistic on that,” Draghi said.

Haruhiko Kuroda who heads the BOJ took a similarly gloomy view.

“The indirect impact on the Japanese economy could be quite significant ...if this escalation of tariffs between the U.S. and China continues,” Kuroda told the Sintra conference.

Reporting by Balazs Koranyi and Francesco Canepa; Additional reporting by Howard Schneider in Washington; Editing by Matthew Mpoke Bigg

The Globe and Mail. 20 Jun 2018. OPINION. There aren’t many safe places to hide from this global trade war – the best approach may be to do nothing at all. How to handle an escalating trade war. With few safe places to hide amid global spat, best approach may be doing nothing at all
IAN McGUGAN

What should you do during the great trade war of mid-2018? Nothing sounds about right. There are two reasons to sit tight for now. The first is that it’s impossible to know if the current flare-up between Washington and just about everyone else is going to flame into something bigger. The second is that it’s tough to spot obvious havens.

At the moment, global markets appear concerned but not panicked by Donald Trump’s threat to slap tariffs on almost every Chinese import, and Beijing’s vow to retaliate if he follows through.

In Toronto, the S&P/TSX Composite Index inched down 0.4 per cent on Tuesday and in New York the S&P 500 benchmark was off by the same amount.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average suffered the biggest damage – a 1.2-per-cent decline – largely because it holds Boeing Co. and Caterpillar Inc., two businesses that depend upon exports for a large part of their sales.

But there was no sign of widespread dismay. The U.S. dollar climbed a bit, gold lost a little. The VIX, the so-called fear index, ticked up – all the way back to its level of mid-May.

The reason for the relative calm? When Mr. Trump is making trade policy, it’s hard to know how much is bluster, how much is negotiating position and how much is true conviction.

The United States is definitely not in a trade-induced coma. In fact, it’s enjoying healthy growth and its lowest unemployment rate since 2000.

The President’s current zeal on trade issues may result from the midterm elections coming up in November. His Republican Party’s control of the House of Representative is in jeopardy, and lambasting foreigners provides a convenient way for Mr. Trump to wrap himself in the flag.

If so, his passion for the topic may fade once voting is over.

For now, his threatened tariffs on Chinese goods – as well as the levies he’s already slapped on Canadian and European steel and aluminum, and his apparent willingness to end the North American free-trade agreement – leave most experts baffled. His moves seem to originate in a conviction that international trade is a battle that countries win or lose, and that the best way to ensure a trade surplus is by raising tariffs.

That doesn’t jibe with the facts. “By Trump’s logic, Brazil and India should experience enormous trade surpluses, thanks to their high average tariffs, whereas Canada, Chile and Singapore should be wallowing in deficits owing to their low average barriers,” notes Gary Clyde Hufbauer of the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington. “Experience shows otherwise.”

The market’s lack of hysteria suggests most traders are convinced that geopolitical sanity will eventually reassert itself. If so, all of today’s frightening scenarios about potential trade wars will be quickly forgotten.

“People, rightfully, are just basically saying this could happen, that could happen, but those are 30 or 40 really bad decisions in a row that have to happen for those to come to fruition,” Matt Lloyd, chief investment strategist at Advisors Asset Management, told Bloomberg.

There remains, to be sure, the frightening possibility that those 30 or 40 bad decisions could happen. Once the midterm elections are over, Mr. Trump may persist in a growing spiral of titfor-tat measures, not just with China, but with Canada and Europe as well.

The problem is that investors who want to protect themselves from that worst case don’t have a lot of hiding places.

The most obvious risk-control strategy would be to move into bonds, but interest rates are on the rise in the United States and likely in Canada as well. Higher rates are bad for bonds, because bond prices move in the opposite direction to bond yields. So raising your bond holdings would be more about limiting potential losses than avoiding them entirely.

