World Water Day (March 22nd) is a good time to consider this: Canada has nearly 10% of the world’s supply of fresh water. How lucky are we? But what is all this water doing to earn its keep? Nothing. Or so think our politicians – and thirsty corporations like General Electric...The provincial government is expected to table a new Water Act in 2012. It is anticipated that the new Act will allow water licence owners (whatever the purported use licensed) to sell to the highest bidder. The new owner can arbitrarily change the licensed use from, say, agriculture to heavy industry. In a drought such as Australia’s, good luck to farmers who might need to buy water back.

Read this story from TheTyee.ca on Abbotsford Councillor Patricia Ross' brave stand against a private model for water services in her community being pushed by the town's mayor and others.

"Ross is the sole incumbent to oppose a public-private partnership (P3) that would see the private design, build, partial finance and operation of a water works project in Mission's Stave Lake, a contract of 25 years. Originally a partnership with neighbouring Mission as a way to address future water shortages, in April the district dropped out of applying for a federal P3 grant for the project, in the wake of strong public opposition.

To Ross, Abbotsford broke a 'gentleman's agreement' by going ahead with the P3 without the partnership of Mission. But she has other concerns, including the private operation of the water system, cost uncertainties, and what she sees as the lack of choice given to the public in the matter -- concerns shared by other opponents, including some new council hopefuls." (Nov. 10, 2011)

Read full article: http://thetyee.ca/News/2011/11/10/Abbotsford-P3-Deal/

Read this article from the Globe and Mail on the Harper Government's decision to sell AECL to Montreal engineering giant SNC-Lavalin - June 28, 2011.

From Counterpunch.org - June 14, 2011

by Michael Leonardi

After an inspiring mass mobilization of people across Italy with demonstrations of all kinds: banner drops, critical mass bike rides, workshops, information booths, film screenings, use of the social networking and facebook, people running nude through the streets, flash mob die-ins, young people living confined in a giant rendition of a radioactive drum for over a month, and a door to door, neighbor to neighbor, person to person grassroots storm, the Italian people have won a historic vote against the forces of global capitalism and privatization to ban the construction of Nuclear Power plants now and forever, to keep or return Water resources to public ownership and to Prosecute the criminal behavior of political leaders -- first and foremost Silvio Berlusconi.

Italians managed to overcome the daunting task of a quorum of 50 per cent + 1 of all Italian voters in the face of a mass media controlled by Berlusconi and a government that was encouraging voters to go to the beach instead of vote on the first weekend of summer vacation for Italian grade school, middle school and high school students. The quorum had not been reached for over a decade on any referendum. This time the Italian people responded with 57 per cent of the voters turning out to the polls, the highest on any referendum in over 20 years, and with the quorum being surpassed in every region of the country. 95 per cent of the voters have voted “SI” to say No as the Italian winds of change have grown to gale force.

The vote began on Sunday morning and by mid-day the results showed that only around 10 percent of voters had responded nationally. There was a frenzy of activity in every town and city, on the streets, in the coffee bars, in the town squares, on the beaches, everywhere! The proponents of the referendums threw all caution to the wind as they called to every passerby to go to the polls and not let this important opportunity to express our collective democratic voice pass by. This was an incredible mobilization that had a domino effect, as students, families and co-workers pushed one another to make the democratic process function for the people once and for all. Flags sprung up on balconies, stickers on the windows of busses and walls of the metros, with bicyclists up and down the coasts whistling and shouting to get out the vote. By 7 o’clock on Sunday the attendance at the polls was up to 30 per cent. The depression of the morning gave way to a nervous feeling that maybe it really was possible that the quorum could be reached. People went to the phones and text messages and continued to hit the streets contacting and calling out to everyone to let them know that they could be that one vote to tip the scales. 

The polls closed on Sunday at 10 o’clock and by that time voter turnout was reported at 41 per cent, the quorum was well within reach. 25 towns and cities out of over 8000 had already reached the quorum and the predictions were that the last 10 per cent could be reached on Monday. Being so dominated by the Catholic church, the word miracle started to spring forth from people’s lips as a nervous and incredulous tension continued to build. The government still had some tricks up its sleeve. It was rumored that they might not count the votes from Italians living abroad on the nuclear question. It was said that we needed to arrive to at least 52 or 53 per cent of the vote to ensure the Quorum and not just 50 per cent+1, would it be possible? Rome was in a stir of activity, and people there were convinced saying that they hadn’t felt this kind of energy in the streets since the student uprisings of 1968.  In the region of Calabria, the only region that voted for Berlusconi’s right wing coalition in the municipal elections, the activists were more cynical. Would they be the downfall of the quorum for the country? While nationally the turnout was at 41 per cent Calabria was only at 30 and the tension was palpable. On Monday the Italian people responded and even in Calabria! We surpassed the 50 per cent + 1 and sailed to 57 per cent, overcoming any possibility that the votes from abroad could change the outcome.

