Posts Tagged ‘G20’

« Older Entries

In Remembrance of the Charter of Rights and Freedom

Saturday, November 13th, 2010

William Hogarth, "Court of Law"By Elizabeth Littlejohn

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- John F. Kennedy (1917 – 1963), in a speech at the White House, 1962

I write this on the eve of Remembrance Day, 2010, as PM Harper flies to South Korea for a repeat performance of the G20, as three days of testimonies unfold in Toronto and Montreal to question RCMP conduct, and the government continues to refuse a public inquiry into the G20. This judicial inquiry is morally imperative as it would enable the federal court to subpoena evidence from witnesses under oath to knit together the patchwork of incriminating evidence, establish the chain of command of policing during the G20, and finally assign culpability. Both parties are standing firm- this all-encompassing inquiry must not be allowed happen. It may be the only issue they agree upon at this time, having closed ranks to goose-step around civil liberties. Meanwhile, PM Harper is fiddling while Rome burns, selling more of our assets to multinationals in South Korea. Has it occurred to him that Canada is not his to sell?

I dedicate this article to my grandfather, who fought in the First World War, and was one of the few who survived the air force. He came back so shell-shocked that if his family spoke while he drove, he had to pull over to the side of the road to calm down. Within my extended family, several members have been awarded Orders of Canada for public service. I am, however, a vilified ‘protester’, as I believe that there must be a full inquiry into the G8/G20 Summit so that both levels of government are forced to be responsible for the gross abuse of police power, violation of civil liberties and powers of taxation, and desecration of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If the Charter cannot defend its own constitution and abrogation of civil rights, it is a constitution no longer.

It is exactly one week since I witnessed the voting down of the second reading of Bill 121, a public interest investigation into the G8/G20 Summit tabled by Welland’s NDP MPP, Peter Kormos, by 8 ‘ayes’ to 28 ‘neas’ in Queen’s Park. Upon the resounding ‘nea’ across the floor by the consolidated Liberals and Conservatives, there was a unanimous, audible gasp by those in the peanut gallery. Included in that singular voice was my own, and within an hour, having sped away on my round legs, I was listening to Chris Hedges talk about his new book, “The Death of the Liberal Class” at the Munk School for Global Affairs. His lecture was a play-by-play of what I had seen at Queen’s Park, and spoke directly to me.

Could it be, according to Chris Hedges, that the liberal left – unions, churches and universities, progressive political parties, and the press – has lost moral suasion as a guiding voice for democratic dialogue? Have we abandoned our moral compass in favour of corporate elitism? And have we allowed the gutting of ethics, and the erosion of civil liberties, for financial gain? As I watched the provincial NDP fight back at Queen’s Park, and be mocked for their efforts by the opposing parties, I thought no- it is worse- citizens’ rights are being viewed with contempt as they contest the streamlining of economic interests, the growing division between the rich and poor, and the destruction of the environment. As Chris Hedges notes, without a robust liberal voice to engage in this debate, there is a very real danger that things will degrade into violence as the middle and working classes become increasingly disenfranchised, angry and confused. Internationally, general strikes rage, generated by falsely imposed austerity measures imposed by the banks, and Chris Hedges predicts that the US, then Canada, will be next, on the front line. A cynical friend said that no doubt the Conservatives had a contingency fund for legal challenges as part of their G20 bottom line, a line item right after their $500, 000 worth of delegate party favours -glow sticks, hand sanitizer, and $100 pens.

At Queen’s Park, throughout the presentation of the bill, I was distressed by the disregard the opposition had for the NDP. They held extended conversations during their presentation, loud enough to be heard by me in the upper gallery, to show their displeasure at the possibility of the second reading of Bill 121. For me, as a Canadian citizen, it was a momentous historical occasion, for the Liberals and Conservatives, it was a $1.3 billion farce of the highest order, worthy of a William Hogarth cartoon – when Peter Kormos mentioned the editorial in the Star demanding a formal inquiry, a Liberal MPP turned to the fashion section, searching for it there. I watched her. A MPP from the Muskoka region, Garfield Dunlop, mentioned the success of the G8 in Huntsville, although I heard how golfers were losing balls off the green, and militia were crawling out of the brush, holding the golf ball up, and warning them not to hit off the fairway again.

I have always been ambivalent about the Ontario Parliament Network, the official channel of the provincial legislature, but I was glad that it was recording and broadcasting this debate for posterity, ignored as it was by the opposition. MPPs, please be aware that you are being observed. I have heard how the intellectual level of discourse, as transcribed in the Hansard, the official record, is the lowest it has ever been historically, but the resounding speeches of NDP MPPs, Peter Kormos, Andrea Horwath, and Cheri DiNovo , showed courage, a monumental standing up for the underdog. As I left the gallery, I made the universal symbol for typing to Cheri DiNovo. I will transcribe my own citizen’s Hansard of events, and I will remember this travesty of justice in the defense of the Charter, and my grandfather, who fought for a kinder, gentler Canada, and my right to protest. During the G20, police erased incriminating photographs on iPhones by resetting the factory settings to default, and stomping on memory cards, to erase incriminating evidence of police brutality. I refuse to let these memories be erased.

Later, at the lecture, deeply shaken, I asked Chris Hedges about the vilification of protesters, and he spoke of having his microphone cut off, twice, during a lecture, and being escorted off a university campus. The press reported that he had created a riot, and the university sent him his coat by mail. Protesters, intellectuals, academics, environmentalists- these are all epithets, just as a Liberal MP pointed out the eloquence of Peter Kormos was due to his background as a lawyer during the Bill 121 debate. Those who ask for educated discussion are discredited to enable bigotry and prejudice, as PM Harper plays his role as ideologue to evade facts, discourage analysis, and hold court through emotion. Elitists, environmentalists, lawyers, lefties, union members, protesters- these have all become dirty words – just read the comments section online, and see how democratic discourse has descended into name calling, supported by this new form of government.

There will be no justice until there is a public inquiry, which ties together the disparate inquiries into a coherent series of events enabled by a chain of command, and yes, assigns blame. We deserve to know what happened, and not to be distracted by the pomp and circumstance of yet another G20 Summit, quick on the heels of our own. Regulation 233/10, the five meter fence rule, will lead right back to the Premier McGuinty’s office, then to the Prime Minister’s Office.

Investigation of this fallacious law will prove PM Harper’s desire to cut away the backbone of peaceful resistance by targeting caring, educated and engaged youth to ensure their future political passivity. The young woman, hit by rubber bullets, may never return to Toronto, and sadly, these memories of the state of martial law have changed a generation’s perception of police. As an educator, I will never forget this deliberate humiliation of over eleven hundred protesters, and as a citizen, I will never forget that my grandfather fought for naught, because I can be taxed to the hilt to have my civil liberties suspended for a political spectacle enabling police brutality, and civilian abuse. Canada is not safer since the Summits and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has been allowed to be put into question, and with that, the fundamental rights of every citizen. Shame.

References:
Hedges, Chris. The Death of the Liberal Class. New York: Nation, 2010. Print.
Theo Moudakis, Opinion in Toronto Star, Public Inquiry November 1st, link at http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/883743–g20-summit-public-inquiry-still-required
Krystalline Kraus, “Activist Communique: Ontario G20 inquiry public members bill failed to pass second reading and the Summit cost totals”, ‏link at http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/krystalline-kraus/2010/11/activist-communiqu%C3%A9-ontario-g20-inquiry-public-members-bill
The Hansard, November 4th, http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=2010-11-04&detailPage=%2Fhouse-proceedings%2Ftranscripts%2Ffiles_html%2F04-NOV-2010_L066.htm&Parl=39&Sess=2#P1300_294131

Tags:, , , , , , , ,
Posted in Assault on Democracy, Corporate Globalization, Economic policies, Environment, Featured, Labour, The Real Issues | No Comments »

OECD Pursues Free Trade at the G20 Business Summit

Saturday, September 11th, 2010

G20 Toronto Protester

One of the prime concerns of those who protest the G8/G20 summits is the lack of transparency that accompanies these meetings, as well as the absence of democratic channels through which global citizens can voice their concerns with the policies that are pursued.

