The Rants of Issachar
Thursday, May 24, 2007
US Border pre-clearance dispute
So the Canadian and US governments have been negotiating to set up a pre-clearance station at the border between Buffalo and Fort Erie. The plan involved having US and Canadian customs stations just inside the Canadian border, (apparently expanding on the US side would have meant demolishing houses), and streamlined border clearance. (This being rather important to both sides as trade via highway is worth a lot, ($335 billion in 2004).
The negotiations have now been abandoned because the US Department of Homeland Security insisted that if US guards asked a person to step inside to be fingerprinted, that person could not simply refuse and walk away. Of course the facility would be located in Canada and the Charter of Rights bars fingerprinting without consent unless that person is charged with a crime. (Globe and Mail - Subscription) (Washington Post)
Frankly, the US is being downright stupid in insisting on this. We can't agree to it. If the Canadian government asked to locate a facility inside the US in which they would be legally allowed to violate the Bill of Rights, I hope the US answer would be a firm no.
Publish Post
If you're not interested in streamlining hundreds of billions of dollars in trade, then have the courage to say so. (And maybe you should have said it before we spent two years working on this). And don't say it to us. Say it to the US businesses you're hurting.
As for the security issue, I don't buy it. This is the thing that's going to make the US safe from terrorists? How many people cross the border from Mexico on a daily basis? Right...
The negotiations have now been abandoned because the US Department of Homeland Security insisted that if US guards asked a person to step inside to be fingerprinted, that person could not simply refuse and walk away. Of course the facility would be located in Canada and the Charter of Rights bars fingerprinting without consent unless that person is charged with a crime. (Globe and Mail - Subscription) (Washington Post)
Frankly, the US is being downright stupid in insisting on this. We can't agree to it. If the Canadian government asked to locate a facility inside the US in which they would be legally allowed to violate the Bill of Rights, I hope the US answer would be a firm no.
Publish Post
If you're not interested in streamlining hundreds of billions of dollars in trade, then have the courage to say so. (And maybe you should have said it before we spent two years working on this). And don't say it to us. Say it to the US businesses you're hurting.
As for the security issue, I don't buy it. This is the thing that's going to make the US safe from terrorists? How many people cross the border from Mexico on a daily basis? Right...
4 Comments:
Posted by: 
Major JohnPart of that is consistency - if you have to get fingerprinted everywhere else to come in, why give a pass to someone because of this unique situation. Nobody is forcing the person come into the US. If this is too great an intrusion, stay out.
And as for Mexico - yes, plenty of us are hopping mad about that shambles/hypocracy.
Major JohnPart of that is consistency - if you have to get fingerprinted everywhere else to come in, why give a pass to someone because of this unique situation. Nobody is forcing the person come into the US. If this is too great an intrusion, stay out.And as for Mexico - yes, plenty of us are hopping mad about that shambles/hypocracy.
Posted by: issacharThe problem isn't so much with the fingerprinting it's with insisting on the right to do it in Canada.
If the US government wants to fingerprint people visiting the US, they are completely within their rights to insist on it. But they should do it on US soil where US law is supreme. Insisting on an impossible concession makes me wonder how smart they are about security in general.
issacharThe problem isn't so much with the fingerprinting it's with insisting on the right to do it in Canada.If the US government wants to fingerprint people visiting the US, they are completely within their rights to insist on it. But they should do it on US soil where US law is supreme. Insisting on an impossible concession makes me wonder how smart they are about security in general.
Posted by: SarahThe US fingerprints people on Canadian soil already, at the airport (YVR at least). I've lost count of the number of times I was fingerprinted and photographed in Vancouver before I boarded a US-bound flight.
SarahThe US fingerprints people on Canadian soil already, at the airport (YVR at least). I've lost count of the number of times I was fingerprinted and photographed in Vancouver before I boarded a US-bound flight.
Posted by: issacharThat might have something to do with the fact that you're not a Canadian citizen. Although I suspect it doesn't.
If I had to guess, I'd say it's because fingerprinting isn't illegal in Canada if the person consents to it. I wonder what would happen if you got up to the fingerprinting part then said "no thanks, I don't think I'll be entering the US", then left the airport. Presumably under the current situation, you'd be allowed to leave. What Homeland Security wanted was the right to detain and fingerprint you against your will.
As far as the issue of fingerprinting goes, if the Americans want to fingerprint me after I enter the US, they're welcome to.
issacharThat might have something to do with the fact that you're not a Canadian citizen. Although I suspect it doesn't.If I had to guess, I'd say it's because fingerprinting isn't illegal in Canada if the person consents to it. I wonder what would happen if you got up to the fingerprinting part then said "no thanks, I don't think I'll be entering the US", then left the airport. Presumably under the current situation, you'd be allowed to leave. What Homeland Security wanted was the right to detain and fingerprint you against your will.
As far as the issue of fingerprinting goes, if the Americans want to fingerprint me after I enter the US, they're welcome to.
