Montebello Summit

What kind of prosperity lies beyond the closed doors?

Why only request major companies opinions?

Montebello will host the third Canadian, American and Mexican head of state annual summit, from the 20th to the 21st of August 2007, in order to discuss the Prosperity and Security Partnership. Once again, we may ask ourselves why the leaders of the three countries have only requested major companiesinput and suggestions? In 2005, the North American Partnership decided to hold annual meetings between the North American leaders as well as foster the creation of trilateral work groups. A year later, the three countries created the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), whose purpose was to submit recommendations and strategies to the head of states. Although the implementation of such initiatives matters, the importance of the issues at hand and the democratic constraints require the adoption of a more inclusive approach. For instance, two cooperative commissions, one concerning the environmental field and the other in the field of work policies, were created at the time of the NAFTA agreement. Why have these two official commissions been excluded from the process created by the North American Partnership? It would be apropos to ask these commissions to submit a report on their respective fields. This would allow the heads of state to discuss a wider field of issues as well as raise the status of these commissions. Furthermore, why shouldnt the legislators be integrated in the partnership structure for prosperity and security? Favoring parliamentary contributions to the North American discussions would reestablish a bit of balance between the executive and legislative powers, which is essential to democracy, as well as favor a better mutual understanding of the national political dynamics. What about consulting state and provincial governments? North America is composed of three federations, in which the federal governments only detain a part of the powers. When referring to energy, transportation, economic development or even environmental issues, it would be advisable to consult a forum composed of federated states. One such forum already exists, however it is not linked to the North American Partnership structures. These suggestions are not utopian. The European Union has a Committee of the Regions, a forum of federated states. It also has a regional parliamentary body, as does the MERCOSUR.

If more actors contributed to the discussion regarding the future of North America, the process would be more transparent, more democratic and as a consequence more viable. Inviting private companies to share their points of view regarding North Americas competitiveness is in itself legitimate only if they are not the sole external actors to submit suggestions and reports. However it consists of a drift if we consider the fact that major companies regard prosperity in terms of their stockholders and executivessuccess. Governments may believe that they are helping themselves by integrating the business sector in the partnership framework; however this may only be a short term response! In the long term, this strategy proves to be counterproductive because it fosters grudges and suspicion within the general population, who is convinced that the governments are plotting behind closed doors. This is a shame because there are still many challenges in the upcoming years. However these challenges can only be faced with the contribution of the population and not despite it. .