Gold isn’t an obvious winner, either. The yellow metal usually moves in the opposite direction to the U.S. dollar, because a stronger greenback makes it more expensive for foreign buyers. If people continue to move into U.S.-dollar-denominated assets as a way to shelter from trade frictions, gold prices will probably feel the pinch.

So should investors join the crowd and bet on the U.S. dollar? Maybe. However, if trade tensions ease, they may not enjoy what comes next. On a purchasing-power parity basis, the greenback is overvalued versus the Canadian dollar and other major currencies. Betting on the U.S. dollar’s continued buoyancy is far from a safe bet.

The U.S. market’s current darlings – small-cap stocks and high-tech giants – have some appeal, but both look expensive relative to the broad market. In comparison, Canadian stocks are a bargain, but worries about NAFTA and a cooling housing market provide reasons to be cautious.

Europe has its own issues, including trade conflicts with the United States and impending Brexit. Looking further afield, emerging markets have many virtues, but are likely to be hurt as capital leaves them to take advantage of rising rates in the United States.

In sum, then, there are few obvious places to hide from a trade war. To put that another way, international conflict is likely to hurt many people and help very few. Let’s hope that Mr. Trump realizes that before it’s too late.

US - CHINA

US. CHINA. JUNE 20, 2018. Trump to meet lawmakers about 'problematic' ZTE amendment: spokeswoman

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump and a group of lawmakers from the Senate and House of Representatives will meet at the White House on Wednesday to discuss their disagreement over how to penalize Chinese telecommunications company ZTE Corp (000063.SZ) (0763.HK), a White House spokeswoman said.

The Trump administration moved to lift a ban on the company doing business with U.S. suppliers, but the Republican-led U.S. Senate on Monday included an amendment to kill the settlement as part of a defense policy bill it approved.

White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters said the meeting will focus on the “problematic” amendment to the defense bill, but she declined to go into details. A list of participants in the meeting was not immediately available.

Republicans and Democrats have expressed national security concerns about ZTE and another major Chinese telecommunications company, Huawei Technologies Ltd. But their ire against ZTE rose after it broke an agreement to discipline executives who conspired to evade U.S. sanctions on Iran and North Korea.

ZTE Corp
18.49
000063.SZSHENZHEN STOCK EXCHANGE
-2.05(-9.98%)
000063.SZ

000063.SZ0763.HK

ZTE has agreed to pay a $1 billion penalty and put $400 million in an escrow account in a U.S. bank as part of the settlement reached on June 7 to allow it to do business again with U.S. suppliers.

Shares of the Chinese telecommunications firm and its U.S. business partners fell after the Senate vote, although the measure could still be killed when Senate and House lawmakers meet in the coming weeks to forge a compromise version of the National Defense Authorization Act.

Reporting by Roberta Rampton; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Jeffrey Benkoe

US. CHINA. ZTE. REUTERS. JUNE 20, 2018. ZTE's Hong Kong shares rise after clarification of U.S. bill impact
Sijia Jiang

HONG KONG (Reuters) - Shares of China’s ZTE Corp rose as much as 18 percent in Hong Kong on Wednesday as the impact of a U.S. Senate bill that threatens to restore penalties on the company became clearer.

In clarification announcements during the noon trading break, ZTE said a National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) passed by the U.S. Senate on Monday would restore penalties on the company, but the bill would only become law if it could be reconciled with a different version passed by the House of Representatives and signed by U.S. President Trump.

That echoed what the White House and Senate backers of the bill had said overnight.

In a rare departure from White House policy, the Republican-led Senate passed the NDAA on Monday that included two provisions that prevent any federal official from removing penalties on ZTE.

That sets up a battle with the White House over whether a supplier ban on the Chinese company could be lifted as part of a $1.4 billion settlement agreement ZTE reached with the U.S. Commerce Department on June 7.

Hong Kong-listed shares of ZTE rose to as high as HK$11.62 ($1.48) on Wednesday, after declining 25 percent in the previous trading day.

