In the discussion thread: Exposing the Financial Core of the Transnational Capitalist Class [View all]
Response to rhett o rick (Reply #15)
Fri Sep 20, 2013, 05:41 PM
Octafish (38,331 posts)
17. These are the fellahs who'll make a killing off TPP.
An example of the future of Global Capital:
MoreTobacco, Less Health Care
Trans-Pacific Partnership Secrecy Tightens
by PETE DOLACK
CounterPunch WEEKEND EDITION SEPTEMBER 6-8, 2013
The secret Trans-Pacific Partnership is about to become even more secret, perhaps seen as a necessity in light of plans to make it easier for tobacco companies to sue while making health care more difficult to obtain.
The governments negotiating the draconian TPP still don’t want you to know what’s in it. Many of them issued cheery press releases congratulating themselves for the “progress” they made last week in Brunei. But you will search in vain for any information on what TPP negotiators are up to. They will now end their practice of “consultation” — the August 23 to 30 negotiations (the 19th round) are the last scheduled. Instead, negotiators will begin to meet in unannounced meetings.
In other words, not only is the text of the TPP to remain a secret, the negotiations themselves are to now be secret.
Yes to tobacco, no to medicine
The Obama administration has consistently pushed for the most draconian rules. Washington’s latest outrage concerns regulations on tobacco products, universally opposed by tobacco companies. Early drafts of the TPP included “safe harbor” provisions protecting national tobacco-control measures — such as package warnings and advertising and marketing restrictions — from corporate challenges. But the Obama administration has reversed course under tobacco industry and U.S. Chamber of Commerce pressure, intending to severely limit the ability of signatory governments to maintain their laws.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative said its counter-proposal would “contain a general exception for matters necessary to protect human life or health” and add a provision that a complaining “party” (that is, a corporation) must first meet with “health authorities … to discuss the measure.”
Note that there is nothing in the proposal that prevents a complaining “party” from suing to overturn a regulation following a discussion. And the “general exception” is meaningless as the arbitration boards that hear investor complaints (controlled by entities such as the World Bank) consistently rule that any environmental or safety rule that reduces a corporation’s profits be overturned. For example, Canada was forced to pay Ethyl Corporation $13 million and issue an apology because it had banned a gasoline additive that causes neurological damage and contributes to air pollution. This additive was already banned in the U.S., where Ethyl is based, but the chemical company claimed Canada’s ban “expropriated” its profits.
PS: You are most welcome, rhett o rick! Very much appreciate that you grok the situation and what is coming.
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
|woo me with science||Sep 2013||#13|
|rhett o rick||Sep 2013||#15|
These are the fellahs who'll make a killing off TPP.
|woo me with science||Sep 2013||#16|
Please login to view edit histories.