Italy was overcome with joy. The leader of the Italian of Values Party Antonio Di Pietro, who launched the petition drives for the referendums on Nuclear Energy and Legitimate Impediment held a press conference to express his pride and contentment with the outcome of this historic vote, stating that “this was a victory of the Italian People and not of the Political Establishment,” and again calling for Berlusconi to resign from power. The hundreds of local committees and local, regional and national organizations erupted in celebrations in piazzas across the country. The main party was held in Rome and symbolically took place in front of the Roman monument known as the Bocca Della Verita’ / The Mouth of Truth.

While the national media reported the election results with the usual mouthpieces from Berlusconi’s government and the Opposition Democratic Party, the message from the piazzas and il popolo Italiano / the Italian people was clear, this was a victory of, by and for the people and not under the banner or any of the political party of the current political caste. As Marco Bersani of the organization ATTAC Italia said, “it is time to change the discourse in Italy. This was not a victory of any of the major political parties but should be recognized as a clear signal that Italians are fed up with the ineptitude of the political leadership in the country and are ready for direct democracy to confront the serious issues affecting the citizenry.” 

This victory should not only be seen in the context of the Italian political landscape but also in its significance for the rest of Europe and the world. Italians have voted Yes to say no to the privatization of water resources. Many of Italy’s water resources are already poorly managed by multinational corporations and now Italians have decided that water as a primary resource should be controlled and managed publicly. Yesterday at Napoli’s celebration rally, the renegade Italian priest Alex Zanotelli reiterated that “all life comes from water, water is the mother of our existence and it must not be the multinationals that decide how it should be managed and distributed, but the people of the world. We must join together to build human relationships and to create a network of direct democracy to protect Water and other public goods from exploitation.” The Italian decision to say no to the privatization of water is an challenge to the European parliament, the G8 and the IMF  that are threatening the privatization of all public resources in the face of the growing debt crisis facing the Global Economy. Italy now stands alone as the first European country to take this step against the forces of privatization.

Italy’s decision to ban the production of nuclear energy is a signal to the nuclear industry that its time of disastrous profiteering at the expense of our and our children’s future is coming to an end. Italians are now calling for a democratic and just national energy plan that puts renewable energy first. The mass movement of citizens is tired of the business as usual politics dominated by the energy giants and the pressure from the U.S. government to become a nuclearized nation. The people are demanding a diffuse and safe energy production plan that utilizes the abundant sunshine and winds for which Italy is noted and that can help provide thousands of needed jobs for young people left out of the economic shell game dominated by the corrupt business class.  

Italians have also decided that elected politicians should not be protected from prosecution while in office and that the law should be applied equally for everyone. This vote eliminates the Berlusconi government’s decree called Legitimate Impediment which allowed office holders, and especially Berlusconi himself, to be excused from appearing in court.

The winds of change are blowing strongly now in Italy and there is a renewed hope and belief that another world really is possible. Let’s hope that the people of the world take inspiration from this new dawn in Italy and join in this global struggle against privatization, nuclear energy and government corruption. Here the people realize that despite this historic victory, the struggle has only just begun.

Michael Leonardi splits his time between Ohio and Italy. He can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

Read original article

From the Vancouver Sun - June 11, 2011

by Barry O'Neil - CUPE BC President

Read original article

From The Council of Canadians - March 8, 2011

Ottawa – The record-setting $130-million NAFTA settlement with AbitibiBowater has effectively privatized Canada's water by allowing foreign investors to assert a proprietary claim to water permits and even water in its natural state, says trade lawyer and Council of Canadians board member Steven Shrybman, in a presentation to Parliament today.

"It would be difficult to overstate the consequences of such a profound transformation of the right Canadian governments have always had to own and control public natural resources," says Mr. Shrybman in his presentation to the Standing Committee on International Trade, which is studying the AbitibiBowater NAFTA settlement from last August.

"Moreover, by recognizing water as private property, the government has gone much further than any international arbitral tribunal has dared to go in recognizing a commercial claim to natural water resources."

In 2008, AbitibiBowater, a Canadian firm registered in the United States, closed its pulp and paper mill in Grand Falls-Windsor, NL. The company asserted rights to sell its assets, including certain timber harvesting licenses and water use permits. These permits were contingent on production. More importantly, under Canada's constitution they are a public trust owned by the Province, not by private firms. So the Newfoundland government moved to re-appropriate them as it has a right to do under Canadian law. AbitibiBowater sidestepped the courts to challenge the Newfoundland government.

"The case clearly put the concept of water as a public trust on a direct collision course with treaty-based corporate and commercial rights. However, rather than defend public ownership and control of water, the federal government has agreed to settle AbitibiBowater's claim," says Mr. Shrybman. "By stipulating that the payment of compensation is on account of rights and assets, the government of Canada has explicitly acknowledged an obligation to compensate AbitibiBowater for claims relating to water taking permits and forest harvesting licenses."

By settling with the company rather than challenging its case, we have no response from the federal government to refute the company's proprietary claims to water and timber rights, explains Mr. Shrybman. The settlement also fails to identify the particular rights for which compensation will be paid, and makes no attempt to exclude any of the company's claims, "thereby acknowledging the validity of the claims."

"Moreover, by recognizing a proprietary claim to water taking and forest harvesting rights, Canada has gone much further than any international tribunal established under NAFTA rules, or to our knowledge, under the rules of other international investment treaties," he says.

A statement by the government that the settlement shall not set a precedent is "entirely ineffective," because of NAFTA's National Treatment clause which grants foreign companies treatment no less favourable than national companies in like circumstances.

"It is not therefore an overstatement to describe the consequences of this settlement as effectively representing a coup-de-grace for public ownership and control of water and other natural resources with respect to which some license or permit had been granted."

Shrybman suggests water takings by tar sands operations in Alberta, a golf course in Ontario or a water bottling plant in Quebec are other examples of where even a partial recovery of water rights by the provinces could detrimentally affect business. If any of these companies were foreign owned they could claim compensation on the same terms granted AbitibiBowater.

***

The Council of Canadians strongly believes there is no place in existing or future trade agreements for such overstretching investment protections. It has repeatedly called on the federal government to reopen NAFTA to remove the investor-to-state dispute process. The Council also recently joined several other Canadian organizations in writing to all members of the European Parliament urging them to reject the inclusion of NAFTA-like investment protections in the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), which could be signed by the end of the year.

Read original press release

From Focus Online - Feb, 2011

by Briony Penn

Wham BAM, thank you TAM

Corporate mergers raise questions about who really owns BC

I used to report on the colourful species that inhabit this part of the world, but those articles are diminishing with their populations. Now I’m as likely to report on the colourful CEOs of companies who are doing their best to liquidate these last “distressed assets.” It’s quite a challenge, as one has to be able to follow the ever-changing mergers, selloffs and vertical integrations that the big players concoct through Byzantine-like structures and deals. 

One also has to be able to remember three-word acronyms which often change. To follow the money in this region right now, the most important ones to be aware of are BAM and TAM. Look out your window anywhere from Crofton to Sooke and you’ll be gazing at a piece of real estate owned in some fashion by BAM or TAM.

Mr Martin J. Whitman, the founder of Third Avenue Management (TAM), runs his empire out of New York; a few of its minor assets have included Western Forest Products, Timberwest, and Island Timberlands through  associations with another roving predator of distressed companies, Brookfield Asset Management (BAM) under CEO Bruce Flatt. 

TAM and BAM form a many-headed hydra that has been devouring most of the private forestlands on southeast Vancouver Island. These distressed asset managers live in the skyscrapers of New York and Toronto from which they “manage” thousands of hectares of forest in the Capital Region. We rely on these forests for water and are now having to buy them back from BAM/TAM at great expense.

If you travel around British Columbia, you’ll gaze upon many other TAM assets. In fact, fully one quarter of BC’s public harvesting rights—over 10 million cubic metres of Crown forest—are now under TAM’s controlling interest through their acquisition of huge chunks of BC’s biggest forest and pulp companies, including Canfor and Catalyst. As pressures to privatize crown assets continue, the companies with existing leases to resources will be best poised to secure title to the land underlying those resources.

TAM, working alongside Jimmy Pattison (who is also a board member of BAM), has majority share ownership in Canfor. Pattison and Whitman joined together in 2007 to vote in their own slate of directors, including TAM men like Amit Wadhwaney, an ex-Domtar forest products analyst who heads up the TAM International Value Fund, and Ian Lapey, Whitman’s future successor (they are not on the board now, though Pattison is). The same sort of thing went on with Catalyst. The typical pattern is: close down facilities, consolidate, liquidate assets, avoid taxes (as happened in Crofton), try and exert influence on the political system, wait out the process of privatization and then sell.

Whitman’s investment mantra is “Safe and Cheap.” He coined it after the war when he discovered there was a lot of money to be made buying distressed companies in sectors hit by recession; liquidating and consolidating; then waiting it out for the rising market. The philosophy is stated this way on TAM’s website: “We believe the cheaper you buy, the greater the potential investment reward and the cheaper you buy, the less the inherent risk.” 

What was Whitman’s inspiration? His biography states: “When he encountered a timber company rich with assets [aka forests] but no visible earnings power he realized there was a better way.” One assumes the “better way” is to liquidate the forests prior to selling the land when real estate prices are rising. In southeast Vancouver Island, there has never been so much timber removed from these forests so quickly. 

