Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

eridani

(51,907 posts)
Sun Oct 25, 2015, 06:41 AM Oct 2015

NAFTA's ISDS: Why Canada Is One of the Most Sued Countries in the World [View all]

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/10/23/naftas-isds-why-canada-one-most-sued-countries-world

NAFTA, the free trade deal between Canada, the USA and Mexico that came into effect in 1994, was the first trade deal among developed countries to include an investor-state provision. It grants investors of the continent the right to sue one another’s governments without first pursuing legal action through the country’s legal system. Before NAFTA, ISDS provisions were only negotiated between developed and undeveloped countries.

Ethyl, a U.S. chemical corporation, successfully challenged a Canadian ban on imports of its gasoline that contained MMT, an additive that is a suspected neurotoxin. The Canadian government repealed the ban and paid the company $13 million (approximately €8.8 million) for its loss of revenue.

S.D. Myers, a U.S. waste disposal firm, challenged a similar ban on the export of toxic PCB waste. Canada paid the company over $6 million (approximately €4 million).

A NAFTA panel ordered the Canadian government to pay Exxon-Mobil, the world’s largest oil and gas company, $17.3 million (approximately €11.6 million) when the company challenged government guidelines that investors in offshore exploration in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador – where the company is heavily involved – must invest in local research and development.

New Jersey-based Bilcon Construction is demanding $300,000 (approximately €200,000) in damages from the Canadian government after winning a NAFTA challenge when its plan to build a massive quarry and marine terminal in an environmentally sensitive area of Nova Scotia and ship basalt aggregate through the Bay of Fundy, site of the highest tides in the world, was rejected by an environmental assessment panel.

Chemical giant Dow AgroSciences used NAFTA to force the province of Quebec, after it banned 2,4-D, a pesticide that the Natural Resources Defence Council says has been linked in many studies to cancer and cell damage, to publicly acknowledge that the chemical does not pose an “unacceptable risk” to human health, a position the government had previously held.

The Canadian government paid American pulp and paper giant AbitibiBowater $130 million (approximately €88 million) after the company successfully used NAFTA to claim compensation for the “water and timber rights” it left behind when it abandoned its operations in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador after 100 years, leaving the workers with unpaid pensions. This challenge is particularly disturbing because it gives a foreign investor the right to claim compensation for the actual resources it used while operating in another jurisdiction.

Mesa Power Group, an energy company owned by Texas billionaire T. Boone Pickens, is claiming $775 million (approximately €523 million) in a challenge to the province of Ontario’s Green Energy Act, which gives preferential access to local wind farm operators.

Lone Pine, a Canadian energy company, is suing the Canadian government through its American affiliate for $250 million (approximately €152 million) because the province of Quebec introduced a temporary moratorium on all fracking activities under the St. Lawrence River until further studies are completed. This challenge is concerning because it involves a domestic company using a foreign subsidiary to sue its own government.

Eli Lilly, a U.S. pharmaceutical giant, is suing Canada for $500 million (approximately €337 million) after three levels of courts in Canada denied it a patent extension on one of its products. This case is particularly disturbing because it challenges Canadian laws as interpreted by Canadian courts and represents a new frontier for ISDS challenges
60 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
This is insane. LiberalArkie Oct 2015 #1
Took the words right out of my mouth. +1 tecelote Oct 2015 #3
completely insane n/t uawchild Oct 2015 #19
Jim Hightower wrote about the probability of this years 8-10 years ago. SharonAnn Oct 2015 #53
Trudeau should re-ban all of those things and pull out of NAFTA. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2015 #2
And the TPP doubles down on this. djean111 Oct 2015 #4
It will be interesting to see if that is true. This article from Japan indicates that it might not. pampango Oct 2015 #7
Those are actual cases that Canada already had to pay out. fasttense Oct 2015 #12
The NSA has special courts. -none Oct 2015 #26
Exactly right dragonlady Oct 2015 #22
Which POTUS passed this with the help of Republicans? Omaha Steve Oct 2015 #5
Exactly and for those who think this kind of thing is not in jwirr Oct 2015 #21
I get so frustrated and annoyed with the people that say that the U.S. has never lost stillwaiting Oct 2015 #6
ISDS is the "get out of jail, collect $2T card" for corporations Demeter Oct 2015 #9
Yet, Canada begged to be part of TPP. Why? It brings jobs and tax Hoyt Oct 2015 #8
Yea, and Santa Clause really exists fasttense Oct 2015 #13
Correct -There is no evidence they bring jobs and tax revenue laundry_queen Oct 2015 #20
Tell that to those in rural South Carolina or Tennessee working for a foreign auto company. Hoyt Oct 2015 #38
That came at the expense of better paying jobs for Americans. But laundry_queen Oct 2015 #39
How, if people want a Toyota, they'd buy them whether built in Japan or Mexico. I'd rather Hoyt Oct 2015 #55
It is true to a degree laundry_queen Oct 2015 #58
That's like claiming credit for feeding the horses because you let them out of the barn. fasttense Oct 2015 #42
"Countries that don't sign as many free trade agreements have better economies overall." pampango Oct 2015 #40
Their better situations have nothing to do with free trade laundry_queen Oct 2015 #56
The majority of the people, or just the government mouthpieces? Babel_17 Oct 2015 #17
Sure, every country in the world -- including Denmark -- are corrupt for signing 2500 similar Hoyt Oct 2015 #18
So it's as popular in Canada as here in the USA, roughly speaking Babel_17 Oct 2015 #25
It's true that huge corporations from all over the world have their tentacles into many countries fasttense Oct 2015 #43
+1000. nt. polly7 Oct 2015 #46
Maybe because American cars suxed for so many years, and Hoyt Oct 2015 #48
Because of Harper is why. -none Oct 2015 #27
Harper is no longer there, do you think it will pass? Nor was Harper there for NAFTA. Hoyt Oct 2015 #28
"Cannada" begged? Whatchu mean "Canada" Kemosabe? eridani Oct 2015 #34
Nearly everyone I've talked to about it hates the idea. polly7 Oct 2015 #47
It does not bring jobs and tax revenue. polly7 Oct 2015 #49
So all these countries that sign these agreements -- including Scandanavian -- are corrupt. Hoyt Oct 2015 #50
WTF said they were 'corrupt'? nt. polly7 Oct 2015 #51
Well they all -- including Denmark -- must be corrupt if they are bowing to corporations. Hoyt Oct 2015 #54
Having to bow to corporations has nothing to do with being corrupt or ignorant. polly7 Oct 2015 #57
Now that sanity has returned to Ottawa, perhaps TPP is toast! Demeter Oct 2015 #10
OOOooo! Just wait for the FUN part! gregcrawford Oct 2015 #11
Exactly. CanSocDem Oct 2015 #16
That's true under NAFTA and almost all trade agreements since 1959. Hoyt Oct 2015 #29
Farcical trade agreements Babel_17 Oct 2015 #14
My favorite line from one of my favorite movies. fasttense Oct 2015 #44
I think 'eminent domain' should work in the opposite direction, too, i.e for. Joe Chi Minh Oct 2015 #15
If IT corporations are broken up NobodyHere Oct 2015 #24
A unified corporation would, I imagine, be easier to control. But Joe Chi Minh Oct 2015 #32
These trade agreements = the world gone nuts! Duppers Oct 2015 #23
http://economixcomix.com/home/tpp/ (Economix explains the Trans-Pacific Partnership) Babel_17 Oct 2015 #30
Excellent reference. Thanks n/t eridani Oct 2015 #31
The article explains 'what', not 'why'. randome Oct 2015 #33
A flat ban on environmental poisons applies to both Canadiean and foreign companies eridani Oct 2015 #35
Not just profits, but under the new trade deals, 'expected future profits'. polly7 Oct 2015 #37
It will be interesting to see if the ISDS rules in the TPP are any better than in NAFTA. pampango Oct 2015 #41
It would be interesting if it weren't so awful fasttense Oct 2015 #45
Thanks Bill Clinton. n/t wildbilln864 Oct 2015 #36
Folks do realize that the filing of a lawsuit does not mean you win? Fred Sanders Oct 2015 #52
Clearly governments have no higher uses for their tax dollars than-- eridani Oct 2015 #60
Here is a more detailed report than Common Dreams which is both short and short on analyisis Monk06 Oct 2015 #59
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»NAFTA's ISDS: Why Canada ...