TPP - Raw Deal - "ultra-neoliberal legal and economic bloc"

Public Media and Utilities Could be Crushed by TPP: Wikileaks Published 30 July 2015 Wikileaks has dropped another TPP bombshell with a leaked letter suggesting the deal could force mass privatizations of state-owned enterprises The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) could force state enterprises such as public utilities to put profits before public welfare and lead to mass privatizations, according to documents published by Wikileaks Wednesday. Under the TPP, state-owned enterprises (SOEs) would be forced to act “on the basis of commercial considerations,” according to the leak. The document also suggests multinational corporations could be empowered to sue SOEs for supposedly uncompetitive actions like favoring local businesses. The bombshell leak centers around a classified letter from the TPP's December 2013 ministerial meeting. SOEs themselves are common in most TPP countries, and advocates say they perform crucial services aimed at supporting public needs rather than turn a profit. Some examples include Canada's main postal operator, Canada Post, and Australia's public broadcaster ABC. The latter is consistently rated by viewers as one of Australia's most trusted sources of news. “SOEs are almost always state owned because they have functions other than those that are merely commercial, such as guaranteed access to important services, or because social, cultural, development and commercial functions are inextricably intertwined,” said Professor Jane Kelsey, from New Zealand's University of Auckland. In an analysis of Wednesday's leak commissioned by Wikileaks, Kelsey concluded the TPP could carve out a “backdoor to privatization” of state enterprises. She argued seemingly proposed regulations outlined in the leaked document ignore “the reality that SOEs and private firms are driven by different imperatives and obligations.” Kelsey's main complaint was with the document's demand that SOEs prioritize “commercial considerations,” pointing out many state enterprises intentionally run at losses for the public good. “Even where SOEs are profit-oriented, a government may elect not to extract full commercial profits, and choose to reinvest in the enterprise to strengthen the asset base or the quality of the services in ways that private investors would rarely do,” she explained. For example, Australia Post is restricted to using its profits to reinvest in improving services, or handing dividends back to Australia's federal government. Australian Greens trade spokesperson Peter Whish-Wilson told The Saturday Paper that the TPP's chapter on SOEs “directly challenges a government's right to own and operate any enterprise such as Australia Post, the ABC or power utilities that compete with corporate entities, but ultimately also the provision of public good services including healthcare, education. “(It's) a direct assault by corporations trying to limit the role of government,” he said. In a statement, Wikileaks said the leaked document proved the TPP will force member states to swallow “a wide-ranging privatization and globalization strategy.” “In this leak we see the radical effects the TPP will have, not only on developing countries, but on states very close to the center of the Western system,” said Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. Under negotiation for more than seven years, supporters say the TPP will streamline global trade and promote economic growth. Once the TPP is completed, its provisions will override national laws of its 12 member states, including Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and the United States. The deal is already being hailed as the largest trade agreement in world history, and will encompass over 40 percent of global GDP. However, the deal's provisions have been almost entirely withheld from the public, prompting critics to argue the agreement is subject to undue secrecy. The few glimpses the public has had into the closed door talks have been leaked drafts of the TPP published by Wikileaks. Independent analysts say the trade deal is a “bonanza” for big business, and a raw deal for consumers. U.S. trade officials have responded by urging the public not to read the leaks, arguing the draft documents may not accurately represent the final document. The controversial deal has already sparked international protests, with activists demanding negotiators open talks to public scrutiny. Warning that the TPP will erect a “'one size fits all' economic system,” Assange said public debate on the trade deal is urgently needed. “If we are to restructure our societies into an ultra-neoliberal legal and economic bloc that will last for the next 50 years then this should be said openly and debated,” he said. http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Public-Media-and-Utilities-Could-be-Crushed-by-TPP-Wikileaks-20150730-0014.html --------------------- COMMENT This isn't democracy; this is corporate control of the state.   