Tweet
Posted in the rumors section becuase so much of what is talked about with regards to the SPP/NAU is based on rumor, innuendo, agit-prop, etc.
For instance: the replacement of the dollar, the loony and the peso with the Amero and the NAFTA superhighway.
Three Amigos Summit - Manuel Pérez Rocha and Sarah Anderson | April 15, 2008 Foreign Policy in Focus
Guard resources, Ottawa urged - Toronto Star - April 15, 2008
see also:
official SPP website
North American Competitiveness Council (U.S. Chamber of Commerce)
Council on Foreign Relations task force - Building a North American Community
For instance: the replacement of the dollar, the loony and the peso with the Amero and the NAFTA superhighway.
Three Amigos Summit - Manuel Pérez Rocha and Sarah Anderson | April 15, 2008 Foreign Policy in Focus
The chief executives of Wal-Mart, Chevron, and 28 other large corporations are in on the closed-door negotiations, while members of Congress, journalists, and ordinary citizens are excluded. And the secrecy is not just around the presidential summits, but also the meetings of about 20 SPP working groups that carry on negotiations over the course of the year.
What’s on the table? Not much is public, but we do know that the executive powers of the three countries are hammering out regulatory changes that they claim do not require legislative approval. And given who’s in the room, it’s a safe bet that these changes will favor narrow corporate interests over the public good.
The official corporate advisory body, called the North American Competitive Council (NACC), made 51 proposals to the SPP negotiators last year on issues as varied as taxation and patent rights. The NACC later boasted that “all three of our governments have committed themselves to taking action on many of our recommendations.”
In essence, the SPP represents the privatization of policymaking. And so it’s not surprising that on top of the outrageously anti-democratic process, there are also strong reasons to be concerned about the substance of SPP decisions. Here are just a few:
First, at a time when the Democratic presidential candidates have kicked up a long overdue debate over NAFTA, the SPP would actually expand this flawed policy. Even though the lifting of trade and investment barriers under the trade pact failed to create the promised good, stable jobs, the SPP is further chipping away at remaining economic regulations. For example, at the last SPP summit, the three leaders announced a weakening of NAFTA’s “rules of origin” to allow products with a lower level of national content to receive preferential tariff treatment. This will undermine domestic industries by making trade in products from third countries like China even more profitable.
Second, the SPP could exacerbate tensions over energy resources and deepen our dependence on fossil fuels. Under the guise of a “North American integrated energy market,” there is evidence that the U.S. government and corporations are aiming to gain greater control over its neighbors’ resources. One SPP agreement, for example, reflects the corporate advisors’ recommendations to promote energy privatization in Mexico – this in spite of a massive citizens’ movement in that country, which has fought long and hard to prevent their nation’s oil industry from being handed over to global corporations. In Canada, progressive activists are up in arms over an SPP report that envisioned a fivefold increase in environmentally destructive oil production from tar sands, with most of the increase to be exported to the United States.
Third, the SPP talks are aimed at expanding the militarized U.S. security perimeter to all of North America, with disturbing implications for civil liberties. The three countries have vowed to join forces against not only external but also “internal” threats, and Mexico and Canada have already agreed to share vast amounts of information with the U.S. government, including the fingerprints of refugees and asylum seekers. The Bush administration is also offering Mexico a multi-billion-dollar military aid package under the Merida Initiative (also known as Plan Mexico). While the new equipment is supposedly to combat drug cartels, many organizations have expressed concerns that it may also end up being used against political dissidents and immigrants.
What’s on the table? Not much is public, but we do know that the executive powers of the three countries are hammering out regulatory changes that they claim do not require legislative approval. And given who’s in the room, it’s a safe bet that these changes will favor narrow corporate interests over the public good.
The official corporate advisory body, called the North American Competitive Council (NACC), made 51 proposals to the SPP negotiators last year on issues as varied as taxation and patent rights. The NACC later boasted that “all three of our governments have committed themselves to taking action on many of our recommendations.”
In essence, the SPP represents the privatization of policymaking. And so it’s not surprising that on top of the outrageously anti-democratic process, there are also strong reasons to be concerned about the substance of SPP decisions. Here are just a few:
First, at a time when the Democratic presidential candidates have kicked up a long overdue debate over NAFTA, the SPP would actually expand this flawed policy. Even though the lifting of trade and investment barriers under the trade pact failed to create the promised good, stable jobs, the SPP is further chipping away at remaining economic regulations. For example, at the last SPP summit, the three leaders announced a weakening of NAFTA’s “rules of origin” to allow products with a lower level of national content to receive preferential tariff treatment. This will undermine domestic industries by making trade in products from third countries like China even more profitable.
Second, the SPP could exacerbate tensions over energy resources and deepen our dependence on fossil fuels. Under the guise of a “North American integrated energy market,” there is evidence that the U.S. government and corporations are aiming to gain greater control over its neighbors’ resources. One SPP agreement, for example, reflects the corporate advisors’ recommendations to promote energy privatization in Mexico – this in spite of a massive citizens’ movement in that country, which has fought long and hard to prevent their nation’s oil industry from being handed over to global corporations. In Canada, progressive activists are up in arms over an SPP report that envisioned a fivefold increase in environmentally destructive oil production from tar sands, with most of the increase to be exported to the United States.
