Clear Full Forecast

Report From Parliament's Hill: August 23rd

By Prince George - Peace River M.P. Jay Hill

Thursday, August 23, 2007 03:43 AM

    
The Truth about North America’s Security and Prosperity Partnership


I thoroughly enjoy engaging in informed and reasoned debate with constituents and with my colleagues in the House of Commons. Sadly, some of the statements made this week in opposition to the North American Leaders’ summit were, quite frankly, a cheap betrayal to this principle of democratic debate.

Legitimate debate on all sides of the issues surrounding continental cooperation were drowned out as the conspiracy theorists and the paranoid came out of the woodwork with outright lies about the meeting between Prime Minister Stephen Harper, U.S. President George Bush and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.

I know many constituents who called or emailed my office expressing concern about the talks ended up feeling used and angry at being so severely misled by those spouting these falsehoods, primarily about the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP).

Detractors of the SPP say they’re concerned because it’s so secretive and that ‘evil plans’ are afoot.  On the other hand, proponents of the SPP say there are no secrets to keep because we haven’t done enough to advance this plan to facilitate the safe and easy movement of goods and people around the continent. 

While Canada, the U.S. and Mexico are admittedly far from coming to any tangible agreements under the SPP, when officials from all three countries finally come up with a detailed plan, any governing regulations and legislation will be subject to the rigourous processes for openness and accountability required under Canada’s parliamentary system.

But just to address any lingering doubts you may have about the North American Leaders’ summit, let me clear up a few of the bigger myths.


Protestors were NOT kept at a 25-kilometre distance from the leaders’ summit.  At the security fence adjacent to the Chateau Montebello in Quebec, most protestors engaged in legal and peaceful protest while only a handful felt compelled to use violence.  The low protestor turnout was due to poor organization, not security.

The SPP is unequivocally NOT responsible for an evil mastermind plan to build a super highway, four football fields wide, that will include freight and passenger rail lines and pipelines for oil and bulk exports of Canadian fresh water for thirsty Americans.

I would laugh at this far-fetched idea except there are Canadians who’ve been taken in by this concoction by conspiracy theorists.  There are NO plans (or money!) for this super corridor and no plans for bulk exports of Canada’s fresh water. 

So what is the SPP?  Managing outbreaks of the Avian and Human Pandemic Influenza, energy efficiency and technology development, secure borders, disaster planning, and enhanced competitiveness for North American industries have been primary considerations in the SPP’s rather broad mandate.

The focus of the leader’s discussions this week were Canada’s Arctic sovereignty; consumer protection for all North Americans in response to health and safety hazards surrounding imported products; and, practical measures to clean-up our environment, such as auto standards, biofuels and clean energy technology.

Our three nations share a continent.  In summary, it would therefore be irresponsible NOT to hold these cooperative discussions on our shared borders and enhancing the security and quality of life for Canadians, Americans and Mexicans.
 

    

    
Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

"A cheap betrayal of democratic debate"? Jay just what exactly do you think the three leaders of these countries were doing at these talks. It seems a little schizophrenic to hear you talk of democratic process when it comes to allowing these talks but, refusing to mention the complete lack of democratic process involved in the production of these talks. Nice try, but once again it is easy to see through talk designed to cloud the truth. Deep integration is not wanted by anyone but, the neo-cons and their corporate owners and this is why the talks are held in secret rooms by men (and women) who act like scurrying rats trying to hide from those who elected them. It must take a lot of nerve to quote democratic process in public and expect those who follow this fiasco to swallow the intentionally, misleading rhetoric of politicians who support the destruction of all that Canadians hold to heart as being core values. Despicable.
Why are these talks done in secret with very little information being released? Why is that Jay?
Well, they do say that attack is the ebst defense, and if a politician can't answer his critics then attack them and try to discredit them. His opening paragraphs do just that, but I suspect the attempt to discredit the protesters is a failure, especially now that it appears there were police agitators in the crowd ready to throw stones and start a riot.

I have noticed that Jay Hill attacks someone in every article he writes, from Afghanistan to taxes. Surely the Conservative Party bears responsibility for something!!
Typical neo-con tactics. If it is not their ideology they attack it in an attempt to sway public support in their favour (Think George Bush and Iraq). Also constantly, creating hate and attacking things, helps them to hide the real agenda they are working towards, the reduction and removal of government impediments to corporate greed. Pure slight of hand. Jay seems to have been well taught in these tactics as he reverts to them constantly. He did support the lengthened runway but, who does this serve the most? Corporate interests and the maximum advantage of use for the northern transportation hub. Beetle kill does not make money for corporate interests and thus no money for helping the north. Jay is just another typical politician using all the tricks in his bag to allow his party to do whatever they want to the citizens while giving the appearance of actually caring. This is the nature of politics in the twenty-first century. How sad.
It's not just about North American Cooperation. Mr. Bush didn't come here to alter his agenda one iota. He usually expects the other participants to be fully aware of that fact before they even sit down at the table.

Might makes right. The Three Amigos could have flown to some northern lake, accessible only by air and talked about their *harmless* agenda while fly fishing or while sitting around the campfire.

That simple change of venue would have taken the wind out of the sails of the "conspiracy theorists and the paranoid."

