steve101, that makes no sense at all. Whether overseas made goods are sold has no bearing on whether politicians can be bribed.

The deals are made in secret because they would not get the support of the Australian people.

I read a story the other day about Aussie Cane growers looking to get a better deal (increased volume) in US markets with the TPP.

What wasnt mentioned was what we might be giving up in return.

From what I understand one provision in the TPP is a provision for the US to export more of its GMO products to other overseas markets and the GMO labelling issue. BY LAW products will not be allowed to be labelled as containing GMO.

Given that some countries have or are in the process of banning all GMO's these deals done in secret also put our health at risk.

And we won't have a choice.
Battlers will always go for the value option.
What will this cost us in healthcare (let alone quality of life of citizens) years down the track?

I was always told to read the fine print.
Deals done in secret can't be in our best interests.
If they were, they wouldn't need to be secret.

AC,

It is exactly those half truths that make the left such a laughing stock.

SM, I usually agree with you but Wayne Swan & Joe Hockey have not
really been forthcoming on the IMF/G20 Bailin deal have they ?
The first the ordinary public, as opposed to likes of us on here,
those mad politicoeconomic/AGW/Peakoil fanatics, is when they go to
the bank one day and find their bank accounts empty except for enough
to buy next weeks groceries.

It really is a big hush hush job, never a mention during the elections
by either side.
Something as important as the power to confiscate everyones bank
deposits would I though justify a mention.

Bazz,

I find the concept of expecting a blow by blow report on the negotiating positions of the parties ludicrous, especially considering that the initial positions of all parties are very seldom the final positions, and negotiations are difficult enough without a peanut gallery.

However, the rationale behind this request for "transparency" becomes obvious once one realises that those asking for this detailed information are not vaguely interested in the finer points of the final deal, but are the loonies that want to sabotage the whole point by nitpicking the various starting requests and running a scare campaign based on wildly improbable scenarios.

SM, I can understand the confidentiality in the current trade negotiations
but the IMF/G20 bail in agreement has been finalised and Australia
signed the documents at the Brisbane G20 meeting.

As distinct to the trade deals almost no one has heard of the IMF
Financial Stability Board/G20 negotiations while they were been
discussed or after we signed up to it.

Of course I understand why it has been very quiet because if the public
found out about the risk to their bank deposits there would be an
uproar like we have never previously heard.