CLC statement on negotiations toward a CETA between Canada and the EU
Canadian Labour Congress | Monday, 18 October 2010
Statement on negotiations toward a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between Canada and the European Union
Free trade is ... viewed as reliance on the market to determine economic reality. It is part and parcel of the same philosophy that lends support to the “downsizing” of government, privatization, deregulation; in short, the package of “remedies” that place priority on the enhancement of business confidence. One of the implications of free trade is that corporate decision-making in the marketplace is substituted for public decision-making in the political arena.— CLC Executive Council 1985
Twenty-five years after these words were written, history has shown that the Canadian labour movement was correct in its appraisal of the implications of rushing toward free trade with the United States. The Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement affirmed the era of global restructuring that brought us to the greatest economic catastrophe the world has known since the Great Depression. Now, the Canadian government intends to apply neo-liberal solutions to a crisis caused by neo-liberalism. More of these “solutions” are now being proposed in the negotiations toward a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with the European Union. This is a grave error. As the international labour movement correctly declared in its Pittsburgh Declaration of 2009, there should be no return to “business as usual” after the global economic crisis. We stand with our Canadian and European community allies who also have serious reservations about the scope and negotiating process of the proposed CETA.
The Canadian Labour Congress would support an agreement between Canada and the E.U. embodying the most positive features of the European social model, including higher standards and protective regulation, but this is not on offer. Instead, the CETA would constrain the ability of the governments in Canada at all levels to meet their democratic responsibilities to citizens and residents. Both sides are trying to achieve the most “ambitious” and “comprehensive” agreement possible in order to export neo-liberalism abroad and push the World Trade Organization’s Doha multilateral negotiations toward a similar end.
It is unlikely that the Canadian government’s position will be acceptable to our sisters and brothers in the European labour movement. The Canadian government is opposed to European efforts to re-regulate the financial system, including through a tax on financial transactions for profits. Canada takes a completely divergent position on greenhouse gas emissions. Canada and Europe do not agree on genetically modified crops and food, hormone-treated meat, chemicals regulation, and asbestos. Canada promotes greater industry self-regulation across all government departments and sectors. Canada restricts the right to unionization and collective bargaining. The potential for weakening the public interest in Canada and the European Union is significant, and it will engender opposition. Finally, Canada is proposing to insert an investor-rights provision, similar to NAFTA’s Chapter 11, which has never before been a feature of a European Union trade agreement.
We call on the Canadian government to commit to the following goals:
Strengthened Labour Rights: Any agreement on labour issues will be meaningless insofar as workers’ rights are corroded by investor- rights provisions, relegated to a side agreement, or defended by sanctions that are non-binding and not enforceable. Investors should be required to abide by the highest standards. Workers’ organizations must be included in economic and social decision-making. Any comprehensive agreement must commit to raise labour standards and strengthen inspection and enforcement mechanisms for labour law, especially with respect to migrant workers and others facing precarious economic and social situations. Dispute resolutions must be based upon an independent and transparent complaints process with a supra-national mechanism of enforcement when states refuse to live up to their own obligations.
Ratification of ILO Fundamental Conventions: Canada’s record of support for labour rights is indefensible. Canada has only ratified five of the eight fundamental International Labour Organization Conventions. Canada refuses to ratify: ILO Conventions No. 29 on Forced Labour, 1930; No. 98 - Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining, 1949; and No. 138 - Minimum Age, 1973. Canada must also ratify the priority conventions for good governance.
Respect for Workers’ Rights in Labour Mobility: We believe that labour mobility should be a human right and not a commercial opportunity for exploitation; therefore, issues of labour mobility must not be part of trade deals at all, where disputes will be evaluated by commercial arbitration panels. Rather, protocols, policies, and programs that support labour mobility must be governed under international instruments, such as: ILO Conventions No. 97 on Migration for Employment (Revised), 1949; No. 143 on Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions), 1975; the 1990 UN Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Their Families; as well as Recommendation No. 86 on Migration for Employment (Revised), 1949; and No. 151 on Migrant Workers, 1975 ― none of which Canada has ratified.
Sound Industrial Policy: Canada should support industrial policies that support good jobs for both men and women workers, and young workers. We need active government policies to move us toward “green economy” investments that will ensure a low carbon future, as well as just and sustainable development. The Canadian government should use the tools at its disposal to advance decent work and diversification through support for research and development; sustainable investments and job creation; and training and education.
Full Transparency: In past trade negotiations, the public has not received substantive information about the talks until a full and final agreement has been reached. This is unacceptable. In the case of CETA, which is more ambitious than NAFTA and with deeper impacts on federal, provincial and municipal policies, programs, regulations, and public services, the public has the right to full disclosure, along with the right to meaningful and informed input into the negotiations.
A Comprehensive Impact Assessment: A consultation paper issued by the European Commission contains questions addressed primarily to the business community. Similarly, online consultations from the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade are insufficient. There have been no preliminary, independent studies or broad stakeholder debate and consultation. We need a comprehensive impact assessment of the proposed bilateral trade agreement on the economy, jobs, poverty, gender, human rights, culture, and the environment ― in Canada and the European Union.
Protection for Public Services: Any agreement should fully protect public services as delivered by the current system, as well as the ability to create new public services without reservation and without negative impacts from a trade agreement. Governments must retain the authority to favour public delivery of services, such as water treatment and distribution, without fear that such a policy would be considered a barrier to trade in services by European Union companies.
Strengthened Social Policy: Governments have a responsibility to ensure that universal access to public health care and other social programs is protected in trade agreements. Any comprehensive agreement with Europe must commit governments to full employment, decent work, social citizenship, and an end to poverty. The E.U. and transnational drug companies are seeking unacceptable changes to Canadian drug patent laws – including patent term extension, data protection, and new appeal rights for brand-name manufacturers – that would reduce the availability of inexpensive, medically effective generic drugs, and significantly increase drug costs to Canadian provincial governments and consumers.
Public Procurement is a Public Right: The agreement should not include any commitment to open or liberalize public procurement at the subnational level, including at the municipal level. Municipalities should have a clear and permanent exemption from the CETA. Canadian provinces, territories, and cities must retain the policy space they need to use public money in support of sustainable, local, economic development. Canada and all the E.U. Member States need to ratify ILO Convention No. 94 on Social Clauses in Public Procurement.
The Right to Regulate: There should be complete reservation of the right to domestic regulation regarding public services, culture, finance, public health, and the environment. Regulatory harmonization efforts must adopt the higher standard in either Canada or the European Union. Municipalities, provinces and territories, and the federal government must retain the right to develop even higher standards of protection than currently exist in the European Union or any other trading partner.
Protection of Our Cultural Sovereignty: Canada’s ratification of the 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions must be backed up by the resolve to systematically exempt all cultural products and services from any commercial agreement with the European Union. Canada and the provinces must remain free to adopt all cultural and linguistic policies they deem necessary to promote our cultural specificity, and to ensure Canadian citizens have access to the works of Canadian artists and producers.
No Investment Chapter: There should be no right for an investor or private company to directly challenge, in private tribunals, the laws or regulations of a foreign government that is a party to the trade agreement, but this right to challenge should reside solely with the competent government jurisdiction. Instead, Canada should immediately begin negotiations with the United States and Mexico to remove the investor-rights’ provisions in Chapter 11 of NAFTA.
Respect and Protect Indigenous Rights: Canada has recently pledged to endorse the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). While this is a welcome step, proper implementation requires the government to receive Free, Prior, and Informed Consent from Indigenous Peoples whenever Indigenous rights may be affected by any government decision. Since the proposed Canada-E.U. agreement is so sweeping that it will undoubtedly impact Indigenous rights, the agreement must uphold the maximum protections for the rights of Indigenous Peoples in compliance with the UNDRIP as the highest international standard, especially in the case of foreign industries operating in Indigenous lands, territories, and water.
Ecological Sustainability and Climate Action: The urgent need for global coordinated action on climate change to keep the average global temperature under the 2° Celsius tipping-point requires political leaders to recognize the causal role of global trade on increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Commitments to sustainable development in existing Canadian and European trade agreements, as well as those under negotiation, do nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and do very little to ensure the highest protection of our air, earth, and water. A fundamental policy shift is needed in Canada and Europe that places environmental, public health, and global responsibilities above the limited interests of corporations. Governments must commit to science-based emission reductions, provide financing for both adaptation and mitigation in addition to existing international aid funding, and endorse the concept of “just transition” in the negotiating texts of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
