Canada: Merchant of Death

Rich countries habitually export their problems. The Somali piracy, so much in the news lately, with "heroic" Canadian seamen rescuing (white) people in distress facing the dastardly (black) pirates, has some of its roots in the overfishing and toxic dumping by richer countries off the coast of East Africa.The standard neo-liberal justification is that, basically, human life is worth less in these other parts of the world since the amount of income lost as a result of abestos poisoning is less than that that would be lost in richer countries, like Canada.

I'm looking forward to my copy of the Black Book of Canadian Foreign Policy.

The documentary by itself does not seem to be the end of the matter, because at the end of it, Peter Mansbridge asks the question to Melissa Fung - and the viewers - "we'll be looking in the days ahead to see if this reaches the attention of the House of Commons".

ETA: The documentary - as I mentioned in my OP - made reference to the attempt by Melissa Fung - or another CBC staffer - to get a comment from Lisa Raitt, but either she herself or her office refused to comment on camera. Probably will be busy doing damage control now.   Probably wants to cut off CBC funding altogether after this story.

This is really about Canadian domestic politics written larger. There's a good article about it here: http://ibasecretariat.org/kr_can_pol_ldrs_face_heat_asb_issue.php

NDP Press Release from 2007New regulations allow asbestos in toys

I watched it and was not surprised at all, nor with the Liberal, Bloc and Conservative promotion of asbestos in toys that the NDP have been fighting now for 2 years.

I put a thread up on it way back when and never got one response about it. Too inconvienent for some it seems.

It is a case of white supremists manufacturig death. Are we supposed to believe it so that 500 people can be employed?

I at least sent an email to Pat Martin somewhere around 2007/8 thanking him for his work against asbestos.

Good for you boom boom, I should have too. perhaps I will today in order to push the NDP further on this file.

This is actually an excellent time for the CBC to have produced that documentary, because right now asbestos is being removed from the buildings on Parliament Hill, at the same time the asbestos industry is being heavilly subsidized in Thetford Mines (Quebec) for export to Third World and developing countries (like India) - and Lisa Raitt's office refuses to give a comment to CBC. The stars are in alignment on this one.

And I ask:

Why are we subsidizing it in order to keep 500 people employed?

How can it be such a huge political hot button for PQ?

How can Quebeckers, who broker themselves as; "oh so progressive", and front running on social policies and harm to people, condone the continuation of this mine?

Everyone is looking the other way, and hoping this industry will simply be forgotten.

I say BS to that propaganda.

I caught the tail end of the report last night.  I came in on the closing shots of the workers equiped with kerchiefs, up to their thighs in the asbestos.  With the stuff floating in the air about them.

My jaw about hit the floor.

Yeah, I almost shit a brick when I saw that.

ETA: I wonder if the Indian (and other) governments will soon begin lawsuits against Canada to recover the cost of medical care for ailments (cancer and respiratory diseases) caused by Canadian asbestos used in these countries? And, ultimately, to recover the cost of removing asbestos from all their buildings - like we are doing right now in the federal buildings on Parliament Hill?

I'm hoping to see this issue raised in QP today or tomorrow - and how Lisa Raitt responds. Good for the CBC in raising this issue now!

The height of hyprocrisy:

At the same time Canada is paying to have asbestos removed from federal buildings on Parliament Hill, Canada is subsidizing asbestos production in Thetford Mines, Quebec, for export to India and other countries.

Is the asbestos being forced on them somehow??

If not, I wouldn't really expect a lawsuit to be terribly successful, would you?

"We asked for the asbestos, we used it as we wanted to use it, and now we're suing you for big bucks for selling it to us when we asked".

Won't happen under global trade laws, the packages are labelled for what needs to be done to assure safe usage.

Moreover, the people in India will be dead and dying en masse in very short order. White supremist population control in other words.

Again why are Quebeckers not up in arms over this, as opposed to it being a sacred cow that cannot be touched?

Snert: Okay, maybe India can appeal to Canada's conscience, instead.

Remind: Good question, should be raised in Question Period.

ETA: Another question: why is the Canadian government subsidizing the production of such a dangerously harmful product?

If Wikipedia is to be believed, the only asbestos industry in Canada is in Quebec, and is owned by the provincial government, after they purchased the remains of the industry from General Dynamics in 1981.

I guess they want a return on the people's investment.

