Today Wed Thu
It is forcast to be Clear at 11:00 PM EDT on June 18, 2013
Clear
24°/12°		 It is forcast to be Clear at 11:00 PM EDT on June 19, 2013
Clear
22°/13°		 It is forcast to be Partly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on June 20, 2013
Partly Cloudy
23°/17°

10 Comments

politics

Scene: Trojan Horse at City Hall

Calling attention to the dangers that may be lurking, hidden inside the seeming gift of a free trade agreement with the European Union.

By

Kristyn Wong-Tam, Glenn de Baeremaeker, and one very large horse.

WHERE: Just outside the front doors of City Hall

WHEN: 11:10 a.m.

WHAT: Trojans! Greeks! Stealth attacks! Or, at least, a photo op, held by two councillors, the Council of Canadians, and one large horse (we estimate about 10 feet tall) to call attention to concerns they have about the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, currently being negotiated between Canada and the European Union. The Council of Canadians has been campaigning to get municipalities across the country to call on higher orders of government to exclude them from the agreement, worried that it would unduly limit cities’ ability to issue contracts to local goods and service providers, or to make purchasing decisions based on policy goals (for instance, buying local produce in order to support the regional economy).

Tomorrow, the Executive Committee will consider a motion by Glenn de Baeremaeker (Ward 38, Scarborough Centre) and Kristyn Wong-Tam (Ward 27, Toronto Centre-Rosedale), calling for Toronto to petition Ontario for just such an exemption from CETA for the city. It will most likely fail; in order to have the motion considered anyway, de Baeremaeker and Wong-Tam will need to convince two-thirds of their colleagues to overrule the Executive Committee and have a debate about the matter on the floor of council.

Today marked, perhaps, a new high for De Baeremaeker, who has a reputation for being council’s prop-master. Toilets and inflatable, remote-controlled sharks are one thing, but this? This was too big to even fit through the doors.

Comments

  • Anonymous

    If a local company within a stone’s throw of City Hall costs more than a company in Europe, then the local company needs to get it’s act together, not rely on protectionism.

    • Anonymous

      And when that fledgling local company goes under because it can’t match the price of a transnational based in the EU, who pays the price? When City Hall’s local preference isn’t allowed to have the contract because it must go to a bidder in Spain, do we get to ship all the excess CO2 back to Madrid? When our elected representatives are forbidden from acting on our push for greener this and local that, what becomes of democracy at the municipal level?

      • Anonymous

        How is a local going under because of competition from a European company different from it going under because of competition from a Canadian company?
        Why should taxpayers pay more for a local company if a non-local company can do it cheaper?

        (And is this chain of posts asking too many questions?)

        • Anonymous

          There may not be much in the way of local competition for a particular service of the type or scale the City needs, and even if there is, it’s quite possible for multiple suppliers to be knocked out if a large foreign company can do it all and more. The types of companies that will be able to bid on the large contracts in question are accustomed to doing the same job for a much larger population.

          It’s clearly in tax payer’s interest for locals to be employed and for their tax dollars to stay in the country. And just because a Belgian consortium can do it cheaper doesn’t mean the price the local guys were charging was ever an issue before.

          • canpolicy

            It’s not clearly in the taxpayers’ interest if it’s more expensive, doofus.

          • Anonymous

            Right then, so tax payers want people to lose their jobs and for anyone with a job to work for a foreign company. Got it. I’ll be sure to vote that way from now on.

      • Anonymous

        Since Europe is miles ahead of us on emissions, the “excess” CO2 would probably come from the local company (including shipping).

        • Anonymous

          I doubt they’re so far ahead that crossing the Atlantic is less polluting than crossing Bronte Creek.

          • http://anton-p-nym.livejournal.com/ Anton P. Nym

            Modern container shipping is amazingly fuel-efficient (per cargo ton-mile) so I don’t know if I’d place a bet either way.

            — Steve

          • Anonymous

            Per unit, the emissions for long distance shipping can be small relative to the total energy for production, to say nothing of factors like, the average European would take the train to the factory, while the average Canadian would drive.

            You mentioned agriculture: practices vary widely around the world, and Canadian methods are some of the most energy intensive (e.g., hothouses and cold storage for out-of-season fruits/vegetables).