Nuutste resepte

Nuwe handelstransaksies bedreig plaaslike voedselstelsels

Nuwe handelstransaksies bedreig plaaslike voedselstelsels


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Die Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) en die Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) kan globalisering na 'n nuwe vlak neem, wat dinge soos geharmoniseerde voedselveiligheidsbeleid, nuwe regte vir korporasies en beperkte voorkeure vir aankope vereis.


Dink TTIP is 'n bedreiging vir demokrasie? Daar is 'n ander handelsooreenkoms wat reeds onderteken is

Aangesien die groot moondhede in Japan vergader het vir die G7 -beraad van verlede week, is 'n reeks massiewe handelsooreenkomste van alle kante aangeval. En tog, van Donald Trump tot Jeremy Corbyn, is daar 'n erkenning dat 'handel' weinig meer geword het as 'n sinoniem dat groot ondernemings steeds meer beheer oor die samelewing kan neem.

Die TTIP-ooreenkoms tussen die VSA en Europa (die Trans-Atlantiese handels- en beleggingsvennootskap) is die bekendste van hierdie sogenaamde 'nuwe generasie' handelstransaksies en het 'n beweging geïnspireer. Meer as 3 miljoen Europeërs het Europa se grootste petisie onderteken om TTIP teë te staan, terwyl 250,000 Duitsers verlede herfs die strate van Berlyn binnegegaan het om hierdie ooreenkoms te probeer onderdruk. 'N Nuwe meningspeiling toon dat slegs 18% van die Amerikaners en 17% van die Duitsers TTIP ondersteun, vergeleke met 53% en 55% net twee jaar gelede.

Maar TTIP is nie alleen nie. Die kleiner susterooreenkoms tussen die EU en Kanada heet Ceta (die omvattende ekonomiese en handelsooreenkoms). Ceta is inderdaad net so gevaarlik as TTIP, dit is in die voorhoede van transaksies in TTIP-styl, want dit is reeds onderteken deur die Europese kommissie en die Kanadese regering. Dit wag nou op bekragtiging oor die volgende 12 maande.

Die een positiewe ding van Ceta is dat dit reeds onderteken is en dit beteken dat ons dit mag sien. Die 1500 bladsye wys ons dat dit 'n bedreiging is vir nie net ons voedselstandaarde nie, maar ook die stryd teen klimaatsverandering, ons vermoë om groot banke te reguleer om 'n ander ongeluk te voorkom en ons mag om nywerhede te hernasionaliseer.

Net soos die Amerikaanse ooreenkoms, bevat Ceta 'n nuwe regstelsel wat slegs oop is vir buitelandse ondernemings en beleggers. Sou die Britse regering besluit om gevaarlike chemikalieë te verbied, voedselveiligheid te verbeter of sigarette in gewone verpakking te plaas, kan 'n Kanadese onderneming die Britse regering dagvaar vir 'onregverdigheid'. En deur onregverdigheid beteken dit eenvoudig dat hulle nie soveel wins kan maak as wat hulle verwag het nie. Die 'verhoor' sou as 'n spesiale tribunaal gehou word, onder toesig van korporatiewe advokate.

Die Europese kommissie het veranderinge aangebring aan hierdie stelsel vir 'korporatiewe hof', wat volgens haar regverdig is. Maar navorsers het bevind dat dit geen verskil sou maak aan die tientalle sake wat die afgelope jare onder soortgelyke stelsels teen lande aanhangig gemaak is nie. Kanada self het onder die Noord -Amerikaanse vryhandelsooreenkoms (Nafta) talle sake van Amerikaanse ondernemings beveg en verloor, byvoorbeeld vir die verbod op kankerverwekkende chemikalieë in petrol, herbelegging in plaaslike gemeenskappe en die verwoesting van steengroewe. Onder Ceta is sulke gevalle hier onderweg.

Die hele doel van Ceta is om die regulering van sake te verminder, met die idee dat dit dit makliker sal uitvoer. Maar dit sal veel meer as dit doen. Deur die aangename klinkende "regulerende samewerking" word standaarde oor die algemeen verminder, omdat dit 'handelshindernisse' is. Dit kan voedselveiligheid, werkersregte en omgewingsregulering insluit.

Oorweeg net finansiële regulering. Die regerings se vermoë om banke en finansiële markte te beheer, word verder benadeel. Deur die groei van banke wat “te groot om te misluk” te beperk, kan 'n regering in 'n geheime tribunaal beland word.

Die aanslag het inderdaad reeds begin. Teer sandolie is een van die mees vernietigende fossielbrandstowwe ter wêreld, en die meerderheid van hierdie olie word in Alberta, Kanada, onttrek. Daar is tans min teersand in die EU, maar dit verander. Toe die EU onwettige nuwe regulasies voorstel om teerstrande na Europa effektief te keer, het Kanada Ceta as 'n bedingingsbrief gebruik om die voorstel te blokkeer. As Ceta slaag, word die besluit opgesluit - 'n ramp vir klimaatsverandering.

Laastens, deur iets wat 'n 'ratelklousule' genoem word, sou die huidige privatiseringsvlakke 'ingeslote' wees vir dienste wat nie spesifiek vrygestel is nie. As Kanadese of EU -regerings sekere dienste in openbare besit wil terugbring, kan dit die voorwaardes van die ooreenkoms oortree.

Waarom het so min mense van Ceta gehoor? Grootliks omdat Kanadese en Europeërs dink dat hulle baie dieselfde is. Hulle is nie bevrees vir die oorname van hul ekonomie soos wat hulle doen wanneer hulle 'n handelsooreenkoms met die VSA onderteken nie. Maar dit is 'n groot fout, want hierdie handelstransaksies handel nie oor Europeërs versus Amerikaners of Kanadese nie. Hulle handel oor groot ondernemings teenoor burgers.

As u 'n bewys nodig het dat moderne handelsooreenkomste eintlik niks anders as 'n verskoning is om groot sake -mag op ons koste oor te dra nie, hoef u nie verder as Ceta te soek nie. Geen wonder dat die publieke oproer toeneem nie, en die verset teen TTIP spoel oor na die Kanadese ooreenkoms.

Toe Ceta einde Junie na die EU -raad (van alle EU -regerings) gaan vir bekragtiging, het Roemenië - wat met Kanada geskil is oor visumkwessies - gedreig om dit te veto. Die Waalse parlement het 'n kritiese mosie oor hierdie ooreenkoms gestem wat die hande van die Belgiese regering kan bind en die onthouding kan dwing. