>X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Unverified)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 15:04:58 -0500
>Reply-To: "Andrea Durbin (by way of [EMAIL PROTECTED])"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sender: The Other Economic Summit USA 1997 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Comments: RFC822 error: <W> MESSAGE-ID field duplicated. Last occurrence
> was retained.
>From: "Andrea Durbin (by way of [EMAIL PROTECTED])"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [mai] International Week Of Action - February 7-17, 1998
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> *************
>
>*** ACTION ALERT *** PLEASE FORWARD ***ACTION ALERT***
>
>INTERNATIONAL WEEK OF ACTION, FEBRUARY 7-17, 1998
>ON THE MULTILATERAL AGREEMENT ON INVESTMENT (MAI)
>
>CONTENTS OF THIS MESSAGE
>
>I. Suggestions for Week of Action Against the MAI
>II. Sample Letter to Governments
>III. Sample Questions to Ask Your Government
>IV. Request for updates on actions in your country
>V. Contacts for more information
>
>Dear Friends,
>
>Negotiations for the OECD's Multilateral Agreement on
>Investment will reach a critical point on February 16 and 17
>when each country will send top ranking political officials to
>Paris to assess whether and how to complete negotiations. NGOs
>around the world are planning actions from February 7-17 to
>let negotiators know they will face strong public opposition
>if they finish the agreement to meet an April 1998 deadline.
>Because OECD governments face internal disagreements in
>negotiations, public criticism in these countries can help tip
>the balance and prevent governments from finishing the MAI.
>
>It is also important for groups in non-OECD countries to take
>a stand to undermine the efforts of the OECD and Northern
>corporations to pressure developing countries to sign the MAI.
>
>We urge you to take some action against the MAI during this
>time. Good luck,
>
>Mark Vallianatos & Andrea Durbin, Friends of the Earth-USA
>
>I. SUGGESTED ACTIONS
>
>1. LOBBY/PRESSURE NEGOTIATIONS- Write a letter to the
>government raising questions about the impacts of the MAI and
>stating your own opposition to the MAI. Most OECD countries
>are sending high level political officials rather than
>technical negotiators to the next critical negotiating session
>on the 16th and 17th of February. If you can find out who they
>are, target them directly. Otherwise, a letter to the finance
>or trade ministry will work.
>
>2. INCREASE GRASSROOTS PRESSURE- If you have local chapters or
>activists that can respond to alerts, request them to fax,
>call, e-mail or write the negotiators/Finance Ministry.
>
>3. INCREASE PRESS COVERAGE- Your actions can be used to
>attract media coverage. Next Tuesday we will send a sample
>press release describing the international opposition and
>activity around the world.
>
>4. PUBLIC DEMONSTRATIONS- In the US, NGOs will stage a rally
>on the steps of congress and distribute handcuffs to Members
>of Congress to show how the MAI will tie their hands from
>regulating foreign corporations
>
>5. TARGET CORPORATIONS DIRECTLY- In the UK, NGOs are
>protesting outside the headquarters of some of the
>multinational corporations that actively lobby for the MAI and
>will benefit most if the agreement is finished. For an expose
>of corporate lobbying for the MAI contact Corporate Europe
>Observatory ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
>6.TARGET KEY ISSUES HOLDING UP NEGOTIATIONS- Governments have
>to resolve disagreements on reservations, culture, investment
>boycotts, and environmental and labor provisions before they
>
>finish the MAI. Public pressure exploiting these disagreements
>can make it more difficult for negotiators to conclude
>negotiations. For more information on this strategy contact
>Tony Clarke of the Polaris Institute ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
>II. SAMPLE LETTERS
>
>VERSION 1: TO MAI NEGOTIATORS OR FINANCE MINISTRY OF OECD
>COUNTRIES
>
>Dear ___
>
>We are seriously concerned about the OECD's negotiations for a
>Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI). On February 16-17
>the countries negotiating the MAI will make the political
>decision whether the agreement can be completed by the April
>1998 OECD ministerial meeting. We strongly urge you to use
>this opportunity to end negotiations. The MAI would elevate
>the powers of foreign investors in our country and impede our
>ability to determine our own economic policies for many years
>to come. It will also have a significant impact on the
>
>environment and communities in our country and abroad.
>
>Countries that sign the MAI cannot withdraw from the agreement
>for five years, after which the MAI's rules still apply to
>existing foreign investments for 15 more years. Joining the
>MAI will therefore lock us into an economic model which aims
>to benefit foreign investors rather than local communities.
>Rushing to complete the agreement is unacceptable since there
>has been little or no consultations with Members of Parliament
>or members of the public potentially affected by the MAI, such
>as workers, small businesses, and environmental organizations.
>
>We believe that signing the MAI would hinder our country's
>flexibility to move towards a more environmentally and
>socially sustainable society because of the provisions of the
>agreement and because the agreement does not require
>corporations to protect the environment and respect human and
>worker rights. We therefore call on the Government to end its
>involvement in MAI negotiations. We will oppose the agreement
>if it completed and brought to the parliament for
>ratification.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>VERSION 2: SAMPLE LETTER TO THE HEAD OF GOVERNMENT OR FINANCE
>MINISTRY OF NON-OECD COUNTRIES
>
>Dear ___
>
>We write for clarification of the government's position on the
>Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD)
>Multilateral Agreement on Investment, and to urge that ___
>(fill in country name) not join this investment agreement. It
>is our understanding that the government may already have been
>in contact with the OECD about
>
>signing the Multilateral Agreement on Investment. We are
>alarmed that the government is seriously consider joining the
>MAI, an agreement that our country had no role in negotiating
>and that is virtually unknown in our country, when the MAI
>would elevate the rights of foreign investors above our
>ability to determine our own economic policies for many years
>to come.
