Sandra Finley

Apr 292015
 

The system of closed-door trade tribunals has been around for decades now, nestled like a ticking time bomb into hundreds of smaller bilateral trade agreements between nations. (Photo: Backbone Campaign)The system of closed-door trade tribunals has been around for decades now, nestled like a ticking time bomb into hundreds of smaller bilateral trade agreements between nations. (Photo: Backbone Campaign)

 

http://fpif.org/the-case-that-blew-the-lid-off-the-world-banks-secret-courts/

There’s an international awakening afoot about a radical expansion of corporate power — one that sits at the center of two historic global trade deals nearing completion.

One focuses the United States toward Europe — that’s the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) — and the other toward Asia, in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Both would establish broad new rights for foreign corporations to sue governments for vast sums whenever nations change their public policies in ways that could potentially impact corporate profits.

These cases would not be handled by domestic courts, with their relative transparency, but in special, secretive international tribunals.

It’s a stupendously powerful tool and a double win for the corporations: It’s a money machine that loots public treasuries and a potent tool to stifle unwelcome regulations, all wrapped in one. As Senator Elizabeth Warren recently wrote in the Washington Post, “Giving foreign corporations special rights to challenge our laws outside of our legal system would be a bad deal.” But it’s a deal U.S. lawmakers are rapidly preparing to make as they debate extending “fast-track” trade promotion authority to President Barack Obama.

The system of closed-door trade tribunals has been around for decades now, nestled like a ticking time bomb into hundreds of smaller bilateral trade agreements between nations. But not so long ago, the trade tribunal system wasn’t the stuff of high-profile op-eds by U.S. senators. It was virtually unknown except among a small cadre of international lawyers and trade specialists.

The case that brought the system into broad public view was born 15 years ago this month on the streets of a city high in the Andes. How that case was won holds powerful lessons today for the battles over the TTIP, the TPP, and the effort to hand global corporations enormous new legal powers.

The Water Revolt

It started here in Cochabamba, Bolivia, in April 2000, when citizens rebelled against the takeover of their public water system by a foreign corporation.

In what became known as the Cochabamba Water Revolt, thousands of Bolivians faced down bullets and batons to take back their water from Bechtel, the California engineering giant. Within weeks of taking over the local public water system, Bechtel’s Bolivian company had hit water users with price increases averaging more than 50 percent, and often far higher. Families faced stark choices between keeping water running from the tap or food on the table.

So they rebelled.

Protesters shut down this city of half-a-million people three times with blockades and general strikes. The right-wing government sent in soldiers and police to defend Bechtel’s contract, killing a teenage boy and leaving hundreds of others wounded. But the protests only increased, and finally Bechtel was forced to flee Bolivia, returning the water to public hands.

A year later, however, Bechtel struck back — this time in a World Bank trade court. The company demanded not only the $1 million it had invested in the country, but a full $50 million — the rest being the future “profits” the company claimed it had forgone by leaving.

Bechtel’s case against Bolivia sparked a second rebellion. This one was global and just as powerful, a citizen action campaign that stretched worldwide. In the end, Bechtel would walk away not with the $50 million that it demanded from Bolivians, but just 30 cents and a badly damaged public image. The case also ripped the mask off a system of secret trade courts that today sits at the heart of the trade debate.

A System Designed for Corporate Advantage

Here in Bolivia, a soccer team from anywhere else would be foolish to play a match against a Bolivian team in La Paz, the nation’s capital. At nearly 13,000 feet above the sea, most foreigners find it a serious challenge just to climb a staircase, much less chase a ball for 90 minutes.

The legal venue chosen by Bechtel — the World Bank’s International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) — has a similar quality. It’s a playing field tilted deeply to corporate advantage.

It’s no small irony that Bechtel went to the World Bank, since it was the World Bank that set the Cochabamba Water Revolt in motion to begin with.

In 1997, World Bank officials made the privatization of Cochabamba’s public water system a condition of loans the bank was issuing to expand water service in the country. So Bolivia’s government was compelled to offer a 40-year lease to Bechtel, complete with a guaranteed annual profit of 16 percent — a gouging deal backed by the willingness of the government to shoot its own people if required.

The World Bank’s ICSID and other international tribunal systems are a corporate dream. The tribunals that decide these cases are made up of lawyers who move from being highly paid corporate defenders in one case to supposedly impartial judges in the next, a blatant conflict of interest. It’s a system where testimony is commonly sealed and where cases are heard thousands of miles away from the communities involved.

Unsurprisingly, corporations win either a full or partial victory more than half the time.

The Court of Public Opinion

 

The citizen campaign that took on Bechtel refused to wage its fight in the confines of Bechtel’s carefully chosen judicial comfort zone.

The organization I run, the Democracy Center, and our Bolivian and global allies took aim at Bechtel instead on the battlefield where citizen movements do best: the court of public opinion. That campaign became a powerful early prototype for how to organize in the age of the Internet, driven not so much by an orchestrated grand plan as by sheer, viral inspiration.

Through our own articles and our work with journalists from the New Yorker, PBS, and elsewhere, the Democracy Center kept telling, over and over again, the powerful narrative of a David and Goliath victory on the streets of Cochabamba. Water Revolt leaders from Bolivia also traveled across the world to share their story directly.

We hung that story not just around Bechtel’s corporate neck, but the neck of its CEO and namesake, Riley Bechtel. We even released his personal email address to thousands of people. As people reached out to us to get involved, we armed them with the hard evidence and some advice on strategy, encouraging them to take whatever action they were moved to take that could build pressure on the corporation.

The result was a beautiful, global spectacle of citizen power.

In San Francisco, activists shut down Bechtel’s headquarters by chaining themselves together in the lobby. A local coalition also got the San Francisco Board of Supervisors to pass a city resolution calling on Bechtel to drop its Bolivia case — just as the company was negotiating a major city contract.

In Amsterdam, people mounted a ladder outside Bechtel’s local office and renamed the street for the teenager killed by soldiers during the Cochabamba Revolt. In Washington, protesters picketed the house of the president of Bechtel’s Bolivian water subsidiary. At the South Africa Earth Summit, Bolivian activist Marcela Olivera recruited organizations to join a “Citizens Petition to the World Bank” calling on Bechtel to drop the case. EarthJustice filed a legal petition demanding public participation, and the Institute for Policy Studies mobilized Washington NGOs.

From one corner of the world to another, Bechtel was seized upon by angry Lilliputians tying a mighty corporate Gulliver to the ground.

The Power of Storytelling

In January 2006, besieged Bechtel officials flew to Bolivia and signed a deal with the Bolivian government under which it dropped its World Bank case for two shiny 1 boliviano coins — the cost of a local bus fare. No other major corporation, before or since, has ever been forced to drop such a major trade case by a campaign of citizen pressure waged against it.

In the end, Bechtel was defeated by something very simple: a story. It was a narrative about people fighting for their water, and of a corporation content to see them killed in order to squeeze the poor for profits it never earned. The mighty corporation could never escape the moral power of that story. We hit Bechtel with it using not just one tactic, but every tactic we could think of — from legal briefs to direct action. We didn’t waste time debating which approach was more worthy.

The trade battles before us today, including the TPP and TTIP, must also be fought with stories that lift the issue above technical jargon and into popular understanding.

And there’s no shortage of stories to tell. The tobacco giant Phillip Morris demands $2 billion from Uruguay for the sin of strengthening health warnings on cigarette packages. The people of El Salvador face a $300-million case from a Canadian-Australian mining company because El Salvadorans were able to block toxic mining operations. Germany faces a demand of €700 million from a nuclear energy company because, in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster, popular movements won a moratorium on new nuclear power plants in the country.

Telling the stories of cases like these is essential to building a broader public understanding of what’s at issue in these arcane negotiations: a corporate power play against basic democracy.

“It is impossible to overstate the impact of the people’s victory in Cochabamba against Bechtel,” Noami Klein observed recently. “At a time when winning real victories seemed like a distant dream, we suddenly saw that it was still possible to win, even against a giant U.S. multinational.” In the battle of the Bolivian people against Bechtel, David beat Goliath not only once, but twice. In the midst of the current battles on trade, the spirit of both those victories and their concrete lessons well deserve our remembrance.

Jim Shultz is executive director of the Democracy Center and lives in Cochabamba, Bolivia. He tweets at @jimshultz.

 

 

 

Apr 282015
 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/former-pm-jean-chretien-to-meet-with-vladimir-putin-in-moscow/article24124208/

Former prime minister Jean Chrétien met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow in 2002. (Fred Chartrand/The Canadian Press) Former prime minister Jean Chrétien met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow in 2002. (Fred Chartrand/The Canadian Press)

  (Note:  go to the URL to see the Comments on the article.)

 

Apr 282015
 

2015-04-20-1429571893-9271908-maudeandangela.jpg

 

By Sujata Dey

Berlin — Yesterday (April 20, 2015),  Maude Barlow, national chairperson of the Council of Canadians, challenged the Canada-European Union Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) and other trade deals in a panel discussion with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. During the panel, Chancellor Merkel presented her G7 presidency priorities.

“While the themes of the 2015 G7 are laudable — combatting poverty, infectious disease and hunger; protecting the climate; and empowering women — the trade policies of the G7 countries have actually contributed to all the problems they are going to be discussing,” said Barlow. “These trade deals will exacerbate growing inequality and a deteriorating environment.”

Barlow appealed to German and European leaders to reject CETA and its investor-state dispute settlement provisions, which allow corporations to sue countries over labour, environmental and social standards that impede profits.

On Saturday, as part of a International Day Against Free Trade Agreements, thousands of people in Germany — including 23,000 in Munich — protested free trade agreements, in particular CETA and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the U.S.-EU free trade deal. Opposition against CETA and TTIP is strong in Germany, with many German leaders outright opposing the provisions allowing corporate lawsuits.

