THE FTAA - A NEW MAI-TYPE STRAITJACKET
FOR THE AMERICAS
(a mini-analysis of the threats to farmers and other life forms)
Summary Transnational corporations and corporate governments are charging ahead full speed with their plans for a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) by 2005 or earlier. The Canadian government is a major architect of the proposal, which threatens to wipe outwhatever gains farmers and other citizens have won in their on-going struggles for fair prices for farm products, decent working conditions, sustainable rural communities, environmental protection, and food security. Specifically at risk are supply management, farm subsidies, cooperative and single-desk marketing structures, safeguards for organic production, fair transportation policies, food and water safety measures, and public services like education, sanitation and health care. Background The current negotiations for a proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), including the plans for the ministerial meeting in Quebec this spring, are only the most recent stage of a process that has been going on for some years. In 1994, neo-liberal governments in the Americas established a Transnational Negotiating Committee (TNC) to work actively towards an FTAA. After a high-level meeting in Windsor last year, the next step is the "Summit of the Americas" in Quebec City in mid-April 2001. Content Governments involved have agreed that an overriding goal of the FTAA is to eliminate the existing regulatory regimes, prevent any new restrictions, and progressively remove any impediments to profits, whether specifically listed or not. Along with the proposed investor "rights" and other provisions, this demonstrates how the now-dormant MAI (Multilateral Agreement on Investment) is now being resuscitated in the FTAA - measures to protect human health and the environment (eg. sanitary and phyto-sanitary or "SPS" regulations) would be decided by the WTO and must not "impede trade" - the FTAA would open up markets not only for traditional crops but also for GMOs. - existing marketing boards (eg. dairy, eggs, poultry) would be eliminated and new ones prohibited - "subsidies" to farmers would not be allowed - large corporations would have investor state rights, operating under "most favoured nation" status - public agencies and Crown corporations (eg. Canadian Wheat Board, CBC, Canada Post) would have no advantage over private companies, whether foreign or domestic - a local production co-op in Canada or the Caribbean would have to compete with large multinational food companies for local or regional markets; then those companies would use the farmers they've displaced as cheap labour. Process: The FTAA proponents have established 9 negotiating groups, of which Agriculture is one. There are also three non-negotiating committees, "civil society", "integration of smaller economies", and "electronic commerce". Each negotiating group was asked (among other things) to draw up a compendium or inventory of all the regulations in its sector, for all of the countries of the Americas. Some 500 corporate representatives have security clearance for access to the FTAA negotiating documents; this means they are in direct dialogue with the actual negotiators. Meanwhile, civil society organizations and the public have no such access even to the information, let alone the opportunity to influence the process and content of the negotiations. As host city for the official Summit of the Americas in April, Quebec will be establishing a "security perimeter" encompassing the city's downtown, putting up chain-link fence, emptying a 600-prisoner jail to accomodate expected arrests, and deploying a huge police presence.