Profit and loss

[Judy]

jbor wrote:
 > > But you haven't once explained why or how "the effective power of the
> nation
> > state" is even under threat. It isn't, for goodness' sake.
 Phil Wise responded:

> I have, several times.  It is quite clear that one of the concerns many
> protesters have is that corporations under these free trade deals can
attack
> laws made by democratically elected (and otherwise, no doubt) governments
of
> nation states, if those laws could limit corporations' business activity.
> This threatens the effective power of the nation state.

I agree with you here. At the moment the Council of Canadians and the
Canadian Union of Postal Workers have launched a constitutional challenge to
NAFTA investment rules because "they share a conviction that NAFTA
investor-state procedures represent a profound assault on the most basic
building blocks of a sovereign and democratic society".

They continue: "The investment provisions of NAFTA empower countless foreign
investors to sue Canada and its NAFTA partners to enforce the largely
exclusive rights the treaty accords them. In most cases these broad investor
"rights" have no domestic analogue, and could not be enforced before
national courts. Moreoever, when a claim is made against Canada, it will be
determined by a secretive international arbitral tribunal, which operates
entirely outside the framework of Canadian law, our courts, and our
constitutional guarantees of fairness, fundamental justice and equality."

In response to the question what is wrong with NAFTA investor-state
procedures?:
"By allowing countless foreign investors to invoke international binding
arbitration to enforce expansive investment rights, NAFTA and other
investment treaties represent a dramatic departure from the norms of
international law in two important ways. First, by giving corporations the
right to directly enforce an international treaty to which they are neither
party nor under which they have any obligations - i.e., rights but no
responsibility. Second, foreign investors may invoke private and secretive
international commercial arbitration processes to determine claims that
involve important issues of public policy and law - i.e., to use private
procedures to resolve public disputes.

The result has placed a coercive international enforcement regime at the
disposal of countless foreign investors who may use it freely to challenge
public policies and laws they oppose. Not surprisingly a growing number of
foreign corporations are taking advantage of this opportunity to claim
substantial damages from governments that have allegedly failed to respect
the constraints imposed on their authority by NAFTA rules. The targets of
these claims have included water export controls, fuel additive regulations,
hazardous waste export controls, and most recently public services." For
example, UPS (United Parcel Service of America Inc. has invoked
investor-state procedures to challenge public sector postal services in
Canada:

"While UPS has refused to make its statement of claim public, a few details
can be gleaned from the notice it is obliged to file with the NAFTA
Secretariat. The gist of the UPS claim appears to be that Canada Post has
taken advantage of its monopoly position to underwrite the costs of its
competitive parcel and courier delivery services. But in an era when many
Crown Corporations and public agencies deliver at least some services in
competition with the private sector, that argument could apply to virtually
all public sector services - from water supply to health care. UPS is
claiming $US 160 million in damages."

The effective power of  the nation state is threatened when tribunals
operate outside of our laws, our courts, and our constitutional guarantees
of fairness, fundamental justice and equality.

- Judy