Canada Up for Grabs
Montebello proved 'deep integration' should be a big election issue.
SPP: Opposition lining up.
Stephen Harper's behaviour around the NAFTA leaders' Security and Prosperity Partnership summit was politically reckless, and he will pay a price for it. The summit was really about the deep integration of Canada with the United States, a major concern to anyone concerned about Canada's sovereignty, our ability to manage our borders and regulate trade and corporate behaviour.
Harper's dismissal of the demonstrators outside the Montebello summit as "sad" and his condescending rejection of critics from every opposition party leaves the impression that Mr. Harper thinks he is a monarch, not a minority prime minister.
Even worse, Stockwell Day's outrageous fabrication after the Sûreté du Québec admitted sending agents among the demonstrators: "They were being encouraged to throw rocks.... That's the irony of this. Because they were not engaging in violence, it was noted that they were probably not protesters. I think that's a bit of an indictment against the violent protesters."
There was no violence, no rock-throwing at the site of the incident -- not even the police make this claim.
But if Day and Harper believe they can continue to portray the SPP as the jelly-bean initiative, they may be in for a nasty surprise. All the opposition parties have taken a critical stand on the SPP and deep integration in general. The NDP has been leading the charge for months, and successfully flushed out the government on the issue of energy security by forcing SPP hearings in the International Trade Committee. New Westminster MP Peter Julian has been digging up dirt on the process for over a year, and has identified a massive deregulation effort involving some 300 public policy areas. Leader Jack Layton is making speeches across the country on the issue.
Orchard's bounty
On the Friday before the summit, the Liberals got in the game in a major way with a 14-page position paper -- courtesy, I expect, of anti-free trader David Orchard. Orchard was the low-key kingmaker at the Liberal leadership convention, delivering the win to Stéphane Dion with his 100-plus delegates. The Liberal position paper, called "Strong and Free: The Liberal Blueprint for the North American Leaders Summit," takes extreme liberties with the truth when it claims the Liberal conception of the SPP "was one all Canadians could embrace." In fact, Paul Martin's version of the SPP (he initiated it at the first summit in 2005) was every bit as insidious and secretive as Harper's. Nonetheless, Dion has now staked out a new position: demanding complete transparency in the process, identifying the Afghan war as part of the SPP agenda and reiterating the party's position that the mission end in 2009, calling for water exports to be taken off the table, and demanding the return of Canadian Omar Khadr from Guantanamo. The energy issue -- the massive, Kyoto-killing tar sands expansion -- however, was conspicuously absent.
The Green party's Elizabeth May also has a lot riding on the deep integration issue, having stated several times that it will be the core of the party's next election platform. The Greens held a counter-summit in Ottawa, with their U.S. counterpart also taking a stand against the SPP. The party is focusing much of its attention on the North American Competitiveness Council -- the body of 35 corporate CEOs (the U.S. gets 15, Canada and the Mexico 10 each) that has been formally established as the only non-government body making recommendations to the three governments.
Even the Bloc has taken a critical stand, a reversal of the sovereigntist position on free trade and NAFTA.
How the opposition parties decide to play the SPP and its critical component parts -- the environment, energy security, Afghanistan, the militarization of Canadian culture, water exports and the relentless corporatism of the process -- in the next election remains to be seen. The Bloc has already threatened to try to bring down the government over Afghanistan. The NDP is extremely well placed to take the issue on, but seems reluctant to make it the centrepiece of their electoral vision. The Green party's intentions are good, but they have almost no resources to carry them out. And the Liberals always run from the left, so their "strong and free" document is likely to suffer the same fate as other such promises (like Paul Martin's Red Book), even if does end up in their platform.
Creating traction
Despite these positive signs, if the opposition parties believe deep integration has little traction, they will drop it as an issue. So it will be up to the social and environmental movements and organized labour to make deep integration and the SPP the central issue of the next election. That it should be the central issue seems obvious. There is no better time to reverse 20 years of Americanization of Canada. We will likely still have George Bush as U.S. president, a gift to Canadian nationalists. The U.S. itself is in rapid decline by most measures, and Canadians' alarm over global warming creates a perfect context for challenging the power of oil companies to determine Canadian public policy.
The Montebello summit, and the unprecedented exposé of police provocateurs, marked the end of the secrecy phase of deep integration. The parallel with the fight against the Free Trade Agreement of Brian Mulroney is striking. Following years of secrecy, Mulroney and his Bay Street cronies finally had to come out in the open and defend the substance of the deal -- and they almost lost the 1988 election. But the NDP got it wrong that time and Mulroney walked away with the spoils. This time the stakes are even higher. Everyone will have to get it right or we really will lose the country.
Related Tyee stories:
- The Plan to Disappear Canada
'Deep integration' comes out of shadows. - 'For Our Own Good, Give Canada Away'
The 'deep integrationists' plan one happy continent, but we must teach the little ones. - Secret Summit on Shared 'Security'
Why was North America's power elite invited to Banff? - Trade Debate BC Libs Don't Want
Talk of TILMA deal censored in the legislature. But not in The Tyee.
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
rjm
29-08-2007
treason
i dont know why, every time i refer to these globalists as a bunch of traitors, my posts get deleted (or maybe i do). nonetheless, the reference to treason, treasonous, and traitorous behavior needs to be introduced to the public debate.
one way or another, this terminology must be inserted into the discussion.
the niceties required to avoid the truth, by using different terminology, waters down the argument that should be ongoing.
the actions of successive globalist governments, not just in canada, is literally treasonous. it needs to be identified in the most specific and glaring terms.
what criminal wouldnt relish a situation where the prosecutor was prevented from accusing him of the specific crime of which he is guilty?
vichy governance is vichy governance.
treason is treason.
tks,
rjm
Realist
29-08-2007
In Agreement
I agree that these politicians are nothing less than treasonous. Here in B.C. it is clear that the policies of our government are directed at corporate power at the expense of those who elected our officials. This is exactly the definition of treason and to call it anything else is to deny our reality.
dorothy
29-08-2007
when are they doing their job?
It is all very well to hear how the various opposition parties are rolling out their cannon, positioning themselves for the next election, etc. But the fact that they spend time doing this shows clearly that none of them have serious concerns or intent in this. It is just another device to vie for power and influence and ultimately get their hands on the self same resources.
If they are serious, if they think these people are selling the country down the river, why don't they end it now by calling a confidence vote the first time one of the issues involved comes into the picture as an attempt to get legislation through? Would that throw us into an election before they are all ready to take care of their own special political concerns?
I feel more and more sorry for the immigrant who suffered and contrived and sacrificed for 'that one vote'. He is more and more on the receiving end of a tremendous con game, where there are no winners, as that kind of victory has a way of turning to dust in one's mouth.
The ad says 'don't mess with Karma'. It then presents 'Karma' as some kind of ugly mutated octopus/dragon. Why not show us the respect of calling it by it s rightful name, what it is you can't mess with: entropy. As this is one of those infamous fundamentals in our universe, people who laugh all the way to the bank now will cry with the rest all the way to thermal death. Like I said, no winners!
The elected representatives do not represent anything right now, other than collective idiocy. One might find religion:
"Why, you are nothing and your work is nought! To choose you is an abomination."
(Isaiah, 41,24)
alive
29-08-2007
GREED
For those who have difficulties with understanding what goes on, look at it this way:
Our free-enterprise world is represented well in the board game "Monopoly"!
the players go round and round untill one player buys up everything in sight and then "owns" the board!
There is no considerations given, just the "need" to be the top dog!
The need to control everyone else and perhaps have the opportunity to be "gracious" to each player as he bows out of the game.
The rich people already have more money that they need, this is a game about power and greed!
Once again : welcome to living in a free enterprise country!
Fiat lux
29-08-2007
The politicians are not to
The politicians are not to blame. It is the universities, where the neoclassical market economy theory is being taught who are providing the pseudo religious scriptural justification for this, the biggest crime wave in human history.
The politicians are only the hired mercenaries enforcing the demands of the rulers, their crimes absolved by the priesthood of economists.
Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC.
Working Man
29-08-2007
Rhetoric Aside....
"The NDP is extremely well placed to take the issue on, but seems reluctant to make it the centrepiece of their electoral vision."
All the rhetorical nonsense above aside, Mr Dobbin is perhaps assigning too much influence to his masters, since they many win 30 out of 301 seats, or a little less than 10%. It is also very important for the left to avoid their "sky is falling" mantra. Only the faithful listen to it.
"So it will be up to the social and environmental movements and organized labour to make deep integration and the SPP the central issue of the next election"
Another case of preaching to the choir. Average Joe and Josephine voters vote, if they vote at all, on very simple issues and this is something Harper is very good at doing.
I have become a great fan of minority governments. Anything like the SPP is certainly going to die in committee anyway and that is a good thing.
The brain
29-08-2007
A good article
So much more awareness needs to be brought to this. And that takes time. Media support. Political parties staking their position with PR (and much as a few of us think its a waste of time for political parties to do so, its highly necessary).
The bottom line is that the threat to our national sovereignty is real. I was waiting for an issue where all opposition parties would collectively agree on an issue that would paint it as an "us against the bad guys" or "us against Stephen Harper's private agenda to sell/give away the country to the U.S.".
The wait is over.
And the point Dobbin makes with Stockwell Day should not be overlooked. In negative advertizing campaigns that are designed to actually work, there is no better fodder than virtual lies like his.
Reader11722
29-08-2007
Corporations run the world
Corporations own Canada as well as the US. In America, corporations and gov't are merely quid-pro-quo whorehouses sold to the highest bidder. When the gov't needs illegal wire-taps, Verizon and Sprint allow them secret rooms to listen in on calls. When Haliburton (and KBR) need more revenue, the gov't hands out no-bid contracts. When the gov't dislikes literature, Amazon and Wikipedia ban the book "America Deceived". The US (as well as our brothers to the North) had our gov't sold out from beneath us.
