Dear Saskatchewan friends and colleagues...

Just when you thought trade deals were done (the GATS is toast and so is the FTAA) we in BC and Alberta have another one to deal with - and you may have it, too, if we don’t expose it.

I am talking about the Trade, investment, and Labour Mobility Agreement, or TILMA, signed by the two provinces in April and coming into effect next April.

BC and Alberta trade officials are now shopping it around to other provinces to get them to sign on. Saskatchewan is now set to sign on with Lorne Calvert apparently well informed and supportive of the deal.

Ontario is also interested.

I am forwarding to you an analysis done by Ellen Gould, who does trade research for the Council of Canadians and is working on a study of TILMA for the CCPA. It gives you an idea of how horrific this deal is - basically representing a surrender of the power to govern.

This deal takes NAFTA principles and applies them to virtually every regulation in existence (NAFTA at least has some exceptions) - making democratic governance almost irrelevant. It allows companies from one province to sue for up $5 million in compensation for lost profits.

Please take half an hour to write a short letter to the premier with copies to the other ministers below. THERE IS STILL TIME TO STOP IT.

Lorne Calvert - premier@gov.sk.ca
Clay Serby - Minister of Economic and Co-operative Development -
cserby@rd.gov.sk.ca
Eric Cline - Minister Responsible for Investment Saskatchewan Inc. -
minister.ir@gov.sk.ca
Harry Van Mulligan - Minister of Government Relations -
minister.gr@gov.sk.ca <mailto:minister@gr.gov.sk.ca>

Yours, extremely alarmed,

Murray Dobbin
mdobbin@telus.net

Murray Dobbin is a Vancouver journalist who has written extensively on trade agreements.

---

ATTENTION: OPINION PAGE EDITOR

Alberta BC investment deal threatens local government

By Murray Dobbin

Last April the provincial government signed the Trade, Investment, and Labour Mobility Agreement, or TILMA, with the province of Alberta. It may well be one of the most radical investment deals ever signed anywhere and local governments may be the most negatively affected.

The agreement - to come into effect next April - will jeopardize many of the regulatory powers now enjoyed by municipalities and could result in enormous amount of additional administrative paper work and costs.

TILMA has been promoted primarily as a labour mobility agreement and has been touted as a way of creating a economic powerhouse of the two provinces by harmonizing all regulations. The agreement requires BC and Alberta regulations to be made the same. But by far its most important provisions have to do with investment - and the power the agreement gives to investors to challenge existing and future regulations.

But the agreement goes much further by adopting some of the most controversial aspects of international treaties such as NAFTA. Specifically, TILMA enshrines the right of corporations to sue governments when regulations negatively impact their profitability. It allows private individuals (and companies) from one province to sue and get up to $5 million compensation for regulations, policies, and programs existing in the other province, that "impair or restrict" investment, trade, or labour mobility. A three person dispute panel will have the power to make legally binding decisions that will compel these governments to change their
policies, no matter how popular they might be.

This agreement is designed to foster massive deregulation. Article 3 proclaims that there shall be "No Obstacles" that would impair or restrict" .. investment.. between the Parties" and that "Parties shall not establish new standards or regulations that operate to restrict or impair trade, investment or labour mobility." The problem, of course, is that virtually every regulation or standard has some impact on investment. That means that literally all existing and future regulation could be affected.

TILMA accepts certain regulatory objectives as legitimate - but even these can be challenged on the basis that the stated objective could be achieved in a "less restrictive" manner. Also, there are many objectives that are not accepted as legitimate - for example the preservation of agricultural land, the conservation of heritage sites, the maintenance of scenic views, or the promotion of neighbourhood or rural economic development. By-laws restricting billboards could be one of the first to be challenged. Tax deductions for local businesses in depressed areas could be next.

There are some limited exceptions allowed for in the agreement, such as water, but even these are to be reviewed annually to reduce their scope.

There is supposed to be a transition period for municipalities during which time consultations will take place. But as of next April, the agreement will require that no municipal (or school board) regulation or policy be "amended or renewed in a manner that would decrease its consistency with this Agreement." This means local governments actions could be the subject of a TILMA challenge as early as next April.

The agreement has the potential to increase exponentially the amount of paper work municipalities have to do regarding new by-laws, procurement or new infrastructure. Each provincial government, as well as local governments in each province, will be obliged when they are undertaking any action that might be covered by TILMA, to "provide the other Party [BC or Alberta] with an opportunity to comment on the measure, and take such comments into consideration." In addition, purchasing decisions costing as little as $10,000 will be open to challenge and could be overturned if the panel decides the purchase violated the agreement.

TILMA is being sold to the public as an agreement about getting rid of internal trade barriers and increasing labour mobility. But a 1998 study for the BC government found that: "efforts to liberalize interprovincial trade will have almost no effect on trade flows. The reality is that interprovincial trade barriers are already very low." As for labour mobility, this question is already being dealt with at the national level, under an initiative taken by Manitoba.

It would be difficult to imagine a more anti-democratic initiative by a government. The governments of BC and Alberta have actually created greater rights for interests outside of their provinces to intervene in the legislative process, than they have guaranteed for voters in their own provinces. As of next April, the value of citizens' votes - provincial and municipal - will drop dramatically as governments of one province will not restricted from increasing their standards or regulations. Nor will they be able to undertake most kinds of regional or industrial development initiatives. Maybe that is why the Liberals cancelled the fall sitting of the legislature. They are already anticipating having nothing to do.

