Canada’s anti-NAFTA faction – at least, those in the faction who actually care about Canadian workers – should pray it doesn’t get what it wants. Skewed media coverage has left Canadian workers unaware of how much they benefit from NAFTA and the dire consequences of undermining the agreement.

Protectionist fever is rising on both sides of the border. Canadian neo-protectionism was marked by the Conservative government’s recent rejection of the proposed takeover of MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates (MDA) by Alliant Techsystems.

The rejection was based on fatuous grounds strung out by anti-trade groups. Sadly, it will give ammunition to anti-NAFTA factions in the United States – and that presents a real danger to Canadian workers. While the MDA decision is not directly related to NAFTA, it is part of the anti-free trade/investment picture on both sides of the border.

The NDP’s Jack Layton has “helpfully” written Hilary Clinton and Barak Obama supporting their anti-NAFTA campaign. Buzz Hargrove, head of the Canadian Autoworkers (CAW), wants the deal dead. Reflecting views he still holds, Hargrove wrote then Prime Minister Paul Martin in 2004:

“We call upon you to take a visionary approach, in the interests of Canadians…. We urge you to provide the U.S. and Mexico with six months notice of withdrawing from the existing NAFTA.” Had Martin taken his advice in 2004, the Canadian economy would now be in tatters with unemployment soaring. Hargrove represents workers across the transportation sector, from autoworkers to parts-makers, who must find it odd that their union leader is lobbying for legislative change that could result in their losing their jobs.

Over the past decade, Canadian transportation workers produced nearly $900 billion of exports to the United States, with a surplus of nearly a quarter of a trillion dollars (that’s trillion with a “t”) – good ammunition for US anti-NAFTA groups but hardly something that would inspire the paramount leader of Canadian transportation workers to attack NAFTA.

NAFTA, our nationalist friends argue, hollows out our manufacturing sector. Over the past decade, Canada sold $2.6 trillion of manufactured goods to the United States, with a $600 billion surplus. That created a lot of pay cheques in Canada.

Canada’s overall trade with the United States equaled $3.4 trillion over the decade with a surplus of $1.2 trillion. We run a deficit with most of the rest of the world. Our trade with the United States gives Canadians the means to buy Korean electronics, Pakistani textiles, and superb French wine, suitable for elegant wine and cheese parties where members of Canada’s elite, not an actual worker among them, can comfortably damn US trade.

In recent years, our exports to the United States have been around $350 billion yearly with a surplus of about $150 billion. The surplus alone equals more than a tenth of Canada’s economy. Compare that with pre-free trade days, when Canada often ran a US-deficit and exported under $100 million to the United States.

The MDA decision was caught up in the anti-trade fever, partly based on the argument that foreign takeovers are hollowing out Canada’s corporate sector and partly based on security arguments that Canada will lose control of MDA technology designed to monitor the Arctic.

The first argument is based on simple ignorance, the second is downright foolish. MDA has promised to maintain control of the technology in Canada but the real point is that ownership of technology doesn’t affect sovereignty. Our military and coast guard, like those of all other nations, employ lots of foreign technology with zero impact on sovereignty. Canadian defense and technology industry companies and workers would be devastated if other governments, including that of the Untied States, insisted on domestic ownership of all the technology they use to protect their borders.

The hollowing out argument is pure fantasy. In most years, there are more big Canadian takeovers of foreign firms than vice versa. Because of really strange media coverage, most Canadians probably believe Canadian head office staff is falling. In fact, it is increasing. More Canadian companies than ever in our history are industry leaders.

The facts on trade, investment, and head office growth will surprise many Canadians. They’ll recall anti-US coverage on softwood lumber, a miniscule part of our trade; they’ll recall the damning attacks on free trade’s supposed damage to manufacturers and head offices; but they will be hard-pressed to recall the media making much of our great trade and investment triumphs, particularly in manufacturing, transportation, and head office growth.

The myths of trade and investment and the distorted information being provided Canadians is the real threat to our prosperity, workers, and ultimately our sovereignty.