Final link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):
America Deceived (book)
IAMC
29-08-2007
Bored Game
I have to agree with alive, that monopolies are a scourge.
I am sure we all hate the monopoly that CUPE has with garbage pickup in Vancouver.
IBBC, being the only source of mandatory auto insurance.
Marketing boards that give a monopoly to a small group of farmers, that force the entire population to pay double what they should pay for dairy products, eggs and bread.
Yes, these evil entities are indeed a scourge, and should be turned over to the private marketplace.
Mel from Calgary
29-08-2007
Voting
All this talk of calling an election better take place soon.
The Free Trade Agreement(FTA)and NAFTA are designed to tie the hands of governments and stem the democratic will of the people.
The SPP will go even further.
What of democracy once government is reduced to administering american laws and standards? This SPP process is not a negotiation among equals.
How do we raise standards when a company can sue the country for doing so?
The FTA prevented Bob Rae's NDP government from bringing in provicial car insurance. He could not say the private sector has failed to provide a needed service at a reasonable cost and put this in place because american (not Canadian)car insurance companies would have to be paid billions in compensation. This would have been the situation with Medicare 45 years ago if this had been in place.
The business community prefers stable dictatorships because democracy is too iffy and these "deals" are designed to thwart the will of the people.
pender paul
29-08-2007
politically reckless
Must not criticize Harper or the US government--I did (politely) in a letter to my member of parliament and was told that, in future, correspondence of a critical nature would not be replied to--so much for democracy and acceptance of different points of view. I hope the Tyee isn't expecting anything from the feds! It won't happen. Harper adores the US and wants to complete the sell-out of Canada to his good buddies. He has the nation involved in an impossible situation abroad and is eager to do whatever George tells him. Capitalism and the neo-Conservative agenda are the true enemies of freedom and democracy. The summit will support capitalism while taking away more from the ordinary citizen. Great system!
realisticman
29-08-2007
What's the Up side?
Murray, I have a bit of cash, since taking that position just before the present market blips, what do you think are areas likely for upward movement - going forward? I'm looking at private security firms in Canada which could be undervalued. I'm also thinking that some of the larger construction companies could see an upside when we have to build a Thames Barrier-type system on the Fraser estuary to quell concerns from those that fear global warming raising the sea level and the need to protect New West from flooding. Perhaps airline stocks too with increased north-south trade and more cross-border flights. Any thoughts?
kootcoot
29-08-2007
Dorothy, you may have a point:
I often find myself feeling the same way. Like when the talk of attacking Iran starts being consider "normal" and "reasonable" in the Empire to the South as it seems to be. Like the lead up to Iraq with one letter different - Yogi said it best, "It's deja vu, all over again!" If (and it seems more like when) that happens a chain reaction will commence that in the end will see the end of Israeli and US dreams of Empire and the control of the Middle East and the rest of the world's resources.
I fear there will need to be much more pain, before the survivors see the gain of a new more sustainable society living on the earth and not worshipping the god of greed anymore. I'm getting along and won't be around forever, but I certainly don't feel terribly optimistic about the world my children and grandchildren are inheriting.
Canis Latrans
29-08-2007
Privatize it all...
Indeed Koot, privatize it all. It will hasten its end, in fact. Even the ruling class whose agenda that is, are smart enough to know the risks inherent in that endgame, and tend, in fact, to look rather favourably on their State intervening in the economy-, so long as it pumps the cash into the collapsing stock markets for example, to keep the hallowed institutions of capitalism afloat in their own Sea of Bedlam.
And there is the rub ye US Empire Loyalists to the capitalist cause, capitalism NEEDS the state to save it constantly from itself, its excesses and the social choas it tends in fact to create. It needs it to control the lower classes, through big money manipulated "democratic" means in our case of course, and where that doesn't work any longer, outright fascism. Whatever works to serve their ruling class interests. And the trend of the latest period is toward corporatist fascism.
The State is grudgingly then tolerated, as I say, so long as it serves their class need, and does not actually attempt to do anything of benefit to the working class-, save where periodic superior working class power has, under threat of revolution, such as in the 1930s, compelled it. And even then, they constantly chip away at it and attempt to undermine working class gains forced into State "social policy", as has been the character of the "class collaborationist" time since shortly after WW2.
Their pretence at hostility to "The State" is largely feigned, though not entirely, for in some other hands, there is ever the risk that Their State may come to be used against them. Though the USSR proved NOT methinks, because the new political class tends to simply evolve over time into another ruling class, the capitalist class still fears the potential, with some good reason.
The working class though, has not had a good historical experience with The State, any State, and is actually more inclined to greater suspicion of all such institutions. They really need to evolve real and more fundamentally democratic alternatives to it, built upon the foundation of a "democratically" owned and controlled economy.
This country being successfully absorbed into the continental schemes of the US Empire however, will only serve to make real power and democracy possibilities more remote and estranged. It must therefore be resisted by all means. My view.
RickW
30-08-2007
Martin
Ever heard of "externalizing costs"?
What about the continuing and apparently irreparable environmental damage being caused by the tarsands, by the pine beetle, and by any number of things that make these "economic benefits" possible?
There is no one who uses that phrase of yours, who seems to be concerned at all with the damage being done, never mind for future generation, but for this one.
dorothy
30-08-2007
Cause and effect..or was that the other way round?
"We must resist the power of Public Sector Unions, who want to monopolize many services that don't need to be run by the Govt.
Smaller Govt. and reduced influence of Public Sector Unions, is paramount to our success as a society."
So, obviously, this is not what sends the society down south into the toilet. I would welcome suggestions as to what does, then?
Also, I think it is time to re-remind of the World Values Survey files, where you can clearly see that the most 'socialist' states in Europe, those in Scandinavia, come out on top of the 'happy and fulfilling' scale, while it is remarkable that they also can compete in the domains of the private sector, due to a well-educated, resourceful workforce.
It has been proven time and again, that the three things that goverments need to take a hand in bringing into place for a society to be successful are 1)major infrastructure, roads, bridges etc,
2)education, and 3)health care. These will not be looked after by private enterprise to the optimal degree for society to function in a sustainable fashion, due to the psychopathic nature of corporations.
One good example is the side-by-side operations of private labs and hospital labs. The privates take on a lot of the simple routine stuff that lends itself readily to automation and bulk processing. The hospital labs are totally stuck with the intricate stuff that must be dealt with individually and requires high skill level, in other words, all the stuff that can't be made to 'pay' in immediate, monetary terms, but may have a very great impact on expenses down the road, due to prevetative measures being possible to take early in the game. Many of the public 'monopolies' whereof you speak are of the same nature, consisting of the sticky, ugly and cumbersome parts, in which privateers have no interest. Yet you would surely not suggest that these jobs should not be done?
Let us drop the dumb partisan rhetoric and the ready name-calling in these threads, and let us have discussion of the issues rather than the people. Let us take it as an example of how a non-union enterprise can be brought to become productive through voluntary choices (or not).
Diane Bourdeau
30-08-2007
Canada up for Grabs
I'm from the States, and recently read a few articles regarding linking Canada, USA, and Mexico.
There has been very little discussion in America, about these moves except briefly on Lou Dobbs, that's about it on television. This isn't surprising since Corporate News in the States, really doesn't talk about anything other then Britney Spears and some regional rain storm, or train accident. When it comes to real news it's pretty much gone. Except,for the wonderful internet. This has allowed me to discover your wonderful Tyee News.
Canadians, should beware of these changes, do you, or really do we need them. I really feel there is a major division with unifying with Mexico. We have a completely
different language. Their standard of living and wages would suck a great many more good paying jobs away from both Canada and the US.
Beware of your cherished freedoms,in America they have done away with Habeus Corpus this has been in existence for 1200 years,torture, wireless wiretapping, I did not want this and the majority of Americans did not did not want this but we have it, now.Your great healthcare, I wish we had that here in the States, but we unfortunately do not and I doubt that in our Lifetime we will ever see Universal Health Care there are many Lobbyist, and Insurance Company's wanting a piece of the pie oh lest I forget, our good Doctors wanting more, and more money!
So, you good people in Canada be very careful for what you wish for.
Canis Latrans
31-08-2007
Canada grabbing...
I hear ya Diane-, loud and clear.
Working folks in both our countries share a common cause in this corporatist driven "continental integration" power and wealth grab.
It is but an attempt to concentrate more power and wealth in ruling class hands, at the expense of the democratic rights and standards of living of both our peoples. The rhetorical smoke and mirrors they throw up in the course of this power and wealth grab, is but an attempt to razzle dazzle us, and throw us off their game. And what demonstrates that is all the secrecy, and the exclusionist attempts of the corporate and political elites to cut out labour, environmental and other citizen representation and interests from the process.
This is "their" baby, the ruling class, and they don't give a shag what we think. The high mesh fences and phalanxes of armoured cops, all the tear gas and "agents de provocateurs" sent into demonstrators to foment clashes, is the proof of that.
In the face of all this, working folks in Canada, the US, and yes, Mexico, need to act in solidarity with each other. (After all, most Mexican workers and farmers still wish to have a viable and progressive economy within their own country, that serves their needs and that of their families, rather than to have to leave for the slums and cheap labour agricultural ghettos of Amerika in Decline.) We need power (democracy), livable incomes, decent and progressive working and community conditions in each of our national spaces, rather than to allow it all to be alienated away from us, into continentalist and corporatist ruling class hands dominated by the US Empire.
dr evil
31-08-2007
from Brit colony to
I guess when the `murricans took over the Great British Empire on behalf of Anglo Saxon Protestants everywhere we were kinda a throw in.
We were allowed to sit awhile ..look after the water..think maybe we might become a nation or something.
Still trappin` furs...sendin` em out buying em back as hats.
Guess its corporate colonialism now..even `mericas a colony..global neo liberal corporate colonial capitalism...who`d a thunk it.
