PROTECTIONISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By Melvin J. Howard
Ottawa Canada raises concerns over US trade protectionism. It seems Canada is concerned with a certain clause in the US stimulus package. More specifically I call it the buy American clause. Industry Minister Tony Clement told a Canadian television news cast that the United States has treaty obligations that they’ve have signed onto, NAFTA is one, the World Trade Organization is another and we expect the United States to live up to its treaty obligation. Oh really now you don’t say well Canada you are exactly right you should honor your trade obligations. I have been in an ongoing trade dispute with Canada for the last 6 years over our lost investments in Canada.
Needless to say I have not been impressed with how we have been treated nor the non seriousness about our complaints you may read all about it at http://www.centurionhealthcorp.blogspot.com/ Canada says it protects Medicare from the terms of NAFTA by “reserving” it as “a social service provided for a public purpose. This is an outdated and mute defense because private firms have already been allowed into the delivery of health care in Canada, thereby setting precedents that open the door to privatization. I want to make two major points about NAFTA and they are reiterated and reinforced in the GATS. First, all sectors that are not explicitly and exclusively reserved for public action are to be open to international trade and competition, if not immediately then as soon as possible. Under Article 19 of the GATS, member countries are obliged to pursue “a progressively higher level of liberalization” in any service sector involving a mix of private and public ownership. In a 1998 background note, the World Trade Organization (WTO) stated that countries where the hospital sector is a mix of public and private ownership, or where there are user fees or private health insurance. They cannot argue for exemption under Article 1.3 of the GATS, which provides for “services supplied in the exercise of governmental authority” to be excluded. Once an Article 1.3 exemption is withdrawn, it can never be restored. If a country (or any region of a country) chooses, for example. The passing of the controversial Bill – 11 and the opening of an Alberta-based private hospital called HRG Health Resource Group. Under existing trade agreements if even one hospital is operated on a for-profit basis, the entire country has then committed itself to allow this trend to spread throughout its territory.All such measures, in principle, are covered by the GATS, including laws, regulations, guidelines, licensing standards and qualifications, and limitations on market access. As long as it affects trade in services (even potentially or incidentally), a health purpose is in principle covered by the GATS obligations. The GATS applies to measures taken by any level of government—including provincial, regional and municipal authorities—and even to measures taken by non-governmental agencies exercising powers delegated to them by any level of government. Regional health authorities, regulatory bodies, and even not-for-profit health care providers are therefore covered by the GATS obligations. It applies to most public services and does not distinguish between commercial and not-for-profit services. Any service, including health care, which involves a mix of public and private funding and delivery, is subject to GATS on the same basis as are totally commercial services. When President Obama meets in February I am urging him to put pressure on the Canadian Government to resolve this issue. Barring that calling on the US Trade Representative to file with the WTO that Canada’s health care system no longer constitutes a social service. On the grounds they have commercialized it we want compensation and damages.
