U.S. Inciting Terrorism?

When workers in foreign owned industries in Canada face threats of plant closures & down sizing, unless they accept wage & benefit cutbacks, it is difficult to see the benefit Canadian workers gain from these foreign investments. Canadian management and employees become lackeys or puppets of the foreign owners.

When industries elect to move their operations or outsource to areas where low wages, low benefit costs, & little or no environmental control regulations apply, they effectively abandon their employees and transfer the abandonment & social costs to government funded EI and welfare programs. Many firms have left Canadians with the costs of carrying out environmental cleanups, costs which should have been borne by the firms, not the taxpayers.

Spin doctors would have us believe that service jobs rather than manufacturing jobs are quite acceptable to Canadians. These same spinners fail to elaborate the fact that Canada has lost many factories and jobs which produced items such as household appliances, agricultural tractors and machinery, electrical apparatus, plumbing fittings, footwear, clothing, food processing equipment, industrial equipment, etc., etc. The spinners evade telling Canadians about the social and economic impact plant closures and relocations to other countries of convenience have caused. Nor do the spinners highlight the job and investment losses to Canada which occur when Canada allows the free reign export of its raw form resources. Might the spin doctors spout about the likely trade sanctions the U.S. may take against Canada’s oil patch and pipeliners once U.S. storage caverns have been filled up with enough Canadian oil and gas to give them a 10 year “security” supply?

The demise of Canada’s foreign investment review board means that foreign investors no longer have to demonstrate any benefits to Canadian society which might be desired and expected from “investors”. Our political elite seem to show no will to prevent our banks and financial institutions from providing funds to foreign interests buying out our own Canadian firms. This in turn leads our financial gurus to cut back on loans to Canadian corporations needing funds for their expansion and upgrading plans. In other words, it is Canadian capital being used to foreignize the ownership of Canadian industry. This doesn’t quite equate to Canada being the recipient of foreign investment does it? Statistics indicate very little of the “foreign investment” in Canadian industry resulted in new capital or job creation. The overwhelming “investment” has been for acquisitions of existing Canadian developed entities.

Canadians have witnessed an accelerating pace of control being transferred to foreign interests in a number of vital areas of our economy. Just to name a few, Transport—CNR & Air Canada, Forestry, Oil & Gas, Pipelines, Cultural venues. (not to mention the push for media, telecommunications, banks/insurance/financial institutions, etc.).

The U.S. aspirations for control of Canada’s economic, political and social systems continue unabated in spite of their successes in reducing Canadian manufacturing capabilities to near zero in many segments of our economy. Their success in getting Canada to sign onto the FTA & NAFTA, & WTO agreements is astounding. Canada’s negotiators and their political leaders should be labeled and prosecuted as traitors--=-but the spin doctors continue spewing their line that we have a free trade agreement, which must be good for Canadians.

If it's free trade we gained through these agreements, which it is not, why then is Canada being badgered to abandon its wheat board, dairy and poultry boards, healthcare/medicare program, public funding and control of its educational institutions, banking ownership restrictions, welfare and pension programs, publicly owned utilities, etc., etc.? Privateers, mainly of U.S. origin, we are told, will solve Canada’s ills. (Heard this solution being offered by any of your favourite federal or provincial leaders or the wannabees?)

The U.S. congress continues to justify its transgressions of genuine free trade by accusing Canada of unfairly subsidizing its exports. (As of Mar.5/04, the announcement that Hogs are now to be targeted, -- another blow to our farmers and a bonanza for our civil service, hired lawyers, consultants, the media, our Minister of Agriculture, and of course our expensive “negotiators”.) Canadians witness the hardship being wrought upon their livelihoods, and yet our political leaders continue to insist that “negotiations” to improve relations with our neighbor will overcome the difficulties being faced by thousands of Canadians. Might these “negotiations” lead to further sacrifices of Canadian sovereignty as our “negotiators” make attempts to appease the U.S. by “harmonizing, blending, standardizing, bending, melding, reaching understandings, joining the U.S. domination of space program, entering into a North American energy “security” agreement, etc.”?

We have our media bombarding Canadians with proposals being put forward which would lead Canada to become another satellite of the U.S. like Puerto Rico. Washington we hear, should have unfettered control of all aspects of our social, economic, financial and international relations. Our border should be “opened up”. All of our resource processing industries could freely be moved to points south. Canada’s resources could be totally turned over to our U.S. neighbors. Canadians could be brought down to wage and living standards equivalent to those imposed upon the citizens of Puerto Rico. Is this what ordinary Canadians strive for?

Might it be appropriate for Canadians, in a free press & speech society, to brand those among us who are proponents and propagators of this type of Canada/U.S. relationships as having traitorous characteristics? Might the U.S. accept them as immigrants or would the U.S. prefer to have them stay in Canada to carry on their quest?

