Australia walks away from Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal talks
Source: The Guardian
The world’s biggest regional trade deal – Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – is still within reach despite Australia walking away empty-handed from the latest talks, the federal government says.
The trade minister, Andrew Robb, confirmed that a conclusion was not be reached on the $200bn deal during the latest round of negotiations in Hawaii.
“Australia had made some excellent progress but unfortunately some difficult issues were not resolved,” he said on Saturday.
Robb has laid the blame for the failure to come to an agreement with the “big four” economies of the US, Canada, Japan and Mexico. “The sad thing is, 98% is concluded,” he said.
Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/aug/01/australia-walks-away-from-trans-pacific-partnership-trade-deal-talks?CMP=soc_567
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
n2doc
(47,953 posts)Really, not a strong effort at all.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)and Obama - and some DINOs - want this thing.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Only the GOP Leadership wants it, the GOP base opposes it. President Obama wants it and a majority of the Democratic base favors it (though the base opposed FastTrack), but the Democratic leadership opposes it.
djean111
(14,255 posts)and probably have swallowed the lie that it is about trade between countries. Which we already have. Or they are merely thinking that if Obama wants it, it must be GOOD! No critical thinking needed!
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)BTW ... do you realize how elitist your comment looks?
When one gets to a point where a group is not really that group because they don't agree with the smartness of me (and those that agree with me) ... it's probably time to step back and self-reflect.
djean111
(14,255 posts)has dribbled out about it in the news. There are protesters in many other countries, too.
And to be very clear - I would never consider basing my feelings on legislation - or any damned thing at all - on what the "Democratic base" thinks. I will think for myself.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)And,
From that ... It is just as easy to say you base your opinion on what other people lead you to believe.
djean111
(14,255 posts)The people for the TPP are just saying oh, trust us, it is gooood. That train has left the station.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)provide unverifiable "leaks" and you leap because "They say it's BADDDDD" ... Yep, that's thinking for one's self and infinitely better than "being a lemming" and waiting to the agreement is finalized so we can have an informed discussion.
djean111
(14,255 posts)I guess the people in other countries who are protesting these "trade" agreements are "Bad Democrats!!!!", too.
Australians and New Zealanders - BAD Democrats. Even the ones who are in on the negotiations, right? Bad Democrats.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)No ... the other protesters of other nations are not Democrats at all. Nor, do they operate under our system of government.
djean111
(14,255 posts)What does their system of government have to do with objecting to the TPP?
I don't really care about our system of government, or theirs, when it comes to the actual agreements.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I have no opinion on TPP, as there is nothing beyond speculation upon which to form an opinion.
djean111
(14,255 posts)that countries like Australia and New Zealand have expressed?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)that MIGHT make it into the agreement, as if it/they were actually IN the agreement?
djean111
(14,255 posts)Actually, then, why do you care if some of us are "hot and bothered"? Bad chi'i?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)then, make the argument to the US legislators, in the position to vote down the agreement.
Well ... Yes. I hate seeing passionate people make fools of themselves ... that's bad Ju Ju.
djean111
(14,255 posts)who is anyone here to decide that others are making fools of themselves? To who, exactly? I don't really care what others think, if I think something is rotten, then that is that. For me. And, really, I am afraid all the necessary palms have been greased with corporate cash. But we can all voice our objections. For me, if this is as bad as, say, the Australians and New Zealanders (and Europeans objecting to the TTIP) say it is - I will simply and absolutely never vote for anyone who had their hand in it, ever again. Helped write it, shilled for it, pronounced it a gold standard. I can pretty much use the membership of the New Democrat Coalition to make my Congressional DINO list, and then there are others who shilled for it. No drama. Just no votes. Ever.