Here's my question, though:  isn't India responsible for making and enforcing health and safety laws in India?  Given that it is possible to use asbestos safely, why should India's desire for asbestos be a cause for concern among Quebeckers, or anyone else, for that matter?  I'm getting kind of a whiff of paternalism from this.

BS snert, we tax payers are funding a mine, that exports deadly products, when every other country in the world has stopped exporting asbestos and using it too.

You do not sell shit to people that kills them, take the toxic  food stuffs and toys from China, this is no different, the country of origiin is culpable to stop sending deadly toxic crap in their exports.

I see more supremist  exploitation in your beliefs and words, than I see paternalism in ours.

Uh, no they haven't. Canada isn't alone in exporting it, and India isn't alone in importing it. Take a second and look it up if you don't believe me.  Don't be wilfully ignorant when the interweb is so easy to use.

Selling someone something they WANT TO BUY is totally different from hiding a toxic substance in toys or pet foods. This is like someone buying cigarettes, knowing they're cigarettes and choosing to buy them anyway.  The melamine scandal was like someone hiding nicotine in potato chips.  India is choosing this with their eyes open.  Nobody chose melamine tainted pet food, or lead-contaminated toys.

Nobody is being exploited.  India is not being forced to import or use asbestos.  How incredibly patronizing of you to pretend that they're incapable of deciding whether or not to use asbestos.  The kicker being that you seem to see me, and Canadians, as "white supremists" for not telling those ignorant brown people that they can't have any asbestos because we don't use it. 

Do you really believe that brown people need us to show them the error of their ways, and to refuse to sell them something they want?  That's a pretty offensive opinion, if so. 

BS snert they are being exploited, and indeed murdered, and I will go no further with you on this as your ill informed at best, view makes me nauseous.

Exploited and murdered!  Well then!

Why don't you go teach them, remind?  Pick up your share of the White (Wo)man's Burden?

Because clearly you don't believe Indians are capable of saying "we don't want to use asbestos" on their own.  And if you think you can support your assertion that they're being "exploited" with something other than a re-assertion that they're being "exploited", by all means, have at it, because right now your assertion is nothing but chin music.  Nobody is forcing asbestos on anyone.

And speaking of "ill-informed", have you learned to Google yet, or do you still believe with all your little heart that "every other country in the world has stopped exporting asbestos and using it too"? I'm getting the definite sense that your IQ can be written using only two numbers, but if Gran-Gran can use "the google" surely you could too.

Oh disparaging my IQ, wins your arguement does it? As does your relegating me down to my gender, I suppose too.

You can fuck off anytime you sexist twit!

Exploiting the extremely poor and non-educated is a hallmark of sociopath capitalists, as is wasting their lives so they can get richer.

Yes, we do. Millions of our tax dollars go toward subsidizing asbestos mining and export of asbestos, including the marketing of asbestos.

Youre helping the asbestos industry to pawn off their wicked-deadly product on unsuspecting people. Melissa Fung said last night on CBC News, none of those workers in India realize theyre killing themselves.

So how does it feel to be an accessory to mass murder, Snert?

Thank you for that empty re-assertion that this is "exploitation".

Could you tell us how, exactly, India is being "exploited", if you get a minute?

Nobody has to use asbestos when building.  It's a choice.  It actually costs MORE to use asbestos than to not use it.  But you seem quite convinced that someone is forcing this on India and that that forcing must stop.  That doesn't even slightly make sense.

Nor does your accusation of sexism, but one thing at a time.  And kudos on your abrupt change of heart.  I knew you'd be back.

Fidel, no point in speaking to snert, he is sick troll.

And it's a choice for our shitheads in government to subsidize the marketing and export of asbestos, even though they know how dangerous it is. They know that dozens of other first world countries have banned import-export and sale of asbestos because it's a dangerous toxic substance.

And if you voted for the shitheads in successive federal governments of Canada that have knowingly helped to send thousands of workers around the world to their agonizing deaths because of Canadian asbestos exports, then that makes you a shithead too.

So, how does it feel to know full well that youre a shithead led and bred by supreme shitheads in Ottawa? Feeling shitty? Pee You!

So like I said, it's not being forced on anyone. Unless you're saying we have some treacherously effective marketing!

How does it feel to have lost all perspective?

Uh, India has no idea that asbestos can be harmful under some conditions? Could we send them a book, or the link to Wikipedia or something?

Or are you just patronizing an entire subcontintent of people? Perhaps you could join remind in bringing some White Thinking to the Indian subcontinent. Remember to be very patient with "them" when you explain to them how wrongheaded they're being.

Presumably when someone is poorly informed, the best response is to provide them with solid evidence in support of what you're saying and not to insult their character, isn't it?

Snert was told that the workers were not informed concerning the health hazards of the substance they were breathing.  Obviously, he chooses to ignore that these workers are in fact being exploited. Remind doesn't do half as good a job insulting Snert as Snert insists upon doing him/herself.

Ah. And that's not anybody in India's job to do, it's ours. Right?

Just like no Canadian company or government is responsible for health and safety standards at workplaces here in Canada; we expect raw material suppliers on other continents to take on that role.

No, I'm ignoring the unspoken assumption that the Indian government isn't aware enough or responsible enough to educate and protect their own workers, so we have to do it for them by not selling them something they want.

Or else we're mass murderers, tommy.  MASS MURDERERS!!~!1

I don't think anyone assumes that the Indian government is unaware of the health effects of asbestos.  Clearly, that government has a lot to answer to, also.

But, the issue here is Canadian companies role in exploiting those workers, with subsidized help from you and I.

Funny, all the stuff that gets done with your good name.

Why does that sound so much like their responsibility is some kind of add-on? I'd say they have the whole thing to answer to.

We're selling India a product that they seem to want. Again, unless you want to bring them some White Wisdom that they evidently lack, I think it best to let them decide their own affairs, don't you think?

You might have a point if the asbestos industry wasnt using Canadian tax dollars to pay for junk science studies that suggest asbestos is good for people and thirdworld economies, but I'm afraid it's true that they are knowingly selling a toxic material to piss-poor capitalist countries.

Our dummies in Ottawa have dealt away Canadians rights similarly regarding NAFTA and gasoline additives dangerous to human health. Long-term contracts arent that easy for us to slide out of with Yanqui corporations, and the WTO and IMF pressure Indian governments all the time to force their farmers to abide by all kinds of restrictions that end up being bad policies for India in general.

Supporting a toxic trade 

So, yes, it is being forced on workers around the world by way of lies, junk science, and deceptive marketing, and your tax dollars are being used to do it, too. Pittsburgh University doctor of public health, Devra Davis, said that German scientists of the Hitler regime knew about tobacco and asbestos and industrial chemicals still in use today, and that they are dangers to human health way back in the 1930's. And many of them were ferreted off to the US after the war and given good jobs in American industries and government positions. They knew a long time ago.

Don Newman just showed a clip of MP Pat Martin this morning reacting to last night's The National story on asbestos, saying the Canadian government is spending tens of millions of dollars to remove asbestos from offices on Parliament Hill, yet subsidizes the export of asbestos to Third World and developing countries.

Well, on the good side, if India ever thinks to google "Asbestos + toxic" they'll end up here and then they'll know that it's all been a big sham. 

"B-b-b-but we trusted your marketing department! Oh, if only we'd actually read up on asbestos ourselves, before using it!" 

Here's my question, given your article: why is an attempt being made to try to salvage what appears to be a very dying industry? 550 employees, down from nearly ten times that? The only thing I can think of is "government ownership". I can't imagine the government throwing any money at this if the government didn't own this. That I find odd. I would still maintain that health and safety standards in India should begin with India, not us, but I think it's reasonable to ask the government whether this is really a good use of revenues.

added:

The asbestos being abated at Parliament Hill will be loose asbestos, probably installed back when asbestos was a common component of everything from insulation to brake shoes to potholders. That's not what's currently manufactured.

That makes a great, though cheap and ultimately inaccurate, sound bite though, I have to admit. If you don't bother to do your homework, it sure sounds evil.

Meh, selling a product known to be linked to massive health issues is unethical regardless of how much the buyer wants it epscially in the case where the workers and people handling the product are not informed...it's weird to see anyone justify that since they're willing to buy, we're somehow justified in selling it.  Have the same viewpoint regarding weapon exports too...doesn't matter who we're selling them too as long as they're willing to buy?

As I wrote earlier, Lisa Raitt's office refused to comment on the issue when asked to do so by the CBC.

We're talking about asbestos here. If you want to talk about cigarettes and alcohol, start a new thread.

