The parties and the candidates are off and running in another election to choose a national government. Yet an issue which may not even get raised could make this and subsequent elections almost irrelevant. That issue is the multilateral agreement on investment - the MAI. It is NAFTA on steroids - a proposed agreement amongst the 29 developed nations of the OECD which will, in effect, put the actions of international investors and transnational corporations beyond the reach of our laws.

Most Canadians have never heard of this agreement because negotiations have been conducted virtually in secret. This is particularly alarming because Canada is playing a key role in promoting the deal. In effect, while the Chretien government is campaigning on a promise to return to liberal values and policies, it is brokering a deal which makes such policies next to impossible.

The MAI is explicitly designed to forbid government use of investment rules to promote social, economic, or environmental goals. At a time when Canadians' top priority is reducing unemployment, the government is pushing a deal which will cripple its ability to promote job creation.

The MAI states that no government, federal, provincial or municipal, will be able to oblige any foreign corporation investing in Canada to provide jobs, do research or invest in productive activity.

One section of the MAI would, quote, "outlaw" any measure that restricts the right of foreign investors to bid on government contracts and to buy up privatized crown corporations. Public interest guarantees for such privatized services would also be outlawed. For example, a privatized utility could not be obliged to provide equitable services to rural areas. Foreign corporations could not be required to buy local goods or hire locally.

The MAI would not only stop governments from passing new regulatory legislation. It would oblige them to gradually, quote, "roll back" existing laws which do not conform to MAI liberalization goals. If we sign this deal, our existing tax, labour, consumer protection and environmental laws could all be up for review by unelected international panels. One of the first challenges would almost certainly come from the tobacco and alcohol industries who could use the MAI to turn back laws restricting the advertising and promotion of their products.

Unlike NAFTA, this agreement is binding for twenty years, and gives corporations the right to sue governments directly for any perceived violation of their rights. Like NAFTA, the dispute settlement mechanism is binding, beyond our courts and legislature.

Only a few last minute glitches have prevented this constitution for the global economy from being signed this month. The four to five month delay and the current election campaign have given Canadians a narrow window of opportunity to demand a full public debate. If we don't, future elections may well be reduced to the status of ritual.

For commentary, this is Murray Dobbin in Vancouver.

A letter from Margaret Lefebvre on MAI and the OECD