Not much a boy can do ..`cept watch `em take `er down...maybe finish `er off...burn her out deader `n Mars.
lynn
31-08-2007
SNAFU
So how did we get so far and lose so much...with nary one bombing raid, no visible frontline and no visible enemy? How are we as a country on the tragic brink of losing it all if this is not indeed a case of treason?
It simply is impossible for this country to have reached this catastrophic point otherwise.
Our country is in the process of being obliterated yet there is no material evidence? No visible devastation? At least none that THEY dare reveal in the open air. But that is exactly, (counter-intuitively), the dead giveaway when it comes to the question of treason - the total lack of the usual accoutrements of war - the increasingly unsettling appearance of normal ...the secrecy, the pretense behind it all - what has been quite rightly referred to in the past as "the normalization of evil".
Not that there isn't devastation in this war, there is plenty of it, but its voices have been silenced, and the evidential details have been hidden... or disguised.... or simply made inaccessible in a myriad of devious ways from public view. This, too required co-operation. It just doesn't happen in a vacuum.
It's what you'd call in the grandest of understatements "a big project" but it is a war, no question, otherwise Canada would not be "up for grabs.". This kind of invisible, undeclared war depends on - and must depend on a high level of collusion and co-operation in high places. It cannot be otherwise.
A co-operation that has cruelly attempted at so many levels to kill the soul of this country - a shy and decent, uniquely Canadian soul that I for one quite love.
Lies, subterfuge, secret meetings, co-option - these are the invisible weapons of a darkly invisible, largely unreported on war.
It cannot have happened without a cadre of co-operative and co-operating quislings on board. And that is the truly sly cowardice of this sickening crew.
It's why treason is right up there with murder. The human and emotional impact of the word strikes hard against the heart. That's why it's a risky word. After years of trying to subdue and neutralize any real dissent this is a word that can and will mobilize forces. And that is why as rjm makes clear in his/her fine piece above: "one way or another, this terminology must be inserted into the discussion."
THEY are counting on us to behave and not use the word treason as they edge towards the finish line.
To avoid or censor or refuse to debate the word treason at this critical time in the history of our country is to become an accessory to the worst of crimes.
mopled
31-08-2007
It's the Security part
that has me most worried after reading Naomi Klein's article in the Straight.
http://www.straight.com/article-107561/big-brother-watching-you-in-high-def
lynn
31-08-2007
thanks for the link,mopled
thanks for the link, mopled.
From the same article by Naomi Klein:
Security is the new prosperity. Surveillance is the new democracy."
Diane Bourdeau
31-08-2007
Why not like Europe
In Europe there were discussions and a vote taken by each Country, when they made the decision to unify. Why not an open discusion on such matters.
Why, this building of this highway without an agreement between Nations and her people.
My Country's minimum wage is not anywhere near as high as Canada's, it should be but there are so many illegals from Mexico creating a major drain on our jobs. Keeping the wages depressed, plus our Congress will not agree to vote on a wage which people can live on.
There really needs to be a discussion on all of this. John Edwards God bless him is the only person running for president in my Country who wants to make some much needed changes.
We definitely have major challenges in all the three Countries. My Country seems to have forgotten how to demonstrate like you Canadians do. Good for all of you. Perhaps your all three Countries only hope.
G West
31-08-2007
Not that I'd put much stock in it
But John Edwards IS starting to sound a bit different.
This from an article in Salon:
Of course, he never named the fellow travelers targeted by his broadside. But he left plenty of clues, given Hillary Clinton's time in the White House and Barack Obama's record fundraising. "The American people deserve to know that their presidency is not for sale," he said, "the Lincoln Bedroom is not for rent, and lobbyist money can no longer influence policy in the House and the Senate."
In one way, the onslaught was not surprising. In the ecosystem of the Democratic primary, Edwards is both the liberal lion and the populist prairie dog. He loves bashing corporations and their big wallets, and he often blames lobbyists for the nation's ills. It's a tried and true posture. He won his first Senate race in 1998 as the self-branded "People's Senator," running numerous ads that tied the incumbent Republican to "PACs and Washington lobbyists." He won a slot on the Democratic ticket in 2004 by promising to blur the dividing line between the haves and the have-nots.
But this summer, as he has struggled to gain traction in the polls in the early primary and caucus states, Edwards has taken a new turn. For the first time in his career, he is running for office by criticizing segments of the Democratic Party, the institution he has long held up as the only hope for restoring economic justice in America. In particular, he has tried to paint Democrats who continue to accept money from corporate lobbyists or political committees as part of the problem, not the solution.
Who, on the Canadian scene, is making the same kind of noises? I think there's a opening for someone here in this country to make the necessary connections and draw the lines of control back to the source of what you've properly called treason Lynn. Perhaps, as the scales fall from peoples' eyes and the corporatist agenda behind the utterly phony security "crisis" is laid bare, there may be a vacuum into which public opinion could pour the winds of real change.
