MOVING FORWARD: New International Trade Crossing will have huge implications for southeastern Michigan

Advisor & Source (

By Jim Kasuba
Journal Register News Service

DETROIT — After more than a decade of debate, public meetings and political campaigns for and against it, a new international bridge is on the horizon.

To be certain, the controversy over whether or not to build the New International Trade Crossing, a publicly funded bridge project between Windsor and Detroit, will continue until the first ceremonial shovel hits the ground, and most likely beyond that point.

But governments on both sides of the American-Canadian border have completed their due diligence and it appears only a matter of months until that ceremonial ground-breaking will take place about a mile south of the privately owned Ambassador Bridge, which also links the United States and Canada.

In November, Michigan voters roundly rejected Proposal 6, a ballot measure that would have required voter approval of any new state-backed international bridges or tunnels. That proposal went down in flames despite a huge spending gap between the Detroit International Bridge Co., which bankrolled the petition drive that put the measure on the ballot, and the anti-Proposal 6 group. By comparison, the $1 million spent by those against Proposal 6 was a paltry sum when going up against the $31.7 million the bridge company spent trying to convince voters to approve it.

Gov. Rick Snyder said in published reports that with the defeat of the proposal, the state can now begin to move forward on the NITC, which formerly went by the name of the Detroit River International Crossing, commonly referred to as DRIC.

The new bridge would connect Windsor’s 401 Highway and I-75 in Detroit’s Delray neighborhood. Those close to the project say the next step is to get a “presidential permit,” which could happen by summer. However, with all of the delays that have occurred up to this point, no one is placing bets on a timeline. Once bridge construction gets started, the project is anticipated to be completed within five to seven years.

Mohammed Alghurabi, who served as the Michigan Department of Transportation’s senior project manager of the project when it was known as DRIC, said it’s his understanding that the permit is expected to be approved, but the exact time frame is uncertain. The permit falls under the purview of the U.S. State Department.

“The biggest hurdle (in getting the presidential permit approved) is making sure all the ‘i’s are dotted and ‘t’s are crossed when it comes to environmental clearance,” Alghurabi said. “The No. 2 issue is that they want to know about the funding.”

Up to this point, one of the biggest obstacles to getting the project started has been Detroit International Bridge Co. owner Manuel “Matty” Moroun, who has vowed to continue fighting it.

Company spokesman Mickey Blashfield did not return a phone call and email seeking comment for this report.

However, shortly after voters failed to approve the DIBC-backed Proposal 6, Blashfield told The Detroit News that the fight over the new bridge would continue.

“If the governmental proposal doesn’t collapse from the weight of legal and legislative scrutiny, the unstable salt mine foundations (of Snyder’s bridge) will present some serious obstacles, which should call the entire project into question,” Blashfield said. “Similar and serious financial, legal and logistical questions have already been raised regarding the viability of the NITC — questions Gov. Snyder and his administration have still refused to answer directly.”

Government officials have dismissed the salt mine issue as baseless. The new bridge, if built, would compete with the DIBC-owned Ambassador Bridge and has been the source of contention between the state and Moroun’s company for years. There have been nearly 30 lawsuits between the two sides over either the NITC or issues at the Ambassador Bridge.

State Rep. Douglas Geiss (D-Taylor), who in January 2011 reintroduced legislation to authorize construction of the new bridge, doesn’t believe Moroun will put an end to his lawsuits anytime soon.

“No amount of data or facts will sway Matty Moroun’s argument,” Geiss said. “He will say or do anything to delay construction of a bridge. The longer he delays, the more money he makes.”

Geiss cited figures estimating that the Ambassador Bridge gains about $60 million per year for each year it’s the only bridge between Detroit and Windsor, which is one reason Moroun’s critics say the billionaire can easily afford attorney fees to keep fighting the NITC. However, those same critics believe spending on TV commercials, the seemingly never-ending court battles and donations to the campaigns of various politicians throughout the state are reasons it now costs $4.75 for a passenger car to cross the bridge, the fee that went into effect May 1, 2012.

Geiss uses the Mackinac Bridge, which connects Michigan’s Upper and Lower peninsulas, as a prime example of an authority that knows how to oversee a bridge.

“People say that an authority can’t run a bridge, but that’s how the Mackinac Bridge is run,” Geiss said. “The Mackinac Bridge is in top-notch condition. They do continual work on the bridge, they have an exemplary safety record and it’s a much more difficult bridge to maintain.”

