Why did we have to invite the yanks and their desire to dominate everything everywhere, into this club.

Arguably they're are against everything China stands for!

And won't ever be satisfied with something almost everyone else can at least live with.

Like say, means tested social justice, and a minimum wages a little better than being a kept slave, in terms of comparative costs!

The real reason for the American intransigence, I believe, is probably they fear that their currency will soon lose its dominance as the international currency, and with it, their ability to print money and acquire foreign holdings with the USD, that the foreigners (non Americans) pay for, with their price gouged purchases/30% premium at the checkout!

I think we might be better off if we reject this agreement entirely, than accept any of the American impositions, or should that read, American corporate impositions/control; at least until they and their dog wagging the tail corporate impositions are off the table!?

Time to get up off of our knees and stop kissing butt; be it American or Chinese; and just put our position first and foremost!

Perhaps we just need to focus on bilateral agreements, than a T.P.P, that needs to be fired with force, into the too hard basket!
Rhrosty.

Thank you Jonathon for an interesting and informative article. I also endorse the comment above of Rhrosty. The willingness of the Coalition to negotiate in secret, aided and abetted by Labor, gives one a real insight into who actually runs this country. Hint: it is not those we elect.

Apart from the bland assurances from Trade Minister Robb there has been almost no reporting on this from the major media, which again raises alarm bells. Lost in all this is a clear view of what Australia's true national interests are. They sure as hell don't include capitulating to American corporate power.

Everyone who cares about this country and the notion of sovereignty should be appalled by the dispute resolution processes. It seems to me as a lawyer that this is perhaps the most insidiously dangerous aspect of the whole proposed deal. It will need more than the brave Peter Whish-Wilson to put a stop to this madness.

"Why did we have to invite the yanks and their desire to dominate everything everywhere, into this club?"
With that question, Rhosty raises the fact of the cultures of countries being influenced heavily by America.

In Australia, we seem very prone to model our lifestyles around Yankeedom, particularly in speech and song. When, oh when, are we going to be spared the sound of vocal would-be stylists singing plaintivly about "Ma lerv", or skewing vowel pronunciations to emulate the inability of the Big Apple to pronunce English well.

Now, I'll just put some gasoline in the auto after I fill a drink of water from the faucet, and wander down the sidewalk, and listen for the sounds of sense.

Rhosty,

I agree with your comment that we are better off without the TPP. Even with no TPP, foreigners will still beat a path to our door for our goods and services.

Peter,

You are right to mention that the ISDS is the biggest concern.

I was flabbergasted to find in a publication I very rarely read, Green Left

https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/57675

that in the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) case of Philip Morris v Commonwealth of Australia, that amongst others representing Philip Morris is the Auckland barrister David A.R. Williams QC.

http://www.ag.gov.au/Internationalrelations/InternationalLaw/Documents/Philip%20Morris%20Asia%20Limited%20Notice%20of%20Arbitration%2021%20November%202011.pdf

who as luck would have it, is also a judge at ICSID.

https://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet?requestType=CasesRH&actionVal=showDoc&docId=DC4353_En&caseId=C1960

How lucky can Emphysema International get?

Typo in earlier post, I meant to say James not Peter.