840high
(17,196 posts)Ned Flanders
(233 posts)Don't you mean, we can have an informed discussion four years after it's passed, and has finally been declassified?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/opinion/dont-keep-trade-talks-secret.html?_r=0
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the agreement will not be classified ... if you look a little more deeply, you will see the DRAFTS of the final document, and the negotiating memos, will be classified for 5 years after adoption ... not the final agreement.
erronis
(15,256 posts)I'm not arguing with you, 1StrongBlackMan, but I don't understand how injecting a term like "elitist" into a conversation does anything other than trying to be negative.
I just spent a generally pleasant weekend with a couple of liberal friends who were staunch Hillary supporters. I favor Bernie and became a a quick subject of discussion. After it was clear that they were pretty set in their views, I indicated that I'd rather not discuss politics. Dismissive and condescending. When I said I didn't get my news from the T.V. set (which I don't own), I was also an elitist.
Wonderful put-downs. Almost like being a liberal, or a progressive, or a free-thinker.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)and it's a good idea NOT to discuss politics, religion, or NFL/NBA/MLB, in mixed, or uncertain, company.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Never ceases to disgust me that people on a Democratic board cheerlead for killing people by raising the cost of their meds.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I will accept your non-published anecdotal account of what you were told by your Senators. (I wonder how many people call their Reps to say they support something, as opposed to calling to voice opposition?)
OMG ... that's terrible! Who is doing that?
eridani
(51,907 posts)And you all think the following is wonderful as well
• A French company sued Egypt after Egypt raised its minimum wage.
• A Swedish company sued Germany because Germany wanted to phase out nuclear power for safety reasons.
• A Dutch company sued the Czech Republic because the Czech Republic didn't bail out a bank that the Dutch company partially owned.
• Philip Morris is using ISDS right now to try to stop countries like Australia and Uruguay from implementing new rules that are intended to cut smoking rates – because the new laws might eat into the tobacco giant’s profits.
Every single labor, environmental, and public interest group is against TPP. You, corporations and Republicans are for it. What is wrong with this picture?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I want you to learn a lesson here.
progressoid
(49,990 posts)Your personal support of TPP notwithstanding, your defense of them implies support.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)eridani
(51,907 posts)Quite a bit different from just supporting the general notion of "free trade."
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121989/trans-pacific-partnership-divides-left-dems-support-free-trade
Opponents to the trade deal point out that public opinion turns significantly more negative when people are asked about the specific impact of such agreements on jobs, wages, and the economy—the thrust of their vocal argument against the deal. In the Pew poll, 51 percent of Republicans and 44 percent of Democrats believe that free trade agreements lead to job losses, and similar numbers believe they depress wages. When asked whether trade restrictions are necessary to protect domestic industries, or whether free trade should be allowed “even if domestic industries are hurt by foreign competition,” two-thirds agreed with the latter, according to the new NYT/CBS poll. Said DeLauro: “Yes, we’re for trade. We are for trade. But not for trade agreements that put American workers at a disadvantage. And when you describe that, and you listen to what the concerns are of people, then they change their minds as to what is in their benefit. So you have to go beyond the first question that is asked.”
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)The polling indicates something different from the claim I was responding to.
eridani
(51,907 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)And people seem to think because one does not oppose something, one must support it. That is NOT the case with me, regarding the TPP ... I have not formed an opinion.
GitRDun
(1,846 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)nikto
(3,284 posts)It is an incontrovertible fact that many many people judge the validity of an idea by who supports that idea whom they happen to like, rather than actually trying to understand the idea in any kind of objective way.
So we get: "If So-and-so supports it, it's got to be good, so I support it too".
Using popular "leaders" to focus and guide public acceptance of a questionable new policy idea that might actually be a detriment, is the oldest trick in the ruling elites' book.
In fact, that is the entire story of the Reagan administration's success with the American working class,
whom his administration abused terribly and without respite in a series of hurtful policies
that people loved him for regardless.
A similar thing is happening here with Obama and TPP, I'm afraid.
Obama did say he admired the Reagan Presidency (for its effectiveness, I presume).
But with TPP, he's borrowing a POLICY and PHILOSOPHY page as well as a public relations one.
TPP is right out of the neoliberal U of Chicago/Milton Friedman's playbook.
But U of Chicago is Obama's Alma Mater, so maybe it should come as no surprise, eh?
bread_and_roses
(6,335 posts)I'm not sure which base - but then, as I often note, I am not a Democrat.
Labor opposes it, as to do environmental, food safety, and just about any other rights group you can think of - I'm in too much of a hurry to type them all.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)not so much the leadership of groups ... but perhaps, the poster above is correct, the people/voters are just stupid. 
bread_and_roses
(6,335 posts)And believe me, it's not just the "leadership" of Labor in opposition - rank and file are not dumb, and from reading your posts I honestly don't think you'd claim otherwise.
Every major environmental organization, all of Labor, advocates for access to health care, safe food orgs, animal welfare orgs, democracy with a small "d" orgs, good government groups .... any and everyone who cares about the rights of people and the protection of the earth oppose the TPP. To pretend otherwise is disingenuous, as is dismissing them as "stupid."
CBTU has a nice, succinct summation of the TPP
http://www.cbtu.org/
The Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP as it is commonly referred to, is a trade agreement being developed behind closed doors with the potential to impact 4 continents. Crafted in secrecy, this trade agreement is being designed to empower multinational global corporations over national and worker interests. Under no uncertain terms can CBTU support such a devious and shady partnership. CBTU and our Leadership stand in opposition to the TPP and any proposal that would fast track its passing and implementation. The TPP is an agreement that looks to trade worker rights for corporate profit.
I'm not around here that often, but I am always impressed with your posts. It is beyond my imagination what could make someone so intelligent defend this subjugation of people and the earth to benefit the 1% and corporate hegemony over all our lives.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I was snarking. (I tend to do that when I see, "No REAL {fill in the blank} would disagree with me" posts.)
I was just referring to the polling data ... I have not taken a position (in favor or in opposition) on the TPP. I prefer to actually see what I support or oppose ... I suspect, like in all complex agreements, there will be some good, some not so good (bad), and a bunch of stuff we will not be able to judge for decades.
Salviati
(6,008 posts)Plenty of people on both sides of the isle are guilty of this
djean111
(14,255 posts)Old device. I said ill-informed. Not "stupid".
Ill-informed - I believe that once they are cognizant of what the TPP consists of, and stop just listening to a "leader", then I believe they would be against it too.
Asking someone about "free trade", by the way, is miles away from asking about the TPP. Very little of the TPP is about "free trade", it is about corporate rights to overrule countries.
If, as you say, there is no way to know what is in the TPP - then how the hell can the Democratic base be in favor of it? Wouldn't that be hearsay, too?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I've HAVE said that it is unwise to get hot and bothered about the TPP without knowing what is actually in the TPP.
djean111
(14,255 posts)And you keep saying we don't know what is in the TPP - wait - do you know a way? Besides the leaks?
Do you know what is in the TPP, personally?
But it is quite rational to be FOR it without knowing what is in the TPP. Do you see the lack of logic?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Very true.
Yes. Treat the TPP just like any other negotiated international agreement ... we wait until the trade partners reach agreement ... then, it will be submitted to congress (made public).
No.
Where have I said that?
djean111
(14,255 posts)the agreement, and I said that perhaps they don't know what is in the agreement, and then you spun that into me saying they were stupid. If I cannot have a negative opinion, by your logic, since I don't know exactly what is in it, why would the opinion of the "Democratic base" on the TPP have any point at all? Just because they obediently fall in line?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)that only republicans, President Obama and DINOs support the TPP. I referred to a poll indicating otherwise.
djean111
(14,255 posts)And I was referring to Congress, where the only people supporting the TPP are the GOP, Obama, and DINOs.
Plus, sorry to say this, but very few in DC really care about "the base" until they need votes or money.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Perhaps, you were ... But that is a relatively late qualifier to your comment.
That is arguable; but, I largely agree.
djean111
(14,255 posts)I have stated that support for the TPP, whether actual votes or shilling, will determine my voting forever.
Many many times.
I never considered that the people had any say at all in this. No say at all. I was actually puzzled when you brought up the Democratic base, because they are not going to be informed until it is a done deal. Not a word can be changed. GOP, Obama, and DINOs. The base will not/does not count.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)what do you think about the Iran Nuclear Deal?
djean111
(14,255 posts)It does not cancel out how I feel about the TPP and how I will vote in the future, though.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Closed negotiations ... classification of negotiation notes ... presented to Congress as an up or down vote.
djean111
(14,255 posts)agreements here - TPP, TTIP, TISA. That is not such a good analogy. Do you really think I am just upset about the secrecy? In this case, I feel the secrecy is because it reeks. The Iran deal is not the corporations being given power over countries.
Apple and oranges.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)
PSPS
(13,597 posts)
jalan48
(13,865 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Doctors Without Borders don't want it. Unions don't want it. But conservatives do want it. This is part of the class war being waged by the conservatives and corporations.
They are including in the Agreement, a package that will designate something like $400 million to be used to compensate those Americans that will lose their jobs. They are admitting that Americans will lose jobs, hello. It looks like the money will come from Medicare, or maybe the taxpayers, certainly not from the corporations that will profit from it. And what good is compensation for Americans that lose their jobs? Training for non-existant jobs? Food stamps?
Conservatives claim that this will help the economy grow and that's how Clinton proposes to fix the wealth gap. But we all know that rising tides only lift yachts.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the polling indicates that the majority of persons self-identifying as Democrats indicated they supported the TPP.
I have not taken an opinion of the agreement, as I prefer to know what I am supporting or opposing based on what I have read of what IS ... Not what others say I should think about what they have read from what was leaked.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)train hits you to decide if you are in danger.
The problem with your thinking is that there is absolutely no reason to think that this Agreement will help the working people. There is a lot of evidence to the contrary.
And they have indicated that American will lose jobs. What rewards could make up for that?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)They're for it whole heartedly.....
.....until they hear her come out against it.
villager
(26,001 posts)And I'm not expecting them to dare deviate.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)There are those that attack those of us that are against the TPP but they never enter a discussion to explain the benefits. The two arguments I've heard are, "Obama likes it, therefore, I like it," and "Trade is good." Well, to be fair, there is another arguement but I really don't count it. "We need this "Trade" Agreement to fix the last POS Trade Agreement.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)These are the ones that hate Liberals because they say Liberals hate Hillary and they LOVE Hillary so they hate Liberals because it's their duty.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Clinton is a liberal. Their definition is, "If you ever supported a social issue, then you can call yourself a liberal." They don't have a clue that if you support Wall Street domination over Main Street, you can not be called a liberal. If you submitted to the Boy King Bush, you can not be called a liberal. I could go on and on and often do.
Those that attack people that are concerned about the coming disaster called "free trade", do so because they think their chosen leaders want that. But they are not convinced enough to actually come up with a decent argument in favor. They confine themselves to ad hominem attacks on those daring to question the almighty authority. This is classic authoritarianism. If you haven't, read "The Authoritarians" by Bob Altemeyer. It's free on the internets or get a soft cover for a small fee.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Only environmentalists, Doctors Without Borders, unions, etc. The TPP will likely screw our seniors over but those here that side with the corporations apparently don't care.
Two sides to this class war and those supporting the TPP are not on the side of the 99%.
djean111
(14,255 posts)12 years are up.
In addition - AUSTRALIA ALREADY TRADES WITH OTHER NATIONS.
Very little of the TPP has to do with actual trade - 5 chapters, I think, out of 28 or 29. The rest is corporate control over the signatories.
