Part I: Macro-economics, Trudeau, the Proposed
Free Trade Deals and Disempowering Canadians
Disempowerment of the Majority and "Father
Knows Best"
Canadians aren't
totally duped on free trade, but Trudeau counts on Canadians to trust him on
this. -- Trudeau can get away with this because of his success in projecting a
"Father Knows Best" almost Messiah-like image, framed with his acting
skills.
Yet, 40% of Canadians think the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has not
been good for Canadian workers and 60% think the prime beneficiaries are
corporations. Only 8% think NAFTA offered a best deal for
Canadians.
No wonder Lawrence
Summers, former US Treasury Secretary, and former chief economist at the World
Bank, has gone full circle to conclude that international agreements should be
judged on whether they empower citizens.
The Transpacific Partnership (TPP), the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) and NAFTA
represent quite the opposite of empowerment!
At the generic level,
these agreements place national corporate tax systems in a perpetual race to
the bottom, leaving governments without the necessary finances to address inequality. Rather they contribute to greater inequality. The Trudeau administration is most
comfortable with this unfairness for the majority of Canadians.
As for the supposed
benefits for the population at-large stemming from NAFTA, they have not
materialized. The economic plight of the
majority have not improved in the last 30 years or more.
Turning to the specifics
of the proposed new agreements, according to leaked versions of the TPP, the
agreement among other things, would extend patents for
pharmaceutical companies on drugs -- in some cases indefinitely -- and
"block" bio-similar competitors from introducing new medicines in subsequent
years. If there was ever a great formula for raising drug costs for the middle
and low income Canadians, this is it!
One has only to look
to the US where similar patent rules apply. There,
high drug prices and monopolistic protections have resulted in treatment
rationing, prescriptions going unfilled and severe impacts on family/individual
budgets.
Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)
Clauses
Like NAFTA , the TPP
and CETA contain clauses on Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) systems,
which effectively allow a foreign corporation to sue a national government in
the event that the nation's environmental; First Nations; labour and economic
stability initiatives; or other government actions impede the company in
question from maximizing its profits -- In this way profits trumps sovereignty,
specifically, profits taking precedence over the best interests of the nation
regarding the common good, or as we say in Canada, "peace, order and good
government."
In this context, Lone Pine Resources is suing the
Government of Canada for $119M under the NAFTA ISDS clause over Quebec's ban on fracking. Similarly, TransCanada is suing the US
Government for $15B under this same NAFTA ISDS
clause concerning the Obama rejection of the Keystone XL project aimed at bringing
tar sands oil to US for refining, prior to being exported outside the US.
Foreign Companies Get to Have a Say on our
Legislation and Regulations
Not to be outdone, CETA
takes foreign rule in Canada to new heights.
As proposed, CETA would allow foreign companies to not only receive
national treatment equivalent to domestic companies with respect to government
procurement, but would also offer foreign companies
the right to participate in public consultations on proposals for new
government regulations.
While we would
consider it unthinkable that a foreign citizen could influence the development
of Canadian laws and regulations, CETA offers foreign corporations such rights. In other words, a foreign company would have
the privileged opportunity have a say on laws drawn up to serve the best interests
of Canadians, Canadian companies, and, more
generally , Canadian economic and sustainable development initiatives. As a case in point, this provision would
re-open the doors for the export of Canadian water.
Bulldozer Communications Techniques
Notwithstanding the
known concerns of progressive Canadians on these agreements, Chrystia Freeland would like Canadians to believe that 1) her
signing of the TPP in New Zealand in Feb 2016 does not make the TPP a done deal for Canada, 2) Parliament would
need to ratify the deal and 3) consultations would be held with Canadians on
the agreement before any such ratification.
On item 1 above, in
fact, ratification of the deal is Cabinet's
task, not that of the Parliament.
As for the promised consultations, the
aforementioned item 3, they would best be described as secret talks with industry
representatives and university professors for which attendance is by invitation only,
and there is little public advance notice.
