A conversation with the Prime Minister Entretien exclusif avec le

ENTRETIEN
with/avec Stephen Harper
Q&A
A conversation with the Prime Minister
Entretien exclusif avec le Premier ministre
For the third time since taking office in February 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper
sat down with Policy Options editor L. Ian MacDonald for a look back, and a look
ahead. The half-hour interview took place in the PM’s Centre Block office in the
afternoon of January 15.
Pour la troisième fois depuis son arrivée au pouvoir en février 2006, le premier
ministre Stephen Harper s’est entretenu avec le rédacteur en chef d’Options
politiques L. Ian MacDonald. L’entretien d’une demi-heure, qui a porté sur le bilan et
les projets du gouvernement, a eu lieu dans le bureau du premier ministre au
Parlement, l’après-midi du 15 janvier.
OPTIONS POLITIQUES: Monsieur le
Premier ministre, merci d'avoir accepté
de nous rencontrer encore une fois, à
l'occasion de votre deuxième anniversaire au pouvoir. Êtes-vous surpris, si je
peux utiliser cette expression, de constater que votre gouvernement a
survécu une autre année, que vous êtes
toujours là ?
LE PREMIER MINISTRE STEPHEN
HARPER: Je ne suis pas certain si cela
me surprend ou non. Mais j’en suis
certainement ravi, parce que mon
objectif depuis le début est de gouverner le pays, et de le gouverner aussi
longtemps que possible. Nous sommes
ici depuis deux ans et au cours de cette
période nous avons effectué une transformation. Nous avons commencé
avec un programme en cinq priorités
tiré de notre plate-forme électorale, qui
visait des objectifs à plus ou moins
court terme. Depuis nous avons transformé notre programme sur le plus
long terme, de manière à répondre aux
besoins de l'économie, de l'environnement et de la fédération mais également soutenir la souveraineté du pays,
la participation du Canada dans le
monde et lutter contre la criminalité.
Je pense que pour moi, pour nous, c'est
une bonne chose.
La question originale était « suis-je
surpris » ? « Est-ce que je pense que ça
peut continuer » ? Je n’en suis pas cer6
OPTIONS POLITIQUES
FÉVRIER 2008
tain. La nature d’un gouvernement
minoritaire dépend toujours des partis
d'opposition et je ne contrôle pas leurs
agendas.
OP: C'était la prochaine question
justement, Monsieur le Premier ministre. Quels défis entrevoyez-vous
pour 2008 ? Pensez-vous que les
libéraux vont trouver le courage de
renverser le gouvernement lors du vote
sur le budget ?
STEPHEN HARPER: Je ne sais pas.
Franchement, je ne sais pas. À
plusieurs occasions, nous avons vu M.
Dion menacer, s'engager à défaire le
gouvernement, pour ensuite changer
d'avis. À la fin de l'année passée, il a
encore prédit la défaite du gouvernement sur le budget, au printemps.
Maintenant, ce n'est plus si clair. Dans
cette situation, la seule responsabilité
d’un gouvernement est de gouverner.
Cela dit, nous sommes prêts — si l’opposition nous défaisait à un moment
donné, nous serions prêts.
POLICY OPTIONS: If you’ve seen
our year-end Policy Options poll, The
Mood of Canada by Nick Nanos, the
country is in a very good mood. Twothirds of Canadians believe the country’s moving in the right direction.
Canadians are optimistic about the
economy and our role in the world
and they give the government generally high marks on performance, but it
doesn’t translate yet into voting intention. You seem to be still knocking up
against a glass ceiling short of majority
territory. What are your thoughts on
that? There seems to be a bit of a disconnect between the two.
PRIME MINISTER STEPHEN HARPER:
Well, I don’t know. We’ll see. I’ve been
leader now of a national political party
for almost six years, and I don’t think I’ve
seen a poll that accurately predicted an
election in that entire time, and I’d just
like to remind you last fall when we had
the Quebec by-elections, the results of
those by-elections were completely different than the polling numbers were the
weekend before. So we feel pretty good
about things, but we’ll cross the bridge of
what the people actually decide when we
get to an election.
PO: How do you feel you’re connecting with the voters on a personal
level?
STEPHEN HARPER: That’s a hard
one to measure. Across the country, I
meet a lot of people. I can’t believe the
number of places I go to in the country
where I’m told I’m the first prime minister to ever visit, the first sitting prime
minister to ever visit, so we meet a lot of
people, we talk to a lot of people. I think
it’s hard to communicate much about
yourself through conventional media,
but our own sense is that the Canadian
people have a fair amount of confidence
Entretien exclusif avec le premier ministre
Q&A
have an independent dollar. We will
inevitably have a floating dollar, and I
believe we will also inevitably have, if
we look over the past year, a higher dollar. And I don’t mean higher than today,
I mean a dollar that’s gone up in value.
It will stay up because we have a relatively strong economy and there are all
kinds of reasons why the value of the
dollar would be going up. To
To the extent we may have had briefly last year an overvalued the extent we may have had
briefly last year an overvaldollar, there’s nothing inevitable or necessary about an
ued dollar, there’s nothing
overvalued dollar, but I think we will have a strong dollar, an
inevitable or necessary about
independent dollar and a floating currency. I think those
an overvalued dollar, but I
things would be the case regardless of who was running the
think we will have a strong
dollar, an independent dolfederal government.
lar and a floating currency. I
think those things would be the case
tinue to pay down debt and we’ll be
election before it affects us here, and
regardless of who was running the federcautious with public finances.
are you concerned about the jobs
al government.
PO: And what about the dollar? We
report you saw in January with the
PO: Concerning federal-provincial
know you never comment on
economy shedding 18 000 jobs, even
relations, you proposed in the Speech
exchange rates or try to talk down the
though it added a record 377,000
from the Throne to limit the federal
dollar, but in light of its run last year,
through the whole year?
spending power in areas of provincial
an appreciation from 85 cents to
STEPHEN HARPER: Well, first of all
jurisdiction in return for a stronger, a
US$1.10 at one point, and with all that
in terms of election timing, the govstrengthened economic union, a
implies for managing margins in
ernment’s preference remains to govstronger common market clause in secexport-reliant economies such as ours,
ern, and to govern through to October
tion 121 of the Constitution. Is it fair
I wonder if even hypothetically any
2009. We set an election date. We’ve
to say that you’re philosophically a
thought might be given to moving
been very clear and unequivocal on
classical federalist, a division-of-powfrom a floating to a fixed exchange
this since the day we were sworn into
ers guy, that Ottawa does what it does
rate. Or even in the long term having
office, and I don’t see the governin section 91 and the provinces do
some kind of discussion about a comment’s view changing on election timwhat they do in section 92?
mon North American currency, what
ing. There are certain things we have
STEPHEN HARPER: I think that I
some call the NAMU, a North
to do as a government to run the counwould qualify that with a recognition
American monetary union.
try. Those are confidence measures.
that government in the 21st century
STEPHEN HARPER: Well, I think, if I
The opposition will have to make their
can just address the last question first, I
decisions at the appropriate time
works best when governments work
think there is a practical difficulty in
whether they do or don’t want to suptogether on shared objectives. But that
having a common North American curport the government.
said, I think nothing can replace govrency, and that is that a common North
Look, it’s always hard to go on one
ernments also taking care of their own
American currency would be in reality
month’s labour survey. We lost jobs,
areas of responsibility.
Canada adopting the US dollar. I don’t
yet that wasn’t enough to raise the
As you know, a historic, a longthink there’s any real prospect of a comunemployment rate. It remained at 5.9
standing critique I’ve had of federal
mon currency. It would inevitably be a
percent, which is the lowest level in 33
governments has been that they were
single dominant currency, and I think
years. We’re bringing in a series of tax
really good at intervening and interferfor various reasons that’s not on. I also
reductions, which will continue to
ing in provincial jurisdiction, not real
believe that in terms of global trade, a
kick in over the next five years. It will
good at managing their own responsirelatively small trading economy, there’s
give us the lowest federal tax rate, the
bilities: criminal justice, national secua lot to be said for having a floating curlowest federal tax take in 44 years,
rity, national defence, international
rency, particularly when you want monwhich I think will help sustain busitrade negotiations, national infrastrucetary policy to control inflation and
ness confidence in our economy going
ture. These were all things that under
interest rates. It’s difficult to do those
forward. Yes, I said very clearly at the
successive federal governments had
things simultaneously if you start fixing
end of the year, we are concerned
not had a lot of attention, even though
your dollar. I think we will inevitably
about uncertainty in the global and
they were really good at bullying the
in the job that we’re doing here and a
fair degree of trust, and we just have to
keep making our best efforts to build on
that reputation.
PO: In your television year-enders,
you warned of the impending slowdown in the United States with their
economy almost tipping into a recession. Would that argue for a spring
more specifically in the American
economy. We don’t think Canada’s
immune, but we do think Canada’s
well positioned, and I said that primarily what we’ll be doing as a response
to this is making sure we remain well
positioned and don’t undertake any
radical new tax or expenditure obligations on a long-term basis. We’ll con-
POLICY OPTIONS
FEBRUARY 2008
7
Stephen Harper
ENTRETIEN
minoritaire, et surtout après la façon
The program can’t proceed otherwise.
provinces into starting or augmenting
dont il a distribué les 700 millions $
Part of it is because, for various reasons,
programs that were clearly in areas of
transférés d'Ottawa pour le déséquiliwe want to spend the money in this fisprovincial jurisdiction. So one of our
bre fiscal, il semble que cette relation
cal year when we have a surplus and we
first responsibilities has been to fund
se soit refroidie… ?
require trust agreements with the
properly and to have clear policy direcSTEPHEN HARPER: Je suis conprovinces to release the money. So that’s
tion in core areas of federal responsibilvaincu que les intérêts de toutes les
what we’re doing. In terms of meetings
ity. It’s one of the things our
provinces sont bien servis par de
with the provinces, I’ve had two multigovernment’s been trying to do, from
bonnes relations entre le fédéral et le
lateral meetings in the two years, but
trade to security to national defence
gouvernement provincial. Il n'y a pas
look, we also have ongoing meetings
and infrastructure and the rest. At the
toujours des premiers ministres ou des
with all the premiers on a regular basis.
same time, I think we are a government
cultures politiques provinciales qui
And frankly, I think for the most part
that as a matter of course has respected
appuient cette analyse, et je suis conwe’re not always going to agree. For the
provincial jurisdiction. We don’t intervaincu que c'est la meilleure chose. Je
most part we’ve had productive relavene in provincial jurisdiction. We cerpense qu’une situation minoritaire à
tions with the provinces. We always
tainly don’t intervene in provincial
l'Assemblée nationale n’est pas facile
have provinces where provincial interjurisdiction without a high level of
pour n'importe quel premier ministre
ests are different than the national intercooperation with the provinces.
du Québec en ce qui concerne ses relaest and there are premiers who will have
The Speech from the Throne — I
tions avec Ottawa, et c'est présentea different philosophy of government
don’t see it as a trade-off. I think that’s
ment la situation dans laquelle nous
than the federal government, but I
a policy that needs to be continued
nous trouvons. En même temps, je
think for the most part, we’ve had pretand, to the extent we can do it, institupense que le pays est bien servi quand
ty productive relationships with the
tionalized. At the same time, I do
un bon fédéraliste est premier ministre
provinces, and the provinces certainly
think we need to have a stronger ecodu Québec.
are coming out of their experience with
nomic union. So I don’t see it as a
OP: Mais les libéraux provinciaux
this federal government with a lot
trade-off. I think they’re both objecdu Québec n’étaient évidemment pas
stronger balance sheet. I think now with
tives and both things we’re going to
très contents que vous partagiez une
our “réglement du déséquilibre fiscal” as
want to take action on in the future.
estrade avec Mario Dumont, chef de
we call it, with the resolution of the fisPO: In terms of “open federalism,”
l'opposition à Québec, à Rivière-ducal balance question — fiscal imbalance
as you called it in your famous Quebec
City speech of December
2005, so far there’s been Mais la réalité politique pour nous est que le Parti
only one real meeting with
conservateur fédéral est un mélange des tendances et surtout
the premiers, other than a
short one in February 2006, des supporteurs du Parti libéral du Québec et de l’Action
and this was in early démocratique. Ça c’est la réalité. Nous devons continuer nos
January, a three-and-a-half- bonnes relations avec ces deux camps. En même temps,
hour working dinner at 24
comme je viens de dire, le pays est bien servi par un premier
Sussex, and clearly there
wasn’t time to get into any ministre du Québec qui appui fortement l’unité du Canada.
of this philosophical stuff,
Loup juste avant Noël, alors qu'il avait
question — I think the provinces collecand some of the provinces were comconnu une très mauvaise session à
tively have stronger balance sheets than
plaining about the format and that the
l'Assemblée nationale. M. Dumont,
the federal government now.
federal rescue package was imposed
pour sa part, a déclaré que s’il était
OP: J’aimerais vous entendre en
unilaterally without consultation. So
porté au pouvoir, il exigerait plus d’auce qui concerne votre relation avec
what are your thoughts on that?
tonomie pour le Québec. Pouvez-vous
Jean Charest. Pendant votre première
STEPHEN HARPER: Well, in terms of
nous dire l'état de votre relation avec
année au pouvoir, vous avez
the support for vulnerable communities
M. Dumont ?
entretenu une relation spéciale avec
and the Community Development
STEPHEN HARPER: Je peux seulelui. Vous aviez une rencontre et une
Trust, I mean, the triggering of that
ment dire que je connais M. Dumont
annonce après l'autre, au point où ça
money requires agreements with all the
depuis longtemps. Il a appuyé le Parti
ne faisait pas l'affaire de certains
provinces and territories, and we’re in
conservateur fédéral lors des deux élecautres premiers ministres provinthe process. First of all, we responded to
tions fédérales de 2004 et de 2006. Mais
ciaux. Mais depuis l’élection québédemands specifically for that kind of
la réalité politique est que le Parti concoise, alors que M. Charest a été
support, and it is proceeding only
servateur fédéral est un mélange de tenréduit au statut de gouvernement
through the participation of provinces.
8
OPTIONS POLITIQUES
FÉVRIER 2008
A conversation with the Prime Minister
Q&A
Jason Ransom, PMO
Prime Minister Stephen Harper in conversation with Policy Options editor L. Ian MacDonald at the PM’s Centre Block office on January 15.
Le premier ministre Stephen Harper en conversation avec L. Ian MacDonald, rédacteur en chef d’Options politiques, le 15 janvier, dans le
bureau de l’édifice du Centre du chef du gouvernement.
dances, trouvant des appuis tant dans le
Parti libéral du Québec que dans
l'Action démocratique. Ça, c'est la réalité. Nous devons continuer d’entretenir de bonnes relations avec ces
deux camps. En même temps, comme
je viens de dire, le pays est bien servi par
un premier ministre du Québec qui
appui fortement l'unité du Canada.
OP: L’environnement est sûrement
un enjeu sur lequel Ottawa et Québec
ne sont pas tout à fait d'accord, sur les
objectifs de Kyoto par exemple. Est-il
juste de dire que le Canada appartient
toujours à la famille Kyoto, mais que
Kyoto lui-même est mort et qu’on
cherche un consensus post-Kyoto ?
STEPHEN HARPER: Le Canada fait
partie de Kyoto depuis presque le tout
début, mais la décision à cet effet a été
prise par l'ancien gouvernement. Ils ne
l'ont pas dit, mais ils ont décidé de ne
pas respecter les engagements de
Kyoto. Je peux dire ça parce que quand
nous sommes arrivés au pouvoir, le
Canada émettait déjà 35 p. 100 plus
d’émissions que les cibles visées dans
le protocole de Kyoto. Et ça c'est la
réalité de ce gouvernement. Nous
avons dit deux choses : que nous
allions continuer de travailler dans le
protocole de Kyoto et dans le processus
international pour arriver à un nouveau protocole pour la période après
2012 ; que nous allions établir des
cibles obligatoires nationales dans ce
pays. Et nous avons faits les deux
choses. Nous l’avons déclaré claire-
ment, très clairement dans le discours
du Trône, et le Parlement a appuyé
notre approche.
PO: You have been trying in the G8
and APEC and the Commonwealth and
at Bali and other places to promote a
post-Kyoto framework whereby emissions would be reduced, the so-called
20/20 and 50/50 targets, at least 20 percent below current levels by 2020 and
at least 50 percent by 2050. How do you
think you’re doing, with our partners,
in moving this along? How attainable
do your scientists tell you that these
objectives are scientifically, and how are
they tenable politically in terms of a
new product in the marketplace?
STEPHEN HARPER: Well, first of
all, I would just say post-Bali, the
POLICY OPTIONS
FEBRUARY 2008
9
Stephen Harper
ENTRETIEN
interests and obligations in terms of
tion. It’s a country that has very little
world is a very long way from acceptrebuilding and in terms of building
tradition of unity or stability. It’s coming the need for binding international
Afghanistan up, that sustains our
ing out of 30 years of intense civil war
targets that are effective. In fact, I
international reputation, that honours
of various kinds that has led to one of
would categorize the general tenor of
the sacrifice and commitment that our
the poorest economies on earth where
the Bali discussions as being that tarsoldiers and other public servants have
virtually all educated people have left.
gets are really important for everybody
shown to that cause.
