Jobs and Timber Accord was a long time coming he B.C. Jobs and Timber Accord sets a milestone for the way a resource indus- try should and can be managed for the benefit of working people. The announcement, made earlier this month, (see story page one and Presi- dent’s Message on opposite page) sets guidelines to create additional employ- ment in the province's forest industry and sets the stage for the creation of good-paying, family-sup- porting jobs which will pump money back into for- est-dependent communities. It also turns around the faltering direction of For- est Renewal B.C. which has a mandate to link dis- placed forest workers with new enhanced silvicul- tural work in order to better manage the forests of the future. The I.W.A. has got a great deal of work cut out for it with the establishment of a Forest Worker Agency that will operate on the coastal and the interior for- est regions. The union will sit down with employers in order to negotiate under long-term, stable arrangements to ensure all workers will be union- ized and that the first priority will be given to dis- placed forest workers. This will be the fulfillment of some of the long- standing promises made to workers by the previous NDP government of Mike Harcourt and several ministers. Now it’s time for the workers in such areas as Clayoquot Sound, the Walbran Valley, the Tahsish- Kwois, the Cariboo-Chilcotin, the Kootenays and many other parts of the province to be picked up and gainfully re-employed in the forests. It will take some time for all of this to happen and much patience will be required to steer progress through. Negotiations will not be easy. The Accord also endeavors to create more jobs in B.C. by offering increased wood volume to value- added manufacturers and secondary industry. This is a first for Canada. The NDP government deserves credit were credit is due. We agree that the Jobs and Timber Accord is a “historic break from the past” as Glen Clark remarked. We also agree that the forest industry is a “sunrise industry” as a result. Greenpeace boycott has lost all credibility Not long after Greenpeace International launched its campaign to save the “Great Bear Rainforest,” (see article page three) Greenpeace spokesperson Tzeporah Berman was interviewed by a television reporter from CKVU, based in Vancou- ver. She was asked point blank if her organization would continue to demand a boycott of B.C. forest products even if it affects people particularly in small rural communities dependent on logging, in the short-term. She replied: “It won't effect people in rural com- munities in the short-term. That is an absolute lie that the government and the industry are pushing out so that they don’t have to change their practices or address the information that we're giving to con- sumers or to the public in B.C.” Need the honesty of Greenpeace be challenged more? Ms. Berman’s comments speak for the credi- bility of her organization. LUIMBERUWORKER Official publication of I.W.A. CANADA NORMAN GARCIA Editor we Bae Street 1285 W. Pender Stree - ‘ Vancouver, B.C. ARYEUARG V6E 4B2 ‘TERRY SMITH BROADWAY “at4802 PRINTERS LTD. Ath Vice-President Secretary Treasurer BC. LOGGERS GEAR UP FOR A SUMMER OF CONFRONTATION INGRID RICE FOR THE TUMBERINORKER OIRICE 47 Federal Liberals launch into talks on international trade agreement for world’s 29 richest nations First there was the Canada - US. Free Trade Agreement, which became the central issue in the 1988 federal election. Then there was the North American Free Trade Agree- ment which became a major issue in the 1993 federal elec- tion. Now there is another major upcoming international trade agreement to worry about, known as the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAID), currently being negoti- ated by the 29 richest coun- tries in the world, including Canada. Another federal election has come and gone and no other major political party other than the New Democ- rats, has talked about the MAI. In fact during the cam- paign, one incumbent Liberal MP, Hedy Fry of Vancouver Centre, declared on CBC radio that, “there is no such an agreement being made or under discussion at this time.” That contradicts a state- ment made in April by Liber- al Trade Minister Art Eggel- ton that all Liberal MP’s were sent a memo to call them into a closed briefing session on the MAI. It appears as if the meeting was set up to hush-up any Liberal talk of the MAI dur- ing the campaign. Government and corporate officials in Canada and the other 28 nations of the Orga- nization for Economic Cooper- ation and Development (OECD) have received a confi- dential draft text called the “Multilateral Agreement on Investment: Consolidated Texts and Commentary. It has been circulating this spring and the Liberals have it. In fact top government bureaucrats have been an integral part of high-level, secret, closed-door discussions at OECD offices in Paris, France. The first draft was supposed to be ready last month where OECD officials could look it over. That process has been delayed by several months in order for the draft to be passed around member states and more negotiations may take place. The MAI is shaping up as an international bill of rights for transnational corporations that will supersede the pow- ers of federal and provincial governments. It will be, in fact, a set of global rules to administer international capi- tal for the wealthiest corpora- tions in the world. According to a paper being distributed by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives “Ottawa is actively support- ing Washington’s bid to con- stitutionalize transnational corporate power on a world- wide scale through the negoti- ation of a Multilateral Agree- ment on Investment.” Included in the MAI are provisions that will prohibit governments from demanding that there be domestic require- ments attached to invest- ments, such as job creation. Economist Marjorie Griffen Cohen of Simon Fraser Uni- versity pointed out that such restrictions could prohibit job creation initiatives like the Jobs and Timber Accord which provide social benefits. B.C. Premier Glen Clark said that the provincial gov- ernment will simply ignore the MAI. The government will continue to push both Canadi- anand international investors, in the province's forest indus- try, to create more jobs. The same thing applies to the fishing industry. Investors rights could be violated if gov- ernments direct them to cre- ate jobs and local employment in local communities. The commentary accompa- nying the MAI draft says that “the MAI should prevent the application ofnational employ- ment quotas or labour market tests.” In other words, protection of investments is fine, but the protection of governments‘ rights to create employment strategies would not exist in an MAI world. Under a MAI, foreign cor- porations could have the right to sue a national government if it nationalizes property or investments. It could also for- bid the nationalization of pro- perties or industrial and ser- vice sectors in the future. Transnational corporations could be excused from legal actions for the violation of environmental standards, lab- our standards and human rights. OECD signatories could be required to give equal funding to publicly funded medicare and privately funded hospital corporations as well. The MAI has clauses, toimposeon gov- ernments, “privatization rights” and “monopoly/ state enterprises” which could include medicare. The recent federal election focused, in large part, on the issues of employment, medi- care and the protection of other public institutions. All major political parties sensed this in their polling and designed their campaigns accordingly. It was only Alexa McDo- nough and the New Democra- tic Party who stuck to the issues of jobs and social pro- grams when other major par- ties like the Reform, Liberals, Conservatives and Bloc Que- becois switched to the issue of national unity in the final days of the campaign. And it was only the New Democrats who raised the issue of the MAI. No other major political party would touch the issue. Marjorie Griffen Cohen recently wrote in the Vancou- ver Sun: “Jean Chretien and the federal Liberal govern- ment should not be able to sign away people’s rights through these secret negotia- tions at the international level. Substantive public consulta- tions on the MAI needs to begin immediately. “People’s rights as citizens are undermined in ways which are going to be difficult to con- frontifthis agreement receives the consent of member coun- tries of the OECD.” LUMBERWORKERNJULY 1997/5