FIPA like treaties with investor-state arbitration miss-lead the public into believing their government is able to exercise sovereign powers.

FIPA is particularly harmful because it denies public access to arbitration case decisions miss-leading the public into believing their government is able to exercise sovereign powers.

Harper's trade mission to India failed in part because FIPA like treaties with investor-state arbitration have hurt India in the past.

Also FIPA treaties are NOT required for trade "Brazil has not ratified a single investment treaty yet its foreign direct investment in 2011 stood at a record $66.7 billion."

India is not alone in questioning investor-state arbitration. South Africa recently declined to renew an investment treaty with Belgium and Luxembourg, and other such treaties are up for non-renewal or cancellation by South Africa. According to a review by the South African government, the treaties “pose risks and limitations on the ability of the government to pursue its constitutional-based transformation agenda”. The review was conducted after individual Italian investors with investments in South Africa’s mining industry brought investor-state arbitration claims against South Africa’s post-apartheid Black Economic Empowerment legislation. In Latin America, several countries have taken steps to limit their exposure to investor-state arbitration. Economic powerhouse Brazil has not ratified a single investment treaty yet its foreign direct investment in 2011 stood at a record $66.7 billion.

Developed countries have also reviewed the impact of investment treaties. In 2011, Australia decided not to include investor-state arbitration in future trade agreements. This decision was made in light of the ongoing threats by U.S. tobacco giant Philip Morris that it would sue the Australian government under an investment treaty for requiring warnings and plain packaging of cigarettes. Phillip Morris has since sued the Australian government under the Australia-Hong Kong investment treaty. Similarly, Philip Morris brought an arbitration claim against Uruguay, under a Switzerland-Uruguay investment treaty, after Uruguay required cigarette health warnings. Public interest groups have argued that investment treaties put pressures on government NOT to introduce environmental and health regulation.

Under FIPA, provincial, regional and municipal governments will be on the hook for payouts without having been party to the creation of this act. Where will the money come from?

Foreign national companies only need threaten. Provincial, Regional and Municipal governments without the resources to fight or chance payouts will block, retract environmental and health regulations protecting the health of Canada and its people. 

http://www.troymedia.com/2012/12/17/stephen-harper-left-india-with-no-fipa-heres-why/

Why Canada failed win a seat on the UN’s Security Council, for the first time in the history of the UN.

Canada failed win a seat  on the UN’s Security Council, for the first time in the history of the UN.

The lack of international support was a direct result of Canada's changed foreign policy. There is a tremendous amount of power to be held by having a seat on the UN’s Security Council. The Harper Government try to win over international diplomats with maple syrup and Canadian beer rather than actual participation in international affairs. Harper also consistently stakes out hawkish ground on international matters.

How the world sees Canada
"The often-combative rookie foreign minister" ( Canada's UN Ambassador John Baird).
http://www.safpi.org/keyword-tags/united-nations-security-council-unsc?page=4
UN two weeks ago foreign minister John Baird was the only speaker who wasn't cheered by the General Assembly. the words of the diplomat Aaron David Miller, Canada has largely acted as a neutral broker between the parties. Harper’s comments were controversial for that reason. But instead of backing down, he doubled down.

Canada’s new foreign policy can therefore be said to have begun with Harper’s very first address to Parliament as head of government, in April 2006. Harper’s first speech to the United Nations, in September 2006, he signaled a dramatic shift by questioning the international body’s relevance. Harper’s most noticeable change to Canadian policy has come in regard to Israel. Simply put, Canada is now the single most supportive nation of Israeli policy, exceeding even the United States, Israel’s traditional senior partner.

He is the first prime minister produced by the Canadian New Right that emerged in the 1980s. Canadian New Right comprises neoconservatives, Christian evangelicals, and fiscal conservatives. It is centered in specific regions. It has a powerful voice in newspapers like the National Post and the Sun media chain, and on blogs,

http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/reinventing-canada-stephen-harper%E2%80%99s-conservative-revolution

.... Stephen Harper’s foreign policy ..... makes no apologies for stepping on a few toes. From climate change to Israel, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird is willing to shrug off the gripes.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/john-baird-crafts-canadian-foreign-policy-with-a-hard-edge/article2284834/

Harper's policies have spurred an unprecedented international backlash against Canada. And, after nearly seven years of this government’s more belligerent and corporate centric foreign policy, displays of opposition are growing.

http://rabble.ca/news/2012/12/could-foreign-policy-be-stephen-harpers-achilles%E2%80%99-heel

http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2011/12/canada-in-2011-international-relationsforeign-policy/