So we don’t talk about rebuilding
else. That was kind of the position virPO: On the Middle East, on Israel,
Afghanistan. It’s a question of buildtually everybody had at Kyoto. You
the West Bank and the settlements and
ing: building its economy, building its
know, we are trying to lead by setting
so forth: President Bush has called on
governments, building its democracy
our own targets.
Israel to freeze settlements and withand doing so from nothing.
There are other countries that are
draw to the 1967 boundaries. What are
I think the international communitrying to do the same thing, and I
your thoughts on that and the
ty, notwithstanding all kinds of probthink it’s important we all make conprospects for peace in the region?
lems in the structure of the United
tributions, but we are a long way from
STEPHEN HARPER: I think this
Nations effort, the international comhaving a protocol internationally that
government’s been very clear that furmunity has made some remarkable
would reduce targets. The Kyoto
ther settlement activity is not helpful
progress in six years. That said, we’re
Protocol: one of its grave weaknesses is
to the process of peace. And
it only regulated a third of
know, without going into
world emissions. At the rate
Afghanistan is a country that has no you
details: I think that the framewe’re going with the Bali disdemocratic tradition. It’s a country work of a settlement between
cussions, the next protocol
may only have — if we don’t
that has very little tradition of unity Israel and the Palestinians, the
broad outlines of that have
have China and India and othor stability. It’s coming out of 30
clear to a lot of people for
ers in — may have targets that
years of intense civil war of various been
quite some time. I won’t get
cover 20 percent or less of
kinds that has led to one of the
into the elements of that.
world emissions. So we’re a
long way from having an effecpoorest economies on earth where You’ve mentioned some of
them in your question. The real
tive global target. We’ve got to
virtually all educated people have
question will be whether the
keep pushing our view forcefulleft. So we don’t talk about
international community, led
ly, and I think we’ve got to
rebuilding Afghanistan. It’s a
by the United States, wants to
keep having our own targets
put the resources into that to
and actually meeting some of
question of building: building its
those targets. You know, I’ve
economy, building its governments, drive that to a solution. Not
the United States, but also
often joked that — and it’s
building its democracy and doing so just
with the participation of Arab
maybe a little bit unfair — but
from nothing.
states as well, whether everythat Kyoto consisted of two
body wants to drive that to a
countries, those countries that
solution, and then ultimately whether
making progress from zero, and there’s
didn’t have targets and those countries
we have leaders on the Palestinian and
a long, long way to go before
that wouldn’t meet the targets. We’ve
Israeli side who can and who desire,
Afghanistan is the kind of society and
got to establish — if we’re going to be
who can and who will make that solukind of country that not only will enjoy
a leader — we have to establish targets
tion take hold. I’ve spoken in the
even a small part of some of the beneand actually meet those targets.
recent weeks to both Prime Minister
fits we enjoy and some of the advanced
PO: On foreign policy, which has
Olmert and President Abbas. I believe
governments we enjoy, but a while
again been a dominant frame in 2007
they both want peace. I believe they
before it’s a country that isn’t vulneraand going forward: first of all, in
both understand the compromises
ble to extremist elements and to falling
Afghanistan as we speak in midthat ultimately have to be made. I’m
back into the status of a fragile state. So
January, you’re two weeks away from
convinced that important players in
we’ve got our work cut out for us.
receiving Mr. Manley’s recommendathe international community do want
We understand this. I think the
tions of his eminent panel. But withthis thing to be resolved, but you
previous government understood that
out anticipating that, how do you see
know, there’s a lot of hard work ahead
pretty clearly when they made a comthe progress in the mission going forfor that to happen.
mitment to Afghanistan and to
ward and the difficulties?
PO: It’s a fascinating election year in
Kandahar originally. I just hope that
STEPHEN HARPER: Well, it’s a
the United States, the most interesting
going forward, the country will take a
challenging mission. Afghanistan is a
campaign in generations, probably, since
position that protects our long-term
country that has no democratic tradi10
OPTIONS POLITIQUES
FÉVRIER 2008
Entretien exclusif avec le premier ministre
Q&A
good day here when we hear of the
loss of a young man or young woman
in uniform. It is never a good day,
regardless of the circumstances. These
are our most committed citizens, people full of energy and idealism who
believe in what they’re doing and are
prepared to commit everything for it.
You can’t replace that. That’s always
tough when that happens.
