Community 'has a right' to see Vale Inco takeover agreement: MPs

(28) Comments | Print | Report a typo | Contact the Editor
Oct 30, 2009- 3:38 PM

By: Sudbury Northern Life Staff

Nickel Belt MP Claude Gravelle and Sudbury MP Glenn Thibeault are calling on Vale Inco to publicly release the agreement it made with Industry Canada when it acquired Canadian-owned Inco in 2006.

“If Vale says that they haven’t broken the agreement, then why won’t they make it public? The community has a right to know exactly what they committed to when they purchased Inco,” said Gravelle.

“We sent a letter to Vale last month asking for a copy of this agreement, and to date we still have not received a response.”

The MPs were responding to comments made on Thursday by Vale CFO Fabio Barbossa that the company was “absolutely” complying with the Investment Canada Act despite three rounds of layoffs at its Canadian operations.

Vale officials had stated at the time that there would be no layoffs for three years after it purchased Inco. However, there were layoffs at the company earlier this year.

“We need the games to stop now.  If Vale Inco is a good corporate citizen, it should have no problem making this agreement public so the citizens of Sudbury can see it,” commented Thibeault. “Why won’t this government come clean and let us see what is actually in the deal with Vale?  Sudburians have to know that this Brazilian company is living up to its original commitment.”

The agreement is protected under S.36 of the Investment Canada Act and can only be released upon the consent of the company. Gravelle is currently drafting legislation that would amend S.36 to make all undertakings made by foreign companies during takeovers public.
Read More: Home > Sudbury News
(28) Comments | Print | Report a typo | Contact the Editor

Reader's Feedback

Editor’s Note:

NorthernLife.ca may contain content submitted by readers, usually in the form of article comments. All reader comments and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of NorthernLife.ca. The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that NorthernLife.ca has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to NorthernLife.ca to report any objectionable content by using the "report abuse" link found in the comments section of this web site.

28 Comments

  • drifter 11/4/2009 10:33:45 AM - Report Abuse

    OP & UW
    You're right...I am pretty hard on Myles....probably because at the beginning of the strike, he headed down to Brazil on the USW of A ticket and then posed for his pic with sunglasses like a tourist....(hence "masked man".
    Also, during the 8 month Falco strike, he was on the exec of the O & T union and crossed the picket line every day for 8 months.
    I'll lighten up on him.

  • overpaidunderworked 11/4/2009 9:21:13 AM - Report Abuse

    hey drifter did myles steal your wife or something. you seem to slam him lots. why not any other jabronies from the hall??

  • drifter 11/3/2009 5:20:37 PM - Report Abuse

    The previous owners of Inco (the shareholders) received a very attractive offer from CVRD for 19 billion cash and took the money and ran.
    There is nothing to support that Inco was a Canadian Company although one of their major assets was in Sudbury. Until about 20 years ago the head office was in New York City in fact.
    The details of the deal are confidential business arrangements and the people of Sudbury do not have "the right" to view them. If this was not true wouldn't the Mighty Masked Man Myles be clambering for their release?
    What may be common sense in Chemmy is not so in Ottawa

  • Mario_3 11/3/2009 12:03:43 AM - Report Abuse

    Common sense dictates.........if Vale and the government have nothing to hide.........then show the document.

    There are literally thousands of Sudbury families affected by this strike,AND the ramifications of what could happen

    This is a NO brainer

  • drifter 11/2/2009 6:26:23 PM - Report Abuse

    Mario
    Do you have an opinion on whether the community has a right to see the agreement?
    thats the topic on this blog.

  • Mario_3 11/2/2009 5:01:55 PM - Report Abuse

    Well.'Mikey',i was just quoting YOU........"Apparently the courts disagree with you Janet,or Vale would have been ordered to disclose it'.

    That was YOUR comment.I never heard it go thru the courts either,BUT,since you seem to know EVERYTHING,well............

  • MAXIMVS-corruptioncentral 11/2/2009 3:06:13 PM - Report Abuse

    The ultimate end of all revolutionary social change is to establish the sanctity of human life, the dignity of man, the right of every human being to liberty and well-being. Without any government/big busuness accountability thats impossible.

    Communication or disclosure of information

    36(3) Information that is privileged under subsection (1) may, on such terms and conditions and under such circumstances as the Minister deems appropriate,etc ab..

    Seems like government at ALL levels deem the release of info as inappropriate. ....We have a governing system of the power elite, by the power elite, and largely for the power elite. Excluded from the decision arena, most ordinary people are relegated to watching silently from the sidelines as elite interests dictate the contours of their lives. If strikers were to picket politicians rather than mine shafts...well.. he loves his country best who strives to make it best...

  • Linux_Advocat 11/2/2009 1:32:26 PM - Report Abuse

    Good post Joey. Thanks for the link!