Questions are allowed
at these hearings, but on the basis of one of these meetings, one in Montreal where
the Council of Canadians managed to be present, the Council learned
that none of the questions raised actually get answered. Regarding the maximum of one day's public
notice for these consultations, the rationale offered was that MPs have busy
schedules!
True, the House of
Commons Standing Committee on International Trade will be holding hearings in
various cities in Canada. But the press release on the purpose of
these hearings reads as
follows: “The Committee’s primary objective is to assess the extent to which
the agreement, once implemented, would be in the best interests of
Canadians.”
Evidently, the issue for the Trudeau government is not
whether the agreement should be ratified or not, but rather how to manage the
message to Canadians to the effect that TPP is good for them and "Father
knows best."
Part II: Micro-economics, Air Canada Middle
Class Maintenance Jobs, a Case History
Absolving of Air Canada of Obligations on 2600
Middle Class Aircraft Maintenance Jobs in Canada
On the more day-to-day
governing level, the mindset favouring corporate rule by the Trudeau Liberals
is well-reflected in Bill C-10.
Bill C-10 is not a
familiar legislative initiative for most Canadians. That's because the Liberals
did everything possible to sweep this initiative under the rug. The Bill was passed, with closure imposed,
Harper style, with little time for debate in the House of Commons. And a tie vote in the House was broken in
favour of the Liberals, by the Speaker, who cast the deciding vote.
Why all this fuss to
shove this Liberal legislative change under the carpet? The answer is that this law was about the
abandonment of 2500 middle class aircraft maintenance jobs to accommodate Air
Canada's request to modify the legislation that applied to Air Canada dating back to its privatization in
1988. With the changes put into law, Air Canada would no longer be obligated to
undertake its aircraft maintenance in Montreal , Mississauga and Winnipeg.
The story behind all this
is that following Air Canada's privatization, Air Canada sold off its aircraft maintenance division to Aveos, a
company primarily made up of former Air Canada employees. However, prior to the
Trudeau government legislation, Air Canada had already transferred
half of 5000 Canadian maintenance jobs to locations outside Canada. The end result was that Aveos went into bankruptcy.
All of this was
followed up with the January 2016 agreement with the CEO of Air Canada, Calin Rovinescu, to reward him for his great
work in transferring jobs outside of Canada with a minimum of $3M/year in annual income. Prior
to that, in 2015, Air Canada approved an increase in his retirement guaranteed income by 90%, to reach
$800,000/year.
Maintaining the Flippant Legacy of Liberals on
Middle Class Jobs
This current Liberal
frivolity on middle class jobs has its roots in the 1988 Air Canada privatization
itself. Consider the fact that 60% of all international
aircraft companies are state-owned.
The legislation
governing the privatized Air Canada was supposed to have assured that the
disadvantages of privatization, with respect to the preservation of middle
class jobs in Canada, would not come into play.
Justin Trudeau merely completed the task of abandoning middle class
Canadian jobs and interests that the privatization legislation was supposed to prevent.
Through all this, the
public had been led to believe that this was all part of a trade off to
encourage Air Canada to purchase 45 Bombardier C Series aircraft that would
ultimately be serviced in Montreal.
Unfortunately, all the indications are such that this was just a
rumour. In reality, it was soon
discovered that once more Air Canada has a free reign to do as it feels, to
transfer jobs outside of the country.
In July 2016 at the
Farnborough air show in England, Air Canada signed a contract with
Pratt & Whitney for the maintenance of the Pratt & Whitney engines of
the C-Series. Not so coincidentally, in June 2016 Pratt & Whitney announced an investment of $65M to do the
maintenance of the C Series engines in Columbus, Georgia.
With the cat now out
of the bag, Air Canada corrected the originally intended false impressions by
explaining that the maintenance of the C Series in Canada would be for the structure of the aircraft
only, the engines to be
excluded from maintenance work in Canada.
Part III: Epilogue
Now one has to wonder
how much else is being kept from public scrutiny in keeping with the principles
of "Father knows best" and corporate rule, the Trudeau government
trade mark.
