Category Archives: harper government

Bruneians Question Point of Trans Pacific Partnership, Impact and Significance

Posted on by

The 19th round of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations have begun in Brunei, scheduled to go until August 30.

By Andrew Chernoff     August 22, 2013 

Research: The Brunei Times

While many Canadians have reservations around the Harper government embracing of the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement and the present negotiations, some countries like Brunei, have similar concerns.

In Canada, according to a Huffington Post article, everything from the rules surrounding Internet downloads, to how our groceries are produced, to when you can copy textbooks legally, will be affected.

Leaks from some of the TPP discussions disclosed in the Huffington Post article, suggest the following could impact Canadians if included in the final agreement:

  • It Could Criminalize Small-Scale Downloading
  • It Could Reduce Or End Canadian Content Rules
  • ISPs Could Become Internet Cops
  • It Could Mean Foreign Telecom Coming To Canada
  • Corporations Could Control Your Browsing History
  • It Could Change Your Grocery Bill
  • Copyright Terms Will Likely Be Expanded
  • You May Have To Do Less Copying And Quoting

But the Harper government is not releasing any substance regarding the negotiations to Canadians, and it is not clear whether Canadians will have the final say on ratification of the agreement or whether his majority government will assume our wishes and vote on our behalf.

In Brunei, they are equally concerned about the secrecy its government has imposed as well on the negotiations as well as other things. The following are examples from the Editorial section of The Brunei Times:

 

Secrecy over TPP talks shows priority is for big business

Friday, August 23, 2013

Dear Editor,

THERE have been many comments in The Brunei Times recently on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations and its impact on participating countries, including Brunei, the latest being your excellent editorial.

TPP negotiators keep telling their public that the TPP outcome will be good for us, yet have kept us totally in the dark on the negotiations. What an irony! I guess we will just have to take their word for it and hope that they excel in what they do whilst keeping in mind our best interests.

I, for one, am not too optimistic about this, based on the total absence of engagement with stakeholders so far. Why this reluctance? A public and informed debate will help to clear up the air and maybe even garner public support for the TPP. It is precisely because of the dearth of information from Brunei’s negotiators that we, the public, whom they purport to serve, have to rely on rumours, hearsay and third-hand information.

The various reservations have already been aired in the BT, ranging from intellectual property through investors rights to state-owned enterprises, so I need not delve into these here. But I would like to quote Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz:

“… no trade agreement should put commercial interests ahead of broader national interests, especially when non-trade-related issues like financial regulation and intellectual property are at stake. … Other trade agreements have insisted on financial liberalisation and deregulation as well, even though the 2008 crisis should have taught us that the absence of good regulation can jeopardise economic prosperity.

Profits ahead of saving lives

The US pharmaceutical industry, which wields considerable clout with the office of the US Trade Representative (USTR), has succeeded in foisting on other countries an unbalanced intellectual-property regime, which, designed to fight generic drugs, puts profit ahead of saving lives. Even the US Supreme Court has now said that the US Patent Office went too far in granting patents on genes. Finally, there must be a commitment to transparency. But those engaging in these trade negotiations should be forewarned: the US is committed to a lack of transparency….

In the case of the TPP, there is a further concern. Asia has developed an efficient supply chain, with goods flowing easily from one country to another in the process of producing finished goods. But the TPP could interfere with that if China remains outside of it….

If negotiators created a genuine free-trade regime that put the public interest first, with the views of ordinary citizens given at least as much weight as those of corporate lobbyists, I might be optimistic that what would emerge would strengthen the economy and improve social well-being.

The reality, however, is that we have a managed trade regime that puts corporate interests first, and a process of negotiations that is undemocratic and non-transparent.

Concerned Stakeholder

Looking at TPP pact and its significance

Editorial

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

THEY have kept it in the dark so far, and they intend to keep it under wraps until after the signing, and that is something which is inappropriate, and immoral if you will.

“They”refers to the negotiators, and “the signing” refers to the signing of the agreement of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

If the TPP agreement is for the benefit of the people, common sense dictates that the people should know about it, and not learn bits and pieces through leakages here and there.

From what we have gathered so far from the discussions already held, 18 rounds thus far since March 15, 2010, in Melbourne, though not much, are enough to sound the alarm bells.

Much has been written in The Brunei Times about the lengthening of patents, which could result in higher medicine prices for TPP countries, and that is one key reason why we feel “UN-comfortable” about this agreement, and it’s a very big “UN” here.

According to another leak, the US is also pushing for “investor rights”, which translates into the rights of companies to sue the government of a country if a regulation was passed and it affected the profit of the companies.