  • Phillip Morris 11/2/2009 11:15:57 AM - Report Abuse

    Well said Joe. Conspiracy theorists, and anti-corporate people will always be paranoid and can't grasp the simple facts.
    Of course they don't give a second thought to watching big corporate movies and tv. Consume corporate foods and beverages. Drive big corporate made vehicles. Or work for a corporation. As long as their personal world isn't shaken. As soon as a roadbump is hit, its onto some socialist crusade.
    The crux of the matter is preserving company and government trust in privacy. Face it friends, the deal is long done and can't be reversed. Even in the anti-corporate utopia you dream of.

  • MAXIMVS-corruptioncentral 11/2/2009 9:11:26 AM - Report Abuse

    cooperation of Big Government, otherwise they are relatively impotent. When our govt does nothing (courts included)...they are in fact co-operating. Any local govt funded corporations come to mind? The forces of a capitalist society, if left unchecked, tend to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty, which are embodied in one maxim: The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate.

  • MAXIMVS-corruptioncentral 11/2/2009 9:10:20 AM - Report Abuse

    Phillip Morris...What have ya been smokin? The turnabout can be very unfair play The ability of a corporation to impose its will on individuals is rather limited absent a large state (govt) apparatus capable of enforcing that will. Wal-Mart doesn’t have police agents able to prevent competition. But politicians can rig markets to prevent competition. Archer Daniels Midland can’t force you to buy their ethanol. But they can buy off politicians who pass laws forcing you to buy the ethanol, and, for good measure, pass laws handing some of you tax monies over to ADM in the form of subsidies for doing so. Integrety? You said.."We've seen a glimpse of how the NDP runs government in the Rae 90's Ontario. No thanks." How many years of Liberal scandals have we've seen? Any politicial party is only as good as the people (leader) in them. Unfortunately the the majority of our politicians are led by big business. Any public official responsible for the tax dollar should be liable to public enquiry as to how its spent. The info that was requested was not as frivolous (mortgage etc) as you try and make the issue to be.
    Offence
    (5)Every corporation or transfer agent that fails to furnish a list in accordance with subsection (1) when so required is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $1,000, and every director or officer of such corporation or transfer agent who authorized, permitted or acquiesced in such offence is also guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a like fine.
    Wonder if they will release the NAMES on the sale agreement? Probably not until they;re all out of office.

    Government and courts who allow corporations to break the law are denying the public the right to communicate with the corporation, or lobby for positive change, etc.
    In the real world Big Business is like Big Religion; in order to pose a real threat to the general public they need the cooperation of Big Government, oth

  • Joey 11/2/2009 8:19:56 AM - Report Abuse

    An informed opinion may be out of place, but here goes:

    There are two key reasons why these agreements are important.

    1) The conservative government must take responsibility for holding Vale to the Net Benefit clause in the agreement. (This goes beyond three years btw). If there was no such clause then the government must be partially accountable for the economic and social losses caused by this dispute. This does not require the exposure of the entire document, but the aspects of the agreement which proved to the minister that a net benefit was in the plan. Our MP's can't hold the government accountable without this information.

    2) Our natural resource base is still up for sale to the highest bidder, and the Harper conservatives, with Clement at the industry ministry, are still signing these agreements every day. We need to do what we can to protect the interests of Canada by strengthening these agreements so other communities don't suffer likewise.

    The problem here (if you knew as much about this as you pretend to) is that Section 36 of the Investment Canada act specifically provides the Minister responsible with the ability to determine what elements of an agreement are privileged and not.

    Educate yourself and read the act here:
    http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ica-lic.nsf/eng/h_lk00071.html#partVI

    See subsection 36 (1) and 36 (3).

    It is Tony Clement's decision, therefore, to hold the net benefit rulings privileged. "The courts" can't force him to change his mind. Either a change of legislation or outrage from the people could accomplish that, which are Thibeault and Gravelle's goal. The NDP doesn't take the government to court to challenge legislation. They work in the House of Commons and the realm of public opinion.

    A re-wording of the act could solve this, or a change at the Minister's office. Either way, the agreement in question is absolutely relevant to the outcome of this dispute and the

  • MikeK 11/2/2009 7:24:01 AM - Report Abuse

    It didn't even go to the courts Mario, do you know anything at all about this, or are you just making a comment for the purpose of arguement? Your commenting as though a Judge already ruled against the NDP and your discrediting the courts, but NDP hasn't even attempted it. They are simply asking Vale for a copy, hoping that Vale volunteers the information. Try reading the articles at least, before you throw in your 2 cents.

    And for the record, the 'courts' didn't find O.J. not guilty, a Jury of his peers did. big difference

  • Phillip Morris 11/2/2009 7:13:20 AM - Report Abuse

    Can you imagine if the NDP ran this country?
    Its stunts like this that continue to show how totally out of touch they are. And of course the socialist/union rubes will fall for it. Their hollow demagogue is laughable.