No question though Lynn, it may already be too late.
I have one other question for anyone who might have an opinion on the matter. When exactly did it become as important for the police in this country to spend as much effort and talent on public relations and media spin as the politicians?
robertjb2
31-08-2007
canada up for grabs
I wish it were otherwise but I don't think any of the political parties have the guts to make this an election issue in any serious way. The Conservatives and Liberals have already sold out on the issue, the NDP folded their hand on the FTA and will no doubt do so again, the Green's are too marginal as is the BQ which leaves the rapidly failing Rhino party.
Nor do I think most Canadians are concerned. We are too enthralled with post- modernism as defined by southern neighbour.
Tragically, those of us call ourselves Canadian nationalists aren't even a distinct minority but a dwindling minority.
Our sovereignty has suffered the death of a thousand cuts and the SPP arrives late in the count.
RickW
31-08-2007
Murray Dobbin.......
....is of course, assuming that there will be an election in the first place. Of that, I am not so sure. Harper is not acting at all like a PM with a minority. Tht last time that was tried, Joe Clark went down in flames pretty quick. So is the "fix" in, somehow?
Me, I can see a mini-nuc being detonated somewhere in the American mid-west, not too far from Canadian border in the days leading up to the American election. Set off by "terrorists" of course, and necessitating marshal law (and the convenient cancellation of elections). And the Canadian "opposition" parties do not seem at all interesated in hindering Harper's minority run into 2008..........
Paranoid? Of course! But wrong? I stand behind my words............
BC Dude
31-08-2007
I'm 100% behind a total
I'm 100% behind a total withdrawal of all but essential services for humanity sake starting with buying only local, getting rid of the idiot box, maybe cells, boycott those ten Canadian corporations that were at the SPP meeting.
This is a great site
http://www.harperindex.ca/ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=0083
G West
31-08-2007
you forgot yo note this -
Remember, context is everything. Coles's statement doesn't necessarily mean that the damn stuff should be processed at all...but it does mean that the Canadian people - and not a lot of unelected neocons - and toadies like pee wee - need to have some input into what's happening to the country's resources.
Get rid of all the SUVs, stop flying the damn airplanes for idiot tourists and purblind businessmen, use trains to move goods and we won't need to pollute the atmosphere here to solve America's addiction problems. Just requires governments with some intestinal fortitude and a commitment to advance the good of the Canadian people - all of them and not just the masters of the universe.
Anyone who wants to sell out this country, as Lynn noted so clearly above - is a traitor. Those are the folks we should be exporting.
realisticman
01-09-2007
Actually, no Diane
Not all EU countries had a vote. Of the 25 countries that make up the EU only Denmark, Spain, France, Ireland, the Netherlands and the UK had a referendum on the ratification of the Constitutional Treaty. There were/are possibly other referendums possible but primarily the decision to sign was made by the respective Parliaments. (It's all here if you are interested [http://www.ena.lu/mce.cfm]).
G West
01-09-2007
sounds pretty democratic to me Diane
While here in North American the three amigos watch a video of the so-called 'sad' protestors while hired goons try to foment phony violence.
Here the only thing we're guaranteed is that the masters of the universe 'won't' actually consult their citizens while they treat the electorate like children being 'disciplined' for their own good. All this nonsense has only made the lot of Canadian, American and Mexican citizens worse - relative to the status of the rotten cream at the top of the bottle - and largely relative to how things were 30 or 40 years ago. Here's a very interesting explanation of what this is all about, where it came from and what's wrong with it - from someone with a lot more credibility than Stephen Harper, George Bush Philipe Calderon combined
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/08/28/how-did-we-get-into-this-mess/
Membership in the EU is and always has been voluntary Diane, so don't let the fact that some nations didn't bother with a constitutional referendum worry you too much.
Your comparison is perfectly apt...EDITED FOR PERSONAL INSULT. LET'S STICK TO THE ISSUES INSTEAD OF LEVELING TAUNTS. THANKS. TYEE MODERATOR.
realisticman
01-09-2007
Just the Facts
Sure, 6 countries had referendums but 19 didn't. That's over 75% of the member countries NOT having referendums. As GWest says, they 'didn't bother'. So one wonders why we should 'bother' with having one on this side of the pond.
Membership of all trade deals is voluntary. We had governments here campaigning on the NAFTA. Once elected by the opposition the deal was signed, then they were re-elected! The people of Canada have spoke on this issue repeatedly, at the ballot box.
Your input is welcomed Diane Bourdeau. A broad perspective is needed since sometimes these discussions become quite parochial. Thank you for reminding us about our freedoms and our excellent healthcare system, sometime we forget just how great it is.
G West
01-09-2007
You may think
You may think that the governments of Canada, the United States and Mexico are legitimate democracies - I don't.
George Bush was NOT elected in 2000, he was 'appointed' by the Supreme Court and has been illegitimate ever since; Philipe Calderon's election has been controverted since the day the ballot counting ended and he too is there because of the courts.
pee wee Rambo represents significantly less than 40 % of the citizens of this country..in fact he doesn't even represent 40% of the portion who took the trouble to vote in 2006.
