CETA is Coming Are You Scared Yet

Are there any campaigns in Europe on this issue? I'm sure that European people would also be negatively affected. Plus given the "no" votes in France and the Netherlands 5 years ago shows that there is some latent resentment for how the EU was forced upon the European population, so there should be something there to exploit.

CUPE, allies in Brussels to lobby on CETA

Jul 11, 2011 09:17 AM

Quote: The trade deal is being negotiated behind closed doors by the Harper government and EU officials.

Key issues are:

- increased pharmaceutical costs of $2.8 billion annually

- new corporate rights that override the public interest

- threats CETA poses to public water

- loss of democratic rights for municipal  and provincial governments especially with regard to public purchasing

The European Parliament recently passed a resolution on CETA, raising concerns about Canadian asbestos, Canada’s tar sands, and GMOs (genetically modified organisms), among other things.

The Trade Justice Network delegation has come to Europe (London, Brussels and Paris) to lobby Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) to meet with unions and civil society groups, and to monitor the negotiations. CETA threatens public services, environmental policy, Indigenous rights, municipal autonomy, farming and cultural policy, jobs and other important areas of social policy.

http://cupe.ca/privatization/cupe-allies-brussels-lobby-ceta

Maybe if Eurozone countries start defaulting in large numbers, the EU will go down in flames and the whole deal will be nullified anyways?

I can dream, can't I?

Day 3: European labour movement engages on CETA

Jul 14, 2011 09:12 AM

Day three in Brussels began with an early morning meeting with the provincial government negotiators for Ontario, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Quebec, and Newfoundland – Labrador. This was an opportunity for the Trade Justice Network/RQIC delegation to raise concerns and pose questions about the status of key CETA issues such as pharmaceutical costs, water, labour standards, and the treatment of energy utilities like hydro.   

Blair Redlin and Carol Ferguson then joined Larry Brown (NUPGE) and Teresa Healy (CLC) at the International Trade Union House for meetings with sisters and brothers from the European and international labour movements.....

http://cupe.ca/privatization/day-3-european-labour-movement-engages

The scarest thing of all is that according to the Canadian Constitution: all trade agreements are ratified by the Governor-General on the advice of the Governor-in-Council aka the Prime Minister or Minister of International Trade. Parliament is not even needed according to the Canadian Constitution. For all that is wrong with the United States, at least the Senate must ratify trade agreements. 

That's right once the deal is finally signed, the PM tells the GG to make it so and it is done! Not sure what is required on the European end for trade agreements. Does anyone know?

What is the ratification process with regards to CETA on the EU side of things? 

It is looking like too much fear morgeling and not enough facts because there is limited access to the documents and few understand the trade agreement negolitition process. 

..if we find that the provinces have the power to reject the deal it will automatically be easier to bring the whole deal to a stop.  it will be easier to pressure the provinces and the cities will be potential allies.

eta: i have emailed the question about provincial power over the deal to my mla. i will share the response once/if i get one.

Economist Jim Stanford on CETA:

http://creekside1.blogspot.com/2011/07/why-canada-eu-free-trade-deal-is-...

Greetings Shane Simpson:

I have been following the Ceta negotiations. As you may know CUPE sent a delegation to Europe recently to learn what it could. One of the CUPE delegate sent out a daily journal to which i refer to below. My question to you Shane..Is there anything preventing any provincial government from saying no our province will not agree to CETA?

....

Hi Paul,

Thanks for your email. While this is not directly my file I do know a bit about the issue. You are correct, there are aspects of CETA that deal directly with provincial jurisdiction and authority. On those matters it appears the BC Liberals are concurring with Prime Minister Harper. As the New Democrat Opposition we have taken the position that this agreement is not beneficial to the interests of British Columbians and should we form government before the deals are committed to, we will not be supportive. We will also debate this issue in the Legislature should we get the opportunity.

I hope that’s helpful to you. Thanks again for the email.

Regards,

Shane

Shane Simpson MLA Vancouver-Hastings

t: 604-775-2277 | f: 604-775-2352 | www.shanesimpson.ca

....

g'day shane:

thanks for the quick response. and appreciate the ndp position. does
this mean that the provincial government has the authority to say no to this deal thus preventing the negotiations from moving forward? this is an important question don't you think?

....

An important but hard question to answer. While the provinces can protect some issues it may be possible for creative negotiators to get around that. Hard to say without more information. But we could make it tougher no doubt.

Regards,

Shane

Shane Simpson MLA Vancouver-Hastings

t: 604-775-2277 | f: 604-775-2352 | www.shanesimpson.ca

..txs m. spector

Municipalities across Canada are requesting exemptions from CETA

Secret international trade deal places too many restrictions on local governments.

FRENCH RIVER, ON, March 20, 2012: Awareness about the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the European Union is growing and opposition is mounting. There are currently 45 municipalities in the country that have passed — or are in the process of passing — resolutions on CETA, some seeking full exemptions from the agreement. In addition, six school boards and nationwide and province-wide municipal associations have passed similar resolutions. In total, about four million Canadian citizens are represented....

http://www.publicvalues.ca/ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=001178

On the surface, it seems that Europeans have more to be concerned about. As usual, the devil is in the details-- but Canada does need greater access to the EU market. I wouldn't dismiss CETA out of hand.

I see an opportunity for Canadian industry to compete against higher standards by taking advantage of our high dollar to recapitalize our manufacturing base with advanced machinery and process controls that will increase productivity necessary to maintain wages, pensions and benefits at current levels. It will also force Canada to get serious about climate change, as the EU will not ratify an agreement that vindicates the failure of Kyoto. Baby seals are problematic as well.

M. Spector wrote:

I'd rather hear what your dog has to say. It's bound to make more sense than that.

My dog thinks you're a superannuated twit.

Communiqué - La Coalition Eau Secours, en collaboration avec ATTAC-Québec et les AmiEs de la Terre de Québec, interpelle le Parti québécois concernant l’accord de libre-échange Canada-Union européenne

Lors de la rencontre organisée par le ministre des Relations internationales, de la Francophonie et du Commerce extérieur, Jean-François Lisée, au sujet de l’Accord économique et commercial global (AÉCG) entre le Canada et l’Union européenne, le 5 octobre dernier, le négociateur en chef du Québec, Pierre-Marc Johnson, a confirmé que les services de l’eau sont toujours sur la table de négociation, malgré les demandes de nombreux groupes au pays pour les en retirer. Ainsi, la porte semble définitivement s’ouvrir pour permettre de plus en plus aux multinationales européennes d’obtenir des marchés publics dans le secteur de l’eau et de fournir leurs services lorsqu’une municipalité choisira la voie du privé.

La Coalition Eau Secours, ATTAC-Québec et les AmiEs de la Terre de Québec estiment qu’il n’existe aucun consensus au sein de la population québécoise en faveur d’une telle libéralisation qui imposera des règles commerciales strictes dont nous n’avons jamais débattu démocratiquement. Ils jugent également qu’une telle ouverture à la concurrence européenne est contraire tant au programme du Parti québécois qu’à la Politique nationale de l’eau. Ils demandent au Parti québécois d’exiger urgemment une exemption claire pour les services de l’eau potable et de traitements des eaux usées dans l’AÉCG.

Open letter to Thomas Mulcair: Maintain NDP's opposition to 'trade' deals like CETA

Not sure why this is necessary - I've seen no indication whatsoever that Mulcair will back CETA.

Anyone?

Maybe I've been slacking too much and haven't been paying attention?

Thanks, ygtbk - don't know how I missed that one.

Mulcair ponders support for Canada-Europe pact 

Federal NDP leader adopts moderate tone at the risk of alienating strident members of his caucus

The Vancouver Sun just had to get that word "strident" in there, didn't they? Ah, well.

Mulcair's comments raised eyebrows in a Canadian union movement that, only last week, joined other Canadian and European labour and environmental groups to denounce expected Canada-EU concessions to major multinational corporations.

But Mulcair's statements are part of a long-term strategy, evident under the late Jack Layton, to gradually moderate the NDP's position.

Mulcair is attempting to position himself as a credible candidate in 2015 to be Canada's next prime minister, noted University of B.C. political scientist Philip Resnick.