>
>The MAI is intended to restrict the ability of governments to
>regulate foreign-owned corporations. The agreement will:
>
>* Give foreign corporations the right to invest in virtually
>all sectors of the economy.
>
>* Bar governments from giving local companies preference over
>foreign-owned companies.
>
>* Prevent governments from imposing some conditions on foreign
>investors such as requirements to operate in joint ventures,
>hire a minimum number of local people, or transfer technology.
>
>* Require governments to pay foreign investors in the case of
>expropriations, including environmental regulations or social
>protections that may have "the effect" of expropriation.
>
>* Let foreign investors transfer financial capital in and out
>of countries without delays despite the dangers of short-term
>speculative investment demonstrated by the troubles in Asia
>markets.
>
>* Let foreign investors sue governments for monetary damages
>to enforce the MAI.
>
>Countries that sign the MAI cannot withdraw from the agreement
>for five years, after which the MAI's rules still apply to
>existing foreign investments for 15 more years. Joining the
>MAI will therefore lock us into an economic model which aims
>to benefit foreign investors rather than our country's needs
>and priorities. We believe that signing the MAI would hinder
>our flexibility to move towards a more environmentally and
>socially sustainable society because of the provisions of the
>agreement and because the agreement does not require corporate
>investors to protect the environment and respect human and
>worker rights.
>
>Negotiations between OECD countries are supposed to conclude
>at the end of April 1998. Non-OECD countries will then be
>invited to sign on to an agreement that they did not take part
>in negotiating. It is clear from OECD negotiators that a major
>aim of this agreement is to expand the number of countries and
>to include developing countries.
>
>We therefore call on our Government not to sign on to the MAI.
>The OECD's MAI was not written to meet the needs of our
>people, but to advance the goals of corporate investors from
>
>OECD nations. We also ask our Government to make a strong
>public statement against the MAI process which would help
>ensure that our interests are not ignored in the future.. We
>await your response to our concerns.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>III. SAMPLE QUESTIONS TO GOVERNMENTS
>
>The following are sample questions that can be posed directly
>to Governments or planted with sympathetic Members of
>Parliament to ask. The questions are designed to expose flaws
>in the MAI and the way the agreement was negotiated, and
>particularly, to show that Governments have not sufficiently
>explored the implications of the MAI.
>
>1. What has the government done to inform the public of MAI
>negotiations and seek public input?
>
>2. What reservations is the government asking for to protect
>our national interests? Are they limited to protection of
>certain existing laws or do they extend to the right to
>regulate freely in the future?
>
>3. Has the government performed assessments of the MAI's
>likely effects on the environment, workers, and the economy?
>If so, were public comments sought in this process and are the
>assessments available to the public?
>
>4. Have regulatory agencies such as the environmental and
>labor ministries been involved in developing the government's
>negotiating position? If so, which ones?
>
>5. (for non-OECD countries): Would signing the MAI give the
>OECD countries an incentive to continue to negotiate
>agreements without allowing us a seat at the bargaining table?
>
> (for OECD countries): Will pressing developing countries to
>sign the MAI undercut the efforts of our overseas development
>assistance and other forms of cooperation with non-OECD
>countries? Is it the government's position that it is
>appropriate to negotiate international treaties affecting all
>countries without allowing all countries to participate?
>
>6. Wouldn't the 20 year withdrawal period restrict our
>nation's ability to meet the needs of our population? Why does
>the MAI have such an extended withdrawal period when most
>international treaties allow 6 months notice to withdraw?
>
>7. Is there time before the end of negotiations {before
>ratification} to address our concerns and ensure full public
>debate?
>
>8. Why is it that measures to protect corporate investors are
>enforceable, but the environmental and labor provisions are
>non- binding? What is the government's position on requiring
>binding environmental and labor standards in the MAI?
>
>IV. SEND US UPDATES ON ACTIONS PLANNED IN YOUR COUNTRY AS SOON
>AS POSSIBLE
>
>The international week of action will have the greatest impact
>if we can show the wide range of activities planned and taken
>by NGOs around the world. Please send a short summary of
>planned actions that your organization will be taking to FoE
>([EMAIL PROTECTED]) as soon as possible. We will compile these
>summaries and send everyone a full list of international
>actions for use next week. This should be available by
>Tuesday, February 10. Also, special thanks to those of you who
>have helped distribute the October 1997 Joint NGO statement on
>the MAI. Hundreds of new NGOs have signed the statement. We
>will send the statement with updated signatures by next
>Tuesday as well.
>
>V. NGO CONTACT POINTS
>
>If you want to take part in anti-MAI activities over the next
>two weeks but are not sure which organizations in your country
>are already planning actions, we can suggest NGOs to contact
>that are aware of anti-MAI activities in their country and
>region.
>
>Please Contact:
>
>Mark Vallianatos
>Friends of the Earth US
>1025 Vermont Ave, NW 3rd Fl
>Washington DC 20005
>tel: 202 783-7400 x231
>fax: 202 784-0444
>email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Andrea Durbin
>Friends of the Earth U.S.
>1025 Vermont Avenue, NW 3rd Fl
>Washington, DC 20005
>tel: 202 783-7400 x209
>fax: 202 783-0444
>email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
