This section reveals the extent to which the provisions of NAFTA might impact bulk water policy regulations in order to better understand the extent to which they impact environmental regulation in general in Canada.
NAFTA was mainly designed to constrain government behavior in certain areas, where such constraints are understood to uphold the common good of parties to the agreement . Under NAFTA, Canada is prevented from regulating any trade through the use of tariffs or taxes because these represent barriers to trade. In fact, any such action would be interpreted as pushing towards protectionism.
In the case of bulk water
exports, the three most probable sources of conflict lie in NAFTA's chapters
3, 11 and 12. In this section, evaluations of the impact of these chapters
on bulk water export policy will be given.
a. NAFTA Chapter 3: Trade in Goods and National Treatment:
i. Tariff elimination & import/export Restrictions:
Under this provision, Canada has abandoned
the option of regulating bulk water exports by imposing taxes or tariffs
under Articles 302: Tariff Elimination, 309.2: Import and Export
Restrictions and Article 314: Export Taxes. If Canada allows
the export of water in bulk, under the provisions of this chapter, it would
not be allowed to regulate the quantities of water traded.
ii. Water is a tradable good in all of its forms:
NAFTA Article 301 classifies
water in all of its forms as a tradable good. Hence, under NAFTA, "natural
or artificial waters,... snow and ice, and ordinary natural water of all
kinds other than sea water" are considered as commodities that can be traded
on the international market.
iii. GATT Article XX: General exceptions:
NAFTA and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade share the same basic architecture. A fundamental difference between the two however is that GATT provides special exceptions to the prohibition of trade regulations. These exceptions are defined in Article XX of GATT which states that:
...nothing in this Agreement (GATT) shall be construed to prevent the adoption or enforcement by any Member of measures:…(b) necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health;
... (g) relating to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources if the such measures are made effective in conjunction with restrictions on domestic production and consumption;
It is significant, when
assessing the impact of NAFTA on bulk water export policy, to know that
GATT Article XX exceptions do not apply to the provisions of NAFTA.
iv. Article 301: National Treatment of Exports
Article 301 provides that:
v. Proportional sharing :
Another unique feature of NAFTA is the proportional sharing provision described by article 315:
b. NAFTA Chapter 11: Investment
Chapter 11 of NAFTA was designed to protect foreign direct investment (FDI) as it plays a key role in promoting economic development. Indeed, for free trade agreements like GATT which encompasses a great host of countries, FDI plays a critical role in achieving sustainable development in developing countries. As a source of capital, it represents between one-third and one-half of all private investment in developing countries, and is helping to relieve their dependence on foreign development assistance. However, as this section will show, foreign investment under NAFTA can also pose grave risks to sustainable development.
Chapter 11 establishes the most extensive array of investor rights ever provided to foreign investors. Chapter 11, Section B also establishes its own enforcement regime that involves recourse to binding international dispute resolution. It provides the right of foreign investors to initiate direct action against the host government and is unprecedented because it deeply affects public foreign policy making.
The five main provisions upon which claims can be and have been made against Canada concerning water export control measures and that this paper will evaluate are:
- the right to National Treatment (Article 1102)
- the most favored nation treatment (Article 1103)
- a Minimum Standard of Treatment (Article 1105).
- the prohibition against certain Performance Requirements (Article 1106)
- Compensation in case
of Expropriation (Article 1110).
i. Article 1102: National Treatment for Investors and Investments and Article 1103: Most favoured nation:
ii. Article 1105: Minimum Standard of Treatment:
This ensures that the signatories
to NAFTA ensure "fair, equitable treatment and full protection and security"
for both domestic and foreign investors operating within the boundaries
of their country. There have now already been at least four cases which
have used this article to sue host governments, among which is the Sun
Belt Water case.
iii. NAFTA Article 1110: Expropriation and Compensation:
Another potential ground for an investor claim under Chapter 11 can be found in the provisions of Article 1110:
No party may directly or indirectly nationalize or expropriate an investment of an investor of another Party in its territory or take any measure tantamount to nationalization or expropriation of such an investment except:
Hence, it can be seen that
what received little attention during the implementation of NAFTA was the
scope and interpretation of the investment protection provisions contained
in NAFTA's Chapter 11, and how they related to environmental protection
by the host state. The past few years' experience demonstrates that this
is critical. The investor protections provided in NAFTA's Chapter 11 have
been used repeatedly to challenge environmental laws and administrative
decisions that have negative economic impacts for foreign investors. As
a consequence, the provisions designed to ensure security and predictability
for the investors have now created uncertainty and unpredictability for
environmental regulators (in this case bulk water export regulators).
c. Chapter 12: Services:
Chapter 12 of NAFTA sets out an extensive regime to govern trade and investment in the services sectors. As for the scope of Chapter 12, Article 1201.1 provides:
d. Summary:
Canada already lacks a clear national water policy and legislation that would prohibit bulk water exports of freshwater, and under NAFTA, it could lose complete control over its freshwater once it becomes a tradable commodity. Indeed, NAFTA rules concerning both investment and services would extend to water, whether water is classified as a good or not. In reaction to this, the Canadian federal government has conceded the following point: