A first impression is that we did not. In fact one of the independent observers felt compelled at the end of the presentations to point out how obvious the bias of most MPs appeared.
In fairness, it is probable that most of our arguments had been heard before. On the other hand, with the exception of the NDP's Ms. Ramsey, the focus was clearly on the economic benefits as opposed to the democratic and constitutional constraints of trade agreements like the TPP.
Thus, we presented from the perspective of democratic values, but we ended up answering questions from an economic perspective.
Here's what we said.
.......................................................................................................................................................
Thank
you for giving me the opportunity to present. Citizens against CETA is a rather grandiose sounding name for a local
group of concerned citizens.We
submitted a brief last June filled with statistics refuting the supposed
benefits of the TPP. But today I would like to talk about values.
In
his meticulously researched book on wealth and income, Capitalism in the 21st Century, French economist, Thomas Piketty, concluded
that we were heading into a period of inequality such that the world has never
seen. If we are to change that, he said, "we have to bet everything on
democracy."
I
believe that inequality continues to grow precisely because, around the globe, democracy
is under attack. The aggressors aren’t terrorists or rogue nations. The aggressors
are international corporations backed by financial elites. The weapon used is a contract.
The
TPP and CETA are gigantic contracts that define, not what corporations can and
can’t do in our country. Instead, these
contracts define what government itself can and can’t do. Any
government action, present and future, that is not clearly defined or not
written into the contract can be challenged by corporations in those infamous
investor-state tribunals where the
public good and environmental protection count for nothing. There, all that matters is entitlement under the
contract.
According
to Osgood Hall investment treaty expert, Gus Van Harten, these contractual agreements
have succeeded in doing what no parliament has been previously able to do under
our English common law system, and that is fetter or straitjacket future parliaments
I
believe that government is asleep at the wheel when it comes to acknowledging
the threat trade agreements pose for our democratic rights. But then, so too are the passengers in the
back seat, the Canadian public. The reason
in both cases is that we live in an age where economic values trump everything.
I’m
a retired social studies teacher. Around
the turn of the century every single course
that allowed a discussion of democracy and politics was deleted from the high school curriculum in my province and replaced with economic
education courses. There was a
consequence. In the 2011 federal election the last election for which we have a
breakdown by age, only 29% of young people under 25 bothered to vote.
I’m
going to suggest that the same neglect of our democratic values has happened in
government. Economic values now dominate,
more precisely the economic values of neoliberalism with its emphasis on free
trade.
This Committee now has all sorts of hard evidence disputing the
Liberal Party`s claims about the benefits of free trade. But two important reports came out last week that I want
to highlight.
The first was a Tufts University study on CETA. “CETA", and this is a quote, "will cause
unemployment, inequality, welfare losses and a reduction of intra-EU
trade.”
That certainly suggests that
CETA is not the “Gold Standard of Trade Agreements” that Prime Minister Trudeau and Minister
Freeland maintain that it is. Will the
prime minister and his trade minister now reverse direction and call for a halt
to the provisional acceptance of CETA?
It all depends on what their true values are, doesn’t it?
The
new OECD report is even more interesting, in spite of its blinkered call for
more trade liberalization. Trade as a driver of GDP has fallen steadily
since 2009. In fact, trade growth is now lagging growth in the broader world economy this year
and that lag is likely to persist Emerging
countries in particular are pulling back
from a dependency on exports and choosing, instead, to develop internal markets as
a means of increasing GDP.
As for OECD countries, governments are increasingly being forced by their citizens
to question the benefits of a free trade model that has heightened
inequality,caused job losses, and straitjacketed government`s ability to deal with either.
Consider
the way that the TPP unexpectedly became a major campaign issue in the US elections.
Consider Brexit - or last week when 320,000 Germans in multiple cities
demonstrated in the streets against the TTIP and CETA.
These
aren’t going to be isolated incidences. According to the recent OECD report, election
results and polls in OECD countries are
pointing to a shift away from the traditional left–right divide among voters
towards anti-and pro-globalization electorates. That`s a very significant
development to consider.
As members of the trade committee, you hold an enormous responsibility. I`m sure you’ve been watching closely how public
opinion is coalescing against these trade agreements elsewhere. But
you are also affected by the unwavering, ideological enthusiasm those who control policy in our two major parties
still have for free trade.
How
do you choose between ideological faith in free trade on the one side and substantial
evidence on the other side that our
trade policy will hurt Canadian value added industries, increase inequality and
fetter democratic governance?
Surely
it`s with values. What do you value
most? Do you believe that you have a
responsibility to your children and grandchildren and community to preserve democracy
and fight initiatives that promote inequality. Because I ‘m hoping if you do, you will say a resounding and public NO to trade agreements
like the TPP.
Marilyn Reid for Citizens against CETA