“CETA and TTIP export the worst of each continent to the other continent. They undermine the higher food, safety and environmental regulations in Europe by allowing North American companies to challenge these standards. And they impose higher drug prices on North America as they extend patent protections there. Also, they give European companies access to municipal and public services, leading to privatization. These deals favour the one per cent at the expense of the public interest,” adds Barlow.

Barlow also cautions European leaders who have expressed hope that these deals could provide them access to cheap energy.

“European alternative energy production and energy conservation policies are models for the world. North American North American Energy– fracking and tar sands– are dangerously unsustainable. Greater access to oil is not going to help Europe or the planet.”

The panel was part of a G7 Civil Society Dialogue Forum hosted by the German NGO Forum on Environment & Development, VENRO (the Association of German Development and Humanitarian Aid NGOs) and the German G7 presidency.

The audio recording of the event can be found here.

Photos can be found here.

Photo: World Future Council

Apr 262015
 

Note:

  • the tour includes a location near Orillia ON.
  • Saturday, May 23rd is the next international March Against Monsanto.  A list of the Canadian events and links to other information  is at http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=9497

Back to Neil Young:

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/neil-young-recording-new-album-with-willie-nelsons-sons-20150108

Lukas Nelson and Neil Young

Neil Young will bring Willie Nelson’s sons Lukas (pictured) and Micah to promote their new album ‘The Monsanto Years’

Neil Young and Promise of the Real, a band featuring Willie Nelson’s sons Lukas and Micah, will hit the road this summer in support of their upcoming album together, The Monsanto Years. Young’s new LP will reportedly arrive on June 16th according to a press release sent to promoters, while the Rebel Content Tour itself will kick off July 5th at Milwaukee’s Summerfest.

For years, Young has railed against Monsanto, the chemical company specializing in genetically modified seeds. In January, Young revealed that he was working on an album called The Monsanto Years, but the rocker appeared to be joking about the title at the time. “I’m working on another album now that I’m going to be doing with Willie Nelson’s sons,” Young said. “It’s an upbeat review of the situation.”

At a surprise concert April 16th at San Luis Obispo, California’s SLO Brewing Co., Young and Promise of the Real debuted 11 new tracks that might appear on their joint LP. Those songs boasted protest-minded titles like “Monsanto Years,” “Rock Starbucks,” “Seeds” and “Too Big to Fail,” fan site Sugar Mountain reports. Young had previously teamed with the Nelson brothers at Farm Aid and the Bridge School Benefit.

According to the Burlington Free Press, Young’s Rebel Content tour will feature the rocker’s first ever concert in Vermont. The newspaper speculates that Young is rewarding the Green Mountain State for their stance on genetically modified organisms, or GMOs. Vermont passed a law requiring companies to list whether their food contained GMOs, and in a note to fans, Young called for a boycott of Starbucks for their part in the effort “to sue Vermont, and stop accurate food labeling.” The coffee giant later clarified that they were not involved in the lawsuit against Vermont.

 

Apr 212015
 

http://www.lfpress.com/2015/04/20/governor-general-paved-the-way-for-chakmas-double-dip

Governor General of Canada David Johnston (Postmedia Network)

Governor General of Canada David Johnston (Postmedia Network)

Related Stories

Long before public outrage over double-pay wobbled the future of the  head of Western University, another academic ushered into Canada an era of perks and payouts — our current Governor General, David Johnston.

Johnston came to Rideau Hall in 2010 as a heralded choice but also with pay cheques and benefits from the University of Waterloo that year and the next totalling $1.67 million. Most of that came from contracts that entitled him to two years of paid leave, Ontario Sunshine Law disclosures show.

Johnston didn’t reply to questions Monday e-mailed to his spokesperson from The Free Press.

But Richard Leblanc, a Toronto lawyer who advises boards and teaches at York and Harvard universities, said Johnston paved the way for other university executives. ​

That should concern taxpayers, students and faculty alike. Though Johnston and others borrowed private-sector perks, they did so without many of the controls that keep in line the leaders of publicly traded companies.

“They need adult supervision,” Leblanc said. “They want the perks without the constraints.”

Other university heads followed Johnston’s lead, cashing out when they left office with fully paid administrative leave. Such provisions are common across Canada, The Free Press has found, not only at the country’s biggest schools but some of its smallest: Two years ago, the principal of tiny Brescia University College in London, Colleen Hanycz, was paid $444,386 — more than the president of the University of Toronto.

But those payouts flew mostly under the radar until Western’s Amit Chakma took in $967,000 in salary and benefits last year.

Chakma blundered by taking it midway through his tenure and in a way that rubs average Joes the wrong way: Double dipping, collecting a regular salary and then getting a second for forgoing an administrative leave.

“He became a lightning rod,” Leblanc said Monday.

A public storm it was after The Free Press reported Chakma’s double pay, a second massive payout in 2009 from Waterloo and his option to double dip again in 2019. Last week, 30 Western senators voted for a non-confidence motion in Chakma and another five to abstain — about 42% of the total.

That’s a crippling blow, said Leblanc, who suspects Western board members are now debating whether to back Chakma or cut bait.

It was Johnston who changed what it meant to be a university president in Canada, said Leblanc: Predecessors focused on how schools functioned; he turned outwards to push for donations, a path also taken by Chakma.

This new cadre face little incentive to spend wisely when they can cut costs by growing class sizes and replacing tenured professors with cheaper contract teachers.

“There’s no pressure for (management) efficiency,” Leblanc said.

The Ontario NDP wants to ban double dipping and cap executive pay, but if the cap is too low, universities may bleed talent, he warned.

The better fix is to mimic what’s done at publicly traded companies:

— Set performance targets that measure not just cost but quality and report them publicly to tax payers.

— Link targets to executive pay.

— Recruit board members with certain skills so they can provide oversight to administration rather than serve as a rubber stamp.

— Make the whole board review the presidential contract rather than a small executive committee.

— Create a code of conduct and whistle-blowing provisions.

— Require independent audits.

“Universities have largely been immune (from controls),” he said. Governments must force changes.

The uproar in London has reached phones at the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. “We need more accountability,” said Christine Van Geyn, the federation’s Ontario director.

jonathan.sher@sunmedia.ca

Twitter.com/JSHERatLFPress​

— — —

David Johnston’s pay and pension set a benchmark, observers say:

— Car allowance with no hard cap

— $3,000 for legal, money and tax advice

— $500,000 loan at 3% interest to get a home at a time when the rest of us paid an average of 6.73% for a fixed five-year mortgage.

— A souped-up pension that could pay him as if he had twice as many years of service than he did.

 

 

Apr 212015
 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/california-droughts-could-leave-bc-high-and-dry-on-food/article21644937/

This article is part of Globe B.C.’s eight-part weekly series on food security in Canada. Visit this page  for the rest of the series so far.

When California Governor Jerry Brown declared a statewide emergency in January, there was hope water conservation and increased pumping from aquifers could blunt the impact of a withering drought.

Now, as the driest year in the state’s history is coming to a close, the aquifers are so overdrawn there are concerns about long-term damage – and the National Weather Service is predicting a fourth year of drought.

The dry spell, which some studies blame on climate change, is raising concerns about future food price hikes across North America.

In B.C., which over the past 20 years has relied increasingly on crops from California, food security experts describe the situation as alarming.

If California’s agriculture productivity collapses “we’d be in huge trouble,” says Brent Mansfield, co-chair of the BC Food Systems Network.

“The urgency is … as prices go up, will we be able to [afford to] put food on the table?” Mr. Mansfield asks. “First off, they are going to feed their own and then they are going to feed those who can pay the most. And that might not be us.”

Mr. Mansfield recently wrote a report predicting produce prices in B.C. could jump by 25 per cent to 50 per cent over the next five years as California’s productivity declines.

This year, rice production in California fell by 20 per cent, cotton was down 32 per cent and 170,000 hectares of farmland were fallowed, putting more than 6,000 farm labourers out of work. Revenue losses and the higher expenses of pumping water cost the state $2.2-billion (U.S.).

It could get worse next year.

In a recent report, the Association of California Water Agencies warned “a dry 2015 would have disastrous consequences,” which could include the complete failure of the state’s $1-billion annual cotton crop; the death of 20,000 hectares of citrus trees and the exodus from the state of non-farm businesses that rely heavily on water.

“Hundreds of thousands of acres of annual and permanent crops throughout the state would be idled,” the report says. “For consumers it means loss of jobs and higher prices for food and other products. It also means less locally produced food, which affects food security and our carbon footprint.”

Mr. Mansfield said while California’s loss of productivity will be felt across North America, B.C. is particularly vulnerable because of a shift in the province to imported produce. B.C.’s vegetable production fell more than 20 per cent between 1991 and 2011. Currently, more than 67 per cent of all B.C. vegetable imports come from the United States, with more than half that coming from California.

“We’ve seen a decline of [B.C.] staple crops in the past 20 years,” he said. “We’ve more or less stopped growing the crops we are now reliant on California for. … We are importing from California when we could be producing it ourselves.”

Broccoli, lettuce, strawberries and other crops that used to be grown in B.C. for consumption there are now largely imported from south of the border.

At the same time, he said, B.C. growers have shifted increasingly to export crops, growing more cherries and blueberries, for example, because of overseas demand.

B.C., Mr. Mansfield said, needs a dramatic shift back to local supply, and that means getting more agricultural land into production.

“Hopefully, this is a wake-up call for us,” he said.

Kent Mullinix, director, Institute for Sustainable Food Systems at Kwantlen Polytechnic University, said the drought dramatically underscores the need for B.C. to produce more food locally.

“We have messed up the climate. We have changed the climate, which is going to have profound effects on weather patterns and the incidence of severe weather events,” he said. “So our dependence on food from anywhere is iffy, much less central and southern California or Mexico. And that’s just all there is to it.”

Dr. Mullinix is working on a project to figure out how B.C. can best maximize the agricultural productivity of its different bio-regions. The goal is to provide a road map that will show how each environmentally distinct region can develop its own food system networks, where everything from genetic research, through production and processing, is done within that region.

He says this “re-regionalizing” of B.C.’s agriculture industry is urgent in the face of a changing climate.

“A sustainable food system has to be seen as the basis of a sustainable society in British Columbia, and elsewhere,” said Dr. Mullinix. “We are blessed with natural resources to achieve what maybe other areas can’t achieve as easily or as broadly. … And what we need to do and what we can do and what I think we’re in a better position to do than any other jurisdiction, is to figure out how to re-regionalize our food systems.”

He is working with several municipal and regional governments interested in encouraging the development of local food systems, and hopes the California drought will spur action at the provincial level.

“The fact of the matter is we can’t count on agriculture from anyplace, any more,” said Dr. Mullinix. “Even if California doesn’t suffer a drought next year, it might very well suffer the most devastating drought that it’s ever experienced the year after that – and we will be without fruit and vegetables.”

Shifting to regional production, and moving away from imports from massive, industrial scale farms in distant jurisdictions will be good environmentally, socially and economically, he said.

“The beauty of it is we will, through our food systems, start reconnecting with our environment and the environmental capacity of the place we live. I mean, connect our being with the place we live,” said Dr. Mullinix. “ I believe we can substantially enhance our regional economies. I think we can create a huge number of jobs, and I think we can probably produce more nutritious, wholesome foods.”

More Related to this Story

Apr 182015
 

Arising out of:

2015-04-15    A Trade Rule that Makes It Illegal to Favor Local Business? Newest Leak Shows TPP Would Do That And More, David Korten, Yes! Magazine

 

I remind Canadians of how much we are already paying out to Corporations for fines under NAFTA.   One example:

Here’s a make-you-sick example of how the system works:

With thanks to the Council of Canadians:

http://canadians.org/nafta 

Possibly the most anti-democratic legacy of NAFTA is its investment chapter (Chapter 11), which protects U.S. and Mexican corporations in Canada from all kinds of public policies that could get in the way of profits. There have been about 20 investor lawsuits filed by U.S. firms under NAFTA, many of them challenging environmental policies such as a ban on trade in gasoline containing the suspected neurotoxin MMT. These lawsuits are heard in private by a three-person panel of paid arbitrators whose decisions are final and binding. Canada has paid more than $160 million in fines already and is facing another $4-5-billion worth of NAFTA lawsuits, including one from Lone Pine Resources, which is seeking $250-million compensation for Quebec’s publicly supported moratorium on fracking in the St. Lawrence River Valley.

2015-03-20    Bilcon wins NAFTA challenge against Canada over gravel quarry expansion   (Bilcon won the ruling.  They are going for $188 million in damages.)

See also,  the fines we would pay out under  CETA  (the Trade Deal with Europe):

2011-02-08   CETA plus Harper signs new security perimeter deal without consultation

 

 

Apr 182015
 

We have been engaged in the battle over the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) since October 2012.   Americans, Canadians, and people in the “Partnership” countries are fighting it.  It is a deal for corporations, at terrible expense to citizens.

Julian Assange (Wikileaks) published the early leaks about the TPP.

Our American colleagues have been successful in fighting down one aspect of the trade deal.   2015-02-26  Huge Win!  FCC votes to protect the internet with Title II regulation

David Korten is the author of the following,  an elucidation of “recently leaked” documents.  (I attended a 4-day workshop in Washington a few years ago.  David Korten, author of “When Corporations Rule the World” was a presenter and participant.  He is very down-to-earth, personable, hard-working, a man of integrity.

TPP, links to earlier postings – – see  APPENDED.

See also:   2015-04-18   Hundreds of Millions of Dollars already paid out to corporations because of trade deals. It’s about to multiply many times over  (TPP, CETA, etc.).

Bloody obscene.   Worthy of a revolution for this reason alone.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

A Trade Rule that Makes It Illegal to Favor Local Business?
Newest Leak Shows TPP Would Do That And More
David Korten,  Y es! Magazine

http://www.yesmagazine.org/thisweek/20150417?segment=df&utm_source=YTW&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=20150417

The leaked text is full of dense legal jargon. But a close reading makes its corporate agenda crystal clear.

Secret negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a trade and investment agreement involving 12 nations of the Pacific Rim, are coming to a close, and President Barack Obama will soon submit the final agreement to the U.S. Congress for approval.

Presumably, he will urge the deal’s passage with the same unsubstantiated and misleading claims his administration has offered all along: that the TPP will support Made-in-America exports, enforce fundamental labor rights, promote strong environmental protection, and help small business.

But a newly leaked document belies those claims. The Trans-Pacific Partnership’s text consists of a number of chapters, among the most important of which is the one on investments. On March 25, WikiLeaks released a confidential draft of that chapter dated January 20. The draft contains instructions indicating that it will be declassified only “Four years from entry into force … or, if no agreement enters into force, four years from the close of the negotiations.”

A quick reading of the leaked chapter makes it clear why TPP sponsors have gone to great lengths to keep their negotiations secret. The document substantiates claims by opponents that the TPP is a corporate-rights agreement designed to facilitate the export of U.S. jobs, allow corporations to sue governments for enacting labor and environmental protections, make it illegal for governments to favor local businesses, and advance the colonization of national economies by global corporations and financiers.

As problematic as this chapter is, we can be thankful that it is out in the open. Now the need is to understand what all the legalese means.

The leaked document includes many technical details decipherable only by trade lawyers. Here are the Cliffs Notes in simple English.

1. Favoring local ownership is prohibited

Let’s start with the Investment Chapter’s section on how the TPP’s member countries should treat foreign investors:

Each Party [country] shall accord to investors of another Party treatment no less favorable than that it accords, in like circumstances, to its own investors with respect to the establishment, acquisition, expansion, management, conduct, operation, and sale or other disposition of investments in its territory.

Put in plain English, the above paragraph means that signatory countries renounce their right to favor the domestic ownership and control of the lands, waters, and other productive assets and services essential to the lives and well-being of their people.

The 12 countries further renounce their right to favor locally owned businesses, corporations, cooperatives, or public enterprises devoted to serving their people with good local jobs, products, and services. They must instead give equal or better treatment to global corporations that come only to extract profits.

2. Corporations must be paid to stop polluting

Another provision limits what member countries can do in regard to corporate investments:

No Party may expropriate or nationalize a covered investment either directly or indirectly through measures equivalent to expropriation or nationalization (“expropriation”), except: (a) for a public purpose; (b) in a nondiscriminatory manner; (c) on payment of prompt, adequate, and effective compensation [emphasis added] … ; and (d) in accordance with due process of law.

This provision may sound reasonable, until you look at the chapter’s definition of “investment,” which includes “the expectation of gain or profit.” This odd definition means that a corporation can sue a signatory nation if the country deprives the corporation of expected profits by enacting laws that prohibit the company from selling harmful products, damaging the environment, or exploiting workers. Other language in the chapter makes it clear that this applies to actions at all levels of government.

In other words, a country in the TPP has every right to stop a foreign corporation from harming its people and the environment—but only if the country compensates the corporation for the expense of not harming them.

Similar provisions are already on the books in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). According to Public Citizen’s Trade Watch,

Foreign firms have won more than $360 million in taxpayer dollars thus far in investor-state cases brought under NAFTA. Of the 11 claims currently pending under NAFTA, demanding a total of more than $12.4 billion, all relate to environmental, energy, land use, financial, public health and transportation policies—not traditional trade issues.

3. Three lawyers will decide who’s right in secret tribunals

The leaked chapter also describes how disagreements will be settled:

Unless the disputing parties otherwise agree, the tribunal shall comprise three arbitrators, one arbitrator appointed by each of the disputing parties and the third, who shall be the presiding arbitrator, appointed by agreement of the disputing parties.

The arbitrators are private lawyers who are not accountable to any electorate. They are empowered by the TPP to order unlimited public compensation to aggrieved investors. The proceedings and the identities of the tribunal members are secret, and the resulting decisions are not subject to review by any national judicial system.

According to The New York Times, NAFTA tribunals, on which the ones in the TPP are modeled, even have the power to overturn judgments of national courts—including the U.S. Supreme Court. John D. Echeverria, a law professor at Georgetown University, has called this method of dispute settlement “the biggest threat to United States judicial independence that no one has heard of and even fewer people understand.”

4. Speculative money must remain free

Yet another provision prohibits restrictions on movement of money from one country to another:

Each Party shall permit all transfers relating to a covered investment to be made freely and without delay into and out of its territory. …

Forms an investment may take include: (a) an enterprise; (b) shares, stock, and other forms of equity participation in an enterprise; (c) bonds, debentures, other debt instruments, and loans; (d) futures, options, and other derivatives.

Thus, the TPP guarantees the right of speculators to destabilize national economies through the manipulation of exchange rates and financial markets, without interference from national governments.

In so doing, the TPP strips national governments of the right to limit speculation in favor of investment in strong, stable, and productive national economies.

5. Corporate interests come before national ones

Another passage assures that corporations need bear no obligation to serve the interest of the people who live in the countries where they do business:

No Party may … impose or enforce any requirement or enforce any commitment or undertaking: (a) to export a given level or percentage of goods or services; (b) to achieve a given level or percentage of domestic content; (c) to purchase, use or accord a preference to goods produced in its territory, or to purchase goods from persons in its territory.

The article continues on with six additional provisions, which together prohibit governments from requiring that a foreign investor be under any obligation to serve the host country’s people or national interest.

Obama administration officials say these provisions are needed to level the playing field for American companies doing business abroad. This raises an important question: What is an American company?

The Institute for Policy Studies reports that U.S. corporations and their subsidiaries currently hold $2.1 trillion in profits offshore to avoid paying taxes to the government of the United States. These include highly profitable companies like Microsoft, Google, Apple, General Electric, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron. One wonders on what basis we should consider these globe-spanning, tax-dodging, job-exporting corporations to be American.

Approval of the TPP means sacrificing our democracy and our right to manage our markets and resources for the public good. And for what gain? To secure rights for corporations—which claim an American identity only when convenient—to exploit the peoples and resources of other countries that have signed the same nefarious agreement.

David Korten is co-founder and board chair of YES! Magazine, co-chair of the New Economy Working Group, president of the Living Economies Forum, an associate fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies, and a member of the Club of Rome. His books include the international best-seller When Corporations Rule the World, which will be released in an updated 20th anniversary edition in June 2015.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
APPENDED

 

Apr 152015
 

Mel Hurtig to Canada’s rescue, as always!

We owe so much to this passionate man.

– – – – – – – – – – – – –

Mel Hurtig

The Arrogant Autocrat: Stephen Harper’s Takeover of Canada.

 

Dear Friends,

 

I am very happy to be able to tell you that my new book about Stephen Harper is at the printer. Copies should be available through bookstores any day now. We have purposely kept the book to under 150 pages so we could keep costs down and get it out well in advance of the next federal election. The book will be a quality trade paperback retailing for $19.95.

Only a very few people have had a chance to read it yet but there has been much praise – “powerful,” “explosive”… Everyone who has seen the manuscript is very excited about the book. The one person who won’t be is Stephen Harper.

The title is – The Arrogant Autocrat: Stephen Harper’s Takeover of Canada and it is an excellent description of how Stephen Harper has been ruining our country.

If your bookstore doesn’t have copies, you will be able to order them through your bookstore or from Chapters.ca or Amazon.ca. If you have any difficulties whatsoever, give me a call at the number below.

Given that the election is just around the corner, this book is very, very timely and should have an impact on the results. The Arrogant Autocrat contains all kinds of information that you won’t find in other Stephen Harper books. There is a great deal of new material here and much of it is shocking. I hope you will tell all your friends and family about the book.

 

Best regards,

Mel

604-684-8443

https://www.facebook.com/#!/mel.hurtig?fref=nf

– – – – – – – – – – –

I (Sandra Finley) acknowledge a special debt of gratitude to Mel.

He was very active in the effort to stop the contracting-out of work at Statistics Canada to Lockheed Martin Corporation (American military). (2003 – 2006 and beyond)

When I was subsequently charged for failure to comply with the Census, Mel was there with emotional and moral support. Through the years I received occasional, brief but important words of encouragement from him.

“Arrogant Autocrat” will be another valuable contribution to the history of Canada. Bless you and thank-you Mel.

 

Thanks to Janet who writes:

. . . I can’t  wait to read  Mel’s “powerful,” and “explosive” new book . . .

My Pre-Election Reading List:

1. Mark Bourrie.  “Kill the Messengers: Stephen Harper’s Assault on Your right to Know.” 2015

2. Michael Harris.. “Party of One. Stephen Harper and Canada’s Radical Makeover” October 2014

3. Donald Gutstein. “Harperism, How Stephen Harper and his Think Tank Colleagues have Transformed” . Sept 3 2014

4. Lawrence Martin. “Harperland : the Politics of Control”. October 5th, 2010

5. Christian Nadeau. “Rogue in Power: Why Stephen Harper is Remaking Canada by Stealth”. 2010

FYI- janet

p.s.   On the  cover of Mel’s new book are found his words:

”I have spent much of my career  warning Canadians of the increasing threat that foreign corporate takeovers of our companies and resource sectors pose to our sovereignty. But in decades of sounding the alarm of takeovers, I never imagined that the greatest threat would come from the takeover of our country by one politician determined to remake our nation according to his own values and priotities.”

THAT ONE POLITICIAN IS, OF COURSE, STEPHEN HARPER.

Apr 122015
 

Sign the Petition:  http://diy.rootsaction.org/petitions/initiate-a-world-peace-conference

I am chuckling.

Last week I didn’t think it was possible to stop the “defense” industry people who should be locked in an insane asylum.   Their “business plan” is for “growth”, of course. The targeted markets for their “capabilities” (weapons) are areas of tension in the world.   ONE of these corporations alone has annual revenues of $40 billion, the majority of which is Government-funded.   What chance have we against their destroy-the-world-with-war in the name of “growth” action plan?

I am happy I did not tell you my despair.   I wrote:  It would be great if the German people could lend a hand here. Stop Deutsche Bank from investing in Lockheed Martin (whose growth plan it is, along with others that have the same advisors).

See  Strategy, scenarios, and the global shift in defense power.

Today, WHAT A GIFT!   A small number of people in Germany did way better! (Although I would still be happy if they stopped the investment in Lockheed!)

They issued an open letter to Mikhail Gorbachev asking him to initiate a World Peace Conference. It was picked up, translated, and launched in the U.S.

It will go viral, I think. I was the 1,186th to sign (April 12th, 1:30 pm, west coast of Canada).

Let ‘er rip!

