Tell The Dept Of Foreign Affairs What You Think About FTAA

I wrote to the above noted email address, expressed my concerns and hope that more people will do the same. I am absolutely horrified, that the Canadian people seem to be in a constant state of conflict with our elected officials. It seems that they only care about what we think on election day, after that \'they\'rule! The interests of the Canadian people ought to supercede any and all personal gain for elected officials. No trade agreement should ever discuss our water, natural resources, our military ability to defend our interests, health care for all Canadians, education etc. These are services which I call essential and should be covered under an umbrella to protect us from any trade agreement. Trade or the idea of trade should be to exchange goods and services which benefit both parties, not at the expense of one party. Any issue which ultimately affects this country\'s national security should not be on the table; if we don\'t have access to water because we have traded it away, that will become an issue for national security very quickly! The people of each country ought to be the beneficiaries of trade decisions not the victims! The environment and safety of the people of every country ought to be protected from corporations\' greed. These law suits, currently affecting countries that won\'t allow a corporation to pollute and end up paying big $$$, are ludicrous! So I have expressed these concerns and as I said I hope others do the same, we must fight for our rights today in order to save this country for the future.

Dear Sir/Madam:

I am concerned that the so called free trade
agreements are neither free nor about trade.

We are already now forced to guarantee the USA our
energy resources, even if we are short here in Canada
in future. This is outrageous. Even much smaller
Mexico refused to sign this blatantly unfavourable sort
of deal!

What will be next? Health care, no doubt, because US
private corporations who make a killing at the people\'s
expense want to do it here too. I remember when
families were brought to financial ruin because elderly
parents needed medicine they could not afford. Have
you forgotten those days or are you that young? I do not
want to see those days again, especially since now I
too am a senior on a low income.

I hear future wars will be about water. The first shots
are already being fired under NAFTA since Sunbelt
Water of California is suing Canada for - is it 30 billion
dollars US?

This is outrageous. It is not a level playing field when
private companies can sue countries, but have no
responsibility to the citizens of that country! Where are
your brains, gentlemen of the government? Did you
forget them somewhere?

Let me tell you: this is not democracy but
fascism/corporatism that you are promoting here.
(Mussolini said that fascism should be correctly called
corporatism, because in that system government does
what corporations tell them to). We Canadians will not
stand for it much longer.

Tomorrow is Remembrance Day. Do you think
Canadian men and women died in wars to give their
children this? You are stealing a free Canada away
from her people. For shame!

In summary: The whole purpose of so called free trade
agreements should be about trade, not foreign control
of the resources and lives of Canadians, or any other
citizens of the world, for that matter.

Secondly, corporations should not have rights to sue
governments. Governments must retain the powers to
act in the best interest of their citizens.

Thirdly, corporations must be accountable to the
people
of Canada. Their charters should be cancelled (this
legislation I think is on the books) if they do not act in
the best interest of the citizens at large.

If we do not have these guarantees, we don\'t have a
democracy, and shortly we will not have a country. It will
belong to foreign multinationals, and we will be their
slaves.

Yours truly,

Eva Lyman
Celista, BC

I hve sent the following to DFAIT:

When asked what he thought of Western civilization,
Gandhi is said to have replied, \"It would be a good
idea.\"

The same might be said of \"free trade.\" As currently
constituted, \"free trade\" is more concerned with
\"investment\" - i.e. foreign (read corporate) ownership
than with trade. Foreign investment - fickle,
unprincipled, often ephemeral, siphoning off the last jot
of profit regardless of human, social, and
environmental destruction - which is, in Orwellian
fashion, heralded as mankind\'s greatest boon.

As to actual free trade, it is practiced mainly where it is
profitable to corporations - in intra-corporate trade and
in foisting corporate products on mainly poor countries,
while retaining often prohibitive tariffs and/or domestic
subsidies (mainly in the US and, with considerably
more justification, in the EU, where subsidies protect
family farms rather than gluttonous agribusiness)
against poor countries\' main products, such as crops
and textiles.

True free trade between approximate equals is a very
good thing. Rigged \"free trade\" between vastly unequal
partners is an engine for the perpetuation of misery and
inequality, especially when coupled with the
smothering interest payments imposed by the IMF.

Canada should take a courageous stance against
these terrible policies instead of championing them as
part of the \"Washington consensus.\"