U.S. Corn Used In Ontario Program

I had heard from people around Chatham that Ontario corn was too good to use in the Ethanol plant, and that Michigan corn was used because it was inferior quality and therefore cheaper.

That could just be shrewd PR put out by the company though.

---
If you don't like these ideas, I've got others. --Marshall McLuhan

Is this a joke? I've been working on a potato/berry/etc farm & one of the farmers pointed out that the burlap potato sacks are 100% HEMP, but they get them from India, not Canada. We even want to start growing hemp/pot commericially & still don't even make our own burlap sacks. Pathetic. Same with this corn deal. Why are we not keeping our farmers in business? NAFTA isn't a good enough excuse. Any agreement that forces us to buy something from somewhere else when we could make it here isn't worth following, imo.

---
"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va

"Free trade rules make restrictions difficult: Premier"

Never seems to bother the Americans..............

I also heard that Ontario govt. is giving GM some $500 million, and GM can STILL layoff up to 2500 workers and keep the money.?????????????????????


---
RickW

A Short List Of Free Trade Rules <br />
A short list of the new realities in Canada's economy and social community arising from free trade reflects the purpose of the agreements. As with examples of their effect that I have given - the killed promise of provincial auto insurance for Ontario and the 20 year pharmaceutical patent law passed by the Canadian parliament - I shall attempt to list matters about which there is no question. G. Bruce Doern and Brian W. Tomlin state in their 1991 evaluation of the Canada/US free trade negotiations, Faith and Fear [Toronto, Stoddart, 1991] the chief US goal. It related "directly to Canadian energy and investment policies. The US was determined to use the negotiations to ensure that they would never again be a target of discriminatory actions like those embodied in the N E P and FIRA. In the final agreement, the US achieved its goal." (p. 284) <br />
<br />
At the heart of that achievement is the new reality that henceforth US investors and corporations operating in Canada shall be treated as if they are Canadian. They must be given "national treatment". No government may favour Canadian enterprise for any reason. <br />
<br />
The US has access to all forms of Canadian energy. If there is a shortage of oil or if - for any other reason - Canada wants to cut back on its export amount to the US, it can't. It must deliver the amount it has been delivering to the US averaged over the last three years, or the same proportion of restricted output. <br />
<br />
The US has the right to "any good" which means energy resources or anything else - at the same price as Canadians get it. If Canada (as it has done in the past) wishes to supply any form of energy to Canadian enterprise more cheaply than it sells to the US - in order to help develop Canadian industrial capacity - it may not do so. If it wishes (as it has done in the past) to place an export tax on an energy "good" to create revenue for government, it may not do so. <br />
<br />
The US has been given a complete waiver from the operation of the laws that limit or restrict foreign ownership of Canadian controlled financial institutions. US interests may take over every federally licensed financial institution in Canada. The US has been called "Canadian" in relation to the Bank Act, the Loan Companies Act, the Trust Companies Act, and the Insurance Companies Act. The US may take over Canada's major banks; Canada may not take over US banks.<br />
<br />
The US is given "national treatment" in a huge number of service industries. That means US enterprises must be treated as Canadian. Among them a very few are health and social services, management of hospitals, extended-care hospitals, psychiatric institutions, children's hospitals, public health clinics, medical laboratories, etc. In the list also are printing and publishing, postal and courier services, almost all building trades, drug industries, and education services. Looked at closely, the very small part of the list I have reproduced reflects on the hard push in Canada - especially by corporate interests - to break the Canadian medicare system and provide private health services. It reflects, as well, on the legislation to grant 20 year patents in drugs. It reflects upon the increasing attack in Canada upon public education, an attack which may well eventuate in some provinces establishing large, parallel, private, for-profit education services.<br />
<br />
On all contracts over $25,000 the Canadian government will treat the US companies as Canadian for the procurement of goods by government.<br />
<br />
The right to profit or to compete for profit is raised to a holy right. When either government "reasonably" considers that any measure (whether covered in the trade agreement or not) taken by the other country might directly or indirectly reduce benefits, the measure may be challenged before a disputes panel. Such statements throw a huge blanket over almost any freely chosen action a Canadian government might take to lessen the cost or increase the efficiency of, or extend the range of any government or nonprofit activity that offends US free enterprise interests. <br />
<br />
Just such a blanket statement is made about culture in Canada. The Canada/US agreement specifically exempts culture from its provisions. But the very next statement, in effect, says that if Canadians make any moves in their culture that may be deemed to reduce profits by US interests, the US may retaliate in any way it thinks best.<br />
<br />
In addition, Canada must grant unexamined "temporary" entry to an enormous range of people - among whom are scientists, teachers, researchers, medical experts, journalist, librarians, etc. - as well as most corporate personnel in transfer, or other.<br />
<br />
Canada must grant unexamined takeover of Canadian enterprises worth between 5 million and 150 million, and it must grant unexamined takeover by indirect acquisition of enterprises worth up to a half billion dollars. <br />
<br />
Finally, subsidies are forbidden generally, but subsidy has not yet been defined, and, as we saw, Jean Chretien broke an election promise recently so that the word doesn't have to be defined.<br />
<br />
As an election promise to the country and to members of his own party unhappy with the Free Trade Agreement with the USA, Chretien declared he would only sign the North American Free Trade Agreement with conditions. He would sign only if the countries agreed - within two years - on definitions of subsidy (assistance to forms of national enterprise) and of dumping (usually the sale of goods to a foreign country for a price lower than that paid in the home country). Both words, undefined, plague Canada/US Trade; Canadians often believing they are bullied by US definitions. When the two-year date arrived, the Canadian government quietly annouced no agreement was reached, none was expected soon, and gave no indication that Prime Minister Chretien was in the slightest degree unhappy that the US had ignored his conditions. This means US interests can persistently attack parts of the economy unlike parts in the US, claiming Canada is using a form of "subsidy" to get advantages. <br />
<br />
The listing of those very few points from the enormous free trade agreements reveals dramatic new realities. The two economic, social, and political systems are not now closely united - that is a false way of recording what has happened. In fact, Canada's economic, social, and political system has been set up to be increasingly absorbed into the US system. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.ola.bc.ca/online/cf/module-4/usrel.html">http://www.ola.bc.ca/online/cf/module-4/usrel.html</a><p>---<br>Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.<br />
<br />
Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.<br />

