#05OTTAWA3103, #cablegate SPP: FIRST FINANCIAL SERVICES WORKING GROUP 05OTTAWA3103

Viewing cable 05OTTAWA3103, SPP: FIRST FINANCIAL SERVICES WORKING GROUP

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs.

Understanding cables

Every cable message consists of three parts:

  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.

To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables

If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at the paragraph symbol).
Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #05OTTAWA3103.

Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
05OTTAWA3103 2005-10-17 20:18 2011-08-30 01:44 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Ottawa
This record is a partial extract of the original cable.
The full text of the original cable is not available.
 
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 OTTAWA 003103

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EB/IFD, EB/OMA, WHA/EPSC, AND WHA/CAN
TREASURY FOR WILBUR MONROE
STATE PASS FEDERAL RESERVE BANK FOR ANN MISBACK
STATE PAS SEC FOR SHAUNA STEELE
STATE PASS OCC FOR GERALYNN BATISTA
STATE PASS COMMODITIES FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION FOR
WARREN GORLICK
COMMERCE FOR ISRALY ECHEGARAY

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EFIN ETRD ECON PREL CA MX
SUBJECT: SPP: FIRST FINANCIAL SERVICES WORKING GROUP
MEETING YIELDS DELIVERABLES

1. Introduction and Summary: Treasury DAS for International Monetary and Financial Policy Mark Sobel led the U.S. delegation to the first Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) Working Group meeting and the 11th NAFTA Financial Services Committee meeting near Ottawa on October 4, 2005. The session was chaired by Gerry Salembier, Director for Financial Institutions at Finance Canada and the Mexican delegation was led by Guillermo Zamarripa Escamilla, head of the Bank and Savings Unit at the Ministry of Finance (Hacienda). Canada will draft a record of the meeting for clearance by Mexico and the U.S. in which the report on SPP issues will be covered in a format that can be presented as a separate report to the leaders, highlighting completion of the first items in the work plan. There was agreement that the U.S. will host the 2006 meeting, with details to be confirmed later. End Introduction and Summary.

NAFTA Chapter 14
—————-

2. The meeting opened with a review of NAFTA Chapter 14 issues, with most discussion on nominees for the Financial Services roster. Canada and Mexico have proposed five roster members each; the US has proposed four and confirmed that we hope to be able to reveal the fifth nominee within a few weeks, after Congressional consultation. There was consensus on exploring the possibility of flexibility in the length of nominees’ terms. There were no legislative notifications relating to federal reservations in Section A of the Schedules to Annex VII.

SPP Work Plan
————

3. The morning session was devoted to reviewing progress on the SPP work plan for the Financial Services Working Group. Following is a brief and by no means comprehensive summary of some of the major points raised in the discussions. (Numbers are keyed to the June 2005 SPP Report to Leaders.)

– 1. Further collaboration on training programs for bank, securities and insurance regulators and supervisors: The parties will report to Leaders that two items in the work plan have been completed. These items comprise an inventory of existing technical assistance training programs for financial regulators, their value, and whether there is need for more extensive training programs. It was agreed that the existing program is comprehensive and should be continued. The parties also outlined initiatives to boost financial literacy and financial education, agreeing that things are on a positive track and can continue independently of the SPP process.

– 2. Automatic Clearinghouse Issues: The U.S. and Mexico reported progress, but agreed more work will be needed before making the ACH process bi-directional.

– 3. Tax issues: Negotiations are underway between the U.S. and Canada and the working group will evaluate progress at the end of the year. The Canadian side flagged concerns about a non-agenda item – the 30% withholding tax on clients of branches of U.S. insurance companies in Canada.

– 4. Banking/Tax issues: On tax issues, the FSWG recognized that U.S. and Canadian negotiators are working on revision of the bilateral tax treaty, and it was agreed to update those elements of the work plan towards the end of this year. The FSWG will report that an item regarding information sharing on interest income by Canadian nationals will be dropped from the work plan as it has progressed as much as possible.

– 5. Banking and insurance issues: the Mexican delegation noted that the sectors are very distinct in Mexico. The fact that 80% of bank capital is foreign changes the dynamic. On insurance issues, experts will be meeting later this month and their findings will be incorporated into the FSWG’s final meeting report.

