I know independence is a new and different feeling but, come on, folks, give it a chance! If the parents divorce, we don't have to choose sides. We could be the adults in the room, get on with our lives and have mature relationships with both. Choosing one or the other is still choosing dependence, just changing sides.
We are becoming the strong, vibrant nation that we are capable of becoming. We will do it with planning and determination and without arrogance. We can trade with nations and groups of nations as equals. We do not need alliances that will attempt to control decisions best made by ourselves. We will make our own decisions, with fairness but always with the best outcomes for this nation. CANADA STRONG.
Associate Membership with the EU hould be as far as we go. After that it would effect our sovereignty negatively from my understanding of how the EU works. Associate Membership gives us most of the perks without all of the commitments and regulations.
Looking at the UK following Brexit back in 2020, they have come to realize that full separation is not in either sides interest. The current Labour government is seeking closer alignment on trade, security, and research, (as well as other, less important to Canada, issues such as fisheries, youth travel and education etc). Those three things, trade, security and research are where we could reasonably focus and already are to some extent, althouh more so with individual countries.
As stated, it doesn’t have to be an either or situation, maybe it could be both, but…..I have strong doubts that we will be able to negotiate with Trump if Carney goes through with his latest promise to not spend $0.70 of every military dollar in the USA. That likely means choosing the Gripen over the F35 proposal. That will not be well received. Hopefully we can review CUSMA before that decision is made, but that game of chess will, in itself, be extremely interesting and may well decide if we can have an either one or both.
I think we should be following the UK’s lead in negotiating a partial membership even if a full one were offered, which it likely won’t. Europe has now changed with no single country having a veto at the EU Parliament. Now it will be majority rule, I believe. No question there are many, many benefits from such a union…..travel, access to markets, free trade, further validation for Canada being metric, potential university swaps and so on. I love the idea personally, but then I am born a Brit so may be a little bias.
How do you see the Gripen vs F35 playing out, Fred?
I know independence is a new and different feeling but, come on, folks, give it a chance! If the parents divorce, we don't have to choose sides. We could be the adults in the room, get on with our lives and have mature relationships with both. Choosing one or the other is still choosing dependence, just changing sides.
We are becoming the strong, vibrant nation that we are capable of becoming. We will do it with planning and determination and without arrogance. We can trade with nations and groups of nations as equals. We do not need alliances that will attempt to control decisions best made by ourselves. We will make our own decisions, with fairness but always with the best outcomes for this nation. CANADA STRONG.
Jim, well said.
The goal isn’t to switch sides…
It’s to stop needing one.
Thank you for the clarity! As usual…
Joanna, thank you.
Clarity’s the goal… even when the answer isn’t clean.
Associate Membership with the EU hould be as far as we go. After that it would effect our sovereignty negatively from my understanding of how the EU works. Associate Membership gives us most of the perks without all of the commitments and regulations.
Adapt. So far we have adapted very well in this changing dynamic of a world.
Ron, adaptation got us here.
Strategy decides where we go next.
Looking at the UK following Brexit back in 2020, they have come to realize that full separation is not in either sides interest. The current Labour government is seeking closer alignment on trade, security, and research, (as well as other, less important to Canada, issues such as fisheries, youth travel and education etc). Those three things, trade, security and research are where we could reasonably focus and already are to some extent, althouh more so with individual countries.
As stated, it doesn’t have to be an either or situation, maybe it could be both, but…..I have strong doubts that we will be able to negotiate with Trump if Carney goes through with his latest promise to not spend $0.70 of every military dollar in the USA. That likely means choosing the Gripen over the F35 proposal. That will not be well received. Hopefully we can review CUSMA before that decision is made, but that game of chess will, in itself, be extremely interesting and may well decide if we can have an either one or both.
I think we should be following the UK’s lead in negotiating a partial membership even if a full one were offered, which it likely won’t. Europe has now changed with no single country having a veto at the EU Parliament. Now it will be majority rule, I believe. No question there are many, many benefits from such a union…..travel, access to markets, free trade, further validation for Canada being metric, potential university swaps and so on. I love the idea personally, but then I am born a Brit so may be a little bias.
How do you see the Gripen vs F35 playing out, Fred?
Thank you Fred