Home » Posts tagged 'TPP' (Page 3)

Tag Archives: TPP

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Catacylsm
Click on image to purchase

Post categories

Post Archives by Category

Current trade treaties: “a revolution against law”

Current trade treaties: “a revolution against law”

trade cartoon snippetA respected human-rights expert at the United Nations, Alfred-Maurice de Zayas, has joined the global movement opposing trade treaties like TPP and TTIP. And he has novel and powerful legal arguments.

In international law, de Zayas says, there is a hierarchy of agreements, and at the top is the UN Charter: “in case of conflict between the provisions of the UN Charter and any other treaty, the Charter prevails.” In other words, trade treaties that lead to a violation of human rights — or breach any other obligation set out in the UN Charter — are legally invalid. Most countries have signed onto human rights treaties, but “they have also entered into trade and investment agreements that hinder, delay or render impossible the fulfillment of their human rights treaty obligations.”

De Zayas is especially concerned about Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clauses, which allow corporations to sue governments over laws or regulations that might diminish expected profits. Such mechanisms, he says, “actually constitute an attack on the very essence of sovereignty and self-determination, which are founding principles of the United Nations.” In fact, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights requires these kinds of disputes to be decided by independent, transparent and accountable tribunals. “Allowing three private arbitrators to disregard international and national law … is tantamount to a revolution against law.”

De Zayas notes that of the 608 known arbitration awards, many “have overridden national law and hindered States in the sovereign determination of fiscal and budgetary policy, labour, health and environmental regulation, and have had adverse human rights impacts… including a ‘chilling effect’ with regard to the exercise of democratic governance.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Leaked TAFTA/TTIP Chapter Shows EU Breaking Its Promises On The Environment

Leaked TAFTA/TTIP Chapter Shows EU Breaking Its Promises On The Environment from the toxic-trade-deal dept

As far as trade agreements are concerned, the recent focus here on Techdirt and elsewhere has been on TPP as it finally achieved some kind of agreement — what kind, we still don’t know, despite promises that the text would be released as soon as it was finished. But during this time, TPP’s sibling, TAFTA/TTIP, has been grinding away slowly in the background. It’s already well behind schedule — there were rather ridiculous initial plans to get it finished by the end of last year — and there’s now evidence of growing panic among the negotiators that they won’t even get it finished by the end of President Obama’s second term, which would pose huge problems in terms of ratification.

One sign of that panic is that the original ambitions to include just about everything are being jettisoned, as it becomes clear that in some sectors — cosmetics, for example — the US and EU regulatory approaches are just too different to reconcile. Another indicator is an important leaked document obtained by the Guardian last week. It’s the latest (29 September) draft proposal for the chapter on sustainable development. What emerges from every page of the document, embedded below, is that the European Commission is now so desperate for a deal — any deal — that it has gone back on just about every promise it made (pdf) to protect the environment and ensure that TTIP promoted sustainable development. Three environmental groups — the Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth Europe and PowerShift — have taken advantage of this leak to offer an analysis of the European Commission’s real intent in the environmental field. They see four key problems:

The leaked text fails to provide any adequate defense for environment-related policies likely to be undermined by TTIP. For example, nothing in the text would prevent foreign corporations from launching challenges against climate or other environmental policies adopted on either side of the Atlantic in unaccountable trade tribunals.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The TPP: An Attack on the Internet

The TPP: An Attack on the Internet

shutterstock_174517040

The Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, initialed by the delegations of the 12 participating countries in early October, is one of the most talked-about mysteries of our time. The moment the treaty was announced, there was a tidal wave of commentary and criticism: most of it based on previous versions, speculation and a few leaks. Because it won’t be published for months (even years perhaps), nobody really knew what the document actually said.

Then Wikileaks, the on-line bible of revealed secrets, published several leaked sections of what its editors believe is the final edition and the collective groan morphed into an outcry. It was, as the Electronic Frontier Foundation puts it, “all that we feared.” The TPP internationalizes some of the worst inequities and abuses specific signing governments are currently committing and nowhere is that more true than with surveillance and communications repression.

Its measures deepen the illegality of whistle-blowing and broaden who can be held responsible for it. They use copyright law to make online dissent and online scholarship and research much more difficult. And they chop away at the rights to online privacy.

The deal would fundamentally repress the Internet and, while proponents insist that the agreement would not over-ride the specific laws of each country, it allows and even encourages countries to pass more repressive laws.

It is, in short, a nightmare.