It there are going to be any changes to the current arrangements along the lines that the 3 amigos have been discussing, it is absolutely contingent that the people of the 3 countries be informed and consulted. Which is what Diane suggested before you dragged in the red herring of the EU constitution.
In no one's imagination, even your's R/man, can consultation be said to be happening. And that is precisely what's parochial and illegitimate about this deal my friend.
Of course Diane is welcome to comment, but it would be entirely wrong to suggest that this statement of yours is anything but wrong, and not just grammatically:
Because they haven't.
realisticman
01-09-2007
Please Read
Under the heading, Why not like Europe, from Diane Boudreau you can read a comment on the EU. This, my friend, is the genesis of my clarification. 'twas not I that initiated the item.
If you, GWest, consider these democracies illegitimate is it only co-oalitions that you would feel are legitimate, when there are more than two parties and a popular majority is unattainable?
I thought that Chretien promised to re-negociate NAFTA if he won, which he did, the 1993 election but didn't, yet was re-elected over and again. Wasn't he?
G West
01-09-2007
Free trade was never an issue of any consequence
Nope, “Free Trade” [now there’s a euphemism] was never a significant issue or factor in any election except the Turner/Mulroney one. As to Chretien and the Liberals - Insult them all you like - I'm no fan of theirs - they take their water at the self-same trough as pee wee does and the current brand’s (Dion’s) failure to recognize the single decent thing pee wee has done (Income Trusts) is laughable.
I think coalition governments are infinitely preferable to the effective corporate dictatorships we have now. These people and their neocon ideas have been and are continuing to ruin this country as they have already ruined the great republic to the south – as the John Edwards campaign there is starting to demonstrate. They need to be stopped by whatever legal means are available and discussion and education and a constant effort to point out what they are and what harm they've done is the most important function of a free people – especially when essentially good people like yourself have allowed themselves to be so thoroughly gulled by illusion and prestidigitation.
The press, having been bought and paid for and the wealthy - who might seek to change things if they had any real sense of public purpose (beyond reducing their own taxes) - being complicit in the criminality, there are not yet any other ways to fight back against the lies.
I don't believe in violence - I do believe in people having the ability to govern themselves by a means that is more representative than the current morass.
realisticman
01-09-2007
Yet
After signing NAFTA Mulroney was re-elected with 43% of the popular vote. The Libs and the NDP, who said they opposed NAFTA, totaled 52% combined. That's democracy when you have many parties vying for the same votes.
G West
01-09-2007
Then really
Then really you agree that NAFTA is undemocratic and has been foisted upon the unwilling citizens of the country against their will?
Just as, by all appearances, the current sellout being contemplated by the three amigos is undemocratic.
And isn't that precisely what we've been saying - and Murray has been reflecting upon?
I'm glad you finally have seen the light - now get out there and start campaigning for an end to the criminal sell out (financed with our money) and a return to sanity and a better chance at an equitable result for ALL CANADIANS and not just the people pulling pee wee's strings. The number of parties is not the issue - as the US dichotomy shows - listen to what John Edwards is saying R/man and remember it applies more or less concurrently here.
Diane Bourdeau
01-09-2007
Here's what happened down South
http://www.slate.com/id/2167284?nav=tap3This link is in reference to G. West, Yes, in 2000 the Supreme Court selected the US President. But, in 2004 there is widespread belief with proof by, Greg Palast, an American who now works as a BBC Reporter for you can no longer do real Investigative Reporting in the US.and Robert Kennedy, Jr. have done much research on this subject. The link discusses voter caging, which has been occurring in the US for many years. In the mid eighties Congress created a law to prevent this. It was always the Republicans which used voter caging. Their still doing it and they did it in 2004. They also used electronic, paperless voting machines which could easily change an election.
Right now the Secretary of State in Ca. is trying to prevent this in any other elections in Ca. I hope she succeeds for Ca. is normally a trend setter for the rest of the Country.
Thank you, G. West, for the Monblot link. It really educated me to how these changes occurred, in relationship to Government and Big Business meaning Corporations.
Realisticman, thank you for sharing that all the members did not vote on the Unification Plan in Europe. The link is very interesting, but it was in French. Even though most of my ancestors are from Quebec, I don't speak. I wish, I could.
Diane Bourdeau
01-09-2007
Trade
It appears that the majority of people from both Countries have suffered from, this Global Economy. Its crap, most of our manufacturing base has been gutted. GM and Ford may now be going to Asia. Not much left.
So much for those new trade agreements. Don't you love those politicians. In my Country they will give those jobs away for a campaign or Party contribution.
Realisticman, Thank you for the Maastricht Treaty. It helps explain everything clearly.
G West
01-09-2007
You have it right Diane
The question is, what can we DO about it?