If Mulcair is serious about embracing free trade - and several insiders say privately that he is - he'll have to keep onside several key caucus members who come from groups that have fought tooth and nail, without success, to defeat trade pacts like the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Among those most likely to object are high-profile Vancouver-East MP Libby Davies, usually considered the leader of the party's left wing in caucus, and Peter Julian, former executive director of a strongly anti-trade-deal organization, the Council of Canadians. Finance critic Peggy Nash, meanwhile, is a former senior official with the Canadian Auto Workers, which is bitterly critical of some of the elements expected to be included in the Canada-EU trade agreement.

Holy sh*t.

Canada-EU trade deal: No time for NDP to show moderation

NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair’s “wait-and-see” approach to the Canada-European Union trade deal is dangerous, not moderate.

quote:

Canada’s experience with other free-trade agreements belies the myth that a free-trade agreement with the European Union could somehow reverse an already imbalanced trade relationship. According to economist Jim Stanford, CETA could expose Canadians to an even greater trade deficit and lead to the loss of as many as 152,000 jobs. CETA also grants rights to corporations that jeopardize the powers of Canadian governments at every level.

Such concerns are echoed by environmental organizations, labour unions, civil society groups and a growing number of researchers and experts. In fact, Council of Canadians Chairperson Maude Barlow has been at the forefront of opposing CETA’s threat to water, education and other public services, and more than 80 municipalities and school boards have expressed concern, with more than 40 demanding to be exempt. Even a UN envoy this week signalled that this agreement would undermine the ability for Canada to support local economies and address poverty and hunger....

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2013/03/07/canadaeu_trade_deal...

Boom Boom wrote:

"If Mulcair pursues the mushy middle, where do the left-nationalists go? There's not a lot of choice," Whitehorn said.

- snip -

Barlow acknowledged that the Canadian left, even if it was frustrated by a major trade reversal, wouldn't abandon the party if it was seen to have a chance of forming government.

"This is the worst government we've ever had in this country - the most right-wing, anti-democratic, anti-environment, anti-human rights government ever - and we need to get rid of them."

I'm still digesting all of this, but I sort of agree - with misgivings - that it's worth supporting the NDP at all costs just to get rid of Harper.

It's not quite true that left nationalists have nowhere else to go. A section of the Green Party page is about fighting the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and you don't see that on the NDP webpage. Okay, so NDP MPs like Peter Julian have been fighting these deals, and thus are more known without the publicity, that's fine. But to not say anything, and to especially support these agreements, that gives an opening for the Greens to try and earn the support of these people. Obviously not enough to make the Greens a major contender, but if enough people for whom these trade agreements are important support the Greens over the NDP in enough key ridings, that could very easily hinder the party's chances of forming government. And the "lesser evil" argument may not even work, because these are voters who would have refused to support the Liberals to Stop Harper because their principles were more important. Same way many of us voted NDP when the Liberals were the second party.

Even setting aside the principle of the question, the NDP supporting the trade agreements is bad politics.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

The Liberals have always used the lesser of evils argument to try to get people like you and I to vote for them to remove Mulroney and stop Stockwell.  If there is no party that runs on my principles then none will get my vote.  My principles on free trade and peace have not changed but the NDP's have.  The NDP had gambled that they can piss off their left wing to get small l liberal support.  They may yet pay dearly for that as small l liberal voters get caught up in the Big Hair contest and go back to their normal voting pattern.

And I'm sure you can remember when voter turn-outs were, on average, higher than they are now. It's not even necessarily a matter of being "left-wing," but of standing up for your principles. That's why racist movements in Europe do well in the polls, because they are willing to defend their principles no matter how socially unacceptable they are. When I talk to people about politics, there is a general sense of, "they're all the same," "they're all crooks and liars," etc. And they have a point. Why bother voting if the main decisions have already been made?

Surely this cannot be lost on someone as intelligent as Thomas Mulcair. I have to ask, for his own self-interest sake, does he even want to be Prime Minister? Or is he part of some crazy plan to ensure that certain political ideas never get implemented? Let me put on my tin foil hat for a minute....