Monday, June 20, 2016

Seeing Canada’s Direction? Imperial Globalization. Part III

Seeing Canada’s Direction? Imperial Globalization.  Part III.

Written by Robin Mathews

Something strange is occurring in Ottawa… something more than ordinarily strange.

Call it, for short, The Canadian Infrastructure Bank … an apparently totally unnecessary (and expensive) idea being moved toward existence by the Liberal government headed by Justin Trudeau.  The work of such a ‘Bank’ can be done by the Bank of Canada and has already been done by that Bank.  It worked for several decades before 1974 with unquestioned success, financing huge infrastructure activity through interest-free loans, keeping the country almost debt-free. 

In 1974 the Liberal government of Pierre Trudeau silently let that power slip away to please the [imperial globalizing] Bank of International Settlements and its very close connection to International Capital and U.S. designs for the globe.  Since that time Canadian debt has sky-rocketted almost beyond the possibility of paying it off as Canadian governments have borrowed at market rates from private Canadian banks or foreign ones.

The Justin Trudeau Liberals have appointed an “advisor” to the Minister for Infrastructure from The Bank of America Merrill Lynch in the U.S.A. (as well as other unnamed advisors to cabinet to design the new Infrastructure Bank).  But the Liberals know that COMER (the Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform), with William Krehm and Ann Emmett, is conducting a case in the Federal Court of Canada to return the Bank of Canada to its fully viable function as the already existing Canadian Infrastructure Bank!

Something Not At All Strange: the COMER case was launched by Rocco Galati in December of 2011.  And from the start the Conservative government led by Stephen Harper fought hard to destroy the case, wanting no power removed from Big Private Capital, no matter how much it pauperized the country. 
Something Most Strange: The Liberal Party platform for the November 19, 2015 election contained the promise of heavy Infrastructure spending to fill real need and to further employment and industrialization. But when the Liberals took government, they continued (and still do) to fight the COMER case in an attempt to destroy it (just as the Conservatives did).

Reasonable Canadians might well have expected the Liberal government to withdraw opposition to the COMER case and to announce that the existing power of the Bank of Canada to finance Infrastructure and related spending, interest-free, would be taken up and used – and so COMER could fold its court action as unnecessary.

That didn’t happen.

In an article in the March-April COMER (pp. 1-5) Joyce Nelson draws attention to the simple stupidity (my word) of appointing, however talented, an advisor from two U.S. corporations (now one - Bank of America Merrill Lynch) deeply tainted by the Derivatives Scandal and Bank Collapse of 2008.  Does that mean the Liberal government is going to involve U.S. ‘international capital’ in the “Canadian” bank? Nelson points out the additional stupidity (my word) of the Liberal government in appointing a number of other advisors, too, to the Infrastructure Bank matter without making public even their names!  That is exactly what the ugly, insensitive Conservative government of Stephen Harper would have done.
Something more than ordinarily strange is going on in Ottawa … obviously.

Into the picture comes Paul Hellyer, for years a Liberal (and cabinet minister) and then a Tory, and then founder and continuing supporter of the Canadian Action Party – and a person deeply concerned with the questions raised by COMER, by the national debt, and by ways to finance the Canadian economy and public spending in a way that is viable and debt-free.

In “An Open Letter to Prime Minister [Justin] Trudeau” (Dialogue, Summer 2016, pp. 8-9), dated June 1, 2016, Paul Hellyer says nothing about the COMER case that he earlier supported.  That may be an accident. He proposes (without reference to the Liberal intention to create a Canadian Infrastructure Bank) a process of feeding into the Canadian economy money (not loan-created debt) in order to absorb previous debt and re-root private banks and the economy on a sound basis. [That process would have to have money created by the Bank of Canada available to feed into the Canadian economy. Hellyer doesn’t mention that very significant fact.]

His proposal, I think, is sound.  He is a Privy Counsellor, which means he may be given privileged information by government and may be consulted in confidence by government.  Does his letter suggest that both Rocco Galati and the COMER case to retrieve the Bank of Canada for the Canadian people have been thrown to the wolves?

Hellyer makes a very strange statement in his letter to Justin Trudeau… that in 1974 “Bank of Canada Governor Gerald Bouey, unilaterally, and without consultation or agreement with your father, the prime minister, announced that the Bank was adopting ‘monetarism’.  There was no hint that shareholders’ interests were to be abandoned in favour of policies established by the International Bank of Settlements, an organization indirectly controlled by the elite banking families.” (Dialogue, p. 8)
That statement seems almost over-simple.  Even if what Hellyer says is true, the Pierre Trudeau cabinet could have said to Bouey: “That initiative must be significantly reconstructed. Do it”. Pierre Trudeau was prime minister for nearly another eight years and had the power (with his cabinet) to change the situation at any time.  The Bank of Canada is not more powerful than the cabinet - which is The Government of Canada in fact. The Bank of Canada is not a separate State.  And so blaming the Bank of Canada for the huge failure of the Pierre Trudeau cabinet may be admirably loyal, but it is considerably less than convincing.  (That was a time, moreover, when Pierre Trudeau was still in his phase of “internationalism”, and splenetic anti-nationalism.)

The cabinet of Pierre Trudeau (and the following cabinets of both major Parties) permitted the “imperial globalizing” Bank of International Settlements to make major (damaging) monetary and economic policy for Canada. And, now, the present Justin Trudeau cabinet is using boatloads of taxpayers’ dollars to defeat the COMER action to return the Bank of Canada to it’s pre-1974 state as Canada’s very successful Infrastructure Bank! ! !

Something more than ordinarily strange is happening in Ottawa ….
Could it be that the Liberal Party of Canada is tied to International Capital, to phoney, and “world” organizations (the hand-maidens of U.S. imperial globalizing) and can’t confront them through the Bank of Canada? Could it be the Liberal cabinet is going around them – to avoid bloody confrontation - and moving to create a separate Canadian Infrastructure Bank (seemingly abandoning the Bank of Canada’s role as lender-without-interest for Infrastructure and related projects)? What they are doing seems more than ordinarily tricky, tacky, and strange.  Can they (possibly?) be creating a “Canadian” Infrastructure Bank with U.S. partners – another name for National Suicide? Questions.  Questions.  Questions.

Neither you nor I know the truth of the “Infrastructure” situation, nor the answers to the questions asked above … and no one who knows is willing to tell Parliament - or us - what is really happening.  Why not?

Written by Robin Mathews


"Does anyone really care what time it is"

The Straight Goods

Cheers Eyes Wide Open

No comments: