Smart Regulations Are Not That Smart! Speak Out!

Dear Mr. Alcock I attach a letter sent to Mr. Versteeg for your information regarding, ‘Smart Regulations’. In your speech on the website, you are quoted in part, ‘A cornerstone of the implementation plan is improved "regulatory governance" and better cooperation and coordination among federal departments and with other levels of government. "We want to avoid situations where a new regulation or policy is introduced, only to find that it conflicts with that of another department or jurisdiction," said Minister Alcock.’ Although I can understand wanting to have national standards, which this implies, it is the interference of other countries’ jurisdictions which concerns me. We cannot have Canada’s governing bodies, virtually neutralized in their ability to govern in the ‘best interest’ of Canadians, and tie their hands with the rules of NAFTA. This must be changed immediately, by removing the National Treatment Clause, and/or giving notice to abrogate NAFTA. This is by far, one of the worst agreements this country has ever entered into, with dire consequences for the people. Although I realize that corporations are enjoying a ‘hay day’ because of it. I encourage you and the government of Canada, to cease with these policies, including Smart Regulations, biometric border security, the Lockheed Martin Census, to name a few, which are threatening our security, sovereignty and Canadian way of life. I look forward to your response. Catherine Whelan Costen CAP Vice President and Candidate Hajo Versteeg, B.A., LL.B., M. Jur. Environmental Law and Policy Advisor 5365 Hilltop Dr Manotick, Ont, Canada K4M 1G4 hajo@sympatico.ca June 28, 2005 Dear Hajo Versteeg Thank you for your response to my email. I have reviewed the website on Smart Regulation, and although it has a great deal of detail, I fail to see how it will enhance the lives of Canadians. I also do not see where there are discussions with Canadians, with full disclosure about how these changes will impact our lives. The fundamental issues that are not addressed are that regardless of regulations that a Canadian government might wish to make law, NAFTA, WTO etc are the dominate rules by which we are bound to govern by, and that in fact makes our government a neutered entity. Prior to Canadians having a full understanding of Smart Regulations, we are assaulted by news reports stating that, Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan has already had secret discussions with her counterparts from the U.S. and Mexico and are planning to go ahead with new policies, which will make, among other major issues, drug regulations in Canada obsolete. Just because another country deems a drug safe for its citizens does not make it safe for Canadians, and further to that, this appears to be a favorable decision for speedy drug approvals benefiting the corporate agenda, but not necessarily in favour of the public. We should not be put at risk of being used as guinea pigs for drug companies profit margins! I have read your plan from the website and believe there are many issues tied to it, which require a great deal of discussion, but the major issue is to remove the ties to NAFTA, and WTO . Canada must be a sovereign nation capable of creating legislation, which benefits and protects the population, the environment, our natural resources including our water, our non-profit public healthcare, our culture and national institutions. Your Smart Regulations appear to be designed to promote ease of doing business in Canada, corporate speed, access and maximizing profit margins, however governments role is to ensure that society is protected, supported in a viable, sustainable environment. I fail to see those values enshrined in your plan. Several issues are not discussed, although you may have a plan that I did not read. The first is protecting our food supply from genetically modified foods, which Canadians do not want; the second is although you mention speed and approval of pesticides, I would be more in favour of safe, controlled and moderate use of pesticides, which are affordable to the Canadian farmer. There is nothing in your report, which discusses control over the costs to the farmer. It is my understanding that Alberta farmers have seen the cost of fertilizers rise in a 20 year period, from approximately $10,000.00 a year to $100,000.00 a year, in some cases. What does the smart plan, intend to do about that? It would appear from your website, that the focus of this plan is to decrease the paperwork for corporations, and increase the speed with which businesses can begin to make money. I fully understand that a corporation has its focus on profit, it owes its loyalty to its shareholders, however the government of Canada owes its loyalty to the people of this country. Rules must be in place, enforceable and practical, to ensure that our food is safe, our environment is sustainable for people and habitat. The Primary role of government is to govern, and make policy, which allows corporations to do business in a productive manner that supports the citizenry not in spite of or at risk to the public. Unfortunately, your ‘smart regulations’, don’t seem all that smart, although they do appear quite clever. We as a sovereign nation must not give up our right to legislate on behalf of the people of Canada, and in tying ourselves so closely to the U.S. regarding trade and regulations, be they security or food and drug supplies, we are in fact giving up our sovereignty. I fail to comprehend the agenda of this Liberal Government as indicated by your ‘smart regulation plan’. As I stated, in my previous correspondence, we need full, clear, concise and definitive disclosure regarding what all of these regulations mean to Canadians, how they will effect us today and in the future, as well as the ability to make policy in this country which enhances the lives of the people of a sovereign nation, even if it means a lower profit margin for a corporation. When you come up with a plan that puts people before corporate interests, humanity and a clean sustainable environment as the primary focus for policy, then perhaps we can start calling it ‘smart regulations’. I look forward to your comments. Yours truly Catherine Whelan Costen CAP Vice President and Candidate Cc: Connie Fogal, CAP Leader Prime Minister Martin Reg Alcock, P.C., M.P. P.S. Yes, I was asked to accept the appointment of Vice President for Canadian Action Party, last week and I have accepted the position.

Note: www.regulation.gc.ca