In the mean time, lumber mill and forestry workers are joined by farmers & steel mill workers looking for some way to retain and maintain their properties and livelihood, and not be forced to apply for welfare. How long will these and other Canadians be able to contain their frustration in a peaceful and subservient manner? Will the lack of will, of Canadian governing people, to act quickly and decisively on behalf of Canadians, lead to civil and social unrest & disobedience? Are we to wait to see this occurring? Is the U.S. inciting terrorism? With elections looming, will Canadians be enticed to overwhelmingly vote for “none of the above” in a hope that wimpish candidates and parties are turfed from power? Perhaps the wimps will prefer that Canadians continue to remain stoical? Might the PHOENIX arise in time to save us?

There are a rapidly growing number of Canadians who fail to understand why the U.S. congress has not targeted Canada’s Oil, Gas, & Electric Energy sectors as being highly subsidized industries. Therefore prime candidates for U.S. import duties?

Canadian provincial leaders seem to have taken pride in offering these industries with unusual tax concessions, royalties, taxpayer funded infrastructure, royalty deferrals, water rights and environment damage concessions, surface rights at bargain basement costs, etc., etc., all to contribute to the insatiable appetite of the mainly foreign owned/controlled corporation bottom line profits. These concessions effectively transfer the make-up costs to average Canadians who must then carry the burden—(“distancing” is the word to describe how corporations or individuals pass costs on to taxpayers rather than paying their own way isn’t it?) Canadian taxpayers are certainly subsidizing these industries, and thus in the opinion of the U.S. Congress opposing “unfair trading practices”, they should have little difficulty in justifying another trade sanction on these imports.??? Canadians in effect have been subsidizing energy exports since the start of GST in Canada.

Will the U.S. congress apply a 27% countervailing or dumping duty on its imports of oil, gas, and electric power as they have applied to softwood lumber imports from Canada? Might they impose a still higher rate should our federal government not take on the task, on behalf of Canada, to assess these resources with fees bringing them up to levels charged in Alaska? Perhaps our federal government might wish to adopt the “globally competitive” stance and bring Canada’s total royalty rates to the levels charged in Norway? Could the Canadian consumer look forward to paying a “made in Canada” price for their energy needs while charging what the market will bear for allowed exports? Might this not offer a “Canadian advantage” for our industries?

Might the U.S. consider banning the import of unrefined gas now flowing so freely through the Alliance pipeline to feed new petro-chemical plants in Illinois? Might they also shut down the flow of gas from the Nova Scotia Sable Island gas field and allow this gas to fuel industry and households in the Maritimes? Do these two examples indicate some flaws in Canada’s regulatory bodies? How many jobs has Canada lost, (or exported?) to the U.S.? How many tons of steel did Algoma & Stelco not supply for the U.S. built petro-chemical plants? How many Maritimers would have been pleased to be given first choice on using the Sable gas?

The spin doctors continue their drivel that FTA, NAFTA, & WTO are good for Canada! Listen and read the spin coming from the wheelers/dealers in Calgary and their Bay Street stock broker financial friends frothing praise on these and other planned projects to benefit neighbors to the south. When we start running short, will the gas the spin doctors expel be enough to cover the shortfalls?

Solutions are available for Canada to act on, if only Canadians demand that appropriate action be taken. Some are listed below for consideration:

1. Politicians and Civil Servants to evaluate all existing agreements and regulatory statutes to highlight those which detract from the sovereignty of Canadian governing bodies to legislate, as seen fit, for the benefit of all Canadians, within the bounds of Canada’s constitution.
2. Canada to give notice of its withdrawal/abrogation from the FTA/FTAA, NAFTA & WTO agreements. (Six month notice required for cancellation to take effect.)
3. Give notice to the U.S. and Mexico of the objectionable sections/clauses in the agreements which Canada will no longer abide by as they infringe upon Canada’s sovereignty. Offer for consideration the suggested changes or omissions for the other agreement members to consider. Offer also the same “out” for Canada, as retained by the U.S. to override the agreements.
4. Canada to enact legislation to limit the export of resources beyond sustainable levels forecasted as being in the interests for Canada’s future use and benefit. Stringent evaluation of “reserve” inventories as offered by stakeholders must be cautiously conducted to ensure conformance to latest state of the art measurement methods. (Shell just lost their top executives for falsely over-stating their “proven” reserves.)
5. Canada to conduct talks on energy supply/exchange agreements which would kick in to overcome short term emergency situations occurring in either nation. (Energy Security.)
6. Canada withdraw from any proposals or contracts with any non-Canadian 100% owned/controlled firm wishing to or having access to governmental records/data considered to be of a confidential and sensitive nature by Canada. (i.e. removing consideration of subcontracting Statistics Canada work to U.S. firm Lockheed/Martin.)
7. Canada enact legislation to extend the GST to apply at border crossing pricing on all exports of oil, natural gas, petro-chemical products, electric power, forestry products, and mining products. GST receipts from this depletion assessment to be earmarked to fund Canadians adversely affected by any actions taken by foreign interests, to restrict or curb Canada’s export trade with that nation. Canadian registered firms, being subsidiary firms of foreign ones, would be ineligible for assistance from these funds. Funding surplus to the foregoing would be directed toward becoming available for reclaiming Canadian ownership and control of resource based industries in Canada. Thirdly, a percentage commensurate with the rate of resource depletion being noted, to be retained for long term future relief of adverse costs being encountered by Canadians due to the resource depletion. A portion would also be directed toward renewal endeavours in the forestry and fishing industries to strive for sustainability of supply for Canada’s foreseeable needs.
8. Canada to enact legislation to reclaim ALL.government funding or financial assistance of any kind, provided over the previous 25 year period, should ownership/control in the company by foreign interests exceed 20%.
9. Canada to enact legislation to prevent the bulk export of water resources.
10. Withdraw from any discussions which may lead to participation in any U.S. ventures directed toward its quest for control of space or any space missile program.
11. Enact legislation limiting the export of unprocessed resource based products to encourage value adding activities in Canada.
12. Enact tax revisions to disallow for tax reduction purposes, losses incurred by Canadian registered companies in their foreign endeavours. (A one way street approach to discourage manipulative ventures by financial, industrial, and private individuals.) (Including stock market losses on foreign controlled firms.) (Encourage them to keep their investment exercises in Canada.)
13. Enact legislation to prevent any Canadian firm from entering into any stock- market-like trading of pollution credits with any other foreign firms or governments. (Kyoto)
14. Enact changes to Canada’s election act to obtain a reasonable level of representation in government of the votes cast for each party.—a form of proportional representation.
15. Enact legislation to clarify responsibility and accountability of elected persons and the civil service members reporting to them—including those employed by crown corporations.
16. Reintroduce the foreign investment review measures to insure benefits will accrue to Canada and Canadians from the proposed and or approved investment. Any funding to be invested by the foreign firm shall not originate from Canadian owned/controlled financial institutions.
17. Develop and implement heavier indexed taxation on annual income of persons with income exceeding 10 times the average of the lowest 20% of wage earners in the country.
18. Develop and implement taxation on financial trading transactions of bonds, stocks, debentures, options, rights, etc. at rates equivalent to 10% of the then current charges being applied by the brokerage and financial institutions handling these types of transfers of ownership. Exempt transactions destined to accrue capital funds for new ventures and genuine research and development activities.
19. Develop and implement as tax reduction factors, the interest charges paid on student loans, home mortgages under $ 100,000., and provide tax exemptions on the first $ 100,000. of accumulated earnings of a new wage earner.
20. In an effort to reverse the past trend of increasing total taxation income from individuals while simultaneously reducing total taxation income from the corporate section, develop and implement measures to eliminate previous years tax concession measures provided to corporations.
21. Canada implement “top-up” taxes on existing oil/gas royalties and stumpage/timber lease fees to levels currently in effect in Alaska and respectively in a state in the U.S. charging the highest rates.

In six months, Canada could reclaim its lost sovereignty and act on behalf of the benefit of all Canadians. It could then take immediate action to implement measures to assist all Canadians who have and are being adversely affected by U.S. trade practices.. Foreign takeovers could face stringent commitments to insure that benefits to Canadians will result. Canada would welcome green acre foreign investors willing to demonstrate their commitment to the economic and social well being of Canada. Penalties for breach of commitment could and should be expulsion from Canada without compensation.

Are there a sufficient number of disenchanted Canadians to encourage changes to get us out of the mess we’re in? One would hope that further protectionist actions by the U.S. will not lead to retaliatory measures.. On the other hand, if the U.S. continues its “my way, or the highway” type “negotiations”, Canada should be quite capable of withstanding retaliatory pressures they may wish to apply. Let’s respect and remain friendly to our neighbor, and hope that a mutual respect with fairness and friendliness will prevail.

The foregoing thoughts are intended to highlight some of the difficult issues Canada is facing in its relationship with its neighbor, and also offers some action recommendations which will, if adopted, provide much needed change for the benefit of Canadians.

Comments are sought which might offer a more eloquent presentation and an evaluation of the economic impacts the offered solutions may provide. Feel free to pass this on to others who may have an interest in "Saving Canada for Canadians”.

Respectfully,
V.S. Bretin
Leduc, AB
e-mail: vsbretin@hotmail.com

Note: vsbretin@hotmail.com