I am opposed to Security, Prosperity and the harmonized Jelly Bean

Absolute idiocy. The only thing dumber is taking a bunch of cops and sticking them into a protest to make it rowdier. God, I wish I was in the room when some mandarin spoke up at a security meeting and said "Hey, I have an idea..."

I can understand protesting against the war. You want to send George Walker (R - occupation if necessary but not necessarily occupation) a message and you can't get an appointment so you show up in the middle of the woods with a few of your unwashed friends to create a hullabaloo.

I can understand general anti wto protests that (which usually incorrectly) lambaste leaders for trying to expand market opportunities at the peril of local jobs.

I can even understand the ENGO picketers who can't seem to get their message across despite the fact that three opposition parties, the CBC, and the Toronto star essentially read from their song sheet.

But, why would anyone be opposed to removing regulatory hurdles on the transportation of goods across borders?

The SPP joint statement had a lot of content in it - but the message that YOU should take from it is that government is trying to pool its massive resources together with other governments and make the most of investing your money into your infrastructure. On behalf of industry in Ontario I say - thank you. The companies/employers who have to follow at least six sets of regs for every good they import/export within NAFTA - (Can fed/prov, US fed/state, MX Fed/tribe) none of which are remotely similar, and most of which demand different reporting requirements - have been calling this for a long time. So doing will make things cheaper for you. The number one impediment for doing business in Ontario these days is regulatory compliance. The SPP isn't about less regulation - it is about efficient/streamlined and enforceable regulation. Having one set of rules will help ensure that they get followed.

And maybe we should invite Chinese Toy-makers to participate. I prefer my toys to be like my gas - unleaded. I say that tongue in cheek because we don't really know what happens in Mexico - the SPP would work to ensure that kind of crap doesn't happen.

The Maude Barlow's of the world who think the SPP is the next nail in the coffin for the Canadian identity should have another swig of the Kool-aid. If anything, SPP allows for Canadian ideas to be adopted elsewhere- bolstering the strength of regulatory innovation in areas where we have expertise. For example, the Chemicals Management plan is going to be the baseline for the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) review in the states. Let me tell you how much better that is when compared to European Regulation, Evaluation, Assessment and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH.)

AND ONE REGULATOR WILL RULE THEM ALL!

I think the problem is in how people define sovereignty, which if you say it fast enough, sounds like Sauron-ty. The same Maude Barlow's who think that this is really about selling water, believe that sovereignty is defined based on how we are different and how we can keep our toys. Bollocks.

Sovereignty is about the ability to chose to work together when it is in our best interests - understanding that mutual strength can bolster sovereignty and allow the government to focus on other areas that matter most. Despite their limitless resources, there are limits on government resources. By having congress (pun intended) on one series of technical regulations - which are very costly to both the regulator and regulatee - those limited resources can be refocused on other issues of national importance - like, say, Arctic sovereignty.

Do I think the PM dropped the ball? No - I think he picked up a ball that the Liberals were playing catch with not so long ago. While his jelly bean example was trite, comical and dismissive of the concerns made by the left - it did an excellent job at quickly explaining what the true nature of the problems really are.