That
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)Currently they have Universal Healthcare with very good prescription drug coverage. TPP would put them on a system like we have in the USA
- they want no part of it
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)They claim the ONLY people who don't want the TPP are isolationists who don't want ANY trade with ANY country.
But since there seems to be some confusion, here's a picture of Queen Elisabeth picking her nose.
djean111
(14,255 posts)yesterday.
And, of course, I have already copied that wondrous image. For some reason, I could not copy it directly, I had to pin it, copy it, and delete the pin.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)I have been called "protectionist" and "isolationist" on DU because I have opposed the whole alphabet soup of "Trade Treaties."
Kucinich had it right.
Withdraw from every single "Free Trade" Treaty,
and renegotiate them on a bi-lateral (with each individual country) basis
with Human Rights, Wages, benefits, and Environmental Protections in the first rank of consideration.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)would have been a good president, too
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)phrase it in the form of a question. "Isn't Sen Sanders known for drowning kittens?"
fingrin
(120 posts)Subsidized medicines
The Pharmaceutical Management Agency (PHARMAC) decides what medicines the New Zealand government buys and subsidises for use by the public. Because PHARMAC purchases in bulk and makes its decisions in the interests of New Zealanders, we pay far less for medicines than we otherwise would.
A leaked negotiating text shows what the US is demanding on behalf of its big drug companies (known as “Big Pharma”) and how the benefits New Zealanders enjoy under PHARMAC are threatened by the TPPA. Although PHARMAC itself will not be dismantled, under the leaked text PHARMAC would:
not be able to negotiate a bulk discount for medicines
have to give detailed reasons to the drug companies about every purchasing decision
give pharmaceutical companies the right to appeal PHARMAC’s decisions
publish the identities of all decision-makers around the purchasing of medicines.
If adopted, this text would strengthen Big Pharma’s leverage over PHARMAC. The drug companies’ would gain new rights and opportunities to lobby PHARMAC decision makers and challenge their credentials, demand reasons if PHARMAC rejects their ‘expert’ reports and data, and pressure its decisions by constant threats of appeal. The goal of the big pharmaceutical companies is to influence PHARMAC’s criteria and decisions in their favour at the expense of affordability for the public. If the leaked text is adopted then government would have to massively increase the health budget, reduce the availability of subsidised drugs, or increase the price paid by ordinary New Zealanders.
Affordability of medical devices
Medical devices like heart valves, replacement hip joints and lenses for cataract operations are all now being brought under PHARMAC, so the same problems will apply as with medicines.
Generic pharmaceuticals
One reason why life-saving drugs are affordable for ordinary people — in New Zealand and overseas — is the availability of “generic” alternatives to branded pharmaceuticals. Generics are identical to their branded equivalents, but cost only a fraction of the price. Their availiability helps PHARMAC keep the price it pays for medicines down.
Generics can only be sold in New Zealand where no local patent has been granted, where that patent has expired, or a licence has been issued. Another leaked negotiating text from February 2011 threatens kiwis’ ability to access generic medicines:
Patents on medications could in effect be extended, as pharmaceutical companies would be able to claim additional patents on medications where they discover an alternative use for them, or make a minor modification. This would apply even if the modification were clinically insignificant. It would effectively mean the original product would be withheld from the generic market even though its patent had expired.
The life-time of patents could be extended to take into account the time taken for a new medicine to be approved as safe.
Medsafe — the government body responsible checking whether new pharmaceuticals are safe for New Zealanders — would be forced to investigate whether the drugs they are approving have patents on them or not. This is called “patent linkage”, and it would delay the approval of generics even though drug patenting has nothing to do with drug safety.
Big pharmaceutical companies would be able to prevent generic manufacturers from using original safety testing data for longer, meaning that the registration of generic medicines is postponed.
Every delay in the availability of generic medicines means more money for big pharmacutical companies, and higher prices for kiwis.
GM Food
New Zealanders are wary about genetic modification. In 2001 The Royal Commission on Genetic Modification asked what we thought about GM, and we came back against it — we didn’t want to risk our health or our amazing natural world, we wanted to respect tangata whenua beliefs, and we didn’t trust big business to look out for our interests. Being GM-free has become part of who we are, the same as being nuclear free. It’s not just kiwis who see ourselves that way — our 100% pure, clean-green image is how we are seen by the world, and is a big advantage to our economy.
The TPPA negotiations are putting our anti-GM stance at risk. Away from the public eye, the United States and its big business lobbyists are looking to lock in a new set of rules to open our fields and our supermarket shelves to genetically modified organisms.
Labeling of genetically modified products
At the moment, any food with more than 1% GM content has to be labelled. This way, we get to choose whether or not we bring GMO into our homes. Because supermarkets know we don’t like GM, they generally don’t bother stocking GM products.
It’s no secret that the United States trade negotiators want us to get rid of our GM labeling rules. The annual US report on New Zealand’s ‘trade barriers’ confirmed that they will “continue to raise trade-related concerns with mandatory biotechnology labelling regimes”. The Biotech Industry Organization — who represent the world’s giant GMO companies like Monsanto and Cargill — have also stated that they want GM labelling restricted under the TPPA.
83% of New Zealanders are in favour of GM labelling, so let’s make sure our government doesn’t scrap it behind our backs — if they do the only winners will be the giant US agri-businesses who want to sell us their GM products.
Genetically modified crops
New Zealand law is pretty tough about introducing GM crops, and public opinion suggests that we want to keep it that way. Fortunately, all the major political parties seem to agree. However, our GMO rules are at risk — the US lead negotiator is on record stating that the US wants to use the TPP negotiations to promote agricultural biotechnology within the negotiating countries.
Food safety
GM aside, New Zealand has many other rules to make sure that plant and animal products are safe for New Zealanders and our environment — rules about how much pesticide residue can be present on our food, how food products are preserved and transported, and about testing to make sure imported products meet our standards. These rules (called “Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures” and “Technical Barriers to Trade”) are especially important to New Zealand because we need to protect our unique eco-system and our extensive agricultural and horticultural industries.
There are already international rules around how countries set their own measures. The US and its farmers lobby is pushing for all TPPA countries to adopt a more coordinated approach. Under the TPPA we risk losing the right to decide for ourself how we protect our people and the environment, instead having to follow a set of rules secretly negotiated overseas.
Worse, if we brought in new rules to restrict dangerous additives or toxic residues, investors from those countries could sue the New Zealand government for compensation in a private international tribunal. This happened in Canada last year when the giant US chemical company DowAgro Sciences sued Quebec for banning the use of a dangerous pesticide, using an agreement called NAFTA that does not go nearly as far as proposals for the TPPA. Just the threat of a long and expensive court case with a rich multinational company can be enough to get governments to back down on environmental protection measures. This isn’t right — the environment should come before corporate profits.
Tobacco
Smoking kills around 5000 New Zealanders every year. However, the number of kiwis smoking is on the decline — in large part because of tobacco control measures undertaken by the government, such as banning smoking in workplaces, increasing the cost of tobacco, and banning the retail display of cigarettes. The government has committed itself to making New Zealand essentially smokefree by 2025.
If New Zealand signs up to the TPPA, we’ll be putting our smokefree goal at risk.
This is because a leaked TPPA text shows that New Zealand’s negotiators seem willing to give more rights to big overseas companies, including the right to sue the government for making decisions which significantly hurt their investment. This process is called Investor-State Dispute Settlement and it takes place in secretive offshore arbitration tribunals, bypassing New Zealand’s courts. Anti-smoking measures taken by our government could be challenged by the tobacco companies if we sign the TPPA.
If you think this sounds far-fetched, it’s not — the Australian government is currently being sued by Philip Morris for its new plain packaging policy under an old international agreement between Australia and Hong Kong. Even though Australia’s highest court has ruled in favour of plain packaging, the government still faces international arbitration away from the eyes of the public, and could end up paying hundreds of millions of dollars to big tobacco for trying to protect the health of its citizens. Like Australia, our smokefree law could be challenged under an existing agreement, but it would be difficult and involve back door menouvering. The TPP would let big tobacco stride through the front door.
It isn’t just plain packaging laws that will face problems if the TPPA negotiations are completed. Other policies that could fall foul of the rules include:
banning the use of terms like ‘mild’, ‘smooth’, ‘fine';
controlling the use of flavours that disguise the foul taste of tobacco;
reducing the nicotine content of tobacco products; and
capping the number of tobacco retail outlets.
Many different chapters of the TPPA would impact on the smokefree policies, for example:
intellectual property laws could be strengthened in favour of big tobacco companies, making it easier for them to claim that tobacco control policies infringe their trademarks;
big tobacco’s factories, distibution chains and intellectual property rights would be ‘protected investments’ who could also sue;
advertisers, duty free stores, retailers, and other parts of the tobacco supply chain would also have special rights, even if they were operating by Internet from offshore; and
new “transparency” and “regulatory coherence” rules would give tobacco companies much more influence over government decisions on tobacco control. This would go against another agreement signed by New Zealand — the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) — requiring the government to take steps to prevent tobacco company interfering in policy-making!
All of this goes in the opposite direction to New Zealand’s obligations under the FCTC.
Alcohol
Alcohol abuse is a big problem in New Zealand. Part of the solution is setting rules around the sale of alcohol — for example, a minimum price per unit of alcohol, lower limits on the alcohol content of RTDs, and banning advertising and sponsorship by alcohol companies.
As with tobacco, a TPPA will put the New Zealand government at risk of law suits from overseas companies for trying to reduce the damage caused by alcohol abuse. This could see the government paying millions of taxpayer dollars to overseas companies in compensation, or backing down from policies that protect New Zealanders.
The government will also face pressure to allow imports of products that meet the alcohol product standards in other TPP countries, even when they are inconsistent with our own.
That already happens: under another agreement (the CER) New Zealand is bound to recognise Australia’s regulatory standards. The government had to back down this year on its intention to cap the alcohol content of RTDs popular with underage drinkers — it could not have stopped Australian RTDs, with a higher legal alcohol limit, from being sold in NZ unless it changed the CER rules. Under the TPPA we risk the same thing, but with all 10 negotiating countries. This would have the same effect as watering down our regulations to the country with the lowest standards.
As with tobacco, the government risks being bound to increased “transparency” obligations around its decision-making process for alcohol policy. In practice, this means giving alcohol companies more say in what the government does to protect New Zealanders from alcohol abuse.
snot
(10,524 posts)
Monk06
(7,675 posts)for brand name drugs with drug companies the same way.
There is no way that Canada can sign on to the end of Pharmacare and have to pay retail prices set by US Pharma.
Harper could never even appear to agree with that and no other Canadian politician would tolerate it.
It would guarantee national deficits stretching into the next century as US Pharma sticks the Canadian taxpayer with a bill for inflated drug prices.
The US insistence on trade protections for US based multinationals and the right to sue governments directly to get their way on trade disputes will kill this deal. It is deal designed solely for the benefit of the US just like NAFTA.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
marble falls
(57,081 posts)
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Yet Robb says this..
Concerns around automotives, data protection of biologics, dairy and sugar remain sticking points, but they are not impossible to resolve, Robb said.
“From my reading, the issues are not intractable and there remains a real determination to conclude the TPP among all parties.”
Sounds like they are more than willing to walk back to the negotiations.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Wonder if they can cut out the {Drug Corp trade parts} and proceed with the rest of the trade agreement?
