I may have missed something but how is CPTPP related to CANZUK? The CPTPP actually exists where as CANUK is a pipedream.I hope people don't mind me resurrecting this thread, but people may not have noticed that CPTPP members agreed a few weeks ago to allow formal talks for the UK to join.
CPTPP trading bloc nations agree to allow UK to start joining process
Member nations of the 11-country CPTPP have agreed to allow the UK to begin the process of joining the trading bloc, a Japanese minister says.www.cityam.com
CANZUK Bloc
- Thread starter ngatimozart
- Start date
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Guess I missed Biden’s take on the CPTPP, anyone seen info on US intentions?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #83
Anyway who says that we want the poms in? They drink warm beer, cheat at rugby and cricket, have strange habits, whinge etc.,
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #84
Not yet, but this time around they will find it somewhat harder to get the more rabid of their claims accepted.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Acceptance of claims will be a function of how much other members want US participation.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
UK membership of CPTPP was raised here previously as a more realistic form of UK-et al cooperation than CANZUK. Moving into the formal negotiation process is worth mentioning because CPTPP members had to informally approve the UK's bid first.
MARKMILES77
Well-Known Member
May be it is time to seriously raise the idea of a CANZUK group.
Both as an economic bloc and a defence and security organization.
At the speed with which Trump looks to be destroying/dismantling pre-existing economic and security
arrangements alternatives will likely be needed.
Both as an economic bloc and a defence and security organization.
At the speed with which Trump looks to be destroying/dismantling pre-existing economic and security
arrangements alternatives will likely be needed.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
What’s the status of CPTPP these days? Bigger block, no US membership (or China yet). AFAIK, any member can vote to block new members. Canada and Mexico likely would reject US membership as any agreement with America isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. The existing 3 nation trade agreement is proof of how useless any trade pact with the US is.
I think the issues are easily understood and I can't see this working out with any huge success. Distances, small populations, militaries and economies and politics. If somehow all nations combined into a single landmass, I think we'd have a pretty good arrangement, but alas it's not so.
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
People in Canada have their doubts about the current relationship with the US. Even if trump suddenly try to pretend to be Canada's best friend, the trust is gone and the relationship is damaged for ever. On the other hand, the Canadian people are more united and nationalistic than ever.
Canadees patriottisme leeft op door burenruzie VS: 'Ongekende eensgezindheid'
And now in Australia they have their doubts about the AUKUS submarine cooperation program. According to this article trump didn't even know what AUKUS is, when asked about by a journalist.
Canadees patriottisme leeft op door burenruzie VS: 'Ongekende eensgezindheid'
And now in Australia they have their doubts about the AUKUS submarine cooperation program. According to this article trump didn't even know what AUKUS is, when asked about by a journalist.
Grote twijfels in Australië en VS over onderzeebootsamenwerking AUKUS
Zorgen over de VS en over het programma zelf
marineschepen.nl
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The list of of people with doubts about America increases every time Trump opens his mouth along with his minions parroting his BS.People in Canada have their doubts about the current relationship with the US. Even if trump suddenly try to pretend to be Canada's best friend, the trust is gone and the relationship is damaged for ever. On the other hand, the Canadian people are more united and nationalistic than ever.
Canadees patriottisme leeft op door burenruzie VS: 'Ongekende eensgezindheid'
And now in Australia they have their doubts about the AUKUS submarine cooperation program. According to this article trump didn't even know what AUKUS is, when asked about by a journalist.
Grote twijfels in Australië en VS over onderzeebootsamenwerking AUKUS
Zorgen over de VS en over het programma zelfmarineschepen.nl
MARKMILES77
Well-Known Member
Obviously people in the British Parliament follow Defencetalk:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Given's Trump's tariff policy, he is becoming the best reason for establishing CANZUK.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
Nonetheless, at the moment CANZUK is still only a security blanket. It's something that provides warm and fluffy thoughts, but actually provides nothing to make any of the four countries better off.
Note how there's already an organisation all four countries are part of - CPTPP. It would be possible to push for CPTPP to do more, as currently expansion is very slow. But unless I've missed something Canada still hasn't ratified the UK's membership. Nor has it agreed to an expanded free trade agreement beyond the continuity EU deal.
I think that's a useful barometer of how serious Canada is about something like CANZUK. You can't have meaningful cooperation if Canada doesn't want free trade with the UK. Presumably it's some minority lobbying group that the Canadian government doesn't dare defy that's holding this up - farmers? It's not like the UK has some sort of major diplomatic or economic beef with it.
Last edited:
Dairy farmers in particular. Canada has had a managed supply system for dairy and poultry farmers since 1947. It has been instrumental in protecting our farmers from unfair competition from the South, which is highly subsidized I might add. Without it, most dairy farms in Canada could not survive. I'm not a fan of supply management in general, but in this case, there are strategic implications that are unique to Canada that require some sort of support for farmers. By setting quotas on milk, eggs, and poultry, a minimum price is established that maximizes profit for these goods, while ensuring there is minimal oversupply. Given the US heavily subsidizes it's farmers, it rankles that they find fault with our system. Make no bones - if supply management is dismantled, it will mean government subsidization in order to protect our food supply. The UK subsidizes its farms as well, and I believe most if not all European countries do the same. I will add that under the current free trade agreement with the US, who moan and bitch about this with dramatic statements such as "Canada charges us a 250% tariff on eggs and milk", there is a sliding scale of allowed imports of daily and eggs into Canada such that tariffs only start to come into effect after a certain volume of those goods are allowed in. In other words, there are ZERO tariffs on milk and eggs until a point where the importation starts to become a threat to our food supply. In the time that this has been in place, that level has NEVER been reached. US dairy and eggs have never been subject to tariffs under this free trade agreement. I will point out that New Zealand and Australia have also complained about our system during TPP negotiations. Ironically, farm unions in the US ((the Wisconsin Farmers Union (WFU) and Dairy Farmers of America (DFA)) are looking at Canada's supply management system to resolve their own problems of low prices. It's a complex issue, but very much misunderstood.
I see no benefit to Canada in a CANZUK affiliation that we can't already get from an existing trade or security relationship. It would be another useless bureaucracy in a time where we should be looking to make more efficient use of the relationships we already have in place.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
Why would it need to be dismantled to enable a better trade deal with the UK? It's not like Canada is going to be swamped with cheap UK food imports. Last time I heard the UK wanted better access for British cheese, but that would be premium stuff. We just don't do extremely cheap, volume food production. It's impossible for Canadian farmers to be threatened unless they specialise in forcing particularly tasteless cheese on the Canadian middle class.
Having looked into it, it appears Canada wants to force the UK to take hormone-treated beef - which is currently illegal here. It has nothing to do with "unfair" Canadian pricing or subsidies.
Not really. Subsidies have been slashed since we left the EU and a lot of money has been redirected to encouraging farmers to rewild/revitalise the environment (e.g. leave fields fallow). But as noted above, pricing isn't relevant to UK-Canada trade problems.
They still agreed for Canada to be in CPTPP, though. They could have torpedoed the whole thing or played the "it's us or them" card on the other members.
CANZUK is just a heading for better relations. It doesn't have to be another layer of bureaucracy. E.g. see Canada being interested in AUKUS. And if Canada wants to increase trade with countries to make up for Trump's tarrifs, it's going to have to give something up.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yes, I recall this complaint. I believe Canada complains about US milk produced by cows receiving growth hormones. Strange that it seems to be acceptable to eat treated beef but drinking milk from these cows is not. Perhaps different hormones, who knows. WRT agriculture in general, a nation with a threatened agriculture sector is no different from a threatened rare earth sector, the nation is vulnerable. Just my two cents.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
Realistically not every nation can have food security. Some countries are geographically unsuited for it. Canada and Australia are perfect for producing large amounts of food because they have large landmasses and comparatively small populations.
I seriously doubt that Canada is concerned that if it can't export hormone-treated beef to the UK, the farming sector will become increasingly vulnerable. Rather, this is Canadian farmers having too much political clout and - quite frankly - being selfish. They'd prefer Canada miss out on increased trade if they're not "getting theirs".