He also added that it’s cheaper to use the Mackinac Bridge than it is to use the Ambassador Bridge. The current toll passenger cars pay for the Mackinac Bridge is $4 per car.

Featured prominently on the Ambassador Bridge’s website is an article by “Corps!,” a publication that brands itself “Everything Business.” In an article dated Sept. 8, 2011, Matthew Moroun, the son of the bridge’s owner and vice chairman of his family’s business, spoke out against a new bridge.

In the article, Moroun scoffed at the financial case made by Canadian and Michigan officials for the $2.1 billion NITC, calling it “political math,” adding that a taxpayer treasury is needed to make this kind of project work.

However, Geiss and other bridge proponents say the NITC will be built at no cost to Michigan taxpayers. Canada has agreed to front the cost of construction and expects to recoup that money through toll collections.

Geiss sees the fact that the Canadian government is willing to spend up to $550 million to cover the costs of the U.S. portion of the project as proof that it views this second bridge as critical.

But the money fronted by the Canadians goes much further when taking into consideration that the Federal Highway Administration is allowing Canada’s expenditure for the NITC project to be used to secure federal matching funds.

According to Alghurabi, the state of Michigan appears to be on solid ground in the funding area when it comes to its presidential permit application, since the Canadian government has agreed to front the money.

One argument the Ambassador Bridge owners have made against the proposed new bridge is that there isn’t enough traffic to support it. In the “Corps!” article, Moroun said that traffic peaked in 1999 when almost 12.4 million vehicles crossed the bridge. In 2010, that number was down to 7.2 million vehicles.

Assuming a 3 percent compound annual growth rate, it would take 19 years for the Ambassador Bridge to achieve its former peak.

Even with the projections being what they are, Moroun’s company still has plans to add a second span to the Ambassador Bridge, at a projected cost of $1 billion, that would add even more capacity. On the home page of the Ambassador Bridge’s website is a photo of the bridge as it looks today, along with an artist’s rendering of what it would look like with a second span, labeled “tomorrow.”

Moroun said his company hasn’t given up on the idea of a second span, and that it will take place “sometime in the future.” He added that when the second span is opened, the old span would undergo renovations before reopening to traffic. In terms of the economics, Moroun said it’s much more expensive to repair and rehabilitate the bridge when it’s under traffic load.

In the fall, Canadian Consul General Roy Norton spoke to the Dearborn Chamber of Commerce and to the Southern Wayne County Regional Chamber about the economic importance of a second bridge between the two major border cities.

Norton said the project is critical to maintaining the free flow of goods along the Detroit-Windsor corridor. One-quarter of the $689 billion in trade between Canada and the United States in 2011 passed over the Ambassador Bridge. Although not believed to be obsolete, the now 84-year-old bridge is the only freight crossing between Detroit and Windsor, with the next closest 60 miles to the north at the Blue Water Bridge, which crosses near Port Huron to Sarnia, Ontario.

Norton said the age of the Ambassador Bridge coupled with increasing tolls and traffic volume are the reasons Canada stepped up to finance a $550 million freeway interchange on the Michigan side of the NITC.

The Canadian government’s agreement to pay for cash-strapped Michigan’s portion of the project is one of the most unique aspects of the deal, and in all likelihood a second bridge would not be possible without it.

Norton said that since 1972, when Congress put the responsibility of U.S.-Canada border crossings on states rather than the federal government, every project has been jointly financed by the Canadian government and the state the crossing is in.

“Maintaining a death watch on an 83-year-old bridge and crossing our fingers for its eternal life didn’t seem like a very sound way to proceed,” Norton said.

He also answered critics who say another bridge isn’t necessary because traffic counts on the Ambassador Bridge are down. Norton said that while traffic counts are lower relative to all-time highs, they’re quickly rebounding from the global economic crisis of 2008 and are projected to continue growing.

But traffic issues aside, Norton said the critics’ argument doesn’t address that the Ambassador Bridge is aging and the fact that it is the sole crossing at the Detroit-Windsor trade nexus.

The DIBC has made public statements criticizing the use of public money to build a second international bridge, saying that it should be the private sector taking the lead. Norton said that, in fact, the bridge will be built and financed by a private contractor and in the event toll projections don’t live up to expectations, the Canadian government is the party that stands to lose.

Geiss also emphasizes the fact that this bridge is a public-private partnership. A private company will bid to build and maintain the bridge for a period of years, most likely a 30-year contract, he said.