The following article is a transcript of the remarks made at the G20 Toronto Business Summit by Angel Gurria, the Secretary-General of the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). These remarks provide insight into the inner workings of the G20 policymakers as they continue to consolidate free trade policies such as privatization, the scaling back of government services and anti-protectionism across the globe.

These policies have direct impact on the lives of billions of citizens who have absolutely no say in the actual decisions that are made. By using the G8/G20 summits as forums for these kind of topics, trade ministers and corporations are circumventing the traditional routes of democracy to implement policies against the will of the people. This is why it is important to insist that our voices be heard, to make our presence known at the summits and demand that our concerns be taken into account.

Remarks by Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD
G20 Business Summit
Toronto, Canada
26 June 2010

It is a pleasure to be here on the occasion of the G20 Business Summit. I welcome the opportunity to discuss with you the current economic context and the challenges that Leaders will be discussing in the Summit.

A strengthening recovery, but also new risks

The recovery is on its way, but it is uneven across regions. In our latest projections, we project global growth will reach around 4 ¾ % this year and next. The main engines of growth are the emerging market economies. These economies will account for well over half global growth.

However, major challenges remain. First of all, joblessness is unacceptably high. This is the human face of the crisis that we need to continue to address effectively. In OECD countries, and even though unemployment is likely to have peaked, is still at post war high of 8.7 percent in the first quarter of 2010.

The crisis required unprecedented measures to stimulate the economy. And some countries were better prepared to afford this effort.  Right now, however, public debt and deficits are also at record high, and in some regions like Europe, financial markets have reacted strongly with rising interest rate spreads on sovereign debt.

Inflationary pressures are emerging in some G20 countries where growth has been vigorous, and are receiving substantial capital flows, contributing to sharply rising asset prices.

Finally, the crisis has reduced the productive capacity of our economies. This is due to the higher cost of capital, and also high unemployment. We estimate that the fall of this productive capacity is around 3 percent in OECD economies.

In this delicate environment, governments face difficult policy choices. First of all policy needs to strike a balance between the imperative of fiscal consolidation and the need to support a job rich recovery. If public debt is left to accumulate at its current pace, the cost of borrowing is likely to rise, crowding out private investment. And private business investment is exactly what we need right now. Private demand needs to replace policy stimulus as the source of recovery in order to be self-sustaining.

But, if countries consolidate too soon, too fast and by too much, the fragile recovery could stall. Job creation, also a driver of a sustained expansion, would in turn be delayed. Moreover, if all countries move to consolidate at the same time, these effects would be exacerbated through trade and financial linkages. Thus getting the balance right is primordial!

This issue is at the core of the G20 Leaders’ agenda. The solutions inevitably will be country specific, but through cooperation the trade-offs can be reduced, and growth maximized. At the OECD, we believe that there is no option other than combine sound fiscal policies with specific actions to maintain the momentum for recovery and job creation.

Our view is that fiscal consolidation should be as growth-friendly as possible. Specifically, it means that on the spending side, growth enhancing programmes, such as on education, innovation and infrastructure should be preserved to the extent possible, and efforts, for example, to improve public sector efficiency and phase out inefficient subsidies should be pursued. Moreover, consolidation measures should concentrate first on cutting government spending.

When additional revenue is needed, emphasis should be placed on the least distortive taxes. Our analysis found that such taxes include consumption and property taxes, rather than taxes on labour and business income. Recently announced fiscal consolidation plans in the UK move in this direction. Other options include, putting a price on carbon, via a carbon tax or through tradeable emission permits, which would both raise revenue and help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

However, we must ensure that the tax burden is fairly shared, and seen to be fairly shared. This requires a renewed effort to achieve better tax compliance. Here, thanks to the combination of G20 political support and OECD work, the world has achieved important breakthroughs in combating tax evasion. Such is the case of exchange of information for tax purposes, where since November 2008 we made more progress than in the last 10 years. This breakthrough means a more level playing field for international business, where competitiveness depends on the productivity of business enterprises, rather than aggressive tax planning.

In addition to fiscal policy, we must also focus on structural policy reforms. These are essential to speed up the recovery and to lay the groundwork for a more sustainable and fairer economic future. Structural reform will also be needed to reduce global imbalances in a durable manner. For example, action will need to be taken to raise savings in countries with large current account deficits, such as the United States, and to rebalance demand towards domestic sources in surplus countries, such as China and Germany. In such an environment, businesses have a stronger incentive to hire, which in turn boosts household incomes, leading to a virtuous cycle of stronger domestic demand.

The last point I would like to make is that it is not only policy reforms that count. Avoiding policy reversals and mistakes also matters. During the past one-and-a-half years, it is fair to say that the most important lessons from previous crises have been well learned. Leaders avoided misguided labour market policies and committed to open markets as an integral part of getting the world economy out of the crisis.

The OECD, WTO and UNCTAD report to G20 leaders on trade and investment measures conclude that most G20 members are holding to these commitments. The key role that trade is playing in the current upturn is there to remind us of the fundamental benefits of keeping markets open.

But we need to remain vigilant. Protectionist sentiments are likely to increase with low growth, persistent

unemployment and mounting pressures on government finances. And as our last joint report warned, discretion in the application of the many state support and support programmes for troubled firms may be used to favour domestic companies and disguise protectionism.

Bringing the Doha Development Agenda to a successful conclusion would prevent backsliding, bring much needed stability and predictability to international businesses and, in a period of intense fiscal consolidation and other headwinds holding the pace of growth back, give added impetus to the recovery.

In this context, strengthening international dialogue and consolidating the G20 as the prime forum for economic cooperation is key. We have already seen certain decisions taken by G20 governments that go in the right direction to boost productivity and rebalance the global growth. We are certain that the outcomes of this important meeting will have a positive impact. That’s why we are here, and why international organisations are committed to contribute to this important process.  Business too has a role to play by initiating new investments and hiring to expand productive capacity in order to be ready to take advantage of the recovery.  Together we can build a stronger, cleaner, fairer world economy.

Taken from the OECD website.

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Economic policies, Featured | No Comments »

“It’s Not What We’re Protesting, It’s What We’re Promoting!”

Monday, August 23rd, 2010

Shot and Produced by: Michael Napiorkowski
Music by: while they were sleeping
Song Title: A Friend Across the Margin

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Featured Video, Political Art, Video | No Comments »

Clare Demerse: Leaked G20 documents – Canada won’t cut extra subsidies for fossil fuels

Wednesday, August 18th, 2010

Canada’s section of a leaked G20 document detailing plans to phase out fossil fuel subsidies reveals that Canada has no plans to phase out any of its estimated $2 billion a year in tax breaks to oil and gas producers.

By Clare Demerse, Pembina Institute Climate Change Blog
Originally Published Jun 29, 2010
Image courtesy of ImageShack.us

Despite the Harper government’s decision to downplay climate and energy issues at the G20 summit, there was no way to avoid a discussion of phasing out fossil fuel subsides. That’s because leaders at the previous G20 summit, held in Pittsburgh in September 2009, decided to phase out these subsidies “over the medium term” – and specifically asked ministers to prepare implementation plans and timetables for discussion in Toronto.

The Toronto summit gave G20 leaders an opportunity to take the next step with their subsidy commitment by agreeing to a joint target and timeline. (That’s exactly the approach that Stephen Harper proposed, and won agreement on, for reducing the G20′s budget deficits.) And G20′s Toronto declaration does refer to fossil fuel subsidies – but it doesn’t set a common target or timeline. Instead, Paragraph 42 welcomes “the work of Finance and Energy Ministers in delivering implementation strategies and timeframes, based on national circumstances.” It also encourages “continued and full implementation of country-specific strategies” and commits to reviewing “progress towards this commitment at upcoming summits.”

The problem with a “country-specific” approach is that there’s no common definition of what constitutes a subsidy, and no collective deadline for getting rid of them. So instead of a joint commitment with mutual accountability, you end up with a potluck, where everyone can decide for themselves what they want to bring. Some people will make a mouthwatering dessert, but others will merely pick up some ketchup chips en route to the party – or even arrive empty-handed.

Canada’s Contribution

Officially, the G20 has not released countries’ implementation plans and timeframes. But thanks to a leaked document published yesterday by the U.S. news service ClimateWire , we now know that they prepared to do exactly that: the group drafted a 50-page annex listing the G20′s plans and actions, with the words “Not for distribution until the Toronto summit” right on the cover.

Unfortunately, Canada’s section does not make for inspiring reading. It offers no new plans to phase out any of the estimated $2 billion a year (as described in a previous blog post ) in current tax breaks to oil and gas producers. Instead, it relies on a commitment from Budget 2007 to phase out a specific subsidy to the oil sands – a good decision, but one made long before the Pittsburgh commitment.

In other words, if the G20′s approach is a potluck dinner, Canada arrived with some stale leftovers.

We can’t say that we weren’t warned. In late May, articles from journalist Mike de Souza described a leaked memo from the Department of Finance to federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. The memo gave the minister two choices:

• “Lead by example” in phasing out Canada’s remaining tax breaks to the producers of oil, gas and coal. This was the option that the department recommended, for a number of very sound environmental and economic reasons.

• Make no policy change and instead “seek to minimize the commitment”.

Just in case Minister Flaherty went against the department’s advice and chose the second option, his officials provided him the arguments he could use to try to defend it. On page six of the memo, Finance officials suggest listing three older commitments as evidence of Canada’s early action.[1] The government’s 2007 decision to phase out the accelerated capital cost allowance to the oil sands could be portrayed as “a current action helping to fulfill the commitment,” according to the memo.

It’s very telling to compare that list with Canada’s actual G20 submission : while the G20 document is a bit longer, the content is almost identical. You rarely get to see such clear documentation of a minister’s decision to override his own officials’ recommendations on the right course of action. 

We outlined our concerns with Canada’s approach at a media briefing over the weekend, and we’re going to keep pushing the government to re-think its attempt to “minimize” the Pittsburgh commitment.

One argument we’ll be making is to compare and contrast Canada’s approach with President Obama’s, because Canada’s government often likes to say that it’s harmonized with the U.S. on climate policy. But in his budget plan for this year (see Table 14.3 on p.30), President Obama has proposed phasing out 12 specific subsidies to the producers of oil, gas and coal, which they estimate will save a cumulative total of $38 billion from 2011 to 2020.

So it turns out that some countries did show up with goodies in hand to the G20′s subsidies potluck. But despite the extra pressure of hosting the party, Canada wasn’t one of them.

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Economic policies, Environment, Featured, The Real Issues | 3 Comments »

Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid Protests G8/G20

Friday, August 13th, 2010

The Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid (CAIA) is one of the many groups active within the G8/G20 resistance movement. Members were present for the Toronto G20, protesting the complicity of G8/G20 countries in allowing and encouraging Israel’s policies of occupation and Apartheid within Palestine.

The following is a statement from the Students Against Israeli Apartheid, released ahead of the G20 summit, outlining the reasons it opposes the G8/G20 as well as listing ways these countries enable Israeli Apartheid:

As many of you will know, the so-called “leaders” and bankers of the twenty richest countries, alongside the leaders of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), are meeting in Huntsville and Toronto on 25-27 June 2010 at the G8 and G20 Summits. Also invited to these summits are the heads of large corporations, known for peoples’ exploitation and environmental degradation, both locally and globally. The only group shut out of these meetings and their agenda are people: ordinary people.

These “leaders” will be making decisions that intensify the exploitation of people and the environment. In response, communities throughout Toronto are uniting together to resist the G8/G20 and build momentum for a movement for Indigenous Sovereignty and Self-Determination, Environmental and Climate Justice, Migrant Justice and an End to War and Occupation, Income Equity and Community Control over Resources, Gender Justice and Queer and disAbility rights.

Students Against Israeli Apartheid (SAIA) will be joining this network of activists, community groups and allies because of the complicity of the G8/G20 in Israeli Apartheid.

While Israel ignores international law in its refusal to (1) end the occupation and dismantle the wall; (2) grant full equality to Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel; and (3) respect the right of return, most G8/G20 states continue to support the Israeli state and fund these apartheid policies. Trade between Canada and Israel has more than tripled since the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement was signed in 1996 while the European Union, whose president is also participating in these summits, remains one of Israel’s largest trading partners. In addition, the US government, whose unyielding support for Israel is well-known, increased military aid to Israel to nearly US$3 billion for 2010 as part of a pledge to give US$ 30 billion over the next ten years.

The World Bank and the IMF are also responsible for the conditions of the Palestinian people under occupation. In 2007, the Palestinian National Authority, in close cooperation with the World Bank and the IMF, proposed the Palestinian Reform and Development Plan (PRDP). This plan, in accordance with World Bank/IMF’s neoliberal agenda, encouraged cuts in social services, the opening of markets for foreign investment, and export-led development in the West Bank. As the economy of the West Bank becomes increasingly orientated towards the needs of Western powers and a small elite class of Palestinians, the majority of Palestinians are pushed further into poverty.

At the same time, Palestinians are being isolated and starved by the illegal siege of the Gaza strip. More Palestinian land is confiscated to build settlements, Israeli-only roads and the Apartheid Wall. While Palestinians are forced into ghettos, watch their olive trees uprooted, their environment destroyed, their family members killed and their livelihoods erased, Israel’s colonial power grows and its brutal acts become more brazen and unthinkable. This is all because the “leaders” of the world encourage and abet Israel’s behavior as it falls in line with their own policies of exploitation and displacement.

Finally, the decisions of imperial powers and global institutions to intensify and normalize economic and political relations with Apartheid Israel fly in the face of the demands made by Palestinian Civil Society to cut ties with Israel through Boycotts, Divestments and Sanctions. This non-violent call, made in 2005, is modeled to bring freedom and justice to the Palestinians while there is no will from the international community to support them.

It is for these reasons that SAIA-UofT and York invite you to join us in our resistance to the G8/G20 summits during these events in the month of June.

To read the Palestinian United Call for Boycotts, Divestments and Sanctions Against Israel, please click here.

(taken from http://www.caiaweb.org/node/1479)

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in War and Occupation | 2 Comments »

Sticking the Public With the Bill for the Bankers’ Crisis by Naomi Klein

Thursday, July 29th, 2010

Why does the public have to pay for corporate errors? Klein writes a scathing critique of the G20 and how its policies have “hemorrhag[ed] public money to save the banks, the tax base collapsed, creating an entirely predictable debt and deficit crisis.”

Article by Naomi Klein

My city feels like a crime scene and the criminals are all melting into the night, fleeing the scene. No, I’m not talking about the kids in black who smashed windows and burned cop cars on Saturday.

I’m talking about the heads of state who, on Sunday night, smashed social safety nets and burned good jobs in the middle of a recession. Faced with the effects of a crisis created by the world’s wealthiest and most privileged strata, they decided to stick the poorest and most vulnerable people in their countries with the bill.

How else can we interpret the G20’s final communiqué, which includes not even a measly tax on banks or financial transactions, yet instructs governments to slash their deficits in half by 2013. This is a huge and shocking cut, and we should be very clear who will pay the price: students who will see their public educations further deteriorate as their fees go up; pensioners who will lose hard earned benefits; public sector workers whose jobs will be eliminated. And the list goes on. These types of cuts have already begun in many G20 countries including Canada, and they are about to get a lot worse. For instance, reducing the projected 2010 deficit in the U.S. by half, in the absence of a sizeable tax increase, would mean a whopping $780-billion cut.

They are happening for a simple reason. When the G20 met in the London in 2009, at the height of the financial crisis, the leaders failed to band together to regulate the financial sector so that this type of crisis would never happen again. All we got was empty rhetoric, and an agreement to put trillions of dollars in public monies on the table to shore up the banks around the world. Meanwhile the U.S. government did little to keep people in their homes and jobs, so in addition to hemorrhaging public money to save the banks, the tax base collapsed, creating an entirely predictable debt and deficit crisis.

At this weekend’s summit, Prime Minister Stephen Harper convinced his fellow leaders that it simply wouldn’t be fair to punish those banks that behaved well and did not create the crisis (despite the fact that Canada’s highly protected banks are consistently profitable and could easily absorb a tax). Yet, somehow, these leaders had no such concerns about fairness when they decided to punish blameless individuals for a crisis created by derivative traders and absentee regulators.

Last week, the Globe and Mail ran a fascinating article about the origins of the G20. It turns out the entire concept was conceived in a meeting back in 1999 between then Finance Minister Paul Martin and his U.S. counterpart Lawrence Summers (itself interesting since Summers was, at that time playing a central role in creating the conditions for this financial crisis, allowing a wave of bank consolidation and refusing to regulate derivatives).

The two men wanted to expand the G7, but only to countries they considered strategic and safe. They needed to make a list but apparently they didn’t have paper handy. So, according to reporters John Ibbitson and Tara Perkins, “the two men grabbed a brown manila envelope, put it on the table between them, and began sketching the framework of a new world order.” Thus was born the G20.

The story is a good reminder that history is shaped by human decisions, not natural laws. Summers and Martin changed the world with the decisions they scrawled on the back on that envelope. But there is nothing to say that citizens of G20 countries need to take orders from this handpicked club.

Already, workers, pensioners and students have taken to the streets against austerity measures in Italy, Germany, France, Spain and Greece, often marching under the slogan “We won’t pay for your crisis.” And they have plenty of suggestions for how to raise revenues to meet their respective budget shortfalls.

Many are calling for a financial transaction tax that would slow down hot money and raise new money for social programs and climate change. Others are calling for steep taxes on polluters that would underwrite the cost of dealing with the effects of climate change and moving away from fossil fuels. And ending losing wars is always a good cost saver.

The G20 is an ad-hoc institution with none of the legitimacy of the United Nations. Since it just tried to stick us with a huge bill for a crisis most of us had no hand in creating, I say we take a cue from Martin and Summers. Flip it over, and write on the back of the envelope: Return to sender.

This article was published on Monday, June 28, 2010 by CommonDreams.org

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Corporate Globalization, Economic policies, The Real Issues | 6 Comments »

21 Reasons for a Full Public G20 Inquiry

Tuesday, July 27th, 2010

(Note: This list was posted on http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/ontario-watchdog-launching-new-review-of-police-action-during-g20-summit/article1648886/ by Paul R 64 on page 2 of the comments section.)

The internal investigation/deputation process by the Toronto Police Services Board, though to be warmly received, is not the full public inquiry that I and 50,000 others are campaigning for to clear up the answers to so many questions:

1. Why did Stephen Harper choose to hold the G20 summit in downtown Toronto against the advice of the city government?

2. What other advice did he consider in making that decision?

3. Where did the billion dollars go – not just the security budget, the whole expenditure on the G8/G20 summits – in detail?

4. What were the details of the tendering/selection process whereby Contemporary Security got the contract to provide security services? Remember, they didn’t have a license to work in Ontario.

