Dangers of CSME (CAFTA precursor)

The Nassau Guardian ^ | May 30, 2005 | MINDELL SMALL

[hedgetrimmer]

Attorney says Bahamas faces too many risks

By MINDELL SMALL,Guardian Staff Reporter mindell@nasguard.com

Continuing to voice strong opposition to the proposed Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME) attorney Paul D. Moss said The Bahamas faces too many risks if it signs on to it.

Mr Moss is Chairman of the group 'Bahamians Agitating for a Referendum on the Free Trade Area of the Americas (BARF)'

Over the past three years BARF has been seeking to highlight what it refers to as the "dangers" of not only the CSME but also the WTO and FTAA. BARF said it studied the three agreements and found that they have similarities.

In focusing on the Right of Establishment, namely Articles 30-36 and Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), Mr Moss said, "Contrary to what Minister Fred Mitchell and CARICOM High Commissioner A Leonard Archer have said - that the CSME is no big deal and that nothing will change if we sign on and that opponents are prejudice against other parts of the Caribbean - I want to tell you that I have great love and respect for my brothers and sisters in the Caribbean and that the CSME is a big deal."

He then quoted Dr Kenny Anthony, Prime Minister of St. Lucia, who recently said CSME, the most significant development in Caribbean integration, would bring dislocation.

Owen Arthur, Prime Minister of Barbados, who is charged with responsibility for CSME development in the region, said CSME was the most complex, ambitious and difficult enterprise ever contemplated in the region.

"And I agree with both Prime Ministers whose views are diametrically opposed to our minister and high commissioner," said Mr Moss.

"You would have also heard the minister say that we will have reservations concerning the free movement of persons. Whilst the reservations are debatable, I will show you how free movement will happen notwithstanding the reservation," he added.

CCJ hurdles

He said Article 32 of the CCJ prohibits any law or policy that The Bahamas may have which is designed to restrict nationals of member states from creating and managing economic enterprises.

Economic enterprises include any type of organisation for the production of trade in goods or the provision of services and is owned or controlled by any person or entity of a member state.

"What this means is that while you may have a reservation, you cannot exclude or restrict any citizen of, say, St. Kitts, from coming here to set up shop as a hairdresser. In other words, setting up shop to compete with those of you who are in the business," he explained.

"The same article refers to companies. This means that, say, a construction company from Montserrat, or pre-school from Belize can come to The Bahamas and set up shop and compete with those of you in the business. I submit that this is tantamount to free movement."

He pointed out that Articles 7 and 8 of the CCJ, which deal with non-discrimination on the grounds of nationality and the most favoured nation treatment, serve as the protector of the right of establishment thereby entrenching the right of the movement of labour to The Bahamas.

The BARF Chairman further noted that under the Article, The College of The Bahamas, which charges a higher price per credit for non-Bahamians, would not be permitted to continue that practice.

"Put simply, Bahamian students would have to compete for seats at COB and they will pay the same rate as their fellow Caribbean students."

Blunt warning for CARICOM

Under the heading, "Stop the deception - region must prepare for risks to single market," Economist Professor Clive Thomas also weighed in on the debate. Professor Thomas said because CSME is market driven, it runs the risk of falling prey to the pitfalls of market-determined scenarios - therefore the region must have compensatory arrangements in place.

Professor Thomas is the Director of the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Guyana and the leading economist of the 15-member CARICOM community.

He gave a blunt warning to the governments of the Caribbean in a speech on May 17, saying, "To my mind it does not require great jurisprudence to recognise that 14 sovereign states (Montserrat is a member but not independent), cannot create a single economic space - a single market perhaps, but never a single economic space, in any meaningful way.

"Political union is the inescapable logic of a single economic space, given the world we inhabit."

Thomas added that trade liberalisation gives way to preference erosion, which could devastate small, vulnerable economies.

"What is at risk", he declared, "is far greater. We put at risk the loss of a distinctive society still in the making. We put at risk a loss of culture; and ultimately, we put at risk a loss of humanity."

[hedgetrimmer]

The author shows that when you have a single market economy, which CAFTA would create with Central America and the United States, you will get unlimited immigration, out of country students demanding in-state tuition, and unlicensed individuals working in areas where national and local licensing controls existed.

In other words, this trade agreement, and CAFTA as well, will completely undermine of the system of nations in this hemisphere.

[hedgetrimmer]

The author reflects on the changes this "free trade" agreement will cause in Nassau. These changes have happened, especially in the border states with Mexico, since NAFTA was passed. Free trade== unlimited immigration and the degradation of a whole system of government. This degradation is allowed to occur to accommodate the migrants who may not be properly licensed, or those who wish to attend taxpayer funded universities at the same rate level and citizen students.

[A. Pole]

"What is at risk", he declared, "is far greater. We put at risk the loss of a distinctive society still in the making. We put at risk a loss of culture; and ultimately, we put at risk a loss of humanity."

Distinctive societies are the main obstacle in the way of Free Market Juggernaut!

[Reaganwuzthebest]

The author shows that when you have a single market economy, which CAFTA would create with Central America and the United States, you will get unlimited immigration, out of country students demanding in-state tuition, and unlicensed individuals working in areas where national and local licensing controls existed.

This is what the federal government apparently wants. They all know what their policies are doing yet there is little change, in fact they want more of them.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

That is the plan.

To undo over two hundred years of Constitutionally protected freedoms and make us all one big happy Guatemala.

[JesseJane]

Good find.. you are exactly right.

There is to be a global gameboard unrestricted by laws, constitutions, or the will of individual countries or her people. As Chiraq would call it, just the politics of business. I call it, capitalistic communism. Where the rights and freedoms of people are stripped under the mask of eradicating poverting and improving the environment, both of which all are afraid to oppose rather than expose.

[iconoclast]

To undo over two hundred years of Constitutionally protected freedoms and make us all one big happy Guatemala.

Hey! The upside is it'll give a real kick start to Army recruiting!

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

The modern U.S. army doesn't want illiterate cannon fodder, but the new regional government will.

To use against those of us who refuse to play along.

[Dog Gone]

I am an unabashed free trader, but I draw the line at provisions allowing foreigners unfettered immigration to compete in any country.

CAFTA doesn't permit that, though, so your characterization is false, hopefully not intentionally so.

[Iscool]

This is unheard of in the way of modern day thinking...

You don't suppose this person cares more about the people and the sovereignty of the country this guy represents than the payoffs and 'contributions' he would get if he pushed this thru???

He certainly couldn't qualify as an American politician...

[hedgetrimmer]

Not false.

Starting with the WTO,and through NAFTA to CAFTA to the FTAA, rules have been established regarding "the right of establishment" and the "national treatment" of migrants.

The right of establishment means that any country within the "free trade" area designated in the treaty has the right to establish business in any country in the "free trade area". That is why the article mentions the right of establishment, it is one mechanism for establishing open borders and unlimited immigration. The article goes on to say that the Caribbean Court of justice( not national courts) will go on to protect the right of establishment(unlimited immigration) in the CSME countries.

If you research previous trade agreements the US has signed, including the creation of the WTO, and in NAFTA and in CAFTA you will see that the legal precedence for the "right of establishment" is there.

This is true in CAFTA, although CAFTA specifically limits the right of establishment to professional services, which does not include agricultural and hospitality industry workers I presume. However, the FTAA will open up the right of establishment to anyone who cares to move anywhere in the western hemisphere.

What the right of establishment does is force country's with migrant or temporary worker labor to give "national treatment" to the foreign nationals working in that country. National treatment means you must treat them the same as citizen workers, and allow them mobility to go to any job they want(no quest worker program that ties them to a specific employer, because that harms their economic freedom).

CAFTA clearly creates a "national treatment" and provides the "right of establishment" for professional workers, which is the camel's nose under the tent for other migrant labor in the hemisphere as soon as the FTAA is signed.

NAFTA has clear "right of establishment" and "national treatment" rules for Mexico. It is one proof that "free trade" promotes illegal immigration.

If you want to educate yourself about the fuzzy phrases that don't sound harmful to American sovereignty, but really are, I suggest you read up on how the "right of establishment" has harmed sovereignty in the EU, the "right of establishment" in the NAFTA, CAFTA, the FTAA and what "national treatment" means in "free trade" agreements.

[hedgetrimmer]

This might interest you.

[Dog Gone]

This is part of the text of CAFTA

UNDERSTANDING REGARDING IMMIGRATION MEASURES

August 5, 2004 The representatives of the Governments of the Republic of Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, the Republic of El Salvador, the Republic of Guatemala, the Republic of Honduras, the Republic of Nicaragua, and the United States of America confirm the following understanding reached by our Governments in the course of negotiations regarding the Dominican Republic – Central America – United States Free Trade Agreement signed this day (the “Agreement”):

No provision of the Agreement shall be construed to impose any obligation on a Party regarding its immigration measures.

[american spirit]

Excellent analysis and I think it's very apparent that the vote to establish the new EU constitution has encountered much opposition for reasons similar to those you've discussed......although listening to the usual shallow reporting done by the mainstream media morons most folks don't have a clue as to what's really going on.

Also, we need to be aware that if these trade pacts become reality there's a good chance we'll see new hemispheric bureaucracies being created that will present a real challenge to our own Const. and legal system.

[hedgetrimmer]

You see, immigration is the procedure by which a country allows foreign citizens to establish a presence in a country that can lead to an application of citizenship. These treaties do not discuss immigration they discuss migrants and temporary workers and professional workers who want to work in a country other than their country of origin. These treaties are not proposing that migrants change their citizen ship. They are however enforcing rules that gives migrants the same rights as citizens(or "nationals") totally bypassing any national immigration process and totally forgoing any imperative to become a citizen before taking economic advantage of a country.

The "economic elites" don't want citizenship in America by these people, they just want them to be a mobile, cheap labor force that can be easily manipulated, proper immigration and citizenship would deny them that power.

[hedgetrimmer]

Also, we need to be aware that if these trade pacts become reality there's a good chance we'll see new hemispheric bureaucracies being created that will present a real challenge to our own Const. and legal system.

Its already being done. We have the Summit of the Americas, the OAS and now due to regional ftas, the Courts of Justice, which are composed of tribunal judges to enforce the treaty clauses and force compliance through trade sanctions and fines.

[Dog Gone]

But it is clear that each country can make its own decision whether to admit such people into their own country. Nothing in CAFTA forces them to admit guest workers or people wanting citizenship.

It guarantees the right of permanent residents the ability to open businesses, but that's no change from current US law, is it? My sister-in-law is a Canadian with permanent resident status and she's able to work as a nurse right now. What's the new threat?

[american spirit]

And I would that cheap labor force is one that is paid minimal $ by the big corps. knwoing full well the taxpayers will be socked with other living expenses for the employees....in the meantime many employers get to outwardly break federal law with little fear of getting caught.

[hedgetrimmer]

Look at this fuzzy wording in CARICOM (of which the USVI and Puerto Rico are US territories).

The Protocol consists of the following elements: the right of establishment, the right of capital mobility, free movement of labor, the removal of existing restrictions on the free movement of services, national treatment provision guarantees in respect of all members of CARICOM, and perhaps most important the obligations not to impose any new restrictions on services upon the execution of the Protocol.

[hedgetrimmer]

So as not to alarm the American people, the idea of "free movement of labor" is not elucidated in the CAFTA directly, but members of CAFTA are required to follow protocols established in other agreements. Here is where the "free movement of labor" gets established in the CAFTA countries (of which the United States is one, Dog Gone) via the Protocol of Guatemala.

In 1993 the five Central American countries plus Panama met in Guatemala City and signed the Central American Economic Integration Protocol to the General Treaty on Central American Economic Integration of 1960. This so-called Protocol of Guatemala sought to gradually create a Central American customs union, a common customs authority, and the eventual free movement of labor and capital among the member states and establishment of a monetary union.