Skip to content

More information needed on ongoing CETA negotiations

Lack of transparency heightens skeptism, suspicions.

I wonder how many readers know what the initials CETA stand for. It is the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement which is now being negotiated between Ottawa and the European Union, and which officials hope to finalize in 2012 – though with the current  fiscal turmoil in Europe discussions may well be delayed.

Although negotiations have been anything but open and transparent, enough is known to cause real concern, especially at the municipal level.

There are at least four good reasons for this concern.

Under CETA, transnational corporations could challenge our environmental regulations, make it difficult to introduce new or stricter controls and would encourage extractive industries. There have been assurances that CETA will differ from NAFTA, which has made it possible for corporations to institute legal proceedings against public environmental regulations, but how good and meaningful are those assurances? Can we be sure that the NAFTA model will not be copied?

Last year saw U.S. investor T. Boone Pickens challenge Ontario’s Green Energy Act and a U.S.-registered Brazilian company attempt to overturn Ontario’s decision preventing development of a quarry that would have impacted farmland and water resources. In other words, outside bodies were attempting to dictate how and by whom we should be governed.

We need clear and unequivocal wording that will eliminate the possibility of any such actions if CETA is to be acceptable but, given the secrecy surrounding negotiations, we have no guarantee that this requirement will be met.

It appears, too, that, if implemented, CETA will restrict how our governments can control private water corporations (Europe is home to the world’s largest) and allow them access to our drinking water for their profit. There are even some suggestions that CETA regulations might enable overseas corporations to lay claim to our water resource. Sanitation services could also be affected.

Besides these environmental worries, there appear to be threats both to our jobs and to local decision-making powers. If European corporations are given unrestricted access to government purchasing contracts, this will deny municipalities the freedom to obtain goods and services locally. If, as the European Union (EU) wants, all of our public services come under the agreement, then medicare will be subject to increased pressure for privatization and generic drug costs could rise.

Given these possibilities, it is deplorable that CETA has not been opened to public scrutiny and discussion. The fears that governmental authority, at all levels, will be compromised are real and can be put to rest only if the terms of the proposed agreement are available for detailed study and eventual approval or rejection by the populace at large while they are still in draft form. Keeping them from the public view heightens skepticism and fosters unfortunate suspicions that there’s something to hide.

Why are we not being told what’s involved?

Dr. Roy Strang writes monthly on the environment for the Peace Arch News. rmstrang@shaw.ca