Citizen Action Monitor

Arrogant Minister Freeland misses the point — CETA is way out-of-step with public opinion

Her narrow focus on the political ignores citizen concerns over a deal that prioritizes corporate interests.

No 1806 Posted by fw, October 22, 2016

“Yet to focus exclusively on the political dimensions… is to miss the broader concerns with trade agreements such as CETA. The Stop CETA protests across Europe tend to focus on broader opposition to trade agreements that extend far beyond reduced tariffs. Indeed, few oppose reduced tariffs. The concerns instead typically point to the wide range of regulatory measures and dispute settlement mechanisms that may prioritize corporate concerns over local rules. The fear of these aspects of the agreement are what lies at the heart of opposition to CETA, as well as to the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and TTIP. The insistence that such provisions remain in the agreement is what is truly puzzling.”Michael Geist

My apologies to Michael for interpreting his text in a way that expresses my opinion about Minister Freeland. You see, I’m one of thousands of Canadians who took seriously her invitation to participate in the TPP public consultation process. As we inch closer to ratifying that deal, it’s obvious in hindsight that the ‘consultation’ was a façade to create the illusion of participatory democracy. Consequently, Minister Freeland has lost my trust. Her primary concern over Walloon’s rejection of CETA appears to have been egoistical – i.e., the damage it may have caused to her reputation, especially among the ruling class – and not with the betrayal of the working class millions who voiced their strong opposition to CETA. Perception, as they say, is everything – and this perception of Ms. Freeland is now firmly etched in my mind.

Below is a repost of Michael Geist’s excellent piece on the breakdown of the CETA talks. To read it on his website, click on the following linked title.

By the way, on the breaking news front, CBC News reports this morning that Hope remains for CETA. Hope for whom?

**********

CETA Talks Break Down: “It is Evident that the EU Is Incapable of Reaching an Agreement”  by Michael Geist, michaelgeist.ca, October 21, 2016

International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland has walked out of talks aimed at addressing Belgian opposition to the Canada-EU Trade Agreement, stating:

I have personally worked very hard, but it is now evident to me, evident to Canada, that the European Union is incapable of reaching an agreement – even with a country with European values such as Canada, even with a country as nice and as patient as Canada. Canada is disappointed and I personally am disappointed, but I think it’s impossible. We are returning home.

Leaving aside the odd reference to how nice Canada is, this is remarkable language that lays bare the obvious frustration and disappointment for the government which prioritized the CETA agreement above all others. The prospect of the deal falling apart has been evident for months. I wrote in July that the agreement was in more trouble than the Canadian government would admit, noting that opposition from any national or regional government could kill CETA altogether. Canadian officials downplayed the risk, but it was obvious that CETA faced stiff opposition that would not be easy to overcome.

Yet to focus exclusively on the political dimensions (which should also include how disingenuous the Conservatives’ claims about their trade deals were) is to miss the broader concerns with trade agreements such as CETA. The Stop CETA protests across Europe tend to focus on broader opposition to trade agreements that extend far beyond reduced tariffs. Indeed, few oppose reduced tariffs. The concerns instead typically point to the wide range of regulatory measures and dispute settlement mechanisms that may prioritize corporate concerns over local rules. The fear of these aspects of the agreement are what lies at the heart of opposition to CETA, as well as to the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and TTIP.

The insistence that such provisions remain in the agreement is what is truly puzzling. Given that Europe and Canada both offer reliable, respected court systems, there is little reason to insist on ISDS rules at all. Further, expanded trade should not require Canada to face increased health care costs (as would result from CETA’s extension of patent protections) or Europe to confront changes to various food and safety regulations.

The CETA setback in Europe has strong echoes to the 2012 defeat of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. Trade negotiators and governments similarly downplayed mounting protests and concerns associated with ACTA, but the European Parliament ultimately rejected the agreement in a landslide. Killing ACTA – much like the potential death knell for CETA – isn’t about Europe’s ability to conclude deals or how nice Canada is. It is about the expansive approach to traditional trade agreements that it is increasingly out-of-step with local regulation, the balance between government and corporate rights, and public opinion.

FAIR USE NOTICE – For details click here

 

Information

This entry was posted on October 22, 2016 by in information counterpower, political action and tagged , , .
%d bloggers like this: