SPINNING THE TPPA WHEEL

Now here’s an interesting video clip;

 "How does the TPP affect little old me at home?"

Well, the text for the TPPA agreement is out, and all the interested parties – those previously denied the text – are pouring over the 30,000 pages.  The debate will now rage as to how truthful the government and its corporate buddies have been; about what they’ve been telling us in the run up to the agreement.   I believe that we've been led up the garden path by a deliberate, sophisticated  campaign of duplicitous spin.  Mike Hosking’s cuddling up to John Key’s government is symptomatic of the campaign.    I think we need to revisit that . . . right before the text reveals the TPPA affects our democracy more than we thought.  Now, I don't watch TV1's "7 Sharp" (I simply can't stand  Mike Hosking) but I did watch this clip where Professor Jane Kelsey was interviewed by Hosking, referenced here, also.  It's actually quite funny:

 "Jane Kelsey Seven Sharp TPPA"

At about 4 minutes into the interview Hosking started talking about how trade disputes are ironed out at the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Professor Kelsey corrected him, pointing out there is a great difference between State-to-State disputes and Investor-State disputes; Investor-State disputes are where corporations sue countries.

After the interview Hosking IGNORED what he had been told about 4 minutes previously and suggested again to viewers that there is nothing to worry about as the WTO will resolve it like they did the Apples importation issue into Australia.  And exactly HOW many apples have we actually sold into Australia since then?!

So, this is either sheer right-wing political bias on Hosking's part, willful blindness, or a failure to understand the difference between State-to-State disputes and Investor-State disputes.  Despite his political leanings, Bryan Bruce graciously suggests the latter.

Bryan Bruce explains; disputes between states are worked through by the WTO and there are no big fines because it is a country vs country issue (as in the now resolved issue of Australia refusing the importation of the NZ apples).  Disputes between corporations and states are completely different.

In some trade agreements - of which the TPPA will be one - foreign investors can actually sue Nation States in offshore tribunals (not courts) if they believe their shareholders are out of pocket because the country changed its laws and they lost profits as a result. (Nations, by the way, cannot sue Foreign Investors).  Tim Grosser, our Trade Minister negotiating on our behalf, says, it's "highly unlikely" we'll be sued.  In his comments, Grosser is trying to convince us that his negotiating skills outweigh those of all the powerful contributing US corporations and lobbyists.  Remember, these are the same corporations and lobbyists that have access to the deal terms - but we don't!  And John Key says, New Zealand has never been sued before under a trade agreement . . . so, of course, it won't happen (!)

Does it happen? Oh yes - and on our doorstep.  It's happening right now in Australia over plain packaging of cigarettes.  Tobacco giant, Philip Morris, was able to initiate legal proceedings under the Investor Dispute terms in Australia's "free trade" deal with China.   The Sydney Morning Herald revealed, in the article below, that Australia has already spent $50 MILLION on legal bills defending its cigarette plain packaging legislation before a tribunal in Singapore:

*   "Australia faces $50m legal bill in cigarette plain packaging fight with Philip Morris" [Sydney Morning Herald]
*  "Tobacco giant sues Australia" [Yahoo News]

And that's only for the initial hearings!  If the Singaporean tribunal decides there is a case for Australia to answer . . . watch that legal bill soar!

This is exactly the kind of scenario NZ could face under the TPPA Investor State Disputes provisions.  As taxpayers, we will foot that bill.

Back to the video.  So, Hosking finished the programme by remarking "the proof will be in the pudding." Well, if we don't like the pudding, we can't leave the restaurant.  The TPPA is virtually IMPOSSIBLE for future governments to withdraw from, as South American countries are finding with their current "free trade" deals with America.

Personally, I'd like to stick with a main course Trade deal - we'll sell you some beef and lamb and you sell us some cars and computers. However, that's not going to happen as long as corporates have access and lobbying to the TPPA terms, but we The People don't.

Oh .. and I'd like to see the menu before I order, if that's OK.  US corporate lobbyists are inserting terms into the TPPA, but we won't see the final terms until AFTER the TPPA is signed!!!  Call me old fashioned, but that's not democracy.  But then again, we don't really live in a democracy, do we?

[With thanks to Bryan Bruce]