Kilgour Media Clippings: August 2004 - February 2005
February 2005 Top of Page
DAVID HOWELL, Edmonton Journal, February 10, 2005 EDMONTON - For nearly eight years, Ephrem Buki lived with the pain of being separated by civil war and unrest from his six eldest children in Africa. A new chapter of the family's life began early Wednesday when the children, ages 12 to 19, arrived at the International Airport at the end of an air journey they began Monday in Kigali, Rwanda. Olga, Jean-Noel, Alice, Grace, Cedric and Gamaliel were reunited with their father and their two youngest siblings, Jonathan, 11, and Gallican, eight, who already live in Edmonton. The children's mother won't be joining the family here because she has chosen to remain in her home country, the Democratic Republic of the Congo. "Oh, my God!" Buki exclaimed as he hugged daughter Grace in the airport concourse. The children were tired and somewhat overwhelmed. One by one, they were hugged by the father they hadn't seen since 1997. Jonathan and Gallican buzzed around, laughing, asking questions, tugging at their siblings' arms. Wednesday's reunion, facilitated by the Mennonite Centre for Newcomers, Calvary Lutheran church and Immigration Canada, had its roots several years ago in a refugee camp in Cameroon, when Buki vowed he would one day bring the children to a safer place. "If there ever was a story of a triumph of patience and hope and everything that Canada stands for in the world, this has got to be it," Liberal MP David Kilgour said of the family's remarkable saga. In an interview before the reunion, Buki was nervous with anticipation. "In our culture, men don't cry, but on this day, I am not sure I will not cry," he said. "For me, it will be the best day of my life." Until he arrived in Canada in November 2000, Buki had spent most of his adult years fleeing one African trouble spot after another. A Tutsi born in 1943 in Cyangungu, Rwanda, he has lived in Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Republic of Congo, and a refugee camp in Cameroon. He was not in Rwanda during the 1994 genocide but some relatives were killed. "Every time I moved, it was because I was threatened to lose my life," he said. "It was because of civil war -- fighting, trouble." He studied at university in Kinshasa, the capital city of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and became a pharmacist. He owned his own pharmacy in Kinshasa, where he met his Congolese wife, Patience Mobani. His business or the family's home were looted at least four times, forcing Buki to start over again each time. "Everything was stolen violently," he said. "My pharmacy, one time they took everything, including the fridge." In the mid-1990s, during fighting between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Buki was targeted yet again, because he was a Rwandan Tutsi. He fled Kinshasa for Brazzaville, the capital city of the neighbouring Republic of Congo, and from there went back to Rwanda before returning again to Kinshasa after the fighting stopped. But fighting resumed between Rwanda and Congo, and many Tutsis were being killed in Kinshasa. Buki feared for his life again. After 15 months in hiding, he and the two youngest boys were brought to a temporary refugee camp in Kinshasa with the help of the U.S., Canada and the Red Cross, and eventually flown to a camp in Cameroon where they stayed for a year. Jonathan was five and Gallican was three. His wife was eligible but chose not to go, he said. Buki hadn't seen the older children since June 1997. When he fled to Brazzaville, they had gone to Kigali, Rwanda. Buki had no way of contacting them. "When the war started I couldn't move, I was underground. I didn't see the sun for 15 months. It was very stressful there. I never smoke, but I smoked there. Each minute I was threatened to be killed." After a year in the refugee camp, Canadian officials helped Buki and the two youngest children come to Canada as landed immigrants. Buki had relatives here -- a brother in Toronto and a sister in Edmonton. Buki and the two boys lived for 18 months in Hamilton, before coming to Edmonton in June 2002. Buki works here as a night-shift caregiver in a group home. He and the boys live in a subsidized three-bedroom townhouse in Mill Woods. When Buki came to Edmonton, his efforts to bring his older children here came to the attention of Chantal Hitayezu, volunteer developer at the Mennonite Centre for Newcomers. Hitayezu, who is a Rwandan Tutsi, made it a priority to help Buki. Buki also enlisted the help of Kilgour, the MP for Edmonton Mill Woods-Beaumont. His file became the thickest among hundreds in the office, said Nancy Dhillon, Kilgour's constituency assistant. After Immigration Canada granted the six children permanent resident visas, Buki faced other problems, including finding a way to cover the $8,500 cost of airline tickets to get the children to Edmonton. Hitayezu spoke with Bill Beach, a Mennonite Centre volunteer who sits on the newly formed refugee committee at Calvary Lutheran church. Church parishioners paid for the airline tickets. They have also donated clothing, furniture, appliances, housewares, toiletries and other articles to the family. For the next week, Buki and his children will drive around in a 15-passenger van that was rented for them by the church. In coming weeks, Buki will look for a larger home. He has applied to the Capital Region Housing Corp. for a bigger place but has been told there are no guarantees he will get one. He will also need a bigger vehicle. His 1990 Chrysler sedan won't seat everyone. Hitayezu calls the reunion "a miracle." When she told Buki that the children's airline tickets were being booked, he asked her if they could fly in two smaller groups rather than all together. His reasoning, borne of desperation, was that if one plane crashed, he would still have three of the children. Hitayezu told him not to think that way. He took her advice. dhowell@thejournal.canwest.com
January 2005 Top of Page
December 2004 Top of Page
November 2004 Top of Page
October 2004 Top of Page
IAN AUSTEN, New York Times, October 29, 2004OTTAWA, Oct. 28 - The China Minmetals Corporation is expected to make a formal bid for Noranda, Canada's largest mining company, next month. But just the announcement that it is interested in taking over Noranda has set off protests by both Canada's political right and left. The biggest concern seems to be that China Minmetals is government-owned. While several government-owned companies in China, including Minmetals, have purchased foreign companies, those deals have usually involved small, privately held operations rather than a large, publicly traded corporation like Noranda. In addition, some of the political critics have raised questions about the Chinese company's commitment to environmental protection. In the province of Quebec, Bloc Québécois politicians are concerned that Minmetals will move ore processing to China. And Stockwell Day, a member of Parliament from the Conservative Party, has said that Minmetals' labor practices need to be scrutinized. David Kilgour, a Liberal member of Parliament, said that if one commercial company was taking over another, "nobody would bat an eyelash." But, he said: "This is a branch of a government department in China. I had two town hall meetings last week and everyone said, 'No, don't do it.' " Noranda is the world's largest zinc producer and is ranked ninth in copper. It owns 60 percent of Falconbridge, a leading nickel producer. Minmetals, based in Beijing, is a former metals trading company that now controls mines, iron and steel operations. A deal would represent a shift by Minmetals from simply purchasing resources abroad to acquiring the Western companies that produce them. On Thursday, Derek G. Pannell, chief of Noranda, said the due diligence process by China Minmetals was nearly completed. In a conference call with analysts, Mr. Pannell said that any deal with Minmetals was unlikely to close before the first quarter of 2005. The proposed takeover of Noranda, which is expected to be valued at more than 6 billion Canadian dollars ($7.4 billion), comes at a sensitive time for the Canadian government. The country's relatively new Liberal government needs support from opposition parties to maintain power. But not only are politicians from all those parties criticizing the takeover, they have been joined by several Liberals, including Mr. Kilgour. At the same time, the Liberals have made improving trade and economic ties with China a component of their economic program. Any move to block China Minmetals, advocates of the Noranda takeover say, would undermine that goal. "We expected some negative reaction," said Denis Couture, a spokesman for Noranda, which is based in Toronto. "But we were surprised at the number of people who reacted negatively.'' "The Chinese are going to invest several billion dollars to conclude this transaction. They don't want to risk that investment and they don't want to risk their reputation as they're going to want to make more transactions like this in the future." But critics said they would be more comfortable if Minmetals was privatized first. "What's the business of a government in operating a natural resources company?" said Roy J. Cullen, another Liberal member of Parliament who was once the vice president of a forest products company when it was owned by Noranda. "Is there a net benefit to Canada in this? Personally, I need some convincing." Minmetals announced its intention to make an all-cash bid for Noranda last month. The bid is endorsed by the company as well as its major shareholder, the conglomerate Brascan, based in Toronto. Like all major foreign takeovers, the proposal will undergo a review by Industry Canada, the government agency that oversees such deals. All such reviews are conducted in private to protect corporate information. Mr. Kilgour and others are critical of that system, contending that the agency largely rubber-stamps the deals it reviews. Because the agency does not report what deals it rejects or what deals are withdrawn, there is no way to confirm independently its power or effectiveness. Mr. Kilgour is working with members of other political parties to demand that the government establish a special subcommittee of Parliament to investigate the merger. To date, the government has fended off most questions about Noranda by noting that no formal offer has been made. Industry Minister David Emerson, however, has said that his department will consider China's human rights record in any review, although he has also emphasized the importance of economic links to China. Last week, Mr. Emerson told reporters that the unusual nature of the takeover meant that it would probably be discussed in Parliament. He declined, however, to commit himself to establishing a special committee to review the deal, saying only that he would consider the idea. Stanley H. Hartt, the chairman of Citigroup Global Markets Canada, which is advising Minmetals, said the negative publicity would not stop the Chinese company from proceeding with its bid. Mr. Hartt, who was chief of staff to Brian Mulroney, the former Conservative prime minister, also dismissed criticism of the takeover as a creation of the editorial pages of The National Post, a politically conservative newspaper based in Toronto. Much of it, he said, will vanish when Minmetals discloses the terms of its bid. "I don't think this thing has legs at all," Mr. Hartt said. "A lot of this hand-wringing is speculation upon speculation. This is a commercial company, not a political arm of the Chinese government."
Noranda defends China sale: 'If China is going to put out multi-billions, it will have a huge investment to protect' Drew Hasselback and Paul Vieira, National Post, October 7, 2004
TORONTO and OTTAWA - Senior executives from Noranda Inc. are adamantly defending controversial talks to sell the company to China's communist government, despite suggestions from MPs that Parliament may block the proposed sale. Opposition and government MPs have complained the sale would grant China cheap access to Canadian minerals and put Canadian workers in the hands of a Chinese company that has been accused of labour abuses. Derek Pannell, chief executive of Noranda, flatly denied those accusations yesterday. "China Minmetals wants to do all the right things in terms of environment, health and safety. I honestly believe that is what they intend to do," Mr. Pannell said. He and Aaron Regent, chief executive of Falconbridge Ltd., mounted the spirited defence in an interview with the Financial Post yesterday. They insisted China Minmetals Corp. would do nothing to harm Canadian employees or operations. "If China is going to put out multi-billions of dollars to acquire Noranda, they'll have a huge investment to protect," Mr. Regent said. "They're going to have to make sure that they treat employees fairly, otherwise they won't be able to retain people. If they don't retain people, they're potentially going to put the investment at risk." Mr. Pannell denied suggestions the takeover is a back-door attempt by the Chinese government to secure cheap access to Canadian minerals. He said China Minmetals is clearly in business to make money, and that means selling mineral production at full market prices. "I don't know if you've ever been to China, but I would say that it has more of a market economy than Canada does," Mr. Pannell said. Noranda, Canada's oldest and largest mining company, has begun exclusive talks to sell itself for more than $7-billion to China Minmetals, a holding company owned by the Chinese government. China Minmetals would also acquire Noranda's 60% control stake in Canada's third-largest miner, Falconbridge. Federal politicians have raised concerns about the Chinese Minmetals proposal in Parliament. Conservative foreign affairs critic Stockwell Day and Liberal MP David Kilgour have talked about blocking the sale to protect Canadian interests. The Chinese company's human rights record has come under fire, too. A Chinese dissident accused the company of abuses during U.S. congressional hearings in 1997. David Emerson, the Minister of Industry, yesterday admitted the federal government would consider China's human rights record in any regulatory review of a proposed sale. "Clearly, we're all concerned about human rights issues, but we have to be concerned about long-term economic consequences," Mr. Emerson said. "It's fair to say that I believe -- and I think this government believes -- that trade and investment relationships with China are very, very important going forward. And that will factor in the decision making." Mr. Regent and Mr. Pannell expressed some disappointment the political criticism has centred on the rights issue, and ignored the economic opportunity. Mr. Pannell admitted he was not surprised by some of the political attacks, but said he had hoped discussions would mention Noranda's strategic opportunity to connect with the massive Chinese market. Mr. Regent echoed this point, pointing out China is already the world's largest consumer of copper and has been responsible for a huge jump in nickel demand. "Whether we like it or not, China is going to be a major determinant for the future industry over the next 10 to 20 years. So for us, when we're looking at tactically developing our strategies, to have this window into China, assisted by Minmetals, has to be very strategically advantageous for us." Mr. Regent said China Minmetals has indicated that it would prefer to see Falconbridge remain a publicly traded company. Noranda currently holds 60% of Falconbridge's shares. The remainder are widely held. Top of Page
Noranda's Chinese suitor cited in forced labour case: Dissident says firm deals in goods made by 'gulag' prisoners Peter O’Neil, National Post, October 5, 2004
OTTAWA - The state-owned Chinese firm involved in the $7-billion-plus negotiations to buy Noranda Inc., Canada's largest mining firm, was accused during U.S. congressional hearings and a civil court case during the 1990s of profiting from forced labour in China's prisons. Chinese dissident Harry Wu, who led the attack against China Minmetals Corp. in Congress, said yesterday he still believes the trading company deals internationally in goods made by Chinese prisoners who earn no wages and are beaten and deprived of food if their production falters. "Minmetals is a state-owned import-export company, and when it exports products from China, some of them, many of them, are made with forced labour," Mr. Wu said yesterday from his office in Washington, D.C. Mr. Wu, in his testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1997, cited evidence from a civil suit in California involving a U.S. company, Excel Industries, and MM Rotors, a U.S. subsidiary of China Minmetals that sold brake rotors. A Chinese-speaking Excel official testified in that case that he went to the manufacturing plant in China and realized it was a prison -- a sign identified it as such, and the plant was surrounded by armed guards and a fence topped with electrical wires "This is further evidence that the Chinese government has no intention of preventing the export of Laogai goods," Mr. Wu told senators, using the Chinese term Laogai for what he calls a "gulag" prison system. A U.S. union official, who like Mr. Wu singled out China Minmetals in his 1997 testimony before the same committee, said yesterday the U.S. government has failed to take action against imported Chinese products made with prison labour in violation of U.S. law. Finding clear evidence, in the face of Chinese denials and lack of access to the prison system, is one key impediment. "Mining is a common Laogai activity," said Jeffrey Fielder of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), a federation of 60 national and international labour unions. "But being able to prove that would require a considerable [amount] of dangerous work inside China." A U.S. State Department report issued last year also cited "serious" concerns about forced labour and said the Chinese government wasn't co-operating with U.S. officials to determine if goods exported to the United States came from the camps. Mr. Wu, Mr. Fielder and Liberal MP David Kilgour, former secretary of state for Asia-Pacific, questioned yesterday whether it is in Canada's interests to support the Noranda takeover given its direct links to a Communist dictatorship. "The purchase price will come from China's ballooning foreign exchange reserves -- now more than US$470-billion -- which have been created in large measure by exploiting its labour force through artificially low wages," Mr. Kilgour said. He said he finds it "curious" that a country that is the fourth-largest recipient of Canadian aid is buying Canada's largest mining company, and expressed concern with the likely conduct of Chinese firms abroad. "Does China Minmetals embrace the principles of corporate social responsibility, including good treatment of its employees and the natural environment, respect for human rights and so on?" Mr. Kilgour said he believes the proposed takeover would be unpopular, but said there may not be any mechanism to block it. An official with Industry Canada said foreign firms must meet a number of conditions in any takeover, in areas such as employment in Canada, the participation rate of Canadian executives in senior management, planned investments in research and development, and the takeover's compatibility with Canada's broader national and economic policies. But the official said there is nothing in the Investment Canada Act that would block a takeover based on the foreign company's human rights record in another country. John Wiebe, head of the Vancouver-based Asia-Pacific Foundation of Canada, supports the deal because Chinese firms may learn by running companies in democratic countries with modern labour and environmental laws. "They'll have a window on us but we'll have a window on them," said Mr. Wiebe, who was unfamiliar with the issue of forced labour in China. "This is a good sign of them becoming more westernized in terms of business." The Vancouver Sun was unsuccessful in its attempt to contact China Minmetals in Beijing, and the Chinese embassy in Ottawa and the Chinese consulate in Vancouver. A man who answered the phone in Vancouver said the missions were closed due to a Chinese holiday. An executive with Noranda said the proposed takeover is being unfairly exploited by Mr. Wu and other critics. "Those people are just piggy-backing on our business transaction to achieve their own agenda," said Denis Couture. "It's not for the benefit of either China Minmetals or Noranda or Canada's or China's." He said Noranda has already spoken to union leaders who represent its workers, pointing out that Canada's labour, environmental, governance and disclosure laws remain in place even if the company's owner is China's Communist government. While Mr. Couture said he was unaware of the forced labour issue, a U.S. State Department report released last year indicated the practice that Mr. Wu estimates involves eight million Chinese prisoners. "Forced labour in prison facilities remained a serious problem," the annual report for 2002 concluded. "At the Xinhua Reeducation-Through-Labour Camp in Sichuan Province, inmates were forced to work up to 16 hours per day breaking rocks or making bricks, according to credible reports. Former inmates reported that there were several deaths from overwork, poor medical care, and beatings by guards in 2000. widespread among prisons estimated to hold." The report cites China-U.S. agreements signed in 1992 and 1994 allowing American officials to visit prison production facilities. "Since these agreements were signed, the Government's co-operation with U.S. officials has been poor. Between 1997 and 2001, the Government allowed U.S. officials to conduct only one visit to a prison labor facility.'' (The Vancouver Sun) Top of Page
Top of Page
