ACTION ALERT: Perimeter Security Consultations

[Oscar]

ACTION ALERT: Perimeter security consultations extended: Tell Harper you oppose deep integration with the U.S.

The Harper government has extended its on-line consultations on a proposed perimeter security pact with the United States to June 3, 2011.

Though the questionnaire on the government’s Border Action Plan website is designed to exclude criticism of deep security and economic integration with the U.S., we encourage you to voice your opposition anyway using the options provided.

The “Beyond the Border” declaration, announced jointly by Prime Minister Harper and U.S. President Obama at a February 4, 2011 press conference in Washington, D.C., commits both governments to “pursue a perimeter approach to security, working together within, at, and away from the borders of our two countries to enhance our security and accelerate the legitimate flow of people, goods, and services between our two countries.”

We’ve been here before. The “Beyond the Border Action Plan” that Harper and Obama are drafting behind closed doors, based almost entirely on corporate input, simply rehashes the hopelessly flawed and publicly rejected Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America (www.IntegrateThis.ca). The only difference is that Mexico is not a part of the discussion (though the explosion of drug-related murders in Mexico offers proof where security integration across borders can go terribly wrong).

No one can know for sure what ‘perimeter security’ will mean until the details of the Canada-U.S. action plan are announced later this summer. But if it means wrapping North America in a high tech security blanket under U.S. control, increasing surveillance of everyday people across the continent, and harmonizing health, environmental and intellectual property laws, then the scheme cannot truly make any of us safer or more prosperous.

TAKE ACTION
Send the Harper government your thoughts on its post-SPP perimeter security plan with the U.S., and make sure to send us a copy, too, at inquiries@canadians.org. We’ve provided a few talking points below to help you draft your response. You can use the government's online form here. Or you can send your submission by mail or e-mail to the addresses below:

Beyond the Border Working Group
235 Queen Street, Office 1020C
Ottawa ON K1A 0H5
E-mail: border@ic.gc.ca

TALKING POINTS
1 - An online consultation is not sufficient public consultation for a plan that is being dubbed as the biggest North American deal since NAFTA. It is also difficult to comment on a perimeter plan when we don't have the details yet. There should be open public consultations and lengthy parliamentary scrutiny, with the ability to make changes to the plan, once those details are released later this summer. And there should be no special access to the process for Canadian and U.S. business lobby groups, as there was for the 30 CEOs of the North American Competitiveness Council during the publicly rejected Security and Prosperity Partnership discussions.

2 - The links between economic prosperity and a U.S. version of security are not obvious. If the financial crisis and current environmental crisis have taught us anything, it's that ecological and economic security are much more important priorities for people and governments around the world. NAFTA has increased trade between Canada and the U.S. but not prosperity for the majority of Canadians or Americans. Regulatory cooperation measures announced in a side-statement to the Beyond the Border perimeter security plan may undermine efforts in the United States and Canada to set stronger environmental and public health policies and regulations than currently exist.

3 – There is little evidence of a major problem with the flow of goods and people across the Canada-U.S. border. Where is the independent impact assessment of U.S. security demands since 2001 on border flows? David Wilkins, the former U.S. ambassador to Canada, recently claimed that stories of a "thicker" border are exaggerated. What problem is perimeter security looking to solve if not border flows? There is also a question of cost. Canada has spent $10 billion beefing up border security since September 2001, which is dwarfed by an estimated $1 trillion spent in the U.S. on new security measures. A new study by Ohio State University national security professor John Mueller and engineering professor Mark Stewart of Australia’s University of Newcastle suggests we may have hit the point where additional security spending produces no new benefits in terms of real security.

4 - A common understanding of the ‘threat environment’ and how to respond to it, as proposed in the February 4 joint declaration, really means a U.S. understanding. Canada will be asked to fear the same thing the U.S. government fears, and to respond in a similar way. A perimeter security approach will mean a jointly patrolled outer perimeter under de facto U.S. control. Canada will end up with a U.S.-patrolled external border and a U.S-controlled internal border.

5 - Recommendations from the Arar Commission following Maher Arar’s deportation to Syria from the U.S. stated that Canada should more carefully monitor the operations of its numerous security agencies, and put filters on the information it shares with U.S. and other foreign security agencies. These recommendations have gone unanswered by the Harper government. More information sharing across the border without proper checks and balances may undermine the civil liberties of Canadians and Americans alike.

