Alfonso Llanes, Master Degree in International Development
The specific answer is that few people know exactly what the TPP is because the agreement has not been made public.
In the same light as other participating governments, the agreement is kept under cover but many advisers, most of them corporate lobbyists, have been able to read it and make suggestions that benefit them. This has of course, led to speculation from a variety of fronts about what is actually included in TPP. All we have is a broad outline where it states that “it wants to create favorable conditions for U.S. companies doing business in TPP partner countries.”
Two leaked chapters cover intellectual property and environmental regulations. And what they reveal has many Internet privacy rights advocates, labor unions and environmentalists, very concerned.
Environmentalists in a joint analysis by the Sierra Club, World Wildlife Fund and National Resources Defense Council claimed that they found the TPP to be a step backward from a 2007 agreement worked out by the George W. Bush administration. The TPP takes a softer approach on the environment, by only requiring that signatories "affirm [their] commitment" to uphold environmental regulations and allowing countries to avoid a more demanding legal standard.
Critics of the agreement point out that during the negotiations corporate lobbyists were consulted broadly but no significant consultations took place with consumer groups, taxpayer organizations, union organizations, healthcare professionals or environmentalists. Even elected representatives, were given only restricted access to the negotiating documents and then were not allowed to discuss them with anyone. Therefore, criticism of the agreement is that was negotiated in dark and in the interests of major corporations not in the interest of the general populations of the member countries.
The result of other agreements has been that corporations move jobs overseas to increase their profits while workers at home have been forced to take on under qualified, lower paid employment.
Another sticking point is that the TPP is as much about investor rights and promoting investors’ interests as it is about free trade. One sturdy argument is that the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS) gives foreign corporations the right to “by-pass domestic courts and to go before an international tribunal to seek compensation” if and when a member government makes a policy that interferes with profits. This “right” interferes with the sovereignty of member states like is the case of big tobacco suing Uruguay, Australia and other countries for lost profits. Other vital policy areas include environmental and general public health issues and the regulation of basic sectors such as real estate and finance.
Another critical issue is focused on the existing economic and technological hierarchy among members. The countries that produce high-tech products and hold large numbers of patents, principally, developed countries will be able to protect their high-tech industries through the Intellectual Property Rights provisions while resource extraction countries and low-cost manufacturing economies will find themselves in a difficult position to move up the economic and technological ladder in any significant way. Additionally, it limits the role of government to such an extent that it will be difficult to address a whole series of problems including those associated with global warming, financial crises, and health emergencies. Moreover, State own enterprises (SOE) or mixed economies of private and public ownership are ranked below the protection of investors and private corporations.
No comments:
Post a Comment