Western politicians and governments place corporate interests ahead of vital public interests and public well-being, as if this were already a corporate dictatorship it will definitely become under the TPP. Everything the public, workers, unions, and other activist have fought for over the decades is about to be denied the public, and government is even assigning national sovereignty to corporations, by virtue of placing corporate powers set out in the 'free trade' agreement ahead of national, state, and local authorities' ability to subsequently legislate in the interest of public well-being. In negotiating the TPP, elected government is working against public interest by even entertaining an agreement which lets corporations call the shots: with the threat of corporate lawsuits blocking future lawmaking; by letting corporations block the right to public ownership of vital public services; and by letting corporations dictate that the good of the corporation (profit) must come before the public good. It's criminal that this trade agreement has been kept from the public by politicians, who also hoped to keep the sell-out agreement under wraps for something like 5 years, even after signing. It's ironic that whilstleblower publisher WikiLeaks - whose editor is presently under siege, and under an unprecedented 5-year long attack by US authorities - is the source of information regarding this immense threat from corporate America and friends.  The hide of the politicians acting contrary to their mandate to serve the public, rather than to screw the public (as intended by the TPP), who have acted to keep this agreement from public scrutiny, is really something to behold. And the prospect of life under corporate rule, a la corporate controlled, less than minimum wage, downtrodden, union-less, exploited, underclass hell-hole USA, is positively frightening. So why are the unions silent? SEE ALSO: TRANSCRIPT - VIDEO - Noam Chomsky: You Can't Have Capitalist Democracy

Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA)

TiSA – the new trade deal being kept under wraps Tony Burke The deal would enable corporations to monopolise entire sectors, such as telecoms and communications Earlier this month I wrote about Obama’s plans to fast track TTIP. Now, the WikiLeaks publication of seventeen documents related to the proposed TiSA trade deal has shone a welcome light on the secrecy surrounding negotiations on this trade deal. Although an outline of the plan has been in discussion for over a year it has remained secret, with the documents supposedly due to remain classified for five years. The Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) has been around since 2013. Discussions are taking place between the USA, the EU and twenty-two other nations including Canada, Mexico, Australia, Israel, South Korea, Japan, Norway, Switzerland, Turkey, and many others across South America and Asia. Twelve of the G20 nations have a place at the table, and it has been extended to include Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa. Like TTIP, CETA, and TPP, the TiSA deal would turbo-charge global trade this time in ‘services’, which includes air and maritime transport; parcel delivery; e-commerce; telecommunications; accounting; engineering; consulting; health care; private education; and financial services – around 80 per cent of the US economy. Like the other deals, TiSA is veiled in secrecy but the leaked documents show that that it would restrict the ability of sovereign governments to manage their own legislation. This would be done through a regulatory cap limiting regulation of services at all levels from national to local government level. Using ‘standstill’ clauses, TiSA will be able to stop new laws being passed, and prevent new professional licensing, new or amended qualifications or technical standards being enacted. And like TTIP it has a ‘ratchet’ clause, which would make decisions made under TiSA irreversible. Experts also say the TiSA text is almost incomprehensible unless you are a trade lawyer.  However, it appears that foreign corporations must receive the same ‘national treatment’ as domestic companies; that regulations cannot be ‘more burdensome than necessary to ensure the quality of the service’ and no restrictions can be placed on foreign investment. This would allow corporations to monopolise entire sectors such as telecoms and communications. Public services, including telephone and postal services, would be broken up or forced into competition with foreign service providers. The United States and EU have said that that these regulations need not be permanent, but they also ‘noted the important complementary role of the private sector in these areas to improve the availability and diversity of services’. Catch 22 again! Corporations would also be able to use secret courts similar to the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) process in TTIP, TPP and CETA where they can demand compensation equal to ‘expected future profits’ lost through violations of the ‘regulatory cap’. Experts have warned that if TiSA comes into force, governments would be helpless to stop ‘financial innovation’ – including the type of behaviour which brought about the collapse of the banks in the US and the EU in 2007- 2008. Switzerland, that bastion of transparency, has proposed that TiSA must allow ‘any new financial service’ to enter their market. Regulations designed to protect investors and savers are ‘allowed’, but they ‘must not act contrary to TiSA rules’. A win-win situation for the banks! Financial services suppliers will also be able to use individual client data regardless of national privacy laws. And what of employment protections and workers’ rights? Well, although there is still a lack of clarity it appears that TiSA would classify migrant workers as ‘independent service suppliers’. This would apply not just to professionals such as architects, vets, engineers, accountants, designers and IT consultants, but to other migrant workers like nurses and care workers, who would be classed as ‘service suppliers’ with no employer-employee relationship. TiSA will put corporations before governments on every occasion, and as with TPP and TTIP the US president will have ‘fast track’ authority to push TiSA through the US legislature without line-by-line scrutiny. Rosa Pavanelli, general secretary of Public Services International (the global trade union umbrella body for public service workers) criticised “The irony of the text containing repeated references to transparency, and an entire Annex on transparency requiring governments to provide information useful to business, being negotiated in secret from the population exposes in whose interests these agreements are being made”. Larry Cohen, outgoing president of Communication Workers of America, said: “This is as big a blow to our rights and freedom as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and in both cases our government’s secrecy is the key enabler.” Tony Burke is Assistant General Secretary of Unite responsible for manufacturing. He is a member of the TUC Executive Committee and General Council, the Labour Party National Policy Forum, Trade Union co-ordinator for the Morning Star newspaper and chair of the Campaign For Trade Union Freedom. He also contributes to Tribune, the Morning Star, The Manufacturer, the TUC’s Stronger Unions website and blogs at his own Power In A Union. SOURCE http://leftfootforward.org/2015/07/tisa-the-new-trade-deal-being-kept-under-wraps/ --------------------- COMMENT TiSA sounds as bad news as the TPP, so why would any responsible government enter into this?  Stand by for being screwed by corporations generally, as well as foreign corporations.

Canada - Middle Eastern Player

CANADA  -  MIDDLE EAST Curious what is motivating the huge Canadian display of solidarity with Israel. Here's a bit about trade: Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement In force since January 1997. The Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement (CIFTA) eliminated tariffs on industrial products and some agricultural and fisheries products. Since CIFTA came into force, Canada-Israel bilateral merchandise trade has more than doubled, from $507.3 million in 1996 to over $1.4 billion dollars in 2013. On January 21, 2014, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of the State of Israel, announced the launch of negotiations to expand and modernize the CIFTA Agreement ... http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/israel/index.aspx?lang=eng&view=d Canada and Israel Begin Third Round of Trade Expansion Talks December 7, 2014 - Ottawa, Ontario - Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada The Honourable Ed Fast, Minister of International Trade, today announced the start of the third round of negotiations to expand and modernize the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement (CIFTA). The negotiations are taking place in Jerusalem from December 7 to 11, 2014, and will cover a range of issues. An expanded and modernized agreement will support Canadian businesses and investors, deepen trade and investment linkages and further strengthen Canada’s bilateral relationship with Israel. Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced the launch of negotiations during his official visit to Israel last January. Israel is a priority market for Canada under the Global Markets Action Plan. Quick Facts CIFTA is a cornerstone of Canada’s commercial relationship with Israel. Since CIFTA came into force in 1997, Canada’s two-way merchandise trade with Israel has more than doubled. Key opportunities for Canadian companies exist in sectors such as defence, information and communications technology, life sciences, sustainable technologies, agriculture, agri-food, and fish and seafood. http://www.international.gc.ca/media/comm/news-communiques/2014/12/07a.aspx?lang=eng Trade and Investment (2013) Canadian exports to country: ...   $380,860,289 Canadian imports from country: $1,058,896,443 http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/israel/bilateral_relations_bilaterales/fs_israel_fd.aspx?lang=eng It looks like Israel does better out of the trade than Canada, as Canada's importing way more than it is exporting. Found this really cool site - International Trade by Commodity Statistics 2013, Canada - but from a quick flick nothing really jumps out at me. ......................................................................... A random check on arms indicates: Canada Is Ramping Up Its Arms Exporting Trade By Nicky Young April 9, 2014 | 10:55 pm Earlier this year, the Harper government proudly announced it has sealed the “largest export deal in the country's history”—a $10-13 billion deal that will create and sustain 3,000 jobs. Contrary to what you might want to think, the commodity we’re sending overseas isn’t maple syrup or lumber; it's light armored vehicles. The recipient? Saudi Arabia: everyone's favorite champion of human rights and democracy. While light armored vehicles sound like fairly chill, non-threatening machines, they’re actually “amphibious reconnaissance vehicles” that are often mounted with machine guns. The Saudis have already used these kinds of vehicles to suppress Arab Spring protests in Bahrain, in hopes of preventing any encroaching Iranian involvement in the area. So basically, Canada’s record-breaking arms deal just provided a significant advantage to the Saudis who are in the midst of an already very complex and hostile arms race in one of the most volatile regions in the world. Nice one! Canada is getting more secretive with protected 'public information'. Read more here. Bolstering economic stability by increasing Canada’s presence in the arms trade has become a cornerstone of Conservative policy in the past few years. One of the more controversial deals, especially in light of recent events, was the $80,000 arms deal to the brutal Ukrainian Yanukovych regime in 2011, which was enabled by Harpers refusal to sign a landmark UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT); a treaty that even the U.S signed. On its own website, the Canadian Government claims to “strongly support the ATT” in a seven year old post they have conveniently ignored editing, while simultaneously ignoring demands to put the treaty they originally agreed with into effect. This issue is certainly underreported, but the NDP issued a statement last month requesting that the Government of Canada follow the lead of Germany and suspend all arms trade with Russia following the invasion of Crimea, because apparently we haven’t already. It appears that this request has gone unanswered. After losing nearly 46,000 jobs in December 2013 alone, Canadians are clearly hurting for work; so maybe we shouldn't be looking the gift munitions in its armed mouth. After all, new jobs have to come from somewhere, and they certainly won’t be coming from public sector. So they might as well come from selling arms to one of the most brutally repressive regimes in the world, right? This strategy feels even more hypocritical when you take a peek at other stances the Conservatives and their buddies are campaigning on. There’s the ongoing Ethical Oil lobbying foundation started by Alykhan Velshi, a former Conservative communications director, who is continuously attempting to pacify Canadians to the tar sands by running TV commercials that argue Canadian oil is the lesser of two evils, when compared to the oil being produced in Saudi Arabia. These ads viciously attack the Saudis on their human rights violations, and yet our International Trade Minister still feels confident about Canada’s decision to sell weapons to their government. As Canada.com reported, the Minister’s spokesman insisted that Canada “rigorously assesses all exports of military goods and technology on a case-by-case basis,” adding that deals are only given the green light “if such exports are consistent with Canada’s foreign and defence policies, including human rights.” This is not to mention Harper’s new "Office of Religious Freedom,” which is emblematic of an open and accepting Canada, while also providing the Conservatives with a great PR look for the country’s religious minorities. Unfortunately, slanging LAV’s to a country where religious conversion from Islam is considered apostasy and punishable by death seems slightly counter-productive to dropping five million a year in hopes of "Protecting, and advocating on behalf of, religious minorities under threat" in Canada. [LOL ... this writer's quite funny.] It seems the glory days in which Canada was held in high regards as a global peacekeeper have come to an end, thanks to economic instability. Since massive cuts to the defense budget in the United States, Canada is now looking to unstable developing nations to market its tools of death. For more information on Canada’s increasing role as an arms exporter, I got in touch with Hilary Homes, an ATT campaigner from Amnesty International Canada. She told me: “Amnesty isn’t opposed to arms sales, we’re opposed to irresponsible arms sales. We’ve been campaigning for the ATT to assess and regulate the risk of weapons being used for human rights violations through sales and licensing. I think people often focus on tanks, guns, and ammunition and forget that transport is needed to moves forces, and LAV’s often have other equipment like automatic weapons mounted to them. Our Government likes to think it’s got a good record in terms of the export regulation of arms. Amnesty would really like Canada to sign on to the ATT and become more rigorous. When you see a sale of this size to a country like Saudi Arabia it raises red flags.” As for Canada’s reluctance to sign the UN’s ATT, Hillary explained: “Canada voted in favour at the UN when first considering the text, but has yet to sign it. Internationally, Canada is way behind the game on that one and really doesn’t have a valid reason. The U.S signed the ATT; they didn’t even sign the Landmine Treaty. Canada needs to live up to prior commitments.” Hilary directed me to Ken Epps, an expert on the Canadian military industry and our arms exporting deals, who is currently serving as Senior Program Officer at Project Ploughshares, an NGO that “works with churches, governments and civil society, in Canada and abroad, to advance policies and actions to prevent war and armed violence and build peace.” Hilary described Ken has someone who has “been in the room,” alluding to his firsthand experience with arms treaties. Ken told me he thinks the Canadian government “intends” to play a large role in the arms trade, adding: “The Saudi deal has certainly been couched in those terms.” He referred me to an article he wrote that demonstrates “the different programs that have been around for some time but are now getting a boost from the current Canadian government all pointed towards increasing Canada’s arms exports. The Saudi deal is the first major indication that things are moving in the direction they want.” In a way, Ken says Canada’s recent deal with the Saudis is “not news” as “between 1988 and 2008 Saudi Arabia was the second largest customer, next to the U.S, of Canadian military goods… it’s just the size suggests that Canada is really trying to boost arms exports.” While Canadian arms dealing may not be a brand new phenomenon, such a large sale to the Saudis is noteworthy. As Ken told me: “This new arms deal is being promoted by the government as jobs, with very little attention paid to the risk of this equipment being used in the next outbreak of conflict in the region… Canada should not be creating jobs dependent on countries where human rights are a major concern. Workers should not be in a position where they are building equipment that they could see on the news being used to attack civilians. I think that’s a pretty poor job creation strategy.” https://news.vice.com/article/canada-is-ramping-up-its-arms-exporting-trade ......................................................................... COMMENT If Canada is invested in selling arms in the Middle East, Canada is therefore probably invested in promoting and maintaining conflict in the Middle East -- or, at the very least, backing up the camp it stands to profit from. No wonder the Canadian Foreign Minister is hysterically pointing at Iran, the imminent Iranian threat to the 'Universe' and galaxies beyond!  Iran is the Saudi Arabian nemesis in the region and Saudi Arabia appears to be Canada's best customer.

This and That

This and That What's happening? Discovered a Turkish controlled 'exclave' in Syria -- guessing it's this place. According to the Treaty of Ankara signed between France and Turkey in 1921, Turkey controls the tomb and no mention is made of the land beneath it. So it's not really a territory within a territory, like I imagined?   Checking elsewhere, it states it's 'smaller than a city block', so it's not just a few feet by a few feet like I first thought when I read about the tomb.  It's some kind of tiny 'territory' after all.  Looks like it's going to shape up as an excuse for Turkey to take 'action' against Syria if the IS group attack this territory. Encountered a creepy photo of what was allegedly the FSA group getting a child to behead what I suppose was a Syrian loyalist:  bound, hand and foot (I think), on his side, with his head resting, raised on some kind of block.  The child held something above his head, swinging.  Not sure what it was.  Imagined it was an axe.  But I'm now guessing it was a sword, seeing it's the Middle East.  Elicited a degree of revulsion. Stumbled on some information on the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA).   Trying to recall what it was, got it mixed up with the other agreements. This one relates to:   "liberalizing the worldwide trade of services such as banking and transport" [wikipedia] It's just another in agreement upon agreement that gives the US control right around the globe. "The EU and the US are the main proponents of the agreement, and the authors of most joint changes."  [wikipedia] But it doesn't end with the US and the EU.  A host of other countries are involved in this and end result is that something like two-thirds of 'trade of services' will be subject to the provisions of this agreement. Apparently, nobody finds the spread of US control at all frightening and they're happy to sign up.  Guess that goes back to being corporate controlled governments doing the bidding of big business, instead of primarily being engaged in representing the people of the nation they're supposedly serving as an elected government in a 'democracy'. Add to that unpleasant picture the fact that this is a 'secret' agreement that was supposed to stay quiet for 5 years after signature.  