In catch-up with the Hong Kong shares that have more than halved in price since trading resumed last Wednesday, ZTE’s Shenzhen-listed shares declined by the maximum daily allowed 10 percent for the fifth consecutive day.

Reporting by Sijia JiangEditing by Christopher Cushing

US. CHINA. REUTERS. JUNE 19, 2018. Chinese media denounces Trump trade moves as Beijing touts sincerity

BEIJING (Reuters) - The Trump administration has “blood lust” when it comes to pushing its trade agenda against China and wants to “suck the lifeblood” from China’s economy, a state-run newspaper said on Wednesday, stepping up the angry rhetoric over their dispute.

President Donald Trump threatened on Monday to hit $200 billion of Chinese imports with 10 percent tariffs if China follows through with retaliation against his previous targeting of $50 billion in imports, aimed at pressing China to stop what the United States sees as the theft of its intellectual property.

The world’s two biggest economies appeared increasingly headed toward open trade conflict after three rounds of high-level talks since early May failed to reach a compromise on U.S. complaints over Chinese trade practices and a $375 billion trade deficit with Beijing.

While Trump is said to have rejected China’s offer early this month to increase purchases of U.S. goods by $70 billion, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said on Wednesday the two sides had made progress in their three rounds of talks.

“During the consultations China showed ample sincerity and goodwill. I hope the U.S. side pays attention to this point,” he told a daily news briefing.

China has accused the United States of “extreme pressure and blackmailing” and vowed to retaliate, and financial markets have been hit hard by the escalating trade dispute.

Shanghai stocks staged a modest 0.3 percent recovery after tumbling nearly 4 percent on Tuesday to a two-year low, buoyed by soothing comments from the central bank chief and in state media, and a burst of share purchase plans.

‘CHINA IS UNITED’

In an editorial, the English language China Daily, often used by the government to get its message out to the world, said the United States had failed to honor an agreement on rebalancing trade, a reference to a deal stuck in May for China to significantly increase purchases of U.S. goods and services.

“Faced with this heightened intimidation from the U.S., China has no choice but to fight back with targeted and direct measures aimed at persuading the U.S. to back off, since it appears that any concessions it makes will not appease the Trump administration, which wants to suck the lifeblood from the Chinese economy,” the newspaper said.

“Beijing will have to ensure that Washington is aware that there will be heavy price to pay every action it strikes against China if it is to avoid being a victim of the Trump administration’s growing blood lust.”

In a post illustrated with an unflattering picture of Trump with his hair flying in the wind, the ruling Communist Party’s People’s Daily said on its WeChat account that China had the confidence and the ability to win the trade battle.

One of the most important reasons: China is united, it said.

“Everyone is joined in opposition against the common enemy supporting the government’s counterattack,” it said.

“The price the United States wants is not only to take advantage of China; even more so it wants to wreck China’s economy. China has really been compelled to a desperate action.”

China has been particularly upset with suggestions it is not doing enough to protect intellectual property, and says that in recent years it has radically improved protection and cracked down on copyright pirates.

Still, Washington has shown no sign of backing off, and has also stepped up its rhetoric.

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, who views China as a hostile economic and military power, said on Tuesday that China has underestimated Trump’s resolve to impose more tariffs unless it changes its “predatory” trade practices.

Reporting by Ben Blanchard; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore and Tony Munroe

US - EU

The Globe and Mail. REUTERS. JUNE 20, 2018. EU to hit U.S. imports in response to Trump tariffs
PHILIP BLENKINSOP

BRUSSELS - The European Union will begin charging import duties of 25 per cent on a range of U.S. products on Friday, in response to U.S tariffs imposed on EU steel and aluminium early this month, the European Commission said on Wednesday.

The move confirms a tit-for-tat dispute that could escalate into a full trade war, particularly if U.S. President Donald Trump carries out his threat to penalise European cars.