In terms of what I like about it, I
always tell people what I like best
about it. They say what’s the best
thing about being prime minister? I
say, “Running the counWe are concerned about the direction in the United States
try.” It’s always the obvious. I enjoy governing. I
that we have seen for some time now, and I’m not pointing
at the current administration or anybody. I’m just saying it’s a have a great staff. I have a
great cabinet. I have a great
reality. Realities we have seen are really falling into two
caucus. I have a great party
categories. One is a trade-security axis, and the other would
apparatus. I have a great
senior bureaucracy, all of
be an environment-energy axis.
which helps do that. And
it’s a hell of a lot of pressure and a hell
think is very worrisome — and we think,
thing on the public record about any of
of a lot of strain on time and family
by the way, a view that’s shared by the
the candidates of either party.
life, but I really enjoy it. Every day I
American business community, that we
PO: Except for polls being wrong,
come in to work, and I think I live in
think serves the interests of neither counas they were spectacularly in New
the best country in the world, and
try particularly well. And so we are conHampshire.
I’ve got the best job in the best councerned about that. We have worked as
STEPHEN HARPER: Polls are always
try in the world. It’s not going to get
closely as we can with the current adminwrong. The Republican one wasn’t actumuch better than this.
istration to resist that and change that
ally that close either, even though it had
So you know, I don’t know how
direction, but we’re obviously looking for
the order right. Polls are always wrong,
long all this will last, but I say that
an opportunity for a fresh start with a
whether they’re good or bad. But I think
we’ll make the best of it while we’re
new administration. Likewise on energy
I do believe, first of all, it’s important for
here, enjoy it as much as we can. My
and the environment, we are the largest
any prime minister of Canada, regarddefinition of enjoying something
energy provider to the United States. At
less of party, to establish a good and
probably involves more work than
the same time, as we’ve discussed earlier,
constructive working relationship with
most people’s definition of having
Canada has been a signatory to Kyoto
the president of the United States, whatfun, but we’ll enjoy it while we can
and is a firm participant in global efforts
ever party. And I just think that’s really
and get as much done as we can. In
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
critical to Canadians’ best interests. And
terms of what I’m learning, what
Those efforts are undermined by an enerso we will be prepared to work with
can I say? I think it’s a constant
gy partner that doesn’t have targets and
whoever’s there, to advance our interstruggle to manage time and manage
hasn’t seen it as a priority. And so on that
ests and our mutual interests and ultistress. Those are probably the
axis as well, we would hope to make
mately the interests of the planet.
biggest challenges. And when I say
greater progress with a new administraWe are also as a government —
“managing time,” that involves
tion, regardless of personality or party.
and obviously our officials are keeping
obviously the managing of people
PO: And finally, after two years in
a very close eye on everything that
and a whole bunch of other things.
this job, what do you like about it,
potential presidents are saying to try
I’m not sure you ever perfect that in
what are you learning about it, and
and calibrate how those may or may
this job. I’m not sure you ever look
what is the hardest part of it? I’m told
not serve our interests and how, if we
back over a day and say, “Geez, I
that for you the hardest part is calling
see a direction coming from a presiwish I’d spend some time this way
the families of servicemen and women
dential candidate, how we can posiand not that way,” but you do your
who’ve lost their lives.
tion ourselves to ultimately bring
best. You know, it’s always a work in
STEPHEN HARPER: Yeah, that is
greater wisdom and clarity to any of
progress.
the hardest part. You know, it’s never a
those judgments in the future. Now,
the Kennedy-Nixon campaign in 1960.
And certainly Senator Obama is a guy
who changes the paradigm and a very
powerful campaigner. I wonder if you
have any longer-term concerns post the
election about maintaining our economic interests and our trading relations
with the US, because some of the
Democrats, particularly Senator Clinton,
are talking about reopening the NAFTA.
STEPHEN HARPER: Well, let me just
say a couple of things. First of all, yeah,
it is a fascinating election, and I would
probably other than that never say any-
that all said, we are concerned about
the direction in the United States that
we have seen for some time now, and
I’m not pointing at the current administration or anybody. I’m just saying
it’s a reality. Realities we have seen are
really falling into two categories. One
is a trade-security axis, and the other
would be an environment-energy axis.
On the trade and security axis, we
see an increasing thickening of the border
for security reasons or justified by security criteria, sometimes, not always, disguising protectionist sentiment that we
POLICY OPTIONS
FEBRUARY 2008
11