I just love it – – there’s always someone among us who comes up with a brilliant idea.   I might not agree with every detail,  doesn[t matter.   Our job is to unite millions – we can bring the pressure to force the talks to happen.   Yes!  to a World Beyond War:

Sign the Petition: http://diy.rootsaction.org/petitions/initiate-a-world-peace-conference

Details from the organizers:

 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Dear Anti-War friends,

The German Left Party (DIE LINKE) has recently published an open letter to  Mikhail S. Gorbachev to be presented and put up for vote at the main party convention on June 6/7.

The letter calls on the Former President of the Soviet Union to initiate a World Peace Conference in the face of escalating tensions not only in Ukraine but around the globe.

The petition has initially been signed by 20 members of the german parliament and additionally by about 1000 supporters on a german website.

World Beyond War, an international peace network started by us-peace activists has last week published an english-language version of the german petition, which has so far been supported by more than 1000 people.

We would like to ask you to consider supporting the initiative, by signing or forwarding it.

Please note that many people who are not affiliated with the german Left Party have also supported the initiative, which is ultimately calling on Mikhail S. Gorbachev to initiate a World Peace Conference. The call for a peaceful transformation and for cooperation, is also a central argument of several initiatives and alliances, namely ALBA, UNASUR, CELAC, BRICS, Shanghai Cooporation, and The Non Aligned Movement. It is a call for a policy of non-interventionism –  characterized by the absence of interference by a state or states in the external and internal affairs of a sovereign state without its consent.

The concept of a worldwide appeal of prominent nonpartisan politicians and leaders for desescalation and reconciliation is therefore more urgent than ever and needs our support. –

———   Here the US-initiative http://diy.rootsaction.org/petitions/initiate-a-world-peace-conference

Initiate a World Peace Conference To: Mikhail S. Gorbachev

We ask you to initiate a world peace conference for the international coordination of nonviolent resistance to highly dangerous U.S. and NATO actions in Eastern Europe, Ukraine, and elsewhere.

Such a conference should seek an end to the practices of bombing, of murdering by drone-warfare, and of deploying troops anywhere in the world. There must be an end to the destabilization of entire countries for the purpose of controlling them. Legal standards must no longer be set aside by arbitrary interpretations.

Why is this important?

The United States of America is moving the world toward a new Cold War, which as you have warned “could become a real war.”

When Germany reunited, the United States promised you that NATO would not expand eastward. Now NATO stands in the Baltic States, in Poland, in Romania and in Bulgaria.

Symbolicly at the end of February, in the Estonian city of Narva, a U.S. tank with stars and stripes positioned itself at the border with Russia. In March 3,000 NATO soldiers with 750 tanks and heavy equipment held maneuvers in the Baltics. NATO naval ships are rehearsing in the Black Sea. Bases on Russia’s borders have been expanded and new military structures have been created there.

Threats to world peace are not limited to Ukraine. At no time since the end of World War II have there been as many military conflicts and wars as now, and at no time have there been so many refugees. These wars are driven by economic power and profit, sources of raw materials, and strategically important spheres of influence. No other power on earth defends its interests so aggressively as NATO with the United States at its helm.

The intelligence services of the U.S. and Britain are actually spying electronically on the whole of humanity.

Germany is moving away from the principle that no war can be launched from German soil. The statement by the German President Joachim Gauck at the Security Conference 2014 in Munich, that Germany must take on more responsibility, means a stronger military commitment. Since then, German military missions abroad have been expanded and more money spent on armaments. The new NATO Secretary General declared that Germany is the second most important power within NATO. Germany is the “leading nation” of the new rapid reaction force of 30,000 NATO soldiers.

This rapid reaction force is being mobilized in reaction to the “danger of Russia” in Eastern Europe. We reject this new role for Germany in world politics. We therefore urge the dissolution of NATO and its replacement by a collective security system involving Russia, a project which has disarmament as a central goal.

– – – – – – – – – — – – – – – – –

This petition was inspired by our friends in Germany who created this petition in German, which you should also sign: http://www.weltfriedenskonferenz.org T his effort was initially signed by 20 members of the German Parliament. This English language petition has been signed by: Heinrich Buecker, Coop Anti-War Cafe Berlin Miriam Volkmann, Vigil for World Peace and Human Rights Berlin David Hartsough, World Beyond War, USA David Swanson, World Beyond War, USA

PLEASE SIGN HERE: German-language Initiative http://www.weltfriedenskonferenz.org    (in the box marked STADT you can fill in yor city, in the box on the bottom FUNKTION/KREISVERBAND you can fill in your position or organisation)

english translation of the German-language Initiative weltfriedenskonferenz.org http://wp.me/p1dtrb-3Wu US-initiative (as above) http://diy.rootsaction.org/petitions/initiate-a-world-peace-conference

Please feel free to contact us for further discussion and ideas how to proceed.

Thank you.

Heinrich Buecker

Coop Anti-War Cafe Berlin http://coopcafeberlin.de

World Beyond War, Berlin