The Commission formally adopted a law putting in place the duties on 2.8 billion euros (US$3.2-billion) worth of U.S. goods, including steel and aluminium products, farm produce such as sweetcorn and peanuts, bourbon, jeans and motor-bikes.

“We do not want to be in this position,” EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom said in a statement, adding that the “unilateral and unjustified” U.S. decision had left the EU with no choice.

She called the EU response proportionate and in line with World Trade Organization rules and said that they would be removed if Washington removed its metal tariffs. EU steel and aluminium exports now facing U.S. tariffs are worth a total of 6.4 billion euros.

Donald Trump hit the EU, Canada and Mexico with tariffs of 25 per cent on steel and 10 per cent on aluminium at the start of June, ending exemptions that had been in place since March.

Canada has announced it will impose retaliatory tariffs on $16.6-billion worth of U.S. exports from July 1. Mexico put tariffs on American products ranging from steel to pork and bourbon two weeks ago.

Some of the products chosen are designed to target the states of Republicans, who are seeking to retain control of both chambers of Congress in November elections.

The EU also has in reserve potential tariffs of 10 per cent to 50 per cent that it could impose on a further 3.6 billion euros of U.S. imports in three years’ time.

ENERGY

OPEC. REUTERS. JUNE 20, 2018. For OPEC, oil tariff spat is short-term gain, long-term pain
Shadia Nasralla, Ernest Scheyder, Dmitry Zhdannikov

VIENNA (Reuters) - OPEC, which has lost Chinese market share to U.S. oil producers, should in theory view a tariff spat between Beijing and Washington as a boon.

But while OPEC can sell more oil to China as a result of import tariffs on U.S. crude, in the long term the trade dispute could hit economic growth and oil demand, OPEC officials and oil executives said.

“In the long term, this will have a negative effect on the global economy even if, in the short term, it might be positive for other non-U.S. producers,” Austrian oil company OMV’s chief executive Rainer Seele said on the sidelines of an OPEC seminar in Vienna. “In the long-term, (U.S. President Donald) Trump’s policies will weigh on the global economy.”

A trade spat between the U.S. and China escalated last week with China threatening to slap a 25 percent tariff on $50 billion worth of U.S. goods, including oil and refined products.

“Trade wars (are) not good news for the world economy,” Total’s chief executive Patrick Pouyanne told the seminar.

Pouyanne said it was also not good news to see tariffs on steel and aluminum which could impact the costs of oil company investments. “So I think all that is part of what OPEC ministers should keep in mind.”

Oil executives are meeting OPEC ministers this week ahead of an OPEC gathering on Friday, which is set to decide on new output policies.

U.S. President Donald Trump has called on OPEC to raise production to cool down oil prices.

CHINESE DEMAND

China has been the largest Asian buyer of U.S. crude with U.S. exports booming thanks to the country’s shale revolution.

U.S. oil exports to China exceed 300,000 barrels per day and compete with long-term OPEC suppliers such as African producers of light crude including Nigeria, Angola and Algeria.

“For sure, it is good news for Algerian crude,” an Algerian oil source said when asked about the impact of the U.S./China trade spat.

“New tariffs will support flow from others sources starting from the fourth quarter. It is also a period of robust demand in China,” the source said asking not to be named because he is not authorized to speak to the press.

An OPEC source said he believed Chinese buyers would increase purchases of light crude grades from other OPEC members such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, the UAE and even Iran.

“But in the long run ... it is not helpful. It is destructive for the global economy,” the OPEC source said, referring to the U.S./China dispute.

Majid Jafar, chief executive of UAE-based Crescent Petroleum, said: “Beyond short-term targeting of U.S. oil exports, oil producers need to be concerned about how potential major disruption to the global trade and economic systems could harm demand over the longer term.”

Jamie Webster, analyst from Boston Consulting Group, also said that even though Chinese tariffs represented an opportunity for OPEC to sell more crude they also created more oversupply in the United States, potentially pushing oil prices down.

BP’s chief executive Bob Dudley said he did not believe the trade spat could tilt the global economy into a recession.

“I think when you put sanctions and tariffs ... the world will respond and figure out ways around it and I think the demand for energy will remain.”

Scott Sheffield, executive chairman of U.S. oil producer Pioneer, said he has not discussed new tariffs either with the White House or OPEC and said he believed U.S. crude exports were set to grow to 4.0-4.5 million bpd in next several years from the current 2.6 million bpd.

“Hopefully we can find another home for that oil,” he said adding that Singapore, South Korea, Japan and the European Union could mop up what China does not take.

Additional reporting by Ahmad Ghaddar and Rania El Gamal; Writing by Dmitry Zhdannikov. Editing by Jane Merriman

US. CHINA. REUTERS. JUNE 20, 2018. U.S. shale producers warn Chinese tariffs would hit energy exports
Ernest Scheyder, Collin Eaton

HOUSTON (Reuters) - China’s proposed tariffs on U.S. petroleum imports, part of a mounting trade war between the two countries, would crimp sales to the shale industry’s largest customer, adding new pressure on U.S. crude prices, energy executives and analysts said in interviews this week.

China has said it would slap a 25 percent tariff on imports of U.S. crude, natural gas and coal on July 6 if Washington went ahead, as planned, with its own tariffs on Chinese goods that day.

Energy would be added for the first time to a burgeoning trade dispute that has hit imports of Chinese metals and solar panels, and exports of U.S. medical equipment and soybeans.

Targeting petroleum puts the Trump administration’s “energy dominance” agenda in Beijing’s cross-hairs as U.S. shale has grabbed share from Middle East suppliers in Asia.

China is the largest customer for U.S. crude, importing about 363,000 barrels a day in the six months ended in March. Thomson Reuters shipping data shows those exports have increased since, rising to an expected 450,000 bpd in July.

“It is going to hurt everyone for the short term,” said Ron Gasser, vice president at Mammoth Exploration, a west Texas shale producer. While U.S. crude will continue flowing to market even with tariffs, “it’ll force you to put your oil somewhere else, and it’ll cost you more” to line up other buyers.

U.S. oil exports have steadily grown since the four-decade-old ban on crude exports was lifted at the end of 2015.

China’s tariff threat caught U.S. producers off guard because it had been discussing buying more U.S. energy and agricultural products to reduce its $375 billion trade surplus with the United States. The levies could boost suppliers of West African crude at the expense of U.S. exports.

The tariffs are “creating a whole new set of uncertainties on top of what’s already there,” Daniel Yergin, vice chairman of consultancy IHS Markit, said on Tuesday as he arrived in Vienna to attend this week’s OPEC’s International Seminar.

On Friday, OPEC oil ministers will gather to consider sharply increasing the group’s production this year, a move advanced forth by Saudi Arabia and Russia. The change is opposed by members Algeria, Iran, Iraq and Venezuela. The United States also recently set new sanctions on Iran’s petroleum industry, which is expected to disrupt oil flows.

“The global oil industry didn’t really worry or think about trade issues. Now, trade issues are moving really pretty fast up the agenda,” said Yergin.

The impact likely would be temporary as U.S. oil becomes less attractive to Chinese buyers. But the tit-for-tat expansion of tariffs has U.S. oil industry officials and politicians calling on the Trump administration to move cautiously.

The American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers Association on Tuesday called on the president “to work with China - and all nations - to reduce barriers to competition rather than promote them.”

U.S. Senator Michael Enzi, Republican of Wyoming, a coal and oil producing state, wants the administration to be “wary of how these retaliatory measures from China could seriously impact the industry,” spokesman Max D’Onofrio said on Monday.

In coal country, there are worries the trade war could harm exports, said Steve Roberts, president of the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce. “China is an enormously important trading partner,” he said.

Some U.S. producers said growing demand for U.S. energy would overcome the impact of China’s tariffs just as higher oil prices this year have not slowed the global thirst for oil and natural gas.

Gary C. Evans, chief executive of shale producer Energy Hunter Resources, called the tariffs “a lot of saber rattling” that will not hurt exports of U.S. crude oil or liquefied natural gas, the latter a fuel that China has not included on its list of products facing a tariff.

“Crude oil is a fungible global commodity,” Evans said. “Without growing U.S. crude supply and exports, global prices could today be multiples higher than they currently are.”

Reporting by Collin Eaton and Liz Hampton in Houston and Ernest Scheyder in Vienna; additional reporting by Valerie Volcovici in Washington and Devika Krishna Kumar; Writing by Gary McWilliams; Editing by Richard Chang

TOURISM

StatCan. 2018-06-20. Travel between Canada and other countries, April 2018

• Travel abroad: 4,914,820; April 2018; 0.1% increase (monthly change)
• Travel from abroad to Canada: 2,581,382; April 2018; -3.1% decrease (monthly change)
• Source(s): Table 24-10-0005-01: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=2410000501

US residents make fewer trips to Canada in April 2018

US residents made 2.0 million trips to Canada in April, down 4.0% from March and down 2.8% from April 2017. The declines were mainly attributable to decreases in car travel.

After accounting for normal seasonal variation, the number of car trips by US residents to Canada totalled 1.3 million in April, down 5.3% from the previous month and down 5.7% from the same month last year. Overnight plane trips accounted for 416,000 trips, down 2.7% from March, but 3.4% higher than April 2017.

Of the car trips to Canada made by US residents, 637,000 were same-day car trips, down 6.2% from March and a decline of 8.5% from April 2017. There were 655,000 overnight car trips to Canada made by US residents, down 4.4% from March and down 2.8% from April 2017. All border provinces except Manitoba reported reduced car trips by US residents in April, on both a month-over-month and year-over-year basis.

The three most-visited provinces by all modes of transportation were Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec.

The value of the Canadian dollar, historically an important factor influencing the movement of people across the Canada-US border, rose from US$0.77 in March to US$0.79 in April. In April 2017, the exchange rate was US$0.74 for each Canadian dollar.

Travel to Canada from overseas is stable

Residents of overseas countries (countries other than the United States) made 582,000 trips to Canada in April. This was little changed (-0.1%) from March, but up 1.9% from April 2017. Over three-quarters of these trips were by European and Asian travellers.

The number of trips by travellers from Europe rose 2.8% over March to 250,000, while travellers from Asia made 204,000 trips to Canada, down 2.3% from March.

Overnight travel to the United States rises

Canadian residents made 3.8 million trips to the United States in April. An increase in overnight travel was more than offset by a decline in same-day trips, resulting in a slight decline from March (-0.4%). However, the total number of trips by Canadian residents to the United States was 8.7% higher than in April 2017.

The majority of trips (2.9 million) were made by car, down 1.3% from the previous month. Same-day car trips fell 3.5% from the previous month to 2.0 million. In contrast, overnight car trips rose 3.5% from March to 972,000.

Overnight plane trips increased 1.8% from the previous month to 734,000.

Canadian travel to overseas countries continues to climb

Canadian residents made 1.1 million trips to overseas destinations (countries other than the United States) in April, up 2.0% from March and 8.5% higher than April 2017. This represents the highest April total on record.

FULL DOCUMENT: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/daily-quotidien/180620/dq180620a-eng.pdf?st=OQJ_cEmm

NOMINATION

Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. June 20, 2018. Government of Canada reappoints Anil Arora as Chief Statistician of Canada. Arora will continue to lead as Government invests in renewed and modernized Statistics Canada

Ottawa, ON - Today, the Honourable Navdeep Bains, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, announced the reappointment of Anil Arora as Chief Statistician of Canada.

The appointment is for a term of five years, effective immediately. It was made following an open, transparent and merit-based selection process. He was first appointed Chief Statistician in September 2016.

Mr. Arora has spent over 23 years at Statistics Canada leading several high-profile initiatives, including systems that today provide Canadians interactive online access to data and publications, as well as developing and implementing the current Census methodology that allows Canadians to complete their questionnaire securely and online.

He has played an active role internationally over his career, working extensively with the United Nations, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, as well as having led the International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities.

The reappointment comes at an important time, notably as the Government invests in a renewed and modernized Statistics Canada. Budget 2018 included a number of measures to ensure the agency continues to respond to data needs of the 21st century.

Quotes

“As the digital transformation has swept across the globe, our economy has become increasingly data-driven. Statistics Canada provides accurate, reliable and impartial information upon which businesses and Canadians can make evidence-based decisions. I am confident Mr. Arora will continue to succeed in leading our national statistical agency.”

– The Honourable Navdeep Bains, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development

“It is an honour for me to be appointed the Chief Statistician of a world-leading statistical agency. We are a dedicated team of experts, committed to providing Canadians with high-quality data and insights they trust for important decision making. ‎It is especially exciting for me to lead innovative change at the agency during a time when our society and economy are generating data like never before and, at the same time, looking to us for factual evidence and competent data stewardship.”

– Anil Arora, Chief Statistician of Canada

Quick facts

• Statistics Canada produces statistics that help Canadians better understand their country—its population, resources, economy, society and culture.
• The Statistics Act was amended in 2017 to give the Chief Statistician authority for decisions on statistical matters and to increase government transparency.

WORLD REFUGEES DAY

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. June 20, 2018. Ministers Hussen, Freeland and Bibeau mark World Refugee Day. Statement

Ottawa, ON – The Honourable Ahmed Hussen, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship; the Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Minister of Foreign Affairs; and the Honourable Marie-Claude Bibeau, Minister of International Development, today issued this statement on World Refugee Day:

“Each year, millions of people are forced out of their homes due to conflict, war and persecution. In 2017, a record 68 million people were forcibly displaced from countries in continued crises such as Syria, South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Yemen, and Myanmar. Canada has a longstanding tradition of providing humanitarian support to people from all over the world fleeing war and persecution, and we remain committed to helping refugees as they rebuild their lives in safety.

“No one becomes a refugee by choice. We are all capable of helping refugees rebuild their lives and protecting them from famine and warfare.

“The successful resettlement and integration of refugees has been critical to the development of our nation. Throughout Canada’s history, we have seen refugees and their descendants become productive and contributing members of our economy, our society and our cultural life.

“Since November 2015, our country has welcomed more than 90,000 refugees, including 52,000 Syrian refugees. We have welcomed more than 1,300 survivors of Daesh and their family members, including vulnerable Yazidi women and children, and as announced in Budget 2018, we will resettle an additional 1,000 vulnerable women and girls from conflict zones around the world. We are proud to be among the top resettlement countries globally.

“Canada is addressing the gaps in education for the world’s most vulnerable women and girls. Two weeks ago, at the G7 Summit in Charlevoix, Canada, the European Union, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom and the World Bank announced an historic $3.8 billion dollar investment for girls’ and women’s education and skills-training in crisis and conflict situations.

“Further, the Government recognizes the specific vulnerabilities faced by refugees who identify as LGBTQ+. The Government is committed to working with organizations internationally, nationally and locally to further enhance its understanding of the needs of this vulnerable population to ensure their protection.

“We remain concerned about the welfare of refugees worldwide, and particularly in recent months, the welfare of the Rohingya people and other minorities in Myanmar and Rakhine State. We will continue working with our international partners to address the protection needs of those displaced by the conflict.

“While the Government remains committed to respecting domestic and international obligations regarding refugees, we continue to enforce our laws and procedures to protect the border, and the health and safety of Canadians.

“Canada is a country that values compassion, openness and diversity. These are the principles that we honour on this World Refugee Day”.

________________

LGCJ.: