Mulcair complained the deal does not protect the ability of provinces and municipalities to pass laws to protect public health or the environment without being sued by Chinese investors, and said the Conservative government should allow more time for MPs to scrutinize it.
Saying it is “a basic rule in a parliamentary democracy that one parliament cannot bind the hands of a future parliament,” Mulcair said the deal, as is, would not get the support of a future NDP government.
“You can sign into an agreement and then you can remove yourself from the agreement. That’s what successive governments can do. And what we’re signalling clearly is that we’re not going to be bound for the next 30 years by an agreement that hasn’t even been studied, that would make our court system take the interests of foreign investors and foreign companies pass above the interests of Canadians, the interests of our environment, the interests of our rights.”
He did not explain what legal mechanism he would use to renege on its commitments.
The text of the agreement says once passed it “shall remain in force for a period of at least 15 years.” After that, it is valid for another 15, but either party can terminate it with one year’s notice.
However, Ottawa contends the deal — which protects each country’s investors against arbitrary or discriminatory practices, and provides a legally binding, impartial dispute resolution process — retains federal and provincial power to regulate in areas of public health, the environment, and public education.
Mulcair slammed the Conservative government for failing to allow parliamentary debate on the agreement that was reached in February after 18 years of closed-door negotiations. It was signed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Chinese President Hu Jintao on Sept. 9, and released publicly in late September.
The agreement is slated to be adopted, without any vote in the Commons, on Thursday or Friday.
International Trade Minister Ed Fast retorted the opposition could have used its one of its own debate days to examine the deal. After Mulcair spoke to reporters Tuesday, the NDP called for a “take-note” debate — one in which views are expressed but no votes cast — in Parliament.
“There’s nothing we can do if it gets ratified, we’re out of luck,” said Elizabeth May, the Green Party leader. “We’ll be locked in for 31 years. That’s why we’ve got to try to stop ratification.”
The Commons standing committee on international trade has heard just one hour of testimony from Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade officials. They likened it to Canada’s other 24 foreign investment promotion and protection agreements (called FIPAs) now in force.
The NDP’s tougher stance comes as two advocacy groups behind an online campaign against the deal say they’ve collected 60,000 signatures on a petition they intend to present Wednesday. It says the deal would “pave the way for a massive natural resource buyout and allow foreign corporations to sue the Canadian government in secret tribunals, restricting Canadians from making democratic decisions about our economy, environment and energy.”
The NDP’s trade critic Don Davies said he is aware of one premier who complains he was not consulted, but DFAIT officials said the provinces were consulted and none objected.
Assistant deputy minister Ian Burney said no provincial sign-off was sought, as international trade is a federal responsibility.
Burney explained the deal gives Canadian investors now in China “better” and “state of the art” legal protections than many of Canada’s international competitors operating there who don’t have similar agreements, including the United States.
The deal does not impose new market access obligations or liberalize existing investment restrictions. Burney said China will retain current restrictions on sectors like mining, financial services and manufacturing.
He said Canada has its own unspecified markets that Ottawa wishes to protect, and added the deal will still require Chinese investment to be subject the “net benefit” test and national security concerns under the Investment Act.
The foreign affairs officials touted the level of “transparency” in the deal, saying even the North American Free Trade Deal does not contain as much transparency in its dispute resolution process. Burney said it is also the first time China has agreed to transparency in such a bilateral investment protection agreement.
But the NDP and the Liberals have strongly disputed that claim, saying a disputing party can object to disclosures in a dispute if they deem it is “not in the public interest.”
“Every Conservative Member of Parliament should be asked whether they favour allowing Chinese state-owned enterprises not only to question decisions made by democratically elected governments but also to sue for damages and leave the entire matter up to an arbitration group of three people in a closed process that can stay secret,” May said in an interview.
Ottawa says the deal is key to protecting Canadian investment in China, which amounted to $4.5 billion last year. China’s investment in Canada last year totaled $10.9 billion.
The government says those figures don’t tell the whole story. They say that over the three-year period between 2008 and 2011, direct foreign investment in Canada from China increased more than 92 per cent. Canadian foreign direct investment in China rose nearly 25 per cent.
DFAIT says Canadian investors want to boost their spending in “a broad range of sectors in China, including transportation, biotechnology, education, finance, information technology, manufacturing, and natural resources.”
Meanwhile, Chinese investors are eyeing Canada for investment in natural resources, renewable energy, information and communication technology, food processing, pharmaceuticals and natural medicine, and advanced manufacturing.
May has tried twice, without success, to convince Commons Speaker Andrew Scheer to allow an emergency debate on the treaty. But she still hopes to hold up implementation of the investment deal.
In the Commons, Fast defended the treaty, saying it “represents a very significant step forward in protecting Canadians when they invest in China,” he said. “The treaty will give Canadian investors greater confidence when they invest in China, in turn creating jobs and economic growth right here at home.”
Original Article
Source: the star
Author: Tonda MacCharles
No comments:
Post a Comment