One of Washington's most prominent minnesotans and I believe you're a speaker here. Next month is the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General John vessey. The story that illustrates very well several key points about Canada US relations. Hope he doesn't tell the same story. It's about a widow up in the northern tip of Minnesota somewhere up around Brown. It was told at some land surveyors would soon be by to check on a surveying error that may mean that our farm was in Canada and not, Minnesota.Much to everyone's surprise the woman objected strenuously and refused even to allow the surveyors on the roll and saying I wouldn't want to live in Canada finally after much persuasion. They found her reason she told him I hear the winter is there are very cold. Well, that lady was an American because she wanted to be and that border was very important to her. She may have been mistaken about exactly what that border meant. But she knew that the Border indeed meant something this is a fact that it's too often forgotten by people who will look at Canada and the United States and try to examine the Canada to us relationship. As a result, I spend an awful lot of my time traveling around this country speaking to whoever will listen and telling them that cadians are not Americans who mistakenly ended up on the wrong side of the board. Add that when we choose to do something that is different from the way it's done here in the US. It's not because we have some kind of mistake and appreciation for the American way. It is in most cases that like the women up in northern Minnesota. We have made a conscious decision shaped by our history and by our political culture to do things differently. Inevitably when we start talking about our differences. It's important to remind ourselves that these differences must always be considered within the framework of our common goals and values. We are both pluralistic societies with a common and immutable commitment to democratic methods and a shared notion of Human Rights. We have a condom. He's based on the dominant creative role of the private sector and generally shared human values traditionally. We have roughly similar worldviews and we are on the same side of events in a large questions of peace and security and a free and a free trade Society. This is very important common base is reinforced by a vast network of social business and Family Ties that exist and which you feel every time you talk to an American or Canadian. We all feel relatively knowledgeable about each other's countries about our strength and our weaknesses. We vacation and each other's lands and many of us by one or educated in the other country. We watch each other's TV and hear each other's radio. We read each other's newspapers. And how about American or Canadian? Brother-in-law who makes his own contribution to Canada US relations by bad-mouthing the variant of football enjoyed by the rest of the family. The relationship between Canada and United States I think is about the most complex in the world of any two societies the longest undefended border in the world may well be now the world's longest unexamined cliche. But like all creatures it contains a lot of Truth. if we were to make an imaginary pilgrimage along the length of our border from one Coast to the other we would however discover. surprising number of problems border broadcasting softwood Lumber seed potatoes The Garrison Dam that version acid rain foreign investment review Gulf of Maine boundary dispute the national energy policy of Canada by America Great Lakes pollution Fisheries are cultural questions Park beef you name it? And of course, I'm nowhere near the end of the list. Some of these problems are under control but others threaten any moment to explode and sometimes into one of those crises that the newspapers and the media love to report on some of these issues are National While others have primary Regional or local significance summer caused by government action summarize at state to provincial levels and some from the private sector, but one thing we've learnt and that is that all demand careful attention careful management. and careful handling So I think that in many ways the greatest challenge we face in dealing with the car that us relationship is the very complexity of it. And the greatest problem we face is unpredictability. Never know where the another side where the next problem will be coming from last year out of nowhere Trucking International Trucking rolled onto center stage four decades trans-border tracking problems when they arose it all we're dealt with smoothly and quickly at the official level last year that million-dollar a year trade sector almost swerved out of control. It took tremendous effort on both sides of the border to get it back on the road again. So what is going on? Is it all conflict or Worse are the strains and their relationship a reflection of some deliberate plans on the part of the government to do increased tensions between our two countries. Well right about things maybe and appear to be somewhat chaotic at times. We are a very long way from undifferentiated or deliberate conflict. A two-way trading relationship that involves over a hundred billion dollars a year demonstrates that we have remarkably few problems in the management of that relationship. I hope that this is more than a simple-minded panglossian view our problems are real but there is much more that goes right between our two countries and then often without the direct involvement of either government. What are the things that works is the concern for the environment which Canadians share with many Americans and particularly with minnesotans. It's my view my perception of things that the people of Minnesota have a view of the relationship with the natural environment. That is very similar to the Canadian one. We live close to the land and we understand its importance not just environmental terms but in Social and economic