The Council replies: Letters to the editor
Column funny; SPP pact isn't

By Stuart Trew
Moncton Times and Transcript
November 13, 2007
Re: Farewell to one 'conspiracy,' Nov. 8, Times & Transcript

Alex Bruce's column Thursday about the Security and Prosperity Partnership was funny (Farewell to one 'conspiracy,' Nov. 8, Times & Transcript), I'll give him that.

But a little more attention to what Canadian critics of the agreement are saying would have been nice.

The Council of Canadians says that our environmental and health regulations are in danger for good reasons.

First, we have evidence. News reports earlier this year claimed that the Canadian government was raising pesticide residue limits on hundreds of fruits and vegetables in order to harmonize with lower U.S. standards.

On Aug. 22, Prime Minister Harper also announced a new Regulatory Co- operation Framework with the United States and Mexico that would further streamline standards across North America.

If that means protecting the environment and public health like they do at the White House, we can expect widespread deregulation up here.

Another major concern we have with the SPP relates to the types of security policies it advocates on a continental scale, such as no-fly lists and so- called "trusted traveller" biometric ID cards, neither of which have been proven to stop terrorists from crossing borders, but both of which will effectively trample on equality and mobility rights in Canada.

All of Canada's privacy commissioners share our opposition to Transport Canada's "Passenger Protect" no-fly list, which was created in collaboration with U.S. authorities as part of the SPP, and for the same reason: because it cannot protect Canadians from what other countries will do with the information it stores on them.

Maher Arar knows better than most Canadians what that means. Furthermore, we have joined with groups like the Canadian Labour Congress, the David Suzuki Foundation and individuals like Arar and his wife Monia Mazigh in demanding that the SPP be brought to Parliament for a full vote.

Currently there is no parliamentary oversight into the SPP. Our MPs are not even briefed on what is being decided in closed-door meetings like the one in Montebello, Quebec this past August.

If Mr. Bruce were serious about wanting to separate the conspiracy from the actual content of the SPP, he might consider reporting on the details of the agreement.

These details are not half as funny as his columns.

Stuart Trew, Researcher, The Council of Canadians

Visit the IntegrateThis.ca website for more information about the SPP.