Fight the SPP / North American Union

[Fain]

I'm all for the freedom to cross into other markets in various ways, what I oppose is restriction on what we can and can't do inside our own country. Yes, you MAY buy our resources if you want them and we want to sell them, but NO you don't have any right to them nor do you have the right to dictate what price we will charge you for them. That's a lot different than how these trade pacts usually end up.

Then opt for a more refined agreement then. Easy peezy japanezy. It shouldn't mean you be against the whole thing then.

[mikemac]

If you like Canada and are concerned with Canadian sovereignty then vote tomorrow like Danny Williams, ABC, Anything But Conservative.

Steven Harper still has a chance of getting a majority government.

A majority Conservative government would mean the end of Canada as we know it.

The Council on Foreign Relations wants to implement the North American Union by 2010.

A majority Harper Conservative government would do that.

See this page for more on the North American Union,

http://hubpages.com/hub/North-American-Union--Canada

Mike

Edited October 14, 2008 by mikemac

[Slim MacSquinty]

Hey Mike: how are things over at the Canadian Action Party anyhow? Solved that pesky 911 thing yet?

[mikemac]

Hey Mike: how are things over at the Canadian Action Party anyhow? Solved that pesky 911 thing yet?

Canadian Action Party?

[Slim MacSquinty]

These are the north american union worriers responsible for much of the rhetoric you refer to:

http://www.canadianactionparty.ca/home.html

Another very important part of their platform is involved in the 911 truthers cause.

Nutters all.

[mikemac]

Slim see what Lou Dobbs has to say in the first video.

See both Harper and Bush get caught in a lie in the second video.

See Harper's talk at the Council on Foreign Relations.

You can see it all here http://hubpages.com/hub/North-American-Union--Canada

And it's not from the Canadian Action Party.

Believe it or not Slim, Canadian sovereignty is at stake with this election.

[Smallc]

Believe it or not Slim, Canadian sovereignty is at stake with this election.

If it is, then I can't think of a better defender of it than Harper.

[Smallc]

Slim see what Lou Dobbs has to say in the first video.

See both Harper and Bush get caught in a lie in the second video.

See Harper's talk at the Council on Foreign Relations.

You can see it all here http://hubpages.com/hub/North-American-Union--Canada

And it's not from the Canadian Action Party.

Believe it or not Slim, Canadian sovereignty is at stake with this election.

In the video about the Manitoba Legislature, they don't even seem to know who it is talking and they mistakenly say its the speaker....its not...wow....some info you got there when they can't even get the simple things right....

oooh....trade....scary.

Edited October 14, 2008 by Smallc

[Slim MacSquinty]

Canadian sovereignty is at risk from a long list of things that don't particularly worry me.

The north american union debate has much to do with trade harmonization to ensure that we have some commonality to our regulations and in particular border security. In many ways a mountain out of a mole hill. Canada (although I've heard some natives argue otherwise) is still an independant nation.

[mikemac]

https://secure.greenparty.ca/spp.php

To Prime Minister Stephen Harper, President George Bush and President Felipe de Jesús Calderón of Mexico,

We, the people of Canada want to send you a clear message that we do not support the SPP and will actively work to stop its implementation.

The Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America, initiated on March 31, 2005 by the leaders of Canada, the United States and Mexico to advance free trade and security cooperation should not go forward.

We demand fair trade not free trade and a continued separation between our countries on issues such as:

* Homeland security;

* The military;

* Energy and natural resources;

* Global security and foreign policy;

* Economic policy; and

* Regulatory policy – environment, health, food safety for expediting cross-border trade.

We are separate nations that deserve to keep our sovereignty.

http://www.ndp.ca/platform/otherpriorities/thenorth

Cease Canadian participation in the Liberal and Conservative-driven Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). This deal would deepen integration with the U.S. and erode Canadian authority in key areas of public policy.

But this is a quote that I got from the Liberal Party head office yesterday by phone.

There is no plan in the Liberal Party to implement the NAU. And there is no intention in Mr. Dion endorsing the North American Union. There is a commitment to ensure Canadian integrity, autonomy and Canadian interests are protected. So there's no plan to amalgamate currencies, borders, security or any economic integration. Canada will remain independent and autonomous 100 percent. So that is the position of the Liberal Party. Mr. Dion will not implement the NAU.

The Liberal Party of Canada has the best chance of stopping the sell out of Canada by the Conservative Party.

[mikemac]

I don't think enough Canadians know about this.

Why do you think it was not being covered by the media?

[M.Dancer]

I don't think enough Canadians know about this.

Why do you think it was not being covered by the media?

Mainly because it is tinfoil hat toaster talking nonsense. Media tend to put the conspiracy theories on cable between Secrets of Loch Ness and the Davinci Code....

[Radsickle]

Harper would not be able to force the North American Union on Canada without a majority government.

Mainly because it is tinfoil hat toaster talking nonsense. Media tend to put the conspiracy theories on cable between Secrets of Loch Ness and the Davinci Code....

Actually, I think it's more along the lines of Naomi Klein's `Shock Doctrine'; Part of this `economic crisis' is orchestrated to scare us into the SPP.

I don't think enough Canadians know about this.

Why do you think it was not being covered by the media?

