Tag Archives: harper government

Stephen Harper ‘hasn’t seen anything yet’

Posted on by

Mulcair warns of Senate-scandal grilling when House returns

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair says Conservatives should be paying for audit.

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair says Conservatives should be paying for audit. Photo: The Canadian Press / Files

August 26, 2013    http://o.canada.com

OTTAWA — Stephen Harper may have bought himself an extra month of peace by proroguing Parliament and delaying the fall session but when he returns in October, he can expect to be back on the hot seat over Senate spending, NDP Leader Tom Mulcair warned Monday

“In the last five weeks of Parliament, the prime minister showed up to answer questions exactly five times. By the time the House finally reconvenes, it will have been five months since he’s had to answer a question,” Mulcair told party faithful during a stop on Parliament Hill as part of the Opposition’s “Roll Up the Red Carpet” campaign to abolish the upper chamber.

“Well, Mr. Harper needs to answer for himself and he needs to answer to Canadians. If Mr. Harper thought the questions last spring were tough, he hasn’t seen anything yet. We’re just getting started.”

Mulcair, who was lauded by political observers last spring for his performance during question period — namely his rapid fire grilling of Conservatives over Senate spending that left them squirming —  returned to Ottawa to draw attention to the prime minister’s absence and rail against the “unelected and unaccountable” Senate.

It’s part of a cross-country campaign to sway public opinion and get provincial leaders on his side in the hopes of winning a mandate in the next election that would allow his party to scrap the so-called chamber sober second thought. It’s a crucial proposition for the NDP which has no senators and would likely struggle to pass legislation if it were to form government.

Mulcair, has yet to explain exactly how he would get rid of the Senate — a complicated proposal the Supreme Court has been asked to clarify — but acknowledged Monday that it wouldn’t be easy even if it is a “vestigial organ that can safely be removed with no harm to the body.

“I intend to meet with the premiers. I know that not all are in agreement. We’ve never had any illusion. We don’t think that this is going to be easy,” he said.

“But we want to start the conversation now, while we’re still in Opposition, to make sure that Canadians understand that we’re serious about it. That we know it’s a profound institutional change but we want to get a mandate to do that as part of the 2015 election.”

Mulcair also reiterated calls for the Conservative Party to pick up the tab for embattled Sen. Pamela Wallin’s $127,000 audit. Not only did Harper initially defend the senator in the House of Commons, he argued the audit later revealed that many of the expenses under question had to do with partisan fundraising efforts.

With the auditor general now set to review the expenses of all senators, Mulcair said both the Liberal and Conservative parties should be prepared to cover the cost should any “irregularities” related to party financing be uncovered.

Mulcair also touched on other priorities in advance of upcoming meetings in Saskatoon where his caucus will hammer out a strategy for the return of Parliament. Mulcair said the “public protection” of Canadians and the erosion of regulations related to rail safety, food security and maritime search and rescue, are among the issues the NDP will explore in the lead up to the next election.

tcohen@postmedia.com

Twitter.com/tobicohen

Cheap labour and the lessons of the Plaza Hotel strike

Posted on by

Robyn Benson By Robyn Benson on August 23, 2013   http://www.aec-cea.ca

 

plaza hotel strike.JPG

Who are those people pounding the pavement outside Toronto’s Plaza Hotel, whom the owner called “animals?” They are workers with little or no hope for the long-term, decently-paid jobs that many of us take for granted, living a precarious existence. If you want to know how many of them there are these days, take one Plaza Hotel and multiply by a very big number.

The low-wage workers at the Plaza are at least unionized. Largely due to their Steelworkers Union and to the Ontario Federation of Labour, the public is becoming more aware of the appalling working conditions there.

But this is just the tip of the cheap-labour iceberg.

I’ve posted before about the Temporary Foreign Workers program, a part of this new race to the bottom, in which the Harper government has been complicit. A victory or two have been won in that area, but there is much more to the problem than offshore workers entering Canada on a government program. In some ways, that was just a matter of domestic Canadian cheap labour being edged out of jobs by foreign cheaper labour.

Take the North American fast-food service industry, for example. It used to be that this was a good sector for young people to find a job for a while, and then move on. Now more adults than teens are asking if you want fries with that, and they’re in it for the long haul.

The new employees of this largely non-union sector are more experienced and better educated than formerly, but their wages and benefits don’t reflect that. Small wonder, as we have seen recently in Halifax with coffee-shop baristas, and in the US with employees of McDonald’s and other franchises, that these workers are beginning to look to unionization—and a substantial increase in the minimum wage—as a way of making their circumstances comparatively less precarious.