– 6. Securities issues: Salembier reminded WG participants that in Canada regulatory jurisdiction is provincial and stressed the Federal government’s commitment to remedying that “piece of unfinished business.” The Finance minister met last week with provincial counterparts to discuss evolution towards a single national securities regulator. Salembier noted that Quebec has temporarily exempted the London Stock Exchange from recognition requirements as a step towards facilitating exchange access. The Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) continues its strong advocacy for access to U.S. trading screens. The SEC invited the TSX to meet with the new chairman to explain their proposal. Salembier, in an aside, noted that firms would welcome clarification from the SEC on when contacts in the U.S. trigger the “solicitation” recognition threshold.

– 7 With regard to reciprocity/harmonization of insurance requirements for motor carriers, the GOC side hoped that “in the spirit of progress” they would see a more forthright response from the U.S. to get the process underway. The U.S. side responded that the Insurance Trilateral Working Group would follow up on this and other issues in the near future, and their results could be incorporated into the report.

– 8. Annuities: The issues under this category remain bracketed. The Mexican delegation stressed that reform of Mexico’s social security system is a thorny domestic issue that will be handled in channels other than the SPP.

– 9. Supervisory and Regulatory Standards: There was some discussion of the nature of this item on the work plan, but agreement that the parties will continue to cooperate in facilitating application of standards and, where appropriate, working towards convergence.

– 10. Financing for Development: The Canadian chair of the FSWG explained that despite efforts to interpret the scope of the working group as broadly and comprehensively as possible, establishing a grant to fund development in Mexico fell outside his area of jurisdiction and might be more usefully pursued by another SPP working group. The U.S. expressed similar views. It was agreed that although this item is bracketed and is unlikely to progress under the auspices of the FSWG, it will remain on the work plan unless or until the Mexican Presidency decides it should be removed.

NAFTA Financial Services Committee
———————————-

4. The meeting continued in the afternoon with updates by each party on regulatory and legislative developments and the financial services aspects of other international agreements. Mexico provided a preview on plans for changes in bank regulation, covering complementary services companies, capitalization standards, multiple scope financial institutions and bank investments. Other plans include a project on sanctions implementation on financial institutions, a new securities market law and reform of the insurance laws.

5. Canada reviewed upcoming legislative initiatives including the 5-year review of financial sector legislation, enhancements to the anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing regime and changes in private defined benefit pension plans.

Update on Fireman’s Fund
————————

6. Mexico provided an update on the status of this NAFTA Chapter 11 case, and Canada, stressing its neutrality in matters of fact, provided copies of its submission on the prudential carve-out.

Visit Canada’s Classified Web Site at
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa

WILKINS

 

Download, Archive, Mirror, Share!

courage is contagious

 


#09OTTAWA425 #cablegate Prime Minister announces proposal to expand NAFTA’s government procurement commitments to provinces 09OTTAWA425

Viewing cable 09OTTAWA425, Prime Minister announces proposal to expand NAFTA’s government procurement commitments to provinces

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs.

Understanding cables

Every cable message consists of three parts:

  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.

To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables

If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at the paragraph symbol).
Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #09OTTAWA425.

Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
09OTTAWA425 2009-06-04 20:23 2011-08-30 01:44 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Embassy Ottawa
VZCZCXRO0935
PP RUEHGA RUEHHA RUEHMT RUEHQU RUEHVC
DE RUEHOT #0425/01 1552023
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 042023Z JUN 09 ZDK
FM AMEMBASSY OTTAWA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9498
INFO RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHDC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASH DC
RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO 1984
RUCNCAN/ALL CANADIAN POSTS COLLECTIVE
 
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 000425

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

STATE FOR E, EB/DCT, WHA/EX, WHA/CAN

STATE PASS USTR (SULLIVAN)

COMMERCE FOR ITA/MAC (WORD)

TREASURY FOR IA (WEYER)

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ECON EFIN ETRD EINV EIND PREL PGOV CA
SUBJECT: Prime Minister announces proposal to expand NAFTA’s
government procurement commitments to provinces

Ref: Ottawa 393

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED. PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY

1. (SBU) Summary: Prime Minister Harper is receiving guarded
support from Canada’s provinces over his proposal to counter “Buy
American” measures by expanding the NAFTA government procurement
chapter. The government hopes such an expansion will secure access
for Canadian suppliers to the U.S. sub-federal procurement market.
However, this strategy would require negotiation on two fronts:
first, the provinces must be persuaded to drop their own
protectionist barriers; and second, the United States and Mexico
must then be persuaded to expand the NAFTA procurement chapter.
Were this to happen, it would be a positive opening of Canadian
markets but would not be a panacea for the disruptions caused by Buy
America provisions. End Summary

Harper’s Response to “Buy American”
———————————–

2. (U) On June 3, Prime Minister Harper announced his intention to
pursue an expansion of sub-federal government procurement
commitments in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
Growing Canadian concerns over potential business losses resulting
from “Buy American” provisions in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) and other pending federal
legislation (reftel) prompted Harper’s announcement.

3. (U) Harper stated that while the WTO and NAFTA contain
prohibitions against national preferences for federal level
procurement, they do not apply to provinces and municipalities
(i.e., sub-federal entities). “I believe it would be interesting
for all of our countries to look at dealing with that problem here
in North America,” stated Harper. “Obviously, at a time when we’re
trying to keep borders open internationally, I do think that the
proliferation of domestic preferences in sub-national government
procurement is really problematic. It is part of the creeping
protectionism, not just in the United States, but elsewhere, that we
must avoid to ensure a global recovery.”

4. (U) While Canada has previously resisted formalizing
provincial-level procurement access for foreign suppliers, recent
actions in the context of the planned free trade talks with the
European Union have help ease the way for Harper’s proposal. As a
pre-condition for launching the FTA talks, the EU persuaded Canada
to bring the provinces to the table for procurement talks. Canada’s
Minister of International Trade, Stockwell Day, indicated that the
EU action “really opened the door” to the current federal-provincial
dialogue on the NAFTA.

Day as Provincial Consensus-Builder
———————————–

5. (SBU) Minister Day has been given the job of building consensus
among provinces – with Quebec and Ontario already voicing a degree
of support. One of Day’s challenges is to overcome provincial
reluctance to give up buy-local provisions in their existing
provincial regulations. The Canadian public also tends to be
fiercely protective of social, health, and cultural matters – and an
obvious foreign commercial presence in these areas might trigger a
backlash against Harper’s minority government. While
municipal-level procurement does not appear to be on the table at
Qmunicipal-level procurement does not appear to be on the table at
this stage, the results of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities
(FCM) annual meeting on June 6 (reftel) will likely help shape
federal and provincial thinking on the issue. During the FCM
meeting, more than 1000 municipalities will consider a slate of
actions to counter “Buy American” restrictions.

No pain, no gain
—————-

6. (SBU) Canadian trade watchers suggest that the domestic debate
will hinge on comparing the costs and benefits of new procurement
commitments against the current informal mechanisms governing
provincial procurement. According to Canadian trade lawyer, Simon
Potter, while most provinces already allow U.S. companies to bid on

OTTAWA 00000425 002 OF 002

their contracts, it is a difficult process complicated by a
patchwork of rules, exceptions and protectionist measures.
Responding to the Prime Minister’s announcement, Lawrence Herman,
another Canadian trade lawyer, stated that “It will take a lot of
effort to get the provinces to agree, but it’s the only realistic
way to solve the problem.”

7. (SBU) Comment: Herman’s hope that this will “solve the problem”
raises a tactical issue for us and the Canadians: even were these
negotiations to come to fruition, they would not be a a panacea for
“buy national” provisions on both sides of the border. For one
thing, the offers by states and provinces will be limited by
geographical scope and by sector; for another, municipalities will
not be covered at all. We suggest keeping in mind that this opening
of Canadian markets will be a very positive step for U.S. exporters
and investors but will not put to rest the arguments over “Buy
America” and “Buy Canada” regulations. End comment.

 

Download, Archive, Mirror, Share!

courage is contagious