[Oscar]

ADAMSON: Border Perimeter Plan

From: adamson.bl@shaw.ca
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 9:03 PM
To: rcc-ccr@tbs-sct.gc.ca
Subject: Border Perimeter Plan

Sir or Madam:

I thoroughly reject and oppose the Border Perimeter Plan between Canada and the USA. !!

Who the hell is doing all this fear-mongering? I strongly reject this "fortress mentality" being pushed upon us.

Canada needs to run its own affairs as a peace-loving nation, and we do not in any way need all the economic and political strings that will be involved in such a deal. Canada no longer needs to be a "puppy on the leash" of the USA. Prime Minster Harper is selling our sovereignty down the drain. The hell of it is that he does so much of it in secret, and doesnt have the guts to explain the details of his negotiations

to the Canadian public. Knock it off!!

Yours truly,

Dr. W. R. Adamson, 304- 1735 McKercher Dr.,
Saskatoon, SK.
S7H 5N6

[Oscar]

HUGHES: Perimeter Security

From: Elaine Hughes
To: rcc-ccr@tbs-sct.gc.ca ; border@ic.gc.ca
Cc: inquiries@canadians.org ; Layton, J. NDP ; May, Elizabeth GPC ; info@liberal.ca
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 6:39 PM
Subject: Perimeter Security

Beyond the Border Working Group
235 Queen Street, Office 1020C
Ottawa ON K1A 0H5
E-mail: border@ic.gc.ca

This so-called ‘consultation’ process is a joke!

An online consultation is not sufficient public consultation for a plan that is being dubbed as the biggest North American deal since NAFTA. It is also difficult to comment on a perimeter plan when we don't have the details yet. There should be open public consultations and lengthy parliamentary scrutiny, with the ability to make changes to the plan, once those details are released later this summer. And there should be no special access to the process for Canadian and U.S. business lobby groups, as there was for the 30 CEOs of the North American Competitiveness Council during the publicly rejected Security and Prosperity Partnership discussions.

Besides, no one can know for sure what ‘perimeter security’ will mean until the details of the Canada-U.S. action plan are announced later this summer. But if it means wrapping North America in a high tech security blanket under U.S. control, increasing surveillance of everyday people across the continent, and harmonizing health, environmental and intellectual property laws, then the scheme cannot truly make any of us safer or more prosperous.

I am absolutely opposed to this scheme as well as any further integration with the USA. We are our own country – we can manage our own security and we certainly don’t need American protection from the enemies which they continue to make for us – all in the name of ‘TRADE’ and the ‘ECONOMY’!

Elaine Hughes
Box 23, Archerwill, SK S0E 0B0
EMAIL: tybach@sasktel.net

CC:
Council of Canadians: inquiries@canadians.org
Jack Layton, Leader of the Official Opposition: Layton.J@parl.gc.ca
Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party of Canada: Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca
Bob Rae, Interim Leader, Liberal Party of Canada: info@liberal.ca

[Oscar]

FINLEY: Beyond Border

From: Sandra Finley
To: border@ic.gc.ca ; rcc-ccr@tbs-sct.gc.ca
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 10:44 PM
Subject: Beyond Border

Dear Sirs and Mes dames,

1. The U.S. is floundering in debt and corruption, hated abroad. You are integrating Canada with a ship that is sinking.

2. I am very pleased that you think I will believe your initiatives “would improve security while supporting economic competitiveness, job creation and prosperity”. I’ll let the American experience speak to that. They know best how NAFTA has sent their manufacturing sector off-shore and how de-regulation to serve corporate interests (greed) has turned a million home-owners out into the streets. You are espousing plans that have brought the American economy into bankruptcy and the international economic system to the brink. You want to bring Canada to the same fate as the Americans. Anyhow, I was saying that I am pleased you think I will believe your propaganda. It signals to me that you are delusional.

3. Your “joint action plan for . . economic competitiveness” is nothing more than a plan for handing over the Governance function to Corporate interests. Those interests tend to be American. American corporate interests want to secure access to resources, aided by the military-industrial complex if people resist. It makes me want to get out my knife that is used for castrating calves. I won’t, of course, use it on you!

4. Your “joint action plan” is an act of treason and deception. Unmanned drones are already deployed along the Canada-U.S. border, etc etc – the making of a military state. Perhaps you have an addicted personality - - addicted personalities are master manipulators and adept at lying (I say this because of the propaganda and deception).

5. I hope you are consulting with Americans as well as Canadians. As you will know, the Americans are even more ready than Canadians to kill anything to do with the North American Union (related to NAFTA). And they are better than Canadians at killing.

6. You are engaged in illegitimate process. You are engaged in deception. You are claiming “public consultation” but are circumventing democratic participation by giving almost no notice to the public. The deadline for input is June 3rd. Most of your web pages about these consultations are dated May 26th - - one week ago. The election was on May 2nd. How much notice did you give? How did you publicize the consultations?

Thank-you for this opportunity to express my point-of-view.

I wish it would make a difference. But it won’t. These consultations are a sham. You have already sold us out.

(It doesn’t mean it’s the end of the battle.)

But you know, I don’t really get it.

Is it that you only love money? and not something that is at least alive?

Otherwise, why would you do these dastardly deeds?

I would just like to understand that. Can you explain it? Is there some other motivator besides money?

If there isn’t, I am truly sorry for you.


As always,

Sandra Finley
656 Saskatchewan Cres East
Saskatoon SK S7N 0L1
306-373-8078
sabest1@sasktel.net
www.sandrafinley.ca

[Oscar]

ARNEY: Perimeter Border with the USA.

----- Original Message -----
From: jeremy arney
To: rcc-ccr@tbs-sct.gc.ca
Cc: Layton, Jack ; Rae, Bob ; May Elizabeth ; Harper. Stephen ; Mackay, Peter ; Baird, John ; Toews, Vic ; Kent, Peter
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 11:14 AM
Subject: Perimeter Border with the USA.

RE:
http://www.borderactionplan-plandaction ... ier.gc.ca/
psec-scep/consultations-consultations.aspx?lang=eng

There is some confusion here as one part says emails must be in by May 31st and the other says you ALLOW responses until June 3rd.

Today is the 3rd June and I only found out about this this morning so thank you for letting the Canadian Public know this was even up and that we had an option to have our say.

There is talk always from this government about openness and transparency and keeping this hidden is surely the opposite. What is the rush?

However my views:

There is a border between Canada and the USA for a very good reason. We are two completely different countries, one being a Republic and the other a Constitutional Monarchy.
There is trade between us that has constantly been restricted by ever more complex "trade agreements" rather than just letting trade happen. The idea that with more trade deals it will get better is ridiculous and only feeds into the myth that has been perpetuated on the great unwashed on both sides of the border. Anyone who can think knows well that no trade under any "free trade" agreement is free; on the contrary, there are financial strings attached because the only real beneficiaries of such deals are the bankers and futures dealers.
I have been a cross border truck driver for more years than I wish to say and can tell that each year it gets more complex and slower to get across. Even with a "fast card" and "pre clearance" border crossing is still longer, particularly going south. More free trade or perimeter deals will just increase the regulations instead of decreasing them. If we truly stood by consumer safety in foods here in Canada, more than half of what we import from the USA would never get across the border due to the pesticides allowed down there but not here, and so produce is only allowed up into this country because of NAFTA and the penalties for loss of profits clauses. How many cases have we lost so far?
Our border is with the world's greatest terrorist country, whose notion of minding their own business doesn't exist, and which will attack without hesitation any country that stands up to their bullying. With the Canadian Minister of War's latest declarations of intent to open Canadian Forces bases around the world so we can be ready to jump in and help the USA attack those countries, it shows that this government is taking us into the same constant war footing as the USA. We will then be subject to the same retaliatory attacks from the "enemy" namely those who wish to defend their country and their faith and their right to exist with their own democratically elected governments ruling them. Palestine and Libya are perfect examples of such countries and though we have yet to attack Palestine we certainly have no intention if helping them in any way do we?
To immerse ourselves with such a country as the USA is what our current prime minister has had in mind for years, but that does not mean that is what the Canadian people desire.
We just want to live in peace with everyone, especially our neighbours to the south and trade freely with whoever desires to do business with us.
It is my belief that having a perimeter around the north American continent is only beneficial to those corporations which wish to get at our resources without hindrance and without any benefit to the Canadian people and in particular our First Nations peoples.
I am totally against tying ourselves as a country, or as peoples, to the USA until such time as the USA can be called a good neighbour by every country in the world. It would also be good if we were in that position as well.

That’s my view.

