It has been three months since the demonstrations against the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) summit in Montebello, QC, and as much as the corporate players involved might like, the story just won't go away.

The Globe and Mail wants us to believe that the SPP is dead, and while the governments of Canada and the United States attempt to re-assure us that the SPP is in everyone's best interest, Stuart Trew of the Council of Canadians reminds us and the Globe and Mail that the SPP is far from dead as preparations continue in "20 governmental SPP working groups".

Meanwhile, the CBC has taken its head out of the sand long enough to report that the Montebello summit cost Ottawa and Quebec police $11 million, and that $7 million of that was spent by the Quebec Provincial Police "to secure the perimeter outside the Fairmont Château Montebello resort during the summit of North American leaders" on 20-21 August 2007.

Provocateurs sure are getting expensive. Well, that's inflation I suppose (damned privatization of the money supply).

Not to be disrespectful to all the activists that have worked so hard to bring the SPP into the public domain, but if the government was willing to spend $11 million on security, why didn't they just use that money to bribe the activists off the streets?

Not funny enough for you?

How about this?

The City of Ottawa has requested a "refund" from the federal government for its local police services during the summit.

I guess they didn't get the memo on downloading.

How much real debate has been published in the corporate media about the SPP since Montebello? I haven't been able to find anything substantial at all (if you know of some useful publications, contact us).

Ms. Denise Savoie (Victoria, NDP) introduced a citizen's petition to Canadian parliament on 19 November 2007:

"Mr. Speaker, this petition touches on the so-called security and prosperity partnership which encompasses over 300 wide-ranging initiatives. It is a partnership that appears to be seeking to merge our security policies and practices with those of the United States, leaving Canada with less autonomous and sustainable economic, social, cultural and environmental policies. The petitioners call on the government to stop further implementation of the partnership until there is a democratic mandate from the people of Canada. They urge the government to conduct a transparent and accountable public debate of the process, involving meaningful public consultation with civil society and a full legislative review..."

What's this you say? The SPP has actually been discussed in parliament?!

While the corporate media certainly may not be filling us in on the discussions, there are 152 references to the SPP in the Canadian Hansard (1 June 2006 - 19 November 2007) in Parliamentary Debates and Committee Evidence.

Ms. Savoie also made a direct request to the standing government on 19 October 2007:

"On the security and prosperity partnership on which the member's government is forging away enthusiastically and signing away our sovereignty by integrating and harmonizing our regulations in over 300 areas with those of the Americans to better mesh with and fit the needs of American companies, I am wondering if this is in the best interests of Canadians. Would the government support having an open discussion in Parliament?"

Mr. Laurie Hawn (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence, CPC) responds:

"Mr. Speaker, the NDP has never seen a conspiracy theory it did not love."

Nothing like hauling out the old "conspiracy nut" moniker to avoid answering a reasonable question. What's so terrible about an open discussion in Parliament? Is there something going on in those SPP working groups that you don't want us to know about Mr. Hawn?

Don't worry, Savoie doesn't give up quite so easily - on 22 October 2007 she brought up the issue again:

"On a similar but much broader front, the Conservatives are implementing the Liberals so-called security and prosperity partnership. Behind closed doors and away from the eyes of citizens and their elected representatives in Parliament, the government is hollowing out our country as it pursues its agenda of deep integration with U.S. corporate interests. I take this opportunity to call on the government to bring the SPP agenda to the public scrutiny of Parliament. Because the Conservative agenda does not reflect Victoria's priorities, I oppose the Speech from the Throne. Because these policies will incrementally convert Canada into a neo-Conservative country that we will not recognize, I stand opposed to the government's direction. It would be unconscionable not to."

No further comments on the SPP were made that day.

While "the Conservatives are implementing the Liberals so-called security and prosperity partnership", not all Liberals support the SPP.

On 14 June 2007, Ms. Bonnie Brown Liberal MP for Oakville, Ontario), while speaking in support of Bill C-42, spoke about the "industry initiative" for "smart regulation, in which Mexican and Canadian regulatory regimes are being harmonized with those of the United States."

She said:

"What is rarely mentioned is that this effort is being organized through the security and prosperity partnership.

This international agreement was initiated in 2005 by the Governments of Canada, the United States and Mexico. It was the brainchild of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and its American counterpart, which want deep integration of the Canadian and American economies, military and culture.

This would include uniform regulatory regimes for a wide array of products and services, including food, drugs and environmental protection. It would include increased interoperability between the Canadian and American military. It would include a continental energy pact, whereby Canada would guarantee America's access to our energy resources and force Canadians to compete with Americans for our own electricity as we do now for our oil and gas.

It would include a North American security perimeter that could erode the civil liberties of our citizens. It would include common immigration and environmental policies and a host of other policies that together would dramatically undermine the sovereignty and autonomy of Canada and its citizens.

The participants in the security and prosperity partnership are well aware that this agenda would lack broad public support and have therefore committed themselves to what they call "integration by stealth". The SPP is not a signed treaty and has never been brought before the legislatures of the three nations for discussion or for committee oversight. Its implementation is being coordinated not by parliaments, not by a broad spectrum of social groups, but by the North American Competitiveness Council, a working group of 30 corporate CEOs, 10 from Mexico, 10 from Canada, and 10 from the U.S.

This group meets regularly behind closed doors with senior government officials and ministers. One of its key objectives is business deregulation and harmonization, yet no other stakeholders have been given a seat at the table and the meeting minutes are not made public. Even more disturbing is that two out of the 10 representatives of Canada are actually American citizens.

The entire security and prosperity partnership is so profoundly undemocratic that 14 U.S. states to date have passed resolutions demanding that the U.S. Congress act to cease America's involvement. The impending changes to Canada's pesticide residue levels are just one small element in an ongoing effort to harmonize Canadian and American regulations in the interests of powerful businesses.

The Canadian government needs to replace corporate control over this partnership with a democratic process that involves parliamentary oversight and public input. It needs to ensure that efforts to reshape our nation are fully transparent and in the interests of all Canadians, not just an economically powerful few."

The SPP is certainly not dead, but the beast can no longer hide in the shadows. Let's keep it that way!

Contact your MP and demand an open debate in parliament! 

You can watch the Hansard index for any new discussion of the SPP in parliament, simply by using the following link:

http://www.activistmagazine.com/hansard-spp

The Council of Canadians has also prepared a very useful Citizen's Guide to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) for their IntegrateThis.ca website.

More info on the SPP:

Common Frontiers SPP Fact Sheets
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA)
Canadian Labour Congress
SPP official Canadian government website
SPP official U.S. government website
SPP official Mexican government website
SPP on wikipedia

Are you involved in a local SPP activist group? Register an account and post your link here.

Get involved in The ACTivist magazine's Hansard Watch project, contact us for more details.