>Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 16:02:46 -0500 >From: Eric Fawcett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: sfp-89: Canada at the WTO - media are mum! >MIME-Version: 1.0 >X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by >helios.physics.utoronto.ca id QAC2070706 >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 >Precedence: bulk >List-Id: <sfptor.helios.physics.utoronto.ca> >X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >I rely on the Globe and Mail and internet for news, and I've seen seen >nothing at all yet in either about the Canadian government's position >that was belatedly released on Monday, Nov 15, except for the Article and >Readers Letters in reply copied below. Since the outcome of the >negotiations in Seattle may be the biggest national story in busy 1999, >it deserves nomination for the prize awarded annually by Project Censored! >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >G&M Tuesday, Nov 16, 1999 > >Article on Commentary page: Canada risks sleepwalking into Seattle" >by Patrick Grady and Kathleen Macmillan, Ottawa economic and trade-policy >consultants, who have written a BOOK about the WTO published by Global >Economics Ltd. >I didn't try to download this article, since it's rather turgid and >uninformative. They tell us of course that "The next multilateral round >will address matters that would vastluy improve our economic and social >well-being. Such new trade issues as the environment andlabour standards >are on the table.." >But, they tell us, "a rainbow coalition of protestors will be massing >outside to demonstrate against globalization"...having..."tasted blood >with their success in getting the industrialized countries to scrap the >proposed MAI." "Governments have been spooked by the virulent opposition >of non-governmental organizations to trade and investment negotiations. >A new euphemism - 'civil society' - has even been coined to refer to >these, not always civil, groups.' >Their stirring advice: "Canadians [who do they think many of the NGO >members are?] shouldn't allow themselves to be browbeaten by anti-trade >forces into surrendering before the negotiations have even begun, >especially since most of the protesters know little about trade and >economics" [unlike Patrick and kathleen]. >They are wringing their hands in despair because "the government waited >until yesterday to produce an official position paper on its negotiating >objectives." > > >Readers Letters to the G&M, Wednesday, Nov 17, 1999 > >Health care on the table >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >By Judy Darcy, National President, Canadian Union of Public Employees >Ottawa -- According to your headline, Canada Risks Sleepwalking into >Seattle (Comment -- Nov. 16). Indeed, Canada -- or rather, our elected >representatives -- risk sleepwalking into Seattle. So do the authors of >this opinion piece. > >It is truly remarkable that there is not a single mention of the fact >that, for the first time in our history, health care, education and other >vital public services are on the negotiating table. Not just bits and >pieces -- the whole hog. Wielding the carving knife are the United States >and the European Union, which have been lobbied hard by corporations eager >to tap into what they see as profitable industries. They're clear in their >goal, and make no effort to hide their plans. > >Yet the ChrČtien government slumbers, rolling over occasionally. Canada's >recently released position on WTO negotiations includes plans to expand >market access for Canadian exporters, particularly those in agriculture >and services. Elsewhere, the Departments of Foreign Affairs and >International Trade acknowledge that "Canadian requests for further >liberalization in export markets will likely lead to similar requests from >other countries for further liberalization of the Canadian services >regime." Translation: The floodgates will open to multinationals peddling >for-profit services. Some strategy. >============================================================================= > >Environment on the table >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >By Manuela Bizzotto >Vancouver -- Call me ignorant, but it's my understanding that the WTO has >begun to repeal environmental regulations that it has taken citizens 30 >years to enact. In 1998, the WTO ruled that the European Union, which >banned the import of carcinogenic hormone-treated beef, must now pay the >U.S. $150-million each year as compensation for lost profits. The WTO has >also declared illegal a U.S. regulation that imported shrimp must be >caught by methods that minimize harm to endangered sea turtles. In 1997, >the WTO overturned part of the U.S. Clean Air Act, which prevented the >import of low-quality gasoline with a high potential for air pollution. > >Granted, this information comes from an alternative media source. >Unfortunately, the corporate-controlled, mainstream press has been >curiously silent on the actions of the WTO, much to the detriment of >stupid saps like me. > > > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >To (un)subscribe please send a request giving >the name of the list in the Subject line to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED], thus: >Subject: (un)subscribe sfptor >