Even "conspiracy theorists and the paranoid" have a vote at election time, one vote per person, just like a politician who craves the votes no matter where they come from!
It is no conspiracy theory that SPP is about blending regulations across the three countries. These regulations were put in place by democratically elected governments in Canada, and therefore negotiations for their removal done in secret by vested interests inevitably undermines our democracy and our sovereignty.

That is fact not conspiracy.

The super highway is a misdirection of the real issues at hand and really has nothing to do with Canadian concerns about SPP. Frankly I hope they do make the superhighway and figure it is an American issue, and not a Canadian issue. I highly doubt a single constituent of Jay Hill called him about American super highway concerns, so why even bring it up other than to confuse the real issue. Because bringing it up allows him to discredit the real issues that concern Canadians. The sovereignty of our democracy is the real issue, and that is the issue Jay will not respond to as government whip.

If the debate is on the up and up, then why not invite opposition politicians to sit in on the debates? Why not publish exactly what the regulations are that are causing the corporate world such problems, so the public can decide on their own if these are legitimate issues in keeping with societies values.

Does Jay Hill anymore stand for democracy of the people that he won three elections as a Reform candidate; or is he now an elite working in secret to implement corporate regulations that supersede our democracy?
Does anyone seriously think people like Jay Hill and Pat Bell write the trash they dish out as weekly columns? There's an ass in their caucus communications branch who churns it out by the shovel load for them to stick their names on.
He wrote (or his caucus communications branch ass wrote): "I thoroughly enjoy engaging in informed and reasoned debate with constituents and with my colleagues in the House of Commons."

So, it sounds to me that he knows some things we do not know as to what the SPP discussions are all about and more or less what transpires in the discussions. Then again, maybe they are so secret that even he does not know and all he can do is regurgitate the party line.

So, how are we to engage in fair informed discussion when we cannot inform ourself of the issues and some of the details of the issues?

Sort of like playing poker with his marked deck of cards.
Then the caucus communications ass states: "Sadly, some of the statements made this week in opposition to the North American Leaders’ summit were, quite frankly, a cheap betrayal to this principle of democratic debate."

They most certainly were. The betrayal was by our representatives who will not give us the tools. He points teh finger of betrayal in the worn direction. He has to point it right back to his party.
.... how about ..... "he points THE finger of betrayal in the WRONG direction".

This fellow who has the gall to call himself a parliamentary debater has me so ticked off I cannot even take the time to correct my typos.

;-)
"we haven’t done enough to advance this plan to facilitate the safe and easy movement of goods and people around the continent."

Why not? If it is so unsafe, tell us waht the plans are to make it safer without removing essetnial freedoms, without over reacting.

I notice that the ariprot security, both here and in Vancouver are now patting down individuals simply because their sensitive metal detection instruments are going off.

While returning from Vancouver a few days ago, the signal went off even though I emptied my pockets of all metal and took my watch off. The belt buckle, of course, has to be undone each time, and then the wand goes off due to the fly zipper which virtually all males have.

When the wand sounded on my upper back on both sides of my shoulder blades I asked the security agent why the thing is going off there. The nearest metal was my belt buckle on the front. Supposedly no idea.

They now double up the wand with a feel everywhere it goes off. So far, they seem to be stopping at the fly.

They even patted my uncovered arms down when the thing went off there for some strange reason. I was wearing a short sleeved shirt.

Too many false positives in the instrument setting for my liking.
"The low protestor turnout was due to poor organization, not security."

Here is a newspaper article which deals with the protest conditions. Had it not been for the court ruling, not even that would have been allowed.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=632a1416-be6b-4c26-a2b5-62c5baab0c83

The system is sort of neat, actually. A TV feed of protesters somewhere outside hidden behind the trees. That suggests that the next time the feeds should actually come from protest locations set up accross the country. That way everyone saves energy, which is one of the supposed goals of the SPP talks, to get to the location which may be thousands of kilometres away.

I wonder whether there is a neutral observer inside who is in charge of assuring that the TVs are turned on, that they are not facing against the wall, that they are in high participant traffic areas, that the volume is turned up, and the images are clear.
But Jay, after all that BS, to me the burning question is - " Did Steve and the two other amigo's get the jellybean standardization all fixed up.?" I wouldn't want to be eating any non conforming jelly beans. I also expect that once a standard for these super beans is established the price will probably double and if Canada exports too many there will be a tarriff applied by the US.
"The sovereignty of our democracy is the real issue, and that is the issue Jay will not respond to as government whip."

A visit to the Canadian Action Party website can provide plenty of information about the SPP and NAU. The US will not give up any of its sovereignty and it will not agree to anything that it has decided beforehand not to agree to. That leaves only Canada and Mexico to give in and compromise, even on issues that really shouldn't be up for discussion, like sovereignty.

Mr. Hill's characterization of the whole matter studiously avoids and sidesteps the real agenda, which has been worked on by CEOs of all three countries behind closed doors - a couple of hundred of the bosses of banking and industry.

Canada and Mexico will be junior partners with very little clout and decision making powers.

Washington will be running the entire show.
"Washington will be running the entire show."

It states as much on the US SPP site.

http://www.spp.gov/myths_vs_facts.asp

"The SPP is a White House-led initiative" ... the first words .... not as tripartite initiative or a joint initiative .... it is a White House-led intiative ....

Not even a US led intitiative ..... it is a White House led intitiative .....

So, when the present tenant is kicked out, will it still be a white house led intitiative?