| |
|
Who's Online |
|
We have 34 guests online |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Upcoming Events |
Burma Uprising Anniversary- Fri, Aug 8th, 2008, @12:00am- 12:00pm
|
Better Biking Brainstorming Session- Thu, Aug 14th, 2008, @7:00pm- 9:00pm
|
Missing Women Conference Opens- Thu, Aug 14th, 2008, @3:00pm- 9:00pm
|
Weyburn Zero Waste Convention Opens- Fri, Aug 15th, 2008, @9:00am- 5:00pm
|
100 Mile Potluck- Tue, Aug 26th, 2008, @5:30am- 8:00pm
|
Briarpatch Birthday- Wed, Sep 10th, 2008, @7:30pm- 8:30pm
|
Aboriginal Music Festival - Saskatoon- Fri, Sep 19th, 2008, @6:00pm- 11:00pm
|
Naomi Klein Lecture - Regina- Tue, Sep 23rd, 2008, @7:30am- 8:30pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Pathway :: Home
|
NAFTA Continues to Curb Environmental Protection |
|
|
|
|
Contributed by Jim Elliott
|
|
Tuesday, 29 January 2008 |
|
NAFTA continues to put up barriers for the Canadian government to protect the environment and to manage their natural resources. In a report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, there are currently 49 investor-state claims against Canada (18), the United States (14) and Mexico (17).
NAFTA’s controversial investor-state dispute settlement mechanism
allows foreign investors to bring claims against NAFTA governments for
breaches of the broadly worded investment rights and protections in
NAFTA’s investment chapter (chapter 11).
Foreign investors have
used chapter 11 to challenge a wide range of government measures that
allegedly diminish the value of their investments. Because almost any
government regulation or policy affects property interests, NAFTA’s
investment rules have been criticized as constraining the fundamental
role of democratic governments.
The report looked into 6 cases
filed against Canada. Two of these were the multinational oil giant
Exxon-Mobile challenging Newfoundland's local economic development
policies and Ontario's decision to halt a controversial project to
dispose of Toronto's landfill into a man-made lake. “Unfortunately, NAFTA’s investment rules are so broadly worded that
these aggressive claims might well succeed,” remarked Scott Sinclair,
the report’s author. “At a time when Canadians are more concerned than
ever about protecting the environment, this is simply unacceptable.”
What is concerning about these challenges is that this is not a legal
or judicial decision but the decision of an independent behind closed
doors tribunal with no appeal mechanisms. In the reports assessment,
Canada has lost 2 of the last 3 claims. In two, Canada paid the
investors damages and in one repealed the challenging measure. Mexico
has lost all of its 3 cases. By contrast, the investors' four claims
in the United States have all been dismissed.
“Instead of eliminating the NAFTA investor-state mechanism, our
government seems intent on expanding it through bilateral trade
agreements,” Sinclair said. “New agreements with Peru, Colombia and
South Korea contain versions of NAFTA’s chapter 11 rules, which permit
foreign investors to challenge government measures that allegedly
diminish the value of their investments.”
Foreign investors have also aggressively challenging measures that
governments maintained were not covered by NAFTA. These include
challenges related to water exports, log export controls, public postal
services, Canada’s agricultural supply management system, Canadian
cultural policy, and other matters which were supposedly excluded from
the NAFTA.
Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register. Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 29 January 2008 )
|
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owners. Opinions expressed in articles within this site are those of their owners and may not reflect the opinion of ActUpInSask.org, its staff, or its associates.
|
|
|
