rabble.ca SEP 11TH, 2008

NAFTA renegotiation was to be the giant elephant, or pink dinosaur, in the room throughout both the U.S. and Canadian federal elections. But it has yet to make much of an appearance, at least in Canada, even with the economy cited as Canadians’ second most important issue, and with one U.S. presidential candidate saying that, if elected, he will want to open up the free trade agreement.

While Elizabeth May can take some credit for trying to get the renegotiation ball rolling in mid-2006, the pressure only heated up after both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton suggested on a Democratic tour stop in Ohio that they would seek changes to NAFTA to protect labour, the environment and even the lopsided investor-state dispute process that allows corporations to sue foreign governments within the free-trade zone for policies – environmental and public health included – that interfere with profits.

The rhetoric practically derailed this year’s Security and Prosperity Partnership summit in New Orleans where U.S. President George Bush, Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon and Prime Minister Stephen Harper were forced to defend the SPP agenda rather than promote it. The now three-year-old “NAFTA expansion pack,” is falling apart according to one of the secretive pact’s key architects.

Three months later, an Angus-Reid poll suggested that more than half of Canadians “think their country should do whatever is necessary to renegotiate the terms of (NAFTA).” The news was so shocking that not a single news outlet reported it! This was shortly after Republican presidential hopeful John McCain addressed a nervous business crowd in Ottawa on his staunch support for free trade and deepening Canada-U.S. economic integration.

And without wanting to jinx the results, there is a very good chance Americans really do want “change” this time around. Shouldn’t Canada’s candidates be saying something – anything – about the very likely chance they will have to defend their country’s trade interests and renegotiate NAFTA at some point after January 1, 2009?

Sadly, it wouldn’t be unlike our leaders to ignore this issue. After all, NAFTA, and the previous free trade deal with the United States, never really had much to do with Canada’s interests. The deals can also largely be blamed for the inaction of successive federal governments on climate change, energy policy, the threat of bulk water exports, the erosion of social policy and the elimination of good jobs across the country.

Canadians need to know whether they will be re-electing NAFTA or the Security and Prosperity Partnership when they go to the polls. Not only is there a clear desire to talk about these issues, but a compelling deadline for when Canada will be brought to the table with the United States to discuss their futures.

Stuart Trew is the Ontario-Quebec-Nunavut Regional Organizer for the Council of Canadians.

This article was posted on Thursday, September 11th, 2008 and is filed under Canadian Issues and Politics, NATO, federal election 2008. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.