TILMA: Planet S Magazine boldly goes where the Saskatoon StarPhoenix and other CanWest newspapers won’t
The June 7, 2007, edition of Saskatoon’s Planet S Magazine contains an excellent article by Chris Kirkland exposing the potential impact the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA) could have on local governments – the City of Vancouver being one of the more recent to come forward with concerns.
TILMA gives clout to
Let Prairie trade fire roar (April 27, 2007)
Western trade pact builds better future (April 3, 2007)
Trading with the neighbours (May 15, 2007)
Calvert wrestles with TILMA (April 21, 2007)
The provinces (May 22, 2007)
B.C.,
B.C.-Alberta trade deal "will expand’ (September 26, 2006)
Push on to cut barriers between provinces (December 27, 2006)
JUN 07 - JUN 20 2007
VOLUME 5 · ISSUE 21
WITH TILMA, PROFIT IS KING—AND THE KING IS NO FAN OF DEMOCRACY
by Chris Kirkland
In a recent editorial urging the province to sign on to the Trade, Investment, and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA),
Well, I’ve never met Theresa Dust,
Yet, both Dust and McEachern have analyzed the potential impacts of TILMA on
All this, according to Ward Six councillor Charlie Clark, is more than a little worrisome. Even more worrisome is the fact that, before Dust embarked upon her research on behalf of city council, almost no one had looked at the implications of the deal for municipalities—including cities in B.C. and
“It’s absolutely worrying—Theresa Dust contacted both the Alberta and B.C. unions of municipalities in February, to find out what they knew about this agreement that they’d signed, that was going into effect for them in three months, and nobody had anything to give her. There was no consultation or discussion, apparently, which is pretty scary,” says
“And for the general public, when they hear about TILMA at all, they hear that it’s something we need to make it easier for a student transfer from one university to another, or a tradesperson to transfer from one province to another, and that’s why we should sign this. But almost none of the proponents of the deal will acknowledge the impact on jurisdictional matters, and the fact that TILMA essentially values free trade over almost everything else. If it was in place, whatever you do has to make it easier for investment and trade to flow freely, regardless of whether that impedes the democratic ability of local and provincial governments to make choices that meet the particular needs of their area.”
According to Dust’s report, the agreement’s sole focus on profit may have far-reaching implications for many city programs that have been very successful in areas such as downtown revitalization, housing, and health standards (such as the smoking bylaw).
“
“[As well], part of maintaining a healthy downtown in
“Right now in
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg, believes Clark, who notes that almost every decision a municipal government faces where profit could potentially be involved will be liable for challenge under TILMA.
“It really is overarching—the smoking bylaw is something that could be challenged as a trade barrier, if we wanted to put a pesticide ban in place, pesticide companies could challenge that as a barrier, and so on. In BC, some of the school systems talked about reducing junk food served in schools, and the Minister of Education said ‘we can’t do that now that we’ve signed TILMA, so we’ll just have to ask for Coca-Cola and so on to voluntarily comply, but if they don’t there’s nothing we can do.’
“The view of TILMA is basically that the right of Coca-Cola to make profit off the school system, or for others to make profit off of our property system or our neighbourhoods, is more important than the school boards’ or municipal governments’ right to create programs they feel are in the best interests of the people.”
Moreover, it’s not just the right of a given municipal government to govern in a democratic fashion that may be at risk—the right of citizens to work at grassroots levels for their communities may also be a thing of the past under TILMA, says
“It’s definitely potentially anti-democratic—as the solicitor points out, petitions could be challenged as a barrier to investment. So whether it be the democratically elected government or people who’ve organized into civically-recognized petition campaigns, the rights of a corporation could supersede the rights of government and citizens to govern their communities.”
Yet even with all of these concerns, proponents of the Agreement seem prepared to dismiss critics with the same old “anti-business, anti-capitalism” insults they’ve used in many such similar situations in the past. But if those insults are true, says
“The proponents of the agreement don’t even address those issues. They accuse people who have concerns of claiming the sky is falling, but they don’t say why they think it’s acceptable that the right of corporations to sue governments should trump the right of governments to make decisions on behalf of the public that democratically elected them. They don’t address that—instead, they talk about needing to make it easier for a plumber to move from one province to another, or a business to register in a different province,” says
“I don’t have any quarrel with those things, and I don’t think anyone else does, either—those are good goals—but why does this agreement include clauses that are of far more serious concern for local governments and communities? That’s what they won’t answer. I’m not even sure that the people who’ve written the agreement completely understand its implications—they’ve taken an international trade agreement and tried to squeeze it into inter-provincial relationships, and then subsumed other levels of government underneath that. It’s a huge move, and I don’t think anyone’s understood the complexity of it even as they’ve done it.”
Then again, according to the CanWest daily in
“The assumption of the governments of B.C. and
“It may well be that the issue which will be facing cities is ‘do you want TILMA or do you want local choice—or at least a protected local choice, free from the risk of TILMA challenges?’ That would be a very different debate than what is proposed for B.C. and
It would seem fairly clear that, despite the manner in which TILMA boosters dismiss their critics, it’s a debate we desperately need to have.
© 2006 Planet S Magazine
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home