ones as well. Here in the North country with our thin soil is our slow going growing for us are fragile aquatic ecosystems. We understand that our economic well-being rest ultimately on the health and fertility of the biosphere. We know that we must act in ways that often go far beyond the arithmetic of cost-benefit analysis. So it's a nurturer our endowment of Natural Resources. We must do this to ensure that the Earth will continue to provide us. With a product's nutritional economic at acetic that sustain our lifestyles. Put in a global context we in this blessed corner of the world are very fortunate. We still have our Force we still have productive lakes and streams and healthy fish populations, and we still have Fort Collins. We still have this wonderful Heritage because Canada and United States have shown world leadership and attacking some of these problems. We've done this by supporting International efforts of various kinds to the UN and other such bodies, but mostly we have done it by developing and pursuing responsible and environmental and resources management policies at home. In Myriad ways. We are showing that as societies we have grown sensitive to the need to stop acting as Frontiersman how to tame a wild land. But it's thoughtful and responsible custodians of the natural resources that comprise our main Legacy to our children. We know that we must preserve and not exceed sustainable yield about Resorts base. We must no longer engage in the biological equivalent of deficit financing. U.s. Canada Border as being a crucible for international cooperation in the rational management of scarce natural resources. I think it's fair to say that no other two countries have dealt more responsibly with a shared Resorts. We all this in part to the foresight of those who in 1909 and it goes back to them created the historic Boundary Waters treaty. We all went to a unique by national entity the international Joint Commission, which I studied many bilateral environmental problems and has come forward with effective and far-sighted proposals which by and large are two states have endorsed. But we all went also to the growing environmental ethic in both our countries. And perhaps most of all we owe it to the sense of good Maybelline Maybelline this which is manifested. So well here in Minnesota. What are the best examples of bilateral cooperation here is that pair of environmental Jewels Medical Park in Ontario and The Boundary Waters canoe area in Minnesota the close working relationship between the managers of those Lambs deserves special Commendation even here. We know that protecting as diligently as we do these two Wilderness areas is much more than the expression of preservationist philosophy. We know that the Piston quality of these beautiful lands provides unique and highly prized recreational opportunities for many of you and many in Canada who have the Good Fortune to live nearby and attracts tourism to a region where outside visitors provide a powerful boost to the local economy that Shirley was the determinant of your concealed or concern about Ontario's plans for a power plant in atikokan. What would happen if to this land and economy if the trees stop growing and you trees failed to germinate as is now happening in Central Europe? What would happen if the rich Aquatic Life perished and the lakes and streams became a kind of wet desert as is now happening in central, Ontario. That would not only be a tragedy in environmental and ethical terms. It would also be any economic calamity. It is that synthesis protection for the land. And knowledge that we must protected if it is to sustain has that lies at the heart of the powerful concerning the Canadians and minnesotans share about acid rain. Cuz I said they're also a number of problems. We we must deal with and if there is not a simple explanation of our problems, I think that certain similarities in the problems are worth noting drawn together. I think we see a certain pattern and their way which and way in which kind of US problems are coming to the fore and occupying a central place on the bilateral agenda. And these are mostly putting environmental lens the side of a economic nature. I believe that many of our difficulties can also be traced back to be prepped. Primarily Trace today to what I regard as a major change or redistribution of political power in your own country have at least equal importance are the changes in the way. That power is exercised in your country. Executive and legislative branches obviously must work together if things are to get done this working relationship changes. Sometimes the president nominates. Do you know sometimes the Congress sometimes there is great cooperation. But other times it hardly seems to work in addition to the historic ab and flow of power between the Congress and the administration. There are many other important players the courts rugged or agencies the press the lobbies and so long The last few decades that system has undergone dramatic shocks. These changes have altered altered fundamentally the American political process. New ways of doing business in Washington have developed an interest. government and non-government alike must understand this and must also develop new approaches to American politics. First there is a shift in the relationship between the Congress at Administration Congress. I believe has become much more excellus of its prerogatives and far less acceptable to White House leadership or pressure is this means that the administration cannot expend great effort on issues are relatively lower priority or and this is what I whatever size a priority only to a foreign power. Over the past year the Administration has indeed supported Canada on several troubling Congressional initiatives was originated in the Congress or we have together beating back some of these it must be acknowledged that the administration sway over Congress is not from this Canadian perspective as extensive as we would have liked on the other hand on some issues such as the environment Canadian concerns have sometimes found more active support in the Congress then within the administration itself. So there's never any real certainty in advance where support for a given position may be found. There are also changes that have occurred within the Congress itself you rules of broken the back of the old Congressional seniority system. They no longer exists a small group of people who by virtue of their seniority exercise grade control control over the actions of their junior colleagues until relatively recent times a president could effectively work with a few senior Congressional members in an act way exercise influence and some authority over Congress this capacity to make deals. It is often noted now almost disappeared as a standard politicals modus operandi that can make it difficult for a foreign country a country like Canada to have his interest recognized and respected. We are also witnessing real changes in the traditional roles of the independent regulatory agencies in some cases dramatic policy initiatives have come from the Regulatory Agencies themselves such as the FCC and FTC in other cases. Mention the ICC and the c a b deregulation has significantly significantly curtail their functions and their importance to the industries. They regulate trade disputes are bought before independent agencies for resolution. This process can be expensive and adages over the past decade has a role of agencies a change sometimes in opposite directions. They present real serious new challenges to foreign interests. There's also been over the past two years enormous growth and what are called single interest constituencies environmental activist consumer Advocates photos of abortion or gun control. These are familiar to you, but there's also been great growth in the influence of the more traditional lobbies in Washington one reason for this is that the increasing fragmentation of authority in Congress Demands a very sophisticated approach on the part of particular interest groups and lobbyists. It is not enough to convince the chairman of a particular committee. Lobby's must go after each member of the committee members of other committees, which could have a say on the issue and individual senators and congressmen whose votes cannot be counted on foreign governments must also do the same. Committee in Washington the army of lawyers lobbyists Pac-Man Consultants think tankers analyst and so on constitutes a sort of third chamber Congress a dynamic Center for power separate from that rivaling the Senate and the House of Representatives of overstatement, obviously and the real influence which these elected elected representatives do wield. I don't think enough attention has been paid either in this country and I certainly not of my own to the impact these changes the ones I've described are having on the management of international relations with United States stated, simply the political system appears to The Outsider to be fragmented or atomized there is no one stable locus of Power with which it can deal other obviously the administration occupied us. Do you need a place and must be are continuing and principal interlocutor at all times, but depending on the issue we must seek to identify potential allies within the within the administration just always the Congress the private sector the press and other groups the cast changes as the issue change places change the same strong supporter on one issue acid rain. Will be an implacable opponent on other order broadcasting foreign interests require a whole new level of sophistication to defend their interests in Washington. An obvious case is a negotiation of international agreements when foreign governments it down with the US to negotiate a treaty is the administration. What's it's at the other side of the table in negotiating an agreement all countries attempt to balance competing domestic Regional demands. The desired result is abroad balance of concessions in which each gives a little in one area in exchange for a game in some other area but a special interest group and certainly not only those in the United States often have little regard or no regard whatsoever for the broad balance of concessions the difference between the US and its major Partners. However, I'm I say, I say, so he said the US interest groups give a second given a second-rounder one more go-round Lenny agreement is sent to the senate for ratification. And a specific example of that history. It is the East Coast Fisheries boundaries treaty between our two countries were a few years ago one or two senators in response to one small industrial group were able to block Senate ratification of a balance carefully negotiated over a couple of years and highly Innovative agreement Innovative in the Forum in in in the area of international organization as well as in the area of resource management. Ironically, we have just gone through something of a Repeat Performance the last few weeks over at Pacific Coast treaty to manage the Harvest of salmon. The result was that they never was in East Coast agreement on fisheries, and I don't know if he'll be one at 7. There's another more subtle area of international concern. We are all familiar with the notion of economic interdependence. The notion of the economies of all countries are inextricably linked to trade Financial investment relations. for Canada where trade accounts for approximately 30% of GMP interdependence and his consequences for National Action have been around for quite a long time and I think our had become relatively easy to appreciate it, but for your country or trade now accounts for approximately 12% to GMP has a double what it was a 1970 but still 12% the consequences of interdependence are a relatively recent phenomenon many US Industries are being affected For the First Time by developments around the world. And this is the stage for domestic special interest groups operating mainly in the private sector to become important factors in the formation of US foreign Economic Policy. We have seen the results in such areas as steel and textiles. The special interest groups concentrate their efforts on the Congress and that's not surprising since in a democratic system politicians should be must be responsive to and represent the interests of their constituencies Congress has shown itself to be much more susceptible to special-interest pleading the family Administration. The administration must be mindful of the broad foreign policy interests of the United States Congress. However, is not required to balance different foreign policy interests to the same extent individual Congressman responding to domestic pressures off and push particular measures in abstraction from the broad themes of foreign policy by the administration. The result is that in recent years Congress has become a significant and in some reflex the dominant initiator of USA economic and trade policy. We see this in the current American debates over protectionism, which is a particular amount of particular concern to Canada, then move to protect domestic markets from Cormac foreign competition is a a congressional initiative President Reagan and his administration continue to believe in free trade, but they are fighting an uphill battle with an increasingly restive legislature. Once again, it is the very special interest with set the terms of the debate. There are few within the Congress or media who argue for protectionism as a concept or is a broad and coherent trade strategy. Instead it's always this industry or that region which needs temporary relief and in some cases. There is I think little appreciation of the water policy concerns which argue against yielding to protection specialist. And even when these are known we run up against the politically pressing need to make an exception. The Speaker of the House of Representatives recently stated that this Congress is the most protectionist mind that he has seen in his 32 years in Washington frustration some legitimate some less. So which ban European community and I think to a lesser extent but with Canada and other trade in the training Partners threatened continue to threaten to boil over in the Congress. No country is more threatened by this mood than Canada. The fact is that ours is the largest bilateral economic relationship which United States has United States exports week count exports more to the United States. Then almost 70% of our product at the United States exports more to Canada and the Japan and the top three European export countries that export together so that every initiative in this regard insurance that it will have some impact probably a direct impact on a tenant interest or that it will as I sometimes say sideswipe Canadian interest and Uncle Sam is not always conscious of what he is doing to us. The fact is that Congressional economic initiatives initiatives have become in large measure US foreign policy towards Canada in the last Congress Canadian Trucking cement. Specialty Steel mass transit and other interests were harmed by congressional laws and resolutions in this Congress uranium and possibly Automotive Products are only two of the important industries, which could be very significant changes for a country trying to live with Uncle and there are things happening in Canada to which are having an effect on the racing ship while the US has been undergoing changes. There have been changes in Canada to to which American need to adapt as we must adapt to yours. much to the surprise of many I think that Trends and developments in the US have not always been mirrored by Trends in Canada one striking example is provided in that area of deregulation. I wish I spoke Canadian sometimes get fed up with the amount of regulation in their lives, but our social and Geographic economic basis is profoundly different from that of the United States. The result is that deregulation in areas such as Airlines communication and trucking whatever far different meaning for us that does the United States. The result of some of the conflicts and disputes that arise from these different philosophies sometimes leads to people asking at Washington cocktail parties or speaking engagements what's going on up in the Canada that we had been in the news a lot in this country in the past two years. Some of the news is provided real inside. Some of the reporting is first class not all not all of it is good. And then of course the news itself in Canada isn't always good. The bad news. Is that the recession which we've gone through hit us and Canada harder than it hits you and it hit you hard. But there is also been a news from Canada like you we are now on a on the path of a real economic upswing or inflation is Crash down. The economy is showing all the signs of study and improve performance. And in our federal system, which is perhaps the most decentralized in the world and which is pretty raucous at times but would seems to suit our country's needs. We have after a hundred and eighteen years or so and you Constitution for 18 years with all our disputes. We've managed to provide I think a stable and environment is stable country. And as good a place to live for most of the inhabitants has any other country in the world and we are building an Economy based on the tremendous power of the natural and human resources in our country, but that versified and sophisticated and able to compete in state of the art industry throughout the world. And we are friendly just think if you weren't. I think we've created an account of something solid something. It is a bit different and something very precious to us. It's developments it development. Sometimes against Great odds and forces such as the tremendous. and an end end permanent north-south economic pull the pole that you exercise is has been and remains and injuring theme perhaps V and doing themed of Canadian history on the whole in Canada experiment has worked and it was just that development of our country government sometimes seek to limit the impact of huge outside influences, which might otherwise Dominate and overwhelm our development by the vast economies of scale of industry or through cultural saturation by the media and the best ways to live with you but to ensure our own future Government actions such as the Canadian national energy policy many american-based oil companies, but it was meant to be and I believe it is an exercise in moderation. And that is because Canadians are indeed moderate people. I'm sure you know that return from Xtreme Solutions and because we are fully aware that the world on which we depend expects this from us. We were confident that when we explain this policy, it would receive a fair understanding from our friends have something we had to do. But the NEP made it necessary the new energy policy made it necessary for American Business to acknowledge that while there is still lots of money to be made doing business in Canada. It is a foreign Affair. It's not the backyard of United States. It is a foreign country not as foreign as many others, but for endeavor list it in that foreign land there are over fifty billion dollars of American direct investment in our country and that's a statement of confidence by the artist age states which we respect and because it is so much and because it's so near the management of those Investments has to be a daily concern of all Canadians. If we are to ensure that our needs are met that is being to some extent are recent dilemma in relating to the US public on the one hand. We have to had to make the point that we are a separate country with our own preoccupations our own very difficult challenges and needs the geography. The demography the size and therefore has some very different ways of doing things. And therefore that we are a different in foreign state, but on the other hand, we have to acknowledge that emphasize the extraordinary deep natural ties between the two countries deeper ties. I think that exists between any other two countries that I know Going to Canada. We're proud of our achievements in the past few decades. We've shown that even in the shadow of Economic and cultural giant the greatest the great the great greatest superpower in the world United States true differences and a genuine Independence is indeed possible for Canada. What we have demanded of Uncle Sam. Is he recognized that this goal of ours? Is it legitimate one? And on the whole this acceptance has been there we recognize however, but at times often when it finishes his pocketbook Uncle Sam has reacted differently and we are on our part have been particularly touchy when our neighbor has acted like a Stern Uncle rather than the bigger brother. We recognize him to be But we're both learning and are both improving our management other relationship are foreign ministers. And now I'm eating four times a year and prime minister Trudeau just has had his ninth meeting with President Reagan for 3 or 4 days ago in Washington. These sessions are provided an important political lesson on the value of open and frequent repeated communication the reminders of the mutual overriding interest in both countries in keeping our relationship productive. It's too dangerous the world with our relations with neighbors to deteriorate Relations with Canada may not be the biggest foreign policy challenge. The United States has the u.s. Is to Canada in D the apparent asymmetry of dependence and respective importance is a bilateral problem. Perhaps leave out after a problem in itself as I've tried to explain but the worldview of both of our lands would be significantly different if instead of a good secure Ally with whom we have a deep and productive relationship. We were next to a country with whom we were considerably less secure. The difference is between us natural as they are and undoubtedly inevitable ought to be kept in perspective and prospective and what we truly share that is the hopes for a concept of a new world and for the enhancement of human values deeply shared by the closest to friends. Thank you very much. Well, I think Sid are are are cultural policies towards the Soviet Union is that the business is business. We we don't subsidise our trade and we never have but we do sell green to them and at just as as you do and I did notice the other day that that the president of your country is announced the decision to negotiate a long-term agreement with the Soviet Union. Well, we have we've always felt that that that the normal trade it with the Soviet Union in non-strategic Goods in our cultural products as an example is is his bumper end end and desirable. It's been broadly supported in Canada. And we have exported firm for many many years since the late 50s almost entirely and exclusively on the basis of cash and we only went to provide credit when when some of your Supplier has started to provide credit themselves, but the the it is a a cash Market at 1 which Behati value because the Soviet Union has been a good customer of ours the only other comment icon that is that when President Carter did impose his own embargo at your at your country's embargo, when you cut back your your sales to the minimum Level under the long-term agreement if you had than 8 million times a year we undertook in Canada not to undermine your your decision but to it here at that time to our traditional levels, which we did and if you hear anybody blame in Canada for for stealing your Market at that time, I don't believe it. It's not true. Do we have any other questions, please? Yes, would you go to the microphone? Ambassador would you comment at greater length on the issue of the acid rain the implications and the way you see we might expect repeat ourselves from that problem. Well, I think that the first point that I I I I I I have to go to to say in this is why I've mentioned it here. Is it any we see it as an international problem? It is nothing is something that we cannot solve by ourselves in Canada and you can't entirely solve yourself and your country because state quarters of our acid rain comes from you but some maybe 25% of your acid rain comes from us and I think about maybe 20% here in Minnesota. So we have to have a Cooperative approach. That's the first point II is we we have to have a treaty to do that and we don't have that and the third I think you said we have to have agreement that there is a threat and that this this is a danger and I I'm not sure that we have that at WWE today because although in Canada there is an overwhelming sentiment and believe that the scientific evidence is clear and on. There are notes in United States there are doubts in your own country. And there are many who argue that that the evidence is not sufficiently clear. What we can do about it is enter into a long-term agreement that each country on its own but committing itself to the other country to reduce the emissions that cause acid rain the the sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions that cause it by a bike ride figure up to 50% over the next 10 years how we do it on each side will depend upon the region and the source and what is the cheapest and most effective way but we have to do it together and is no question that will cost money. But the money it will cost is nothing compared to the cost of the damage to our forest to our to our lakes and to our environment that the cost of those Those calls cannot even be estimated. Do we have another question history Ambassador us a comment by May and then a question. Could you initiate it in Canada? Some kind of a foreign aid program for the United States which would bring our public broadcasting radio broadcasting up to your level. We're fortunate enough to have a number of your programs rebroadcast here. How about a high-frequency transmitter which would cover the whole country. I'm serious about that. The quality is outstanding, but the question I have relates to Quebec and the contribution which the United States may or may not be playing in keeping that problem of more difficult making it more difficult for you. I'm telling you about the financial relations with the United States where the electric power agreements or the other more complicated and subtle elements would go into the conflict between Quebec and the remainder of the of the Federation. Well on your ear first pointer statement I dispatched so I could say that we have been incredibly fortunate in Canada and being able to import all your programs and all your network. So we have had the benefit of watching 80% of Canadians going to watch your television programs. Unfortunately, you do not have the equal benefit on your side of being able to impart Canadian programs. Although I know when radio was that in some border areas that Katie in the CBC is now hurt but I think the good news media is that them that technology is coming in the direction of of the viewer and the end the end the people that like to watch and I think we'll see it with the new we have an agreement. Now our two countries recently revised which allows for satellite Communications to go from one country to the other before that couldn't happen. And we now we have the possibility of increasingly of of of on Specialized channels and with the number of channels. It can be received through cable and by satellite I've been able to get programming originated in each other's countries, but I think there is a very great likelihood that it's Indian television as well as Canadian radio could be received all over the United States by means of a graph broadcaster Rai high-powered satellites even point to point that are connected with cable and I I look forward to that day because I think that that would be an important step in in are getting to know each other better and I personally believe that it is not too far off. I believe on your on your second point is that that the United States government has behaved very correctly over the years in terms of any of the Constitutional a problems and conflicts in Canada. We are a country that has almost from the RNC. Being subject to strong internal strains and it isn't perhaps around the reason that Deborah imagination that that that sometime United States might want to take advantage of that. It has never done so to my knowledge and I died would defy any Canadians to show that I think I did States has been circumspect and correct. It is that it is said and it said clearly and fairly and I'm basically in a responsive way to two questions that United States would like to see and wants to see as strong and you know how to Canada they add that it is up to Canadians to choose their own for so I think the under States is being the correct insofar as as as trading deals electrical whether it's Hydro or or anything else between the United States are part of it. Quebec that's wonderful. I mean we want that we want it with go back with wanted with Ontario or take it with Manitoba to wherever it is. And I think what's it what's good for the people of Quebec is good for the people after all Canadians. And what's good for all Canadians is good for the quebecers to why do we have another Court Lassiter? Is the required behavior of a Canadian officials in Washington now sounds a lot to me like a short course in lobbying on the safe for the American Medical Association members or something like that? It occurs to me whether you can see some problems for yourselves and for for us when the foreign governments become that closely involved and the process. He's in Washington as you describe them. Well, I think that's a very good question. And if these things are are done in the wrong way, I think it don't my experience is being the One can draw a distinction between lobbying against the administration in your country in that I think is it is it some more of a high-risk thing and it was it if we were to go around and try to fight as an