Would this make hamburgers, coffee and fried chicken too expensive? That’s always the scare-story put about by the anti-union types. But it’s not founded upon fact:

Several studies show that raising the minimum wage would have minimal effects on the industry as a whole. One letter signed by more than 100 economists and published by the University of Massachusetts said that raising the minimum wage to $10.50 would increase the price of a Big Mac by a nickel. Another study shows that doubling the salaries and benefits of all of McDonald’s employees would add 68 cents to each Big Mac.

Perhaps one of the more comical aspects of the corporate fightback was the spectacle of McDonald’s solemnly informing its low-wage employees how to budget. The bosses’ scheme works perfectly—if the minimum wage is doubled, and you can do without water, clothing, gas, heat and child care.

Are low wages the natural cost of working for a living wage in the service sector these days? Well, no:

Consider Costco and Wal-Mart’s Sam’s Club, which compete fiercely on low-price merchandise. Among warehouse retailers, Costco…is number one, accounting for about 50% of the market. Sam’s Club…is number two, with about 40% of the market.

…A 2005 New York Times article by Steven Greenhouse reported that at $17 an hour, Costco’s average pay is 72% higher than Sam’s Club’s ($9.86 an hour).

On the benefits side, 82% of Costco employees have health-insurance coverage, compared with less than half at Wal-Mart.

…In return for its generous wages and benefits, Costco gets one of the most loyal and productive workforces in all of retailing, and, probably not coincidentally, the lowest shrinkage (employee theft) figures in the industry….Costco’s stable, productive workforce more than offsets its higher costs.

A cheap labour strategy doesn’t work. It costs just about everybody. Costco knows this from experience, and has resisted calls to lower its wages and benefits.

So the push-back against impoverishing workers is not only a union concern, although we can certainly play a lead role in it. But we in the labour movement can’t do that by focusing too narrowly. We need to be part of a wider movement to defend the right to a living, dignified wage and secure employment for everyone. After all, it’s our whole society that is at stake here—and surely that makes it everybody’s fight.

IP on agenda of TPP talks

Posted on by

Friday, August 23, 2013    The Brunei Times

His Majesty Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkiah Mu’izzaddin Waddaulah (R), the Sultan and Yang Di-Pertuan of Brunei Darussalam, held an audience yesterday with ministers and heads of delegates from Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) member countries at Istana Nurul Iman. Also present were His Royal Highness Prince Hj Al-Muhtadee Billah (2nd R), the Crown Prince and Senior Minister at the Prime Minister’s Office. Picture: BT/Yusri Adanan

 

MINISTERS of the 12 Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) member countries yesterday commenced the 19th round of discussions on the trade agreement, with focus on, among others, the intellectual property provisions.

Held at the International Convention Centre, the 19th round for the TPP also welcomed Japan as the 12th member of the discussions. Japan joined the TPP towards the end of the 18th round in Malaysia last month.

Akira Amari, Japanese minister in charge of economic revitalisation and minister of state for economic and fiscal policy is in the sultanate for the proceedings.

YB Pehin Orang Kaya Perkerma Dewa Dato Lim Jock Seng, Brunei’s second minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, welcomed TPP ministerial colleagues to the Sultanate and noted that the meeting was a good opportunity to take stock of their current progress.

He said Japan’s inclusion as the 12th member serves to emphasise the significance of the collective undertaking, and hoped that the meeting in Brunei would yield positive results that can be reported to the leaders in the upcoming months.

The TPP ministerial meeting was chaired by United States Trade Representative Michael Froman.

At a press conference the other day, Froman had expressed hope that negotiations for the trade pact would be concluded by the end of the year.

The 19th round is set to run until August 31.

Brunei’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MoFAT) stated that there would be a stakeholder dialogue on the morning of August 27, to be held in “a leading hotel in Jerudong”.

“The dialogue will include a number of presentations by various stakeholders from TPP countries and provide an opportunity for stakeholders to engage directly with negotiators,” it stated.

MoFAT added that YB Pehin Dato Lim held a bilateral meeting with Japan’s Amari to exchange views on trade and economic relations between the sultanate and Japan, ASEAN and Japan and “matters related to the TPP negotiations”.

Intellectual property is one of the most contentious issues in the trade pact, with some members of the partnership expressing concern over how protection of medical patents would affect access to more affordable generic drugs.

The TPP is being negotiated by Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam.

Debbie Too The Brunei Times

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.

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.