Cheers,

Murray Dobbin

---

The BC/Alberta Trade, Investment, and Labour Mobility Agreement - A Summary of Its Impacts by Ellen Gould

“Within the TILMA are the seeds of a true economic union, an erasing of the provincial boundary for all purposes except voting and the color of the license plate.” Todd Hirsch, Canada West Foundation, July 15, 2022

If the Campbell government was going to erase the border with Alberta, shouldn't it have had a consultation with the province's citizens first? The “Trade, Investment, and Labour Mobility Agreement” (TILMA) was signed by Alberta and BC in April 2006.

It is posted on the Internet at http://tinyurl.com/krqrb.

With no public consultation process, Campbell and Klein signed this agreement that (among other things):

- Allows private individuals to sue and get up to $5 million compensation for regulations, policies, and programs that “impair or restrict” investment, trade, or labour mobility. Alberta and BC will also be able to sue each other for any violation of the agreement. A three person dispute panel will have the power to make legally binding decisions that will compel these governments to change their policies, no matter how popular these policies are.

- Is a major step towards "deep integration" with the US. Complaints about differences in provincial regulations are made repeatedly by the US Trade Representative. At the most recent Pacific Northwest Economic Region conference, representatives of north western US states and BC and Alberta committed to explore the possibility of "expanding the B.C.-Alberta Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA) /concept/ throughout the PNWER region."

- Goes far beyond NAFTA in enabling commercial interests to sue for regulations they don’t like. NAFTA allows private investors to sue under NAFTA’s Chapter 11, but TILMA allows these suits over “any matter regarding the interpretation or application of this Agreement.” While TILMA restricts compensation to $5 million, private interests could all line up to get compensated once one complaint has been successful. This will force governments to change their policies. Alberta’s Minister of International and Intergovernmental Relations, Gary Mar, Alberta Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, told the Richmond Chamber of Commerce in June 2006 that the TILMA dispute process is “everything Canadian business asked for”.

- Massively deregulates. The agreement says in Article 3 that there shall be “No Obstacles” that would impair or restrict “trade through the territory of the Parties, or investment or labour mobility between the Parties” and that “Parties shall not establish new standards or regulations that operate to restrict or impair trade, investment or labour mobility.” There are some limited exceptions allowed for in the agreement, such as water, but these are to be reviewed annually to reduce their scope.

All government regulation will be affected because any regulation could be seen as in some way restricting investment. And even if a regulation fits with one of the objectives TILMA accepts as being legitimate, it can still be successfully challenged if it is not the least restrictive way to achieve the objective.

- Recognizes only certain government objectives as legitimate. Among the objectives not recognized as legitimate are the preservation of agricultural land, the conservation of heritage sites, the maintenance of scenic views, or the promotion of small business, neighbourhood or rural development.

Some examples of regulations that would be vulnerable to challenge on the grounds that they are not based on “legitimate objectives” and restrict investment are the Agricultural Land Reserve, municipal bans on billboards, municipal development restrictions to maintain the quality of neighbourhoods.

- Makes BC and Alberta regulations the same - forever. Aside from some limited exceptions, BC and Alberta will have to “mutually recognize or otherwise reconcile their existing standards and regulations”. All BC mining regulations, for example, will forever have to be as minimal as those of Alberta’s, regardless of changes in government. This binding obligation lessens the value of the right to vote in each province, as the government of one province would not be permitted to increase standards and regulations beyond what exists in the other province.

- Covers all government “entities” - Crown corporations, local governments, school boards, universities, private agencies on contract with the government - and subjects their policies to potential challenges. Although there is supposed to be a consultation process with these entities in a transition period until 2009, the agreement already requires that none of their measures is “amended or renewed in a manner that would decrease its consistency with this Agreement.” This means all local governments, for example, already cannot initiate anything that might violate the agreement.

- Eliminates political choice. TILMA commits all future BC and Alberta governments to automatically support expansion of trade agreements. It commits all future BC and Alberta governments to promote cross-border transfers of energy, including to the US.

- Will allow all purchasing decisions by provincial governments, local governments, Crown Corporations, school boards, and universities to be challenged and overturned for purchases costing as little as $10,000.

- Bans government support for rural development, small business, and economically depressed regions. Targets any agricultural support. Government assistance that "distorts investment decisions" is a violation of the agreement.

- Undermines the democratic process in each province by granting political rights to non-citizens. Each provincial government, as well as local governments in each province, will be obligated when they are doing anything that might be covered by TILMA to "provide the other Party [BC or Alberta] with an opportunity to comment on the measure, and take such comments into consideration."

In other words, the governments of BC and Alberta have created greater rights for interests outside of their provinces to intervene in the legislative process than they have guaranteed for voters in their own provinces. This is especially ironic given the lack of consultation British Columbians and Albertans were afforded in the creation of TILMA.

- Is being promoted on a false basis. Alberta and BC politicians are selling the agreement on the claim that supposedly show "billions" could be saved by eliminating so-called inter-provincial trade barriers. These claims have been repeatedly debunked by economists. Real barriers to inter-provincial trade are minimal. The claims about inter-provincial barriers are really an attack on government's right to regulate.