Let the Drug corps continue to conduct their business the way they always have.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Instead of 12 years patent... maybe 8 years.. although there are critics to that as well.
http://www.ip-watch.org/2015/07/27/decision-time-on-biologics-exclusivity-eight-years-is-no-compromise/
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I'm glad someone knows how to say NO.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)about trade. It is about turning over legislative control to mega corporations.
The "trade" part of TPP is subterfuge to provide cover for corporations to build trap doors into our environmental, safety, consumer protection and labor laws.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)They're called Lobbyists and several lobbyists hang around every one of our elected 'Leaders' -daily.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Yeah, I know they've already got the SCOTUS, but they're not guaranteed to continue to own that. Belt and suspenders.....
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)can tie the hands of future elected leaders, and/or give them plausible deniability/cover to ignore the wishes of the voters
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)I don't care what else is in the TPP, these extra-governmental tribunals are a deal breaker.
And the people here who say "wait to judge until it is finalized" slay me. History shows that by then it will be too late.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)
eppur_se_muova
(36,262 posts)Makes you wonder if these people know what they're doing.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)eppur_se_muova
(36,262 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)eppur_se_muova
(36,262 posts)Well, maybe not, given their current stock market situation. :\
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)China could be upset over lost control over some other asian pacific countries, some who are in on this trade deal.
eppur_se_muova
(36,262 posts)First time I've heard it suggested that there might be something at least half-reasonable behind the TPP. 
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)world how china dominates their neighbor countries.
Small country fishermen are being killed out in those waters, heres a 'selfie' video of fishermen being killed after their boat was sunk
hedda_foil
(16,374 posts)Yeah, I know it's a ridiculous expectation, but it seems to be the thinking of the PTB.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)To counter the 800 pound Chinese trade gorilla.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)
NCjack
(10,279 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)their Dairy industry concerns in the Australian business reports.
Australias Dairy Industry is huge and always depended on exports to Asian/pacific nations.
Our American Dairy industry has already ramped up exports of American products to Asian pacific area and was cutting out some of Australias business.
TBF
(32,060 posts)is paying attention. K&R
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)snot
(10,524 posts)
Michigan-Arizona
(762 posts)If I could talk my grown kid's into moving there I'd go in a heart beat, like tomorrow.......
daleo
(21,317 posts)Though, this might just be some orchestrated political theatre. I no longer think trade deals are helpful to the bulk of the population.
lark
(23,099 posts)They aren't willing to let the 1% take over their country, like we are. They aren't willing to see their people massacred every day with guns.
WAAYY SMARTER!!
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)review the details of President Obama's push for this deal, how can I support that which I have no clue of the contents, consequences and benefits?
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)
villager
(26,001 posts)It doesn't seem The Empire would give up just yet, regardless...
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)I expect the TPP to pass and I expect We, The People to fight it tooth and nail for years.
I don't know about you, but expect to spend the rest of my life in full rebellion mode.
villager
(26,001 posts)...unfolding in our lifetimes, too. So -- you're doubtless right. 
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)And when that happens, goodbye humans.
villager
(26,001 posts)It's possible.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)not needing us to increase their intelligence, they will simply forget us and do their thing, kinda like in the movie Her. And we won't know how to do anything.
villager
(26,001 posts)And we will remain increasingly "footnoted" in our self-poisoned biosphere...
blackspade
(10,056 posts)if this turd of a 'trade deal' implodes.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)As more countries decide not to betray their poor and middle class citizens by supporting the TPP.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)One less nation given a pass to override local state and federal laws that protect US consumers...Let's hope this is the beginning of a mass exodus.
Just the fact that reps from Halliburton are given constant updates while the American people are left in the dark is unconscionable.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)When they say "We will take no part in the TPP and are walking away from it" then they will have walked away.
nikto
(3,284 posts)Let's hope this is the beginning of the end for TPP.
We can dream, can't we?
Australia is a pretty significant subtraction.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)and the whole nasty thing falls into the Pacific with those who wrote & supported it.
