(AlbertaIndex, June 3, Tuesday) --- A groundbreaking trade agreement between Alberta and British Columbia has drawn fierce responses from both supporters and critics.

    The governments of the two provinces hail the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA) Implementation Statutes Amendment Act as helping to create Canada’s second largest economic region.

They view it as an innovative agreement that will simplify, streamline and strengthen the way the two provinces do business. TILMA is expected to reduce barriers to trade and labour mobility between the provinces, and will open up new opportunities for the people in Alberta and BC.

“TILMA will help preserve Alberta’s quality of life into the future, as a strong and vibrant legacy for generations to come,” said Premier Ed Stelmach. His government has taken a significant step in realising TILMA when it passed the act’s Third Reading in the legislature last week.

That will provide the mechanics needed to fully implement the TILMA by April 2009. The Act will reconcile corporate registration, which will help businesses by eliminating the need to register in both provinces, provide authority for Alberta to waive certain corporate presence requirements when energy regulators in both provinces agree to equivalent, high standards and amend the Government Organizations Act to consolidate TILMA provisions in one place to allow the agreement to operate smoothly.

The Alberta government also continues to consult with municipalities, along with academic institutions, school jurisdictions, health authorities, occupational organizations, regulatory bodies, crown corporations and financial institutions that will be covered by the TILMA when it is fully implemented.

The British Columbia Legislature is currently considering complementary legislation.

TILMA, however, has also drawn strong criticism from trade and public interest lawyer Steven Shrybman who has deemed Alberta’s Bill 1 to be unconstitutional.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) commissioned Shrybman, a lawyer with Sack, Goldblatt, and Mitchell, to analyze the Bill. He warns that by imposing financial and other sanctions on the otherwise lawful acts of public bodies, Bill 1 contravenes basic constitutional norms, including the rule of law and democracy.

CUPE said the opinion raises concerns about such elements in the Bill as a clause requiring governing public bodies to compensate business if they pass a law that “restricts” profitability.

“That clause alone is a threat to the autonomy of Albertan decision-makers,” says D’Arcy Lanovaz, CUPE Alberta Division president and National Executive Board member.

“Environmental regulations could be deemed to restrict business. Rules banning junk food in schools restrict business. Minimum wage laws restrict business. Almost any law, regulation, or action that a government might come up with could be spun as restricting business.”

CUPE has charged that under TILMA, labour standards are vulnerable to challenge, as is how much training a local authority may determine an employee needs to perform duties. In cases where governments have different safety standards, the lowest common denominator would become the rule of the day.

“TILMA as we know it in Alberta and BC should sound the alarm in other regions of Canada, like Ontario and Quebec, that are currently considering similar inter-provincial agreements,” said CUPE national president, Paul Moist. “Do we want the ability to make our own laws restricted by trade agreement dispute boards bestowed with governance-type powers?”

Did you enjoy this article? Please share it!