SUV Trade-In Values Plummet

By Edward Niedermeyer - The Truth About Cars
April 30, 2008 - 1,669 Views
As U.S. fuel prices head for $4 a gallon, US News and World Report takes a look-see at SUV resale values. The mag divines that weakening demand has dramatically eroded resale values. (Ya think?) Citing a CNW Marketing Research study, USN&WR says March sales of used SUVs are down 14 percent from last year, after dropping eight percent in the first two months of this year. The story also kicks some journalistic tires at used car lots, where dealers no longer want to stock large vehicles. A Sales Manager from a Florida Chrysler/Jeep dealer says "some large vehicles are dropping thousands of dollars in value each month… Anything diesel has dropped $5,000 in the past five months." So where are all the body-on-frames going? Overseas, according to the Sales Manager of a Florida Nissan dealership. Apparently (hey it's a used car dealer), the store's been exporting about one car a month" in recent years. But this year they average "roughly 10." (Roughly? Would that be, say, five?) Add nasty depreciation onto huge operating costs, and it's not hard to not see the future of the SUV.US News and World Report »
view reader comments on this article at The Truth About Cars

Canadian Government Struggles With Biofuel Issues

Canadian Government Struggles With Biofuel Issues
By Glenn Swanson - The truth about Cars
April 30, 2008

Last year, the Canadian government initiated an "aggressive push" to produce fuel from crops. The 2007 federal budget included a C$2.2b support package for biofuels. According to a report in the Globe and Mail, "political consensus in favor of biofuels is suddenly breaking down." Member of Parliament (MP) Keith Martin thinks it's time to step back and "put a moratorium on it now so people can actually wrap their heads around the facts; the current biofuel strategy is deeply misguided." The president of the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association claims "the issues that come up have nothing to do with food supply." Gord Quaiattin says concerned Canadian should blame rising oil prices for food costs. "Everybody's screaming about 'food for fuel'; it's too bad we can't have a rational debate in this country," sighs MP David McGuinty. Still, it may be too late to shut the door: the government has poured billions into a biofuel facilities fund. Fourteen plants are running already and six more being built- so this horse may have already left the barn.Globe and Mail »
read viewer responses about this article at The Truth About Cars

Are Hybrid cars emitting dangerous Electromagnetic Fields?

Fear, but Few Facts, on Hybrid Risk - New York Times
By JIM MOTAVALLI
Published: April 27, 2008
ALMOST without exception, scientists and policy makers agree that hybrid vehicles are good for the planet. To a small but insistent group of skeptics, however, there is another, more immediate question: Are hybrids healthy for drivers?

There is a legitimate scientific reason for raising the issue. The flow of electrical current to the motor that moves a hybrid vehicle at low speeds (and assists the gasoline engine on the highway) produces magnetic fields, which some studies have associated with serious health matters, including a possible risk of leukemia among children.
With the batteries and power cables in hybrids often placed close to the driver and passengers, some exposure to electromagnetic fields is unavoidable. Moreover, the exposure will be prolonged — unlike, say, using a hair dryer or electric shaver — for drivers who spend hours each day at the wheel.
Some hybrid owners have actually tested their cars for electromagnetic fields using hand-held meters, and a few say they are alarmed by the results.
Their concern is not without merit; agencies including the National Institutes of Health and the National Cancer Institute acknowledge the potential hazards of long-term exposure to a strong electromagnetic field, or E.M.F., and have done studies on the association of cancer risks with living near high-voltage utility lines.
While Americans live with E.M.F.’s all around — produced by everything from cellphones to electric blankets — there is no broad agreement over what level of exposure constitutes a health hazard, and there is no federal standard that sets allowable exposure levels. Government safety tests do not measure the strength of the fields in vehicles — though Honda and Toyota, the dominant hybrid makers, say their internal checks assure that their cars pose no added risk to occupants.
Researchers with expertise in hybrid-car issues say that while there may not be cause for alarm, neither should the potential health effects be ignored.
“It would be a mistake to jump to conclusions about hybrid E.M.F. dangers, as well as a mistake to outright dismiss the concern,” said Jim Kliesch, a senior engineer for the clean vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “Additional research would improve our understanding of the issue.”
Charges that automobiles expose occupants to strong electromagnetic fields were made even before hybrids became popular. In 2002, a Swedish magazine claimed its tests found that three gasoline-powered Volvo models produced high E.M.F. levels. Volvo countered that the magazine had compared the measurements with stringent standards advanced by a Swedish labor organization, not the more widely accepted criteria established by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, a group of independent scientific experts based near Munich.
Much of the discussion over high E.M.F. levels has sprung from hybrid drivers making their own readings. Field-strength detectors are widely available; a common model, the TriField meter, costs about $145 online. But experts and automakers contend that it is not simple for a hybrid owner to make reliable, meaningful E.M.F. measurements.
The concern over high E.M.F. levels in hybrids has come not just from worrisome instrument readings, but also from drivers who say that their hybrids make them ill.
Neysa Linzer, 58, of Bulls Head in Staten Island, bought a new Honda Civic Hybrid in 2007 for the 200 miles a week she drove to visit grocery stores in her merchandising job for a supermarket chain. She said that the car reduced her gasoline use, but there were problems — her blood pressure rose and she fell asleep at the wheel three times, narrowly averting accidents.
“I never had a sleepiness problem before,” Ms. Linzer said, adding that it was her own conclusion, not a doctor’s, that the car was causing the symptoms.
Ms. Linzer asked Honda to provide her with shielding material for protection from the low-frequency fields, but the company declined her request last August, saying that its hybrid cars are “thoroughly evaluated” for E.M.F.’s before going into production. Ms. Linzer’s response was to have the car tested by a person she called her wellness consultant, using a TriField meter.
The TriField meter is made by AlphaLab in Salt Lake City. The company’s president, Bill Lee, defends its use for automotive testing even though the meter is set up to test alternating current fields, whereas the power moving to and from a hybrid vehicle’s battery is direct current. “Generally, an A.C. meter is accurate in detecting large electromagnetic fields or microwaves,” he said.

Testing with a TriField meter led Brian Collins of Encinitas, Calif., to sell his 2001 Honda Insight just six months after he bought it — at a loss of $7,000. He said the driver was receiving “dangerously high” E.M.F. levels of up to 135 milligauss at the hip and up to 100 milligauss at the upper torso. These figures contrasted sharply with results from his Volkswagen van, which measured one to two milligauss.

Mr. Collins said he tried to interest Honda in the problem in 2001, but was assured that his car was safe. He purchased shielding made of a nickel-iron alloy, but because of high installation costs decided to sell the car instead.
A spokesman for Honda, Chris Martin, points to the lack of a federally mandated standard for E.M.F.’s in cars. Despite this, he said, Honda takes the matter seriously. “All our tests had results that were well below the commission’s standard,” Mr. Martin said, referring to the European guidelines. And he cautions about the use of hand-held test equipment. “People have a valid concern, but they’re measuring radiation using the wrong devices,” he said.
Kent Shadwick, controller of purchasing services for the York Catholic District School Board in York, Ontario, evaluated the Toyota Prius for fleet use. Mr. Shadwick said it was tested at various speeds, and under hard braking and rapid acceleration, using a professional-quality gauss meter.
“The results that we saw were quite concerning,” he said. “We saw high levels in the vehicle for both the driver and left rear passenger, which has prompted us to explore shielding options and to consider advocating testing of different makes and models of hybrid vehicles.”
In a statement, Toyota said: “The measured electromagnetic fields inside and outside of Toyota hybrid vehicles in the 50 to 60 hertz range are at the same low levels as conventional gasoline vehicles. Therefore there are no additional health risks to drivers, passengers or bystanders.”
The statement adds that the measured E.M.F. in a Prius is 1/300th of the European guideline.
The tests conducted by hybrid owners rarely approach the level of thoroughness of those run by automakers.
Donald B. Karner, president of Electric Transportation Applications in Phoenix, who tested E.M.F. levels in battery-electric cars for the Energy Department in the 1990s, said it was hard to evaluate readings without knowing how the testing was done. He also said it was a problem to determine a danger level for low-frequency radiation, in part because dosage is determined not only by proximity to the source, but by duration of exposure. “We’re exposed to radio waves from the time we’re born, but there’s a general belief that there’s so little energy in them that they’re not dangerous,” he said.
Mr. Karner has developed a procedure for testing hybrids, but he said that the cost — about $5,000 a vehicle — had prevented its use.
Lawrence Gust of Ventura, Calif., a consultant with a specialty in E.M.F.’s and electrical sensitivity, was one of the electrical engineers who tested Mr. Collins’s Insight in 2001. He agreed that the readings were high but did not want to speculate on whether they were harmful. “There are big blocks of high-amp power being moved around in a hybrid, the equivalent of horsepower,” he said. “I get a lot of clients who ask if they should buy hybrid electric cars, and I say the jury is still out.” original article located at New York Times

Better get ready for $2.25 gas

Everything from manufacturing to transportation will be affected
Nicolas Van Praet, Financial Post Published: Thursday, April 24, 2008

If you think gas prices are bad now wait until the price of oil skyrockets to $200 a barrel. A CIBC economist says this is a likely scenario and will affect everything from gas prices to the manufacturing ...

Gasoline prices in North America will soar over the next four years to $2.25 a litre, causing a massive jolt to the continent's manufacturing base not seen since the oil shocks of the 1970s, a leading economist is warning.
Jeffrey Rubin, chief economist and strategist with Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, forecasts in a new report titled The Age of Scarcity that Canadians and Americans should brace for $2.25-a-litre gasoline, or about $7 a gallon, by 2012. That's nearly double the current nationwide average price for regular unleaded gas of $1.23. The price will top a record $1.40 this summer as it starts its climb, Mr. Rubin said.
As millions of people in emerging countries such as India and China buy their first cars in the months and years ahead, the economist argues, oil supply will fail to meet the new demand. And as they drive more, North Americans will drive less.
It is an eye-popping prediction from an economist who's been proven correct on his bold calls before. And it would have monstrous effects, widening the divide between Canada's have and have-not provinces and forcing up the price of anything that needs to be transported.
In the wake of the 1973 oil crisis, a 55-miles-per-hour speed limit was imposed on U.S. highways. Toyotas and Hondas became big sellers. And Alberta got rich. This time, Mr. Rubin said, hybrids will go "from marketing and PR fluff to the core of car production." People will move closer to where they work. And Alberta could get even richer.
"I think there will be fewer people on the road in North America in five years than there is right now," Mr. Rubin said in an interview Thursday. "For everybody who's about to get on the road by buying a new Tata or a Chery car in the developing world, someone's going to have to get off the road in this part of the world. There's just not enough gasoline to go around."
Gasoline, diesel and other transport fuels now account for over half of the world's oil usage and have driven more than 90% of demand growth in recent years, Mr. Rubin said in his report. By 2012, consumption of oil in the rest of the world will exceed that used by developed OECD member countries, he said, a nearly unthinkable prospect a little over a decade ago.
Global Insight, a major market research firm that specializes in the auto industry, estimates that for every $10 increase in the price of a barrel of oil, manufacturers of new vehicles lose 190,000 sales annually in the United States as people's financial priorities shift away from buying a new car. Based on Mr. Rubin's forecast that oil prices will soar to $225 a barrel by 2012, that works out to roughly two million vehicles that are not needed.
That's more than all the new cars and trucks sold in Canada annually, and about the same as all the vehicles Ford Motor Co. made at all its factories in the United States last year.
Automakers are not ready for this kind of dramatic change and would suffer a "huge blow" from it, said John Wolkonowicz, Global Insight's senior automotive analyst for North America.
"In the short term, it would create absolute hell," Mr. Wolkonowicz said, particularly for Ford, General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC. Detroit's carmakers would see more of their traditional profits from trucks eroded as consumers move quickly to more fuel-efficient cars, he said.
Transportation companies are already making major adjustments to respond to higher fuel prices. Airlines such as Horizon Air and Porter Airlines are choosing turboprop planes over jets. Railways are replacing older locomotives with more fuel-efficient ones. Carmakers have teams of engineers trying to cut vehicle weight and make better engines.
Oil at $225 per barrel would take those efforts to an entirely new level. But some see other solutions.
David Cole, chairman of the Centre for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich., argued the industry is at the edge of a revolution in fuels that will see cellulosic biofuel made from non-food sources become economically viable and come on stream over the next few years. "I think this is really going to dampen the speculation on petroleum."
Global Insight's own forecast calls for the price of oil to come down from its run-up near $120-a-barrel this week. "We're not forecasting that or anything close to [Mr. Rubin's prognosis]," Mr. Wolkonowicz said. "We're forecasting prices are going to come down because higher prices will spur more exploration."
National Post, with files from Scott Deveau

UK New Car Carbon Tax Scarfs $5b, Does Sweet FA for CO2

More Global warming fraud - government imposed carbon taxes will not reduce carbon emissions. Read the latest article in the Truth About Cars and The Daily Mail.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
UK New Car Carbon Tax Scarfs $5b, Does Sweet FA for CO2
By Edward Niedermeyer - THE TRUTH ABOUT CARSApril 24, 2008 - 320 Views
The Daily Mail reports that the UK's new carbon tax works spectacularly… as a revenue-builder. The recently-increased "showroom tax" costs consumers between $500 and $2k on cars based on their C02 emissions. According to her Majesty's Treasury, the carbon tax will add nearly $5b to the government's coffers. And here's the kicker: the gov's own figures will only decrease auto-related greenhouse gas emissions by… wait for it… less than one percent. Conservative Treasury spokesman Justine Greening discovered the discrepancy between the cost to consumers and benefit to the environment during that awesome fixture of the British Parliamentary government known as "Parliamentary answers." "This is a massive tax hike which will have virtually no impact on the environment," said Greening. "Despite their claims, the Government don't expect this move to change behaviour at all - it is just another eco stealth tax of the worst kind." Hear hear.

Original article and readers comments can be found here: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/uk-carbon-tax-works-for-increasing-government-revenue/

What do you call your car?

By Theodore LeverettApril 24, 2008 - 335 Views THE TRUTH ABOUT CARS
Sometimes a badge just isn't enough of a name for a car– especially now that automakers have fallen head-over-heels in love with alphanumerics. Hey kids! Let's all jump in the MKZ! So, how's you're G35x? Mine's the LS 600hL. Growing up, our family car was a 1978 Ford LTD Country Squire. I mean, how American is that? Not very. But at least it was aspirational. (Flex? Flex what?) As an homage to its size and apparent indestructibility, we called the beast "the battlewagon." A brown Ford wagon of my acquaintance was called "Mudblup" after the amorphous cartoon character in the Teddy Ruxpin (Worlds of Wonder) series. A white '96 Monte Carlo with was not-so-creatively (but entirely accurately) known as "Moby." And my '92 T-Bird has long been nicknamed "the Thunderchicken." Of course, a lot of people (i.e. women) simply came up with a cute name like "Sally" and called it good. While carmakers are still going down the spyplane and government agency route (G8), I reckon consumers have taken matters into their own hands. So, how about you? What do you (or your significant other) call your cars? [We welcome Mr. Leverett to the TTAC team and thank Jonny Lieberman for not having a cow over this QOTD usurpation.]

Original article and reader comments can be found at: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/question-of-the-day-what-do-you-call-your-car/

Air Pollution Diminishes Fragrance of Flowers

Study: Air Pollution Diminishes Fragrance of Flowers
22 April 2008 - Green Car Congress
Air pollution from power plants and automobiles is diminishing the fragrance of flowers and thereby inhibiting the ability of pollinating insects to follow scent trails to their source, a new University of Virginia study indicates. This could partially explain why wild populations of some pollinators, particularly bees, are declining in several areas of the world, including California and the Netherlands.
The study appears online in the journal Atmospheric Environment.
The scent molecules produced by flowers in a less polluted environment, such as in the 1800s, could travel for roughly 1,000 to 1,200 meters; but in today’s polluted environment downwind of major cites, they may travel only 200 to 300 meters. This makes it increasingly difficult for pollinators to locate the flowers.
—Co-author Jose D. Fuentes, a professor of environmental sciences, UVa
The result, potentially, is a vicious cycle where pollinators struggle to find enough food to sustain their populations, and populations of flowering plants, in turn, do not get pollinated sufficiently to proliferate and diversify.
Other studies, as well as the actual experience of farmers, have shown that populations of bees, particularly bumblebees, and butterflies have declined greatly in recent years. Fuentes and his team of UVa researchers, including Quinn McFrederick and James Kathilankal, believe that air pollution, especially during the peak period of summer, may be a factor.
To investigate this, they created a mathematical model of how the scents of flowers travel with the wind. The scent molecules produced by flowers are very volatile and they quickly bond with pollutants such as ozone, hydroxyl and nitrate radicals, which destroy the aromas they produce. This means that instead of traveling intact for long distances with the wind, the scents are chemically altered and the flowers, in a sense, no longer smell like flowers. This forces pollinators to search farther and longer and possibly to rely more on sight and less on smell.
The scientists calculated scent levels and distances that scents can travel under different conditions, from relatively unpolluted pre-industrial revolution levels, to the conditions now existing in rural areas downwind from large cities.
It quickly became apparent that air pollution destroys the aroma of flowers, by as much as 90 percent from periods before automobiles and heavy industry. And the more air pollution there is in a region, the greater the destruction of the flower scents.
—Jose Fuentes
The National Science Foundation funded the investigation.
Resources
Quinn S. McFrederick, James C. Kathilankal and Jose D. Fuentes; Air pollution modifies floral scent trails; Atmospheric Environment Volume 42, Issue 10, March 2008, Pages 2336-2348 DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.12.033

Chrysler Opens Chinese Design Office

By Edward Niedermeyer The Truth About Cars

April 17, 2008 - 384 Views

Chrysler LLC announced today that it has opened a design office in China, a move the Detroit Free Press calls "part of a much larger expansion by the Auburn Hills automaker to beef up its product design efforts outside the United States." While Chrysler slashes as many as 25k North American jobs this year, it plans on recruiting 1k engineers outside from outside the United States. Chrysler's Chinese operations are expanding to include more local suppliers, in India the local engineering staff is set to double. Arguing that Chrysler is designing models specific to rapidly growing markets abroad, VP for product development Frank Klegon points to the success of its Mexico division (which is set to add 450 new staff). "They're already doing unique product for Mexico that's designed and developed in Santa Fe and for sale in Mexico by themselves," says Klegon. "It's a resource center that we're building upon. They started out as more of a vehicle development and test facility and moved them into design." But something doesn't add up here. If this is all about "unique products for unique markets," then why is Chrysler selling a rebadged (Chinese) Chery A1 in Mexico as a Dodge?Detroit Free Press »

Gas price shatters record

Gas price shatters record
by THE CANADIAN PRESS

NEW YORK -- Retail gasoline prices in the United States pushed past a record high yesterday as Canadian prices continued to rise as well, although a bit more slowly because of the strong Canadian dollar.

U.S. prices moved to more than $3.40 US a gallon - about 89 cents US a litre - yesterday, fulfilling expectations that they'll keep climbing toward $4 US a gallon as the summer driving season approaches.

Oil prices, meanwhile, fluctuated after setting yet another record high overnight. Analysts said investors were locking in gains from crude's ongoing rally and trying to determine whether prices have more room to rise.

At the pump, the average U.S. price of a gallon of unleaded gas rose 1.9 cents overnight to $3.418 US a gallon, according to a survey of stations by AAA and the Oil Price Information Service.

In Canada, gasoline prices are $1.16 a litre and higher in most markets. They were around $1.18 yesterday in Edmonton.
Some industry analysts expect the cost of fuel to increase to between $1.30 and $1.40 a litre this summer.

Prices appear to be rising more slowly in Canada in part because the high value of the Canadian dollar is offsetting some of the higher costs from rising oil prices.

Since crude oil is traded in U.S. dollars, a rising loonie against the American greenback has eaten into a part of the increase. As well, gasoline imported from the United States is cheaper to Canadian consumers when the loonie soars.

Wholesale cars sales drop 1.8%

Wholesale trade drops 1.8% in February
By Krystle Chow, Ottawa Business Journal Staff
Fri, Apr 18, 2008 8:00 AM EST


Wholesale trade fell by 1.8 per cent in February, wiping out the gains made in the previous month as declines occurred in five of the six wholesale sectors, according to a report by Statistics Canada.

Sales by Canadian wholesalers dropped month-over-month to a seasonally adjusted $42.6 billion, driven down by a four-per-cent decline in automotive product sales to $7.1 billion. It was the segment's lowest level since July 2005, as motor vehicle sales fell for the third month in a row.

"Some of the recent decline can be explained by lower prices, as manufacturers took advantage of the strength of the Canadian dollar to offer attractive discounts on new vehicles sold in Canada," the report read. "The total value of motor vehicle sales has also been affected by a shift in consumer preferences to smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles."

Significant downward pressure also came from the "other products" category, which includes wholesalers of agricultural chemicals, recycled materials, paper products and non-agricultural products, where sales fell by 3.4 per cent to $5.8 billion.

After adjusting for price change effects, wholesale trade fell by two per cent month-over-month.

Chrysler/Nissan/Chery/Suzuki/Mitsubishi Inbreeding Explained

By Frank Williams - The Truth About Cars
April 15, 2008 - 1,008 Views
Let's recap. Chrysler builds pickup trucks for Mitsubishi. Chery is working on a U.S.-market subcompact for Chrysler. Chrysler is selling a rebadged Chery as a Dodge in Mexico. Volkswagen is selling Chrysler-built minivans in the U.S. Nissan is building small trucks for Suzuki to sell in the U.S. and Versas to be sold as Chryslers in Brazil. Chrysler has been talking with Great Wall Motors in China about something. Now, just in case all these relationships aren't confusing enough, The Detroit Free Press reports that Chrysler and Nissan announced Chrysler will build a version of the Ram pickup in Mexico for Nissan to sell in the U.S. In return, Nissan will build a North American-bound small car in Japan for Chrysler. In a way, all this makes sense, particularly the Chrysler-Nissan deals. After all, Chrysler has a well-established presence in the truck and van market while Nissan and Chery specialize in small cars. All they're doing is capitalizing on each other's strengths. However, the more Nissan and Chrysler snuggle-up together, the more it seems that Nissan is testing the waters for establishing an American partner– something Carlos Ghosn has promised, eventually. Don't be surprised if in the next few years you hear that Chrysler's building vans for Nissan or that Nissan's supplying Altima drivetrain components for the Sebring/Avenger. And when Cerberus starts the flip 'n strip with Chrysler, Nissan will be right there to pick up the pieces. You heard it here first.

Globalization a threat to the Canadian Automotive Economy

Living in Guelph I am sure our readers are aware that Guelph is a major center for automotive parts manufacturing and our factories are packing up, moving down to Mexico or just plain closing the doors leaving people in Guelph jobless. As a citizen and an automotive business owner I urge all Canadians to start researching the long-term effects of NAFTA and globalization, create awareness and take your country back because Globalization a threat to the Canadian Automotive Industry, the Canadian economy as a whole and the freedom of Canadian citizens.

As some of you may or may not be aware the Canadian government has been passing several small bills in an effort to move globalization forward. The Canadian government in conjunction with the United States government has been slipping small bills through and making changes in law under the nose of the people to avoid the disagreement of the people and by dissecting these bills into small pieces they do not breach the Charter of Rights or should I say the don't alarm anyone as to the breaches. The majority of these changes have gone un-noticed by the citizens and have of course by-passed any media attention. Please read the following article written by Global Research :

Agenda for the North American Summit
By Andrew G. Marshall
URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8224

Global Research, February 29, 2008

The next North American Summit is set to be held on April 21-22, 2008, in New Orleans, as a fitting memorial – returning to the location where the state turned its back on the people, literally leaving them to die; and where they now meet to turn their backs once again on the people, leaving them in the dark and their countries near death.

In preparation for the next North American (leaders’) Summit, the designated ministers from Mexico, the United States and Canada, met February 28 under the auspices of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). Industry Canada issued a press release February 28, 2008, which stated, "This year marks the fifteenth anniversary of the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). NAFTA has been a tremendous success: trade and commerce among our countries have grown exponentially." Then the press release made the statement that, "Trilateral merchandise trade is approximately $900 billion in 2007, significantly contributing to economic growth and increased standards of living in all three countries." Given the past few months of economic turmoil, record-breaking oil prices, a collapsing US dollar, and fears of a "1930’s style Depression," it’s a little premature to be saying our standard of living is on the rise.

After giving lip service to, "respecting the sovereignty, laws, unique heritage, and culture of each country," it states, "we have reviewed progress achieved since Montebello and have directed officials to" five key areas of integration, "Competitiveness, Safe Food & Products, Energy and Environment, Smart & Secure Borders, [and] Emergency Management and Preparedness."

Competitiveness:

The press release states that they will direct officials to, "Continue to implement the strategy to combat piracy and counterfeiting, and build on the Regulatory Cooperation Framework by pursuing collaboration through sectoral initiatives, with an emphasis on the automotive sector." So, it’s now time to cement together the already extremely integrated automotive industries of Canada and the US, as currently the Canadian "auto and parts makers export more than 85 per cent of their production south of the border."

It was recently reported that, "More than three-quarters of Canada's exports — including oil, minerals, lumber and passenger vehicles — are sold to Americans. The U.S. housing collapse already has slashed sales of Canadian lumber. Now, as a historic decline in home values causes American consumers to retrench, U.S. auto sales this year are headed to a 10-year low, according to TD Bank Financial Group in Toronto."

So my question is, if it’s the integrated economies between Canada and the US, specifically in the auto industry, that with a falling US economy threaten Canada’s own economy to such a great extent, why is the solution more "deep integration"? Looking at this from a perspective of looking out for the interest of Canada’s economy, if the ailment we are facing is a result of our near-total dependence and integration with the US economy, why is the cure more of the same? If you stick your finger in an electric socket, you get shocked. If, after doing that, you decide to continually put your finger in the same socket over and over again, expecting different results, you’re insane.

Safe Food & Products:

Of this the SPP press release stated that the ministers would advise officials to, "Strengthen cooperation to better identify, assess and manage unsafe food and products before they enter North America, and collaborate to promote the compatibility of our related regulatory and inspection regimes."

Of course, this has already started to be integrated, as it was reported in May of 2007 that, "Canada is set to raise its limits on pesticide residues on fruit and vegetables for hundreds of products," and that, "The move is part of an effort to harmonize Canadian pesticide rules with those of the United States, which allows higher residue levels for 40 per cent of the pesticides it regulates."


Energy and Environment:

Here the ministers state they will advise officials to, "Develop projects under the newly signed Agreement on Science and Technology; and cooperate on moving new technologies to the marketplace, auto fuel efficiency and energy efficiency standards."

On July 24, 2007, it was reported that, "The first trilateral framework agreement on energy science and technology was inked Monday by the energy ministers for Canada, Mexico and the United States," focusing on, "ways to increase cooperation on research and development and to reduce barriers to the deployment of new technologies in biofuels, gas hydrates, hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, clean coal, and electricity transmission." It further stated that, "the three countries will exchange scientific and technical personnel to participate in joint studies and projects." The news report further stated that, "The ministers discussed increasing the region's energy security, recognizing the critical contribution that an integrated energy market makes to the North American economy."

Smart & Secure Borders:

Here the press release reports that ministers will aim to, "Strengthen cooperation protocols and create new mechanisms to secure our common borders while facilitating legitimate travel and trade in the North American region."

Creating "new mechanisms" is the most important part here. On January 22, 2008, it was reported that, "B.C. is about to become the first province to use a high-tech driver's licence. For an extra fee, it will enable drivers to cross the border into the U.S. without a passport and still comply with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security concerns," and that, "The enhanced driver's licence or EDL has a radio-frequency identification chip that will broadcast a number linked to a computer database, allowing a border guard to assess data and flag security issues as drivers approach the booth." It then stated that, "Name, address, place of birth, citizenship and photo will appear with a quick scan of the coding of the back of the licence."

On February 28, 2008, it was reported that BC made this move "in conjunction with Washington State," and that, "Ontario and other provinces with high-volume border crossings are expected to follow suit in the near future. Under the U.S.' Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), passports will be required for all travellers entering the U.S. starting June 2009, but RFID-enabled EDLs are being introduced on a voluntary basis as an acceptable alternative to speed up border crossings." The report elaborated that, "the Real ID Act enacted in 2005 calls for the harmonization of drivers' licences across states in the U.S," which are, in turn being harmonized with Canada’s licenses, and that the real agenda with this is to create a North American ID card. Andrew Clement, a professor of information studies at the University of Toronto was quoted in the article as saying:

The EDL scheme is seen as a way to sneak it [the ID card] through the back door by turning state licences, through U.S.-wide harmonization with biometrics, into de facto identity cards. And the Privacy Commissioner has pointed out that Canada's EDLs will be made compatible from a system point of view with Real ID standards, so Canadians will in fact be enrolled in the U.S. apparatus via licences. There are several steps to get there but this seems to be the direction it's heading towards

On top of this, it was reported on February 14 that, "the Garden River First Nation (an Ojibway Tribe of North American Indians), headquartered at the eastern boundary of the city of Sault Sainte Marie, Ontario, Canada, has signed an agreement to license and use Veritec's 2-D VSCode(TM) Biometric technology for multi-purpose cards which will serve as Tribal Member ID, Border-crossing (from and to Ontario, Canada) control and passport-backup ID cards," and that, "[t]he technology stores the individual's fingerprint minutiae." So, while BC is introducing this as a (for now) voluntary move, it’s being introduced elsewhere first for First Nations peoples, then, undoubtedly, for everyone.

Emergency Management and Preparedness:

Under this heading, the press release states that SPP minister will work to, "Strengthen emergency management cooperation capacity in the North American region before, during and after disasters."

This comes right on the heels of the announcement that, "Canada and the U.S. have signed an agreement that paves the way for the militaries from either nation to send troops across each other's borders during an emergency, but some are questioning why the Harper government has kept silent on the deal." It was further reported that, "Neither the Canadian government nor the Canadian Forces announced the new agreement, which was signed Feb. 14 in Texas," and that, "The U.S. military's Northern Command, however, publicized the agreement with a statement outlining how its top officer, Gen. Gene Renuart, and Canadian Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, head of Canada Command, signed the plan, which allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency."

Soon after this was announced, in the Canadian House of Commons, "the NDP couldn’t get an answer out of Defence Minister Peter MacKay on why his government didn’t release details about a new agreement recently signed with U.S. military," and that:

According to what little is known of the agreement (the actual document hasn’t been made public and no word if it ever will) it will be up to civilian authorities on whether military assistance is needed and whether U.S. troops will cross the border to help in Canada in the event of a terror attack, flu pandemic, earthquake or some other domestic emergency. Same goes if Canadian troops were needed in the U.S. to deal with similar situations.

Calls for Further, Faster Integration:

The day of this press release from the SPP Ministers, the Canadian newspaper the Globe & Mail reported on the previous night’s debate between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in which they both threatened to leave NAFTA if they didn’t get certain concessions from Canada and Mexico, and the article stated that if NAFTA was torn up, "Canadians would lose their jobs; companies would go out of business, [and] our standard of living would decline." However, it is actually that, "NAFTA has been responsible for growing poverty, the creation of a new underclass called the ‘working poor,’ and the concentration of wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer people."

The Globe & Mail article reports that regarding Obama’s comments toward NAFTA, "CTV reported last night that the Obama camp contacted the Canadian embassy to give them a heads-up about the upcoming rhetoric and to reassure them there was no cause for concern." Continuing on the idea of a theoretical end to NAFTA, the article states that, "Our politicians can wait with fingers crossed, hoping that Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, if one of them does become president, won't follow through," or, "we can act, as we have acted in the past, to revitalize the Canada-U.S. relationship and turn crisis into opportunity."

It further states that, "Since 1993, when Jean Chrétien and Bill Clinton ratified NAFTA, Canadian prime ministers have largely ignored issues of economic integration," which is, of course, an obvious lie. However, it does give mention to, "Incremental efforts at harmonizing regulatory regimes - the once-much-vaunted Security and Prosperity Partnership - have been quietly shelved, left to the bureaucrats to work on, unperturbed by deadlines." So the problem, according to the Globe and Mail, is that the process of integration is not happening fast enough.

The article then went on to attack those who have attacked the North American Union, stating, "the American economy deteriorated and manufacturing jobs disappeared, prompting xenophobic fears over immigration and trade. Anti-trade zealots such as CNN's Lou Dobbs promoted paranoia. Their poisonous message has filtered throughout the industrial heartland of the United States." In explaining a solution to this "crisis", the article states, "The challenge today is the same; the answer is the same. Prime Minister Stephen Harper should propose a second round of Canada-U.S. trade negotiations."

The purpose of proposing a new trade negotiation agreement would be for the next President of the United States, presumably a Democrat, and if the Democrats want new environmental regulations, "Then let's propose a bilateral carbon market based on a cap-and-trade agreement aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions." This idea would likely follow upon another trend being set in British Columbia. As reported by the Leader-Post, "Driving and other fuel-dependent activities are about to get more expensive in British Columbia as B.C. becomes the first jurisdiction in North America to introduce a consumer-based carbon tax," and that BC Finance Minister "Taylor said the new carbon tax will begin July 1, starting at a rate that will have drivers paying about an extra 2.4 cents per litre of gasoline at the pumps." It elaborated, "The tax will apply to virtually all fossil fuels, including gasoline, diesel, natural gas, coal, propane and home heating fuel. It will increase each year until 2012, reaching a final price of about 7.2 cents per litre at the pumps."

The article finishes by stating, "An activist government will get ahead of the story, with proposals to advance both economic and security integration with the United States as soon as the new president takes office."

Funny, that sounds like what every government since Mulroney’s has been doing, so how is doing more of the same, activist? Brian Mulroney, who signed onto the initial Canada-US Free Trade Agreement with George HW Bush, has since been rewarded with a seat on the International Advisory Board of the US-based Council on Foreign Relations. Chrétien signed onto NAFTA with Clinton. Paul Martin signed onto the SPP with Bush and Fox, Harper went further with the SPP with Bush and Calderon. Now, Harper is urged to go further with the next American President. So, what else is new?


Please support Global Research http://www.globalresearch.ca



What does it all mean to the citizens of Canada?

By the year 2012 Canada will not be the Canada you once knew. We will be a part of a union the North American Union which means that the United States, Canada and Mexico will become one union just as Europe has done. That means that Canada will take on the problems associated with these other countries such as national debt, unemployment, old age pension, laws, housing & credit bubble, re-evaluated currency, loss of freedom due to new laws imposed by Homeland Security and loss of rights. What was once a debt free country with a steady dollar will be no more. We will join forces with a debt ridden, unemployed, bankrupt country that is toxic and has drained it's natural resources.

Laws such as the one passed under the Mulroney Government in 1987, on the eleventh hour Canada signed a Free Trade Agreement with the US regarding the export of Canadian freshwater to the USA (for more detailed info on this issue read: Water and Free Trade: The Mulroney Government's Agenda for Canada's Most Precious Resource by Wendy Holm)is a good indication of the sneaky tactics being used to trick Canadians. These types of laws are being changed daily without the consent, knowledge or support of Canadians. The United States has drained it's land and it's people for everything it's worth and now it plans to do the same here. Ask yourself what benefit there is in joining a union with a country like the USA (who by the way devised this agenda) when they could handle their own matters. Is it for the promise of a stronger economy? If it is then I would advise you to do further research on the European union to see where it to is headed. Unionization is a temporary bandage on a festering wound that will within a few years explode and when it does the problems will be 10 fold.