guest@mcgill-vision.UUCP (Rob Aitken) (10/06/87)
At long last, we have free trade. Or a draft document for free trade. Or a
draft document for something vaguely resembling free trade. As the subject
line states, the agreement appears to be one of give and take: We give and
they take. Every summary I have seen so far lists the agreepment in terms
of "the U.S. gets" and "Canada keeps". We seem to "get" nothing, with the
possible exception of a tribunal that will uphold U.S. law.
Apparently, if the U.S. Congress passes a law stating that all imports
from Canada are banned, the tribunal will be able to say only "Yes, indeed,
that's the law". Even this rubber-stamp commission is not viewed by the
Americans as being binding.
American banks and investment companies now have unfettered access to our
economy, but Canadian companies do not get equal treatment in the U.S. We
will have to end transport subsidies to grain farmers, but the Americans
get to keep their farm subsidies. Even the energy distribution clause, where
on the surface the agreement appears almost good for Canada, means only that
Americans will have guaranteed access to our supplies in case of another oil
shortage.
Finally, we get no protection whatsoever from the ominous "Omnibus Trade
Bill" presently before Congress. This was the grand spectre continuously
trotted out by proponents of free trade, but it, and all future anti-dumping
and anti-subsidy legislation, are left untouched by the agreement.
It's not surprising to me that Brian Mulroney sold out Canada, but what
does surprise me is how little he got for it.
Rob Aitken
reply to: musocs.cs.mcgill.ca!spock!rob
Disclaimer: McGill University may or may not agree with the above, and
either way they're not telling.