Green Party Calls On Canada Pension Plan To Sell Wal-Mart Shares

Posted on Wednesday, December 07 at 07:35 by JimmyD
A track record of anti-union practices and human rights abuses has plagued Wal-Mart both in North America and in emerging countries. It has been accused of exploiting workers, mostly women, by paying meagre wages that vary from $7 to $13 an hour and by not extending health care benefits to nearly half of their U.S. workers. With its anti-union and corporate philosophy, Wal-Mart hinders regional and community development. New Wal-Mart outlets have all too often led to the loss of small community owned businesses and in many towns and cities have often devastated once vibrant downtown cores. "We must ask the question: what kind of economic system do we want to build our society around? For the Green Party, we choose an economic system that respects human rights and communities," said Harris. "Québecers can be proud to have a just and fair society and Wal-Mart has a duty to honour these values." The Green Party proposes to introduce a Corporate Social Responsibility Act, as one measure that will hold Canadian companies to the highest of standards when they operate in foreign countries. "Canadian companies must never be tagged the Wal-Marts of Canada." Such an Act would ensure that Canadian companies apply comparable environmental, employment and social standards at their foreign operation as they do in Canada. "Divesting from Wal-Mart may be a very small measure in relative terms for the Canada Pension Plan, but it will send an incredibly strong signal about what our values mean to us as Canadians," said Harris. http://www.ccnmatthews.com/news/releasesfr/show.jsp?action=showRelease&searchText=false&showText=all&actionFor=570809

Note: http://www.ccnmatthews....

Contributed By


Topic


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Wed Dec 07, 2005 8:50 pm
    I have been skeptical of the Green Party because their leader was an ex-conservative but I have to say this makes sense.

    Dam, now I am going to have to think about my vote. It will be interesting to hear him in the debate. Oh, yeah, sorry, never mind

    ---
    Like a great red wine at the end of a good meal or a Van Morrison song played at just the right time, proof there is a god and every once in a while she smiles.

  2. Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:31 pm
    If there will be any hope of the CPP being around by the time I hit retirement, they better invest in companies like Walmart. I'd only be in favour of selling these shares if CPP used that money to follow a hero of this site (Michael Moore) and bought up Haliburton stocks. They have a better rate of return.

  3. Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:08 pm
    Investment 101 states never involve nationalism when buying or selling a stock. Nationalism is irrelevant in this case. The only thing one considers is future prospects. There is no borders when investing. The original poster to this site will be forgiven for not having this knowledge. Just don't infect anyone with this attitude it can be costly. My post is not to be insulting but to give you 101 adivice. I'm sure you have qualities that are probably helpful but please don't give investment advice to others as you don't seem qualified.

  4. Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:28 pm
    >>I'd only be in favour of selling these shares if CPP used that money to follow a hero of this site (Michael Moore) and bought up Haliburton stocks. They have a better rate of return.<<

    LOL! No one ever stood between that hypocrite and a fast buck, or a double whopper with cheese for that matter.

    Perhaps the Canadian pension plan should only be invested in "noble stocks" as defined as the ones that lose money.

  5. Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:31 pm
    It is nice to meet the only sensible person I have ever seen on this site. With the exception of the writers from the United States. Many of the log ins around write as if they are on the verge of being committed.

  6. by avatar Jesse
    Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:46 pm
    That is true, if all you care about is the biggest profit, then nationalism should not come into play. But if you *also* value the health of your country, then you will take measures to invest in taht country. Since the CPP is a Canadian plan meant to improve the lives of Canadians, I see no reasons not to keep the money in Canada, thereby improving lives *now*, instead of only when the investment matures.

    Money is not the only possible motivator. If it is yours, then that's fine, but one should expect a country to value its citizens more than an extra 1% ROI.

    ---
    Your mantra has been your opinions are stifled due to their contrary nature, when they are actually stifled for being without perceivable foundation.

  7. Thu Dec 08, 2005 2:41 am
    I agree with much you say but consider this. One doesn't generally hold one stock in a partfolio due to the risk factor. Nothing wrong with CIBC, TD, CN Rail as well as an assortment of US stocks. That way you will probably do well and still help Canadian companies. Americans do have a higher productivity rate and generally higher GDP rate. Canadian manufacturing has suffered as they did not become more efficient but hid behind the low Canadian dollar. The Americans had a high dollar for so long they had to be very efficient with productivity to survive. Canadian companies will be more efficient over time as they took the cheapest path and are now being bitten.

  8. Thu Dec 08, 2005 5:49 am
    I don't know if that was for Michael Scott or me but I see it got buried anyway. Cheers to you regardless, for swimming against the current. ;-)

  9. Thu Dec 08, 2005 7:30 am
    As the holder of the 1991 copyright on the only scientifically correct definition of economic efficiency, I would like to know what some of the above posters mean when they refer to "as Canadian companies become more efficient........." etc. ?

    What is their definition of economic efficiency ?

    Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC.

  10. Thu Dec 08, 2005 2:26 pm
    One divides output or domestic product by man hours and when you get the results we consistently are lagging our American friends. Not to say we don't make some gains but an interesting stat came from Stats Can stating that 66% of any gains we have made were from foreign companies operating in Canada. I don't know if that is a definition or not but it sure is important and we better catch up or our exports to US will be badly slipping and everybody knows where that puts us. In the bloody soup.

  11. Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:28 pm
    >> As the holder of the 1991 copyright on the only scientifically correct definition of economic efficiency<<<<

    I imagine its pretty safe from being infringed.

    I have asked you a few times to specifically define what you mean by “neoclassical economics”, a term that even economists disagree on. Is it that you want to keep that term deliberately ambiguous?



view comments in forum


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




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