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!

[email protected]

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

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

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

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

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

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

jjuares wrote:
http://www.ndp.ca/news/tpp-liberals-dont-think-better-possible[/quote]

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

jjuares

mark_alfred wrote:

jjuares wrote:
http://www.ndp.ca/news/tpp-liberals-dont-think-better-possible

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

[/quote]
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.

mark_alfred

Yeah...down with the oligarchs....ndp are at fault....trudeau is fabulous.... yup, like a broken record.

kropotkin1951

mark_alfred wrote:

Yeah...down with the oligarchs....ndp are at fault....trudeau is fabulous.... yup, like a broken record.

Our new ally on the board has the same broken record. At least Pondering doesn't claim to have been an NDP supporter for 45 years. Of course we must all accept them at their word and believe they are not really Liberals just progressive people who think the Bieber Liberal's are so progressive that we all must bow to Trudeau the Lesser's superior positions.

mark_alfred

Awesome! 

Quote:

After a relatively quiet start to Waitangi proceedings on Friday, the heat got turned up briefly when a protester threw a sex toy at Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce.

A woman threw the object at Joyce while he was speaking to media after holding talks with iwi, shouting: "that's for raping our sovereignty".

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/76604655/sex-toy-thrown-at-steven-joyce-...

Video here:  https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/tpp-protester-boldly-chucks-...

mark_alfred

On The Current this morning, Jim Balsillie warns TPP would be disastrous for Canada's innovators. 

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/tpp-would-be-disastrous-for-canada-s-...

NDPP

For those that may have missed it, the empire is most definitely at war. Full spectrum dominance remains the ultimate objective. Freeland's connections to Kyiv and Washington's coup-installed regime, and other European NATO network notables, not to mention the powerful Ukraine lobby, its Atlantic Council connections and  the Wall St/ White House linkage via Larry Summers should be considered and appreciated for all of their implications and significance to this overall process.

This is most definitely a fixed game. It is too important to power that it be otherwise.

TPP is a component of the present rather desperate geopolitical struggles of the US hegemon to capture the entire game while it still can. People serious about opposing the TPP should not lose track of this. The successful defeat of the TPP is an essential victory against 'a corporate coup d'etat by stealth' that seeks the same 'full spectrum' of domination the recently announced massive expansion of the US Defence budget does.

This is a weapon they wish to use against us all. A popular resistance must be assembled to defeat it. TPP is their war here. Don't think things will stay the same after. Even for you.

We must not pretend that the parliamentary opposition is up to the task. It isn't. Do what you can to educate and alert those unaware. When the people lead the leaders will follow.

Down with the TPP!

 

 

Pondering

1) Chrystia Freeland (a Liberal speaking for Trudeau) is pushing for CETA to be signed as is.

2) Canadians are extremely ignorant on the topic of the trade deals.

http://ipolitics.ca/2016/02/03/freeland-promises-full-study-of-tpp-befor...

A recent Leger poll on the TPP certainly supports that. In an online survey conducted between January 27 and 31, Leger found 37 per cent of Canadians haven’t even heard of the agreement.

And among those who have, only 44 per cent claimed to have any idea what impact it would have on Canadian industries.

Less than 20% of Canadians have some idea of what impact it will have on Canadian industres therefore Trudeau can do whatever the hell he wants and he has noted several times he is very pro-trade.

3) European resistance to ISDS could help get people interested in the topic. Why are European's so against it? Why can't we just drop the ISDS chapter? (we can) Why aren't we?

4) It's in TPP too!!!!!!!!!! If it was so bad in CETA that the deal couldn't be signed, why are we accepting it in TPP? would be the ovious question.

Ratification on CETA in Canada is being discussed as a done deal. There is no question that we won't ratify it. No debate on it has been promised and we are at the legal scrubbing stage.

PS So what if it is Europe? European corporations will sue every chance they get just like US has done with NAFTA.

quizzical

kropotkin1951 wrote:

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.

the arrogant thinking is almot beyond belief.....

NDPP

CETA Changes Make Investor-State Provisions Worse  -  by Maude Barlow

https://t.co/5z4525JMxD

"Investors get an extra-judicial system that will deal only with their rights, not their obligations.

The Europeans are calling for a completely different paradigm on how we look at trade agreements. There are many countries - Brazil and India to name only two - that have rejected trade agreements with investor-state provisions. That should be the future of trade agreements, not quasi-judicial tribunals that exclusively serve foreign corporate interests.

Demonstrations against CETA and TTIP in Berlin in 2015 attracted 250,000 people. Surely they are not all 'haters' of Uncle Sam. Contrary to these lazy cliches, I can guarantee you that the opposition is organised, informed and sophisticated.

Europeans are coming together..."

Why wouldn't we avail ourselves of the experience, knowledge and successes of our European brothers and sisters in this our common struggle? Especially given our lateness to the fray and the necessity not to repeat the mistakes already made, corrected and learned from by others.  If you don't wish to consider these similar weapons of attack together, you'd better know that the corporate global enemy who develops, orchestrates and delivers them against us all most certainly does.

Besides the experience of the anti-CETA struggle, we must also remember that there is a serious body of Indigenous, international and constitutional law, well known to Indigenous sovereignty struggles, that would effectively eliminate from the TPP Treaty's jurisdiction, massive amounts of territories, peoples and resources over which no lawful cession or transfer has taken place. Or consent given to Canada to impose TPP. This should also be discussed and investigated as a potential and powerful legal fist against the deal, in consultation and cooperation with the peoples of those resisting sovereignties, who are in a position, with help, to declare unlawful and 'evict' these usurpacious, alien instruments from their jurisdictions.

 

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

On February 4, 2016, President Obama will be permitted by Fast Track law to sign the TransPacific Partnership (TPP). During the recent APEC meeting in Manila, Philippines, leaders of TPP countries discussed holding a signing ceremony that day in New Zealand.

Following the signing, Congress will still have to pass implementing legislation before the TPP can be put into place. The Obama administration is currently writing that legislation and is expected to send it to Congress as soon as it anticipates having enough votes to pass it. That can happen any time after Obama signs the TPP.

The TPP implementing legislation could be sent to Congress as early as February 5 and as late as after the elections in the fall. It all depends on when Obama and leadership believe they have the votes.

Our job is to make sure that never happens. And that is why we are mobilizing local actions across the country in February. We hope that our allies in TPP countries are making similar plans, but as the most aggressive promoter of the TPP, the US is where it must be stopped!

Nationwide Mobilization To Stop the TPP Off to a Strong Start

February 4, 2016 actions in these cities:

Arizona

PhoenixFacebook page

Arkansas

Hot SpringsFacebook page

British Columbia

Vancouver

California

Huntington Beach

Los Angeles – Facebook page THE DATE OF THIS ACTION HAS BEEN CHANGED TO FEB. 3.

Sacramento  – Facebook page

San Francisco – Facebook page

Santa Rosa – Facebook page

Colorado

Denver – Facebook page

Connecticut....and many more

 

iyraste1313

we must also remember that there is a serious body of Indigenous, international and constitutional law, well known to Indigenous sovereignty struggles, that would effectively eliminate from the TPP Treaty's jurisdiction, massive amounts of territories, peoples and resources over which no lawful cession or transfer has taken place. Or consent given to Canada to impose TPP. This should also be discussed and investigated as a potential and powerful legal fist against the deal, in consultation and cooperation with the peoples of those resisting sovereignties, who are in a position, with help, to declare unlawful and 'evict' these usurpacious, alien instruments from their jurisdictions.....

thank you for this powerful statement! perhaps being presently so far removed from the opposition to this Bill, where is the organized movement? Council of Canadians? Which Indigenous organizations are in resistance?

An effective movement would of course be presenting their case to the most likely of Indigenous resistance, as e.g in the case of BC, the Union of BC Chiefs......

Pondering

jjuares wrote:
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[/quote]

My point was that ISDS is THE THE THE point to be focused on. This is something Mulcair and the NDP used to agree with me on.

This is something he should be SCREAMING about.

I have for YEARS said that if the NDP would come out STRONGLY over CETA I would support the NDP.

Having a petition on TPP now is a complete waste of time. Canadians are barely aware TPP exists. They trust the government knows best on trade deals. Not the Trudeau government, not the Harper government, ANY government.

I don't think YOU give a shit about either CETA or TPP. Your focus is on me and silly little games rather than actually fighting TPP.

 

mark_alfred

The NDP are clearly an ally in the case against the TPP.  But thinking they alone can do anything significant to stop it when this majority Liberal government has signed and is pushing forward with it is naive.  It's up to the people as a whole to fight it.

jjuares

Pondering wrote:

jjuares wrote:
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

My point was that ISDS is THE THE THE point to be focused on. This is something Mulcair and the NDP used to agree with me on.

This is something he should be SCREAMING about.

I have for YEARS said that if the NDP would come out STRONGLY over CETA I would support the NDP.

Having a petition on TPP now is a complete waste of time. Canadians are barely aware TPP exists. They trust the government knows best on trade deals. Not the Trudeau government, not the Harper government, ANY government.

I don't think YOU give a shit about either CETA or TPP. Your focus is on me and silly little games rather than actually fighting TPP.

 

[/quote]
This is too funny. Now that we have established that the NDP has complained about the investors clause and that makes you guilty once again of peddaling easily proven falsehoods you revert to type. Look at my post 37 in which I predict that because your falsehood was exposed you would now claim that the NDP was not saying it loud enough. And here you are right on cue saying that the NDP is not screaming their objection. Just like I predicted. Like you always do when you are caught in your falsehoods. Wow, if you are going to pedal falsehoods you really do need a new method when they are exposed. As for your claim that I focus on " silly little games". I do believe you are telling the truth in that statement. You do see demonstrating integrity and telling the truth as " silly" and " little". On the other hand you place great importance on trying to score political points. But the relevant question for me is if you can't score political points without using falsehoods is that a point worth making? You and I have come to radically different answers to that question.

Pages