TPP may die because.of.Canada.

Reconceptualizing The TPP: The Brotherhood of the Three Blocs  -  by Andrew Korybko

http://thesaker.is/reconceptualizing-the-tpp-the-brotherhood-of-the-thre...

"The TPP is designed to unify three distinct and expanding blocs. The US applies an economic version of its 'Lead from Behind' strategem in order to control the other two and thus secure its unipolar stranglehold over their Asia Pacific and Latin American areas of 'responsibility'.

On the surface of things TPP seems to simply be about tying Pacific economies closer to the US, but there's really a bit more detail..."

 

APEC Business Council Calls on States to Ratify TPP as Route to FTAAP

http://sptnkne.ws/adTx

 

 

The APEC Business Advisory Council is calling on the TPP member states to ratify the deal as soon as possible, as it may lead to trade agreements encompassing larger areas..."

 

The TPP : Internet Censorship and Trudeau's First Big Test

http://buff.ly/1Qmlv9R

 

Just Say No #tpp !

Days of Revolt: The Most Brazen Corporate Power Grab in American History

In this episode of teleSUR's Days of Revolt, Chris Hedges and organizer Kevin Zeese break down the terms of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and detail the upcoming demonstrations organized against it

The TPP and the New Global Corporate Govt

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/11/19/the-tpp-and-the-new-global-corpor...

"...The TPP is not simply an economic document, about trade in goods, services and investor money capital flows. TPP is first and foremost a political document.

The key to understanding how TPP is about global corporations setting up their own global government is contained in Chapters 27 and 28. The signing of the TPP agreement in Atlanta Georgia, on Oct 4 2015, represents the founding 'Constitutional Convention' of global corporate government."

It's Time For Labour To Fight Back Against the TPP  -  by Nora Loreto

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/nora-loreto/2015/11/its-time-labour-to-f...

"Considering the implications of the deal, the Canadian labour movement must figure out how exactly it plans to fight for workers under the new regime?"

Just Say No: Kill the TPP!

WTO Ruling on Dolphin-Safe Tuna Labeling Illustrates Supremacy of Trade Agreements

https://theintercept.com/2015/11/24/wto-ruling-on-dolphin-safe-tuna-labe...

"...This should serve as a warning against expansive trade deals like the TPP that would replicate rules that undermine safeguards for wildlife, clean air, and clean water,' said the Sierra Club's Ilana Solomon in a statement..."

Nationwide Mobilization To Stop the TPP Off to a Strong Start

quote:

Washington, DC

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.

 

February 4, 2016 actions in these cities:

British Columbia

Vancouver

California

Los Angeles

Santa Rosa

Connecticut

Hartford

Florida

Tampa

Maryland

Baltimore

New York

New York City

Washington, DC

"Freeland said the Liberal government has not yet been invited to sign the Trans Pacific Partnership and has also not decided whether it will do so. Ministers from the 12 countries that have negotiated the massive trade deal, including Canada, are expected to sign the agreement in early February.

'When it comes to signing, what is really important for people to [MIS] understand is that is JUST A TECHNICAL STEP THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO CONTINUE HAVING CONSULTATIONS..."

Freeland to Focus on India and China: 'Two Huge Growing Markets

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/freeland-to-focus-on-india-and-china-two-...

TPP will chain Canada to a dying American globalist hegemonic project at precisely the worst possible historical moment. You are being sold down the river. Don't let this February signing take place.

Trans Canada Sues US For $15 B For Rejecting Keystone XL. Will This Be the New Normal Under TPP? (and vid)

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/1/7/transcanada_sues_the_us_for_15b

"After TransCanada announced its lawsuit on Wednesday, the group Friends of the Earth released a statement saying, 'This is why FOTE opposes the TPP and other trade agreements, which allow companies and investors to challenge sovereign government decisions to protect public health and the environment.

For more we're joined by Lori Wallach, the director of Public Citizens Global Trade Watch..."

 

 

TRNN: The Deeper, Uglier Side of TPP (and vid)

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&I...

"In his State of the Union address, President Obama said the TPP was about staying on top as a global and economic power, but a closer look at the text shows how that only applies to multinational corporations..."

Very scary indeed. NO TO TPP!

Keynes or Friedman?  -  by Murray Dobbin

http://rabble.ca/columnists/2016/01/keynes-or-friedman-tpp-presents-econ...

"TPP presents an economic choice for the Liberals.

The real test of where the Liberals are going to take the economy is tied up in the government's pending decision on the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

There is now a large body of research and commentary exposing just how detrimental the TPP is to Canada's economy and democracy. But there has been little on the commentary that looks at the actual record of these [past] deals.

A trip down memory lane will be helpful in understanding where the TPP (and its EU counterpart, CETA) will take us..."

This is a very disturbing development. As is the snow job accompanying it that the signing is somehow 'insignificant'. Unless people make it very clear that Freeland IS NOT TO SIGN THE TPP, a dangerous victory will have been conceded to this 'corporate coup d'etat by stealth'.  CANADA WILL SIGN THE TPP FEB 4.

Canada Will Sign TPP Trade Deal Feb 4; But Ratification Not Certain

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/transpacific-trade-deal-tpp-signing-free...

'Signing does not equal ratifying', International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland says."

But signing is preparatory to ratification. RESIST IT!

 

The TPP Hands Control Over Trade To the World's Wealthiest

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/sujata-dey/the-transplutocratic-agre_b_9009...

"If there is someone who knows about plutocrats it is Chrystia Freeland, Canada's international trade minister responsible for deciding what to do about the TPP, the foremost international agreement among plutocrats...Pull the plug on the TPP and CETA."

DON'T SIGN TPP!

[email protected]

It's all a kabuki dance. You know they're going to ratify it.

She's the Minister of International Trade.  I believe her signing it sends a strong signal to the rest of the Liberal caucus that they are expected to fall in line and support the TPP.

Yes. Chrystia Free[Trade]land should not be allowed to sign this. The US is a sinking titanic that seeks to lash all the TPP economies to itself as 'life-preservers' but will in the end only drag them all down as it goes inexorably to the bottom.

NDPP wrote:

Yes. Chrystia Free[Trade]land should not be allowed to sign this. The US is a sinking titanic that seeks to lash all the TPP economies to itself as 'life-preservers' but will in the end only drag them all down as it goes inexorably to the bottom.

I would slightly modify the metaphor.

Due to US imperialism I think they were already connected. They were in your metaphor tied by rope at a small distance. The US is trying to lash them so they are tied down rather than floating a few feet away. They have been tied to the mothership for decades -- just coming closer to be lashed down.

lying liar Liberals.

let's just call them triple L

Sean and quizzical, can I buy you both a nice ice cream cone? 

Walkom: Justin Trudeau Government Inches Toward TPP Deal

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/01/27/justin-trudeau-government-...

'There's a lot wrong with this trade pact. But the Liberal government will be pressed to adopt it anyway.' SO PRESS BACK!

"...In effect, the TPP presents Ottawa with a Hobson's choice. If Canada wants to remain in the world of trade and investment deals, it will find it near impossible to stay out of whatever new pact comes along - even if the terms of that pact are demonstrably worse than the status quo.

Theoretically, the Trudeau government can avoid this trap by rejecting the trade-deal model altogether and setting out an entirely new economic strategy.

But I don't see any evidence of that happening."

NO CETA, NO TPP!

[email protected]

Mulcair's right.  How often do you sign a contract that you are potentially not committing to?  Never.  A signature is commitment.  Trudeau's response that they must sign it to be able to debate it is ridiculous.  Triple-L.

NDPP wrote:

Trudeau/Mulcair on TPP

http://globalnews.ca/video/2484077/pm-justin-trudeau-ndp-leader-mulcair-...

 DON'T SIGN TPP!

[email protected]

Interesting. This was Harper's the economic strategy. Sign some corporate right deals and hope for the best.

BREAKING: A Top Official Negotiating the TPP Has Resigned Over Bribery Charges

https://cms.fightforthefuture.org/japan/

"We have to stop this!"

