You Are In: USINFO > Products > Webchats > wilkins_13_apr_2007

Ambassador Wilkins Discusses U.S.-Canadian Relations

USINFO Webchat transcript, April 13

David H. Wilkins, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, discussed U.S.-Canada relations in an April 13 USINFO Webchat.

Following is the transcript:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Bureau of International Information Programs
USINFO Webchat Transcript

Ask the Ambassador: U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins

Guest:      U.S. Ambassador David H. Wilkins
Date:        Friday, April 13, 2007
Time:       2:00 p.m. EDT (1800 GMT)

Moderator: Welcome to another Ask the Ambassador webchat with U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins. We look forward to your questions and comments.

The live event will begin shortly at 14:00 EDT.

Ambassador Wilkins: Welcome to participants from throughout Canada to our webchat. This on-line dialogue gives me an opportunity to hear directly from you, our Canadian neighbors. The friendship that Canada and the United States share is unique in the world. We have the largest trading partnership the world has ever known. We share the largest undefended border in the world. There are so many strong and wonderful connections that unite our two countries.

I also understand that there are some areas where Canadians and Americans, like any good and honest friends, disagree with each other. And I'd encourage you to ask questions about those issues as well. I'd like a chance to discuss with you our policies and perhaps to clear up any misunderstandings.

I've been here for over 20 months now, and I must say that it has been a privilege to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Canada. I've learned so much from the many wonderful Canadians whom I've met, and I look forward to learning more from you today.

I would ask that you let me know who you are when you ask a question -- first name and affiliation (businessperson, student, teacher, private citizen, etc.) would be great.

So let's get started.

J’aimerais souhaiter la bienvenue à tous les participants à travers le Canada à cette séance de clavardage. Cette discussion virtuelle me donne l’occasion de communiquer avec vous, nos voisins canadiens. Nos deux pays entretiennent le partenariat d’échange le plus important que ce monde connaisse. Nous partageons également la plus grande frontière sans défense au monde. Tant de liens forts et formidables unissent nos deux pays.

Mais, comme toute bonne et honnête amitié le veut, les Canadiens et les Américains ont aussi des points de discorde. Je vous encourage à me poser des questions sur ces éléments. J’aimerais avoir la possibilité de discuter avec vous au sujet de nos politiques, et par le fait même clarifier certains malentendus, s’il y a lieu.

Je suis ici depuis plus de 20 mois, et c’est un véritable plaisir to servir en tant qu’Ambassadeur des États-Unis au Canada. Les Canadiens que j’ai rencontrés m’ont enseigné tellement de choses incroyables, et j’espère en apprendre davantage avec vous aujourd’hui!

Ce serait formidable si vous pouviez m’indiquer qui vous êtes lorsque vous me posez une question, c’est-à-dire votre prénom et votre affiliation (professionnel, étudiant, enseignant, citoyen, etc.).

Alors, allons-y!

Question [Vivian]: Hi, why the people wanna together but have lots work means so hard to living together? I am a Chinese woman, I have boyfriend in the U.S., now we are wanna meet and married, but must do lots work and waiting long time, why the government didn’t consider the people feeling? We are both feel sad, because can't meet soon, and married with together.

Ambassador Wilkins: We certainly understand that when people are anxious to be married and start a life together, any delay can be frustrating. But immigrating to a new country is a serious matter. The U.S. law requires that we be certain that the relationship is legitimate and that the person who wants to immigrate doesn’t have a criminal record or other problems. In addition, because there are so many people want to come to the U.S., that we are just a little overwhelmed at times. Please be assured that we have no wish to keep people apart one moment longer than we have to.

Q [Justin2]: How long was the Canadian-American border closed on September 11th, 2001, and has there been new common procedures and/or protocols established to deal more efficiently in case of similar tragic events in the future?

Ambassador Wilkins: The land border was not actually shut following the 9/11 attacks, but the level of physical inspection of vehicles and time spent requiring identification and inspecting people did bring an incredible slowdown. Almost every car was checked under the engine hood and in the trunk. All trucks were checked to ensure their cargo matched accompanying paperwork. Identification was required from every driver and passenger in all vehicles. This amount of increased enforcement caused reported backups of twelve to eighteen hours at some large border crossings.

Much work has been done to avoid similar backups in the future. I and other members of our Embassy team have visited many of the border crossings. U.S. Customs and Border Protection has been working with the trade industry to pre-identify companies committed to cargo security and more secure supply chains. Commercial drivers have come forth to be vetted in advance by joining the Free and Secure Trade (FAST) program of identifying 'trusted' commercial truck drivers from both the US and Canada. Frequent border crossers making pleasure or business trips have joined the NEXUS program, as I have to also be vetted in advance and be identified to both U.S. and Canadian border officials when crossing the border. Some programs have been devised for both countries, like NEXUS and FAST, and other programs, like the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) have been developed by the U.S. alone. More staff has been hired, improved equipment is being installed, and better infrastructure is being put in place.

The two governments continue to work on other issues in tandem to prepare for future emergencies. A business resumption plan in the event of a border shutdown or major slow down, is being perfected by our two governments, the trade and infrastructure operators. The U.S. and Canadian border agencies are working to harmonize to the extent possible the improvements in electronic reporting of commercial data, so that border crossings can be more efficient as well as better targeted in the event of rising threat levels. Improved communications between the governments have been put into place. Work continues on other issues in forums such as the Smart Border Accord, the Cross Border Crime Forum, and the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

Q [nick2]: Regarding the stem cell research restrictions removal bill. If the House and Senate pass the bill or any other with over 2/3 majority does this veto the Presidents veto? If so then what happens. I thought the Presidents veto was final. How would this scenario be resolved?

Ambassador Wilkins: Thank you for your question. Congress has the opportunity to override a Presidential veto but only under certain circumstances. In short, it has to be a regular, not “pocket” veto and a two-thirds majority vote in each House of Congress is required.

When presented with legislation passed by both houses of Congress, the President may sign it into law within the 10-day period prescribed in the Constitution, let it become law without his signature, or issue a regular or “pocket” veto. When Congress is in session, the President must exercise his veto within the prescribed 10-day period and return the rejected bill to Congress with the reasons for his veto. If the President neither signs nor vetoes legislation sent to him, it will become law without his signature at the end of the period. If, however, Congress has adjourned, preventing the return of a bill, the President may withhold his signature and the bill does not become law. This latter practice is known as a “pocket veto.” Unlike the return of a vetoed bill, Congress does not have the opportunity or constitutional authority to override a pocket veto. Action by both the House and the Senate is required to override. A two-thirds majority vote by Members present (provided there is a quorum) is required to override a presidential veto. When one house fails to override, the other house will not attempt to override, even if the votes are present to succeed. See the House of Representatives web site for more information.

On July 19, 2006, President Bush vetoed H.R. 810, the "Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005" saying, “Like all Americans, I believe our Nation must vigorously pursue the tremendous possibilities that science offers to cure disease and improve the lives of millions. Yet, as science brings us ever closer to unlocking the secrets of human biology, it also offers temptations to manipulate human life and violate human dignity. Our conscience and history as a Nation demand that we resist this temptation. With the right scientific techniques and the right policies, we can achieve scientific progress while living up to our ethical responsibilities.” That veto was not overridden.

Regarding a new bill, S. 5, passed by the Senate on April 11, 2007, President Bush has said, “S.5 is very similar to legislation I vetoed last year. This bill crosses a moral line that I and many others find troubling. If it advances all the way through Congress to my desk, I will veto it.”

Whether or not Congress could override his veto depends on the constitutional provisions above and whether Congress can muster a two-thirds majority vote to do so.

Q [salamontreal radio]: Bonjour je suis Salim chouib de salamontreal.com la radio du centre culturel Algerien a Montreal

Ambassador Wilkins: Bienvenue and welcome to the chat.

Q [Michael Blekhman]: Dear Mr. Wilkins, I am Michael Blekhman, PhD, Montreal, Canada, director of 'Lingvistica' company and representative of 'The Voice of Community', a Russian-language newspaper. Could you please tell me about the commodity turnover between Canada and the USA: what is sold/bought from/by each of these two countries, what is the daily volume, in USD, what are the dynamics? Thanks a lot!

Ambassador Wilkins: Thank you for your question.

