I do wonder if the elimination of a minimum Canadian content was proposed by Siemens?
It's not based on a particular corporate interest, it's based on Canada standing tall in trade agreements by being fair and open. If anyone, it's a message to Trump. The unwritten/unstated part is "F with us, and you'll lose as much or more". Canada just called the US' bluff on the automotive sector re Nafta.
U.S. drops auto-content proposal in NAFTA talks - The Globe and Mail
March 20, 2018, 10:13:00 PM EDT By
Reuters
https://www.nasdaq.com/article/us-d...afta-talks--the-globe-and-mail-20180320-01406
And yes, CRRC will have an equal shot at this, caveats of China's playing the game by the rules. That means reciprocity.
Another unwritten/unstated aspect as that pertains to Siemens is that if the US does erect trade barriers, Siemens can certainly win the contract if the conditions are the most preferable, but they have to be supplied from the EU as by CETA, zero....*ZERO* tariffs are applied going in either direction for rail and associated equipment. I posted the chapter a week or so ago in this string.
Canada wouldn't be paying more if it came from the CA plant, perhaps even less, but *in the long term*...Canada would be paying far more in terms of it being one-way trade. We have to affect the CETA option with the EU to invest in further trade benefit if Nafta is broken.
Perhaps they are facing some manufacturing capacity restraints in the US at the moment and planned to have the trains and carriages made in Europe? Or maybe it was Stadler.
See above. Whether the trade compliant clause is explicit or just implied, a rider is in effect either way. And this is as it should be.
What's also implied to US corporations is "keep the idiot POTUS on a leash, or we'll all be playing without you". No-one is more horrified of Trump's moron moves on trade than USA Incorporated.
Credit to the Libs (with the support of all the parties) for holding the line on this stance.
So what about FRA/TC regulations? Does that mean they are going to be waived?
Something's got to change, and in a big way. It is very much in Canada's industrial and trade interests to recognize and approve EU rail safety standards and specs. And/or UIC ones.
I'll dig later for the specifics stated in CETA (it is the most comprehensive trade agreement of its kind ever) but this will suffice for now:
"All Canadian products entering the EUmarket will have to comply in full with all EU standards (such as those on food and product safety), and vice versa."
Guide to the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA)