German Television claims to have leaked CETA document

10 thoughts on “German Television claims to have leaked CETA document”

1. Dear Laila,

   Something has gone wrong with your blog. All I receive is a series of numbers. Most #09’s. What can I do to fix this?

   Joanne Manley

   >

   LikeLike

   1. I’m not sure what you are referring to – do you mean when you load the document? Or my blog page itself?

      LikeLike

   2. I just googled and see the Tyee has it too, try this link http://thetyee.ca/News/2014/08/14/Secret-Final-Draft-CETA/

      LikeLike

2. http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/federal-government-mum-on-leaked-text-of-canada-eu-trade-deal

   LikeLike

3. I wonder if it was leaked on purpose so as to guage public opinion?

   LikeLike

   1. I wonder… the reaction is interesting… so many people don’t know what it is, what it mean or why it matters… but those that do here in Canada for the most part agree whats been released is concerning

      LikeLike

4. I’d suggest the leak is a German thing and not a harper and his herd thing. harper and his herd don’t want Canadians to know anything about the agreement because it won’t do much for us. The E.U. hasn’t worked so well for a number of countries. It has worked to some extent for Germany. It is interesting though that Germany objected to the “secret courts”, which are provided for in other free trade agreements Canada has signed.

   I can’t think of a free trade agreement Canada has signed yet, which has any advantages for Canadians. We have spent a bomb on legal fees fighting American corporations. I expect we will be doing so with the other agreements. Free trade agreements make it cheap and easy for corporations to import goods into Canada, while Canadian workers are laid off.

   What these agreements provide for is companies from other countries, who obtain contracts in Canada, to bring over their own employees and not hire Canadians. (it is way cheaper) These agreements will enable Canadian companies to open “branch” corporations in partner countries, and then bring those workers into Canada. Free trade agreements provide for companies to bring “specialized” workers into Canada. That worked ever so well for a company building in Prince George. They got to bring someone in who would have been in the excluded class, but hey, with Free trade agreements you can bring in workers with criminal records, as long as they have “specialized” qualifications.

   We won’t be exporting much of anything. Europe has amazingly efficient manufacturing sectors and they themselves import much from China these days. Many of the European countries have their manufacturing done in former eastern blog countries, where labour is much cheaper. Does anyone think they’ll bring their manufacturing to Canada? What this free trade agreement will do is make it easier for the elite of Europe to move to Canada if things go “wrong” with Putin and Russia. The agreement works for Europe because, if Putin cuts off oil, gas, minerals, etc. Europe will be able to obtain the goods from Canada, using their own corporations and their own employees.

   Canada maybe able to export more beef, as it can in the deal with South Korea, but really, how is that going to improve the economy of Canada? France and England will most likely object immediately and off to the free trade court we will go to spend another couple of hundred million dollars. No, these days, if harper and his herd is suggesting something is good for Canada, you can bet it means just him and his.

   LikeLike

5. and in Richmond BC

   http://www.richmond-news.com/opinion/columnists/column-the-3-billion-george-massey-hoodwink-1.1313411

   LikeLike

6. ………..and the $3 Billion dollar price tag for a new “massey bridge” came from Christy herself……blurted out at a presser. WTF?
   Where did she come up with that figure? When the new 10 lane Port mann bridge was finished it cost a billion dollars( a billion dollars……wtf?).
   Apparently Christy’s addition must have factored in some ‘perky perks’ for her and her lickspittles a la BC Rail……..
   Time for and audit of Port Mann?

   LikeLike

7. SECRET EU – Canada CETA, TPPartnership, & C-CIT TRIBUNALS are INSIDER TRADING; corp. Canada fears China may Blow “Arrangements” between Can. Lobbyists’ Clients & Parties’ Executives (W.A.D. Accord*)? NON Shareholders HAVE TO PAY the arranged PENALTIES. Repatriating off-shore; profits, goods & services contracts, financing, etc. and co-manufacturing still not on the table? LINE UP to “PRE” IPOs SHOrtens.