    No corporation would ever do business in Canada if their confidential documents had the chance of being exposed to the public AND the competition.
    This has nothing to do with Access to Information. It has all to do with integrity of interactions between businesses. We've seen a glimpse of how the NDP runs government in the Rae 90's Ontario. No thanks.

    What would Thibeault Gravelle say if we demanded all thier personal business documents? Where are they investing money? Any foreign holdings? What is the mortgage like? Any potential conflict of interest with business friends or financial holdings? - Turnabout is fair play.

  • Mario_3 11/2/2009 5:20:53 AM - Report Abuse

    Well,'Mike',just because the courts DIDNT agree to make the Vale agreement public.........DOESNT mean its 'right'decision.

    Hey,the 'courts'found O.J Simpson....NOT guilty.........take it from that

  • bulshoy_62 10/31/2009 8:32:32 PM - Report Abuse

    Great logic Harry & Whiteswan. Since you don't like the party, the two MPs should stop doing their jobs.

    Do you people think BEFORE opening your mouths, or no?

  • MAXIMVS-corruptioncentral 10/31/2009 11:09:34 AM - Report Abuse

    The courts position is best summed up as "telling the two parties to settle it among themselves". In other words...the courts just like the elected officials are not going to get involved. That was not a surprise.

  • MikeK 10/31/2009 10:11:55 AM - Report Abuse

    Apparantly the courts disagree with you Janet, or Vale would have been long ago ordered to disclose.

    The NDP knows they have no legal right to see those agreements, their entire arguement is that if Vale has nothing to hide, then they should happily make them available for public viewing. The NDP is useless.

  • Janet Rodriguez 10/31/2009 8:11:24 AM - Report Abuse

    MikeK, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act is the provincial sunshine law. The federal is the Access to Information Act. The federal is the appropriate law in this case.

  • MAXIMVS-corruptioncentral 10/31/2009 12:42:00 AM - Report Abuse

    After suffering years of frustration, many progressive activists are content merely to “make a statement” instead of actually being heard or to be heard rather than having influence or to have influence instead of having decision-making power or to seize decision-making power rather than creating a true democracy of empowered citizens.Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone...capitalism, it’s "dog eat dog". Under Communism, it’s just the "opposite".

  • frog splash 10/30/2009 11:46:49 PM - Report Abuse

    “We need the games to stop now. what games? oh ya this one is over pretty soon, 3 years is up... game over !!

    If Vale Inco is a good corporate citizen, it should have no problem making this agreement public so the citizens of Sudbury can see it,” “Why won’t this government come clean and let us see what is actually in the deal with Vale?

    See what? I don't see anything here, just the governemnt and vale-inco. It's there secret. Ya 3 years is done now would be a perfect timing to find out, But find out what?? It`s already too late even if they never had followed the agreement.... We people should make a cross (X) on this one because we will never have anything out of this one... Halloween has come and gone so is the so said contract... RIP!

  • Medic1913 10/30/2009 11:10:57 PM - Report Abuse

    Nope, not hard at all muff

  • muff_1 10/30/2009 10:58:06 PM - Report Abuse

    Not hard to tell which camp you belong to medic1913

  • Medic1913 10/30/2009 10:42:23 PM - Report Abuse

    Mikek-are you staff at Vale? You keep coming up with the most ridiculous comments. The government has a different accountability and transparency to the people who live here and pay taxes. To compare that to one citizen asking another to show them their bank statements is the type of silly high school comments I'm learning to expect from you.

  • whiteswan69_1 10/30/2009 9:36:45 PM - Report Abuse

    I agree with you Harry and I don't like NDP and I have never voted NDP and never will.

  • MikeK 10/30/2009 5:52:41 PM - Report Abuse

    Finish the name of the act while your giving your "facts". Its the "Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act". If someone comes to your door and asks to see your personal financal agreements with your bank, would you tell show them or tlel them to piss off regardless of if you have something to hide or not. Thats your protection of privacy.

  • Outskirts Oscar 10/30/2009 5:23:34 PM - Report Abuse

    Yeah, we do have a right to see the agreement. And it's written into our legal system. It's called the Freedom of Information Act.

    A fact too is that Adios Inco is that they did hire a lot of people, and the many levels of government were investing into NORCAT and MIRARCO like crazy in order to woo Vale 'Adios' Inco into the community. There was a false microcosm that encompassed the community and everyone bought in. Then the recession came along, and just like any other company, they had to adjust to the situation.

    Who should be blamed for? Our lemmings as we have of leaders is one thing. Secondly, is all the folks that thought during our good times it would always be like that... Well guess what? Reality Check man! The economy goes in cycles. Something that some people have a hard time understanding... especially a few select groups which I will not mention names.

  • Harry 10/30/2009 4:57:19 PM - Report Abuse

    When will these two clowns just sit down and shut up? At this point in time, who cares about the takeover agreement? And just exactly who is "the community"? Give it a rest, NDP.
FacebookTwitterRSSVideophotoNewsletterMobile