HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Canada's PM Justin Trudea...

Fri Nov 10, 2017, 10:49 PM

 

Canada's PM Justin Trudeau sabotages Trans-Pacific Partnership, shocking leaders

Source: Sydney Morning Herald

Lindsay Murdoch, 12:30PM

Danang Vietnam: Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau sabotaged the endorsement of a pact to salvage a multibillion-dollar, 11-nation Pacific Rim trade deal at the last minute, surprising leaders of the other nations, including Australia's Malcolm Turnbull.

But amid confusion and drama on the sidelines of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Vietnam, trade ministers issued a statement saying all 11 countries had agreed to continue negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership and "core elements" of the deal had been reached, while more work to be done.

The statement said a "limited set of provisions" from the original deal would be suspended, adding further technical work was needed on four areas that still needed consensus "to prepare finalised text for signature."

Mr Trudeau failed to show up at a meeting late on Friday that was set to officially revive the agreement. "There were a lot of unhappy leaders left sitting there," said an official who was in the meeting.

"Everyone was screwed," he said.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/canadas-pm-justin-trudeau-sabotages-transpacific-partnership-shocking-leaders-20171110-gzj866.html



Note: This SMH article was posted at 12:30 pm Saturday, Australian Time

31 replies, 4743 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 31 replies Author Time Post
Reply Canada's PM Justin Trudeau sabotages Trans-Pacific Partnership, shocking leaders (Original post)
Loyd Nov 10 OP
applegrove Nov 10 #1
Achilleaze Nov 11 #13
applegrove Nov 11 #14
Hortensis Nov 11 #20
sandensea Nov 10 #2
elleng Nov 10 #3
sandensea Nov 11 #7
FiveGoodMen Nov 10 #4
sandensea Nov 11 #8
stuffmatters Nov 11 #22
FiveGoodMen Nov 11 #23
stuffmatters Nov 11 #25
Bernardo de La Paz Nov 12 #29
FiveGoodMen Nov 12 #30
Bernardo de La Paz Nov 12 #31
Hortensis Nov 11 #21
Egnever Nov 11 #24
Hoyt Nov 11 #26
Bernardo de La Paz Nov 12 #28
applegrove Nov 10 #5
applegrove Nov 10 #6
Puzzler Nov 11 #9
applegrove Nov 11 #10
Puzzler Nov 11 #11
Loyd Nov 11 #12
applegrove Nov 11 #15
Loyd Nov 11 #16
applegrove Nov 11 #18
nitpicker Nov 11 #17
nitpicker Nov 11 #19
Bernardo de La Paz Nov 12 #27

Response to Loyd (Original post)

Fri Nov 10, 2017, 10:51 PM

1. Me and my taxi driver in Ottawa today think Trump said something

or did something to change Trudeau's mind. It's possible

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 04:35 AM

13. Comrade Casino* pissing on the pact?

would surprise no one.

* republican Draft-Dodger-in-Chief

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Achilleaze (Reply #13)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 04:44 AM

14. Seems less likely after Trudeau rejoined the TPP group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Reply #14)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 06:27 AM

20. Very much so. And it's now the CPATPP. :)

Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Moving forward without the U.S. meant a reordering of what was possible at this point. The word "pragmatic" is used in one vague general explanation.

From Reuters:

Japanese Economy Minister Toshimitsu Motegi said he hoped that moving ahead with the deal would be a step towards bringing back the United States.

Partly to counter China’s growing dominance in Asia, Japan had been lobbying hard for the TPP pact, which aims to eliminate tariffs on industrial and farm products across the 11-nation bloc whose trade totalled $356 billion last year.

A huge purpose behind the TPP, of course, was to unite the Pacific nations to keep China from eventually controlling the Pacific, but U.S. participation is definitely needed to keep that tiger leashed. It had been working. China had seemingly abandoned a number of its plans for the Pacific and had turned its attention to building up connections west across Asia toward Europe and with western Africa.

Itm, the rest of our partners go forward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loyd (Original post)

Fri Nov 10, 2017, 11:04 PM

2. Good.

The most srious - but by no means sole - problem with the TPP would be its ISDS provisions.

ISDS (Investor State Dispute Settlement) allows foreign corporations or even individual investors - many of them criminals - to skip the U.S. court system entirely and sue the U.S. or local and state governments before a panel of private “arbitrators.”

The risk is that they can use these kangaroo courts to challenge any regulation or other government decision.

All they'd have to do is think of an argument for why the decision somehow “violated its right to fair and equitable treatment” or why it might reduce its “expected profits” and it’s got a case.

No way, José.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sandensea (Reply #2)

Fri Nov 10, 2017, 11:13 PM

3. Good info.

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 12:04 AM

7. You bet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sandensea (Reply #2)

Fri Nov 10, 2017, 11:19 PM

4. Agreed! ISDS is unacceptable.

Don't know how Obama thought it would be okay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FiveGoodMen (Reply #4)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 12:13 AM

8. Like a good many Dems, he believed the "environmental and labor law safeguards"

But it's sheer wishful thinking.

The ISDS mechanism itself all but guarantees that any such safeguards in the TPP - plus existing environmental, labor, anti-trust, and financial laws in each ratifying country - would be subordinate to ISDS rulings.

And since these would be Roman-style tribunals, presided by corporate lobbyists not subject to any conflict-of-interest or ethics laws, they'd be just one step above a kangaroo court.

That's what often gets lost in the debate - even among good Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sandensea (Reply #8)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 07:04 AM

22. Yep, Countries relinquish not only their sovereignty but imperil their economic well being too..

I expect, hope Trudeau has witnessed and processed the dangers that ISDS, as written, have already posed to democratic countries in these agreements. BTW in Congress none have been labelled "treaties", which they are, bkz that requires a higher legislative approval % to pass.

ISDS is the new blunt instrument of vulture capitalism; Wall Street is already cashing in billions: Wall Street attracts investors to invest in a company where that country (or state,or city etc) is going to pass a law that will cost
the host company lots of money. Once the law or regulation is passed, they sue for loss of EXPECTED PROFITS(!) and get billions in these ISDS global corporate kangeroo courts, which the government, i.e. the taxpayers of the ISDS mandated host country (or state, or city) must pay.

ISDS was designed to protect investors and companies in foreign countries. But as written in these trade agreements, ISDS not only subverts democracy and the judicial sovereignty of member nations. ISDS is increasingly a major predatory investment mechanism for plundering national treasuries...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stuffmatters (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 12:08 PM

23. "EXPECTED PROFITS"

"We promised ourselves we'd be filthy rich and if we're not, someone (else) is going to pay!"

Expect this, motherfuckers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FiveGoodMen (Reply #23)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 06:41 PM

25. Yep. It's already happening like w TransCanada suing US billions when Pipeline looked thwarted.

It's a typical Wall Street investment instrument, their win win either way & taxpayers pick up the tab not for just costs but "Lost" Profits. Quite the squirrel cage.

Wall Street also sells these ISDS corporate investments then initiates suits against national(states, municipalities) with laws already on the books. Notice how fast Ca's cage free egg law got subverted, how "origin"is now being omitted for food (it's harder to buy New Zealand lamb labels) These are measures taken in order to avoid these law suits and massive fines upon taxpayers from these extra judicial corporate courts. And it's just the tip of the iceberg.

So not only does ISDS encourage these lawsuits and unimaginable wealth extraction for their investors, they also begin to control, by threatening ISDS suits, our environmental, labor, and even food protections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FiveGoodMen (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 12, 2017, 06:29 AM

29. It is impartial. Is it true you support tRump's AMERICA FIRST policies?


Because that is what abolishing the ISDS is all about.

If you don't have a mechanism like ISDS in international trade treaties, and therefore incorporated in American law, you have America First all the way. And you won't get the trade treaties agreed to by the other countries.

America First really means America all alone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bernardo de La Paz (Reply #29)

Sun Nov 12, 2017, 03:00 PM

30. ISDS is all about taking sovereignty away from nations and giving it to corporations

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FiveGoodMen (Reply #30)

Sun Nov 12, 2017, 04:22 PM

31. No, its to prevent corps running to one country, "Daddy, beat up the other country".


It stops excessive America-first super-tariffs and Canada-first super-tariffs and Mexico-first super-tariffs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sandensea (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 06:51 AM

21. All trade pacts have investor-state dispute settlement clauses,

Last edited Sat Nov 11, 2017, 07:23 AM - Edit history (1)

of course, but the development of the very problems mentioned have caused some of the traditional ones to be completely rewritten and signatory nations to many others are deciding what changes should be made. Used to be mainly states who used them, of course, not business to override the sovereignty of national governments.

Nations still need a mechanism to encourage trade by protecting their own investors going abroad, though. EU doesn't do the traditional form at all any more, though I don't know what ISDS they went to. Some use some kind of tribunal with limited appeal powers to states to address disputes.

I always wondered what Hillary intended when she promised to withdraw after major opposition had been womped up over the ISDS boogie. It's impossible to imagine she even for a second considered ceding dominance of the Pacific to China.

No idea what options she was considering, of course, but the best ignorant guess I could come up with was that she and the other partners would restyle and sell the TPP as a new agreement that we could join, adopting a different form of ISDS (no doubt pushing its official name and avoiding the term ISDS like the plague ), and move forward.

Just hope our betrayal of our former partners is temporary and we are able to take our place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sandensea (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 12:38 PM

24. Holly crap still spreading that nonsense

Your understanding of the ISDS is severely flawed.

I have had this discussion with you in the past as well and I know you know better I wonder why you continue to spread misinformation.

What you call "private arbitrators" are actually people chosen by both sides of the case not some random person chosen by outside parties. The pool they have to choose from are agreed upon by all countries involved.

Your pretense that it is some sort of monkey court is complete nonsense and I seriously wonder why you continue to spread this false narrative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sandensea (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 08:03 PM

26. I disagree. The ISDS has been in just about every trade agreement since 1959, even ones USA

was not involved in. That's over 2,500 trade agreements. It helps smaller countries attract investments. The "private arbitrators" are sanctioned by the World Trade Organization operating under the auspices of the UN. Each country gets to pick one of three arbitrators, and the third is by mutual agreement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sandensea (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 12, 2017, 06:25 AM

28. Wrong. The ISDS is part of American law. . . . nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loyd (Original post)

Fri Nov 10, 2017, 11:20 PM

5. I'm so confused. I keep hearing It's on or It's off. Now It's on again:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to applegrove (Reply #6)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 02:00 AM

9. Justin Trudeau appears to be there ...

Taken from the above link:

“... the final day of the APEC CEO Summit on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders' summit in Danang, Vietnam, Friday, Nov. 10, 2017. (Anthony Wallance / Pool Photo)

[PHOTO]

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau with APEC leaders

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, centre top, takes part with other leaders in the APEC Leaders official photograph at the APEC Summit in Danang, Vietnam Friday November 10, 2017. (Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS).”

—�—�—�—�—�—�—�—

BTW: apologies, I’m unsure how to post the photo.

... and apologies if I have misunderstood anything.



-Puzzler

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puzzler (Reply #9)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 03:19 AM

10. I heard on the radio the meeting happened. Then my cab driver told

me Justin had pulled out of the meeting. Now it seems it is on again and they came to some sort of agreement. I think it is just a case of 13 hours time difference and posting articles from the internet vs. radio vs. word of mouth vs. tv that had me trying to figure out where we actually were regarding the TPP. I don't like time-event anomalies

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 03:48 AM

11. Yes ... most likely (n/t)

-Puzzler

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 04:24 AM

12. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/at-apec-canada-is-awol-while-america-stays-hom

 

NOVEMBER 11 2017 - 4:00PM

3:30 later...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loyd (Reply #12)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 04:45 AM

15. Oh i give up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Reply #15)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 04:53 AM

16. I Stand Ready to be Corrected

 

if you have the info.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loyd (Reply #16)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 04:56 AM

18. I'm going to wait for CBC NEWS Saturday night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loyd (Original post)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 04:55 AM

17. From DW

http://www.dw.com/en/pacific-rim-states-agree-on-core-elements-of-tpp-trade-deal-without-us/a-41336489

(snip)
Canada, however, voiced its reservations during the latest talks, insisting on environmental and labor protection. Late on Thursday, Japanese Economy Minister Toshimitsu Motegi told reporters that a basic deal was achieved, but this was quickly disputed by Canada's representative Francois-Philippe Champagne.While Champagne backed the joint statement on Saturday, he also warned that Canada will "not be rushed" into a potentially bad deal.

"We are pleased that progress is being made towards a possible agreement, but there is still some work to be done. Our priority is to ensure that it is the right deal for Canadian workers and businesses," he said.

A press conference was scheduled later on Saturday.
(snip)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loyd (Original post)

Sat Nov 11, 2017, 05:00 AM

19. And The Globe And Mail take

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-10-other-pacific-nations-agree-on-core-elements-of-new-trade-deal/article36911294/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&

(snip)
Canadian Trade Minister François-Philippe Champagne dismissed the reports as a "misunderstanding" and said Canada took the time it needed to push for stronger environmental and labour protections. "This is Canada. We won't settle for just any deal," he told reporters Friday. "This is about making sure that Canada as a Pacific nation would have access to the markets in the Pacific region. This is also about setting the terms of trade in the region."

Mr. Champagne said any changes to trade rules affecting the auto sector – a major point of concern among North American auto makers and labour leaders – would be determined at a later date.
(snip)

The challenge for Canada and Mexico at the TPP talks is that both countries are also in the midst of renegotiating the North American free-trade agreement with the U.S., so many of the same issues are in play at the separate negotiating tables.
(snip)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loyd (Original post)

Sun Nov 12, 2017, 06:22 AM

27. The real story: Mexico and Canada together because it wasn't ready


http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/11/11/justin-trudeau-enrique-pena-nieto-tpp-deal_a_23274383/

Heading into APEC, a senior Canadian government official said Ottawa had been anticipating pressure from TPP partners Japan and Australia, two countries that wanted to move forward quickly with sealing the 11-country deal.

The Trudeau government, on the other hand, wanted to throw some sand in the gears. Ottawa had been pushing the other parties to make changes to how the treaty would affect areas like culture, intellectual property and the auto sector.

"We were not going to be rushed into a deal," Trudeau told reporters at his closing APEC news conference on Saturday, echoing warnings he had issued repeatedly over the course of the week.

...

Mexico had been sending similar signals of restraint about signing on to a new TPP. The talks were "very productive,' but more discussion was needed, Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo was reported to have said on Thursday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread