Updated: October 16, 2001

MSU Canadian Studies Centre
CSC Occasional Papers

Remarks to the State Senate of Michigan

by Michael Kergin
Ambassador of Canada to the United States
Lansing, Michigan - May 1, 2001

I cannot over emphasize the vital role that state governments (along with the Canadian provinces) occupy in the overall conduct of our bilateral relationship.

We recently witnessed what an important influence Michigan's policies can have on Canada and your business relationships with us when changes were proposed to Michigan's single business tax. It may initially have come as something of a surprise to people in Michigan that the proposals risked costly disruption and were viewed with much concern in Canada. I want to acknowledge the pivotal role of this Senate chamber played in achieving an acceptable outcome by offering thanks to many lawmakers here today but especially to Senate Majority Leader Dan Degrow, senate finance chairperson Joanne Emmons and senate chair of the Economic Development, International Trade and Regulatory Affairs Committee, Bill Schuette.

What are the other critical issues in the Canada-Michigan relationship? In my view, we face two key foreseeable issues -- first, border management and, second, a vital basket of environmental stewardship issues. Michigan is well poised to show leadership in both these areas.

What about the border? Border management requires our close attention. Our growing trade -- the relentless success of economic partnership -- places steadily increasing burdens on border crossings in the heavily travelled Michigan -- Ontario corridor. Recognize too that the border is much more than customs and immigration and physical infrastructure. It is a complex and sophisticated "system" which is much more than the sum of its parts.

Prime Minister Chrétien and President Clinton endorsed guiding principles which commit the two national governments to

1. Streamline, harmonize and collaborate on border policies and management;

2. Expand cooperation to increase efficiencies; and,

3. Collaborate on common threats from outside the United States and Canada.

A report earlier this year from the Canada - US partnership (CUSP), established to articulate a vision for the border consistent with these objectives, calls for twin goals of facilitating travel and enhancing security. To meet these goals over the next 10-15 years, in my view we will need to assess what we do at the border, adopt a risk-management approach, increase border resources in the short term, enhance binational cooperation on external as well as internal border management, and coordinate closely with border-area private and public-sector leaders.

Michigan has a vital self-interest in the border. The highway networks connecting with border points are the arteries which support job-creating trade, investment and tourism. Michigan is co-owner with Canada of the Blue Water Bridge at Port Huron and the International Bridge at Sault Ste. Marie, where we face continuing challenges to ensure the safe and efficient flow of growing volumes of traffic. One improvement was the new arrangement for joint management of the Sault facility which was concluded last year and approved by you. Close collaboration of all levels of government will be also be necessary to facilitate an additional Detroit River crossing.

Living alongside it, Michiganders also understand the economic importance of national policies and funding that will ensure a northern "border that works". This is a message that I hope you will ensure is forcefully conveyed to Washington and to people in the other 37 states for which Canada is also their largest market.

Let me turn to the environment. Great Lakes issues remain in the spotlight. Two years ago in the face of a proposal for the export of Lake Superior water, Canada and the United States announced a joint reference to the International Joint Commission (IJC) to study the effects of water consumption, diversion and removal from boundary waters.

Last year, the IJC released its final report and recommended that no water removals from the Great Lakes basin should be permitted unless it can be proven that the integrity of the ecosystem would not be damaged and "no net loss" of water would result. Five months ago, the Great Lakes governors released a draft annex 2001 to the Great Lakes charter which creates an "improvement standard" and sets a de minimus threshold of 1 million gallons per day removal below which no region-wide permitting process would be required. Ontario and Quebec, to date, have not endorsed the draft annex because of concerns with the de minimus level of 1 million gallons per day. Canada supports the IJC recommendations.

The introduction of aquatic nuisance species through ballast water is another preoccupation which we share. The Michigan Senate, led by Senator Sikkema, was the first to contemplate legislation to control aquatic nuisance species in ballast water. Canada believes controls on ballast must be addressed regionally and bilaterally.

Canada has committed to draft a harmonized and mandatory ballast regime by November for implementation in 2002. We will build on Canadian guidelines for ballast water management which have been in place since 1989 and use the ballast water sub-committee of the Great Lakes regional waterways management forum co-chaired by the US Coast Guard and Transport Canada. Canada and Michigan breathe the same air. Climatic patterns dictate that the air pollution that is damaging the health of citizens living in both countries respects no borders. That is why Canada and Ontario support the US/EPA's decision to implement in 2003 a nitrogen oxide emissions reduction program that will apply to 22 Midwestern states, including Michigan.

Canada is also committed to reducing its noxious exports to our American neighbours downwind from us. Canada's environment minister has signed an agreement with all his provincial counterparts to achieve reductions in ozone and particulates by 2010 or earlier. These new Canada-wide standards are an important tool in meeting our commitments under the Canada-United States ozone annex signed last year. We need to continue to work together to sustain our common airshed.

Canada and Michigan enjoy a relationship which is unique in its complexity and density. In a world which is characterized as increasingly interdependent politically and economically, who could think of a better example of the myriad of formal and informal ties that link two peoples. We have a long history of friendship, close linkages and much in common. But, yes, we do have some differences -- our political institutions, our federal structures, the role of government in society, societal attitudes, demographics, and Canada's strong commitment to our two official languages. When differences of view have arisen however, we have managed, in the words of one of Michigan's favourite sons, former President Gerald Ford, "to disagree without being disagreeable". Most of all however we have been creative and very pragmatic in fashioning fresh and durable solutions which respect both our interests.

More than 50 years ago, Winston Churchill pointed to the Canada-United States relationship as a model of international harmony when he said:

That "neighbourly respect" and those "honourable obligations" are found in abundance in the Canada-Michigan relationship.

Let us continue to be the "example" that Winston Churchill set us up to be. I have stressed that the role of state governments in our bilateral relationship is considerable. None is more important than with Michigan. We look to Michigan's leadership in the region and nationally in strengthening our stewardship over shared natural resources, our economic prosperity and our vibrant and ever growing partnership.

Thank you.