“These companies believe they can recoup their investment, plus make a profit,” Geiss said. “The people of the state of Michigan can feel a further sense that they will not be in a position that they will have to pay back the cost of the bridge. If it is not a good business model, you would get zero proposals from private industry. We don’t expect that to happen. If you get three or four proposals, (the project) has been well-vetted.”

The other point to take into consideration, supporters say, is the bottleneck created at the Ambassador Bridge, especially at the Canadian side. Once the traffic reaches Windsor, drivers are faced with 16 stoplights before reaching the highway. Geiss said that would be akin to dropping off traffic on Telegraph Road in the Downriver area, using several miles of local roads and facing numerous traffic lights before reaching the freeway, tying up traffic along the way.

“You may not see it when you go to the bridge, but Ford, GM and Chrysler monitor that crossing,” Geiss said. “If it gets backed up, they will divert to the Blue Water Bridge or another crossing. The economic engine of Michigan and Ontario is tied to that crossing.”

Although the building of a second Detroit-Windsor bridge has far-reaching implications for the entire region, no particular group of residents will feel the impact more than the residents of Delray, the southwest Detroit neighborhood just north of River Rouge that extends east to the Detroit River, west to Fort Street and I-75, and north to Dragoon Street at Fort Wayne.

The once-thriving community of 30,000 people in the 1930s has shrunk to about 3,000 people today, an area of numerous burned-out and abandoned buildings populated by a tough group of people who remain in Delray for a variety of reasons.

“There are people who want to live here because they have generations of family who grew up here, or because it’s close to the river, or close to their jobs,” said Scott Brines, president of the Community Benefits Coalition, a grass-roots organization formed to protect residents from the potentially harmful impact a second bridge would inflict upon the Delray neighborhood. “We need to take care of people close to transportation and heavy industry. People are going to live here no matter what.”

Brines said the coalition is composed of about 500 residents, businesses, churches and organizations who stand united that when the project gains final approval, either the residents be offered buyouts — all of them, not just those in the footprint of the bridge — or else an investment be made in the neighborhood, one that targets air quality, abandoned buildings and city services.

For years, Delray residents involved in the preservation and improvement of their neighborhood have taken part in monthly community meetings hosted by the Michigan Department of Transportation, meetings that offered information about the bridge project as it proceeded through various stages of planning, and seeking input as to how the building of a new bridge could take concerns of Delray residents to heart.

Brines and other Delray residents are no Pollyannas. They realize that a project of this magnitude is going to have some negative impacts on their neighborhood, but one of their goals is to look for solutions that will lessen those impacts, such as increased air pollution from idling trucks. The coalition believes the new bridge and Delray residents can mutually coexist and even benefit from one another.

One of the suggestions his group has made to bridge planners is that they go directly to the source of pollution by requiring that trucks be retrofitted so they produce less pollution.

“In (Los Angeles) ports private developers retrofitted trucks and it took 90 percent of the particulate out of the air,” Brines said. “You can give a credit for new or retrofitted engines and if not they will pay a little more. This would greatly help the community.”

One of the reasons bridge proponents say Delray may not be left to languish has to do with improving the image of Michigan. The last thing bridge builders want to do, they argue, is to build a beautiful new bridge that connects to a slum neighborhood, which is the last view travelers see when they leave the state and the first image when they enter it.

“It’s a black eye on Michigan and Detroit,” Brines said. “How could you let that happen? When you go across the river, Canada has taken great strides to improve the quality of life and the environment to make the area beautiful.”

Brines said the hope is if the government won’t step in to improve and beautify the area, perhaps the bridge’s private developer will. Many Delray residents feel abandoned by the city of Detroit, he said, and don’t hold out a lot of hope that the financially strapped city will put much effort into neighborhood improvements.

“We are dealing with a city in crisis,” Brines said. “We have so many houses that are abandoned — houses that are burned and ravaged, and stripped of their resources. We’ve also had lot of speculators, businesses buying up properties, one of which is the (Detroit International) Bridge Co.”

Right now, Delray finds itself like everyone else with a stake in the bridge — waiting on approval of the presidential permit. However, as might be expected, there’s considerably more anticipation with Delray residents surrounding the length of time it will take for final approval.

Brines said the community expects at least five years of the building process.

“That’s a hardship,” Brines said of the lengthy period of increased noise, dust and traffic blockages that are involved in such a major project. “The longer we wait, the worse it gets. A lot of us are struggling to see how we can come out on top.”