Cleric pleads for his people: Speaks out against Zimbabwe's Mugabe Andy Ogle, Edmonton Journal, September 23, 2004
EDMONTON - Archbishop Pius Ncube of Zimbabwe has been compared to Nobel Prize-winning, anti-apartheid clergyman Desmond Tutu by his admirers and his country's president. But Robert Mugabe, the 80-year-old despotic president of the southern African country that is spiralling into economic collapse and a worsening AIDS crisis, doesn't mean it as a compliment. He dismisses Tutu of South Africa as "an angry, evil and embittered little bishop," and in May, called Ncube another Desmond Tutu, "an unholy man." In the state-controlled press, it's much worse. There, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Bulawayo, Zimbabwe's second largest city, is vilified as gay, a rapist and HIV-positive. None of this worries the 57-year-old cleric, who this year has taken his outspoken campaign against Mugabe to the international stage. He will give a free public lecture tonight at the University of Alberta. "It's typical of him," he says of Mugabe, during an interview in his room at Campus Tower. "He's well known for verbal abuse and twisting things." Ncube has become Mugabe's most prominent critic, partly because the regime has silenced nearly all opposition through threats, torture, even the murders of opposition politicians. Now, said Ncube, the president is forcing all non-governmental organizations that operate in Zimbabwe to register with the government. Those he dislikes, such as human rights groups, will simply not be allowed to operate legally in the country. The archbishop flew to Edmonton on Monday and on Sunday travels to Winnipeg, where he will be hosted by former foreign affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy. He then goes to Ottawa, where Edmonton MP David Kilgour has arranged meetings with MPs and senators. Ncube will also speak at Carleton University and meet with NGOs and foreign affairs department officials. Ncube says he is motivated by the injustices perpetrated by Mugabe and his cronies against the people of Zimbabwe. "Mugabe has six academic degrees, but he can be as primitive as an uneducated man. Because he has silenced civil society, he has silenced the media, he has silenced the opposition and is killing the opposition. I said, 'All right, I must speak up and defend peoples' rights.' " As well as being targeted in the media, Ncube frequently gets anonymous letters threatening violence. His phones are tapped and he is shadowed by Mugabe's agents, who sit in the back of his church every Sunday. But so far, he has only once faced arrest. That was about a year ago, when he arranged a hearing for torture victims to describe what was done to them to a group of visiting South African bishops. The police backed off when the visiting bishops supported him. "I refuse to be afraid," he says. "If I was afraid, then they would have me where they want me to be. I have the right to speak up." He says the international community, including Canada, must do what it can to put pressure on Mugabe, but admits that without effective internal opposition it's hard for people to know what to do. For now, he says, people in Zimbabwe stay quiet and keep their fingers crossed, but they're also resorting to desperate measures such as theft and prostitution to survive. A soft-spoken man in a cleric's collar, grey shirt and dark suit, Ncube says he believes in non-violent resistance. "It's just the people in Zimbabwe have no leader right now," he says. "Otherwise, they would just get up and go into the streets and say to Mugabe, 'We're not having any more of this nonsense.' " aogle@thejournal.canwest.com ZIMBABWE Location: Southern Africa between South Africa and Zambia. Area: Slightly larger than Montana Capital: Harare Population: 12.6 million (Archbishop Pius Ncube puts it at 11.5 million, saying many people have left the country in recent years.) Life expectancy at birth: males 38.63 years; females 36.99 HIV/AIDS adult prevalence rate: 33.7 per cent (2001 est.) Number of adults living with HIV/AIDS: 2.3 million (2001 est.) HIV/AIDS deaths: 200,000 (2001 est.) Literacy (people 15 and over who can read and write English): 90.7 per cent Economy: The government faces an unsustainable deficit, an overvalued exchange rate, soaring inflation expected to reach 700 per cent this year, and bare shelves. Its 1998-2002 involvement in the war in the Congo drained hundreds of millions of dollars from the economy. The government's land reform program, characterized by chaos and violence, has badly damaged the commercial farming sector, the traditional source of exports and foreign exchange and provider of 400,000 jobs. Source: World Factbook -- Central Intelligence Agency Archbishop Pius Ncube is speaking tonight at the University of Alberta at 7 p.m. at the Engineering Teaching and Learning Complex (Room ETLC1) off 116th Street near 92nd Avenue. His visit is co-ordinated by the Zimbabwe Forum Planning Committee, comprising U of A graduate students and faculty and members of the Zimbabwean community. Ncube will also address several U of A classes during his visit and preside over a Catholic mass at St. Joseph's College at 5 p.m. Saturday. Top of Page
Labour practices on trial: Sudanese have been exploited, this academic argues Carol Berger, Calgary Herald, September 20, 2004 When you sit down for your Sunday roast, spare a thought for the men and women who are at the end of the line in Alberta's beef-processing industry, those who are "on the knife." Two hours east of Calgary, on the outskirts of the town of Brooks, the largest cattle slaughterhouse in Canada is in the midst of labour strife. In August, workers at Lakeside Packers voted in favour of joining the United Food and Commercial Workers union, Local 401, based in Calgary. It was a narrow victory, with 51.4 per cent of the workers voting yes to union representation. Earlier attempts by the UFCW had failed by wide margins. What was different this time? Since the last vote in 2001, Lakeside Packers has come under the ownership of the giant, Arkansas-based Tyson Foods. Annual revenues of the company are more than $25 billion US, making it the world's largest processor and marketer of chicken, beef and pork. "Now that Tyson has bought (Lakeside Packers), conditions have gotten worse," says Local 401 president Douglas O'Halloran. "I think a lot of workers thought 'Let's give the union a shot. How much worse can it get?'" With coming contract negotiations, predictions are that worker conditions may very well deteriorate, at least for the short term. "They're going to show them the union can't do anything for the workers," O'Halloran says. "Until we can negotiate a contract, we're a union without any teeth." Throughout North America, the meat-packing industry has become synonymous with harsh labour practices and dangerous working conditions. In the United States, Tyson Foods has faced several charges in recent years, including allegations of cheating workers out of their wages and of transporting illegal immigrants into the United States to work in Tyson plants. The outcomes of those cases are pending. In 1999, Tyson Foods was fined for violating child labour laws after a 15-year-old immigrant girl who worked at a Tyson plant died. The company was also found guilty of discriminating against blacks and women at a Mississippi plant. The Brooks plant has seen months of worsening tension between the Tyson-owned Lakeside Packers and its workers. But, Gary Mickelson, spokesperson for Tyson Foods, says it's "difficult to speculate" on why workers voted in favour of the union. In April, a worker was scalded with boiling water inside the Lakeside plant. The details of what immediately preceded the worker's injuries and the protests and firings that followed are a matter of dispute between representatives of Lakeside Packers and employees. What is not in doubt is that a culture of fear and intimidation has prevailed at the plant -- not just for a matter of months, but years. The fired workers were denied Employment Insurance on the grounds they were fired for "misconduct." Most successfully appealed the ruling, but only after several months without income. The term "misconduct" is routinely used in firings at Lakeside. According to long-term employees of the plant, accusations of misconduct are used indiscriminately, as a catch-all reason for firing injured or ill workers, workers suspected of supporting union organizing, or even workers who question plant practices that may contravene Canadian laws. Company guidelines state that injured employees are allowed to see only a Lakeside-employed nurse. Those who seek medical opinion elsewhere, say workers, have in the past been fired. On top of it all, race relations inside the plant are less than perfect. From 1999 to late 2003, I carried out anthropological research among employees of Lakeside Packers living in Brooks. For six days a week, these employees laboured at jobs few Canadians would choose to do. Because of chronic staff shortages, overtime was the norm, many routinely working 16-hour shifts. It was not unusual for workers to sustain 70-hour workweeks for years at a time. What occurred in April has been described as "the straw that broke the camel's back." It happens that the workers involved in the latest dispute are not native-born Canadians but originate from Africa, the majority of them from Sudan. Some 800 of the 2,000 positions at Lakeside Packers are held by Sudanese-Canadians. While their personal circumstances may differ from those of earlier immigrant waves, their experiences at Lakeside Packers have much in common. Prior to the arrival of African and Middle Eastern immigrants to Brooks in the early 1990s, the newcomers to Brooks and Lakeside were from Southeast Asia. Throughout both waves, economic migrants have also come from Canada's have-not regions, particularly from Newfoundland. Where once it was the Newfoundlander who was the target of intolerance and discrimination, the one who was vulnerable to the labour practices of a non-unionized plant owned by a U.S.-based corporation, it is now the immigrant from the developing world. Alberta's beef producers are reeling from the impact of the U.S. closure of the border to live exports. In August, a few months after the BSE crisis began, Lakeside Packers received both provincial and federal compensation for their expected losses. As we now know, 2003-04 was a windfall year for the processing side of the industry, with profits up by 300 per cent. Meanwhile, a core group of veteran workers, more than 50 men, who enabled Lakeside to increase processing to a million head of cattle a year have been fired. One of Brooks' weekly publications, Coffee News, questioned whether Liberal MP David Kilgour, who met with some of the fired workers, should support the appeal for EI benefits, asking, "Should the taxpayers pay?" But it's the wrong question. Like most other Albertans, these workers -- Canadian citizens or in the process of becoming so -- have paid their taxes. A more apt question would be: "Shouldn't all Canadian taxpayers receive the full benefit of the country's labour laws and employment benefits?" Regardless of the outcome of the coming contract negotiations between Lakeside Packers and the UFCW, questions need to be asked about whether or not our province's regulating bodies and officials have turned a blind eye to exploitative labour practices by a powerful, foreign-owned company. Carol Berger is a Commonwealth Scholar, completing her DPhil at the University of Oxford, and holds an MA from the University of Alberta. A native of Nanton, she was a foreign correspondent in the Middle East and East Africa from 1981 to 1993. Top of Page
Darfur prods west's conscience Susan Riley, The Ottawa Citizen, September 13, 2004 At first glance, Canada's reaction to the unfolding tragedy in Darfur appears miserly and bureaucratic in the extreme. Last week, International Co-Operation Minister Aileen Carroll said Canada will contribute $1 million to the United Nations to investigate human rights abuses in the western Sudan region. It is hard to see how this will provide timely relief to 1.2 million people who have become refugees in a conflict that has already claimed about 30,000 lives. On the other hand,some argue that Carroll's approach reflects wisdom and is not just a shabby delaying tactic. Until the rest of the world knows exactly what is going on in the far-away African state, it is difficult to fashion an effective response -- a response aimed at protecting and compensating the many victims of marauding militias, rather than broadening what is now a regional war. But the truth is that many of us have no idea what, if anything, to do in the face of such distant conflicts. Do we charge into a troubled region, with no knowledge of the language and culture and no historic relationship, and attempt to impose peace and western notions of justice? Do we just send money, which may, or may not, reach its intended beneficiaries? Do we contract out our moral obligation to the United Nations, an imperfect organization at best, hobbled by episodes of internal corruption, a tangle of warring economic interests, and implacable hostility to Israel? Or do we shrug, and turn away, accepting that we can't right every wrong, or rescue every victim; that, in fact, we risk doing more harm than good with our clumsy attempts at charity? This final approach is the cheapest, but what about the Holocaust, or the Rwandan genocide 10 years ago, which was largely ignored by the world? Already comparisons are being drawn to the latter conflict, by, among others, former Canadian general Romeo Dallaire who led the UN force in Rwanda, and by former Liberal minister for Africa , Alberta MP David Kilgour. Unlike the instant experts such crises invariably spawn, these observers have relevant experience upon which to draw. Then there are ideologues, of all stripes, who have the situation figured out without the benefit of ever having visited the country in question. They natter at us from editorial pages and other pulpits, insisting either that western military intervention is urgently required, or that an American-led rescue mission would be reckless and arrogant. In the United States, evangelical Christians have been casting the conflict as genocide -- another front in the battle between Islam and Christianity in which black African farmers are being systematically killed and displaced by Arab militias. This is happening, they argue, with the blessing of the Sudanese regime in Khartoum. Others caution that the situation is more complex, that the goal of the Khartoum government is not genocide, or even ethnic cleansing, but putting down a rebellion in its western region while it tries to negotiate the end of another insurgency in the south. As to the janjaweed, the militias responsible for most of the killing, they are described, in some accounts, as bandits and bullies -- opportunists with no particular religious agenda who have been given carte blanche to kill and intimidate by Khartoum. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell leapt into the ideological fray recently when he said that a genocide is taking place in Darfur. This is a loaded word and not one Canada is ready to use. As a spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew explained: "Genocide is defined in a fairly narrow manner legally ... and it has a very high burden of proof with respect to intent." While this battle of semantics rages on, Powell made an incisive point: "Call it civil war. Call it ethnic cleansing. Call it none of the above. The reality is the same. There are people in Darfur who desperately need the help of the international community." At least some victims have specifically asked for American troops to protect them, which rather undermines the claims of those who portray the U.S. as meddling imperialists. However, Khartoum says the arrival of non-African peacekeepers, particularly Americans, would be a breach of sovereignty. Not that the Bush administration, mired in a losing war in Iraq and fighting a presidential election, wants to go to war in Africa. It prefers to urge the UN to act, but China has a veto at the security council. It is also a major consumer of Sudanese oil and doesn't want to ruffle feathers in Khartoum. The preferred outcome, one Canada likes, is to leave the solution to African nations. The African Union has 300 troops in Darfur, but experts say 3,000 are required to restore peace. Canada has pledged $20 million toward an all-African force, but Africa is a vast and disparate continent not accustomed to acting in unison. Meanwhile, before we set out to save the world, we must know it. To that end, Carroll will be visiting Darfur and Khartoum soon. Canadian diplomats are also trying to facilitate peace talks between the government and rebels. This falls somewhere between doing nothing and doing enough. Is it the best we can offer? Susan Riley writes Monday, Wednesday and Friday. E-mail: sriley@thecitizen.canwest.com . Top of Page
Edmonton Journal, September 12, 2004 EDMONTON - An Alberta Liberal MP is endorsing Premier Ralph Klein's plans for a provincial Senate election this fall -- and is urging Prime Minister Paul Martin to appoint the winner to the upper chamber "The prime minister has promised to address the democratic deficit," Edmonton Beaumont MP David Kilgour said yesterday. "The unelected Senate is a huge part of the democratic deficit we have in this country." He said Mr. Martin is more open to appointing senators chosen by voters than predecessor Jean Chretien because "he has made listening to the provinces one of his priorities." Mr. Kilgour added that appointing a few elected senators from Alberta wouldn't threaten the Liberal dominance in the upper house. The Liberals hold 67 of 105 seats. Alberta currently has three vacancies. Mr. Klein is planning to hold Alberta's third Senate election in November in conjunction with a provincial election. The premier has said he will likely call an election for Nov. 22 or 29. In the last Senate election in 1997, Albertans picked Triple-E Senate advocate Bert Brown and political scientist Ted Morton of the University of Calgary as their choice to fill two vacancies. But Mr. Chretien refused to appoint them. Canada's only elected senator, Albertan Stan Waters, was appointed by former Conservative prime minister Brian Mulroney in 1990. Bert Brown is not planning to run again. Top of Page
Stu Lindop, Edmonton Journal, September 6, 2004 Canada's women athletes were recognized and honoured by the whole world for their achievements at Athens. Too bad the Canadian national anthem, O Canada, does not recognize women in general, the athletes and also the veterans, women who served their country. Isn't it about time to amend the national anthem -- now? In 1993 I put forward the suggestion to amend O Canada by a simple two-word change: "... true patriot love in all thy sons command" to "...true patriot love in all of us command." In the "sons," women are implicitly excluded. In the "all of us command" it becomes all-inclusive! In 1994 the Honourable David Kilgour had a private members bill drafted. Nothing happened. In 2001 the Honourable Sen. Vivienne Roy put forward another private member's bill. It reached second reading (Bill S-3), then there came the election. We now have to start over. I have had contact made with the Sen. Roy. Perhaps this new government will take the time to finally give the women of Canada the recognition and the honour that they have earned. On behalf of Tonya Verbeek, Lori-Ann Muenzer, Perdita Felicien, et al. Stu Lindop, Edmonton Top of Page
Kilgour blasts Canadian complacency on Sudan Bruce Cheadle, Edmonton Journal, September 1, 2004 OTTAWA - A Liberal backbencher from Alberta has sent an open letter to Prime Minister Paul Martin accusing the federal government of responding to genocide in Sudan with nothing but humanitarian aid. David Kilgour a former cabinet minister who once handled Asia-Pacific, Latin America and African issues for the Liberal government, is comparing Africa's latest bloody civil war in Sudan's Darfur region to the genocide in Rwanda of a decade earlier. "Ten years ago, Canada, along with the United Nations Security Council and dozens of other countries, shamefully apologized for allowing one million Rwandans to die under our watch and we promised not to do it again -- but isn't that what we've done so far?" wrote Kilgour, an Edmonton MP and one of two Liberals elected in Alberta. "Has humanitarian aid become Canada's and the UN's response to genocide?" A spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew said the UN Security Council is getting a report on the Sudanese situation on Thursday. "We certainly share everyone's concern with the grave humanitarian crisis in Sudan," said Sebastien Theberge. Kilgour wrote that it's time for the Canadian government to take a "harder-lined stance" against the Sudanese government in Khartoum, including: - Provide logistical support to the 300-plus African troops monitoring a ceasefire in Darfur. - Push for a stronger UN resolution on Sudan, including an arms embargo on the entire country, not just militias. - Call for an international inquiry into crimes against humanity. The Conservatives also called for Canadian action Tuesday. Foreign affairs critic Stockwell Day said Canada must show "relentless leadership instead of hopeless dithering" on Sudan. Top of Page
UN plots Sudan peace force Jeff Sallot, Globe & Mail, September 1, 2004 JEFF SALLOT OTTAWA United Nations officials have drawn up plans for an all-African military force of about 4,500 troops to protect Sudanese refugees, but the operation will need help from Western nations, senior UN diplomats said yesterday. Experts at the UN's department of peacekeeping operations calculate that 4,500 properly equipped troops can stop militias that engage in murderous raids on civilians in Sudan's Darfur region while the government and rebels try to negotiate peace, the diplomats said. While the military muscle would be provided by African nations, the West would have to come up with the estimated $220-million (U.S.) a year to finance the operation. Western nations would also have to supply up to 20 helicopters with crews and other materiel to support the mission, the diplomats said. The African Union is trying to broker peace talks, and AU member countries Rwanda and Nigeria have already dispatched 300 soldiers to protect ceasefire monitors. But the tiny contingent isn't nearly large enough to protect homeless civilians in refugee camps in the region and farmers still on their land from the marauding militias knows as the janjaweed. The AU would have to continue to take the lead in putting together the larger force for political reasons, one Western diplomat said, because the Sudanese government would reject any "interference" by a military force from anywhere other than Africa. But the UN's military planners have been working on the Sudan crisis for several months and can hand over a ready-made blueprint to officers from an AU force. Some diplomats at the UN in New York have all but given up on the possibility of the world body authorizing a protection force of its own. The UN Security Council is scheduled to discuss the humanitarian crisis tomorrow. But the 15-member council has been unable to reach agreement on whether to apply diplomatic or economic pressure on Sudan to curb the janjaweed attacks, much less on putting together a military force under the blue UN flag. The AU's own deliberative body, the Peace and Security Council, is scheduled to meet next week and could authorize an all-African force and begin to line up military personnel if it is assured of financing and logistical support from the West. The Darfur conflict is the worst humanitarian crisis in Africa since the Rwandan genocide 10 years ago. More than 50,000 civilians have perished and more than a million have been made homeless since tensions erupted last year. The World Health Organization reported yesterday that conditions in refugee camps in neighbouring Chad are deteriorating rapidly because stores of food and drinking water are low and medicines are in short supply. "The possibility of further disease outbreaks, including dysentery and cholera, is especially elevated," the agency said. In Ottawa, meanwhile, Prime Minister Paul Martin's government faced renewed political pressure from both the Conservative opposition and its own benches to do more to try to resolve the crisis. In an open letter to Mr. Martin, Alberta Liberal MP David Kilgour said the world community, "Canada included, continues to tolerate the genocidal regime in Khartoum." Mr. Kilgour, a former junior minister of foreign affairs, said Canada could provide logistical support to the Rwandan and Nigerian soldiers already on the ground. "How many more accounts of eight-year-old girls being raped and killed are enough for us to take action?" Mr. Kilgour wrote. "Ten years ago, Canada, along [with] the United Nations Security Council and dozens of other countries, shamefully apologized for allowing one million Rwandans to die under our watch and we promised not to do it again -- but isn't that what we have done so far?" The Prime Minister's Office had no immediate response to Mr. Kilgour's letter. Conservative foreign-affairs critic Stockwell Day said Canada must provide "relentless leadership instead of hopeless dithering" in support of a major diplomatic push, backed by the threat of sanctions, to pressure the Khartoum regime to curb the attacks on civilians. Top of Page
Cattle Ranchers Need a Special Brand of Help David Kilgour, Globe and Mail, August 20, 2004 It's hard for urban Canadians to grasp the devastation felt by tens of thousands of families who work in our national beef industry since bovine spongiform encephalopathy was discovered in an Alberta cow, and the United States closed the border to Canadian beef more than a year ago. One good window on the worsening post-BSE crisis is the decision by large Canadian feedlot operators to sue the U.S. government. On Aug. 12, seven Alberta feedlot owners, led by Rick Paskal, spokesperson for the group Canadian Cattlemen for Fair Trade, filed a $150-million class-action suit against the U.S. administration under Chapter 11 of the North American free-trade agreement. They hope their lawsuit, which could cost more than $3-million, will win them much needed compensation, and, more importantly, pressure the U.S. government into reopening the border. These farmers alone claim damages in the $100-million range; they hope that many others from all industry sectors, including the numerous cow-calf operators, will soon join them, raising the claim to more than $1-billion. The civil-action suit states that the 1989 trade pact established a continentwide and fully integrated beef industry. Up until May 20, 2003, there were seven competing beef processors, both small and large, within driving distance in the Prairies, creating a competitive and thus hospitable market for farmers to sell their cattle. But after the BSE outbreak, the number of packers for meat exports effectively dropped to two -- because only Cargill Foods and Lakeside Packers, both U.S.-owned packing companies and industry giants, are licensed by the U.S. government to export boneless meat from animals under 30 months of age. These two plants also received, together, nearly $42-million from emergency financial assistance provided by the Alberta and federal governments. We need action now, as the financial burden continues to grow on the backs of entire farming communities. A restaurant owner near Lethbridge told me last week that his sales have dropped by almost a third since the border closed. A Saskatchewan rancher said that steers that sold for $1,300 each before the crisis began last year are now fetching only $850. Prairie grain producers are also drastically affected by the crisis, as an estimated one-third of their crops formerly went to feed cattle. In reality, Canada and the United States have complementary practices with respect to BSE; the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, Ann Veneman, has noted that there is "no reason to believe that there is any food safety risk with Canadian beef." Despite scientific evidence, Washington keeps the border closed, presumably for economic or political reasons. One initiative that could help our beleaguered beef industry is to increase domestic processing. Almost four million Canadian cattle were processed in U.S. plants between 1999 and 2003 -- cattle that could have been processed by, and thus generated a higher revenue for, Canadian-owned processing plants. Potential investors worry that when the border finally reopens new processing plants might collapse, but it can be argued that even if the border reopens, it would be in the industry's best interest to increase the level of processing in Canada. Any new plant seeking a federal or provincial loan guarantee should have a business plan demonstrating its viability even with the border open. Another initiative would be to bring in mandatory BSE testing for exported meat. In Canada and other countries with large beef herds, chances are good that another BSE-positive animal is going to be discovered. To counter the risk that international markets may again close their doors to Canadian meat, Canada should implement compulsory BSE tests on meat bound for export markets, if only to regain the confidence of major beef importers, including Japan and Korea. Our beef industry would also benefit from a temporary floor price for processors. When the U.S. border closed to live cattle, our beef farmers lost access to the roughly 40 American packing plants that bought their cattle. What this means is that Lakeside and Cargill now dominate the market on the pricing of the animals they purchase in the Prairies and British Columbia. Until the border reopens and competition is restored, the two plants should be required under provincial jurisdiction to pay a reasonable price to independent feedlot operators, presumably based on the index price set on Chicago's mercantile exchange. Many Western farmers are desperate. It's time to implement these initiatives and get the cattle industry back on its feet. As a Ponoka farmer told me last week, "This is an emergency call. . . . Farmers are getting more disillusioned every day . . . we have a wealth of knowledge and know-how that needs to be passed down to the next generation that is going to feed the world, and yet there is no one to stand up and do the job. . . . When we all go broke from trying, or die from broken hearts and broken spirits, all Canada will be the losers." David Kilgour is the Liberal member of Parliament for Edmonton-Beaumont. Top of Page
Delay naming new senators until election: Kilgour advises Martin to heed Alberta voters David Kilgour, The Edmonton Journal, August 19, 2004 Re: "PM should reform the Senate, not just fill vacant seats," Opinion, Aug. 16. Barbara Yaffe has raised a number of significant issues in the ongoing debate over Senate reform. In light of the upcoming provincial election in which prospective senators could again be democratically chosen by Albertans, our prime minister would do well to acknowledge these elections when filling the current three vacancies from our province. In 1987, in response to growing concern in Alberta about Western alienation and constitutional reform, Alberta passed the Senatorial Selection Act, laying the groundwork for the direct election of senators, with the intention of pressuring the federal government into filling the next Alberta senate vacancy with an elected senator. The first election was held in 1989; Albertans overwhelmingly voted for the late Stan Walters who, two years later, was appointed by Brian Mulroney. He thus became the first and only Canadian to be successfully elected to our Senate. Recent reports from the Canada West Foundation have demonstrated significant support for an elected and equal Senate across Canada. According to a 2003 Environics poll, 73 per cent of Canadians indicated that Senate reform should be a key issue in future talks on constitutional reform. In Alberta, the same poll showed that 77 per cent of Albertans support Senate reform and the democratic election of senators. Based on these findings, Prime Minister Martin can deduce that the majority of Canadians will continue to see the patronage method of filling senate vacancies as a significant part of Canada's democratic deficit. By waiting until November, when Alberta holds their elections, the prime minister would be taking a positive step towards Senate reform and towards regaining the confidence of the many Canadians who grow increasingly hostile of the undemocratic appointment of Senate positions. David Kilgour MP, Edmonton Beaumont Top of Page
Indo-Canadians remember freedom fighters in celebration: India's independence was hard-won Julie Mollins, Edmonton Journal, August 15, 2004 EDMONTON -- India's journey to freedom is a struggle relived every year. Edmonton's Indo-Canadian community gathers every August at the provincial museum to celebrate the subcontinent's independence from British rule, established in 1947. The annual celebration is organized by the Hindi Parishad school. "The purpose of Alberta Hindi Parishad celebrating every year," said school spokesman Rohit Chauhan, "is to make our new generations aware of the struggle which freedom fighters went through to get independence." "A lot of Indo-Canadian people don't know what previous people had to do to get independence. "We all value our freedom, we don't want people to take it for granted," Chauhan said. The school teaches Indo-Canadian children about their cultural roots, traditions and offers Hindi language classes to all interested Edmontonians. On Saturday, dancers whirled across the stage of the museum's auditorium to a hypnotic fusion of modern and traditional Indian music in a performance for a crowd of about 250, including Nitya Nand Swami, former premier of the province of Uttaranchal, India. Also on hand were Edmonton Liberal MP David Kilgour, provincial Community Development Minister Gene Zwozdesky, and Edmonton NDP MLA Raj Pannu. Opposition to British rule in India was spearheaded by spiritual leader Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, who became the first prime minister of independent India. By 1773, the East India Co., a trading company, largely controlled India on behalf of the British until 1858. At that time, the British Parliament passed legislation giving control to the British crown. Complete domination hastened India's transformation into an industrialized economy, which created widespread poverty, turmoil and dissent. India was ripe for change when Gandhi, who instituted passive resistance, began the 30-year struggle for home rule. Top of Page
Cattlemen Sue The U.S. Group Says It's Time to Get Tough With Americans Ajay Bhardwaj, Edmonton Sun, August 13, 2004 A small group of angry Canadian cattlemen - struggling to survive since the United States border closed to their product - is now suing the U.S. government for $149 million in a bid to reopen the border. The Canadian Cattlemen for Fair Trade yesterday filed with the U.S. State Department five notices of intent to submit claims worth $149 million under Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The cattlemen say the American government owes them for keeping the 49th Parallel closed to Canadian cattle after a single case of mad cow disease was found in Canada in May, 2003. "We feel we have a very good case," said feedlot owner Rick Paskal of Picture Butte, 535 km south of Edmonton. "First and foremost, we're trying to get this border open. And then we can talk about the damages. "The Americans kept telling us that the border closure was a temporary measure. We are well into another year and nobody knows when the border will re-open, if ever." Lawyers are to speak to between 80 and 90 more cattlemen to get them to join what is the first class-action lawsuit ever filed under NAFTA, said international trade lawyer Todd Weiler. He agreed the Canadians have a good case, given the Americans closed the border but continued to allow American farmers to own five million cows from Canada. "They don't treat them different and they don't treat the people who own them different, they only treat the people in Canada differently - obviously one group is getting better treatment than the other," he said. Edmonton Liberal MP David Kilgour said it's about time Canadians got tough with their American neighbours. "These people have suffered enormous losses," said Kilgour. "They've been playing hardball with us and we've now got to play hardball with them. This is part of playing hardball ... part of the suit is to get the border open." While U.S. officials have declared Canadian beef safe since last May, the border remains closed to live cattle. The effect of the single case of mad cow disease has ravaged Canada's beef industry and hurt rural communities that depend on it. Some estimates say producers have lost up to $2 billion. Top of Page
A Parent is a Parent is a Parent Graham Hicks, Hicks On Six, Edmonton Sun, August 13, 2004 The good news for St. Albert MLA Mary O'Neal and her husband Jack: Their 26-year-old daughter Jacqueline O'Neal, a former policy adviser to Liberal MP David Kilgour when he was in cabinet, has been accepted for graduate studies at Harvard University! The bad news: Tuition alone is $32,000 US a year ... for a two-year program at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. Guess who's remortgaging the house to help out? Jacqueline, when your folks are ancient, forgetful and incontinent, remember who helped you get that Haavaaard degree! Top of Page
Calgary Herald , August 11, 2004
Several former employees of the Lakeside meat-packing plant in Brooks say they have become homeless and starving as they wait for employment insurance benefits. It's been three months since about 40 mostly Sudanese employees lost their jobs when they protested the firing of at least three cleaners not directly employed by Lakeside. They say they can't find work and have been forced to live hand to mouth or are in danger of depleting savings to sponsor relatives to come to Canada. The group sat down with Edmonton Liberal MP David Kilgour at a Brooks hotel Tuesday in the hope he might be able to convince federal officials to start their EI benefits flowing after a handful won appeals before an EI board of referees. "Everybody is frustrated," said Andrew Mayen. "We were told Canada is a beautiful country. We heard the United Nations say it has human rights and everybody believed that. Now we find out it's different than that." Mayen was one of more than 100 Lakeside employees involved in the protest in April sparked by concerns over working conditions and alleged racism at the plant, and he was one of more than 40 who were suspended and subsequently lost their jobs. He's had to cash in his RRSPs and is now living in an apartment on the generosity of his roommates. Tyson Fresh Meats, which owns Lakeside, could not be reached for comment Tuesday night. In April, Tyson spokesman Gary Mickelson said: "These workers abandoned their jobs even after being warned of the potential consequences." But when the Lakeside employees applied for EI benefits to tide them over while they looked for work, almost all of them were denied. Most were also denied social assistance. They say they haven't been able to find work because Lakeside's official reason for dismissal was misconduct. Seven of the first eight workers to appeal the employment insurance board's decision won their appeals. In one decision, the appeal board admitted the employee left work on April 27, but added, "He did so amidst the confusion and lack of direction and information from supervisors when the doors to the work area were locked." The decision said the behaviour did not rise to the level of misconduct defined as wilful, deliberate or "so reckless as to approach wilfulness." Those who won their appeals have since received letters from the Lethbridge EI office, however, notifying them the government can appeal the decision within 21 days. "The whole thing has upset me terribly -- the phrase I use is travesty of justice," said Heather Miyauchi, chairwoman of Global Friendship, who has worked with the Sudanese community in Brooks for more than five years. Kilgour met with about a dozen Sudanese workers for three hours Tuesday. "I was told stories of people injured at work who were told they cannot see their own doctor," said Kilgour. "They were told they had to see a Lakeside doctor or were told to say the injury happened outside the plant." Kilgour says he will attempt to talk with EI officials and representatives of Lakeside and will file a report to the federal departments of Human Resources, Immigration and Foreign Affairs. He hopes to first convince federal officials to refrain from appealing the decision of the board of referees so the workers can begin receiving their EI benefits. smyers@theherald.canwest.com Top of Page
Kilgour to introduce private member's bill (Cattle-Ownership-Ban) Twelfth NewsWatch - August 9, 2004 Liberal M-P David Kilgour is joining with farm groups in calling for a ban on the right of major meat packers to own cattle. They're accusing the packers of using their cattle to manipulate prices, by slaughtering their own animals when prices are higher and buying cattle when prices are low. The Edmonton M-P says if he can't persuade the Liberal minority government to bring in a ban he'll introduce a private member's bill. (12) Top of Page
Call for ban on Meat Packers owning cattle Edmonton Journal, August 8, 2004 EDMONTON (CP) _ Some farm groups and a Liberal MP want major meat packers outlawed from owning cattle, a controversial practice many say helps packers manipulate prices. Proponents of the idea accuse the meat plants of using their cattle supply to control what they pay to ranchers, by slaughtering packer-owned animals when prices are high, and buying and killing rancher-owned cattle when prices dip again. Edmonton-Beaumont MP David Kilgour, taking his cue from some U.S. laws, says he will press for a federal ban on packers' ownership of cattle. ``That's part of the law in the United States now and it's something that we clearly need as part of the law in Canada,'' Kilgour said in an interview. ``The market is not going to work if the packer can decide whether to buy his cattle today, or someone else's, as a way to control prices.'' The slaughterhouses argue they need to own some cattle to ensure they have animals to fill their kill lines when ranchers choose not to sell to them. Cargill spokesman Rob Meijer said slow weeks force plant layoffs and sluggish recoveries, as happened shortly after the May 2003 mad cow discovery. ``If our High River plant isn't running efficiently, it starts to cost us money, and that affects the whole industry,'' Meijer said. The financial turmoil wrought by the mad cow crisis has led many ranchers to fume that packers' profits have skyrocketed while producers have struggled. But another source of complaint has been that two major Alberta packing plants own about one in seven cattle that are fattened for slaughter. In 2003, Alberta meat packers directly owned 13.4 per cent of all feedlot cattle, either on its own feedlots or on custom feedlots, according to industry analyst firm CanFax. In 2002, packer-owned fat cattle accounted for nearly 18 per cent of the provincial total. Farm groups are split on whether to support an ownership ban. The Alberta Cattle Feeders Association is considering making a demand that packers own no more that 10 per cent of the province's fat cattle, but wants to discuss it with the slaughterhouse firms first. Ron Axelson, the association's general manager, said he doesn't want to alienate his group from the packers, whom members rely on for their livelihoods. Even the left-leaning, pro-control National Farmers Union believes a two-per-cent ownership cap is sufficient, acknowledging that some packer-owned supply is beneficial. Kilgour said he will first work in the Commons agriculture committee to get his Liberal minority government to adopt changes to federal competition laws. If that fails, he plans to table a private member's bill. In addition to drawing allegations of price manipulation, cattle ownership by meat processors also allowed dominant players Cargill and Lakeside to get about $45 million of the $400 million in Alberta mad cow compensation funds. Alberta Agriculture cut off the packers from smaller relief programs once it realized the firms were not suffering because of the crisis, said assistant deputy minister John Knapp. Ownership limits have existed in Nebraska, Iowa and South Dakota. The most recent and harshest of these laws was South Dakota's, which banned anybody but family farms from owning cattle for purposes other than immediate slaughter. The law stemmed from a 1998 citizen's initiative, or referendum, but was ruled unconstitutional last year. David Aiken, a Nebraska-based expert in agricultural law, said it was struck down largely because it explicitly barred Tyson Foods Inc. from setting up shop in the state. Tyson is the parent company of Lakeside Packers in Alberta, Canada's largest slaughterhouse. Efforts to pass a U.S. federal ban on cattle ownership have stalled for years. Lakeside and Cargill have reduced their own cattle supplies since the crisis began, because the closure of the U.S. market has forced feedlots to sell only to the two Canadian plants. Alberta Beef Producers, like the provincial government, argues that packer ownership of cattle is a significant investment in the industry, and its absence would create a large vacuum in the market. (Edmonton Journal Top of Page
By David KilgourThe London Free PressAugust 6, 2004Only four months ago, a Canadian delegation joined thousands of mourners in Rwanda's capital to mark the 10th anniversary of their Genocide. The banner in the national stadium read, “Never Again”. That same week, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan warned the world that the risk of genocide in the Darfur region of western Sudan remained “frighteningly real” and added that further action might be needed, including “a continuum of steps which may include military action”. Darfur Today That was in April. Today the situation in Darfur has become the worst humanitarian disaster on earth. In a population of roughly 6.5 million in the region there are about four million “Africans”. An estimated 2.5 million in this community are now seriously affected by the conflict, which in the looming famine conditions could quickly become five thousand people dying daily from a variety of causes. A full million have already fled their homes. The current estimates of those dead are in the 30,000- 50,000 range; more have died from disease and the effects of malnutrition. As these numbers rise unchecked by adequate international response, some are reportedly asking seriously if the UN Security Council and international community at large have since the Rwandan experience raised the threshold to a million deaths before they will undertake effective measures. The situations are certainly different, but Canada’s hero Romeo Dallaire wrote that an armed intervention of only 5000 soldiers would quickly have stopped the slaughter in Rwanda . No serious observer has the slightest doubt about the cause of most of the violence: the janjaweed militias. Human Rights Watch recently noted that documents of the Sudanese government itself prove that its own officials directed the recruiting and arming of these killers. Amnesty International Amnesty International's own report indicates that the janjaweed methods include the raping of eight-year-old girls. Ethnic cleansing has again jumped continents. Amnesty International provides statements from militiamen specifying that their attacks are directed exclusively at the African communities of the region. If so, such conduct falls squarely within the 1948 UN Genocide Convention-signed by 127 states, including Canada-which expressly defines genocide to include acts aimed at destroying an “ethnic, racial or religious group.” The newly-formed African Union to its great credit has sent a peace-monitoring mission to Darfur, which could presumably be transformed quickly into the first stage of a peace-making force. And peace making will be required: no-one should expect Khartoum to provide a single moment of peace in the region except for tactical reasons. It is the regime itself that has engineered virtually all the bloodshed and suffering. Responsibility to Protect Canada itself sponsored the international study, which three years ago concluded that in defined circumstances the international community has an obligation to act to prevent the kind of catastrophe that occurred in Rwanda and now in Darfur. Are all or most of the conditions not already present to justify an intervention by peacemakers from a group of countries, including Canada, and led by African participants? At a particularly dangerous moment in Sierra Leone's recent past, Canada was urged by a highly- respected African leader to intervene there to save civilian lives. Our government declined, insisting that prior obligations in Europe made it impossible. The United Kingdom successfully led the hazardous peace-making mission and our reputation dropped a large notch in Africa. Avoiding responsibility must not be our policy in this latest humanitarian crisis. As the nation which is still the beacon for so many around the world, Canada must find immediately a really effective role in Darfur. A good first step would be sending the Canadian Forces Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) to prevent the onset of secondary effects of the crisis such as the spreading of disease. Top of Page
Shoveling it We Peasants Left To Pay For The Mad Cow Profits Of Big Biz Rick Bell, Calgary Sun, August 5, 2004, Finally, someone speaks up. Lord knows, we can't wait for anyone of authority in the Alberta government to stick up for us peasants. Yes, the province forks out $400 million of our money, supposedly to support ranchers and feedlots, then refuses to regulate the screwed-up market by setting a minimum price for cattle, allowing mega-multinational packers to almost triple their profits with none of the rest of us any further ahead. With stateside slaughterhouses shut to us, two American-owned packers, Cargill at High River and Lakeside at Brooks, are really the only places the local cattle crowd can sell their live animals. The packers slaughter and then ship here and to the States where boxed beef under 30 months old can be sold. Buy low, sell high and we cover the casualties with our cash. David Kilgour was on the House of Commons agriculture committee when the packers wouldn't open their books and were held in contempt of Parliament. David, an Edmonton-area MP, says nothing is illegal but the "outrageous" situation is "stupid with a capital S." He calls it "a recipe made in heaven." "The packers are abusing their market position and abusing it mercilessly. Cargill and Lakeside should hang their heads in shame. I would hope they'd have the decency to up their payments," says David, before lowering the hammer, suggesting the packers be forced to buy at a fair price. "If we can't persuade them, then, by George, the provinces and the federal government have to do something. We should say: 'Look, Lakeside and Cargill, you have to pay a decent price or we'll legislate you pay it.' If they say it's communism, then they'd better start paying a decent price on their own." "I'm about as free market as you can get, but there are only two companies buying cattle in any meaningful sense. They know the feedlots can't keep the cattle forever. They are sucking the lifeblood out of the industry and it will only get worse until the border opens. Something has to be done." Kilgour says a decent price could be based on a formula. "Presumably the kind of competitive price you'd find in Idaho on a Thursday," he quips. David also evokes an old idea born in the prairies, sharing the burden during hard times. "The producers have suffered and are going to get hammered again. Talk to people. Bankers are threatening cow-calf producers and feedlots. As for the packers, we're not living in the 18th century or the 19th century. There is something called corporate social responsibility," he says. "Where do they think they're going to get product if everybody is bankrupt? Are they going to have one big Lakeside Inc. farm where they own the cattle and the land and their employees can be the sharecroppers." "But the packers don't give a tinker's damn." As for Ralph? "He probably honestly thinks Cargill and Lakeside are doing a great job but I don't think he understands how much havoc is being created." Nah, not our Man of the People. Shirley McClellan, the province's agriculture boss, is silent as she's always been, stalling and sidestepping this stupid scenario every step of the way. All Shirley does is scold critics as irritants insulting the industry, outsiders who don't understand the ins and outs of agriculture. We can, however, read a balance sheet. The absurdity never ends. Now we find out some ranchers are considering Ralph's comment to shoot, shovel and shut up seriously, reluctant to take downed cattle to the testing labs, a move making it impossible to fully open the border. And, since the province still doesn't know what to do with hundreds of thousands of excess cattle, and winter's coming, some ranchers may just shoot the extra animals right there on the farm. Let us conclude with Mr. Kilgour. "If Calgarians and Edmontonians and all Albertans get excited enough, something will have to happen," he says of fixing the mess made of the mad cow mess. Get excited? Dream on. Top of Page
Ottawa must share blame for botched bailout, MP says James Baxter, with files from Jason Markusoff,Edmonton Journal, August 5,2004 EDMONTON - Ottawa must accept some blame for foisting a bailout package on the cattle industry that cost hundreds of millions of dollars and helped meat packers reap unexpected profits, Liberal MP David Kilgour says. Kilgour said it is clear from witnesses who have appeared before the Commons agriculture committee and from the report issued Tuesday by Alberta Auditor General Fred Dunn that the federal government crafted a bailout program that severely depressed cattle prices and allowed the packers to buy livestock at bargain-basement prices. The $250-million program, designed to help an industry trampled by mad cow disease, saw Ottawa contribute 60 per cent of the dollars with the Alberta government picking up 40 per cent. "I don't think anybody would concede that the provincial and federal programs were properly designed to avoid exactly the kind of problem that happened," said Kilgour, the MP for Edmonton-Beaumont. Jean Chretien's Liberal government tried to design a program that would work for ranchers across the country, Kilgour said, but failed to recognize beef farming in Alberta is a much bigger and more structured industry. In his much-anticipated report, Dunn revealed the net earnings of Alberta's three largest meat packers jumped 281 per cent in the aftermath of the discovery of a lone case of mad cow in May 2003, but he absolved the Klein government of any wrongdoing. He said that in the panic and confusion, the federal-provincial bailout package helped keep the industry viable, but cost "too much." Dunn maintained that the three main meat packers -- Cargill Ltd., Lakeside Packers, a division of Tyson Foods, and Canadian-owned XL Foods Inc. -- had done nothing wrong when they took advantage of a collapse in the price of cattle, coupled with overwhelming demand, to reap windfall profits. Dunn pointed to three critical flaws in the bailout program: A preset cap on compensation, a deadline for filing compensation claims and the fact that the animal needed to be slaughtered before compensation would be paid. He said this provided a significant incentive to ranchers and feedlots to dump cattle onto the market regardless of the price. The resulting glut is what caused prices to dip nearly 60 per cent. The federal government had to place conditions on the program, said Gilles Lavoie, director-general of Agriculture Canada's marketing services branch. "It's not normal for any government to develop a program without a budget, without a deadline for application, without an end date, and without being transparent about these facts," Lavoie said. Lavoie acknowledged the program might have triggered the cattle prices to drop, but said keeping the beef industry solvent was a greater concern. Top of Page
Media Advisory Statement in Response to Yesterday’s Release of the Alberta Auditor General Report August 4, 2004 The following is a statement by Hon. David Kilgour, M.P. for Edmonton-Beaumont and member of the Agriculture Committee in the previous House, in response to the findings of the Alberta Auditor General’s report: “Yesterday’s report by the Alberta Auditor General confirms the concerns raised by the House of Commons Agriculture Committee when we asked for the books of the major meat packers last spring. The fact that one segment of the industry, namely Lakeside and Cargill, the large meat packers, nearly tripled their profits while the rest of the industry nearly found itself in extreme – and continuing - financial hardship is both outrageous and contrary to the habit of burden-sharing which Prairie Canadians have long practised. While the US border remains closed, there is no effective competition on the buying of animals for slaughter. Cargill and Tyson control both the prices and volume of finished animals coming from feed lots. The BSE crisis has highlighted the need for a “made – in - Canada beef policy”, which will in part require additional packing capacity and higher levels of value added production for beef exports. Unfortunately, new capacity could take up to 18 months to be completed. An even greater urgency faces the cattle industry this fall because of the under capacity of slaughter houses. The federal government must act before the crisis hits the caw calf producers even harder this fall and should immediately develop a program that recognizes their worsening financial crisis. Cow calf producers in Alberta have been forming organizations to address the under capacity and marketing issues. I will be meeting with representatives of these organizations between August 11-13, 2004.” -30- Top of Page
Embassy, August 4th, 2004 Only four months ago, a Canadian delegation joined thousands of mourners in Rwanda's capital to mark the 10th anniversary of their Genocide. One banner in the national stadium read, Never Again.
That same week, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan warned the world that the risk of genocide in the Darfur region of western Sudan remained frighteningly real, and added that further action might be needed, including a continuum of steps which may include military action.
The situation in Darfur has now become the worst humanitarian disaster on earth. A million have already fled their homes. The current estimates of those dead are in the 30,000- 50,000 range. Some are asking seriously if the UN Security Council and international community at large have raised the threshold to a million deaths before they will undertake effective measures in the wake of the Rwandan experience. The situations are certainly different, but Canada's hero Roméo Dallaire wrote that an armed intervention of only 5,000 soldiers could quickly have stopped the slaughter in Rwanda.
No serious observer has the slightest doubt about the cause of most of the violence: the venomous Janjaweed militias. Human Rights Watch recently noted that documents of the Sudanese government itself prove that its own officials directed the recruiting and arming of these killers.
Amnesty International's own report indicates that the Janjaweed methods include the raping of eight-year-old girls. Ethnic cleansing has again jumped continents. Amnesty International provides statements from militiamen specifying that their attacks are directed exclusively at black Sudanese. If so, such conduct falls squarely within the 1948 UN Genocide Convention -- signed by 127 states, including Canada -- which expressly defines genocide to include acts aimed at destroying an ethnic, racial or religious group.
The recently-formed African Union, to its great credit, has sent a peace-monitoring mission to Darfur, which could presumably be transformed quickly into a peace-making force. No one should expect Khartoum to provide a single moment of peace in the region except for tactical reasons; the regime's agents have caused virtually all the bloodshed and suffering.
Canada itself sponsored the international study, which three years ago concluded that in defined circumstances the international community has an obligation to act to prevent the kind of catastrophe occurring in Rwanda and now in Darfur. Are all or most of the conditions not already present to justify a humanitarian intervention by peacemakers from a group of countries, including Canada, and led by African participants?
At a particularly dangerous moment in Sierra Leone's recent past, Canada was urged by a highly- respected African leader to intervene there to save civilian lives. Our government declined, insisting that prior obligations in Europe made it impossible. The United Kingdom successfully led the hazardous peace-making mission and our reputation dropped a large notch in Africa.
Is ducking out to become Canada's new foreign policy in such crises? If not, as the nation which is still the beacon for so many around the world, we must find immediately a truly significant role in Darfur, which will allow us to meet the expectations of both Canadians and the world.
David Kilgour, the MP for Edmonton-Beaumont, is a former Secretary of State for Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America.
Top of Page | 
