This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 001364 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR WHA/CAN, WHA/MEX, 
 
STATE FOR EB/WAYNE AND DONNELLY, EB/TPP/BTA/EWH 
 
WHITE HOUSE/NSC FOR FARYAR SHIRZAD, DEL RENIGAR, T. SHANNON 
 
USDOC FOR 4320/ITA/MAC/WH/ONIA (WBastian, ARudman, GWord) 
 
STATE PASS USTR FOR SAGE CHANDLER 
 
CALGARY PLEASE PASS WINNIPEG 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETRD EFIN EIND ELTN ECON PGOV PREL CA MX
SUBJECT: Security and Prosperity Partnership in Canada - A 
Mid-term Update 
 
Ref:  Ottawa 1104 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary - From a distance Mission Canada is 
heartened by the effect and attention given to the SPP in 
Washington, throughout our government.  We are hearing from 
Canadians most affected that this is precisely what is 
needed.  Because of the political situation now in Canada, 
we can afford to be more ambitious than they can, but by 
setting up the process and the timelines now, they should 
have more room for ambition down the road.  We sense the 
biggest impact on both the security and prosperity side 
would come from consolidating and simplifying the 
proliferation and at times redundancy of existing programs, 
existing processes.  We will send by septel two reports with 
more detailed views on the proposals in each of the security 
and prosperity goals.  End Summary. 
Canadian Perspectives 
¶2. (SBU) Broadly speaking, Canadians are unfortunately 
unaware of the SPP; they remember the Crawford/Waco meetings 
but did not focus at the time on the initiative.  Since 
then, the country and its political class have been 
understandably distracted by political crisis to do much 
public promotion.  When they have discussed it publicly, 
they have at times misinterpreted it, for example saying 
that this will be used to fix trade dispute mechanisms. 
Those most aware are those border business groups and 
academics following the bilateral relationship. 
¶3. (SBU) The most consistent message we are getting from 
these latter groups is an imperative that we use this 
process to be ambitious. There is a scepticism that this 
initiative will tackle the issues, particularly in the areas 
that matter most - reducing border delays, cumbersome 
processes and regulatory differences. 
¶4. (SBU) Our Canadian counterparts seem to be organized more 
centrally than we are; the Privy Council has farmed out the 
working groups to the Ministries to a much less extent than 
we have. In fact, they have made clear that the only way 
they feel these short timetables can be met is through a NSC 
and HSC close engagement with the process and close contact 
with them.  In addition, they see this as an opportunity to 
advocate again for items we thought were long gone from the 
process. 
¶5. (SBU) Canada is preoccupied with its electoral situation 
right now. There is little certainty that there will be 
elections and on who might win. Those actively involved in 
the SPP process are not distracted, but know that their 
political leaders on whom they will rely for decisions will 
continue to be cautious and avoid anything that looks like 
they are giving in to the Americans. 
¶6. (SBU) For our part, we see little point in trying to work 
in to our SPP calculation any predictions of their electoral 
timetable since it seems to change daily.  An election could 
come as early as late June/early July, but could also slip 
to the late fall.  Since the required time from a no- 
confidence vote to an election is around six weeks, it might 
be best to simply move forward as though nothing was 
happening and adjust to the political situation as it 
unfolds. 
Broad recommendations 
¶7. (SBU) At the border, people face a proliferation of 
programs, seemingly in perpetual evolution, and a lack of 
consistency from one port of entry to another.  Canada has 
fast cargo programs; we have different ones; the 
requirements change.  Canada has expedited traveler 
programs, and we have different ones; NEXUS cards which work 
at ports of entry in Ontario can't work in New Brunswick or 
Manitoba.  New passport requirements, new air travel advance 
passenger rules, separate background checks for NEXUS Air 
and Nexus land all add up to mounting frustration.  People 
are telling us governments are moving in the opposite 
direction of their citizens who are becoming more 
interconnected. 
¶8. (SBU) Our first recommendation: simplify.  Use this SPP 
process to focus on consolidating and integrating - the 
various NEXUS programs, the working groups, the watch lists, 
cargo-security programs.  Realizing this is easier said than 
done, it still seems to make sense to reduce and 
consolidate. 
¶9. (SBU) Second, the business of crossing the border has too 
many steps, and the perception is we keep adding more.  The 
Guide for Importing into the U.S. put out by Dept of 
Treasury runs 180 pages.  Businesses most often choose to 
hire a broker, who everyone admits is the least efficient 
link in the chain.  It takes ninety seconds for a shipment 
to be released at the border; it can easily take up to three 
hours for the broker to do his processing.  Canadian small 
business groups tell us that many of their members do not 
export because it is simply too complex.  Expediting 
implementation of the new ACE system to provide advance 
cargo information over the Internet will make it easier for 
small businesses to communicate directly with CBP rather 
than through a broker.  ACE will also allow for 
communications directly between CBP and truck carriers, 
unlike now where brokers inform carriers via phone or fax 
about the status of their shipments. 
¶10. (SBU) Third, the notion, as expressed in the law 
enforcement matrix, of establishing processes to review 
points of difference in laws which obstruct our cooperation, 
is excellent and which should build on progress already made 
by standards and regulatory experts in terms of information 
sharing.  The aim should be to have domestic standards and 
notification requirements converge over time with border 
regulations, as well as WTD and NAFTA procedures. 
¶11. (SBU) Fourth, border infrastructure is important in that 
it is the principal way to reduce delays and to enhance 
security.  We see this covered in the matrices, and we will 
have to expedite the major improvements in bridges and 
tunnels.  We would only stress, though, the great impact 
from minor changes in the geography, from a parking lot in 
Fort Erie or an approach lane in Windsor or building 
separate approaches for trucks in Champlain, or the 
prospects of moving to short sea shipping opportunities. 
¶12. (SBU) Comment - As we move down the list of action 
items, we can hold the Canadians to two points.  First, this 
was originally their idea, and our Privy Council 
counterparts took a pride of ownership after Crawford that 
this was originally their initiative under NAI.  Second, 
they have just released their International Policy Statement 
where they have publicly spelled out their highest goal of 
advancing their relationship with the U.S. as it is in their 
own long-term interests.  We see this as a big agenda which 
would actually contribute to this own stated goal.  Finally, 
we should not be surprised if during the upcoming election, 
Canadian politicians hold out the SPP as a mechanism for 
gaining more control over U.S. trade remedies, e.g., escape 
from current or future softwood lumber disputes, and 
exemption from U.S. regulatory actions, such as BSE.  End 
Comment. 
Dickson