Advancing The Transatlantic Agenda

Posted on Wednesday, March 31 at 11:40 by NAUWATCH

By Dana Gabriel

Although there is a need for Canada to expand its trade horizons, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) currently being negotiated with the European Union (EU) appears to be based on the flawed NAFTA model. Many view it as an opportunity to decrease its trade reliance on the U.S., but it could serve to accelerate the corporate takeover of the country. The deal would exceed NAFTA in its scope and with the third round of negotiations scheduled for April 19-23 in Ottawa, there are lingering concerns regarding its lack of transparency. A Canada-EU CETA could be used to expand NAFTA, strengthen U.S.-EU economic relations and further advance the transatlantic agenda.

Some believe that the recent
Canada-U.S. Agreement on Government Procurement is an important step in providing protection for future bilateral trade relations, but in the process it opens up provincial and municipal contracts to foreign corporations. Maude Barlow and Stuart Trew of the Council of Canadians criticized the Conservative government for giving up too much and receiving too little. In an collaborative article they emphasized that, “The provinces have been loath to sign the WTO's Government Procurement Agreement and did not agree to include subnational procurement in NAFTA because they could lose too much say in how public money is spent without getting any new access to the U.S. market..” They went on to say, “We believe the Buy American controversy provided Harper and the provinces, who are actively engaged in ambitious free-trade talks with Europe, with an opportunity to restructure the Canadian economy to reduce the role of our communities in setting spending priorities.” As part of the proposed CETA with Canada, one of the EU’s top objectives includes gaining access to procurement and services in areas of health, energy, water, as well as other sectors. The Canada-U.S. Buy American deal is an extension of NAFTA and has set a precedent which could further reinforce EU demands.

In mid-December 2009, Internet law columnist
Michael Geist reported that the EU had proposed negotiating an intellectual property chapter which could reshape Canadian copyright law. He stated that, “While the leaked document may only represent the starting European position, there is little doubt there will be enormous pressure on Canadian negotiators to cave on the IP provision in return for ‘gains’ in other areas.” This also ties into Canada's participation in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) negotiations which also include the EU, U.S. and other nations. With respect to the Canada-EU CETA, Geist also acknowledged that, “When combined with ACTA, the two agreements would render Canadian copyright law virtually unrecognizable as Canada would be required to undertake a significant rewrite of its law. The notion of a ‘made-in-Canada’ approach - already under threat from ACTA - would be lost entirely, replaced by a made-in-Washington-and-Brussels law.” Both the U.S. and the EU have singled out Canada for criticism on intellectual property and are pressing for copyright along with other reforms. Conceding to such demands could severely compromise Canadian interests.

Full article http://beyourownleader.blogspot.com/2010/03/advancing-transatlantic-agenda.html

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:05 pm
    EU Demands Canada Completely Overhaul Its Intellectual Property Laws

    Late last year, a draft of the European Union proposal for the intellectual property chapter of the Canada - EU Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement leaked online. The leak revealed that the EU was seeking some significant changes to Canadian IP laws. Negotiations have continued and I have now received an updated copy of the draft chapter, complete with proposals from both the EU and Canada. The breadth of the demands are stunning - the EU is demanding nothing less than a complete overhaul of Canadian IP laws including copyright, trademark, databases, patent, geographic indications, and even plant variety rights.

    read more http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4914/125/

  2. Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:03 pm
    The EU is getting a little too big for their britches. I think we should remind them why our ancestors left to begin with.

  3. Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:49 am
    Europe, particularly the Rothschild clan, may have let the original colonists of Euro origin slip through their fingers, but they vowed to make up for it in how they dealt with the colonists' grandchildren, great grandchildren, and subsequent progeny.

  4. by RickW
    Thu Apr 01, 2010 3:53 am
    The US is too big for it's britches; now the EU is too big for it's britches. What next? China?

  5. Thu Apr 01, 2010 1:02 pm
    The Rothschilds and their banker corporate fascist bretheren will prop up China for their own greedy purposes in order to maximize profits and consolidate world power ( If the people of the world let them) and just at the right moment after using China up, just like with the USA, these gangsters will pull the rug out from under China, and move industry and finance to some other country. As Franklin D. Roosevelt once said," If ithappened in plitics, you can bet it was no accident, and that it was planned long in advance."

  6. by RickW
    Thu Apr 01, 2010 2:18 pm
    One "consolation" might be that China has been around a lot longer than the Rothchilds.............

  7. Thu Apr 01, 2010 2:31 pm
    Yeah, maybe. Culture and sentiment go a long way. If the Chinese have a knowledge of how the rest of the world has been duped by these thieves, and then couple this with a pride in their rich and deep history....

  8. Thu Apr 01, 2010 4:19 pm
    Ontario foot-dragging imperils Canada-EU trade pact, officials say

    As a proposed large-scale free-trade and economic-integration pact between Canada and the 27 European Union countries enters a crucial stage of negotiations, Canadian and European officials say the deal's biggest obstacle is the province of Ontario.

    After officials from the EU Trade Commission flew to Ottawa last week to meet with their Canadian counterparts in advance of an important round of negotiations starting on April 19, officials close to the talks said in briefings that Ontario’s reluctance to open up its government procurement procedures to European bidding has become a sticking point.

    read more http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/wor ... le1518147/

  9. by RickW
    Fri Apr 02, 2010 12:55 am
    officials close to the talks said in briefings that Ontario’s reluctance to open up its government procurement procedures to European bidding has become a sticking point.


    And I don't blame Ontario one bit. ANY monies spent by government should be exempt from ANY free trade deal. Free trade should cover imports and exports, and not services, other than those provided and funded by private concerns.

  10. Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:23 pm
    Rising oil and thus shipping costs will be the death knell of globalisation.Europe doesn't have the huge shipping distances that China has to it's markets. Trans Atlantic is much shorter. Better to have closer ties to Europe, in terms of sovereignty, than to be too closely dependent on US markets. At least we have an ocean separating us. Criticism of EU deals are an attempt to preserve US control over Canada. .

  11. Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:32 am
    I`m all for diversifying trade with many other countries, as long as any trade deal with Europe or any other country doesn`t have the same totalitarian rules as NAFTA and WTO. But it looks like it will. I think that`s where the worry lies.

  12. by RickW
    Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:30 pm
    Except, I am completely against using natural resources as trade goods. We have a de facto "petrodollar" as it is, and one of the reason the European nations of old invaded the world was to secure natural resources for themselves.

    If we are considering using primary resources as trade goods, then we are voluntarily affirming Europe's former colonial policies. And what does that say about us?

    What (for instance) do we have to trade from a position of strength?

  13. Sat Apr 10, 2010 3:53 pm
    Well, I agree, I mean, if we are going to sell raw materials and/or fossil fuels and that sort of thing, it must be on OUR terms! Not the arrangement we have now, whereby the banker-corporate fascists dictate with their strip-mine mentality, and the country with the resources winds up getting raped. A long term vision, with a plan oriented toward benefitting the people of Canada and reducing environmental harm, must be first and foremost. When it comes to certain resources, profit must not reign, or we find that people and the environment get hurt while the fascists line their pockets.



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.



Latest Editorials

more articles »

Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news