| Resource Centre | News | Programs | Calendar | Links | About | Contact | Get involved |
Location:
What's here:
|
|||
|
|||
|
Location: |
Programs » Peace » Advocacy » | ||
What's here: |
|||
Letter of inquiry into the MAI |
||||||||||
See background on MAI.
December 22, 1997 Dear Honourable Ministers, This letter of inquiry comes to you on behalf of the Mennonite Church Canada. It concerns the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) which your government is presently negotiating. We acknowledge that your work on the MAI is complex and the issues you face are difficult. We appreciate your openness to serious dialogue and your concern to reflect the sentiments of all Canadians in the negotiations. The Mennonite Church Canada is a Christian denomination consisting of over 36,000 members from British Columbia to New Brunswick. We are deeply concerned about policies of the Canadian government which may adversely affect the well-being of Canadians and people in other parts of the world. Having read the publicly distributed proceedings from MAI sessions held in February and September, 1997, we understand that the basic aim of the MAI is to codify "non-discrimination, that is, equal treatment between foreign and domestic investors." We seek clarity about several areas of the MAI. 1. The MAI provides for investment liberalization, which is the removal of restrictions on international investment and restrictions on government interference or subsidies that cause "trade distortions" between foreign and domestic investors. Performance requirements would not be allowed under the "absolute prohibition of certain practices which distort international trade and investment." Given these principles, how would laws and guidelines pertaining to the environment, protection of natural resources, human rights, labour standards, job creation, public institutions, and the social safety net including Medicare be affected? 2. As multinational corporations freely move investment, factories and personnel from country to country, will there be binding guidelines to prevent countries from lowering wage and labour standards and environmental requirements in order to attract investment? 3. The MAI includes the "absolute prohibition of certain practices which distort international trade and investment," and the provision that once a liberalizing measure is enacted by a country, it "could not be rescinded or nullified over time." By signing the MAI, Canada would be committed to it for 20 years, whereas even the North American Free Trade Agreement can be abrogated on six months notice. These factors will effectively bind the hands of future parliaments. How can you guarantee that the MAI guidelines will not restrict the Government’s ability to enact laws or distribute subsidies relating to the interests of the social good or national identity? How will the traditional principle of democratic sovereignty over government processes be preserved in light of the binding character of this agreement? 4. We understand that the MAI covers "all economic sectors" and only a "specific reservation" would "suspend the application of the agreement to a particular sector" which a country wants to protect. Which exceptions and exemptions are being requested by Canada? Will future Canadian governments have the right to request additional exemptions? 5. The MAI provides criteria for investment protection and for the settlement of disputes. Investors would be able to directly sue a government. This corporation-to-government access is new. What is the Government estimate of the costs of lawsuits resulting from the MAI? 6. The countries negotiating this agreement are 29 of the richest in the world. The beneficiaries will be "businesses in the global economy" and individuals with "savings and pension funds." How will the countries that are not part of this agreement be affected? How will the millions of the people in the world who have neither savings nor pension funds be affected? 7. How is the Government planning to consult with the public on the MAI negotiations? Will cross-Canada hearings be held? Will there be a debate in the House of Commons? Will the Canadian negotiators be in a position to propose changes to the MAI or to pull out of the MAI altogether? Thank you for considering our inquiry on behalf of our constituency. We assure you of our continued prayers on behalf of our government leaders. We look forward to receiving your perspectives on the questions we have raised. Sincerely,
cc Charlie Pinson, Reform Party Critic for International Trade
|
||||||||||