Lefty,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership#Contents

"Investor-state arbitration:
The TPP agreement establishes an investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which grants investors the right to sue foreign governments for treaty violations. For example, if an investor invests in country "A", a member of a trade treaty, and country A breaches that treaty, then the investor may sue country A's government for the breach. ISDS is meant to provide investors in foreign countries basic protections from foreign government actions such as "freedom from discrimination", "protection against uncompensated expropriation of property", "protection against denial of justice" and "right to transfer capital":

Freedom from discrimination: An assurance that those doing business abroad will face a level playing field and will not be treated less favorably than local investors or competitors from other countries.

Protection against uncompensated seizure of property: An assurance that property of investors won’t be seized by the government without just compensation.

Protection against denial of justice: An assurance that investors will not be denied justice in criminal, civil, or administrative adjudicatory proceedings.

Right to transfer capital: An assurance that investors will be able to move capital relating to their investments freely, subject to safeguards to provide government flexibility, including to respond to financial crises and ensure the integrity and stability of the financial system.

ISDS cannot overturn local laws (unlike the World Trade Organization) which violate trade agreements, but can grant monetary damages to investors adversely affected by such laws. As pointed out by the Office of the United States Trade Representative, ISDS requires specific treaty violations, and does not allow corporations to sue solely over "lost profits".

The TPP specifically excludes tobacco industries from the ISDS process. The carve-out came as a response to concerns about ISDS cases against anti-smoking laws, including Philip Morris v. Uruguay. The exemption of tobacco from ISDS is a first for an international trade agreement."

Lefty,

That effectively knocks what you are saying into a cocked hat.

Shadow minister
Thank you for the link and your post which was basically a cut and paste job from it, unfortunately you only covered the positive support of the tpp agreement.

However you are correct, that the tobacco industry has been cut out of the deal to make it more salable to the general public. The link listed many decanting voices, who are far from convinced that an agreement that is 2700 pages long should not be fast tracked until every one of those pages is analyzed in detail, for that legal back door that seem to find its way into trade agreements.

So although you have corrected one of my assumptions, you have not eased the suspicion that I and many others have about this agreement that has a lot more to do with the rights of companies than it does about the lives and futures of ordinary Australians.

You said you have not read a final draft of this agreement, could you please send any link you have that sets out the initial draft copy that was used for the original votes it received.

Chris

Lefty,

The link I gave above contains a summary of the TPP in plain English and not in Legalese, not just "the good bits" as you claim, and also includes pro and con political commentary. I suggest that you read it to allay the "suspicions" that you have.

It should be perfectly clear that the government is not going to stump up each time it makes a law, as long it follows the good governance provisions of the treaty. This gives investors assurances (much as a AAA rating gives lenders assurances) and encourages businesses to invest, employ people and pay taxes in Aus. It is pro business and pro people.

shadow minister

The link is a generalized over view at best in most places. Yes it is in plain English, but it does not explain the whole agreement in a way that can be analyzed by people who are skeptical, like US Senator Chuck Schumer.

My comment about “the good bits” was a reference to your post which was a copy and paste of some of the link that was supportive of TPP.
I am still suspicious, because as with many trade agreements, negotiations for the TPP were conducted with significant secrecy. Drafts of the agreement were kept classified during negotiations, and access to the working text was significantly restricted even for government officials and business representatives involved in the talks. So how can you agree to sign on to it if you don’t know what is in it. It’s the old ”trust me” that I have heard from used car salesman around the world.

There are many parts of the world economy that I don’t think you have any knowledge of such is the Indian pharmaceutical companies that produce many generic drugs at a price third world citizens can afford. This agreement spells out, that it will allow extensions of patents on many drugs thus compelling people whose income is $40 a week to go without.

IMO The idea that this agreement is going to increase the growth of the world’s economy shows a complete lack of economic knowledge. What this will do is increase the amount of taxes the respective governments have to extract from its citizens to make up for the disappearance of import levies. This will most likely fall on those who pay sales taxes, as it is the easiest to raise.

Chris

I oppose the TPP based on the fact that I'm not allowed to read the fine print, which leads me to believe they are trying to deceive and take advantage of me somehow.
Most of the international corporations that would benefit from this don't pay tax anyway, so I don't see why we should give them any advantage.

If this was a genuine benefit to Australian citizens then they wouldn't be hiding its contents, so I say No.

And it's a firm NO with a bonus piece of advice and action.
'What the hell are you thinking expecting us to agree to something we're not allowed to know the details of?'
Any government employee that ordered time be wasted on this (treason towards Australian citizens) should be made to pay back the money and any MP that supported deceiving Australians should be put in jail, their future entitlements annulled.

Lefty and AC,

To assuage your paranoia, here is link to the full text of the TPP on the DFA website as released on Jan 2016. I think that you will find that most of what you have heard is wrong.

There is no attempt to hide anything from anyone. That negotiations are kept confidential is standard for every negotiation from the beginning of time, but the final agreement is public knowledge.

P.S. the website to which I linked previously is not pro or con the TPP