The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

The ABCs of the SPP An introduction to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America In March 2005, as a result of intense lobbying from North Americas richest corporations, the leaders of Canada, Mexico and the United States met in Waco, Texas to shake hands on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). The SPP was a pledge to speed up the corporate goal of con- tinental economic integration by link- ing it to U.S. government security demands. In a post-9/11 world where, for the Bush administration, security trumps trade, the Canadian and Mexican governments have agreed to fully inte- grate their security apparatuses with the U.S. and fully participate in its war on terror in return for vague assurances of continued market access for their largest corporations. But the SPP goes much further than this. Plans for regulatory conver- gence, energy sector integration and a potential common external tariff will make independent Canadian policies on agriculture, the environment and energy impossible. Since March 2005, without public input and with little public awareness, all three North American governments have been moving quickly toward establishing a continental resource pact, a North American security perimeter, and common agricultural and other health, safety and environ- mental policies. Working groups com- prised of government officials and corporate leaders are quietly putting this partnership into action, and to date only industry stakeholders have been consulted, often in private, closed-door meetings. Not even our elected Members of Parliament have been kept in the loop. The first report of the SPP in 2005 described how all future decisions affecting Canada-U.S.-Mexico rela- tions would be made: meetings for business, consultations for stake- holders and briefings for Parliament. In other words, there would be no legislative debate on the SPP and the public would be left out of the picture completely. North Americas corporate elite, on the other hand, has a permanent seat at the table. A public-private sector dialogue on the SPP from January 2006 talked about marrying policy issues with business priorities, and establishing a permanent all-CEO working group to guide future discussions on integra- tion. Lo and behold, a few months later, the Canadian, American and Mexican governments handed the pri- vate sector complete control of the SPP process by creating the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC). On top of official SPP meetings, corporate leaders have been colluding with top military brass and govern- ment officials from all three countries at secret meetings on integration like the North American Forum. In September 2006, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day joined a host of Canadian, U.S. and Mexican mili- tary officers and other government reps to discuss things like Demographic and Social Dimensions of North American Integration. Leaked documents show that at least one participant said that integration will happen as a process of evolution by stealth. In April 2006, another closed-door meeting related to the SPP, organized by the Center for Strategic and International Studies and paid for by the U.S. government, discussed bulk water exports from Canada to the U.S. But the SPP is not just high-level policy talk. It is already affecting our lives directly. In early 2007, an SPP priority to harmonize rules on pesticide residues resulted in Canada allowing higher levels of pesticides in the food we eat. The SPPs goal of creating a North American no-fly list means that air travelers are being stopped from boarding their flights just because their names resemble one of almost half a million people U.S. officials implausibly consider an immediate threat. And the SPPs plan for a five- fold increase in Alberta tar sands pro- duction makes it impossible for Canada to reduce greenhouse gas emissions putting everyone at increased risk from climate change. Clearly the public needs a much larg- er say in these kinds of decisions. Those pushing the SPP, be they senior government ministers, top bureaucrats or members of the busi- ness elite, have had it pretty easy so far. They shrug off criticism of the partnership by claiming that the SPP is about making this continent safer and more prosperous. But if the SPP were really about everyones security and everyones prosperity, our leaders would have included more than just a handful of North Americas richest CEOs in the discussion. If the leaders of North America are not prepared to speak with their own citizens about decisions that affect everyones security and prosperity, then we must force them to listen to what we have to say about the SPP. This report is intended to inform the discussion around the SPP and to fuel the public debate. We need to raise this issue with our friends, family, local city councillors and other elect- ed representatives. The facts on the SPP speak for themselves. Together, we can make sure that Canada says no to the SPP and no to the integration agenda behind it... Just say no to the SPP: Five rea- sons to oppose the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America The Security and Prosperity Partnership is such a big agreement, with so many policy recommenda- tions in so many areas, that it some- times feels like we need a ten-page essay to fully explain why it is such a rotten deal for Canada. But it isnt really all that complicated. The Council of Canadians opposes the SPP for five main reasons related to its impact on democracy, water, energy, military and foreign policy, and the real security of citizens across the continent. 1. The SPP is anti-democratic The SPP is the political manifesta- tion of a corporate plan for economic and security integration that was never voted on in any country. Big business lobbies like the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) drafted almost all of the SPPs 300 initiatives and they continue to be the only Canadian group with any input into the SPP. In May 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper put 10 members of the CCCE onto a permanent high- level advisory board called the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC). This group has been asked to prioritize the priorities in the SPP and to drive change. Meanwhile, the public and most of our publicly elect- ed officials have been left out of the picture completely. 2. The SPP is a waste of energy Energy is arguably the sticky goo holding the SPP together. Canada and Mexico have agreed to give U.S. oil companies an even tighter grip of both countries resources in return for vague assurances that the U.S. wont shut the border to our goods. In Canada, that means guaranteeing a fivefold increase in tar sands produc- tion, no matter what the consequences for the environment and public health and even if it makes greenhouse gas reductions impossible. Pipelines are under construction to ship raw bitu- men out of Alberta and to U.S. refiner- ies, which means were not even securing any jobs out of this energy fire sale. In Mexico, while their oil and gas industry is miraculously still state-owned, the corporate lobby behind the SPP is pushing for privati- zation. Clearly, this partnership is about U.S. energy security at the expense of Canadian and Mexican jobs and the environment, and is therefore an incredible waste of ener- gy for Canada. 3. The SPP will lead to bulk water exports An SPP roundtable on the Future of the North American Environment on April 27, 2007 in Calgary dis- cussed water consumption, water transfers and artificial diversions of bulk water, with the aim of achieving joint optimum utilization of the available [North American] water. The meeting was part of the White House-funded North American Future 2025 Project that has Canadian gov- ernment backing as a venue to help guide the ongoing Security and Prosperity Partnership, according to a CanWest news article. Its no secret that the U.S. is going to need water, project leader Armand Peschard- Sverdrup told the Ottawa Citizen. Its no secret that Canada is going to have an overabundance of water. At the end of the day, there may have to be arrangements. Those arrangements are clearly being discussed behind closed doors and must cease immedi- ately. 4. The SPP makes Canadians less secure Joint Canada-U.S. no-fly lists, exclusive airport service for trusted travelers, and racially based immi- gration policies that criminalize peo- ple from high risk countries. These are among a few of the extremely dis- turbing security measures contained in the SPP. The simple fact that Maher Arar is still on the U.S. no-fly list, despite exoneration and a formal apol- ogy from the RCMP and our federal government, is proof that none of these measures can make Canadians any safer. In fact, they increase the insecurity of thousands of people who may be banned from flying, unneces- sarily detained, or even deported because of where they were born or with whom they associate. 5. The SPP ties us to the U.S. war on terror The SPP ties Canada even closer to a militaristic U.S. government and will inevitably erode any differences that currently exist between our two countries foreign and defence poli- cies. Already we see Canada amplify- ing its role in Afghanistan and adver- tising the fact on billboards in Washington, D.C. We see a shift in stance on Middle East issues with Canada backing the U.S. position every time. And we see the big busi- ness lobby continuing to push Canada to sign on to missile defence and cre- ate a joint military command for all of North America. This is all despite public opinion polls on the Department of Foreign Affairs web- site showing that 83 per cent of Canadians would rather that we forge an independent foreign policy despite the negative consequences it might have on trade with the U.S. Its time to put an end to the SPP ! STOP THE SPP! KEEP CANADA CANADIAN! PAID ADVERTISEMENT To learn more about this issue, visit www.canadians.org 10 Independent & Free Press, Wednesday, November 7, 2007