"The TPP has been released and our concerns have been vindicated"

[uawchild]

By Kyla Tienhaara, Australian Broadcasting Corporation

"A treaty that placed the needs and rights of citizens on an equal footing with those of corporations would be much more deserving of the 'gold standard' label so frequently bestowed upon the TPP, writes Kyla Tienhaara.

After a month of speculation about the content of the deal reached in Atlanta, the 6,000+ pages of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) were finally released on Thursday night.

We already knew from the limited information provided on the DFAT website in early October that Australia has abandoned its opposition to investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in the agreement. Big corporations use ISDS to challenge government measures, such as Australia's plain packaging legislation.

The release of the text allows us to scrutinise the Government's claims that the inclusion of ISDS in the TPP is not a threat to Australian public policy.

As has been widely reported, the TPP allows countries to exclude challenges made over tobacco-control measures from ISDS. As such, we won't see another Philip Morris case under the TPP. States are still permitted to bring cases against each other over tobacco-related trade disputes.

What about the claim that "there is explicit recognition that TPP Parties have an inherent right to regulate to protect public welfare, including in the areas of health and the environment"?

There is mention of a "right to regulate" in the preamble of the whole agreement, but this is not legally enforceable. In the investment chapter itself, a provision indicates that parties can maintain and enforce environmental and health measures that are "otherwise consistent" with the agreement. Translation: environmental and health measures (other than those related to tobacco control) can still be challenged under ISDS."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-06/tienhaara-ttp-investment/6918810

==============

Once again, the devil's in the details -- the Australian perspective on the TPP.

[Hoyt]

1. The release shows that most peoples' fears -- including Warren's -- was wrong. The document was

released before Congress begins deliberation. Warren said, over and over and over, that it wouldn't be released until 4 years after Congress enacted it. She was wrong on that, as were those who believed her -- does anyone even know of any agreement or piece of legislation that wasn't available to the public in 200 years or so?

[Cal Carpenter]

2. You're not even reading past thread headlines in your rush to defend this

This article has nothing to do with Elizabeth Warren and fears about when/if the text would be available.

[pampango]

3. "otherwise consistent" with the agreement" may well mean that regulations have to be equally applied

to both foreign and domestic entities.

a provision indicates that parties can maintain and enforce environmental and health measures that are "otherwise consistent" with the agreement.

A country can maintain and enforce environmental and health measures - as long as it applies those measures equally and does not apply different standards to foreign entities.