   What the TREATY of VERSAILLES was to the 20th century PALES in COMPARISON to the TPP, CETA, C-CIT, NAFTA, et al, in the 21st.

   (CAN) – Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s attempts to maintain the secrecy provisions in the Trans Pacific Partnership, the Canada – China Investment Treaty (C-CIT; FIPPA) & the Canada – European Union CETA may be unraveling by way of the threatened Canadian Senate, et al.

   There are several reasons for the secrecy (“omerta”) of the dispute resolution tribunals.

   1) To Protect the parties to the treaty, &/or, agreement, ie. corporate sponsors, from having to reveal to the non shareholding tax payers the existing arrangements that it has with its own government. For instance, the Canadian W.A.D. Accord suggests that corporate Canada’s lobbyists pay considerations to the executives of the political parties for two main reasons:
   A) to promote corporate Canada’s agenda with governing party(ies) by:
   i) reducing its taxes & thus, the “net increase” in taxes for non shareholders
   &
   ii) increase its funding for “economic development” which covers the cost of, among other things, the present & future advocacy, ie. lobbying & the cost of the considerations that corporate Canada pays out, etc. It may be regrettable that given the source of the accessed “economic development” funds, ie. those 95% – 99% of Canadians who are non shareholding tax payers there is a great deal of room for discretionary spending & its abuse
   and
   to protect corporate Canada’s agenda by paying the other (non governing) political parties considerations in order to limit the scope of the “opposition” to manageable issues that can be compromised in order that “opposing” parties can claim victories (at least a limited victory) for their constituents. Under this arrangement both, the politicians & the lobbyists’ clients are protected from scrutiny by the role of the parties’ executives.

   2) To Protect the parties to the treaty, &/or, agreement, ie. corporate sponsor from having to reveal to the each others’ corporate sponsors their existing arrangements that it has with its own government & thus, each counties’ corporate sponsors are not obliged to share the benefits & considerations (& future considerations) that they receive from their respective governments ie. their non shareholding taxpayers. Often the benefits are shared as an inducement to conduct business together in the more convenient jurisdictions.

   3) To Protect the parties to one treaty, &/or, agreement (referred to as the “original” treaty/agreement) from having to reveal to third parties the nature, &/or, details of their “original” arrangements to other third parties who may want to enter into a treaty, &/or, agreement with either of the parties to the “original” agreement/treaty. That is to say, that acquiring & having privileged information of an outsiders treaties, &/or, agreements will cause contention as the third party will undoubtedly insist upon more favorable terms & conditions to a new treaty/agreement than the original treaty/agreement. For example; “You did this with them, so I insist upon more, or, I’ll deal with them, or, others”. The European Union is particularly interested in preventing the Canada – European Union CETA from becoming divisive whereby individual EU member countries may be enticed, &/or, coerced into making preferential, but, “very secretive” side deals with corporate Canada, et al.

   By preventing the non shareholding taxpayers from learning about the aforementioned reasons for the tribunals’ secrecy whereby the non shareholding taxpayers pay for the increase in the value of the shareholders’ stocks & dividends is insider trading & stock manipulation.

   Therefore, corporate Canada, AFN & their traditional media outlets have more than just a vested interest in the continuation of the most vulnerable Canadians (95% – 99% of Native & non Native Canadians) deprivation of the information such as the comprehensive version of The W.A.D. Accord and the comprehensive versions of the Canada – China Investment Treaty, the Canada – European Union CET Agreement, et al, that include the mechanisms, procedures, practices used in the adjudications of the dispute resolution tribunal & its disbursement of its punitive awards.

   It may be regrettable that not all of the 95% – 99% most vulnerable, non shareholders are able, &/or, willing to move to a sovereign Quebec, or, other jurisdictions, in order to:
   1) avoid the “unethical” & “inhumane” (see; The W.A.D. Accord), but, “legal” practices
   and
   2) start getting the relevant & quantitative information regarding the above, et al.

   The issue of the secret tribunals raises some interesting questions about the relationship, ie. the”secret congress” between the lobbyists’ clients & the executives of the political parties which the “congress” has absolutely no intention of answering. For instance; what do the above arrangements say about the 95% – 99% of Canadians who are non shareholding tax payers & the version of “democracy” that “they” are developing in Canada in the context of the growing “global” economy
   and
   what do the above arrangements say about the accelerating growth of the disparity of the wealth between the shareholders (1% – 5% of Canadians, et al) & the non shareholders (95% – 99% of Canadians), et al?

   What are you, the reader, learning about the Canada – China Investment Treaty that will help you to ascertain whether the Canada – European Union Agreement is better for you & the non shareholders, or, corporate Canada & its shareholders?

   What are some of the other questions that the non shareholders need to ask
   &
   who can answer, &/or, is willing to answer (as opposed to “respond” to) their questions that would make the non shareholders informed & consensual participants & direct beneficiaries of the C-CIT & the CETA?

   Have you & your family, friends & colleagues sent PM Harper & Mr. DAN HILTON (Executive Director of the Conservative Party), et al, your:

   “NOTIFICATION of Preexisting CHALLENGE to the TRANS PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP”,

   “NOTIFICATION of Preexisting CHALLENGE to the CANADA – EUROPEAN UNION
   COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC & TRADE AGREEMENT”
   and
   “NOTIFICATION of Preexisting CHALLENGE to the CANADA – CHINA INVESTMENT TREATY”,

   in order to enhance your opportunity to exculpate yourself from having to pay for:
   1) the aforementioned Compensation that is embodied in The W.A.D. Accord
   &
   2) the costs, penalties, punitive damages that will be derived from the C-CI Treaty, the CET Agreement, the Trans Pacific Partnership, et al?

   In conclusion, it may be regrettable that the C-CI Treaty & the CET Agreement has, so far, been successful at giving corporate Canada & its representatives the much higher degree of legitimacy to their aforementioned secrecy (assisted by way of the international cache) that it needs in order for them to later, & once again, claim (see; NAFTA) that they are doing/did “their best” to protect the non shareholders from the over zealousness of their foreign Treaty, Agreement, &/or, Partnership counterparts.

   Is it not easier & just prudent to discuss the preexisting arrangements & challenges to the Treaty, the Agreement, the Partnership, et al, prior to ratifying them in order to determine which is more egregious than the other (or, are both equally egregious) & thus, avoid any of the secret “dispute” resolutions & its “hefty” costs to the beleaguered, non shareholding taxpayers, et al? And, how much will the added costs of the C-CIT’s, CETA’s & TPP’s infra structure, punitive penalties, etc. increase the erosion of the non shareholders health care, educational services, etc. in order to artificially increase the value of corporate Canada’s shares & dividends while dramatically reducing the non shareholders’ disposable income?

   How much has corporate Canada set aside to defend the CHALLENGES, et al, that corporate Canada & the non shareholders are anticipating? How far along are they in collecting this fund & how much more does corporate Canada & its shareholders need to set aside before the non shareholding taxpayers allow corporate Canada & its representatives to proceed?

   Similarly, due to a psychiatrist’s previous linking of the deprivation of The WAD Accord information with the unconscionably high rates of despair, disenchantment, suicides, unemployment, poverty, etc., that are found in many communities across Canada,what are the various different ways that non shareholders can guarantee that corporate Canada & its shareholders have enough financial reserves set aside in order to pay for the CHALLENGES by the non shareholders and those who will be the new victims of the aforementioned deprivation of information?

   On the other hand, are there actually any non shareholding taxpayers who think that corporate
   Canada is anxious to explain to them, or, corporate China, or, corporate EU, &/or, corporate trans Pacific nations, just how effective & lucrative their, corporate Canada’s, secretive relationship between:
   1) lobbyists’ of corporate Canada
   &
   2) the executives of the parties that are operating in Canada,
   has been & is continuing to be?

   And, finally, without:
   1) a meaningful “democratic” forum in which the non shareholders can directly question the direct beneficiaries of the Treaty & the Agreement, ie. corporate Canada & its lobbyists, without the fear of recriminations, etc.,
   2) a predetermined list of circumstances whereby corporate Canada can & will terminate the Treaty & the Agreement without penalties, &/or, costs to the harmless non shareholding taxpayers
   &
   3) et al,

   the ratification of the C-CI Treaty & the CET Agreement will eliminate for most Canadians the last remnants of “democratically” effecting the treaty/agreement by the non shareholding taxpayers
   & thus,
   corporate Canada, et al, will finally be able to give these arrangements the luster of legitimacy that they need that is based upon the logic that “It can’t be another gilded cage that will cause another economic melt down like the “derivative type conspiracy”*** that is continuing to debilitate international finance, etc., because there are just too many vanguards of industry promoting the public financing of the C-CI Treaty & CET Agreement”.

   Regarding the secrecy of the C-CI Treaty, CET Agreement & TP Partnership arrangements, they are not dissimilar to insider trading (fraud, stock manipulation, et al). In this situation the shareholders, who are on “the inside”, use secret, &/or, privileged information to make money for themselves at the expense of the group that is on the “outside”, ie. the non shareholding taxpayers, who are being deprived of the aforementioned information & thus, are being deprived of the opportunity to enjoy the direct benefits of the treaty/agreement. Similarly, some of the means to counter these arrangements are also not dissimilar to those counter measures that can remedy insider trading & pay punitive damages, etc. to the harmless non shareholders. And, while it is likely that the “coveted” Chinese investor**** may have enough of the insider information regarding the more “unethical”, &/or, “inhumane” arrangements in the C-CI Treaty, et al, to navigate the mechanisms of the secret dispute resolution tribunal in his favor & at the peril of corporate Canada, et al, it may be regrettable that it is highly unlikely that the European Union & the nations of the Trans Pacific have been as fortunate regarding the CETA & TPP arrangements.

   This disparity between China’s benefits from the C-CI Treaty & the benefits that the EU, et al, may derive from their CETA will continue to be dangerously contentious.

   And, finally, it may also be regrettable that there is yet another vulnerability that corporate Canada, especially its Alberta chapter, is particularly desperate to be kept secret for as long as possible and it only remains to be seen when it will be most advantageous to “leak” the secret & by which party.

   * C-CI Treaty; Canada – China Investment Treaty (FIPA) & CET Agreement; Comprehensive Economic & Trade Agreement (Canada-European Union)

   ** The W.A.D. Accord; Reference:

   For those who may not be familiar with The WAD Accord, &/or, its recent developments, The Accord can be accessed on line by way of the submission entitled:

   “Towards a More Informed Opinion regarding the Environmental Impact & Context of the NGP (Pipeline), et al”, Researched & Submitted by D.E.H.S., July 24, 2012 to the Enbridge Co.’s NGP Joint Review Panel..
   Contact:
   Ms. Colette Spagnuolo,
   Gateway Process Advisor,
   Northern Gateway Project,
   or,
   Google; “The W.A.D. ACCORD; David E.H. Smith”

   *** “derivative type conspiracy”; “The $58 Trillion Elephant in the Room” by Jesse Eisinger. Upstart Business Journal, October 15, 2008, 8:00am EDT. Re; the “industrialized credit derivatives”
   **********
   For the more information that may lead the non shareholders, corporate China and corporate European Union & their shareholders & the non shareholders, et al, to a greater certainty regarding what corporate Canada may be sharing with you regarding the accessing of the aforementioned, information & Canadian natural resources, et al,
   see;
   Facebook; “David Smith, Sidney, BC” to access the List of RECENT ARTICLES, LETTERS & NOTIFICATIONS by DEHS.
   Then,
   Google; “The TITLE’ from the facebook List above & David E.H. Smith”.

   LikeLike

Comments are closed.