Third, the SPP talks are aimed at expanding the militarized U.S. security perimeter to all of North America, with disturbing implications for civil liberties. The three countries have vowed to join forces against not only external but also “internal” threats, and Mexico and Canada have already agreed to share vast amounts of information with the U.S. government, including the fingerprints of refugees and asylum seekers. The Bush administration is also offering Mexico a multi-billion-dollar military aid package under the Merida Initiative (also known as Plan Mexico). While the new equipment is supposedly to combat drug cartels, many organizations have expressed concerns that it may also end up being used against political dissidents and immigrants.
89 per cent want an energy policy guaranteeing Canadian supply and protecting the environment, "even if this means placing restrictions on exports and foreign ownership of Canadian supplies."
88 per cent of Canadians want a comprehensive national water policy that bans bulk exports of fresh water and recognizes water as a basic human right. There are concerns water is not protected by trade agreements.
87 per cent agree Canada should set its own independent environmental, health and safety standards, "even if it might reduce cross-border trade opportunities with the United States."
In its analysis of the results, the Council of Canadians criticized Harper and his counterparts for allowing a select group of corporate leaders in the North American Competitiveness Council to have "VIP access to annual trilateral summits like the one taking place April 21-22 in New Orleans."
88 per cent of Canadians want a comprehensive national water policy that bans bulk exports of fresh water and recognizes water as a basic human right. There are concerns water is not protected by trade agreements.
87 per cent agree Canada should set its own independent environmental, health and safety standards, "even if it might reduce cross-border trade opportunities with the United States."
In its analysis of the results, the Council of Canadians criticized Harper and his counterparts for allowing a select group of corporate leaders in the North American Competitiveness Council to have "VIP access to annual trilateral summits like the one taking place April 21-22 in New Orleans."
official SPP website
North American Competitiveness Council (U.S. Chamber of Commerce)
NACC Members: Campbell Soup Company
Con-way Inc.
ExxonMobil
FedEx Corporation
General Motors Corporation
Kansas City Southern
Lockheed Martin Corporation
MetLife
NBCU / General Electric
Procter & Gamble
UPS
Whirlpool Corporation
Canada
Dominic D’Alessandro, President and CEO, Manulife Financial
Bruce Flatt, President and CEO, Brookfield Asset Management Inc.
David A. Ganong, President, Ganong Bros. Limited
Richard L. George, President and CEO, Suncor Energy Inc.
Linda Hasenfratz, CEO, Linamar Corporation
Jacques Lamarre, President and CEO, SNC-Lavalin Group Inc.
Gordon Nixon, President and CEO, Royal Bank of Canada
Nancy Southern, President and CEO, ATCO Group
Marc P. Tellier, President and Chief Executive Officer, Yellow Pages Group Co.
Annette Verschuren, President, The Home Depot Canada
Mexico
César de Anda Molina, President and CEO, Avicar de Occidente
José Luis Barraza, President, Grupo Impulso, S.A. de C.V.
Luis Berrondo Ávalos, Chairman of the Board, MABE
Eugenio Garza Herrera, Chairman and CEO, XIGNUX, S.A. de C.V.
Claudio González Laporte, Chairman and CEO, Kimberly-Clark de Mèxico, S.A. de C.V.
Armando Paredes Arroyo, President, Consejo Coordinator Empresarial (CCE)
Ismael Plascencia, President, Confederación de Cámaras Industriales (CONCAMIN)
Daniel Servitje Montull, CEO, Grupo BIMBO, S.A.B. de C.V.
Guillermo Vogel, Vice Chairman, TAMSA American Iron and Steel Institute, Chairman, North American Steel Council
Jaime Yesaki Cavazos, President, Consejo National Agropecuario (CNA)
Chevron
Chrysler LLC
Con-way Inc.
ExxonMobil
FedEx Corporation
General Motors Corporation
Kansas City Southern
Lockheed Martin Corporation
MetLife
NBCU / General Electric
Procter & Gamble
UPS
Whirlpool Corporation
Canada
Dominic D’Alessandro, President and CEO, Manulife Financial
Bruce Flatt, President and CEO, Brookfield Asset Management Inc.
David A. Ganong, President, Ganong Bros. Limited
Richard L. George, President and CEO, Suncor Energy Inc.
Linda Hasenfratz, CEO, Linamar Corporation
Jacques Lamarre, President and CEO, SNC-Lavalin Group Inc.
Gordon Nixon, President and CEO, Royal Bank of Canada
Nancy Southern, President and CEO, ATCO Group
Marc P. Tellier, President and Chief Executive Officer, Yellow Pages Group Co.
Annette Verschuren, President, The Home Depot Canada
Mexico
César de Anda Molina, President and CEO, Avicar de Occidente
José Luis Barraza, President, Grupo Impulso, S.A. de C.V.
Luis Berrondo Ávalos, Chairman of the Board, MABE
Eugenio Garza Herrera, Chairman and CEO, XIGNUX, S.A. de C.V.
Claudio González Laporte, Chairman and CEO, Kimberly-Clark de Mèxico, S.A. de C.V.
Armando Paredes Arroyo, President, Consejo Coordinator Empresarial (CCE)
Ismael Plascencia, President, Confederación de Cámaras Industriales (CONCAMIN)
Daniel Servitje Montull, CEO, Grupo BIMBO, S.A.B. de C.V.
Guillermo Vogel, Vice Chairman, TAMSA American Iron and Steel Institute, Chairman, North American Steel Council
Jaime Yesaki Cavazos, President, Consejo National Agropecuario (CNA)
Comment