 

Do NOT Sign the TPP!

http://linkis.com/dontsignthetpp.net/yTyda

"Decision-makers are pushing to sign the TPP in the next 2 weeks [Feb 4!]. If this happens, it starts the final count-down to push the agreement into law. Tell Trade Ministers 'Do not sign the TPP!' by signing the letter below.."

Contract, agreement, same thing.  I don't believe for a second that they're required to sign it first before presenting it to Parliament for debate.  Signing it is simply a declaration of their intention to become a Party to this Agreement.  The agreement is here.  ETA:  signing makes the whole presentation to Parliament a farce, IMO.

Free Trade Deals Have Become the Opiate of the Ruling Classes

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/daniel-tenser/free-trade-deal_b_9053544.html

"...Did you know the Trudeau government is holding consultations right now on the TPP? No? That's probably because they aren't exactly going out of their way to tell anyone. The non-debate continues under a new government.

The philosophy amounts to 'let's sign up to whatever deal comes along and not worry too much about the details.' In just about any other context, someone who thinks that way would quickly be marked a sucker..."

They have and we are

Don't trust her as far as I can spit. Sign first ratify later when things die down and all is forgotten...

Sean sent me an interesting link with some more details on the ratification process (bolding added):  http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/2014-16-e.htm

Quote:

Under Canada’s constitutional system, the conduct of foreign affairs is a royal prerogative power of the federal Crown.

Consequently, the Executive Branch has the exclusive power to negotiate and conclude international treaties. Parliament has the exclusive power to enact legislation to implement those treaties.

Executive Branch measures:

In Canada, once the text of a treaty is finalized, a minister requests Cabinet approval and submits an explanatory document setting out the treaty’s details. A signing order – an “Instrument of Full Powers” – gives one or more individuals the authority to sign the treaty on Canada’s behalf.

Legislative Branch measures:

After the Executive Branch decides that a treaty should be ratified, Parliament may still need to pass implementing legislation to incorporate the international obligations into domestic law. If such implementing legislation is required, it must be passed before the Executive Branch ratifies the treaty or Canada will be in breach of its international obligations. Thus, after Cabinet approval, a treaty implementation bill is often introduced and goes through the parliamentary legislative process.

Canada’s trade treaties generally change the way in which Canada treats the exports of the other state or states that have ratified the treaty. Consequently, amendments to existing federal legislation – most notably the Customs Tariff – are needed.

Once the federal government concludes that the treaty’s obligations will be respected at the domestic level, Cabinet prepares an Order in Council authorizing a minister to sign an “Instrument of Ratification or Accession.” Ratifying or acceding to a treaty means that Canada agrees to be bound by it.

The Executive Branch being the Prime Minister and Cabinet (and technically the governor general).  So, they've given Ms Freeland the power to sign it.  It seems they don't actually need Parliament as a whole to ratify it.  Rather, the Executive Branch has the power on its own.  But, because legislation may have to be altered or created to make conditions of the treaty possible, they may require the will of the majority of the legislative branch to ensure that this can happen.

From Ms. Freeland's letter:

Quote:

All other countries will follow the same process, and each has up to two years to consider ratification before making a final determination.

So, they have two years to get the laws in order before they (the Executive Branch -- aka the PM and Cabinet) can officially ratify it.  BUT, her letter also contains the following:

Quote:

Only a majority vote in our Parliament can allow the Agreement to take force.

This falls in line with the bolded text I have above too.  Presumably the Cabinet will be voting in favour.  Possibly for the rest of the Liberal Party, it will be a free vote.  So, to guess:  31 yeas from Cabinet + 99 yeas from Conservatives = 130 for sure yeas.  For the nays, 44 NDP.  I'm not sure about the Bloc or Green.  But, for kicks, let's assume they're nays.  So, NDP + Bloc + Green = 55 nays.  I'm assuming Trudeau is fine with a "simple majority" (50%+1), despite his nonsense about how "one vote" should not be able to change the whole country (apparently self-determination of people is different from approving corporate rights deals, but I digress).  So a vote of 170 out of 338 is needed.  So, the yea side needs 40 Liberal backbench votes (130+40), whereas the nay side needs 115 votes from the Liberal backbench (55+115).  It don't look good for the nay side.