More information on that is available at the WikiLeaks.org site.  Not sure what I can and can't link to without being in breach of some law or other, so search away.  Easily found. The secrecy of the agreement and the two-thirds of 'world trade in services' being subject to the agreement were the really big red-flag aspects in my view.  But there's also a lack flexibility to respond to changes in world finance that binds governments who sign up for this, and probably other stuff I don't remember or care to know. How outrageous is it that 'democratic' governments are *hiding* what they're signing their entire countries up for! The WikiLeaks site pointed out that the US is pushing for cross-border exchange of data that includes personal and financial information.  So I take it this is yet more surveillance and foreign control.  The G20 ministers meeting resulted in either sign-ups or agreements to sign up for banking data exchange on what is probably a global scale once all the US puppets sign up, so the G20 erosion of liberties could be TISA related -- or just an added round of more of the same erosions. Highly doubt that this will ever affect me personally, in a direct way.   But this affects everybody in terms of the climate their government is creating:  one of secrecy, one of perhaps 'duty' and subordination to foreign interests, one of inability to put national interests first given constraints of such agreements, one of inability to freely act or legislate in future due to provisions of such an agreements, one of divulging citizens' data to foreign interests and therefore conducting what amounts to surveillance on behalf of a foreign power or powers, and so on.  And if you put all of that together, it's like coming under control of some foreign invader state that already controls much of the world.  A world that is shaping up to be one large prison controlled by the US through control of currency, global institutions, defence agreements, the EU, mass surveillance arrangements and various trade agreements. [Image source:  rachelcarsoncouncil.org] If you imagine US control as a vice; it's a vice that's constantly squeezing to erode national sovereignty and to erode civil liberties, right around the world.  It's literally suffocating.

USA - FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS & PROPOSED FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS LIST

US Free trade agreements in force Here is a list of free trade agreements of which the United States is part. Israel: Israel–United States Free Trade Agreement (incl. Palestinian Authority; 1985) Mexico Canada North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) (incl. Canada and Mexico; 1994) Jordan: Jordan–United States Free Trade Agreement (2001) Australia: Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement (2004) Chile: Chile–United States Free Trade Agreement (2004) Singapore: Singapore–United States Free Trade Agreement (2004) Bahrain: Bahrain–United States Free Trade Agreement (2006) Morocco: Morocco-United States Free Trade Agreement (2006) Oman: Oman–United States Free Trade Agreement (2006) Peru: Peru–United States Trade Promotion Agreement (2007) Costa Rica El Salvador Guatemala Honduras Nicaragua Dominican Republic Dominican Republic–Central America Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA; incl. Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic; 2005) Panama: Panama–United States Trade Promotion Agreement (2011) Colombia: United States–Colombia Free Trade Agreement (2011) South Korea: United States–Republic of Korea Free Trade Agreement (2011) Proposed free trade agreements The United States is negotiating bilateral and multilateral free trade agreements with the following countries and blocs: Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA; incl. all countries on the Western Hemisphere, except Cuba) U.S.–Middle East Free Trade Area (US-MEFTA; incl. most countries in the Middle East) United States, Europe Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA; European Union) Thailand: United States–Thailand Free Trade Agreement (on hold since the 2006 Thai coup d'état) New Zealand: US–New Zealand Free Trade Agreement Ghana: US–Ghana Free Trade Agreement Indonesia: US–Indonesia Free Trade Agreement Kenya: US–Kenya Free Trade Agreement Kuwait: US–Kuwait Free Trade Agreement (Expert-level trade talks held in February 2006) Malaysia: US–Malaysia Free Trade Agreement (last meeting was in July 2008) Mauritius: US–Mauritius Free Trade Agreement Mozambique: US–Mozambique Free Trade Agreement Taiwan: US–Taiwan Free Trade Agreement United Arab Emirates: US–United Arab Emirates Free Trade Agreement (5th round of talks are yet to be scheduled) US–Southern African Customs Union Free Trade Agreement (US-SAUC; incl. South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland, and Namibia; on hold since 2006 due to US demands on intellectual property rights, government procurement rights and investment) Ecuador: US–Ecuador Free Trade Agreement Qatar: US–Qatar Free Trade Agreement (on hold since 2006) Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership SOURCE - WIKIPEDIA @ AUG 2014 - here.