Jeremy Arney
6254a Springlea Rd
Victoria BC V8Z 5Z4
--
If there is something you do not like, do something about it instead of complaining
jeremyarneysblog.wordpress.com
have computer - will write

[Oscar]

Border deal a real danger for safety of Canadians say privacy groups and civil liberties advocates

http://www.canadians.org/media/trade/20 ... ec-11.html

MEDIA RELEASE For Immediate Release December 8, 2011

Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver - Yesterday’s announcement in Washington, D.C. of a Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness Action Plan amounts to the wholesale replacement of Canadian privacy and security standards with U.S. ones. The result is the virtual abrogation of the privacy rights of Canadians. This deal is nothing less than the integration of Canada within the US security regime without any protections for Canadians and other persons.

There are repeated references to “sharing information” and to “harmonizing” standards, approaches, processes or programs. Various security bodies will meet to decide standards, with no mention of the involvement of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. In fact most of the concerns raised by privacy experts in limited online consultations earlier this year appear to have been ignored. The perimeter action plan creates a clear and present danger for the safety of Canadians, who will be at even more risk of being labeled a security threat by the U.S., put on watch lists or otherwise denied the right to travel, with no redress mechanism. It is a complete rejection of the findings of Justice O'Connor and the Arar Commission.

We reaffirm our statement of principles on the proposed border action plan, in particular that no new security or information sharing initiative or recommendation should be implemented or substantially negotiated with the United States prior to an extended public and parliamentary debate in Canada.

We call on the government of Canada to provide a public accounting of current data-sharing arrangements between the Canada and the United States. And we demand that the remaining Arar Commission recommendations with respect to oversight of security activities and redress mechanisms for individuals be implemented prior to moving any further on the proposed perimeter action plan.

WE ENDORSE

B.C. Civil Liberties Association
Micheal Vonn, Policy Director
Tel. (604) 630-9753
www.bccla.org

B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association
Vincent Gogolek, Executive Director
Tel. (604) 739-9788
vgogolek@hotmail.com

Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Sukanya Pillay, Director, National Security Program
Tel. (416) 363-0321, ext. 256
pillay@ccla.org

Common Frontiers
John Foster
john491@sympatico.ca

Council of Canadians
Stuart Trew, Trade campaigner
Tel. (647) 222-9782
strew@canadians.org

International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group
Roch Tassé, National Coordinator
Tel. (613) 241-5298
rocht@iclmg.ca

Ligue des droits et libertés
Dominique Peschard, Président
Tel. (819) 715-7727
communication@liguedesdroits.ca

Rideau Institute
Steve Staples, President
Cel. (613) 290-2695
sstaples@rideauinstitute.ca

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES regarding the proposed Canada- U.S. Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness agreement
A CALL FOR OPEN DEBATE: Not one initiative or recommendation in the border action plan should be implemented or substantially negotiated with the United States prior to an extended public and parliamentary debate in Canada. Past efforts to harmonize security measures across the border in an effort to ease the flow of goods and trade have suffered from a large democratic deficit and excessive influence from parties with a direct financial interest in continued or improved access to the U.S. market.

We reject the argument that our civil liberties must be compromised on the basis that we need to have Canadian goods and services enter the United States with greater ease and certainty. We assert the primacy of human and constitutional rights over economic imperatives. (ELABORATION: Considering the highly integrated nature of many industries working across the Canada-U.S. border, we understand the need for more public investments in border infrastructure, staffing and information technologies in order to reduce shipping costs, border delays and congestion while also providing safe and productive working conditions for workers and travellers. Border traffic flows have been incrementally improved in recent years, and any further changes must not take away from fundamental human and privacy rights in the name of "economic efficiency.")

The Privacy Commissioner must be given authorization to review all new agreements with the United States that affect the privacy rights of people living in Canada, to monitor the implementation of the agreements, and to report annually to Parliament with the results of the reviews and monitoring.

There are currently no oversight and complaint mechanisms with regards to cross-border information sharing between Canadian and U.S. police and intelligence agencies. Building on the Arar Commission recommendations with respect to oversight, before entering into any information sharing arrangement with the U.S., the government of Canada should make a public commitment to create a single authority to oversee all federal police and security organizations involved with the transfer of information between Canada and other countries. This authority should be designated not only to receive, investigate and report publicly on any complaints arising from the provision of information to U.S. authorities, but also to review operations and initiate investigations on its own.

Canada has both mutual legal and customs assistance treaties with the United States. These treaties should be amended so that they include appropriate provision for the protection of information provided by Canada under Shared Vision agreements. A separate treaty should be negotiated for the transfer of information for national security purposes, i.e.. not for law enforcement. Such a treaty would provide for the protection of information provided by Canada outside of the ambit of the mutual legal and customs assistance treaties.

Recognizing the need to collaborate across the border, crossborder policing exercises which result in U.S. police or security officials operating in Canada (and vice versa) should be the exception, not the norm. The framework agreement for the Shiprider program normalizes the deputizing of U.S. police agents on RCMP ships in shared waterways, requiring exceptional reasons for either police force to decline. The mechanism for holding U.S. agents accountable for their actions in Canada is far too vague. Under any cross-border policing agreement, U.S. agents must be subject to Canadian law and accountable to the Canadian courts and judicial system.

The Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) needs to be modernized and strengthened to account for a technological revolution in how personal information is used and shared with the private sector and government. Under no circumstances should Canada's privacy laws be harmonized or otherwise made compatible with U.S. standards, which are weaker.

Canada's constitutional rights and the rights of workers not to face discrimination in the workplace due to race, ethnicity, nationality, national origin, or dual citizenship must remain paramount and not be subjugated to satisfy U.S. security and information sharing demands. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, some immigrants, dual-citizens and workers of colour have faced harassment at the border and discrimination by employers in Canada operating under U.S. laws prohibiting companies from hiring people from 19 proscribed countries.

Harmonization of entry-exit systems with the United States will create pressure to align Canadian and U.S. refugee and immigration policy. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security would de facto determine who is allowed into Canada. The federal government already conceded too much when it agreed to U.S. Secure Flight rules by authorizing Canadian carriers to submit large amounts of personal information on travellers who are not heading to the United States but merely flying over it en route to other Canadian or foreign destinations.

Individuals alleged to be security threats who have been cleared by a Canadian judicial process, Commission of Inquiry or other process must have their personal information purged from databases in Canada and in the U.S. and have their names removed from watchlists (including U.S. no-fly list).

Inherent in the practice of pre-clearance is a system of discrimination and surveillance of workers which is overly invasive with little added security value. We question the use of biometrics, facial-recognition technology and RFID (radio frequency identification) in travel documents, all of which promote a climate of suspicion, fear and undue surveillance instead of lasting security.

We call on government of Canada to provide a public accounting of current data-sharing arrangements between the Canada and the United States. Data-sharing arrangements already exist in myriad forms from international agreements to informal arrangements. We recognize that there are legitimate purposes for data-sharing between Canada and the United States in some instances, however there is also a great failure to provide an account of what personal information of Canadians is currently being disclosed to the United States. For transparency, accountability and to reasonably assess the purported need for increased disclosures, the government of Canada must undertake a comprehensive audit and disclose with specificity:

(i) what type of personal information is currently being disclosed by Canadian authorities to the United States;
(ii) what limits, if any, are there on the use of this disclosed information by the United States;
(iii) what limits, if any, are placed on retention of that information by the United States;
(iv) what mechanisms of correction or redress exist for Canadians whose disclosed information contains errors.

[Oscar]

Pardy on Canada-U.S. border deal

http://www.ceasefire.ca/
?p=9397&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ceasefire%2FycPl+%28Ceasefire.ca%29

Dec. 9, 2011

Former Canadian diplomat Gar Pardy critiques the Canada-U.S. border deal announced on December 7th (Gar Pardy, “How the U.S. blackmailed Canada,” Ottawa Citizen, 8 December 2011):
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/story_prin ... 1&sponsor=


Prime Minister Stephen Harper and President Barack Obama announced Wednesday a 32-point plan establishing an agenda for improvements to cross-border goods and services traffic. In exchange, Canada will provide the United States with personal information on millions of Canadians and become part of a North American security zone.

Fundamentally, the consensus signals Canada signing on to the American-centric view of the world on security matters. In the process, Canadian security institutions will be more closely integrated with those of the United States. [...]

In the announcement yesterday, Canada sold its national security independence in exchange for hoped-for minor changes to American border restrictions.

See also: Thomas Walkom, “Canada a willing patsy in one-sided border deal,” Toronto Star, 7 December 2011.
http://www.thestar.com/printarticle/1098680


Canada-US relations, Gar Pardy, North American border security