The Daily Show: January 9, 2013

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Bridge to Canada
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

Editorial: Top 5 political decisions that changed Michigan’s course in 2012

Detroit Free Press

Snyder decides to fly solo on bridge deal

With Republican lawmakers still balking at the construction of a new, publicly owned bridge across the Detroit River, the governor hinted early in 2012 that he was exploring ways to do the deal without legislative approval.

In June, when he joined Canadian leaders in unveiling an omnibus deal in which Canada agreed to front the costs of building both the bridge and the infrastructure to link it to metro Detroit’s freeway system, Snyder simultaneously averted a showdown with his own party’s lawmakers and neutralized Ambassador Bridge owner Manuel (Matty) Moroun’s legislative allies.

Unwilling or unable to recognize an upswing in public support for Snyder’s plans, Moroun underlined the shift by squandering $33 million on an unsuccessful campaign to enact a constitutional amendment he hoped would block its construction.

Click here to read the entire editorial.

One of the biggest political losers of 2012: Matty Moroun

Tim Skubick: The biggest political losers of 2012

By Tim Skubick

Drum roll: The biggest political loser of 2012 is….err, make that “are.”

Yep, it’s a tie: Matty Moroun and Michigan organized labor.

This past year had all sorts of pratfalls from this player or that as folks went about their business playing the political game in our fair state.

Clearly the owners of the Ambassador Bridge, led by Matty Moroun, did their best to endear themselves to the citizenry as they tried to cement their monopoly. The governor had different ideas: He wanted to break the monopoly by building a second span between Detroit and Windsor.

And $42 million later, Moroun’s statewide ballot proposal remains one of the most expensive yet least successful as voters saw through the stretching of the truth, according to various media outlets, that led to its defeat. And to make matters worse, Mr. Moroun also bankrolled another ballot plan making it next to impossible to raise taxes. That went down in flames, too.

All this was grand news for the TV stations who wallowed in Moroun money.

And then there’s the union movement, which took hit at hit from the GOP legislature and formally thought-to-be-moderate Gov. Rick Snyder. Leaders had it up to here and retaliated with Proposal 2, which began as a way to block Right to Work. Instead, it mushroomed into a top-heavy ballot plan that had everything but the kitchen sink in it. It sank because voters refused to enshrine “collective bargaining rights” into the state constitution.

Along the way there were many runners-up. House GOP Speaker Jase Bolger and his sidekick, former Rep. Roy Schmidt, concocted a stupid scheme to secure Mr. Schmidt’s re-election. It was ugly from the get-go and got uglier as it went along. Now a one-person grand juror will decide whether they broke any laws. The Battle Creek Speaker confessed that his desire to win that seat got in the way of his judgment. Give them both credit for saying they were sorry, but it did not erase their deeds.

Staying on the GOP side of things, the House GOP leadership team made national headlines by turning off the microphone of a female House Democrat who said the word “vagina” during a debate over abortion. Ironically it was a precursor of things to come as other Republicans around the county said stuff about women that they wish they had not.

Democrats in Detroit chimed in with their own performances. In order to prevent the city from drowning in red ink, the governor worked a consent agreement with the mayor and city council. But it took a long time to implement as the local officials had buyers remorse. One can understand the opposition, given the history of Lansing trying to tell the city what to do. But in outstate Michigan it did not play well and as the old year flows into the new one, the fate of the city hangs in the balance.

The list goes on, but they only allow 350 words for these works of art.

It’s Time to Build the Bridge

A look at what others are saying since the voters rejected Proposal 6

“We’re very pleased to see the support of the people of Michigan for the new bridge between Detroit and Windsor, which is very important to the economies of both our countries. Whatever battles lie ahead, this bridge is going to be done.”
– Stephen Harper, Canadian Prime Minister

“The sooner we can build that bridge, the better off we are in creating jobs.”
– Governor Rick Snyder

“We’re very heartened, Canadians are, that Michiganders have seen through the campaign that was waged by the owners of the Ambassador Bridge and that clearly Michiganders have decided they want a bridge built.”
– Roy Norton, Canadian General Consul to Detroit

“The failure of this proposal means that the two governments can get on with putting up the new bridge – known as the New International Trade Crossing – scheduled to be ready for traffic in 2017. It is long overdue. Seven years ago, the Canadian Senate Committee on National Security and Defense, in its report Borderline Insecure, urged the federal government to do everything in its power to put a new span in place by 2013.”
– Colin Kenny, Former chair of the Senate Committee on National Security and Defense

“The defeat of Proposal 6 clears the way for the construction of the new bridge across the Detroit River. This is good news for travelers, workers and industry on both sides of the border who will benefit from the new publicly owned bridge.”
– Denis Lebel, Canadian Federal Transport Minister

“I think the vote is great. One of the reasons I think that is that we are constantly talking about developing the corridor from here all the way up to the Canadian border, so the idea that there is the potential for a new bridge that is a bit closer to the city of Toledo, that could increase the commerce we are doing in Canada as well as northern America, and that is a benefit to everybody.”
– Mike Bell, Mayor, City of Toledo

“There will be pay checks for our people working on construction of the bridge. Only American and Canadian steel will be used. There will be no cost for Michigan taxpayers. Our total cost will be paid by bridge user fares. This is truly a free bridge.”
– John F. McEwan, Former Mayor, City of River Rouge

“Any time you get hung up, it costs you time and certainly costs you money. This will be a huge boost to us as we send parts, powertrains, and vehicles back and forth across the border.”
– Bill Ford, Jr., Executive Chairman, Ford Motor Company

“This will be a real test to see if the Morouns really do think that the people should decide. The people have clearly decided now. Are they going to let the new bridge proceed? Or are they going to throw up frivolous lawsuits to delay?”
– Sandy Baruah., President and CEO, Detroit Regional Chamber of Commerce

“This is a great victory for citizens and businesses on both sides of the border. Michigan and Canada share one of the largest trade relationships in the world. With this wise decision voters have signaled they are ready to cooperate on a huge project to enhance that partnership.”
– Perrin Beatty, President, Canadian Chamber of Commerce

“It looks good on the people of Michigan. There has been so much misinformation bandied about but they weren’t buying it. It restores your faith in democracy. When you drive a truck from Toronto to Miami you go through 16 stoplights, and 15 of them are in Windsor.”
– David Bradley, President, Ontario Trucking Association

“Voters seem happy with the job Gov. Rick Snyder and the Legislature have done in the past two years, and they aren’t about to let loads of money from special interests throw the state into reverse.”
– Detroit News

“No matter what measures Moroun takes, the process is too far along to suffer significant setbacks. The bridge company, however, has suffered many, including the Gateway Project ruling that sent both Moroun and bridge president Dan Stamper to jail for illegally rerouting Detroit traffic to their entrance.

This is an exciting time for people in Windsor and Detroit. The build will result in thousands of jobs and increase cross-border trade and travel.

And Moroun? Well, he asked the people to decide, and they decided they wanted to build a new bridge and embrace prosperity. What more is there to say, except go away?”
– The Windsor Star

“This battle has dragged on for nearly a decade, and this is the most economically important border crossing in America. The people have spoken. The new bridge is legal. It will create jobs and not cost Michigan a cent. Elections mean something, and this one means both governments should begin building it as quickly as safety allows.”
– Jack Lessenberry, Political Analyst, Michigan Radio

“Michigan voters decided Tuesday that they’d prefer leaving infrastructure decisions, like building a new international bridge, to the people we elect and pay to make those decisions. And the people we elected to make this decision believe this bridge is necessary.”
– Jeff Wattrick, Columnist, Deadline Detroit

Snyder to negotiate bridge plans

After rejection of Prop 6, Governor to face new legal hurdles against Moroun


DETROIT — Gov. Rick Snyder is returning to Canada to discuss the plans for a second bridge between Detroit and Windsor, Ontario, nearly six months after signing a deal to build the Canadian financed span and three weeks after getting a vote of confidence from Michigan residents.

Snyder returns to Ontario’s capital with an Election Day victory: Voters rejected a proposal backed by Ambassador Bridge owner and billionaire Manuel “Matty” Moroun to give Michigan residents a say on whether state funds could be used to build international border crossings.

Moroun and his allies spent millions on advertising, court challenges and other efforts aimed at obstructing the competing bridge.

Still, hurdles remain to building a new bridge some two miles south of the existing Ambassador Bridge. Lawsuits are expected to be filed challenging Snyder’s authority to forge the so-called interlocal agreement with Canada without state statute and cite a 1920s congressional act that gave exclusive franchise of that stretch of the Detroit River to the Ambassador’s private owners, said John Mogk, a law professor at Wayne State.

Moroun spokesman Mickey Blashfield told The Associated Press earlier this month that he doesn’t believe state officials’ actions have been credible.

Mogk said he expects legal counterarguments to follow, including one that cites another congressional resolution “that could be interpreted to give the Executive Branch the authority to build another crossing.”

“There’s doubt in the minds of many that the franchise that was granted to the (Ambassador) bridge company that originally built the bridge was exclusive,” Mogk said.

The bridge battle is an extension of Moroun’s recent court tussles with Michigan’s Department of Transportation that landed him in jail earlier this year for violating a judge’s order to complete work on a $230 million freeway-to-bridge project. A competing bridge certainly would cut into toll profits enjoyed solely by Moroun for years.

Moroun’s camp has said his plan to double the more than 80-year-old Ambassador Bridge would cost less to build and will be financed with private dollars. His Detroit International Bridge Co. still is waiting on permits from the U.S. Coast Guard and Canadian agencies to move forward with the project.

Mogk said passage of the ballot proposal would have strengthened Moroun’s arguments.

“Even if it weren’t a matter of law, it would have been a matter of policy persuasion,” he said.

Colby Spencer, a senior analyst with the East Lansing-based Anderson Economic Group, agreed that voters’ rejection of the proposal boosts the state’s case.

“The citizens of Michigan have clearly stated, ‘This is not something we need to be deciding,’” said Spencer, who was part of an independent 2011 study looking at the construction of a new commuter bridge between Detroit and Canada. “Your regular citizens of Michigan are saying, ‘Yeah, go for it.’ It’s a nice good-faith gesture.”

Construction of the bridge is estimated at about $950 million, according to the New International Trade Crossing website. Canada has promised to take on Michigan’s $550 million portion with revenue from future tolls paying off the debt. The total cost of the bridge would be $3.5 billion, including work on freeway interchanges, customs plazas in both countries and infrastructure work.

Spencer and Mogk said the state still needs to acquire land in southwest Detroit that’s needed to build the bridge and connect it to the freeway.

“They’re really going to have to do a big push on community relations (and) … making sure these communities are taken care of and well-compensated,” she said.

Mogk expects challenges over land acquisition and eminent domain, but he believes Michigan will finally get its way.

Truckers impatient for DRIC bridge

Project has been delayed too long: Bradley

By Dave Battagello, The Windsor Star

Canadian Trucking Alliance CEO David Bradley pushed for expedited construction of the planned $1-billion government-backed bridge and better streamlining of the customs clearance process at the Canada-U.S. border during a hearing this week on the federal government’s omnibus bill.

The sweeping legislation currently being debated in Ottawa by legislators includes the Bridge to Strengthen Trade Act which would exempt the Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC) bridge from certain environmental approvals and speed the start of construction.

“Construction will still need to abide by environmental laws,” Bradley said Friday.

“The project has already been through a major environmental assessment. I believe we need to expedite this and reduce the opportunity for lawsuits to slow it down.

“We think it’s a very important infrastructure project that has been delayed for too long.”

During the Senate transport committee hearing this week on the omnibus bill, Bradley called the planned DRIC bridge “North America’s most important gateway” for trade.

“As one who has been championing a new second crossing for about 20 years – who was present 10 years ago when the Prime Minister and the Ontario Premier of the day launched the current process and then watched as the political gamesmanship, particularly in Michigan, very nearly scuppered the whole thing – almost anything that expedites the construction of this vital trade link is a good thing,” he told the committee.

Bradley also continues to push for faster clearance at the border in both directions for truckers and trucking companies.

A report released this week by Statistics Canada called Trucking Across the Border revealed that in 2009 the extra costs of cross-border trucking added about 0.4 per cent to the value of exported goods and 0.8 per cent to the value of imported goods.

While that may not sound significant, that figure adds up to millions each year when considering $300 million in trade passes daily through the Windsor-Detroit border alone.

Cross-border trade costs more because of higher fixed costs per shipment related to border delays and border-related compliance costs. Those added costs are being passed on by trucking firms to their customers, the report said.

“We do believe if you’re going to have a more secure and more efficient border you’ve got to transmit information electronically and take out as much paper as you can,” Bradley said.

The omnibus bill also includes changes to the Customs Act that would allow for a single carrier code – one valid identifier of the carrier prior to entering Canada.

The trucking industry is ready for the change, said Bradley, who is in favour of the move.