Our economic relationship is vital to both countries. Canada and the United States share the largest bilateral trade relationship that has ever existed. In 2006 our two countries traded merchandise valued at over $565 billion Canadian dollars, or over C$1.5 billion a day! And this does not even include the economic exchange in the investment and services sectors. Canada’s merchandise exports to the United States accounted for over 80% of Canada’s total export trade in 2006, while about 55% of Canada's total imports came from the United States. In fact Canada is the top export market for 39 American states. By the way, last year Canada sent C$43 billion more worth of exports to the United States than it imported from us. Among the top imports we received from Canada are crude oil, motor vehicles and natural gas, and perhaps surprisingly, the top exports in 2006 from the United States to Canada included motor vehicles, oil and natural gas.

What all this demonstrates is that our two countries make up an integrated, interdependent, and vibrant marketplace that serves the citizens of our two countries very well. Nevertheless, in a trading relationship this massive there will be disagreements and periodic irritants, yet because we are so closely intertwined, we work hard to solve those problems in a fair and timely fashion.

If you want to further explore the trade relationship I encourage you to see the Canada-U.S. trade section of the Embassy web site.

Q [bebita]: What is the main priority for you now in terms of the U.S/Canada relationship?

Ambassador Wilkins: Right now the most pressing concern is the smooth implementation of the U.S. passport initiative, called WHTI.

A great deal of our time with the U.S. Mission in Canada is spent on border issues as they relate to trade and security. Given the fact that we have a 5500 mile border between the two great countries, border issues are critical to the security and prosperity of both countries. The one issue we hear the most concern about currently is the passport initiative passed by Congress in 2004, which will require passports for all travelers entering the United States from Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean to have a passport or other valid secure document.

The air portion of WHTI went into effect January 23, 2007 with little or no disruption in travel. The land portion of WHTI is scheduled to go into effect between January 1, 2008 and June 1, 2009. The United States and the Mission in Canada are totally committed to doing everything possible to effect the smooth implementation of this passport rule. We believe if we all work together on both sides of the border that this new passport rule will facilitate trade and travel, make our borders smarter and more efficient and not impede trade and travel.

Q [Michael Blekhman]: Dear Mr. Wilkins, I am Michael Blekhman, PhD, director of the Lingvistica company, Montreal, Canada. 2 days ago, I submitted a question concerning Canadian-US trade relations. Could you please reply? Thank you so very much!

Ambassador Wilkins: Thank you for your question. We just replied to it a few minutes ago.

Moderator: Dear participants, we do see your new questions coming in, there is no need to submit your question twice.

Q [salamontreal radio]: Your excellency, could give us any information or explanation about the controversy regarding the Bell helicopter contract with U.S. defense which forbid Bell helicopter to hire any person from some Arab countries. A lots of people think this is injustice for a country like the USA.

Ambassador Wilkins: You are referring to International Traffic in Arms Regulations, or commonly referred to as ITAR. Our goal is to ensure that U.S. defense technology is not smuggled to other countries. In 2005 a dual Lebanese Canadian citizen plead guilty in a U.S. court to attempting to export night vision equipment and infrared aiming devices to Hezbollah. Technically ITAR does not prohibit Bell Helicopter or any other company from hiring people of any nationality. ITAR does relate to U.S. defense contracts in foreign countries, and would restrict nationals from certain countries from working on U.S. defense contracts. Canada does enjoy the most liberal treatment of any country under our ITAR rules. The United States and Canada are currently negotiating to find a workable solution that respects the Canadian charter and ensures that U.S. technology is not illegally transferred.

Q [jes]: Ambassador Wilkins - My Name is James, I am a Student at SFU in Burnaby.

Can you please comment on some of your guiding principles when addressing Canadian politics or policy? I understand that as Ambassador it is your job to state the U.S. position in Canada, however, it would seem to me that it often comes across as heavy handed when you tell the Canadian Government i.e. the Minister of Public Safety to back regarding comments about Arar being on the U.S. watch list and insert the U.S. position during periods of election as you did during you speech at the Canadian Club back in 2005. From an outsider looking in it would seem that you are inserting the U.S. into internal Canadian matters and possibly “stirring the pot” even more, where as, should the rolls be reverse and Canadian officials were making broad statements of what U.S. leaders should do during a U.S. election, the rebuke would be 10 fold. I am not trying to speak in hypotheticals, I just hoping you might cover some of the finer finesse points of how you see your mandate when it comes to these internal Canadian matters.

