Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA)
In April 2006, British Columbia and Alberta signed the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA). Recently, you were cited in the Globe and Mail (Tuesday, November 7, 2006, A12) as saying “I think it’s a step in the right direction for us to move toward ultimately a state where there is free trade actually within this country.”
We would suggest that this is the wrong direction for Ontario. There is far more to such trade agreements than the free flow of trade. Below we outline several of these, both procedural and substantive, in the hopes that your government would reconsider and engage the public in wide ranging consultations over any new policy directions.
First, the Campbell and Klein governments signed this agreement without any public consultation process. This agreement is of a wide ranging, substantive and long-term character. Indeed, in our view, it undermines the democratic process in each province by granting political rights to non-residents. This means that each provincial government, as well as local governments in each province, will be compelled when doing anything that is covered by TILMA to “provide the other Party [BC or Alberta] with an opportunity to comment on the measure, and take such comments into consideration.” In short, the governments of BC and Alberta have created greater rights for interests outside their own provinces and voting population.
Surely such significant changes in a democratic society should not be made without the broadest of public consultation.
Second, there is a range of substantive issues in this trade agreement that deserve comment and critical assessment.
TILMA enables commercial interests to sue government for regulations they don’t like. In this sense it goes even beyond NAFTA’s Chapter 11, as it allows law suits over “any matter regarding the interpretation or application of this Agreement.” In our opinion, this provision gives business unprecedented and unwarranted power over democratic government.
Instead of championing appropriate governance and regulation TILMA massively deregulates. Article 3 of the Agreement states that there shall be “no obstacles” that could impair or restrict “trade through the territory of the Parties, or investment or labour mobility between the Parties.” It further restricts such Parties from establishing any new standards or regulations that operate to restrict trade, investment or labour mobility.
TILMA also allows private individuals to sue government and receive up to $5 million in compensation for regulations, policies and programs that “impair or restrict” investment, trade or labour mobility. Thus, those with substantial capital can sue government even where a democratic majority of the population and the majority of members of a provincial legislature might want, for example, the restriction of raw exports in favour of a finished or semi-finished export or where a government might want to limit or prohibit the export of a resource such as water. Thus the restrictive nature of such a trade agreement does not bode well for new or innovative economic policy directions. Indeed, it would tie governments to totally market driven policies even where alternatives were both possible and necessary.
The above are just three of the many important points of an agreement that covers much more. My intent is not to outline all such points in one letter, but rather to initiate a more critical analysis and to strongly suggest that before any steps are taken in the direction of TILMA an open consultation process should be established. This would allow all stakeholders in the province to contribute to a discussion that could result in significant implications for the future of all Ontarians.
We at the Ontario Federation of Labour would be happy to consult with you directly on this important matter.
Sincerely,
Wayne Samuelson
President
CC:
Irene Harris, Terry Downey
OFL Executive Board and Council
The Honourable Dalton McGuinty
Premier of Ontario
Queen’s Park, Room 281
Main Legislative Building
Toronto, Ontario
M7A 1A1
Dear Premier McGuinty:
In April 2006, British Columbia and Alberta signed the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA). Recently, you were cited in the Globe and Mail (Tuesday, November 7, 2006, A12) as saying “I think it’s a step in the right direction for us to move toward ultimately a state where there is free trade actually within this country.”
We would suggest that this is the wrong direction for Ontario. There is far more to such trade agreements than the free flow of trade. Below we outline several of these, both procedural and substantive, in the hopes that your government would reconsider and engage the public in wide ranging consultations over any new policy directions.
First, the Campbell and Klein governments signed this agreement without any public consultation process. This agreement is of a wide ranging, substantive and long-term character. Indeed, in our view, it undermines the democratic process in each province by granting political rights to non-residents. This means that each provincial government, as well as local governments in each province, will be compelled when doing anything that is covered by TILMA to “provide the other Party [BC or Alberta] with an opportunity to comment on the measure, and take such comments into consideration.” In short, the governments of BC and Alberta have created greater rights for interests outside their own provinces and voting population.
Surely such significant changes in a democratic society should not be made without the broadest of public consultation.
Second, there is a range of substantive issues in this trade agreement that deserve comment and critical assessment.
The above are just three of the many important points of an agreement that covers much more. My intent is not to outline all such points in one letter, but rather to initiate a more critical analysis and to strongly suggest that before any steps are taken in the direction of TILMA an open consultation process should be established. This would allow all stakeholders in the province to contribute to a discussion that could result in significant implications for the future of all Ontarians.
We at the Ontario Federation of Labour would be happy to consult with you directly on this important matter.
Sincerely,
Wayne Samuelson
President
CC:
Irene Harris, Terry Downey
OFL Executive Board and Council
