4) SECRET TPPartnership, C-CITreaty & CETA TRIBUNALS are INSIDER TRADING; corp. Canada fears China may Blow “Arrangements” between Can. Lobbyists’ Clients & Parties’ Executives (W.A.D. Accord*)?

Financial & Human Rights News;
NON Shareholders HAVE TO PAY the arranged PENALTIES. Line Up to “PRE” IPOs SHOrtens. Repatriating off-shore; profits, goods & services contracts, financing, etc. and co-manufacturing still not on the table?

What the TREATY of VERSAILLES was to the 20th century PALES in COMPARISON to the TPP, CETA, C-CIT, NAFTA, et al, in the 21st.

(CAN) – Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s attempts to maintain the secrecy provisions in the Trans Pacific Partnership, the Canada – European Union CETA & the Canada – China Investment
Treaty (C-CIT; FIPPA), et al,may be unraveling by way of the Canadian Senate, which is being threatened with being abolished, et al.

There are several reasons for the secrecy (“omerta”) of the dispute resolution tribunals. They are:
1) To Protect the parties to the treaty, &/or, agreement, ie. corporate sponsors, from having to reveal to the non shareholding tax payers the existing arrangements that it has with its own government. For instance, the Canadian W.A.D. Accord suggests that corporate Canada’s lobbyists pay considerations to the executives of the political parties for two main reasons:
A) to promote corporate Canada’s agenda with governing party(ies) by:
i) reducing its taxes & thus, the “net increase” in taxes for non shareholders
ii) increase its funding for “economic development” which covers
the cost of, among other things, the present & future advocacy,
ie. lobbying & the cost of the considerations that corporate
Canada pays out, etc. It may be regrettable that given the source
of the accessed “economic development” funds, ie. those
95% – 99% of Canadians who are non shareholding tax payers
there is a great deal of room for discretionary spending & its
B) to protect corporate Canada’s agenda by paying the other (non governing) political parties considerations in order to limit the scope of the “opposition” to manageable issues that can be compromised in order that “opposing” parties can claim victories (at least a limited victory) for their constituents. Under this
arrangement both, the politicians & the lobbyists’ clients are protected from scrutiny by the role of the parties’ executives.
2) To Protect the parties to the treaty, &/or, agreement, ie. corporate sponsor from having to reveal to the each others’ corporate sponsors their existing arrangements that it has with its own government &
each counties’ corporate sponsors are not obliged to share the benefits & considerations (& future considerations) that they receive from their respective governments ie. their non shareholding taxpayers. Often the benefits are shared as an inducement to conduct business together in the more convenient jurisdictions.
3) To Protect the parties to one treaty, &/or, agreement (referred to as the “original” treaty/agreement) from having to reveal to third parties the nature, &/or, details of their “original” arrangements to other third parties who may want to enter into a treaty, &/or, agreement with either of the parties to the “original”
agreement/treaty.That is to say, that acquiring & having privileged information of an outsiders treaties, &/or,
agreements will cause contention as the third party will undoubtedly insist upon more favorable terms & conditions to a new treaty/agreement than the original treaty/agreement. For example;

“You did this with them, so I insist upon more, or, I’ll deal with them, or, others”.

The European Union is particularly interested in preventing the Canada – European Union CETA from becoming
divisive whereby individual EU member countries may be enticed, &/or, coerced into making preferential, but, “very secretive” side deals with corporate Canada, et al.

By preventing the non shareholding taxpayers from learning about the aforementioned reasons for the tribunals’ secrecy whereby the non shareholding taxpayers pay for the increase in the value of the shareholders’ stocks & dividends is insider trading & stock manipulation.

Therefore, corporate Canada, AFN & their traditional media outlets have more than just a vested interest in the continuation of the most vulnerable Canadians (95% – 99% of Native & non Native Canadians) deprivation of the information such as the comprehensive version of The W.A.D. Accord and the comprehensive versions of the Canada – China Investment Treaty, the Canada – European Union CET Agreement, et al, that include the mechanisms, procedures, practices used in the adjudications of the dispute resolution tribunal & its disbursement of its punitive awards.

And, while it may be regrettable that not all of the 95% – 99% most vulnerable, non shareholders are able, &/or, willing to move to a sovereign Quebec, or, other jurisdictions, in order to:
1) avoid the “unethical” & “inhumane” (see; The W.A.D. Accord), but, “legal” practices
2) start getting the relevant & quantitative information regarding
the above, et al.

The issue of the secret tribunals raises some interesting questions that the “secret congress” of the lobbyists’ clients & the executives of the political parties have no intention of answering.

For instance; what do the above arrangements say about the 95% – 99% of Canadians who are non shareholding tax payers & the version of “democracy” that they are developing in Canada in the context of the growing “global” economy
what do the above arrangements say about the accelerating growth of the disparity of the wealth between the shareholders (1% – 5% of Canadians, et al) & the non shareholders (95% – 99% of Canadians), et al?

What are you, the reader, learning about the Canada – China Investment Treaty that will help you to ascertain whether the Canada – European Union Agreement is better for you & perhaps, corporate Canada?

What are some of the other questions that the non shareholders need to ask
who can answer, &/or, is willing to answer (as opposed to “respond’ to) their questions that would make them willing participants & direct beneficiaries of the TPP, the C-CIT & the CETA?

Have you & your family, friends & colleagues sent PM Harper & Mr. DAN HILTON (Executive Director of the Conservative Party) your:

in order to enhance your opportunity to exculpate yourself from having to pay for:
1) the aforementioned Compensation that is embodied in The W.A.D. Accord
2) the costs, penalties, punitive damages that will be derived from the TPP, C-CITreaty & the CETAgreement?

In conclusion, it may be regrettable that the TPP, the C-CITreaty & the CETAgreement has, so far, been successful at giving corporate Canada
its representatives the much higher degree of legitimacy to their aforementioned secrecy (assisted by way of the international cache) that it needs in order for them to later, & once again, claim (see; NAFTA) that they are doing/did “their best” to protect the non shareholders from the over zealousness of their foreign Treaty, &/or, Agreement counterparts.

Is it not easier & just prudent to discuss the preexisting arrangements & challenges to the Treaty & the Agreement prior to ratifying them in order to determine which is more egregious than the other (or, are both equally egregious) & thus, avoid any of the secret “dispute” resolutions & its “hefty” costs to the beleaguered non shareholding taxpayers, et al? And, how much more will these costs further erode the non shareholding taxpayers health care (privatize), educational services, etc.?

How much has corporate Canada set aside to defend the CHALLENGES, et al, that corporate Canada & the non shareholders, et al, are anticipating?

How far along are they in collecting this fund & how much more does corporate Canada & its shareholders need to set aside before the non shareholding taxpayers allow corporate Canada & its representatives to proceed?

Similarly, due to a psychiatrist’s previous linking of the deprivation of information with the unconscionably high rates of despair, disenchantment, suicides, unemployment, poverty, etc., that are found in many communities across Canada, what are the various different ways that non shareholders can guarantee that corporate Canada & its shareholders have enough financial reserves set aside in order to pay for the CHALLENGES by the non shareholders and those who will be the new victims of the aforementioned deprivation of information?

On the other hand, are there actually any non shareholding taxpayers who think that corporate Canada is actually anxious to explain to them, or, corporate China, or, corporate EU, just how effective their secretive relationship between:
1) lobbyists’ of corporate Canada
2) the executives of the parties that are operating in Canada, has
been & is continuing to be?

And, finally, without:
1) a meaningful forum in which to “further question” the Treaty
& Agreement without the fear of recriminations, etc.,
2) a predetermined list of circumstances whereby corporate Canada can terminate the Treaty & the Agreement without penalties, &/or, costs to the harmless non shareholding taxpayers
3) et al,
the ratification of the TPP, the C-CITreaty & the CETAgreement will eliminate for most Canadians the last remnants of “democratically” effecting the treaty/agreement by the non shareholding taxpayers
thus, corporate Canada, et al, will finally be able to give these arrangements the luster of legitimacy that they need that is based upon the logic that

“It can’t be another gilded cage that will cause another economic melt down like the “derivative type conspiracy”**that is continuing to debilitate international finance, etc., because there are just too many vanguards of industry promoting the public financing of the TPP, the C-CITreaty & CETAgreement”.

The secrecy of the TPP, the C-CITreaty & CETAgreement arrangements are not dissimilar to insider trading, whereby the shareholders who are on “the inside” use secret, &/or, privileged information to make money for themselves at the expense of the group that is on the “outside”, the non shareholding taxpayers, who are being deprived of the aforementioned information & thus, are being deprived of the opportunity to enjoy the direct benefits of the treaty/agreement. And, just as some of the means to counter these arrangements are also not dissimilar to those counter measures that can remedy insider trading & pay punitive damages, etc. to the harmless non shareholders. And, while it is likely that the “coveted” Chinese investor*** may have enough of the insider information regarding the more “unethical”, &/or, “inhumane” arrangements in the C-CITreaty to navigate the mechanisms of the secret dispute resolution tribunal in his favor & at the peril of corporate Canada, it may be regrettable that it is highly unlikely that the European Union has been as fortunate regarding the CETA arrangements. This disparity between China’s benefits from the C-CITreaty & the benefits that the EU may derive from their CETA will continue to be dangerously contentious.

And, finally, it may also be regrettable that there is yet another vulnerability that corporate Canada, especially its Alberta chapter, is particularly desperate to be kept secret for as long as possible
it only remains to be seen when it will be most advantageous to “leak” the secret & by which party.

* The W.A.D. Accord; Reference:
For those who may not be familiar with The WAD Accord, &/or, its recent developments, The Accord can be accessed on line by way of the submission entitled:
“Towards a More Informed Opinion regarding the Environmental Impact & Context of the NGP (Pipeline), et al”, Researched & Submitted by D.E.H.S., July 24, 2012 to the Enbridge Co.’s NGP Joint Review Panel..
Ms. Colette Spagnuolo,
Process Advisor, Northern Gateway Project
(22nd Floor, 160 Elgin St. Ottawa ON K1A 0H3)

For the other information that may lead the non shareholders, corporate China and corporate European Union & their shareholders & the non shareholders, et al, to a greater certainty regarding what corporate Canada may be sharing with you regarding the accessing of the aforementioned, information & Canadian natural resources, et al, I can be contacted at:
see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com

**”derivative type conspiracy”; “The $58 Trillion Elephant in the Room” by Jesse Eisinger. Upstart Business Journal, October 15, 2008, 8:00am EDT. Re; the “industrialized credit derivatives”

*** the “coveted” Chinese investor; Who is the “coveted” Chinese investor who said:
“It’s not that we are racist when we are dealing with Canadians,
it’s just that we can’t stand the way that you suck up to us.”?
*******                                                                                                                                                 Your DONATIONS for the ongoing research & the dissemination of the relevant information will be gratefully accepted & can be sent to;
David E.H. Smith, 2173 Bradford Ave., Sidney, BC, Canada. V8L 2C8                                       *******
To SHARE Information & Questions re; The Relationship between Human (Nature) Rights & Economics in 1) the C-CI Treaty, the CET Agreement, TPP, et al, and 2) Native Canadian Treaties via The WAD Accord
see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com
Please consider sharing the enclosed information & questions with 10 members of your family, friends, associates in order that they can use the due diligence info to make more informed decision about their families’ financial planning, & then they can share it with 10 others…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s