There is an interesting and often conflicting conversation going on these days concerning the proposed Atlantic Gateway concept and Border Security. The Atlantic Gateway is perceived as an integrated air, rail, marine and road freight transportation network, providing direct access to and from the economic heartland of North America.

Selling features of the Gateway include: ice-free, deep water ports able to handle the world's largest ships; international airports; intermodal facilities; access to border crossings, essential road, rail and marine infrastructure and the fact we're only a two-day truck drive from ports of call to half the population of North America.

In theory, the Atlantic Gateway offers connections and transportation systems that reach across North America. According to an APEC report on The Changing Global Economy, the main benefits of developing the Atlantic gateway would be the direct economic benefits that would result from the increased import/export container traffic, initially through the Port of Halifax. These include the direct employment and economic benefits associated with handling and transporting of the increased traffic along with the economic impact associated with investment in new and expanded facilities and services. Indirect benefits would come from the opportunity for regional firms to better access global markets through the enhanced shipping services offered through the Ports of Halifax and Saint John.

The Atlantic Gateway is competing for global supply chain traffic destined for Central Canadian and Midwest U.S. markets. Other North American ports are competing for the same traffic, specifically Prince Rupert, BC and several East Coast U.S. ports including: New York/New Jersey, Norfolk, Virginia and Savannah, Georgia.

All of these are contending for traffic from both the Suez Canal and from the new and improved Panama Canal. When the Panama is completed in 2013, it will be able to handle much larger vessels. With better rail access (also under construction) from eastern U.S. ports to the interior United States, Halifax and Saint John could lose a significant portion of their competitive advantage.

Another fly in the ointment for Canada's Atlantic gateway is U.S. border security. New, tougher security regulations are making the border more expensive to cross and more time-consuming. The border challenge was highlighted this week by comments from the U.S. Secretary of Homeland Defense alluding to tougher security and tighter borders.

The Atlantic Provinces Trucking Association has been lobbying for changes that would ease the crippling costs of border administration fees. Peter Nelson, Executive Director of the Association, says "it's costing too much for truckers in the region to cross the American border". He spent two days in Washington this week pleading his case.

One of the cost issues is that the U.S. Government charges Canadian truckers for the administrative costs of managing the border, an estimated billion dollars a year. Nelson said the U.S. government maintains that Canada should be responsible for the administrative costs of managing the border, not U.S. taxpayers.

Nelson waters down his argument when he says that Atlantic Canadians will soon be paying $8.00 for a head of lettuce because of these charges. The charges are assessed against trucks heading into the United States, not trucks moving across the Canadian border. Lettuce, citrus fruits, bananas and other fresh produce from Florida, the U.S. southwest, California and Mexico are brought into Canada by American truckers.

"Canada should consider following Mexico's lead and impose fees on American trade to recover some of the $1 billion the Canadian trucking industry pays to cross the border" says Nelson. "The Mexicans did it." when the U.S. placed restrictions on Mexican trucks crossing into the U.S. Mexico retaliated with $2.4 billion in tariffs on American products heading into Mexico.

There is no doubt increased security measures will increase the cost of trans-border shipping but Canadians have to understand the fact that Americans still suffer from deep insecurities created by 9/11. They are overly sensitive to problems at the Mexican border and relatively insensitive to realities at the Canadian border. For many, a border is a border. That would be particularly so for the Secretary of Homeland Security who is from Arizona.

By charging Canadian trucks for the cost of administering the border, the Americans are effectively applying a tariff on Canadian imports. This would seem to conflict with terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement but to start a trade war over border administration costs seems problematic to me. I suspect we would be better off selling the value of Canadian exports to the United States than slapping a tariff on American trucks coming into Canada. A tariff on American trucks would surely lead to Mr. Nelson's $8.00 lettuce. If there is to be value in the Atlantic Gateway concept, we must resolve this issue sooner than later. The Gateway would not survive a trade war.

W.E. (Bill) Belliveau is a Shediac resident and Moncton business consultant. He can be contacted at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com

There's a lot going on this week so I'm going to deal with four things: deterrent punishment, jails in Shediac, the great unknown near Shediac's Chapman's Corner development and an overpass for the airport.

There was a disturbing event in our courts this week. A woman was sentenced to four years in prison for failing to take care of her elder mother. Apparently the mother was left in a chair for months and died shortly after being taken to hospital. The daughter was charged with failing "without lawful excuse to provide the necessities of life to her mother while her mother was under her charge and unable, by reason of illness, to care for herself".

What's disturbing about this, aside from the treatment of her mother is that apparently the daughter had been known to social workers. She had her three children taken away from her because she was unable to care for them. Apparently, she "has only a Grade 6 education and is of low intellect". If this woman (the convicted daughter) was in sight of social worker community, it seems to me that the system has some culpability here. Surely there would be periodic visits to the home where the mother could be observed in distress.

As to the daughter's grade six education, that could be attributed to mental capacity, poverty, lack of a learning environment, illness or any number of things beyond her personal control. I don't think we know the answer to that one.

As to "deterrent" sentencing, the woman pleaded guilty so either she had the mental capacity to know that she did something wrong and therefore deterrent might be appropriate or she does not have the capacity to distinguish right from wrong. If she does not have the mental capacity to be responsible for her behaviour and if she was encouraged by a lawyer or social workers to plead guilty, convicting her of willful abuse is wrong, jailing her is wrong and using her sentence to deter others is doubly wrong.

What happened in this situation is not normal. Passive abuse is not a normal behaviour.

There seems to be some question about this woman's competence. If she is not capable of behaving like a normal human being, she should not be going to prison. She should be going for treatment. Unless we know the answer to these questions, we cannot know whether the judge over-reacted or whether the judge is making good public policy. At the very least, the woman should have had a psychiatric assessment before being sentenced.

While on the subject of legal matters, I see that Shediac will soon be host to Moncton's new jail house. The jail will hold up to ninety inmates, people waiting for trial on charges of murder, rape, arson, theft, drug-dealing, drunk-driving, vagrancy and more. A new courthouse is being built in Moncton. That is where this hostel should be located. People in Shediac are concerned. They're concerned that a jail-break could unleash dangerous people in the community. They are concerned that vagrants could be released in the community. They suspect that prison communities attract more drug dealers than tourists. Their concerns may be unfounded but they beg the question - how does such a decision get made without public consultation?

While we're in Shediac, let's consider another happening. For weeks now, construction workers have been tearing down houses and clearing land on Main Street near Chapman's Corner. Word is that a mall is being built to house a new Sobeys or Superstore, a Canadian Tire and a liquor store. The developers, Montreal's Plazacorp Retail Properties won't say who the tenants will be. A development of this size will attract a lot of traffic. How will that traffic be managed? Will there be new on/off ramps from and to Highway 11 north and south? If not, we're going to be facing some awful big traffic jams. Think of Trinity Drive or Main Street Shediac in July. I ask the question again, how does such a decision (to build the mall) get made without public consultation?

My final comment deals with a proposed off-ramp for travelers on the westbound lane of Highway 15 (the four lane highway from Shediac to Moncton) direct to the airport. In my view, this is an absolute necessity for the airport to grow, for the convenience of passengers and shippers and for the pride of Greater Moncton. What's there now is 'Mickey Mouse', is confusing for strangers and creates a poor first impression of the City. It may also cost the airport money. Surely there are dollars in the federal government's stimulus budget to help fund construction of the overpass and ramps needed to make this a real international airport.

W.E. (Bill) Belliveau is a Shediac resident and Moncton business consultant. He can be contacted at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com