Businesses 'wait and see’ on Scottish vote

The Daily Business Buzz
Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

Some indifferent, others curious about Nova Scotia business impact

Yes campaign and No campaign posters stand outside a polling place in Edinburgh, Scotland, Thursday, Sept. 18.

HALIFAX —  Many Nova Scotia firms doing business in the United Kingdom appear to have little or no concern about today's vote on Scottish independence, mainly because they appear to have little direct trade with Scotland.

Interhabs Ltd. of Hubbards, which was one of the largest Maritime companies selling pre-engineered homes in Scotland for more than 25 years, saw its business there literally wiped out after the worldwide financial crisis in 2008. Robert Williams, a former vice-president now retired, says the market dried up two years after the Nova Scotia government provided the company with a $300,000 loan guarantee to help support their growth in the United Kingdom and Ireland.

Cape Cod Finished Wood Siding, a division of Marwood Ltd. of Hammonds Plains, has a large market in the UK but no direct links to Scotland. A company official says there has been no discussion about the possible impact of a “yes” vote with their partners in England.

Pernille Fischer Boulter, president and CEO of Kisserup International Trade Roots, says exporters are selling far less to the European Union than to the United States but that they could turn that around.

“Companies could utilize the natural advantage of being ‘New Scotland’ when selling to Scotland — the branding could be a huge advantage,” says the president and CEO of the Halifax firm, which assists private sector companies, industry and trade associations, and government organizations with export development.

However, if Scotland votes for independence, this could pose challenges to future export potential.

“CETA [Canada and European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement] will increase its focus when ratified but if Scotland separates it will be a whole new set of regulations, maybe even tariffs for Scotland,” says Fischer Boulter. “On the flip side it would be years for Scotland to develop and implement these.”

The Nova Scotia government says the province is interested in a continuing business relationship with Scotland no matter the outcome of the vote on Thursday.

“Scotland is a significant trade partner for Nova Scotia, including in the energy, fisheries and ocean tech sectors,” says Frazer Egerton, director of trade policy in the Department of Economic, Rural Development and Tourism. “We look forward to continuing and growing our trade relationship, whatever the decision of the Scottish people.”

"CETA [Canada and European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement] will increase its focus when ratified but if Scotland separates it will be a whole new set of regulations, maybe even tariffs for Scotland." Pernille Fischer Boulter, president and CEO of Kisserup International Trade Roots

In June, Premier Stephen McNeil led a trade mission to Europe which included Scotland, seeking ways to enhance air travel and tourism. Energy Minister Andrew Younger met with Scotland’s Minister of Energy Fergus Ewing.

The premier also met with companies interested in developing Nova Scotia’s offshore potential.

Music Nova Scotia is hoping to make inroads in Scotland no matter how Scots vote.

Award-winning Cape Breton band The Town Heroes played Glasgow in July as part of the Canadian Independent Music Association’s Canada Invades Glasgow B2B showcase and trade mission.

Scott Long, Music Nova Scotia’s executive director, said the mission to Glasgow was an important market research effort.

“As a province we have been targeting the UK as a strategic music market for some time, but with particular emphasis on London. Glasgow is increasingly becoming a major epicentre for the discovery of new music. Connecting with buyers in Glasgow is the next logical step to a successful export strategy in the U.K.”

Organizations: Interhabs Ltd. of Hubbards, Marwood Ltd. of Hammonds Plains, Kisserup International Trade Roots European Union Department of Economic Canadian Independent Music Association

Geographic location: New Scotland, Nova Scotia, United Kingdom HALIFAX Maritime Glasgow Ireland England United States Europe Cape Breton London

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • David E.H. Smith
    September 20, 2014 - 03:13

