Demand a national debate on the SPP

August 20 , 2007

The political season is getting an early start this year with the deep integration summit - the Security and prosperity partnership, the SPP - in Montebello, Quebec, near Ottawa. After some three years of efforts to put the issue on the map social movement groups, and others - led by the Council of Canadians - have finally succeeded in breaking the media silence on this crucial issue.

As you know, letters to the editor are hard to get published but when tied to a major event - especially one actually reported on - the chances of getting published increases. So we need to take advantage of the situation to get as many letters in as possible.

Remember, even if letters don’t get published newspapers are aware of the number of letters they get and the use this information to determine what issues are important to people.

I will keep this short, out of recognition that this may still be your vacation time - but PLEASE write a letter. No issue is more important to the future of the country.

FRAMING: Promoters of the SPP have finally been forced to actually defend it and their tack is to cheery pick minor elements that seem quite sensible - tweaking border rules, co-ordinating pandemic plans, etc. - and make it seem of such minor importance that it doesn’t need public debate. We need to frame the issue as one involving the very future of the nation and of deep integration by stealth. It is a massive assault on democracy - and we must demand both transparency and extensive public hearings.

So ... include in your letters a reference to one of more of the important elements, refer to the fact that it has not been debated in any of the 3 countries legislative bodies and declare the need for transparency and a thorough national debate..

Also...if your local paper has covered the issue it is helpful to make a reference to their coverage in your letter.

Elements:

• It is clear from documents coming out of a Calgary conference in the spring that bulk water exports are being actively considered and that Canadian rivers are at risk.

• part of the “security” in the SPP is that Canada is being asked to guarantee US energy security - that is why there are no limits on the development of the tar sands. But this is in the US interests - not Canada’s and it will mean that we will never be able to get even close to meeting the Kyoto targets that we are committed to.

• some 300 areas of regulations are being reconciled with those in the US - most often meaning they are becoming weaker. Just one area that has been revealed shows that we are going to end up with higher levels of pesticide residue on our fruits and vegetables

• the only non-government sector guiding the government is big business - the largest corporations in Canada. The pesticide example demonstrates this: we are changing health standards because they are a “trade irritant” according to the govt. But is health experts were advising the government, and not just big business, they would recommend against these changes.

• part of theJanuary 21, 2008that is Stephen harper’s adoption of US foreign policy and a blind acceptance of the so-called”war on terror” - something Canadians don’t agree with

• we are already integrating our police forces so that situations like the Mahar Arrar case cold easily happen again

• promoters of the SPP and deep integration with the US know that if there was a national debate they would lose - that is why the SPP is not a forma agreement like NAFTA but just an agreement between the three executive branches of Canada, the US and Mexico. They don’t want elected representatives to talk about this agreement.

• there is also growing opposition to the SPP in the US - for many of the same reasons - concerns over sovereignly and democracy.

Click here to SEND YOUR LETTER NOW!