Ambassador Wilkins: James, I appreciate your question and your comments. This may be the classic situation where you and I will just have to agree to disagree on my role as Ambassador and prior positions I have taken as I do my very best to represent my country and your country. My job is to advocate my country's position and articulate our views as best I can. I would never attempt to tell your elected officials what they should or should not do. I would simply express the views of my government.

There is no relationship more important to the United States than the one we enjoy with our friend, neighbor and ally, Canada. I think it is incumbent on both countries and the representatives of both countries to at all times respect the views of each other and while we may disagree on issues to always attempt to do it in an agreeable fashion.

Q [winjeff]: Ambassador Wilkins: I heard that Governor Schwarzenegger is coming to Canada on a Trade Mission. He will be in Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver what about Montreal, Montreal and Quebec is doing something about the environment I would like a response to my question. My name is Winston Jeffers I am from Montreal.

Ambassador Wilkins: The Governor's schedule is controlled by the Governor and his office. As you know, they have announced a trade mission to Toronto, Ottawa and Vancouver this May. We look forward to having the Governor in Canada. Again, we totally defer to his office in choosing the sites he will visit. In the past, we have had many governors and other top officials visit Montreal and Quebec. Just yesterday, I was in Quebec City with U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Furthermore, the first month I was in Canada, we hosted the Governor of Georgia on a trade mission in Montreal in July 2005. We will look for further opportunities to visit the province of Quebec.

Chat Participant: What is the future for Afghanistan? NATO troops -- U.S. & Canada -- could potentially stay for decades to come. But Afghanistan receives the fraction of the global support when compared to Iraq.

Ambassador Wilkins: The United States acknowledges and appreciates Canada's role in Afghanistan. Canadian soldiers have fought bravely and ably. After the United States Canadian forces have taken the second largest number of casualties of NATO forces. Canadian redevelopment efforts to promote economic development and democracy are also essential to achieve success in Afghanistan. We like all NATO nations involved in the Afghan Mission are committed to its success. The United States has the largest number of troops on the ground and has suffered the largest number of casualties. The Mission in Afghanistan is a multi-lateral effort.

Q [Michael Blekhman]: Another question from Michael Blekhman: Dear Mr. Wilkins, both Canada and the USA have conservative parties in power. Could you please tell me what, in your opinion, are the most important philosophical and ideological differences between them? Thank you so very much!

Ambassador Wilkins: The United States and Canada are two great democracies living side by side. The fascinating thing in my opinion is that they practice democracy differently but both do it very well.

Q [salamontreal radio]: Mister Ambassador, 2 days ago Al-Qaeda calmed responsibility of the two suicide attacks in Algiers. As we can see terror is striking almost everywhere despite all the war waged against it. Can we expect any change regarding the U.S. strategy of the war against terror?

Ambassador Wilkins: Thank you for your question. The suicide attacks in Algiers are one more example of the indiscriminate nature of terrorism. We have seen attacks against Turkey, Spain, U.K., Indonesia, Egypt, Morocco and other countries; we've seen attacks claiming lives of women, children and many innocent people.

As President Bush has said on many occasions, the struggle against people who commit this kind of horrific act will take many years and will require sustained action on the part of the international community. We are facing a different kind of enemy that does not belong to one state, that takes advantages of the benefits of democracy, liberty and prosperity to plan, prepare and commit despicable acts.

We are constantly reviewing and adjusting strategies to meet this threat. I am fully confident that efforts we have undertaken to date have prevented attacks around the world.

Unfortunately, this is the challenge of our times and the United States is prepared to do what it can in a leadership role to meet that challenge.

Q [winjeff]: Mr Ambassador: You are doing a good job in this country, I would like to come to your July 4th celebration at the Ambassador's Residence. I never been before and I hear you have a nice residence.

Winston Jeffers Montreal Quebec

Ambassador Wilkins: Thank you for your kind comment. While we would love to open the Residence for all to visit, we are obviously not able to do that. Please refer to the U.S. Embassy Website for information on the Residence.

Again, thanks to all of you for your participation in this webchat. We plan on doing this exercise frequently. Watch our website for an announcement on dates. Hopefully the next time we do it, spring will be upon us, the tulips will be blooming and summer will be around the corner. Best wishes, David Wilkins.

Moderator: We would like to thank Ambassador Wilkins for joining us today. The webchat is now closed. A transcript of today's webchat will be available on the USINFO Webchat Station homepage within one business day.