You think selling cigarettes to people unaware of the effects is ethical as long as they keep wanting to buy them cigs?  You've got an interesting view point Snert

The capitalist knows that the cheapest commodity on the planet is workers' lives.

You stated that it was unethical "especially in the case where the workers and people handling the product are not informed", so presumably your original point was that it's unethical, full stop.

If you'd like to revise that, I'll re-reply.

To answer you directly, of course I would agree that it's unethical to sell something harmful to someone who is unaware of the harm. But I don't believe that India or the Indian government is unaware.

This would be analagous to selling cigarettes to someone who knows their harm, who then gives some to someone else without telling them.

And in this particular case, I'm not even saying it's a good thing. But I'm resistant to going down the ridiculous road that leads to this being OUR fault that the government of India doesn't seem to have the same occupational health and safety standards that we do. By the time it's being asserted that we're all MASS MURDERERS then I think it's time to take a more sensible, less emotional look at who's doing what.

It's a dying industry because dozens of more democratic countries have taken the lead and banned import and export of asbestos and reduced overall world supply and demand, but not because our old line party stooges in power in Ottawa decided to act

It's because our two old line parties have run their course as leaders in this country. They are probably receiving a kick-back on the side for favouring friends in the asbestos industry. And theyre afraid of unempployment. Our obsolete electoral system makes it so that they need to shore up support in ridings where corrupt and amoral politicians stand the best chances of winning. They were fresh out of ideas decades ago and need cleaning out of Ottawa as an exercise in democracy.

Heh, so what...you're promoting the industry for as long as it remains bootlegged asbestos?

So as long as we avoid the blame game and skip pointing our finger back at ourselves...you do agree that the sale of asbestos to India where workers are unaware of the effects is infact unethical?

Snert, there's nothing in babble policy about being wrong, and in your case it's often part of your charm, but there is policy against being abusive.  I'm referring specifically to your post # 23, but you do go on to build on that.

You've been around long enough to know better, and I know you can do better.  Cut it out or you're taking a break.

This story made The National again tonight, with a clip of Pat Martin in Question Period challenging the government to shut down  this industry, and Lisa Raitt would not answer any questions on the subject, but referred all questions to mealy-mouthed Christian Paradis, who more or less confirmed the industry is being kept alive to appease Quebecers - by refusing to condemn a Quebec industry that is producing a hazardous product.

ETA: So far we have heard on The National that the government has subsidized this industry to the tune of $20million, and is spending $10million to remove asbestos from offices on Parliament Hill.

I thought he said something about funding  safe handling of asbestos in those countries or something? I couldnt believe it. It's like the lights are sometimes on but nobody's home with this government.

Yup. Paradis is either an idiot or deliberately being misleading. There is no safe handling or use of asbestos, period.

So now we are going to fund safe handling, as well as subsidize the industry, in the 10's if not 100's of millions, for 550 employees to keep their jobs?

Why?

Hint: those are Quebec jobs. 

ETA: I think this is Christian Paradis' riding, and in Question Period he not only refused to condemn the asbestos iindustry, but he laughed and rolled his eyes at the end of his answer. It's clear the Conservatives won't stop subsidizing this industry because they probably need the votes.

Why does that sound so much like their responsibility is some kind of add-on? I'd say they have the whole thing to answer to.

You are the one who seems fixated on the Indian government.  I think the Indian government is beside the point on this. 

The point is that it is my asbestos, and my money financing the operation.  I'd rather not be a part of it. And if I happen to be in the majority in that view, then we will have to stop.

I really don't have to justify anything beyond that.

So what are you saying boom boom that Quebekers would care so much about the loss of 550 jobs, that they would vote en masse against those who would act for social justice?

snert are u really asking why indian goverment wouldnt care about its own ppl? Are U really asking that question? Really? and u calling sum1 else ignorant? They know full well do u really think they care? let me explain something to u a lot of the ppl in gov have the view that they are a higher "purer" caste that is more whiter and that they must help in the quest to rid the world of the unpure. They internalize white supremacy and colonisation. On top of that where the fucc do u think the companies building the shit are based? U really think a indian company can compete with a multi-national? The ppl in the indian gov are proly among the biggest sellouts globally atm and historically their familes have proven they really like getting raped. I actually expected worse from them to be honest they actually surprised me.

