March 13, 2007
Kamloops Daily News
 

Eye View

The trade agreement between B.C. and Alberta would be a good
idea if it removed significant barriers to trade and
investment between the provinces.

But there are no significant barriers that need fixing. And
the ones that need fixing don't need the blunt tool of this
agreement called the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility
Agreement (TILMA).

If trade barriers were truly substantial, they would show up
in statistics. The opposite is true. In the last five
years, interprovincial trade has increased by 25 per cent.

TILMA appears to be a solution in search of a problem.

It would be great if the agreement encouraged governments to
make environmental laws. Instead, TILMA allows corporations
to sue governments for protecting the environment.

Sure, some environmental issues are protected under the
agreement: water, fish, wildlife, forests, timber use,
hazardous materials, renewable and alternative energy.

But that which is not protected speaks volumes. It
includes: protection and designation of ecological reserves,
regulation of air pollution produced by manufacturing plants
and automobiles such as B.C.'s Air Care program,
restrictions on products like ozone depleting substances or
pesticides, regulation of recreation and tourism to protect
ecologically sensitive areas, environmental assessment of
projects such as ski resorts or chemical plants.

The agreement is so poorly written (or deviously written,
depending on your point of view) that what is not excluded
from the agreement is included. Ellen Gould of the Canadian
Centre for Policy Alternative warns that: "This agreement is
extremely broad. It will create pressure to deregulate in
important areas of public policy. The true meaning of its
provisions will not be fully understood until the limits are
tested by dispute panels."

The City of Kamloops could be forced to shelve any plans to
reduce pesticide use because of the vague agreement. "TILMA
is completely at odds with the notion that Canada will be
able to lead in an area like environmental protection.
Municipal restrictions on pesticide use, for example, are
the kind of environmental initiative the agreement
jeopardizes," adds Gould.

The trade agreement would be wonderful if it added $4.8
billion to B.C.'s economy, as the Government of British
Columbia claims. But those claims are based on an
arithmetic error in a study from the Conference Board of
Canada. When that error is corrected, the potential
benefits are only one-hundredth of those claimed.

Even then, most of the study's projected benefits are in
industries which are exempt from TILMA because they don't
engage in interprovincial trade. The agreement protects
industries that don't need it.

It would be great if the agreement removed barriers to
relocation of workers. But there are no customs inspection
stations along provincial borders and no tariffs on
interprovincial trade. Canadians use the same currency and
share common legal, financial and economic institutions.
Canadians are free to live and work anywhere in the country.

And the credentials of most construction trade workers are
already recognized in both B.C. and Alberta. Of the 60
occupations specified in the agreement, most still require
some upgrading or certification when they move.

The agreement promotes an adversarial relationship between
the citizens and business. Governments, when they
understand their role, are the voice of the people. TILMA
treats government regulations as an impediment to commerce.
It gives businesses the right to sue provinces when they
feel that any regulation or other government policy
"restricts or impairs" investment.

So, what is the purpose of this poorly written trade
agreement if it doesn't significantly reduce barriers?

UBC economist Brian Copeland observes: "Much of the debate
is not really about interprovincial trade, but rather about
how decentralized the policy regime should be in Canada and
how much flexibility governments should have to intervene in
markets... these are issues which deserve to be debated on
their own merits, without the distraction of misleading
claims about a crisis in internal trade."

In other words, TILMA is not about what it claims to be
about. The agreement is really about reducing the ability
of governments to protect consumers, to set labour
standards, regulate pollutants, and protect the environment
in the name of a trade agreement.

TILMA is an ideological agreement between two parties who
believe that the role of governments is to defend business
from the laws that protect citizens.

The supposed benefits of TILMA have been greatly
exaggerated. A club has been used to fix problems that need
a delicate touch.


David Charbonneau is the owner of Trio Technical.
He can be reached at dcharbonneau13@shaw.ca

go back to my Columns in the