In a short note to Nathan Cullen, cc’d to us, a question was raised regarding a specific section of the recently introduced Canadian budget. In referring to some of the contents the author of the note quotes lines from two pages of the budget document;From Page 144:
“The Government also recognizes the need to manage the risks associated with systemically important banks—those banks whose distress or failure could cause a disruption to the financial system and, in turn, negative impacts on the economy. This requires strong prudential oversight and a robust set of options for resolving these institutions without the use of taxpayer funds, in the unlikely event that one becomes non-viable.”
From Page 145:
The Government proposes to implement a bail-in regime for systemically important banks. This regime will be designed to ensure that, in the unlikely event that a systemically important bank depletes its capital, the bank can be recapitalized and returned to viability through the very rapid conversion of certain bank liabilities into regulatory capital.
The term “systemically important bank” is used in various documents across the globe. The term was not made up by Canada’s Minister of Finance.
A quick review of publically available documents reveals the plan to seize everyone’s money, (the funds people save in banks for their own personal security), is part of a global conspiratorial scheme.Globally Active, Systemically Important, Financial Institutions
’s, as they are referred to in financial discussion papers, are to be protected by the peoples deposits.
The common man and woman might challenge this claim by stating their money is protected by the Deposit Insurance Corporation (which claims to insure deposits up to a certain amount) until they understand it is the Deposit Insurance Corporation which sponsored these measures.
The worlds major financial players have determined the world cannot sustain a major financial disruption such as occurred in 2008. Therefore they have conspired together to change the rules and make available the seizure all the deposits, including safety deposit boxes, of any SIFI they deem in financial turmoil.Read More Here
from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and The Bank of Enland.And Click Here
to read the relevant paragraphs in the Canadian Budget itself.
One must draw references to comparable recent changes of Canadian standards. The raising of the retirement age to 67 from 65 without any need in Canada was enacted by our government due to the demands of the International Financial institutions of Greece. Canada is following the leaders, not being the leader. Whatever is happening, anywhere across the globe that impacts the lifestyle and security of the common man and woman, will happen in Canada without hesitation.
The very first evidence of this was the fraudulent election rife with vote intimidation and tampering, which followed the completely illegal shutdown of Canada’s Parliament Buildings during the time when the Harper Government was charged with contempt of Parliament and again when he faced a vote of non-confidence.
Canadians have lost their sovereignty completely. Just like other places across the globe Canada is now being run by a corrupt regime threatening all opposition with vicious charges. A quick reflection on the G8 and G20 police actions against peaceful protestors as well as the Quebec Police Provocateurs in Montreal during the peaceful WTO protests reveal military action against Canadians and disappearances are not an unlikely next step.
In fact these changes to the protections of the common persons savings accounts were designed by a G20 Financial study group in Basil Switzerland, the home of the BIS (Bank of International Settlements). An indepth article on this subject can be found by Clicking Here
. Following is a short extract from an extensive document.No exception is indicated for “insured deposits” in the U.S., meaning those under $250,000, the deposits we thought were protected by FDIC insurance. This can hardly be an oversight, since it is the FDIC that is issuing the directive. The FDIC is an insurance company funded by premiums paid by private banks. The directive is called a “resolution process,” defined elsewhere as a plan that “would be triggered in the event of the failure of an insurer . . . .” The only mention of “insured deposits” is in connection with existing UK legislation, which the FDIC-BOE directive goes on to say is inadequate, implying that it needs to be modified or overridden.
Canada's state of wealth or the credit rating applied to Canada has nothing to do with oil exports or resource development. It has to do with the willingness of the Canadian Government to comply with any directive it is issued; formal, infomal or simply implied.
Chapter 3.2 on page 144 of the recently introduced budget document begins with a need to change the conflict of interest guidelines in the "Financial Sector Statutes"
. This is immediately followed by a statement regarding the strength of Canadian Banks.Canada's large banks are a source of strength for the Canadian Economy. Our large banks have become increasingly successful in international markets, creating jobs at home.
The document then goes on to describe the measures required to protect these fragile banks by seizing all the common persons money held in them.
What has happened in Cyprus is not the Canary in the mineshaft it is the Elephant in the living room.