    EU - Canada CETA News; More Taxes & Less Services to pay the Shareholders (Tribunals). The SHAREHOLDERS, corporates, EUROPE, CANADA et al, VERSUS the harmless non shareholders of Canada. “WILL The COURT CONSIDER...?” Are YOU Depriving your Highest Court of the INFO to Decide Against the Global Corporate Economy? by David E.H. Smith ...Therefore, as a consequence of the aforementioned abuses that have been listed in the enclosed research articles & the dire peril that these abuses puts the NON shareholding Canadians in, both; Native & non Native, et al, as an elaborate, ”inhumane”, ”unethical”, “immoral” & probably, criminal, enterprise, the writer humbly asks; under what circumstances would The Court consider the following? 1) Will The Court consider ensuring that any further attempts by off shore enterprises, such as the aforementioned attempts by the global corporate “arrangements”, including corporate Canada & its associates within the government of Canada, et al, as a “reciprocity pool” of shared “secret decisions” against the non shareholders of Canada, et al, will be dealt with punitively. 2) And, in the interim, until The Court can make a determination of any wrongful intent, &/or, abuses of the ”arrangements” as a criminal enterprise, will the open & public Supreme Court of Canada consider preventing the further use of the non shareholders' tax dollars from being used to make any, &/or, any more secret decisions against themselves, ie. the NON shareholders. 3) Furthermore, can, or, will The Court consider ordering the return of any & all of the tax dollars that have been used by the government, &/or, corporate Canada & their lawyers, et al, that have been used for the development of the aforementioned “arrangements” of a what The Court may determine to be a criminal enterprise (for examples; a) as a means of using/legitimizing off-shore money, et al, b) laundering money from the proceeds of criminal enterprises, &/or, c) going toward the funding of “criminals”, et al, who may be involved in other criminal, or, unethical, or, inhumane, immoral enterprises), and thus, the tax dollars have not been used for the purposes that the taxpayers had intended, such as; for goods, services (particularly to police organizations & judiciaries for their investigation of, not only the aforementioned secret/privileged relationship between corporate Canada via its lobbyists and the executives of the relevant political parties, but, the alleged wrong doing by others, as well), programs, health, education, etc. that are consistent with the NON shareholders' understanding of what “good” government entails and return the tax dollars with punitive penalties paid to the NON shareholding Canadians, both: Native & non Native, et al. Similarly, given the reckless endangering situation that the government, et al, has placed the NON shareholders in, can, or, will the Court ensure that the necessary funds will be spent for their, the NON shareholders', intended purposes in order to “guarantee” these services, et al, and consider ordering corporate Canada, its shareholders & their lawyers, advisers & service beneficiaries of the present “arrangements” will be paid with their own funds, prior to presenting their future “adventures”, &/or, “arrangements” to: A) The Court, &/or, its representatives and then, B) the NON shareholders for their consideration, discussions, improvements, &/or, rejections, et al, in open forums that have eliminated the fear of recriminations, retributions, etc. by corporate Canada, its shareholders, The Tribunals, et al. 4 A) And, less one forgets that the revelation of the present perilous International treaties/”arrangements” began with the regard for the rights of Native Canadians as per the Treaties/”arrangements” that corporate Canada & the Government of Canada have “foisted” upon Native Canadians who have been deliberately deprived of the due diligence information, such as the information in The W.A.D. Accord, et al, I am compelled to ask The Court: will the Court consider whether, or, not The Court's recent “Tsilhqot'in Decision”, makes it easier for corporate Canada, its global economic associates, their shareholders, et al, to sue the Tsilhqot'in First Nation & other Native communities in Canada and thereby, to seek financial relief from the harmless NON shareholding, non Native Canadians via the Government of Canada? And, will The Court consider preventing any unrelated hardship to the NON shareholders as a consequence of the creation of the aforementioned Tribunals & corporate Canada & its associates intent to obtain the unencumbered access to the natural resources that are continuing to be found in Canada & irrespective of Native title to these lands & its resources? B) And, similarly, does the plan espoused by the American born Tom Eugene Flanagan which would enable First Nations communities to become municipalities, also make it easier for corporate Canada, its associates, et al, to sue Native communities, or, seek remedies from the Government of Canada (ie. from the NON shareholders) for any encumbrances that the new, Native municipalities, et al, might impose upon the development, &/or, access to the aforementioned natural resources, etc.? (And, regarding the settlement of Native land claims that are presently before Canadian courts, & will continue to be before the courts for some time, the following question can help The Court a great deal in these deliberations, and that is; how were Europeans convinced to settle in North America in the first place & in particular, the land that became known as Canada?) 5) Therefore, can I only hope that given the enclosed information about the abuse, the potential for abuse & the intent of the aforementioned Tribunals which is: A) to abuse & to limit The Court's ability to hear cases, &/or, challenges, to determine the legality of the actions of litigants & to enforce decisions, penalties, damages, remedies, compensations, et al, B) perpetrate fraud, et al, upon the NON shareholding Canadians, et al, or, can The Court give me, et al, the hope that it might consider rendering “broader” interpretations of the existing laws that the corporate leaders (& their shareholders) of Canada, et al, seem intent upon secretly destroying, avoiding, etc. for their sole benefit, rather than rendering “limited”, or, “narrower” interpretations of the laws that corporate Canada (& their shareholders), et al, would prefer as it would continue to enable corporate Canada to abuse of the justice system & the NON shareholders by way of the existing laws that were created for “intended abuse” by corporate Canada, et al? Will the Supreme Court of Canada consider compelling public investigations/inquiries into the alleged abuses & alleged on-going abuses, starting with, but, by no means limited to, the investigation of the role that Members of Parliament, both; in the House of Commons & in the Senate, play in the NON shareholders deprivation of their “right” to obtain due diligence information (as opposed to the deprivation of the information on the basis that the information has been classified as “privileged”) by way of investigating: 1) the Member of Parliaments' relationships with: A) the executives of the political parties that are operating in Canada &/or, B) the corporations that are operating in Canada & elsewhere & C) the lobbyists for the aforementioned corporations that are operating in Canada & elsewhere, 2) the party executives relationship with: A) the corporations ...the lobbyists for the aforementioned the corporations that are operating in Canada & elsewhere, whereby, The Court can determine, amongst other things; 1) what the aforementioned individuals & groups, know about: A) The W.A.D. Accord & The Compensation that is embodied in The Accord, (& how The WAD Accord may effect, &/or, is effecting the “arrangements” and the NON shareholders, both; domestic & foreign, ie. foreign NON shareholders in the potential signatory countries, et al), B) the basis of opening the treaty processes to the public in order that the public can develop of limited/narrow, &/or, broader treaties, agreements, partnerships, et al, such as; the FTAgreement, the NAFTAgreement, the C-CITreaty, the CETAgreement, the TPPartnership, et al, as the public sees fit & C) et al, 2) as a consequence of the above information & questions, etc., what can the Member of Parliaments , the party executives, the lobbyists, the corporate executives, et al, (ie. THE WITNESSES) demonstrate about their understanding of: i) The Accord & The Compensation as per a list of questions that will be provided... ...Similarly, will the Supreme Court of Canada consider compelling the government of Canada to withhold any & all payments “awards” & “damages” assessed by the tribunals, either, based upon: 1) as a temporary measure while The Court compels an investigation into the legality of the tribunals “fraudulent” self indulgence, (eg. The shareholders, et al, using the secrecy of their tribunals as a means of off loading the responsibilities, &/or, liabilities of the shareholders on to the harmless NON shareholders while the shareholders & their corporate leaders use their, the shareholders', liabilities as means of increasing the shareholders' profit, 2) as a permanent decision to protect the harmless NON shareholding Canadians... ********* To SHARE Information & Questions re; The Relationship between Human (Nature) Rights & Economics in 1) TPPartnership, the C-CI Treaty, the CET Agreement, et al, and 2) Native Canadian Treaties via The WAD Accord, see; Facebook; "David Smith, Sidney, BC".