Diane Bourdeau
01-09-2007
Just Say," NO"
G.West, Canadians must become a single voice on this issue. You must be LOUD and CLEAR. We didn't and look at us now. We were warned by Ross Perot, ran for President here in 1992. He told Americans, there would be a giant sucking sound, if NAFTA was approved. He was mistaken the only one who made any noise about it was Lou Dobbs, on CNN. That's it. Now look at America. We are trillions of dollars in debt.
Great, hunh!
Not much hope here, but you guys can stop it. Try, really try to get a Prime Minister elected that will stop this.
It is a major mess this Global economy.
I went to hear my Congressman, when he was in Town, in June 2007. For Americans it will come down to we will have to start producing our own goods because nobody will be selling to us. Cute, isn't it, don't you love it.
For you Canadians, don't give up your manufacturing base, you will all live to regret it.
I really wish I could tell you how to do it, but all I can tell you is how terrible it will be if you all don't stop it.
realisticman
02-09-2007
Forget Mexico Diane, it's moved on
Innovation through modern science, technology and services are what the west has to concentrate on. The cotton mills of England were replaced with the cotton mills of New England, where many Quebecers went. These were replaced with Taiwan, Sri Lanka and Turkey, etc. Manufacturing moves. The first car manufacturers in the world were French: Panhard & Levassor (1889) and Peugeot (1891). Then others including Detroit. This will move too. Do you know Dalian. Means nothing to many but it is big and they're going, "participants from Canada include Scott Brison, the federal Liberal Party industry spokesman; Gerald Tremblay, the Mayor of Montreal;" The city also has 22 universities, churning out tens of thousands of graduates every year -- including 30,000 students with information technology-related majors alone....home to technology giants including IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Sony, Oracle, Accenture and Microsoft that have located tens of thousands of employees in the city.
In March, Intel signed on, too, announcing a US$2.5-billion investment in a research-and-development centre in Dalian -- some insiders estimate the chipmaker's total injection of funds into the city will be more than twice the announced amount.
Scotiabank from Canada is in there too.
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=7fd63fed-a1f8-486a-baec-f5d747b15d6d&k=50764
Working Man
02-09-2007
Quote:It is a major mess
Tell that to a Chinese family trying to pull themselves out of poverty.
Times change, industries change, economies change.
I trust you are American. Your nation's fiancial problem has much more to do with your tax structure where the wealthy pay practically nothing and the huge amount of money your government has printed to finance the Iraq war.
Diogenes
02-09-2007
Murdock’s offering
In the short time I’ve been on the internet seeing what it has to offer I have been able to determine that there are conspiracies.
Murdock’s offering of the documentary zeitgeist is a good place to start for any who have thus far not been able to get their head around the hard fact conspiracies exist. And can be traced back the formation of the catholic church and perhaps even before.
The North American union/Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America is the most recent title for long planned domination of not only North Americans but the world as well and the documentary spells it all out.
The architects of the takeover are not to be taken lightly. They already control the world’s economies through the World Bank, international monetary fund and the bank of international settlements.
I was gifted the following book just after its publishing,
http://reactor-core.org/none-dare.html © 1971 with the warning to not open it until I thought I was ready. I waited three years before I opened the book
Gary Allen, before his death was able to offer a massive work that can be found at
http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/
Should I personally take an interest in these latest developments?
The real question is should I not?
From an American site I read this drivel
“Why should I care whether the United States joins a North American Union?
If you care about national sovereignty, our cherished American freedoms, the United States Constitution, American independence, retaining the American standard of living, and keeping English as the "real" language of our country, among other unique values and features that adhere to the American way of life, you should care whether we retain our unique identity, legally and in fact!”
You will find similar gak written by Canadians.
My reason for denigrating such trash is frankly due to the fact that the concepts of sovereignty, freedoms, cherished or not, standards of living and similar propaganda are ‘warm fuzzy’s” designed to trap the mind and have never really been implemented for the masses
Good reading and good viewing to those who have thee mind for it
Good to see ya giving the hell G West ;-)
Mel from Calgary
02-09-2007
Popular vote
Our flawed system gave Brian Mulroney a majority of the seats but only 43% of the popular vote, most Canadians voted against this "deal".
Until we change the way we elect our MP's deals like FTA, NAFTA and the SPP need to be put to a national referendum to truly gauge how canadians feel on an issue such as this that effects all our lives and abilty of our government to improve them.
realisticman
02-09-2007
Not a Bad Idea Mel
British Columbia, Alberta and Quebec have passed legislation requiring that constitutional amendments be submitted to a referendum. Provincial governments could lead the way again with other issues they consider of equal, or greater importance.
realisticman
02-09-2007
Dude
Perhaps TILMA too. International trade is almost certainly, constitutionally, a federal jurisdiction and inter-provincial arrangements are likely allowed between provinces. I'm not a constitutional expert. It would, probably, be based on the Canadian constitution also as to whether provinces have the unilateral right to enter into arrangements with other provinces regarding legislated provincial standards and laws, with or without consultations and approvals from their electorate.
As I say, I'm not an expert but provinces in Canada joined into Canada's federation at different times and perhaps under different rules and different requirements.