NAU: Questioning the Minister

Share this post...

Submit to DiggSubmit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to StumbleuponSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
Mr. Menzies, as you know I, as one of the candidates for Macleod Riding in the last election,  made very clear statements about this threat to our Canadian sovereignty and attempted to inform constituents. At that time you were very evasive and in fact attempted to call my concerns ‘fear mongering’. 
I would suggest that my awareness was either more up to date than yours at the time, or you were not privy to this information. Perhaps you could clarify your reasons for not addressing this issue during the election?
June 15,2007

Attention: Ted Menzies, MP for Macleod Riding and David Emerson - Minister of International Trade

Re: Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America

Dear Sirs;

With respect to the above captioned agreement/partnership I submit to you a recent Order Paper from the NDP. Along with the very important  
questions within this document I would like to know specifically your respective roles in this SPP. 
Mr. Emerson however, was involved with this since its beginnings. In his previous capacity with the Liberal government as Minister of Industry and then when he abandoned his Liberal supporters after the election and became an instant New Conservative he flowed back into this historical role.
Connie Fogal, Leader of Canadian Action Party,  was one of his opponents in the election. I understand she attempted  to question him on this issue but again the issue was avoided and  therefore I wonder why he did not discuss it during the election?
If  this is beneficial to the people of Canada, as the governments, both Liberal and Conservatives have attempted to portray it, then why the need for secret meetings?
Why the decision to withhold information from the public?
Why the attempts to discredit those who have tried to discuss it?
Why are the conspiracy tactics being implemented while any attempts to shine the light on it are met with ‘conspiracy theorists’ rhetoric?
Conspiracy according to the dictionary: conspiracy


1 a conspiracy to manipulate the results plot, scheme, plan,  
machination, ploy, trick, ruse, subterfuge; informal racket.
So where is the theory in this? Why the secret meetings in Banff? Why  
is this not openly being discussed in Parliament and why hasn’t it been from its inception? Why is the Canadian Council of Chief Executives involved in creating plans for government to implement? Why are unelected individuals making deals for Canadians? Why is the media in Canada not discussing this issue?  Please do not advise me that the information is on the government website. The information needs discussion and input from Canadians, it also needs very clear explanations of what it means, what the implications are on individual rights and freedoms and our national sovereignty. The website states ‘security and prosperity’ for business, for trade, but does not speak of prosperity or security for individuals.
From what I have read, the new security measures are simply a means to enslave and restrict freedoms of Canadians in order for big business to rule freely. Canadians are not fools, although we have indeed been duped by both Liberal and Conservatives on too many occasions! 
We all  know the detrimental affects that Free trade has given Canadians even though we were told it was good for us. We shall not be so fooled again!

I would like to know when Mr. Menzies became aware of the SPP? As the local newspaper has reported Mr. Menzies close association with Mr.  
Emerson and his enthusiasm for the trade deals, I would appreciate being informed as to how Mr. Menzies is involved with the SPP.
“Menzies just took on the additional role of parliamentary secretary  
to the Minister of International Trade, David Emerson.

What responsibility do you have at this time towards the North American Union? Further I would like to know when you intend to report the facts to the people in Macleod riding? Had the governments’ intentions been made known during the election the results might have been significantly different. I do not believe the people of Macleod are willing to be serfs under corporate rule and that is what the SPP appears to have in mind for Canadians.

It is my understanding that the following Order Paper was submitted on May 30,2007 and the government has 45 days to answer. I am asking that Mr. Menzies respond directly to my letter regarding his involvement as he is my MP. I would also request a response from Mr. Emerson, as he also works for the Canadian public in his capacity as International Trade Minister and these decisions directly affect every Canadian.

The following is the Order Paper I am requesting answers along with  
the questions above:

Q-2282 — May 30, 2007 — Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster) — With respect to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America  (SPP): (a) when did unofficial negotiations on the SPP agenda begin prior to March 2005 and which Ministers, Deputy Ministers, and  
government departments were involved; (b) which Ministers, Deputy Ministers, and branches of which departments are tasked with developing and implementing strategies to advance the SPP agenda;
(c) how often do meetings transpire between Ministers or Deputy Ministers and members of the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), what were the dates and locations of these meetings, who was present at each one of these meetings and what were the topics of discussion at each meeting; (d) what financial resources are estimated to be required to adequately fulfill the SPP on an annual basis; (e) how much money has the government committed to the SPP in the last five years; (f) were these funding announcements made public, and, if so, on what dates were these funding announcements made; (g) of these funds, what amount has actually been disbursed annually, and from which government department budget were these funds disbursed; (h) how many person-hours in government departments are dedicated to advancing the agenda of the SPP, working groups included; (i) has an intranet system been establish to facilitate day-to-day communications between participating countries and the NACC; (j) what is the relationship between NAFTA and the SPP; (k) is the SPP considered an extension of NAFTA; (l) have NAFTA committees been folded into the SPP groups and, if so, why and how; (m) what is the most up-to-date impact assessment of SPP negotiations on Canadian regulations and standards in (i) health, (ii) food, food products and food safety, (iii) transport safety, (iv) privacy, (v) energy, (vi) water, (vii) natural resources, (viii) chemical products, including pesticides and herbicides, (ix) financial services and monetary policy, (x) border security, (xi) outsourcing and jobs, (xii) the environment, (xiii) electronic trade, (xiv) the process of building up and maintaining Canada’s no-fly list; (n) what is the status of these negotiations, have some been suspended, and if some have been completed, what regulations were changed as a result; (o) how would those negotiations affect Canada’s public policy space; (p) are any mutual recognition agreements being negotiated under the SPP; (q) what are all the SPP working groups, their focus, the members of these working groups (including members of the government and civil service), and the minutes of their meetings; (r) is it the position of the government that the SPP is beneficial to Canadian sovereignty; (s) what plans does the government have to conduct a public debate of the SPP process, including public consultations with civil society groups, a full legislative review, and a vote in Parliament; and (t) what plans does the government have to brief Parliamentarians on the SPP, if not, why not, and, if so, how regular will such briefings be?

I look forward to your prompt response as this is critical to our survival and future as a sovereign nation. I am forwarding a copy of this letter to other MP's and  the press as they apparently have not been informed as yet.

Yours truly
Catherine Whelan Costen

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


Share this post...

Submit to DiggSubmit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to StumbleuponSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn