Chrystia Freeland to sign TPP deal in New Zealand: Is this a fixed game?

72 posts / 0 new
Last post
NDPP
Chrystia Freeland to sign TPP deal in New Zealand: Is this a fixed game?

Continues from here:

http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/tpp-may-die-becauseofcanada

 

Chrystia Freeland To Sign Trans Pacific Partnership Deal in New Zealand

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/freeland-tpp-auckland-signing-1.3431631

"International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland is in New Zealand to put Canada's signature on the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal.

'There's a big difference between signing and ratifying,' the minister said. She hedged when asked if there's an economic study proving TPP's benefits: 'it's a big job and we are working on it.'

NDP trade critic Tracey Ramsey said Wednesday, 'if this deal's not good for Canadians then why are we there signing it?' While the signing is a 'very important momvent,' it's 'only a first step,' she said.

As politically useful as it may be to portray the parliamentary vote as the key step towards a final deal, that's not how international treaties work notes an academic who studies the constitutional powers of difference branches of government.

When it comes to ratification, Parliament is 'a political arm, and not a legal one,' the University of Ottawa's Philippe Lagasse told CBC news. 'I think there's a legitimate critique of saying 'are the consultations merely a grand PR exercise?'

Finally, it's cabinet's job, not Parliament's to ratify.

'The difficulty is that it's already been negotiated,' Lagasse said. 'I'm just worried that it's going to give a false impression that somehow you're in a position after government signs to renegotiate.'

'If it is a take it or leave it situation...what role will the House play in scrutinizing this?' he said, notifying that it will be interesting to see if there's a free vote.'

Freeland took her time confirming her attendance. Her department hasn't been forthcoming about the signing ceremony."

 

Good thing she has her 'dear friend', 'teacher' and 'probably the smartest person I know, 'one of the key people steering the world economy' to turn to for advice:

http://dailyheraldtribune.com/2015/04/08/taking-summers-advice-defies-logic

NO #tpp

"The most harmful trade-pact ever." - MSF

"A corporate coup d'etat by stealth" - The Nation

NO TPP!

pm@pm.gc.ca

NDPP

As Countries Line Up To Sign Toxic Deal, Warren Leads Call To Reject TPP (and vid)

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/02/03/countries-line-sign-toxic-de...

"With 12 nations expected to sign the corporate-friendly TPP in New Zealand on Thursday, opponents in the US and beyond are renewing their criticisms of the deal's worst provisions, which they warn pose serious dangers..."

 

Canada Caves on Controversial Trademark Infringement Extension in TPP  -  by Michael Geist

http://rabble.ca/news/2016/02/canada-caves-on-controversial-trademark-in...

"Yet as is the case in so many other areas, Canada ultimately caved on the isssue..."

Pondering

The problem with freaking out over a ceremonial signing that has zero legal ramifications is that the things that can be done to stop the deal are neglected.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

The problem with freaking out over a ceremonial signing that has zero legal ramifications is that the things that can be done to stop the deal are neglected.

The Liberals do not need to take it to the House and even if they do and give their MP's a free vote on it it will pass with the support of the Conservatives and the blue Liberals like the Minister herself. The only hope it seems is for Liberal supporters like yourself to get in touch with your MP's and tell them how much support they will lose including your own. Since I have never supported the Liberals I am not positioned to send that message. Saying I've never voted for you or considered voting for you and if you pass this I will still never vote for you is not a very persuasive tact to take with politicos from any party.

Pondering

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Pondering wrote:

The problem with freaking out over a ceremonial signing that has zero legal ramifications is that the things that can be done to stop the deal are neglected.

The Liberals do not need to take it to the House and even if they do and give their MP's a free vote on it it will pass with the support of the Conservatives and the blue Liberals like the Minister herself. The only hope it seems is for Liberal supporters like yourself to get in touch with your MP's and tell them how much support they will lose including your own. Since I have never supported the Liberals I am not positioned to send that message. Saying I've never voted for you or considered voting for you and if you pass this I will still never vote for you is not a very persuasive tact to take with politicos from any party.

Nothing I say is going to influence Trudeau or the party, even if I was a member nothing I said could influence the outcome.

If the US ratifies TPP then so will all the other countries involved including Canada although it will be after full debate. I would not be at all surprised if the NDP votes in favor when the time comes while crying they would have renegotiated.

There are only two ways to stop TPP. The first is the US not signing, the second is massive opposition strong enough to get hundreds of thousands of people to take to the streets against it in Canada.

The best bet we have of stopping TPP is stopping CETA.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Liberal Tory same old story. I knew Trudeau would merely be a pretty face for his corporate "advisers."  He is as progressive as Hilary Clinton and she is bought and paid for by Wall Street but she does like to talk about women's rights to make herself appear progressive. If the NDP had won their supporters would be holding their feet to the fire on this issue unlike Liberal supporters who will just swallow whatever Trudeau says and cry its really not his fault. He would if he could but he can't.

Pondering

NDP supporters have no more influence over the party than Liberal supporters have over that party. The executive and leader controls both parties.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

NDP supporters have no more influence over the party than Liberal supporters have over that party. The executive and leader controls both parties.

That is your opinion. Since you have never belonged to either party it doesn't seem particularly relevant.

NDPP

TPP 'Fundamentally Flawed', Should Be Resisted - Human Rights Expert

https://www.rt.com/usa/331051-tpp-un-human-rights/

"The top United Nations expert on human rights has called on the 12 nations considering the Trans Pacific Partnership to reject the massive trade agreement, since in its current form, it 'is out of step with today's international human rights regime.

Acknowledging global opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) beause of the agreement's 'undemocratic pedigree', Alfred de Zayas, the UN's independent expert on the promotion of democratic and equitable international order, said the largest trade agreement in decades 'is fundamentally flawed and should not be signed or ratified unless provision is made to guarantee the regulatory space of states.'

'I am concerned that notwithstanding enormous opposition by civil society worldwide, twelve countries are about to sign an agreement which is the product of secret negotiations, without multi-stakeholder democratic consultations,' de Zayas said in a statement ahead of a Feb 4 gathering in New Zealand of trade representatives for the 12 Pacific Rim nations involved in the secretive TPP talks.

Should the TPP go into effect, 'its compatibility with international law should be challenged before the International Court of Justice, De Zayas said, adding that 'if a public referendum was held in all 12 countries around the world, it will be solidly rejected."

 

Canada To Sign TPP Now, Ask Questions Later

http://www.freezenet.ca/canada-to-sign-tpp-now-ask-questions-later/

"Chrystia Freeland has gone to New Zealand to sign off on the agreement. The comment that signing is merely a technical step and not actual ratification is extremely misleading. If a country signs off on the agreement, that country is legally bound to ratify the agreement within 2 years. And Freeland herself has admitted on several occasions, the TPP is an all or nothing treaty that cannot be changed."

NDPP

Chrystia Freeland Signs Trans Pacific Partnership Deal in New Zealand

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/freeland-tpp-auckland-signing-1.3431631

"After signing the agreement, Freeland told reporters that Canada's participation in the Asia Pacific economy was very important and reassured her counterparts from the other 11 countries that Canada's new government was pro-trade.

'Our commitment during the election was to state very firmly that we are a party that believes in trade and a government that believes strongly in free trade..."

 

TPP Formally Signed in NZ as Mass Protest Paralyzes Auckland (Photos, video)

https://www.rt.com/news/331210-tpp-signed-auckland-protest/
"A group of around 1,000 activists protesting against the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) have blocked roads in Auckland as the participant states' delegations gathered in New Zealand to formally sign the controversial free trade agreement..."

NDPP

Trans Pacific Partnership Being Sold With Bogus Economic Models

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/trans-pacific-partnership_b_9...

"The Trans-Pacific Partnership is terrible, even apart from its quantifiable economic effects, as it threatens our environment, our health, our democracy, our sovereignty, our security and many other things.

But it is also a lousy deal on the pure economics, which is why it is currently being sold to the American people and Congress using bogus economic analysis..."

josh

Yes.

Northern PoV

Pondering wrote:

The problem with freaking out over a ceremonial signing that has zero legal ramifications is that the things that can be done to stop the deal are neglected.

Hey... a freak out is definitely called for here.

I voted Lib in Oct. despite a number irritants... with C51 being the biggest.  The inevitible support for TPP was another irritant.

Today, an an ugly little propaganda play, (ala the incrementalism of Harper),  is in motion.  

"just signing this is a tech. step ... still have review" ... BS - the fix is in.

And I am sanguine about my vote even as I oppose TPP.... because only the Greens were credible on this  issue. And how long would that last if they actually got close to power ... about as long as Syriza resisted austerity in Greece? The hail-mary Tom Mulcair opposition late in the campaign was not convincing as the 'front-runner' Mulcair ignored TPP until he was no longer front runner.  Kinda like Clinton's recent flip flop and just as sincere.

jjuares

Northern PoV wrote:

Pondering wrote:

The problem with freaking out over a ceremonial signing that has zero legal ramifications is that the things that can be done to stop the deal are neglected.

Hey... a freak out is definitely called for here.

I voted Lib in Oct. despite a number irritants... with C51 being the biggest.  The inevitible support for TPP was another irritant.

Today, an an ugly little propaganda play, (ala the incrementalism of Harper),  is in motion.  

"just signing this is a tech. step ... still have review" ... BS - the fix is in.

And I am sanguine about my vote even as I oppose TPP.... because only the Greens were credible on this  issue. And how long would that last if they actually got close to power ... about as long as Syriza resisted austerity in Greece? The hail-mary Tom Mulcair opposition late in the campaign was not convincing as the 'front-runner' Mulcair ignored TPP until he was no longer front runner.  Kinda like Clinton's recent flip flop and just as sincere.


I am not a Mulcair fan but your criticism of him is silly. He only opposed it late in the campaign because that was when the deal was reached. He would have looked pretty ridiculous opposing a deal the terms of which had not been reached or known. In fact until the last few days there was some uncertainity that a deal would be reached at all. He was on the record opposing the secret negotiations during the election campaign. Criticizing him for not opposing an agreement whose terms were unknown and unsettled? This is the first time I have seen a politician being criticized for not letting himself being an object of ridicule.

Pondering

We have known about the most problematic chapter for years (ISDS). CETA is much farther along than TPP but the NDP hasn't said a word about it for years as far as I know. If they actually gave a shit as opposed to trying to sound relevant they would be raising the alarm over ISDS in CETA as the Council of Canadians is actively doing because that is actually urgent.

A couple of years back the NDP did mention ISDS in TPP but then they dropped the topic.

They still haven't learned the lesson Harper taught us. The general public pays very little attention. They may be able to hold one or two topics in mind if they are really really really huge. Everything else is just background noise.

As far as I know the only problem the NDP has with TPP at this point is that it would hurt car manufacturing and dairy which is about the weakest possible argument against TPP that anyone could find.

NorthReport

The one guarantee every one of these trade agreements ensure, is that they work to keep the rich, rich, and the poor, poor.

iyraste1313

* I am not a Mulcair fan but your criticism of him is silly. He only opposed it late in the campaign because that was when the deal was reached. He would have looked pretty ridiculous opposing a deal the terms of which had not been reached or known. In fact until the last few days there was some uncertainity that a deal would be reached at all. He was on the record opposing the secret negotiations during the election campaign. Criticizing him for not opposing an agreement whose terms were unknown and unsettled? This is the first time I have seen a politician being criticized for not letting himself being an object of ridicule....* 

....I have been reading of the TPP for years...any cursory reading of the elitists publications would demonstrate their number one priority in their long list of articles disenfranchising the global population for their benefit...so I would possibly add to the criticim that their team are totall incompetent! They should have been warning the Canadain public for years of the danger of this latest Bill of Corporate rights superceding the all but extinct sovereign nation state...and if the Team had any integrity...criticizing all the bogus corporate rights Bills, the entire fraud of globalization leading to th calamities and desperation we are now facing...

jjuares

Pondering wrote:

As far as I know the only problem the NDP has with TPP at this point is that it would hurt car manufacturing and dairy which is about the weakest possible argument against TPP that anyone could find.

I generally avoid responding to this poster. I dislike how she treats facts. Here is a classic case. She says, " As far as I know..." she then goes onto state that the NDP's only objection to TPP is based on cars and dairy. Well, it took me only about two seconds to Google and find Mulcair talking about TPP and its effect on drug prices. But you know as far as she knows this is true. Wilful ignorance is not an excuse to try to mislead people.
http://globalnews.ca/news/2266271/mulcair-vows-to-scrap-tpp-deal-if-elec...

Northern PoV

jjuares wrote:
 

<snip>

I am not a Mulcair fan but  <snip>

tribalism rears its head  Innocent

NorthReport

Where is the Canadian Bernie Sanders when we need her/him?

jjuares

Northern PoV wrote:

jjuares wrote:
 

<snip>

I am not a Mulcair fan but  <snip>

tribalism rears its head  Innocent


I suggest you look up a definition of tribalism. . Too funny

jjuares

NorthReport wrote:

Where is the Canadian Bernie Sanders when we need her/him?


Exactly. We don't need a Mulcair bragging about his 35 years of administration or a PM interested in selfies just Someone to argue the issues.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

jjuares wrote:

I am not a Mulcair fan but your criticism of him is silly. He only opposed it late in the campaign because that was when the deal was reached. He would have looked pretty ridiculous opposing a deal the terms of which had not been reached or known. In fact until the last few days there was some uncertainity that a deal would be reached at all. He was on the record opposing the secret negotiations during the election campaign. Criticizing him for not opposing an agreement whose terms were unknown and unsettled? This is the first time I have seen a politician being criticized for not letting himself being an object of ridicule.

All the NDP needed to do during the election was say they will never support any corporate rights agreement that include Investors Rights clauses. Unfortunately since they supported the Jordon agreement that would have made them look hypocritical. The party lost its way on the issue and when you have a leader touting his time as a Cabinet Minister in an austerity government that fully supported free trade they can't seem to find their way to the right path. They took the wrong fork in the road and keep saying don't worry we will check the map in the future.

NorthReport

Linda McQuaig needs to get herself elected somewhere, somehow.

jjuares

kropotkin1951 wrote:

jjuares wrote:

I am not a Mulcair fan but your criticism of him is silly. He only opposed it late in the campaign because that was when the deal was reached. He would have looked pretty ridiculous opposing a deal the terms of which had not been reached or known. In fact until the last few days there was some uncertainity that a deal would be reached at all. He was on the record opposing the secret negotiations during the election campaign. Criticizing him for not opposing an agreement whose terms were unknown and unsettled? This is the first time I have seen a politician being criticized for not letting himself being an object of ridicule.

All the NDP needed to do during the election was say they will never support any corporate rights agreement that include Investors Rights clauses. Unfortunately since they supported the Jordon agreement that would have made them look hypocritical. The party lost its way on the issue and when you have a leader touting his time as a Cabinet Minister in an austerity government that fully supported free trade they can't seem to find their way to the right path. They took the wrong fork in the road and keep saying don't worry we will check the map in the future.


I knew they supported the Jordan deal. In fact I remember Mulcair bragging about it., I didnt know it had an investors right clause. Most of them do I suppose. Yes, I agree the position should be in favour of trade but not these investor clauses. The NDP needs to make people understand that these clauses cede national sovereignty to corporations. Unfortunately Mulcair has little credibility as a social democrat at a time when social democratic arguments may resonate with the public.

mmphosis

Petition for a binding national referendum on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)

http://you.leadnow.ca/petitions/petition-for-a-binding-national-referend...

 

Northern PoV

mmphosis wrote:

Petition for a binding national referendum on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)

http://you.leadnow.ca/petitions/petition-for-a-binding-national-referend...

Direct democracy doesn't work. Heck, representative democracy barely works.  

Calling for a referendum is typical of Leadnow.  Their recent electoral effort was misguided and embarrasing.

Pondering

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

As far as I know the only problem the NDP has with TPP at this point is that it would hurt car manufacturing and dairy which is about the weakest possible argument against TPP that anyone could find.

I generally avoid responding to this poster. I dislike how she treats facts. Here is a classic case. She says, " As far as I know..." she then goes onto state that the NDP's only objection to TPP is based on cars and dairy. Well, it took me only about two seconds to Google and find Mulcair talking about TPP and its effect on drug prices. But you know as far as she knows this is true. Wilful ignorance is not an excuse to try to mislead people.
">http://globalnews.ca/news/2266271/mulcair-vows-to-scrap-tpp-deal-if-elec...

JJ, you avoided addressing my point in favor of nitpicking, so please continue not responding.

The link you provided doesn't mention ISDS even though it is by far the most important aspect of the deal which my post made clear and you ignored.

 

mark_alfred
mark_alfred

kropotkin1951 wrote:
The Liberals do not need to take it to the House and even if they do and give their MP's a free vote on it it will pass with the support of the Conservatives and the blue Liberals like the Minister herself. The only hope it seems is for Liberal supporters like yourself to get in touch with your MP's and tell them how much support they will lose including your own.

Agreed.  It's up to all people of all political persuasions to oppose this deal.  By signing, the government has accepted the deal.  To ratify it, they simply need to pass any necessary legislation (IE, like amending the Tariff Act or whatever) to make it feasible for the deal to go into effect.  Presentation to the House (the Legislative Assembly) is simply a courtesy.  They don't actually need to do this (see link below if interested in details).  However, if a big enough ruckus is made, it's possible they still could back away from the deal.  But it's a ruckus that has to be made, rather than a polite plea for backbenchers to vote against it in any illusory "ratification" votes in the House the government may have for show.  Don't be lulled into passivity by the lie that the government is still on the fence.  They've made up their minds.  So it's not the time to plea or reason with the government.  It's time to fight this government over this now.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/2008-45-e.htm 

Pondering

Yes, a ruckus. Liberal supporters have no more influence over the Liberals than the NDP supporters or the Conservative supporters.

However, the more urgent ruckus is CETA as it is far more advanced and we have a window of opportunity in which we could actually make a difference that would help us stop TPP.

quizzical

pondering we've already proven Europeans are stopping  CETA in their own right.

how about  you not tell us to ignore Justin's lies and the Liberals signing of TTP?!!!!

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

quizzical wrote:

pondering we've already proven Europeans are stopping  CETA in their own right.

how about  you not tell us to ignore Justin's lies and the Liberals signing of TTP?!!!!

Citizen: Someone is breaking into my house and robbing it.

Liberal thief: Look, look over there someone is planning to break into someone elses house, don't worry about what I'm doing today its to late to stop this theft isn't it better to try to come up with a plan to stop me when I try to pull my next heist.

mark_alfred
mark_alfred

mmphosis wrote:

Petition for a binding national referendum on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)

http://you.leadnow.ca/petitions/petition-for-a-binding-national-referend...

 

Thanks.

jjuares

Pondering wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

As far as I know the only problem the NDP has with TPP at this point is that it would hurt car manufacturing and dairy which is about the weakest possible argument against TPP that anyone could find.

I generally avoid responding to this poster. I dislike how she treats facts. Here is a classic case. She says, " As far as I know..." she then goes onto state that the NDP's only objection to TPP is based on cars and dairy. Well, it took me only about two seconds to Google and find Mulcair talking about TPP and its effect on drug prices. But you know as far as she knows this is true. Wilful ignorance is not an excuse to try to mislead people.
">http://globalnews.ca/news/2266271/mulcair-vows-to-scrap-tpp-deal-if-elec...

JJ, you avoided addressing my point in favor of nitpicking, so please continue not responding.

The link you provided doesn't mention ISDS even though it is by far the most important aspect of the deal which my post made clear and you ignored.

 


I answered your point directly. You claimed that the NDP's only criticism of the TPP only focussed on autos and dairy. That was false. In about two seconds I found another criticism from Mulcair in early Oct. centering on prescription drugs. Simple point, Pondering, you mislead people. You said that they only made two criticism of TPP while that is a demonstrable falsehood. And finally on the NDP website it does talk about ISDS, intellectual property rights and more. So, once again your claim is in direct contravention of easily available evidence. Show some integrity.
http://www.ndp.ca/news/tpp-liberals-dont-think-better-possible

mark_alfred

Great stuff.  It's good we have allies in Parliament on this.

jjuares

Great stuff.  It's good we have allies in Parliament on this.


Thanks. I dislike this dishonest game Pondering plays. She never heard about the NDP's criticism about TPP so they never said it. Next she will claim that they haven't said it loud enough while never admitting she made misleading statements. I hate how she never seems to worry if what she says is accurate or truthful.