Pierre Siklos – Ever Closer to Dis-Union?
From: Pierre Siklos To: The EU Commission Date: June 20, 2016 Re: Ever Closer to Dis-Union? In 2017, the European Union (EU) marks the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome which created the European Economic Community, the predecessor of the EU. But these are troubled times in a part of the world determined to create, as stated in […]Lawrence Herman – Brexit Primer
From: Lawrence Herman To: Canadian investors, financial institutions and exporters of goods and services Date: June 16, 2016 Re: Brexit Primer Let’s slow down a bit when we talk about the Brexit doomsday scenario. Even if the June 23rd vote is won by the Leavers, it will be a long and winding road ahead before UK […]Catherine Mann – Subdued global growth and Brexit uncertainties come lapping at Canadian shores
From: Catherine L. Mann To: Concerned Canadians Date: June 14, 2016 Re: Subdued global growth and Brexit uncertainties come lapping at Canadian shores The OECD Economic Outlook launched last week projected global growth to languish at 3% this year (same as last year) rising to just 3.3% in 2017. OECD economies have struggled to average […]Earls beef debacle shows impact of private industry standards: Globe and Mail Op-Ed
Earls Restaurants got itself into a colossal public-relations jam with its decision to stop buying Alberta beef and instead to source “humane” beef from Kansas.
The chain was looking for suppliers that could provide it with beef free of antibiotics and steroids and slaughtered according to humane animal-welfare criteria. It ended up buying beef certified by Humane Farm Animal Care, but supplied from the United States.
A storm of protest erupted from Alberta beef farmers and consumers in Western Canada. Faced with commercial disaster, Earls shamefacedly admitted its mistake and returned to purchasing Alberta-slaughtered beef that, as it turned out, equally met humane best practices.
What drove this was a pure…
The Common Room – Canada’s Wins and Losses under the Trans-Pacific Partnership
How would the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) impact Canada? Read the full report A Tale of Two Canadas: Part 4 – Canada With and Without the TPP
What would Canada look like without the Trans-Pacific Partnership? In this final edition of our video series we look at a Canada with, and one without, the TPP.
To read the comprehensive analysis, click here.
A Tale of Two Canadas: Part 3 – The TPP & Canada’s Shifting Economy
The Canadian economy is at a crossroads. How will the Trans-Pacific Partnership help show the way forward?
To read the comprehensive analysis, click here.
Better in than Out? Canada and the Trans-Pacific Partnership
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) promises to have a modest impact on Canada, according to ground breaking research from the C.D. Howe Institute. In “Better in than Out? Canada and the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” authors Dan Ciuriak, Ali Dadkhah, and Jingliang Xiao, find that some sectors will benefit from the TPP, while for others, the TPP will […] A Tale of Two Canadas: Part 2 – Economic Impact of the TPP
In Part 2 of our four part series, “A Tale of Two Canadas,” we look at what impact the ratification of the TPP could have on various parts of the Canadian economy.
To read the comprehensive analysis, click here.
Dan Ciuriak on BNN: Dairy takes a haircut, but TPP no big deal for Canada
A Tale of Two Canadas: Part 1 – An Introduction to Canada & the TPP
What does the Trans-Pacific Partnership mean for Canada? In this first edition of our four part video series on the TPP, we are introduced to an economic tale of two Canadas; one with the TPP and one without.
To read the comprehensive analysis, click here.
Canada Is Being Sued By U.S. Investors, But It’s Not As Bad As It Looks: Globe And Mail Op-ed
The federal government announced last week that it would pay Mobil Investments and Murphy Oil about $19-million to satisfy a decision made by a NAFTA investment arbitration panel last year.
The tribunal found that certain guidelines of the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board were discriminatory and thereby breached Canada’s obligations under the North American free-trade agreement. Although the government is disappointed with the decision, the $19-million payment is a small amount measured against the $66-million originally claimed by these two companies.
While not earth-shattering in dollar terms, the case raises issues about Canada and investor-state dispute settlement provisions (ISDS), not only under…