Can someone, who understands it, explain what the consequences would be if the proposed Fast Track or Fast Track passes with regards to the TTP negotiations and what kind of consequences it would have on environmental regulations in the US and worldwide?
I started out with this article: Another Month, Another Leak – Wikileaks Posts TPPA Text
‘The governments negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement need to wave a white flag and agree to release the whole draft text’, said University of Auckland Professor Jane Kelsey as another leaked chapter was posted on Wikileaks.
Then I ended up with the articles below the fold. Please bear with me, as I am writing this in a hurry and in between other work related tasks.
From Another Month, Another Leak – Wikileaks Posts TPPA Text from January 15/16th:
There are two new leaked documents. One is a consolidated or chairs’ text of the environment chapter. ...
The second document is the Canadian chairs’ report that sums up the positions of the other countries, including New Zealand, on the proposed new text and shows what countries disagree with which provisions....
Professor Kelsey describes the text as ‘weak and unenforceable, hardly the 21st century standard-setter ...
‘This confirms our expectations that the “gold standard” rules are only for the corporations, not to protect people and the planet.’
‘Ironically, the US is the sole standout on a number of issues, notably its demand that countries found to be breaching the environment chapter should face trade sanctions.’
The leaked text falls far short of the standards set in a May 2007 deal between President George W Bush and the Democrat-controlled Congress, which the US has required in all subsequent free trade pacts.
‘This poses a major problem for President Obama’, Kelsey said. ‘Last week the administration tabled a Bill in Congress seeking fast track negotiating authority for the TPPA and other agreements. It is already struggling for support. This environment chapter will strengthen opposition from many Democrats and force Obama to rely even more for support from hostile Republicans.’
Noam Chomsky judges the Obama TPP trade deal a
"Neoliberal Assault" to Further Corporate Domination. on January 13th.
“It’s called free trade, but that’s just a joke," Chomsky said. "These are extreme, highly protectionist measures designed to undermine freedom of trade. In fact, much of what's leaked about the TPP indicates that it's not about trade at all, it’s about investor rights.” ...
According to these leaked documents, the TPP would empower corporations to directly challenge laws and regulations set by foreign nations before an international tribunal. The tribunal would be given the authority to not only overrule that nation's legal standards but also impose economic penalties on it. Under World Trade Organization treaties, corporations must convince a sovereign nation to bring trade cases before an international court. Chomsky said the deal is an escalation of neoliberal political goals previously advanced by the WTO and the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Obama Trade Document Leaked, Revealing New Corporate Powers and Broken Campaign Promises updated version from January 14th.
A critical document from President Barack Obama's free trade negotiations with eight Pacific nations was leaked online early Wednesday morning, revealing that the administration intends to bestow radical new political powers upon multinational corporations, contradicting prior promises. ...
The World Health Organization and dozens of nonprofit public health groups have objected to the standards sought by the Obama administration. Two United Nations groups recently urged global governments not to agree to trade terms currently being advocated by the Obama administration, on the grounds that such rules would hurt public health. ...
While the current trade deal could pose a challenge to American sovereignty, large corporations headquartered in the U.S. could potentially benefit from it by using the same terms to oppose the laws of foreign governments. If one of the eight Pacific nations involved in the talks passes a new rule to which an American firm objects, that U.S. company could take the country to court directly in international tribunals. ...
In early June, a tribunal at the World Bank agreed to hear a case involving similar foreign investment standards, in which El Salvador banned cyanide-based gold mining on the basis of objections from the Catholic Church and environmental activists. If the World Bank rules against El Salvador, it could overturn the nation's domestic laws at the behest of a foreign corporation....
Margrete Strand Rangnes, Labor and Trade Director for the Sierra Club, an environmental group said, "Our worst fears about the investment chapter have been confirmed by this leaked text ... This investment chapter would severely undermine attempts to strengthen environmental law and policy."
Here is the
leaked document and
Secret TTP treaty: Enivonment chapter for all 12 nations - WikiLeak Release: January 15, 2014
Wikileaks Exposes What Obama's Secret Trade Deal Would Do To The Environment from January 15th.
"When compared against other TPP chapters, the Environment Chapter is noteworthy for its absence of mandated clauses or meaningful enforcement measures," wrote WikiLeaks in its release. The chapter is intended to deal with issues like overfishing, trade of wood products, wildlife crime, and illegal logging. But most of the measures in the chapter are voluntary, rather than binding, and do not include penalties or criminal sanctions for violations. Compliance is largely left to the respective countries.
Enviros offered similar criticism. "The lack of fully-enforceable environmental safeguards means negotiators are allowing a unique opportunity to protect wildlife and support legal sustainable trade of renewable resources to slip through their fingers,” said Carter Roberts, president and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund, in a statement....
The chairs wrote that Vietnam, Peru and Malaysia object to a provision calling for countries to "rationalize and phase out" fossil fuel subsidies "that encourage wasteful consumption." They also noted that the United States and Australia object to the climate change portion of the pact as it is written....
Office of US Trade Representative's response:
...Our proposals in the TPP are centered around the enforcement of environmental laws, including those implementing multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in TPP partner countries, and also around trailblazing, first-ever conservation proposals that will raise standards across the region. Furthermore, our proposals would enhance international cooperation and create new opportunities for public participation in environmental governance and enforcement.
Democracy Now reports this morning
Japan Remains Hotbed of TPP Protest as U.S. Tries to Fast-track Trade Deal, Crush Environmental Laws. Waiting for the transcript, but I thought worth listening to :
Meanwhile hearings begin today in Congress on legislation to establish fast-track authority that would allow Obama to sign the TPP before Congress votes on it. Broadcasting from Tokyo, we’re joined by Nobuhiko Suto, a former member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs in Japan’s House of Representatives, where he was among the first legislators to point out the dangers of the TPP. He is the Secretary-General of the group, Citizen’s Congress for Opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership. We’re also joined on the phone by Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch based in Washington, D.C.
This is quite above my paygrade and beyond my head, but I hope some people will write about it to make it clearer. To me all of it sounds so unacceptable.
I am unable to stay here and follow comments. But I hope this diary will trigger others to write and comment on the subject. Thanks.