ambassador or try to do explain to Americans weather General audiences or specific Congressman. The United States policies are policies wrong. That might be it might be a risky thing. Sometimes diplomats do criticize a policy of not being timid about criticizing Stadium policies and that's not it that's not a reference to any one of them might be about a long tradition of not being outspoken. And even a whisper of the criticism is is bound to make a headline in it and leaving Cleveland newspaper about that. We tend acadians the two I think I believe that the that the best way to deal with the administration is to discuss matters with him and to enunciate Vision clearly a publicly if it is 8:15 to call for and if there is misunderstanding or if it's necessary to explain to a two Americans in a non provocative action, when an initiative originates in the United States Congress, and when the administration is against it. In this situation if we can stop it, I mean it all you got this interest in that interested. They work at the tremendous head of steam is nothing we can do about it. We we have a case in point. Like with the procurement of of Specialty Metals end of the North American defense where there has been a because there is a an integrated way of dealing with defense procurement in the in the alliance many of us certainly Canada by most of our equipment motor come in from United States. If we were not allowed to sell anything in the United States for the use that equipment it would have quite a far-reaching effect while what has been happening is that the Congress has been removing the right of access. So from this ability to compete for us defense contracts for Morton tender a hundred civilians involved in that and last year this exemption or this right to compete was removed. Well in ministration is fault that tooth and nail. So there is that where that occurs if I go to a leading Senator or congressman and say it is very bad. It hurts Canada, please don't do it. I don't think I can be criticized moreover. And this is where I think it it gets more complex. But as I as I was saying more over I don't think a foreign power can be criticized if it goes to other interests that might have to pay more or Might suffer from that for example, if there is an initiative to exclude the import of picking a Goods uranium shall we say into your country? And there is then I don't think I can AT&T or or an Australian or european whoever can be criticized by going to some interest maybe the power interest or those who use that and say look at this initiative occurs. It's going to cost you more money know if we were undermining initiative Administration. I say it'll be a little bit of it would be little different. But if the administration is on record as against that Congressional initiative then I think we are working with your ministration and we are working openly in in in a free society which is yours to to defend and promote our interest. So I agree that it's it's it's not not traditional diplomacy, but you do have the doctor in the separation of powers and as I've said that you do have a great deal of international Economic Policy now originating in the Congress policies with you. Station is often opposed to so I think that the situation has changed over the years. Thank you on the assumption that my watches right we have time for one more question and I can't see out in the back of the room very well. Mr. Master that I wanted to have you, please on your stable relationships with Cuba in two ways. One is the reaction of our state department to this relationship and then the other the benefits that you feel that you get from this relationship. We have a relationship and it would be recognized and things that we have created with him since we have a quite a substantial trade we so I don't know what it is right now. It probably is about 250 or 300 million dollars a year. Some Canadians do I benefit from the export of those goods and likewise that Cubans derive some benefit from the Hedgehog from the Easter this trade in goods sold at 2 NM Canadians do how to vacation there and travel are so that there are not send son a person-to-person basis. There are there are benefits what we have not not recognizing and because we've never use recognition as it as a recognition of a government or diplomatic relations as a as a political instrument, we feel that it's best to be right. I may be wrong, but our policy has had the the benefit door or the vice of consistency. We do behave that way. We think that is best to have relations with a country. We would like you to have relations with Cuba because we we we like we think that we basically that is the the best way to produce change in this world change that comes from contact and front from infant, but I mean, it's it's yours. Kitchen, and we wouldn't criticize it. It's because it's what your policy is. Our policy has been to to do have eaten all American diplomatic relations with you. But that doesn't mean that we approve all of their policies not at all it many times and those diplomatic relations have been used to criticize their policies and we have been concerned at various times about the the adventurists foreign policies of Cuba in the NF Rica and we have pointed that out but we don't think that having a relationship with them is a question of reward. We think it's it's the basis for for international relations and + 4 + 4 communication but we have criticized them we have had a difficult patches in that relationship we have at one time. We were providing them with Aid that ain't no longer takes place at particularly in the in the Titan since they have followed. I'm more active policy outside their own borders and we felt that the in any event that they program had served his purpose but I think are our general assumption in these matters is that diplomatic relations may not lead to anything but it's better to a better to have them then two then to have no land no dialogue at all.