The document itself is written to appear balanced and protective of the rights of both the powerful (companies and governments) and the powerless (users). It reads like a speech a parent gives when the kids are fighting over something: “You take this one, she takes that one”. But that seeming attempt at balance is deceptive.

“If you dig deeper, you’ll notice that all of the provisions that recognize the rights of the public are non-binding,” a report from the Electronic Frontier Foundation indicates, “whereas almost everything that benefits rights holders is binding.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

What’s up with the global economy, and where do we go from here?

What’s up with the global economy, and where do we go from here?

economy cartoon

It now appears that the grand yearly addition to total human wealth, the global GNP, is no longer growing. If so, this means the world is headed toward a global deflationary spiral, a contraction in the global economy similar in nature to the trade slump that spread globally during the era of the Great Depression.

There really is no other explanation but a global trade slump that can account for the steep decline in the prices of basic essential commodities like oil and copper, and also the decreased demand for shipping capacity reflected in the Baltic Dry Index.

The troubled Chinese economy, its reduced demand for commodities, the devaluation of its currency to try to capture more trade, and the Chinese support for a new trade alliance in competition with the new U.S./Japanese TPP alliance — all these are symptoms that indicate that aggregate global buying power has stalled out. That means that investment capital is unable to find new profitable investments in the global marketplace, which is very bad news for finance capitalism as a global system.

At this point let me refer readers to Gail Tverberg and her blog, Our Finite World, which focuses on the key interactions between energy and economics. In fact we now see just the sort of troubled global economy that we might anticipate from a world that peaked in production of historically cheap conventional oil almost a decade ago in 2006. Tverberg is able to explain the global economic situation so clearly, so convincingly, and so persistently that she has attracted a huge popular economic following. One of her recent posts drew over a thousand reader responses; “Low Oil Prices – Why Worry?.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Europe Secretly Starts Imposing TTIP Despite the Public’s Overwhelming Opposition

Europe Secretly Starts Imposing TTIP Despite the Public’s Overwhelming Opposition

There is even speculation that “The Ed Show” was cancelled by the Democratic Party’s propaganda-operation owned by Comcast Corporation, MSNBC, because its star, Ed Schultz, was that cable-news network’s only host who covered Obama’s proposed ‘trade’ deals; and he was highly critical of them — he was critical of them notwithstanding that his employer,

Comcast is one of the few companies that have been brought in behind closed doors – where our elected Representatives don’t even get to go – to help review and consult with leaders about the global trade agreement. Comcast is hungry for the power they would receive from the TPP because it would gut regulations for all industries, so they had to silence the only voice on their new network that had the courage to talk about how horrible the trade deal would be for American citizens.

But in Europe, things are being rushed, just in case secrecy breaks and the treaty fails to pass. The European Union is already secretly imposing provisions from the secret Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) treaty, even before anyone has signed it, and even before it has been formally approved in any nation. This was revealed over the last weekend in two places:

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The TPP is Supply Management

The TPP is Supply Management

Despite the talk from the establishment about how the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is about global free trade – and therefore Canadian cows, chickens and cars can no longer be protected by supply management – the reality is, is that the TPP is supply management.

It’s supply management on an international level so executive bureaucrats, politicians and crony-capitalists can create rules to further solidify their statist-social order.

Meanwhile, there is rampant supply management in the domestic economy where you and I are burden by thousands of government regulations that determine what kind of, how much of, and how soon we can provide goods and services to each other.

It’s not supply management strictly in the sense that the Canadian dairy industry is considered supply management. But the definition of words don’t seem to really matter for the TPP architects.

The TPP is a perfect example of Orwellian newspeak where “free trade” means two different concepts (managed statist-trade and actual free-market trade) and thus narrows the range of thought, or as Tom Woods would say, “the range of allowable opinion.”

For if the TPP is identified with free trade, no one will seriously ask whether staying out of the TPP will result in a lack of free trade. Of course gettin’ involved with the TPP will mean free trade! derr!!

But if the TPP was truly about free trade, then it would allow all individuals to homestead, contract and exchange without being inundated with tariffs, duties, levies, or other arbitrary restrictions on the movement of people, goods and services.

Real free trade doesn’t require a treaty, nor secrecy where citizens must rely on WikiLeaks for information.

Politicians seem to serving themselves but not in the way we’d like ’em to.

They sign international treaties with each other that award special interests in the short-term instead of policies that promote everyone’s prosperity in the long-run.

This isn’t going to end well for them.

