Trans Pacific Partnership and Election

286 posts / 0 new
Last post
scott16

Does anyone actually think this will move votes around?

takeitslowly

josh

scott16 wrote:

Does anyone actually think this will move votes around?

Yes. I realize it pales in importance to the nijab, but there are some voters, and economic interests, who could be moved based on an agreement. And in a race where moving a couple of percent can make a big difference, that could be significant.

takeitslowly

 yes its possible Feel the Bern in Canada?

jerrym

It's sounds like Canada has already caved on dairy (according to the article its Australia that's holding up an agreement over pharmaceuticals) and auto parts (its not even discussed as an impediment, only in terms of loss of jobs). It also warns of a transfer of power to corporations from the goverment and people.

What a deal for Canadians!

Quote:

All-night negotiations have led to a day of suspense at major trade talks Saturday, which could be extended for a third day in a row amid persistent irritants.

"Ministers have agreed to stay (until Sunday) if necessary," one source said, casting doubt on earlier expectations that a 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership might be announced within hours.

The two-day ministerial meeting in an Atlanta convention centre, if it drags into Sunday, will have lasted five days amid widespread desire from proponents to get a deal done now before elections in Canada, the U.S., Peru and Japan. ...

Critics of the deal fear that any gains in trade would be offset by the loss of good-paying jobs at auto plants and dairy farms, with greater foreign competition. They also warn that the deal, which was crafted with heavy input from U.S. businesses but far less from labour and civil-society groups, could transfer power from people and governments to corporations.

The biggest potential impediment to a massive new trade deal across the Pacific rim is believed to be next-generation pharmaceuticals, where competing political pressures in the United States and Australia have those countries locked in a staredown.

Stakeholders at the meeting say the American Congress might not pass the deal if it doesn't offer eight-year exclusivity rights to makers of biologics medicines, which is already down significantly from the U.S.'s current protection of 12 years. The Austalian government, meanwhile, faces political pressure at home to avoid granting anything beyond five.

Canada is somewhat of a bystander in that dispute. It already applies the eight-year standard.

The last big sticking point involving Canada is dairy. As negotiators worked until at least 4 a.m., sources say Canada, the U.S., New Zealand and others were involved in multi-sided talks about providing more access to each other's milk, cheese and butter.

Canada's dairy sector is 90-per-cent closed to foreign competition and the government is under political pressure -- especially in Quebec and Ontario -- to avoid any additional products on Canadian grocery shelves. With an election weeks away, the NDP has made the issue a centrepiece of its campaign.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/business/11th-hour-snags-spell-another-potential-d...

 

 

 

jerrym

How well industries and their workers are treated by Harper can be seen by what's happened with CETA - Canada's agreement with Europe - and Haprer's promises to Newfoundland. Sounds like deja vu all over again (remember how well Harper kept his promises to Danny Williams even though Danny was a Progressive Conservative). No wonder the Cons have been shut out in Newfoundland and are likely to be again. 

Quote:

Harper was speaking as trade negotiators in Atlanta continue to hash out a massive Pacific Rim trade deal and it was the last major deal his government signed that’s sparked some of the bad blood in Newfoundland for the Conservatives.

In order for Canada to clinch the Canadian-European Trade Agreement, known as CETA, the province had to give up its minimum processing requirements for European markets and the Conservatives agreed to compensation; how much is a sore point on both sides.

The provincial government says the Conservatives aren’t honouring that commitment, which it says is necessary to help the seafood industry once the deal is actively in force – it still hasn’t been ratified.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-to-release-tpp-detai...

 

 

scott16

jerrym wrote:

How well industries and their workers are treated by Harper can be seen by what's happened with CETA - Canada's agreement with Europe - and Haprer's promises to Newfoundland. Sounds like deja vu all over again (remember how well Harper kept his promises to Danny Williams even though Danny was a Progressive Conservative). No wonder the Cons have been shut out in Newfoundland and are likely to be again. 

Quote:

Harper was speaking as trade negotiators in Atlanta continue to hash out a massive Pacific Rim trade deal and it was the last major deal his government signed that’s sparked some of the bad blood in Newfoundland for the Conservatives.

In order for Canada to clinch the Canadian-European Trade Agreement, known as CETA, the province had to give up its minimum processing requirements for European markets and the Conservatives agreed to compensation; how much is a sore point on both sides.

The provincial government says the Conservatives aren’t honouring that commitment, which it says is necessary to help the seafood industry once the deal is actively in force – it still hasn’t been ratified.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-to-release-tpp-detai...

 

 

You seem to know a lot about this. How could this affect the campaign? Could it help the NDP? 

KarlL

scott16 wrote:

jerrym wrote:

How well industries and their workers are treated by Harper can be seen by what's happened with CETA - Canada's agreement with Europe - and Haprer's promises to Newfoundland. Sounds like deja vu all over again (remember how well Harper kept his promises to Danny Williams even though Danny was a Progressive Conservative). No wonder the Cons have been shut out in Newfoundland and are likely to be again. 

Quote:

Harper was speaking as trade negotiators in Atlanta continue to hash out a massive Pacific Rim trade deal and it was the last major deal his government signed that’s sparked some of the bad blood in Newfoundland for the Conservatives.

In order for Canada to clinch the Canadian-European Trade Agreement, known as CETA, the province had to give up its minimum processing requirements for European markets and the Conservatives agreed to compensation; how much is a sore point on both sides.

The provincial government says the Conservatives aren’t honouring that commitment, which it says is necessary to help the seafood industry once the deal is actively in force – it still hasn’t been ratified.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-to-release-tpp-detai...

 

 

You seem to know a lot about this. How could this affect the campaign? Could it help the NDP? 

Short answer is "yes".  It could polarize discussion and give the NDP a chance to reinvent itself for the last two weeks of the campaign,  At this point, the NDP has little to lose in saying that lower North American content thresholds on auto manufacturing and some sort of allowed percentage of imported milk are tantamount to Armageddon.

KarlL

KarlL wrote:

scott16 wrote:

jerrym wrote:

How well industries and their workers are treated by Harper can be seen by what's happened with CETA - Canada's agreement with Europe - and Haprer's promises to Newfoundland. Sounds like deja vu all over again (remember how well Harper kept his promises to Danny Williams even though Danny was a Progressive Conservative). No wonder the Cons have been shut out in Newfoundland and are likely to be again. 

Quote:

Harper was speaking as trade negotiators in Atlanta continue to hash out a massive Pacific Rim trade deal and it was the last major deal his government signed that’s sparked some of the bad blood in Newfoundland for the Conservatives.

In order for Canada to clinch the Canadian-European Trade Agreement, known as CETA, the province had to give up its minimum processing requirements for European markets and the Conservatives agreed to compensation; how much is a sore point on both sides.

The provincial government says the Conservatives aren’t honouring that commitment, which it says is necessary to help the seafood industry once the deal is actively in force – it still hasn’t been ratified.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-to-release-tpp-detai...

 

 

You seem to know a lot about this. How could this affect the campaign? Could it help the NDP? 

Short answer is "yes".  It could polarize discussion and give the NDP a chance to reinvent itself for the last two weeks of the campaign,  At this point, the NDP has little to lose in saying that lower North American content thresholds on auto manufacturing and some sort of allowed percentage adjustment on imported milk/dairy products are tantamount to Armageddon.

KarlL

 

Quote:
Quote:
You seem to know a lot about this. How could this affect the campaign? Could it help the NDP? 

Short answer is "yes".  It could polarize discussion and give the NDP a chance to reinvent itself for the last two weeks of the campaign,  At this point, the NDP has little to lose in saying that lower North American content thresholds on auto manufacturing and some sort of allowed percentage adjustment on imported milk/dairy products are tantamount to Armageddon.

To wit: this from the CBC home page currently:

"Harper pledges transparency on TPP while Mulcair says talks have been 'secret'

Harper would present it to Parliament, Mulcair vows to 'rip up' a deal that harms family farmers"

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

I don't know, given the difference C51 doesn't seem to be making, given the polls, I am guessing Canadians don't much care about this either. I blame the Libs for this; they've focused people on Harper as a personality, and away from the issues. This by the way, was the ONLY way, the Libs could win. I have said this from the beginning. Canadians don't give a G-d damn about issues. They are lazy, stupid, and cranky. We're going to end up with Libs who will pass C51 meaningless changes, and send the TPP saying the "had no choice", just like Chretine did. These threads are pretty much meaningless now. I"m sorry, to borrow a line from Terrytowel, for this election, for the NDP "it is SOOOOO over". And frankly that's all I care about. So this election is pretty much meaningless to me now.

KarlL

They're opposing patches of high ground on which to rally the troops.  

I wouldn't discount this TPP stuff, having seen the benefit that John Turner drew from the free trade issue in 1988.  I know he didn't win but he might have done had his credibility not already been undermined by internal dissent and he did save the furniture and then some when the Liberals were at death's door.

I would say that without the TPP it is over for the NDP and as a Liberal, I therefore hope it goes past this weekend and returns only in the full light of day after the election.  As things stand, Harper wants a deal at almost any price and Mulcair would oppose a deal of any kind whatsoever.  They both want it as a way to gather their people unto them and squeeze the Liberals.  Because right now, Justin Trudeau is the most likely to be PM by Christmas.

 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Yeah and as Liberal, you are obviously chomping at the bit of a LPC government signing the TPP like you know they would. Thanks for nothing Karl; having fun SCREWING your fellow Canadians!

KarlL

KarlL wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Yeah and as Liberal, you are obviously chomping at the bit of a LPC government signing the TPP like you know they would. Thanks for nothing Karl; having fun SCREWING your fellow Canadians!

Well, if it were up to me, I might read it first and weigh its costs and benefits before pronouncing an opinion either way.

But each to his (or her) own approach.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Sorry Karl, now way. NAFTA was a big screw up for ordinary people. This agreement is NAFTA on steroids; the Corproate arbitration provions are even more regressive. They'll result in things like a decline in our National Health Care systme because of Patent Protections for Pharmacuticals. The attacks on Supply Managment will screw farmers, and on and on. These are simply Coporate Liberation Charters. There is NOTHING to read. The real problem is Canadians are lazy and stupid, and they're going to vote for Prince Pretty Hair without asking him why he supports TPP. I'll concede one thing to  you, you guys are winning, because you're better liars then the Tories, and your Photogenic Airhead Leader could sell ice to the Innuit!

jerrym

scott16 wrote:

jerrym wrote:

How well industries and their workers are treated by Harper can be seen by what's happened with CETA - Canada's agreement with Europe - and Haprer's promises to Newfoundland. Sounds like deja vu all over again (remember how well Harper kept his promises to Danny Williams even though Danny was a Progressive Conservative). No wonder the Cons have been shut out in Newfoundland and are likely to be again. 

Quote:

Harper was speaking as trade negotiators in Atlanta continue to hash out a massive Pacific Rim trade deal and it was the last major deal his government signed that’s sparked some of the bad blood in Newfoundland for the Conservatives.

In order for Canada to clinch the Canadian-European Trade Agreement, known as CETA, the province had to give up its minimum processing requirements for European markets and the Conservatives agreed to compensation; how much is a sore point on both sides.

The provincial government says the Conservatives aren’t honouring that commitment, which it says is necessary to help the seafood industry once the deal is actively in force – it still hasn’t been ratified.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-to-release-tpp-detai...

 

 

You seem to know a lot about this. How could this affect the campaign? Could it help the NDP? 

The NDP can use it to counter the Conservative challenge in the rural region around Quebec City where dairy farming is still a major industry and several ridings in Ontario where dairy is still important. The Cons will likely try to buy off the dairy industry with promises of money but history has shown that the dairy farmers will still be big losers in the long run. The decline in the auto sector will play right into Harper's hands as it will do major damage to the largest private sector union, Unifor, a dream coume true for Harper. It could cost him some ridings in southwest Ontario and the Oshawa region though. 

Remember 600 corporations played a role in negotiating this deal, so I expect there will be lots of other goodies for these companies hidden away, buried in the hundreds of pages of dry legalese. As for protections for workers and the environment, how well have those promises worked out with the FTA, NAFTA, CETA and all the other corporate rights (oops free trade) agreements? Ross Perot's comment that NAFTA would end up creating "the giant sucking sounds of jobs heading south", twenty years later has been proven correct as more and more corporations head to Mexico to pay low wages and maximize profits. TPP is a Pacific region version of the same thing with bells and whistles providing even more protection through compensation against regulation of business and the environment. 

Quote:

Canada is likely in a technical recession after the economy shrank for the first five months of the year. It’s heavily dependent on commodities. The oil bust and the broader commodity rout have been blamed liberally. The theory goes that the problem is contained. The oil patch may be wallowing in the mire. But no problem, the rest of Canada is fine.

The swoon of the Canadian dollar against the US dollar has caused a bout of false hope that this would make Canadian exports of manufactured goods more attractive to buyers in the US and elsewhere, and that the economy could thus export its way out of trouble. This theory has now run aground.

Because the threat to manufacturing in Canada comes from Mexico.

“I think Mexico’s just a cheaper place to produce, and you have enough human capital and engineering skills to produce almost everything you can produce in Canada and do it a lot cheaper,” Steven Englander, Citibank’s global head of G-10 currency strategy, told Bloomberg.

http://www.businessinsider.com/canada-exports-mexico-manufacturing-2015-8

 

The sectors that allegedly will benefit in Canada are the beef sector and the extraction industries, in other words, those right in Harper's Heartland, the Prairies and especially Alberta. In other words, this will bring us back to drawers of water and hewers of wood.

The Liberals have been free traders since Laurier's 1911 campaign and will complain about the lack of transparency by Harper's TPP, but will support the deal, leaving the NDP with an opportunity (sounds like C51). Remember Chretien promising to rengotiate Mulroney's NAFTA deal and how nothing changed.

However, beyond the sectors obviously directly hit and ridings where their worker or farmer votes can be the difference, it won't be easy to change voter opinion because the corporate sector, the Liberals and Cons will all be selling its praises with tons of dollars in advertising. Other sectors are likely to be hit as well, especially in the area of very well funded lobby groups like the financial and pharmaceutical sectors, but voters may not realize how badly they wil be harmed before the election. 

Could the NDP expand its voter support beyond those sectors most obviously hurt by TPP - possibly, but with two weeks to go, it won't be easy especially when they have said they support free trade in principle and not done much done to lay the groundwork for such an attack. However, Turner was able to grab the lead with an attack on the 1988 FTA agreement on no notice, but he had the advantage of a Consortium debate, watched by many millions while the debates today are finished, to lay out his arguments and in the end he did not win. 

Nevertheless, it is a wedge issue with the Cons and Liberals on one side, so it could drive votes towards the NDP if pitched right while shifting the NDP from the defensive to the offensive, especially in Quebec where focusing on damage to the dairy sector could overcome the focus on the world's greatest problem - the niqab.  

KarlL

dp

KarlL

jerrym wrote:

scott16 wrote:

jerrym wrote:

How well industries and their workers are treated by Harper can be seen by what's happened with CETA - Canada's agreement with Europe - and Haprer's promises to Newfoundland. Sounds like deja vu all over again (remember how well Harper kept his promises to Danny Williams even though Danny was a Progressive Conservative). No wonder the Cons have been shut out in Newfoundland and are likely to be again. 

Quote:

Harper was speaking as trade negotiators in Atlanta continue to hash out a massive Pacific Rim trade deal and it was the last major deal his government signed that’s sparked some of the bad blood in Newfoundland for the Conservatives.

In order for Canada to clinch the Canadian-European Trade Agreement, known as CETA, the province had to give up its minimum processing requirements for European markets and the Conservatives agreed to compensation; how much is a sore point on both sides.

The provincial government says the Conservatives aren’t honouring that commitment, which it says is necessary to help the seafood industry once the deal is actively in force – it still hasn’t been ratified.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-to-release-tpp-detai...

 

 

You seem to know a lot about this. How could this affect the campaign? Could it help the NDP? 

The NDP can use it to counter the Conservative challenge in the rural region around Quebec City where dairy farming is still a major industry and several ridings in Ontario where dairy is still important. The Cons will likely try to buy off the dairy industry with promises of money but history has shown that the dairy farmers will still be big losers in the long run. The decline in the auto sector will play right into Harper's hands as it will do major damage to the largest private sector union, Unifor, a dream coume true for Harper. It could cost him some ridings in southwest Ontario and the Oshawa region though. 

Remember 600 corporations played a role in negotiating this deal, so I expect there will be lots of other goodies for these companies hidden away, buried in the hundreds of pages of dry legalese. As for protections for workers and the environment, how well have those promises worked out with the FTA, NAFTA, CETA and all the other corporate rights (oops free trade) agreements? Ross Perot's comment that NAFTA would end up creating "the giant sucking sounds of jobs heading south", twenty years later has been proven correct as more and more corporations head to Mexico to pay low wages and maximize profits. TPP is a Pacific region version of the same thing with bells and whistles providing even more protection through compensation against regulation of business and the environment. 

Quote:

Canada is likely in a technical recession after the economy shrank for the first five months of the year. It’s heavily dependent on commodities. The oil bust and the broader commodity rout have been blamed liberally. The theory goes that the problem is contained. The oil patch may be wallowing in the mire. But no problem, the rest of Canada is fine.

The swoon of the Canadian dollar against the US dollar has caused a bout of false hope that this would make Canadian exports of manufactured goods more attractive to buyers in the US and elsewhere, and that the economy could thus export its way out of trouble. This theory has now run aground.

Because the threat to manufacturing in Canada comes from Mexico.

“I think Mexico’s just a cheaper place to produce, and you have enough human capital and engineering skills to produce almost everything you can produce in Canada and do it a lot cheaper,” Steven Englander, Citibank’s global head of G-10 currency strategy, told Bloomberg.

http://www.businessinsider.com/canada-exports-mexico-manufacturing-2015-8

 

1. The Liberals have been free traders since Laurier's 1911 campaign and will complain about the lack of transparency by Harper's TPP, but will support the deal, leaving the NDP with an opportunity (sounds like C51). Remember Chretien promising to rengotiate Mulroney's NAFTA deal and how nothing changed.

2. Could the NDP expand its voter support beyond those sectors most obviously hurt by TPP - possibly, but with two weeks to go, it won't be easy especially when they have said they support free trade in principle and not done much done to lay the groundwork for such an attack. However, Turner was able to grab the lead with an attack on the 1988 FTA agreement on no notice, but he had the advantage of a Consortium debate, watched by many millions while the debates today are finished, to lay out his arguments and in the end he did not win. 

3. Nevertheless, it is a wedge issue with the Cons and Liberals on one side, so it could drive votes towards the NDP if pitched right while shifting the NDP from the defensive to the offensive, especially in Quebec where focusing on damage to the dairy sector could overcome the focus on the world's greatest problem - the niqab.  

Liberals were free traders long before 1911.  That's a core Liberal principle and in a Canadian context, they had a good reason for being so.  The Conservatives' National Policy protected manufacturers in Montreal and Southern Ontario at the expense of consumers and of farmers, who had little choice but to buy overpriced whatever.

I struggle with this one.  I don't mind paying a bit more for milk or for my car to keep good jobs and viable farms in Canada.  But I am mindful that higher priced dairy products affect more people than just me, including families struggling to make ends meet.

I am also aware that wages in Mexico have increased significantly under NAFTA, so question whether my views should be limited to the betterment only of those who live within our own borders.  This one would also affect Vietnam and Malaysia but I am a whole lot less concerned about who benefits in New Zealand, Australia or Singapore.

When I say, I'd want to read the deal and consider its impact, that's not just a throwaway.

mark_alfred

Let Harper know that you don't agree to a TPP deal that threatens Canadian jobs:  http://www.ndp.ca/tpp

NDPP

Breakthrough on TPP Deal

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=1152...

"A Trans Pacific Partnership deal could be announced as soon as today if negotiators clear the final hurdles..."

 

WikiLeaks - The US Strategy To Create A New Global Legal and Economic System: TPP, TTIP, TISA

https://youtu.be/Rw7P0RGZQxQ

"These agreements are part of a new geopolitical war."

jerrym

KarlL wrote:

I struggle with this one.  I don't mind paying a bit more for milk or for my car to keep good jobs and viable farms in Canada.  But I am mindful that higher priced dairy products affect more people than just me, including families struggling to make ends meet.

I am also aware that wages in Mexico have increased significantly under NAFTA, so question whether my views should be limited to the betterment only of those who live within our own borders.  This one would also affect Vietnam and Malaysia but I am a whole lot less concerned about who benefits in New Zealand, Australia or Singapore.

When I say, I'd want to read the deal and consider its impact, that's not just a throwaway.

Don't worry. As wages climb in Mexico, that problem will be solved by shifting jobs to Vietnam or Malaysia or even better Bangladesh where textile workers make $30/month and there are virtually no safety standards. There is no bottom too low when it comes to wages or safety standards when it comes to corporations. In the 1980s, secretaries in Thailand suddenly faced high levels of unemployment as firms shifted work to Indonesia to save less than 100 dollars per worker per month. This pattern, whether involving services or goods, has been repeated nearly everywhere.

As we saw just in the last couple of weeks, firms are willing to raise drug prices 5,000% for drugs they did not invent but bought from another firm and then sue the Canadian government when it tries to regulate drug prices. 

Corporations are known to be lobbying for the right to sue governments for any loss of revenue from any form of regulation in this deal, including risk to the health and environment. In other words, they want to be "free" of any costs or consequences of their actions under any circumstances.

mmphosis

I seriously question the legitimacy of these corporate rights deals.  Canadians voted for Liberals and NDP to defeat the FTA, and the Liberals and NDP got the most votes at the time.  The Progressive Conservatives got a majority government and put the deal through anyways.  When the Liberals came to power they expanded the deal.  Canadians deserve to have an informed referendum on these corporate rights deals.  It has taken over four years to get to where Canadians will actually have a say in government.  This is about more than what we might pay for low grade imported products and services.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

mmphosis wrote:

I seriously question the legitimacy of these corporate rights deals.  Canadians voted for Liberals and NDP to defeat the FTA, and the Liberals and NDP got the most votes at the time.  The Progressive Conservatives got a majority government and put the deal through anyways.  When the Liberals came to power they expanded the deal.  Canadians deserve to have an informed referendum on these corporate rights deals.  It has taken over four years to get to where Canadians will actually have a say in government.  This is about more than what we might pay for low grade imported products and services.

Absolutely agree! I heard mention that this newest deal will generate 1000s of jobs. That's a pittinance when a couple of thousand here and there have been bled annually for the last few decades through privatization, acquisitions and mergers and complete shutdowns. If it created 100,000s of jobs, that would be something to crow about.

josh

Deal reached.  As if there were any doubt.

http://ipolitics.ca/2015/10/05/tpp-agreement-reached-now-the-hard-work-begins/

Provides the NDP their best opportunity to get back in the race.  If they'll take it.

Ciabatta2

Maybe all those visits to rural southern Ontario will pay off for Mulcair?  Question is how many people are opposed to free trade these days, and are the auto/dairy sectors full of enough votes to make it matter.

This could put the Liberals in a bind.

josh

Stanford ‏@JimboStanford · Looks like Cda eliminates its auto tariff in 5 years. US is said to have a much-longer phase-out (20 yrs or more).

 

Say goodbye to tends of thousands of autoworker jobs.

terrytowel

Flashback 1988 Kim Campbell screamns at Free Trade Protesters "Why are you so scared"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBIuLld6r_Q

josh

“I know there is also concern in some parts of our auto industry about the implications of this agreement for that vital sector,” Harper said, promising to soon announce measures to attract new auto investment and ensure the stability of car assembly operations in Canada.

“I want to reassure the Canadians who depend on it for their livelihood that we have reached an agreement that will clearly benefit our auto industry here at home. This agreement will mean the well-paying jobs in the auto sector that they continue to support thousands of Canadian families for years to come.”

 

http://ipolitics.ca/2015/10/05/tpp-agreement-reached-now-the-hard-work-begins/

 

Same old lies.

NDPP

As previously stated this is a monster designed as a 'corporate coup d'etat by stealth'. It must be refused! See #70 youtube above*

 

Statement By MSF On the Conclusion of TPP Negotiations in Atlanta

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/article/statement-msf-conclusion-tp...

"Doctors Without Borders/MSF expresses its dismay that TPP countries have agreed to US government and multinational drug company demands that will raise the price of medicines for millions..."

 

#tpp

https://twitter.com/hashtag/tpp?lang=en

"Wall Street and other big corporations have won again. I will do all that I can to defeat the #TPP agreement." - Bernie Sanders

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

josh wrote:

Deal reached.  As if there were any doubt.

http://ipolitics.ca/2015/10/05/tpp-agreement-reached-now-the-hard-work-begins/

Provides the NDP their best opportunity to get back in the race.  If they'll take it.

They have accepted the premise that some of these corporate rights deals are acceptable.  Since they have not stood on principle against them in the last decade it will not happen and if it does it will sound insincere. The NDP has chosen the mushy middle and it looks like they are going to get mired in the mud because they have abandoned any principled talk that directly attacks the global imperial economic system.  Does anyone understand why "free trade" with Jordan is a good idea? Anyone that does may want to help the NDP explain why it was good and TPP is bad. Don't forget the MSMS will relentlessly say TPP is a good thing just like all the rest including the Jordan deal.

jjuares

kropotkin1951 wrote:

josh wrote:

Deal reached.  As if there were any doubt.

http://ipolitics.ca/2015/10/05/tpp-agreement-reached-now-the-hard-work-begins/

Provides the NDP their best opportunity to get back in the race.  If they'll take it.

They have accepted the premise that some of these corporate rights deals are acceptable.  Since they have not stood on principle against them in the last decade it will not happen and if it does it will sound insincere. The NDP has chosen the mushy middle and it looks like they are going to get mired in the mud because they have abandoned any principled talk that directly attacks the global imperial economic system.  Does anyone understand why "free trade" with Jordan is a good idea? Anyone that does may want to help the NDP explain why it was good and TPP is bad. Don't forget the MSMS will relentlessly say TPP is a good thing just like all the rest including the Jordan deal.


I agree the media will hail this as wonderful. They already have in fact. I believe that the NDP will come out against this. It is a " Hail Mary pass" but so what?

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

josh wrote:

Deal reached.  As if there were any doubt.

http://ipolitics.ca/2015/10/05/tpp-agreement-reached-now-the-hard-work-begins/

Provides the NDP their best opportunity to get back in the race.  If they'll take it.

They have accepted the premise that some of these corporate rights deals are acceptable.  Since they have not stood on principle against them in the last decade it will not happen and if it does it will sound insincere. The NDP has chosen the mushy middle and it looks like they are going to get mired in the mud because they have abandoned any principled talk that directly attacks the global imperial economic system.  Does anyone understand why "free trade" with Jordan is a good idea? Anyone that does may want to help the NDP explain why it was good and TPP is bad. Don't forget the MSMS will relentlessly say TPP is a good thing just like all the rest including the Jordan deal.

Two weeks is too short a time to drum up opposition strong enough to get the NDP elected. The battle against TPP (and CETA) would have had to have been loud for the past couple of years. The NDP has been running centre so they only whispered against it.

KarlL

Still, when you're going under for the third time and something floats by - better grab on to it, whatever it might be.

Sean in Ottawa

KarlL wrote:

Still, when you're going under for the third time and something floats by - better grab on to it, whatever it might be.

It may be enoough to save some seats if they react well.

Trudeau looks like he will look at the polls and provide his answer some time in the future hoping to keep the supporters he has on both sides of the issue. A gamble but not a sursprise.

Quebec has been pro-free trade in the past, however.

The NDP must find a way to save 50-60 seats... otherwise they won't have much of a role in the next parliament.

NDPP

Yes, of course, the NDP had no idea and didn't think to prepare...

TPP Deal Reached: 12 Countries Strike Pacific Rim Accord

https://youtu.be/lPddMcL-HcM

KarlL

.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Harper hails Trans-Pacific Partnership, promises $4.3B to protect dairy farmers

Prime Minister Stephen Harper says the federal cabinet has already approved a plan to spend $4.3 billion over the next 15 years to protect Canadian farmers from the impact of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

josh

If it's such a great deal, why do they need protection? But the ones who will suffer the most will be auto workers.

jerrym

While media discussion of the TPP corporate rights deal has focused on the dairy and auto industries in terms of negative impacts, there are many other areas that are problematic for Canada including: investor-state dispute settlement resolution which enable firms to greatly increase their ability to reverse government decisions that run counter to their interests but support the general interest; intellectual property rights provisions that have been used to greatlyt increase the price of goods; provisions for Temporary Foreign Worker entry without a check for whether Canadians are available to do the work; and restrictions on pharmaceuticals that increase their prices. 

These issues have all been hinted at by people who have seen the text of drafts of the TPP document. Unfortunately, we probably won't know the full extent of the damage done to the general interest of Canadians by the 600 corporations involved in negotiating TPP because the final text, with its implications buried in thousands of pages of legalese is unlikely to be released before the election, to the benefit of the Cons. 

Quote:

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a 12-country trade and investment treaty ne- gotiation that began in 2008. Canada was only admitted, with strings, to the U.S.- led initiative in 2012. Other members include Australia, Brunei, Chile, Japan, Ma- laysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. Supporters call the TPP the “NAFTA of the Pacific” as it is modeled on the 1994 Canada-U.S.-Mexico trade deal. Critics, however, refer to it as “NAFTA on steroids” since it puts far more re- strictions on government policy and regulation.

What Kind of Restrictions?

Like all current free trade agreements, the TPP is only marginally about trade. A far greater part of the text — thousands of pages in more than 30 chapters — has to dowith harmonizing regulations (financial, health and safety standards, etc.), reinfor- cing intellectual property rights (patents, copyrights), opening up new sectors to privatization and foreign investment (health insurance and education), and putting strict limits on how governments choose to protect the environment or create jobs. In almost every case, participant countries will be required to adopt the preferences of powerful U.S. corporate lobbies.

Is It Worth It?

Canada already has free trade deals in place with four of the larger TPP countries (Peru, Chile, U.S. and Mexico) and tariffs on trade with the others are already low. TPP countries with which Canada does not already have an FTA make up only 3% of its total exports and 5% of its imports. Canada has a trade deficit with these coun- tries of $5 to $8 billion annually. Eighty per cent of Canadian exports to these coun- tries are raw or semi-processed goods (e.g. beef, coal, lumber) while 80% of imports are high value-added goods (e.g. autos, machinery, computer and electrical compon- ents). The TPP is therefore likely to exacerbate the erosion of the Canadian manu- facturing sector and jobs that has been taking place since NAFTA.

Canada has not released an economic impact study of the TPP, likely because the effect on GDP and job growth will be so small (and possibly negative, according to one study). A pro-TPP study in the U.S. estimated only a 0.13% increase to U.S. GDP by 2025 from the TPP. Many prominent economists, including Paul Krugman, Jo- seph Stiglitz and Dani Rodrik, feel that the trade impacts of TPP are far less import- ant than the serious concerns it raises about excessive intellectual property rights, regulatory harmonization and investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS).

Issues for Canada

Patents and drug costs — The intellectual property chapter of the TPP could prove a minefield for efforts to control drug costs in Canada, which are already the second highest in the world. For example, Canada is one of only three TPP countries with a patent linkage system for pharmaceuticals (allowing brand-name patent holders to contest regulatory approval for generic drugs). But the TPP will mark the first time that Canada has accepted trade treaty obligations governing patent linkage, which could interfere with cost-saving reforms.

Copyright and trademarks — TPP copyright rules would require far longer terms of copyright protection, based on the U.S. model, and could require protection for con- troversial practices such as “digital locks,” which allow copyright holders to encrypt software in computerized devices. Trademarks have been the central focus of tobac- co plain packaging litigation, and the industry is fighting for stronger trademark pro- tection under the TPP.

Free flow of information — In an e-commerce chapter, the U.S. is insisting on rules to prohibit countries from requiring that personal information be stored on nation- al databases. There are good reasons why a country might require that tax, health care or financial data be stored locally. Treating all information as a kind of private commodity that companies could move when and where they like has considerable implications for privacy.

Increased protection for corporations — Leaked text confirms that the TPP includes an investor-state dispute settlement mechanism similar to NAFTA chapter 11. These clauses exist in thousands of international trade and investment deals and are used by multinational companies from rich countries to sue governments when policy de- cisions interfere with their investments. Canada is already the most sued developed country in the world because of NAFTA’s ISDS process and the TPP will significant- ly increase the number of foreign investors eligible to sue.

A recent Canadian NAFTA ISDS loss shows how unfair and skewed the process is. In that case, a NAFTA tribunal ruled 2-1 that an environmental assessment process, which resulted in a U.S. firm being denied a permit to dig a massive quarry in an ecologically sensitive region of Nova Scotia, violated the firm’s NAFTA investor pro- tections. The dissenting member called this finding “a remarkable step backwards” for environmental protection. Bilcon is now seeking over $300 million in damages from the federal government.

Supply management — One of the most difficult issues for Canada concerns the fate of supply-managed sectors. Although under fierce attack from conservative pundits and big business, supply management systems provide a fair return to farmers and a reasonably priced supply of fresh milk, eggs and poultry to food to consumers. Farmers and consumers in countries and sectors without supply-management sys- tems are subject to wild swings in commodity prices and have little ability to nego- tiate reasonable returns or prices with giant global agri-businesses. The Canadian government is holding back making an offer on market access for dairy until the last possible minute. But U.S. negotiators have made it clear that they expect substan- tial access for all dairy products as well as for poultry. New Zealand and Australia are also insisting on substantial market access for dairy.

Cultural protections — The U.S. and its entertainment industries have always strenu- ously opposed Canadian efforts to exclude cultural industries and policies. The TPP could erode Canadian cultural protections, such as foreign ownership restrictions in broadcasting and publishing.

https://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publicatio...

 

 

 

jerrym

Even Mexico, which itself has taken many former automotive sector jobs from Canada. is concerned about the loss of auto industry jobs because of TPP.

It is the two largest economies in this deal, the United States and Japan, that are the driving force behind TPP and are therefore driving it in the interests of their large corporate transnationals. 

While Magna, with headquarters in Canada, is the largest auto parts manufacturer in North America and has 124,000 employees, those are spread over 29 countries and it will not suffer since it can transfer or create new jobs in extremely low wage countries such as Vietnam, costing Canadian jobs and driving down wages here.

It is the smaller Canadians firms in this and other industries that will suffer because they don't have anywhere near the ability to shift work overseas. 

Quote:

"Now Mexico, who a lot of people in the auto industry see as a threat to Ontario, are now sort of the ally in terms of the [TPP] negotiations," said Anderson.

Oscar Albin, the executive president of Mexico's National Autoparts Industry said Tuesday that if the content rules were amended to allow just 30 per cent of parts to come from North America, as Japan has reportedly requested, that would reduce its exports to the United States by one-third.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/canada-mexico-share-concerns-about...

 

 

jerrym

What has happened to the Australian automotive industry serves as a warning to Canadians, not just in the automotive sector but in manufacturing in general.

Quote:

Toyota will end Australia's run as an automaking nation when it pulls the plug on local assembly in 2017. The move follows similar cut-and-run announcements by Ford and General Motors and triggered an outcry Down Under about the demise of local manufacturing.

But the real question isn't why automakers are closing shop. Rather, it is this: Why were they building there in the first place? Not surprisingly, the answer has a lot to do with tariffs.

The small Australian market hardly warranted local output in an industry where economies of scale matter. So for years, Australia protected local automakers with sky-high import duties. When the tariffs dwindled, so did the appetite to keep making cars there. Australians should have seen it coming.

Warning to others?

The collapse of the local industry post-tariffs might serve as a warning to other markets that still protect local vehicle producers with tariffs. The list includes Malaysia, China and, yes, the United States.

As Washington contemplates the Trans-Pacific Partnership free-trade agreement, might it witness a similar shock if the United States' 25 percent tariffs on pickups are suddenly expunged?

Probably not. Why? Size.

Pickups built in North America compete in a 2 million unit segment.

In contrast, Australia's market is tiny. Last year, domestic sales reached just 1,136,227 units. The country's three remaining manufacturers made just 210,538 cars there.

For comparison, Toyota produced 1,760,792 cars and trucks in North America last year -- more than the entire industry sold in Australia.

'Build where you sell'

For the Japanese especially, "build where you sell" is the mantra of modern manufacturing. But at those paltry volumes, it hardly makes sense.

http://www.autonews.com/article/20140215/OEM01/140219896/why-australias-...

 

 

 

 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Jennifer Hollet just said tweeted Chrystia Feeland won't answer questions on the TPP! GO NDP! This is the issue!

jerrym

TPP will increasingly drive wages down and shift Canada towards the export of raw resources, along with some agricultural products, such as beef potentially. 

The Cons boast of the 23 "free trade" deals that they have signed in power, however during this period we have lost 400,000 manufacturing jobs and went from an enormous trade surplus to an enormous trade deficit during this period. 

Canada lacks the economic power that the United States used to overcome this blockage of a trade market and has and will face this with other "free trade" partners. 

Quote:

Free-trade deals already cover 70 per cent of Canada’s trade – yet the more pacts we’ve inked, the worse our performance has become. I’ve reviewed our five longest-standing trade pacts: with the United States, Mexico, Israel, Chile and Costa Rica. Canada’s exports to them grew more slowly than our exports to non-free-trade partners, while our imports surged much faster than with the rest of the world. If the policy goal (sensibly) is to boost exports and strengthen the trade balance, then signing free-trade deals is exactly the wrong thing to do.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/the-troubling-truth-about-fr...

Our recent "free trade" deal with Korea how projected increase sales of a product, in this case beef, can disappear as other restrictions are put in place. Very shortly after the deal, Korea banned the import of beef on an ongoing basis because of one BSE (mad cow disease) cow, even though many other countries quickly did so. They have not yet removed this ban, thereby protecting their own industry.

Quote:

Food safety concerns were fenced off quickly after officials reported Canada's 19th case of mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, three weeks ago. 

No part of the cow reached any food system. The cow came from the same farm — and so might have contracted BSE the same way — as a case found in 2010. And the latest cow was born in 2009, before any changes resulting from the investigation of the 2010 case. ...

But when countries continue to accept American beef, despite the highly integrated North American industry, it raises questions of unjust trade discrimination, Kanargelidis said. 

 

 

 

 

 

NDPP

The TPP Just Got Passed. This is Our Last Chance To Stop It. (and vid)

https://www.fightthetpp.org

"Want to better understand the Trans Pacific Partnership? Watch this short video about the dirtiest deal we've never seen."

Stop the TPP!

https://twitter.com/hashtag/tpp?lang=eng

Aristotleded24

[url=https://openmedia.ca/blog/tpp-signed-%E2%80%98biggest-global-threat-inte... from the open media campaign:[/url]

Quote:
An agreement that some campaigners have called the “biggest global threat to the internet” has just been signed, potentially bringing huge new restrictions on what people can do with their computers.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is the conclusion of five years of negotiations, and will cover 40 per cent of the world’s economy. Its claimed purpose is to create a unified economic bloc so that companies and businesses can trade more easily — but it also puts many of the central principle of the internet in doubt, according to campaigners.

One particularly controversial part of the provisions make it a crime to reveal corporate wrongdoing "through a computer system". Experts have pointed out that the wording is very vague, and could lead to whistleblowers being penalised for sharing important information, and lead to journalists stopping reporting on them.

Others require that online content providers — such as YouTube and Facebook — must take down content if they receive just one complaint, as they are in the US. That will be harmful for startups looking to build such businesses since they'll be required to have the resources to respond to every complaint, experts have pointed out.

In 2013, when the partnership was still being discussed, the Electronic Freedom Foundation called TPP “one of the worst global threats to the internet”. The changes are dangerous because to unify the various countries in the partnerships’ rules on intellectual property and other internet law, they are opting to take the US’s largely very restrictive rules.

NDPP

More:

TPP, TTIP, TISA Secret Trade Negotiations Threaten Government, Sovereignty, Individual Rights (and vid)

https://hacked.com/tpp-ttip-tisa-secret-trade-negotiations-threaten-gove...

NDPP

What is the TPP? (and vid)

https://www.rt.com/usa/317706-what-is-tpp-trade/

"The TPP is less about trade and more about geopolitical maneuvering and further corporate domination over particpating nations' trade and investment affairs..."

 

TPP: A Bad Deal For The Bottom 90%...  -  by Robert Reich (and vid)

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/32773-focus-tpp-a-bad-dea...

"Global banks and corporations headquartered in the US as well as their executives and biggest shareholders would be the big winners; most other Americans [and Canadians] would lose..."

surprise, surprise

Brachina

 Mulcair is the only hope to stop the TPP.

Mighty AC

I don't have the details on internet censoship yet, but the TPP turned out not to be the disaster for the dairy and auto sector that it was forecasted to be; so that's a good thing. Unfortunately, Tom is thundering on as if it were. Is this dishonest approach just a desperate effort to shore up his plumetting poll figures by hopefullly stealing back some of the far support left gobbled up by Trudeau? 

I'm not in favour of giving more power to corporations and plutocrats. I don't like the idea of multinationals suing our government in secret courts if our laws restrict their future profits. When there are aspects of the deal that desesrve real criticism, why is Tom focusing on something he now knows to be fictitious? This will hurt his credibility...among those that pay attention at least.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada-election-2015-tpp-trans-pacific-partnershi...

Mighty AC

*deleted - double post*

Pages