Normal Media coverage has already been mocked as sounding `alarmist'.

I'm so glad Harper didn't get his majority.

Edited October 16, 2008 by Radsickle

[drewski]

i'll admit I'm not up to date regarding all the provisions in our Constitution, but wouldn't a NAU that many fear require some kind of Constitutional amendments or national referendum?

[kengs333]

i'll admit I'm not up to date regarding all the provisions in our Constitution, but wouldn't a NAU that many fear require some kind of Constitutional amendments or national referendum?

No.

[Smallc]

No.

Ummmm, we can't merge with another country while still having our constitution intact.

[kengs333]

Ummmm, we can't merge with another country while still having our constitution intact.

It says "amendments". If we were to have a NAU, our constitution would simply be discarded.

[Smallc]

It says "amendments". If we were to have a NAU, our constitution would simply be discarded.

I would call that an amendment.

[Mr.Canada]

Mainly because it is tinfoil hat toaster talking nonsense. Media tend to put the conspiracy theories on cable between Secrets of Loch Ness and the Davinci Code....

There will be a NAU just as there is an AFrican Union, European Union and very soon the Asia Union. Why is it so hard to understand or believe?

Will it dissolve our borders or country, no but they will become pretty much transparent for we three. The rest of the theories are outlandish to be sure but the structure itself will happen. No matter who is in power, it will not matter.

The superhighway linking all three is already under construction. Look it up for yourselves for further proof.

No conspiracy at all. Just fact.

[drewski]

It says "amendments". If we were to have a NAU, our constitution would simply be discarded.

my thinking goes that because discarding it could, in theory, change the rules for provinces, it would require application of the amending formula. I feel this would make it a lot harder for any PM to ram it down our throats

[kengs333]

my thinking goes that because discarding it could, in theory, change the rules for provinces, it would require application of the amending formula. I feel this would make it a lot harder for any PM to ram it down our throats

I'll admit I haven't looked into this all that much, but it would seem to me that integration would simply continue to occur until our existing constitution and laws become simply irrelevant and ineffectual.

Isn't there already a court and arbitration system in place that basically supercedes our own legal system? Elizabeth May was the only leader that I know of went anywhere near NAU when she raised the point during the English Language Debate about the guy from Arizona who sued in an effort to establish a private medical clinic in Canada.

Look at the history of English law, and the nature of the court system: by the 19th century, there were a number of courts that simply fell into disuse because other courts creeped into their jurisdiction; the same will arguably happen in Canada; as NAU becomes more of a reality, concerned parties will simply seek to have their grievances addressed in what they believe to be a more suitable court.

[Radsickle]

Isn't there already a court and arbitration system in place that basically supercedes our own legal system? Elizabeth May was the only leader that I know of went anywhere near NAU when she raised the point during the English Language Debate about the guy from Arizona who sued in an effort to establish a private medical clinic in Canada.

That's one of the main threats to HealthCare in Canada. The North American Free Trade Agreement's Chapter 11 allows private companies to sue for lost monies if the host government's policies interfere.... But only if the industry already exists in Canada. We can mostly thank Ontario, Alberta, and Quebec for allowing private medical clinics to start in Canada. Now they'll all want a part of the market in ALL provinces.

We need to re-think NAFTA and forget about the NAU and SPP; far too many acronyms for one decade.

Look at the history of English law, and the nature of the court system: by the 19th century, there were a number of courts that simply fell into disuse because other courts creeped into their jurisdiction; the same will arguably happen in Canada; as NAU becomes more of a reality, concerned parties will simply seek to have their grievances addressed in what they believe to be a more suitable court.

hmmm... like letting Omar Khadr be judged by the American Military instead of Canadian Courts?

Edited October 20, 2008 by Radsickle

[GostHacked]

We sure don't need more free trade. However, we do need some fair trade.

[White Doors]

That's one of the main threats to HealthCare in Canada. The North American Free Trade Agreement's Chapter 11 allows private companies to sue for lost monies if the host government's policies interfere.... But only if the industry already exists in Canada. We can mostly thank Ontario, Alberta, and Quebec for allowing private medical clinics to start in Canada. Now they'll all want a part of the market in ALL provinces.

We need to re-think NAFTA and forget about the NAU and SPP; far too many acronyms for one decade.

hmmm... like letting Omar Khadr be judged by the American Military instead of Canadian Courts?

Actually, you can thank the Quebec Supreme court who said it violated people's rights to not be able to buy medical care. I know I thank them everytime I think about it.

Private care is here and will be increasing. A government that can balance that with the public system to make sure that all who want medical care, can have it, would be the pragmatic and compassionate choice.

Wasting time violating people's constitutional rights trying to shut down private delivery of health care is NOT what is needed now. Your Ideological preferences should not (and thankfully now, DO NOT) violate my right to get medical treatment.

Too bad so sad for you and your ilk.

Edited October 20, 2008 by White Doors

[Topaz]

What US doctors in Michigan are doing is coming over on the weekend day advertising to Canadian, on live radio, if they need an operation but have to wait why not come over to Michigan were you don`t have to wait. They make it sound so fast BUT you will pay high fees and if OHIP doesn`t pay for it then YOU will.