To the editor:
Under NAFTA’s Chapter 11 in 1994, and increasingly in other trade agreements, foreign firms have been given access to an investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS).
Whenever future federal, provincial or municipal governments pass legislation, which, in their opinion, inhibits their opportunities to make a profit, foreign firms could demand an ISDS.
Moreover, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s promise of accountability and transparency does not exist in the formulation of the agreements or in the settlement mechanism.
The two main ISDS tribunals, run by the World Bank and the United Nations, operate behind closed doors, with private attorneys who rotate between being judges and advocates, and have no appeal mechanisms.
Canadians are generally unaware of a past $130-million settlement with a firm against the government of Newfoundland and Labrador, of the recently signed Canada-China Trade Agreement or of a current case in process for $250 million as a result of Quebec’s moratorium on fracking.
Further abrogation of sovereignty is being provided through treaties with the European Union, Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and with countries bordering the Pacific Ocean through the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
Fortunately, for those concerned about the granting of such powers to corporations, CETA is being held off by Germany being unprepared to accept such corporate control.
Joe Hueglin
Niagara Falls, Ont.