We shouldn’t be surprised that our province attracts such companies. Who could resist British Columbia, a great little banana republic on the doorstep of America that meets all those great investment criteria? Safe? For sure, there are no Zapatistas here. And cheap? Once you’ve creamed the forest off the top, you have free real estate that can be sold. Moreover, we have a provincial government that seems easily swayed by corporate investors.

Read full article

From The Guardian - Feb 17, 2011

Campaigners have hailed the "people power" which has forced the government to abandon plans to privatise England's public forests.

The news that Caroline Spelman, the environment secretary, would announce a halt to the consultation into proposals to sell thousands of hectares of woodland was welcomed by grassroots campaigners and conservation charities.

David Cameron heralded the about-turn at prime minister's questions yesterday, when he stated bluntly that he was unhappy with the policy.

The proposals put out for consultation last month detail measures to dispose of up to 100% of England's 258,000 hectare public forest estate, which is currently managed by the Forestry Commission, over the next 10 years.

They included a £250m sale of leaseholds for commercially valuable forests to timber companies, measures to allow communities, charities and even local authorities to buy or lease woods and plans to transfer well-known "heritage" woods such as the New Forest into the hands of charities.

But the proposals attracted cross-party opposition and sparked a public outcry, with critics arguing they threatened public access and wildlife.

Campaign group 38 Degrees started a Save Our Forests petition which attracted more than 532,000 signatures.

David Babbs, executive director, said: "Some people say signing petitions and emailing MPs never changes anything, but it did this time.

"This is what people power looks like, and over half a million of us are feeling very proud of what we've achieved together today.

"We will keep watching David Cameron to make sure he keeps his word. But right now it looks like fantastic news for all of us who want to keep our forests safe in public hands for future generations."

The Woodland Trust welcomed the U-turn but warned the campaign to protect and restore England's ancient forests must go on.

Sue Holden, chief executive of the trust, said: "While we welcome the removal of threats to public access, there is still an acute need for better protection of ancient woodland, our equivalent of the rainforests, and restoration of ancient woods planted with conifers.

"Ministers have made strong commitments over the past few weeks to increase protection for ancient woods, and we will be holding them to these commitments.

"We must not let public passion and support for our woods and forests die down and now that ownership is no longer an issue, we must not lose sight of the need to increase protection for ancient forests and restore those planted with conifers, a once in a lifetime opportunity for woodland conservation."

Read full article

From the Public Eye Online - Feb 8, 2011

The world's second largest company has registered to the lobby the government on a cornucopia of subjects. General Electric Co. is perhaps best known in provincial political circles for having partnered with run-of-the-river, solar and wind energy producer Plutonic Power Corporation Inc. So it's not surprising the company's Canadian subsidiary is targeting the province's "wind development program" and "renewable energy opportunities" as part of its lobbying effort. But General Electric - which hosted two receptions at the government's BC Showcase during the 2010 Winter Olympic Games and donated $15,470 to the Liberals between 2005 and 2009 - is also planning to talk about:

From the Times-Colonist - Feb 7, 2011

by Judith Lavoie

A deluge of connected applications to extract water for bottling — from more than 40 streams around four remote inlets on the B.C. Central Coast — has prompted a flurry of requests for a full provincial environmental assessment.

The applications, now individually under consideration by the Natural Resource Operations Ministry, envisage taking about 112,000 litres a day from each of the streams. The water would then be barged to Vancouver and bottled.

"With 40 or more streams involved that's an industrial operation by anyone's definition," said Lannie Keller of the Friends of Bute Inlet.

"But that ministry is looking only at each individual application and not the entire project."

Although three numbered companies and two First Nations — the Kwiakah First Nation of Campbell River and Da'naxda'xw Awaetlala of Alert Bay — are named on the applications, the common thread is William Chornobay of Langley, who could not be contacted Monday.

"They are all part of a single scheme," said Arthur Caldicott, an energy analyst and writer who has researched the applications for the publication Watershed Sentinel.

"It's a unique phenomenon. We've never seen anything like it before, even during the boom in bottled water in 2007. . . . We have no idea how these are being assessed by government," he said.

Between 60 and 70 water-use licences have been issued by the province in the past, but many have either been abandoned or are not fully used, Caldicott said.

All recent applications are around Jervis, Toba, Bute and Knight inlets.

As the applications are connected, the cumulative environmental effects — rather than the effects of individual withdrawals — need to be studied, say the Campbell River Council of Canadians, Friends of Bute Inlet, Sierra Club Malaspina, Sierra Club Quadra Island and Sunshine Coast Conservation Association. All have asked Environment Minister Murray Coell for an environmental assessment.

Read full article