Latin America
Related: About this forumThe Looming Canada-CARICOM Free Trade Agreement
The Looming Canada-CARICOM Free Trade Agreement
Kevin Edmonds
The Other Side of Paradise
May 3, 2013
On April 23, Kamla Persad-Bissessar, the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago visited Canada to deliver her pitch to make the Canada-CARICOM free trade agreement a reality. The current Canada-CARICOM trade deal, known as CARIBCAN, is set to expire this year because the World Trade Organization stands in firm opposition to its renewal. Persad-Bissessarwho is set to become the head of CARICOM in Julyremarked that Trinidad and Tobago is very open, and we would welcome a free trade agreement, but because of the structure of CARICOM, it isnt a decision we can take, she said. It has to be done in collaboration with CARICOM.
Given Canadas role as the global leader in mininghome to 75% of the worlds mining companiesand the leading producer of tar sands oil, it should come as no surprise that Canada is seeking to make deeper inroads into the resource rich countries of the Caribbean. However, in contrast to the CARICOM-EU Economic Partnership Agreement, so far there has been little analysis of the potential impact this trade deal will have on the economically vulnerable Caribbean.
The primary focus of this lopsided free trade deal is to make it easier for Canadian investment to go into resource-rich countries such as Trinidad, Guyana, Jamaica, Suriname and Haitiand to protect the rights of Canadian investors. Secondly, the liberalization of trade and investment between Canada and the Caribbean will make it much easier for Canadian firms to takeover the already fragile Caribbean manufacturing and service industries. Currently CARICOM accounts for less than 1% of Canadas foreign trade, yet Canada is the third most important market for CARICOM-based goods, after the United States and the European Union (primarily the United Kingdom).
...
While the Canadian government has stated that Canada is committed to negotiating a modern trade agreement with CARICOM that will take into account differing levels of development, vulnerabilities associated with island states, and trade-related capacity challengesgiven the very real power imbalances between the Caribbean and Canada, CARICOM would be wise to look toward Mexico to see how such free trade deals play out.
...
Remaining on the issue of natural resources, investigative reports have revealed that currently one-third of Haitis Northern Region (approximately 2,500 square kilometers) has been granted as illegal concessions to mining firms based in Canada and the United States. In response to this, the Haitian Senate has called for a halt on all mining activities in the Northern Region. It is important to note that if or when a Canada-CARICOM free trade deal is signed into law, the ability of the Haitian government to halt controversial, exploitative, and destructive mining activities will be severely curtailed.
...
http://nacla.org/blog/2013/5/3/looming-canada-caricom-free-trade-agreement
Judi Lynn
(160,527 posts)The last two paragraphs of the NACLA article mean a lot:
Mexicos experience implementing free trade stands as a sharp reminder that trade agreements are structured in such a way to benefit the powerful, both between and within nations. Since the introduction of NAFTA in 1994, Mexico has experienced a sharp increase in illegal migration, food insecurity, and informal employment. While foreign capital flooded Mexico, the majority of it did not lead to job creationbut rather to foreign acquisitions of existing Mexican firms.
It is telling that the primary service exports of the Caribbeansuch as tourism and financial servicesdo not need a free trade agreement. As such, the CARICOM-Canada free trade deal must receive greater scrutiny within the Caribbean in order to determine whether or not any real gains for the region will emerge from the deal. Given that the majority of Canadian investment is based in resource extraction and financial services, it will predominately serve the interests of Canadian business interests, doing little to alter the dependent nature of the regions economies. The signing of productive and mutually beneficial trade agreements is one thing but signing onto a lopsided agreement which will only benefit the owners of resource enclaves is another thing entirely and should be reconsidered.
What a shame they have no consciences, nor any sense of responsibility to their fellow man/woman. So sad they have the power to destroy so much which is needed for the health of the earth.