An excellent analysis. Many of us have been warning about this when fighting against the FTA in the mid to late '80s. All this has been predicted and expected, still carefully covered up by all levels of government, all political parties, all so called economic think tanks and university economics departments.

Mulroney made the mistake of sending out copies of the FTA to anybody who asked for it and as the result, 57% of Canadians voted against it. Chretien signed the NAFTA in virtual secret, no copies available to the public. He wanted to sign the MAI, negotiated by John Manley, again in secret, but it was blown out of the water by the French. Now we have the secret GATS negotiations at the WTO, to remove all public control from all public services anywhere on Earth, handing even municipal bylaws over to multinational service providers. This is called "democracy" !!!!!!!!!

As US Trade Rep. Clayton Yeutter jubilated at the time of the signing of the FTA: "Canada will be absorbed in the US economy in 20 years." This was the whole plan and it is working very well for the planners, as we can see in our daily lives, as we lose all public powers and human rights to corporate profit demands, yet, people are just sitting around, moaning, but never even daring to ask questions?

On the subject of subsidies, it is no wonder politicians are reluctant to define it, when all these free trade treaties, removing democratic decision making powers from the public, are nothing more than subsidies to multinational corporations. Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC.

that comment about the US getting everything they wanted is from a confidential memo from a trade rep to Yeutter that went something like this: <P> <B>"We have achieved a major liberalization of the investment climate and imbedded it permanently so that in the future Canada's investment policies cannot retrogress to the old policies of the FIRA and NEP... The vast bulk of US direct investment in Canada now will go forward with no Canadian government interference whatsoever. <P> There is broad agreement to assure the freest possible bilateral trade in energy, including nondiscriminatory access for the US to Canadian energy supplies... Essentially, in the text we got everything we wanted." - confidential memo from US trade reps to Clayton yeutter & Treasury Secretary James Baker III</B><p>---<br>"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va

The above is correct, to the best of my recollection, but not complete. I have a whole file drawer full of reports, articles etc. from the FTA days and it has been reported at the time in a number of publications that Yeutter said, I believe to American reporters : "The Canadians don't know what they have signed. In 20 years they'll be absorbed in the US economy".. Unfortunately, I don't have the time right now to sort through that pile, but this is something that never appeared in our already controlled media. Then there was the Fox memo to Mulroney, advising him to keep silent on what's being negotiated and keep the public in the dark. Mulroney ignored it and almost lost the game by losing the popular vote.
Chretien, however, learned his lesson, as has his successor and kept all these nefarious deals under cover, as are all governments both in the Americas and in the EU. E.g. How many people know that the FTAA is being negotiated by now for about 8, or more years ? Ed Deak , Big Lake, BC.

only one of many worth the read articles on this topic<br />
<a href="http://www.illuminati-news.com/marijuana-conspiracy.htm">http://www.illuminati-news.com/marijuana-conspiracy.htm</a><p>---<br>Always be tolerant with those who disagree with you. After all, they have a perfect right to their ridiculous opinions-<br />
unknown

here's the Toronto Star article containing the Yeutter quotation:<br />
<a href="http://www.vivelecanada.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?forum=9&showtopic=1267">http://www.vivelecanada.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?forum=9&showtopic=1267</a><br />
<br />
The one I put up was a memo from a US trade rep to Yeutter & Baker, that was leaked to the monthly, "Inside US Trade". I sure wish I could find the original article that was published in. I've only seen that excerpt, & I can't get it through my university library. I don't think the public library system in town can get it either.<p>---<br>"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va

Farm subsidies should at least be spent here in Canada. Especially if they're going to go through all the trouble of causing environmental damage just so they can give money to farmers.

Ethanol is very hard on the environment, while it's true that tailpipe emissions from a motor vehicle are very slightly lower if it's using a blend of ethanol gas - the reality is that making the ethanol in the first place required much ploughing, planting, pesticides and harvesting - all done with diesel trucks. The corn then has to be shipped to an ethanol manufacturing plant where more energy is used to convert it into fuel etc. etc. etc.

That's why there has never been even one litre of ethanol sold without a big expensive taxpayer supported program. Ethanol is hard on the environment.