Over The Edge Page 4

| i [si vy-\

Room Inspectors cause damage

It's been a while since anyone has made me angry. Unfortunately the people who caused my anger are employees of UNBC.

| have lived on my own for sometime now either in school dorms or in private apartments.

| consider myself to be a clean quiet tenant who takes care of my living arrangements.

Into this idyllic lifestyle intrudes UNBC room inspectors. Imagine two complete strangers

entering your house without warning, assessing the damage (if any) to the house, inside of the fridge, cup- boards or carpet.

If they find no damage, they leave. Woe be you if they find something amiss such as a mark on the countertop. Instead of politely inquiring the nature of the mark, rude unpro- fessional comments are made, in what | think of as my house. Normally, unruly guests are quiet-

ly and forcefully shown the door but since | am a student living in the dorms at UNBC, | apparently forfeit the right to civil conversa- tion and respect.

To add injury to insult, a letter arrives under the door where it explains that all four residents will be deducted for the mark. (but it doesn't specify if this comes out of your damage deposit or out of your pocket before you can pick up your marks)

For things like the alu- minum bars that hold the food in the fridge door, if found slightly bent after four years of use, the four residents will be charged $20 per bar.

For those who are slightly insecure, not to worry. For your conve- nience and piece of mind, room inspections were moved to the read- ing break so strangers could have free access to your rooms and belongings. Although

the excuse was posted Stating the inspections were moved due to unavoidable meetings and the flu season, why couldn't the inspections be moved yet another week?

The idea behind room inspections is to ensure that healthy damage free living quarters are maintained. It's an edu- cation process for younger students to what is acceptable and what is expected by landlords. No one

March 9, 1999

learned from this exer- cise and it just furthered hatred and animosity towards housing.

I've had a lot of positive experiences at UNBC. It's to bad this wasn't one of them.

Oh, and the mark of the counter was from last year and just hasn't been fixed yet.

Aaron Mahoney

The MAI- The Affirmative Argument

In the March issue the Prince George Public Interest Research ' Group's (PGPIRG) newsletter, there are a couple of articles regarding the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) that are crafted to make us panic into a tizzy over the possibility that the MAI isn't "dead" (such trite language). It has been said that mankind hopes vaguely but dreads precisely. The irrational hysterics by UNBC's socialist vanguard certainly affirm that theory. Any organization that boldly uses the descriptor "Public Interest Research. Group" but fails\to offer the public both sides of an impor- tant policy debate is far from an organization with the broad "public interest" at heart. As the PGPIRG has failed to offer the competing arguments on the MAI with student funds, | feel

someone ought to make the case. Here it goes.

As someone who has actually read the MAI documents in my pre- UNBC life as a policy advisor in Ottawa, | would like to start by saying that | strongly favour increasing Canada's export oppor- tunities through trade. Exports create jobs. That's why | support the Free Trade Agreement. It's why | support NAFTA. And it's why, with some reservations, | support the MAI.

The MAI is nothing more, nothing less than a common set of rules that define the rights and__ obligations _ of investors from 29 coun- tries when they invest in any of the other 28 countries that are cur- rently negotiating the agreement. Currently we either have or are negotiating investment protection agreements with 44 countries. Rather than keeping

track of who qualifies for what treatment under any given deal, the MAI proposes similar ground

ules for everyone. It

sets out a level playing field, rules that are known to everyone ahead of time and it treats investors equally rather than discriminat- ing against them on the basis of nationality of country of origin. It requires all persons investing in Canada to follow our laws, and respects our sovereign- ty but it does not allow any government to change its laws in order to discriminate against a specific investor.

International trade, investment in Canada, predictable application of known laws, equal treatment, job creation. That's the MAI.

The MAI has a lot of principles that appeal directly to all Canadians. Its sections on transparency require that all laws be pub-

lished so that an investor will know what they are. Transparency is a cornerstone of the Canadian legal process. Even Parliament's bills are not laws until they are ‘proclaimed’, or pub- lished. Transparency is healthy Canadian tradi- tion, and its presence in the MAI would greatly strengthen our trading abilities and give more firms the security the need to trade abroad. National Treatment is another pillar of the MAI. Just as Canada's constitution forbids dis- crimination on the basis of race, colour or ethnic origin, the MaAIl's "National Treatment" section requires us to treat investors equally whether they come from Sault Ste Marie or Stockholm or San Diego. This is complete- ly consistent with our legal system and | sup- port it.

The MAI also offers protection to investors in

just the same way that Canadian law does. Our laws do not allow a gov- ernment to confiscate a person's property with- out due process and proper compensation. When a road is widened and property expropriat- ed, the fair market value is determined and com- pensation is paid. The MAI demands the same treatment for foreign investors. This is simply fair, and Canadians agree with it.

The MAI requires the quick and fair settlement of disputes, something that all Canadians favour. Indeed, in any dispute between a _for- eign Company and a government in Canada, the MAI first suggests Canadian courts as a forum for settling the disputes. These provi- sions of the MAI are compatible with Canadians' sense of fair play and the rule of law. Given Canada's natur- al resource base, our

stable system of gov- ernment, Courts recog- nized for their fair settle- ment of disputes, well- educated population and national infrastruc- ture Canada can com- pete with the best and brightest from around the world. The MAI is just one more way of giving Canadian com- panies the access they need to the markets of the world.

When one actually sits down and studies the specifics of the MAI and its impact on Canada's

economy, when one sheds the anti- American, anti-free

market, tired socialist rhetorical clichés of the PGPIRG, what one will find is a reasonable trade agreement with many benefits for all Canadians.

James Moore (Political Science)

Over The Edge would like to apologize to Emina Jasarevic for an error that was made in the feature announc- ing her election as NUGSS Fundraiser in the February 23, 1999 issue. Over The Edge reported that Ms.

Jasarevic “passinate” about getting involved as a fundraiser. This should have read passionate. Over The Edge sincerely apologizes for this mistake.