Trans-Pacific Partnership text won’t be available before election

Trans-Pacific Partnership text won’t be available before election

Government officials say haggling by lawyers from 12 countries delaying release of trade agreement

Media placeholder

Trade deal details 2:54

Canadians won’t be able to see the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal before they vote.

Government officials told CBC News on Wednesday that the exact wording of the full agreement in principle announced Oct. 5 won’t be finalized until next week.

The federal election is next Monday, Oct. 19.

Twelve countries have signed on to the Pacific Rim free trade deal in principle, although it will require a separate ratification process in each country before it takes effect.

In an interview with CBC News Network’s Power & Politics, Canada’s trade minister said the government was pressing the other 11 countries to release “any form” of the text.

FastVancouverOct8

Trade Minister Ed Fast told the Vancouver Board of Trade last Thursday that the full text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal would be available within days. Now, government officials say it won’t be available until after the election. (CBC News)

“What I did say is that we’re working with our 11 other partners to secure at least a provisional text,” Conservative Ed Fast told CBC’s Rosemary Barton on Wednesday.

“What I’m saying,” Fast said, “I don’t have full control over it but I can tell you we’ve been very, very assertive with our partners explaining to them that Canadians — in the middle of an election — have a right to know what’s in the text.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Veiled TPP Deal Holds Hidden Privacy Risks

Veiled TPP Deal Holds Hidden Privacy Risks

It would restrict governments from creating safeguards for your sensitive data.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a massive trade agreement that covers nearly 40 per cent of world GDP, wrapped up years of negotiation earlier this month. The TPP immediately emerged as an election issue, with the Conservatives trumpeting the deal as a source of future economic growth, the Liberals adopting a wait-and-see approach (the specific details of the agreement are still not public), and the NDP voicing strong opposition.

The focal point of most TPP discussion in Canada has centred on two sectors: the dairy industry, who would experience a modest increase in competition and receive a staggering multi-billion dollar compensation package, and the automotive parts sector, which would face Asian-based competition as a result of new, lower local content requirements (the industry is also pressing for a compensation package).

Lost in the discussion over imported butter and Japanese-made auto parts are the broader implications of the TPP. New rules on corporate lawsuits could result in more claims by foreign corporations against the Canadian government over national policies or court decisions (pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly is already suing the government for $500 million over Canadian patent rulings) and an extension in the term of copyright beyond the international standard would lock down the public domain for decades and potentially cost Canadians hundreds of millions of dollars per year.

One of the most troubling, but largely ignored effects of the TPP involves privacy. Privacy is not an issue most associate with a trade agreement, however, the TPP features several anti-privacy measures that would restrict the ability of governments to establish safeguards over sensitive information such as financial and health data as well as information hosted by social media services.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

All Rights Reserved: Now We Know the Final TTP is Everything We Feared

All Rights Reserved: Now We Know the Final TTP is Everything We Feared

Asia-Pacific Trade Deal

Friday’s release by Wikileaks of what is believed to be the current and essentially final version of the intellectual property (IP) chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) confirms our worst fears about the agreement.

And it dashes the few hopes that we held out that its most onerous provisions wouldn’t survive to the end of the negotiations.

Since we now have the agreed text, we’ll be including some paragraph references that you can cross-reference for yourself – but be aware that some of them contain placeholders like ‘x’ that may change in the cleaned-up text.

Also, our analysis here is limited to the copyright and Internet-related provisions of the chapter, but analyses of the impacts of other parts of the chapter have been published by Wikileaks and others.

Binding rules for rights holders, soft guidelines for users

If you skim the chapter without knowing what you’re looking for, it may come across as being quite balanced, including references to the need for IP rules to further the “mutual advantage of producers and users” (QQ.A.X), to “facilitate the diffusion of information” (QQ.A.Z), and recognizing the “importance of a rich and accessible public domain” (QQ.B.x).

But that’s how it’s meant to look, and taking this at face value would be a big mistake. If you dig deeper, you’ll notice that all of the provisions that recognize the rights of the public are non-binding, whereas almost everything that benefits rightsholders is binding.

That paragraph on the public domain, for example, used to be much stronger in the first leaked draft, with specific obligations to identify, preserve and promote access to public domain material. All of that has now been lost in favor of a feeble, feel-good platitude that imposes no concrete obligations on the TPP parties whatsoever.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

TPP Chapter Released by WikiLeaks Would Let Governments Curtail Trials So as to Contain Information

TPP Chapter Released by WikiLeaks Would Let Governments Curtail Trials So as to Contain Information

T / CC BY-ND 2.0

What WikiLeaks claims to be the full intellectual property chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership appears to give countries greater power to stop sensitive information from going public.

The Guardian reports:

One chapter appears to give the signatory countries (referred to as “parties”) greater power to stop embarrassing information going public. The treaty would give signatories the ability to curtail legal proceedings if the theft of information is “detrimental to a party’s economic interests, international relations, or national defense or national security” – in other words, presumably, if a trial would cause the information to spread. …

Among the provisions in the chapter (which may or may not be the most recent version) are rules that say that each country in the agreement has the authority to compel anyone accused of violating intellectual property law to provide “relevant information […] that the infringer or alleged infringer possesses or controls” as provided for in that country’s own laws.

The rules also state that every country has the authority to immediately give the name and address of anyone importing detained goods to whoever owns the intellectual property.

That information can be very broad, too: “Such information may include information regarding any person involved in any aspect of the infringement or alleged infringement,” the document continues, “and regarding the means of production or the channels of distribution of the infringing or allegedly infringing goods or services, including the identification of third persons alleged to be involved in the production and distribution of such goods or services and of their channels of distribution.”

The Guardian further reports that a drafter’s note says every participating country’s individual laws about whistleblowing would still apply—though whether or not they would be applied would of course be up to the officials empowered to execute those laws.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

This is How the Trade Pact Escalates the Currency War

This is How the Trade Pact Escalates the Currency War

When negotiators from 12 nations and hundreds of lobbyists from around the world, after years of horse-trading, agreed on a “trade deal” on Monday – a deal that remains secret except for the sections that have been leaked – President Obama gushed that it “reflects America’s values.”

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) pries open markets for American goods and services and impose rules on our trading partners that give “our workers the fair shot at success they deserve,” he said.

Similar praise ricocheted around the Pacific from Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Canada, and from politicians and heads of state in Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and the other participating countries. China isn’t part of the deal, but what the heck.

The free trade deal isn’t actually about “free trade.” Many provisions that have been leaked deal with reshuffling the power structure between corporations and democratic states at the expense of citizens and taxpayers.

So now this thing has to be ratified in the 12 countries involved. There might be one or the other hiccup – for example, Hillary Clinton has just come out against it to gain points in her battle to the presidency. “As of today, I am not in favor of what I have learned about it,” she told PBS, thus flip-flopping beautifully from when she, as Secretary of State, had backed the deal.

Despite these potential hiccups, delays, flip-flops, and re-flip-flops, I expect it to get ratified eventually by all 12 countries. Too many deep pockets have lined up behind it to let some elected politician screw it up.

Alas, there remains a little problem: does it really promote exports, which is what they all claim it does, or is that just hype?

That’s the question Krishen Rangasamy, Senior Economist at Economics and Strategy, National Bank Financial, in Canada asked in a note – and then provided the answer: um, no.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Permanently Locking In The Obama Agenda For 40 Percent Of The Global Economy

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Permanently Locking In The Obama Agenda For 40 Percent Of The Global Economy

Obama LaughingWe have just witnessed one of the most significant steps toward a one world economic system that we have ever seen.  Negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership have been completed, and if approved it will create the largest trading bloc on the planet.  But this is not just a trade agreement.  In this treaty, Barack Obama has thrown in all sorts of things that he never would have been able to get through Congress otherwise.  And once this treaty is approved, it will be exceedingly difficult to ever make changes to it.  So essentially what is happening is that the Obama agenda is being permanently locked in for 40 percent of the global economy.

The United States, Canada, Japan, Mexico, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam all intend to sign on to this insidious plan.  Collectively, these nations have a total population of about 800 million people and a combined GDP of approximately 28 trillion dollars.

Of course Barack Obama is assuring all of us that this treaty is going to be wonderful for everyone

In hailing the agreement, Obama said, “Congress and the American people will have months to read every word” before he signs the deal that he described as a win for all sides.

“If we can get this agreement to my desk, then we can help our businesses sell more Made in America goods and services around the world, and we can help more American workers compete and win,” Obama said.

Sadly, just like with every other “free trade” agreement that the U.S. has entered into since World War II, the exact opposite is what will actually happen.  Our trade deficit will get even larger, and we will see even more jobs and even more businesses go overseas.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Trans-Pacific Partnership Deal Struck As “Corporate Secrecy” Wins Again

Trans-Pacific Partnership Deal Struck As “Corporate Secrecy” Wins Again

Once again the corporatocracy wins as the so-called “Trojan horse” Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement has been finalizedAs WSJ reports, the U.S., Japan and 10 countries around the Pacific reached a historic accord Monday to lower trade barriers to goods and services and set commercial rules of the road for two-fifths of the global economy, officials said.

For the U.S., the TPP (reportedly) opens agricultural markets in Japan and Canada, tightens intellectual property rules to benefit drug and technology companies, and establishes a tightknit economic bloc to challenge China’s influence in the region (likely forcing their hand into separate trade agreements).

However, Obama is likely to face a tough fight to get the deal through Congress (especially in light of presidential candidates’ opposition).

The US, Japan and 10 other Pacific Rim economies have reached agreement to strike the largest trade pact seen anywhere in two decades, in what is a huge strategic and political win for US President Barack Obama and Japan’s Shinzo Abe.

As The Wall Street Journal reports,

The deal, if approved by Congress, will mark an effective expansion of the North American Free Trade Agreement launched two decades ago to include Japan, Australia, Chile, Peru and several southeast Asian nations.

The trade deal has been in the works since 2008 but has been stymied by politically sensitive disputes, including a fight between the U.S. and Japan over the automobile industry.

Beyond that, however, it represents the economic backbone of the Obama administration’s strategic “pivot” to Asia and a response to the rise of the US’s chief rival, China, and its growing regional and global influence. It is also a key component of the “third arrow” of economic reforms that Mr Abe has been pursuing in Japan since taking office in 2012.

Biotechs, among others, are the big winners…

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Trans-Pacific Free-Trade Charade

The Trans-Pacific Free-Trade Charade

As negotiators and ministers from the United States and 11 other Pacific Rim countries meet in Atlanta in an effort to finalize the details of the sweeping new Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), some sober analysis is warranted. The biggest regional trade and investment agreement in history is not what it seems.

You will hear much about the importance of the TPP for “free trade.” The reality is that this is an agreement to manage its members’ trade and investment relations – and to do so on behalf of each country’s most powerful business lobbies. Make no mistake: It is evident from the main outstanding issues, over which negotiators are still haggling, that the TPP is not about “free” trade.

New Zealand has threatened to walk away from the agreement over the way Canada and the US manage trade in dairy products. Australia is not happy with how the US and Mexico manage trade in sugar. And the US is not happy with how Japan manages trade in rice. These industries are backed by significant voting blocs in their respective countries. And they represent just the tip of the iceberg in terms of how the TPP would advance an agenda that actually runs counter to free trade.

For starters, consider what the agreement would do to expand intellectual property rights for big pharmaceutical companies, as we learned from leaked versions of the negotiating text. Economic research clearly shows the argument that such intellectual property rights promote research to be weak at best. In fact, there is evidence to the contrary: When the Supreme Court invalidated Myriad’s patent on the BRCA gene, it led to a burst of innovation that resulted in better tests at lower costs. Indeed, provisions in the TPP would restrain open competition and raise prices for consumers in the US and around the world – anathema to free trade.

Read more at https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trans-pacific-partnership-charade-by-joseph-e–stiglitz-and-adam-s–hersh-2015-10#J3RyoruABgKITiZc.99

Where the TPP Could Lose

Where the TPP Could Lose

After years of secret negotiations and silence in the media, the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) has risen to headline news. Now that Congress has voted to give President Obama “fast-track” trade promotion authority to push the deal through the House and Senate with limited debate and no amendments, efforts to finalize the agreement among member countries are proceeding in earnest.

But even if negotiators can reach a final accord, which is far from certain, the pact must still be approved by other national legislatures. And here, the United States is not the only country we should be watching. In Chile, where the administration of President Michelle Bachelet has moved forward with the TPP negotiation process, opposition is strong in the legislature. Even Bachelet’s minister of foreign affairs has indicated that Chile won’t sign the agreement if the TPP doesn’t meet certain criteria.

The Chilean controversy over the TPP highlights some of the biggest problems with the agreement — for working people in Chile, the United States, and around the world — and it makes plain the false promises the Obama administration used to push Democrats to support fast track.

That a no vote from Chile might unravel the agreement as a whole — or inspire other legislatures to follow suit — may be wishful thinking. But growing opposition in that country is a reminder of what’s at stake and why it’s so important for national legislators — in the United States and abroad — to take a stand against bad trade deals. And it highlights the power that organized citizens have to hold politicians accountable and make the TPP vulnerable.

Corporate Boondoggle

The TPP would unite 12 Pacific Rim countries — Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam — in an agreement so big it would account for 40 percent of the global economy.

 

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

 

 

Olduvai IV: Courage
Click on image to read excerpts

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Click on image to purchase @ FriesenPress