What is to be discussed now could be music to the ears of smokers in Brunei.

When Uruguay asked all cigarette firms in the country to put pictures of cancers on their cigarette boxes, Philip Morris (major tobacco company) used an FTA (Free Trade Agreement) provision to sue the Uruguayan government in February 2010 for hurting its cigarette sales (the case is still in progress).

Australia was also sued by the same company in November 2011 for a similar regulation regarding cigarette packs. And as recently as June 2013, Japan Tobacco has also moved against the Thai government on similar issue.

Just think of how many anti-cigarette regulations we have in Brunei, and think of how much profit these tobacco companies can sue us for.

Another contentious issue of the TPP is about the liberalisation of service sub-sectors (healthcare, retail trade, etc), meaning any service activity permitted by companies in one country, “national treatment” must also be awarded to foreign companies, which means companies in other TPP countries will also be able to operate in Brunei like they are a Brunei company.

Maybe there will be people who believe this is a good regulation, as consumers will be able to buy cheaper products and services. But imagine what damage it will do to the Brunei industries; will Hua Ho, SupaSave and Soon Lee be able to stand up to the competition of Walmart and Tesco? And what about the fate of our local SMEs that may have to compete with international MNCs for public contracts, where the locals may not be given legitimate preferences?

This latest round of negotiation in Brunei is slated to be the final round of the TPP discussions, and we are ill at ease. Ill at ease we certainly are because after three and a half years of discussions, the negotiators are still keeping all the information to themselves, which means they retain all the power to decide the fate of the people in the 12 participating nations. We are certainly not comfortable with such kind of power, even if we are to fully trust our own negotiators.

 

Thursday, August 22, 2013:

 

Who gains from ‘selling’ national sovereignty?

Dear Editor,

WE HAVE been made to understand that should the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement come into effect in its current format, foreign multinational corporations would be able to bring Brunei to an international tribunal outside of its jurisdiction if they do not like any of the country’s policies that they may find to be impinging on their ability to make profits, or for any other kinds of unknown or devious agenda for that matter. This, we understand, would tantamount to undermining Brunei’s national sovereignty.

On August 20, 2013, the US Ambassador was reported to have stated that the TPPA would result, for Brunei, an “aggregate income gains of US$193 million by 2025”, quoting a so-called “study” by the Peterson Institute. Is that how much Brunei would “gain” by surrendering its national sovereignty through the TPPA? Are Bruneians willing to sell off their country’s national sovereignty? And who exactly in Brunei would be gaining that “aggregate income”

Perhaps His Excellency would like to elaborate on this? And it would be good as well to know the opinion and stance of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and the Attorney-General’s Chambers on the subject.

UC,
Bandar

 

What does this TPP mean for Bruneians?

Dear Editor,

I READ with great interest the Opinion article published by your paper on August 19, 2013 titled “Role of state in developing nations under attack from new FTAs”. This article was rather mind-boggling knowing Brunei is part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. Just a very basic query, intended for the government officials concerned, the trade side of MoFAT, I assume; what does this TPP mean for us? I suppose our local business people would be more than happy to hear your prompt and easy-to-understand response in this regard.

DWBSS
Brunei Darussalam

The 19th round of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations have begun in Brunei and are scheduled to go until August 30.

MP welcomes bill’s second chance

Posted on by

Bill C-377 To Revert To When  It Passed third reading In The House On Dec. 12 – Nullifying  Senators’ Amendments, Deliberations.

By Alex Browne – Peace Arch News    August 21, 2013 3:00 PM

https://i0.wp.com/media.bclocalnews.com/images/29576whiterockHiebert-Russ0411FC.jpg

South Surrey-White Rock-Cloverdale Conservative MP Russ Hiebert

Russ Hiebert, Conservative MP for South Surrey-White Rock-Cloverdale, says he’s pleased by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s decision to prorogue – or suspend – Parliament until October.

For Hiebert, prorogation means the clock will be turned back to last December on his controversial private member’s bill, C-377, which would require labour unions to publish detailed financial information.

Harper has said prorogation is in anticipation of a throne speech putting forward a new agenda for the government at the midpoint of its mandate.

Following heated debate, the Senate sent C-377 back to the Commons in June, with extensive amendments reducing the scope and impact of the bill that Hiebert claimed, at the time, had “gutted” it.

Under prorogation, according to the Library of Parliament, the bill will revert to the way it was when it passed third reading in the House on Dec. 12 – essentially nullifying the Senators’ amendments and the deliberations leading to them.

The unamended bill will subsequently be resubmitted to the Senate, Hiebert noted in a statement issued Tuesday.

“As such, I am hopeful my colleagues in the Senate will give C-377 appropriate and timely consideration,” he said, adding that the restored bill will “once again reflect the wishes of the elected lower house of Parliament.”

Wednesday, Peace Arch News asked Hiebert if that means he expects the bill will receive a smoother ride the second time around.

“I’m always hopeful,” Hiebert said, adding that he’s making no predictions about how quickly the Senate will deal with the bill when it returns to the chamber.

“This does give me an opportunity to communicate with the small number of members of my caucus who had concerns about the bill. I’ll do my best to persuade them that the bill should pass as it stands.”

Hiebert acknowledged going back to square one with the Senate also raises the possibility the bill could face further Senate Banking Committee hearings before being debated by senators.

“That decision would have to rest with them,” he said. “My hope is that, because we have already had three weeks of testimony, that could be taken into consideration. But it’s completely in the hands of the senators.”

A total of 16 Tory senators joined their Liberal counterparts in approving the amendments to Hiebert’s bill in June.

Hiebert has argued that since unions receive tax deductions through union dues, their finances should be made public, and that the transparency he’s asking for is no greater than that currently required for charities.

Opponents, however, claim the legislation – as it stands – will cost unions millions of dollars, adding that the bill also ventures into dangerous  areas of unconstitutionality and invasion of privacy.

Conservative Senator Hugh Segal was among those who spoke out against the bill in June, saying it was poorly drafted and likely to be challenged.

“Whatever may have been its laudable transparency goals, (it is) really – through drafting sins of omission and commission – an expression of statutory contempt for the working men and women in our trade unions and for the trade unions themselves and their right under federal and provincial law to organize,” Segal said.

Conservative Senator Diane Bellemare, a former economics professor at the University of Quebec, was also critical of the legislation.

“Even with the proposed amendments, this bill remains an unbalanced bill that has no similarity to other transparency bills in France, the United Kingdom and Australia,” she said.

By the Numbers: Youth unemployment and underemployment in Canada, around the world || UFCW Canada – Canada’s Largest Private Sector Union

Posted on by

By the Numbers: Youth unemployment and underemployment in Canada, around the world || UFCW Canada – Canada’s Largest Private Sector Union.

CETA talks ‘re-launch’ in September: Council of Canadians to deliver petitions in Brussels

Posted on by

By Stuart Trew   August 22, 2013   http://rabble.ca

Council-of-Canadians's picture      Council of Canadians’ blog

CETA talks 're-launch' in September: Council of Canadians to deliver petitions in Brussels

Between September 17 and 19, the Council of Canadians will hand-deliver a CETA petition, signed by thousands of people in Canada, to Members of the European Parliament in Brussels. The petition focuses on the excessive (FIPA- or NAFTA-like) investor protections built into the proposed Canada-EU deal but it is more broadly designed to protest a deal that few people have heard of, even after four years of negotiations, and that a growing number oppose.

The timing of the petition delivery is especially important after news that the Harper government will “re-launch” the Canada-EU trade talks in early September, with the aim of wrapping up the negotiations before parallel EU-U.S. talks begin in October.

We need your help gathering signatures for the petition so it can have maximum effect in Europe and right here in Canada. There are two easy ways that you can help:

1. Circulate the petition to your friends and, if you’re a member of a union or other organization, to your colleagues as well. If you have a website, consider copying our web action image (top left) and use it on your site to link back to our petition page.

2. If you are holding or attending public events in the next two weeks, you could print off the letter and have people sign it right away. Hard-copy letters can be mailed to our offices at 170 Laurier Avenue West, Ste. 700, Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 5V5.

Council of Canadians Executive Director Garry Neil will travel to Brussels on September 17 to meet with Members of the European Parliament and trade justice allies, and will deliver the petitions at this point. So we would need to have all hard-copy petitions/letters at our head office by Monday, September 16. We will continue to accept online signatures to the petition up to September 17.

Thank you for your help and good luck!

For more information about the Canada-EU deal, visit Canadians.org/CETA

The Council of Canadians is Canada’s largest citizens’ organization, with members and chapters across the country. We work to protect Canadian independence by promoting progressive policies on fair trade, clean water, energy security, public health care, and other issues of social and economic concern to Canadians.

Telus Workers’ Unions in Quebec Slam the Preferential Treatment the Harper Government Seeks to Offer the U.S. Multinational Corporation Verizon < Communications | CUPE

Posted on by

Telus Workers’ Unions in Quebec Slam the Preferential Treatment the Harper Government Seeks to Offer the U.S. Multinational Corporation Verizon < Communications | CUPE.