The avg person in india has no idea what goin on cuz they aint told the goverment is a corrupt ass co-opted basically puppet regime. Understand? And by supporting the subsidizing of it knowing that the ppl running india are so fucced in the head that cracc would make them saner ur part of it and have blood on ur hands. They already dumping waste around those ways and that basically an open act of genocide. This adds to it. Funny snert how the racial tip only comes into play when it supporting ur argument if ppl want to help they bein paternalising n when they really are where r u or ppl like u? arguing that we pulliin the race card.

Paternalising is assuming ppl cant do anything for themselves and are too stupid. Ur equating a goverment with its ppl. If u think any gov in a 3rd world country allied with the west would ever EVER represent its ppl properly u need to go to rehab. Bring the issue up if ppl ask u for help give it that aint patneralising. Saying basically mayb if we stopped fuccin wit ppl they could stand up aint paternalising. Like I said before the thing about saying sum1 being patneralising is snert that ppl like u n those u support covertly fucc with a goverment then when it gets fucced up they step bacc rid themselves of all responsibility and say clean up ur own mess. Then when ppl cant they say they lesser. it like clipping a birds wings then saying it lesser cuz it cant fly.

The ignorant ones are not them its u.

That may be what the Conservatives think!  How else do you explain the reluctance of the government to condemn the industry?

well, the Liberal government before them would do nothing either.

And while we are at it, why aren't Quebeckers screaming bloody murder  to close this mine down?

I wish I knew. here on the Lower North Shore of Quebec, we are organising against using an area near Blanc Sablon proposed for a nuclear waste dump, and there's a Facebook group for that purpose, if anyone's interested.

Yes, well good luck with that boom boom, it is like getting people interested in the American toxic waste dump being proposed  in the pristine wilderness area of Christina Lake, in BC.

As it is part of the whole carbon credit scheme, and IPP's, some so called environmentalist groups,  are all on board with it. After all what is all the pristine wilderness for except to make profits out of.

I believe there is a range of opinions on this matter in Quebec, and that we can't expect all Quebecois to have the same opinion.

Not surprisingly, there are some who want keeping the jobs to be top priority. 

On the other hand, here's one example of the work of the Asbestos Victims Association of Quebec. Or check out the letter from Laval University experts posted by Ban Asbestos Canada [60]

Naturally, I agree it's time to end all taxpayer support for this sort of toxic export. As long as its production or sale or marketing is subsidized, Canadians will share responsibility for poisoning people who didn't choose to buy the asbestos. 

Rabble interview with anti-asbestos campaigner Kathleen Ruff

Same reason Albertans aren't screaming bloody murder to shut down the oil sands.

And just to show how deep the denial goes, you have the TCA-Québec (CAW)which participates in the "Ban Asbestos" campaign, bemoans Canada's export of chrysotile asbestos to developing countries, and wins an award for its work - while the Québec Federation of Labour and the Steelworkers [63] sound like climate change deniers.

At least some voices are raised, but overall it's pathetic.

It's about time the obvious was stated. Governments push and pull shit on their populations all the time, without us, the people, being fully aware of what it can/may or will mean. I find it sickening that someone thinks selling a deadly toxin to another country is ethical or "their problem".

Excellent interview by Dobbin of Kathleen Ruff. Thanks mspector.

"Canada is an international pariah for their shameful policy of promoting and subsidizing the asbestos industry," said Martin.

For those who can't see the difference between the Indian government and the Canadian and think this is some how putting down India consider this:

Governments in general rarely care about the people -- they care about the money and power that keep them where they are. This is the same here as there.

What distinguishes Canada from India is the hypocrisy. We have, even with a government that rarely cares about us, reached a national consensus that this product is dangerous and we won't allow it to be used here for most applications and we have standards here regarding the handling of it. Yet to make money we inflict it's damage on other people for money even when we are agreed that this is unacceptable here.

The Indians have not won this particular battle for national understanding and approach to this product so their lack of regulation may be wrong but it is not hypocritical. It is like many governments not truly in the interest of the people much of the time. But in Canada since we have consensus backed by domestic law that these are dangerous products our promotion of unsafe practices that are illegal in Canada is different than the actions of the Indian government and in my mind more despicable. In this case we officially know what we are doing-- to use another analogy- what we are doing is closer to murder 1 than manslaughter by virtue of this knowledge.

"what we are doing is closer to murder 1 than manslaughter by virtue of this knowledge."

I agree!