5. How did the Ontario Government process the application of Contemporary Security in such a short time relative to the time that it takes to process other similar applications?

6. Why did Bill Blair think he needed additional legal powers to protect the area inside the security fence and why did he specifically ask for the Regulation under the Public Works Protection Act?

7. In the days leading up to the summits, why did Dalton McGuinty and his cabinet remain silent about the existence of the Regulation that they had passed?

8. Why did Bill Blair, with no authority in law, create the 5-metre exclusion zone OUTSIDE the security fence, then order his officers to enforce it?

9. Why did Dalton McGuinty, when David Vasey was arrested on June 24 under Bill Blair’s fake law, not speak up and inform Blair that he had overstepped the authority of the law?

10. It was known for months that vandals would arrive in Toronto to attack property. What was the strategy of the ISU to deal with them?

11. Who gave the command that the police in the street should abandon their “cruisers”? The quote marks are intentional. These were not functional cruisers. Why were they there?

12. Why, in NONE of the videos or still shots that have surfaced of the burning cruisers or the vandals damaging property, are there any police officers? Where where they?

13. Who gave the command that the police give free rein to the Black Bloc-ers as they burned the cruisers and broke windows? Why was this order given?

14. Who gave the order to disperse the demonstrators from the designated demonstration site in Queen’s Park on Saturday, June 26? Why was this order given?

15. Who gave the order to detain and arrest the people on the Esplanade on the night of Saturday, June 26? Why was this order given?

16. Who gave the orders to fire tear gas and to arrest people outside the detention centre on the morning of Sunday, June 27? Why were these orders given?

17. Who gave the order to “kettle” the people at Queen St. and Spadina Avenue on the evening of Sunday, June 27? Why was this order given?

18. Who designed the Eastern Avenue detention centre? What were the principles under which the centre was designed; e.g., why were gays detained separately?

19. Who gave the order for police to demand identification and to make unwarranted searches of peaceful people in locations all over the city, far away from the security fence?

20. What training did the police officers receive that, as individuals, they behaved in a manner so disrespectful and contemptuous of the rights of Canadian citizens?

21. What will be done to identify police officers who removed the identification (names and numbers) that they are required to wear? What sanctions will be applied against them?

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Assault on Democracy, Featured | 1 Comment »

Protest Anthem: “WHOSE STREETS? OUR STREETS!”

Tuesday, July 13th, 2010

The Protest Anthem by 4D is a hip hop tribute to the act of taking back the streets. It is a response to the events outside the G20 summit in Toronto, where a police state  emerged to resist and repress, and attempted to withhold that which belongs to the people. Footage by Eye Witness.

Video posted on YouTube by MISSISSAUGAWATCH

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Featured Video, Political Art, Video | No Comments »

G20 Fake Law in Action

Tuesday, July 13th, 2010

On June 25th 2010, Toronto Chief of Police Bill Blair announces that police have been given new power under the Public Works Protection Act.

According to Chief Blair the new law empowers police to arrest anyone within 5 meters of the G20 security zone who refuses to identify themselves or agree to a police search. The penalty is a $500 fine or 2 months in prison.

On June 28th 2010, Toronto Chief of Police Bill Blair admits that he had been lying. The police did not have new powers to demand ID and search people.

That did not stop police from enforcing a law that didn’t exist for three days…

Police openly violate peoples rights and then wonder why protesters are pissed off at them?

Video by Paul Manly

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Assault on Democracy, Featured Video, Video | No Comments »

Protesting with baby: A mom’s G20 experience

Tuesday, July 13th, 2010

Anne Marshal brings along Simon, her toddler, to the G20 protests in Toronto. She describes her experience and speaks of the support she received at the protest.

Thanks to Anne and Simon Marshall, and Ann Russell

Protesting at G20 with a baby from Josh Harrower on Vimeo.

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Featured Video, Gender and Sexuality, The Real Issues, Video | No Comments »

« Older Entries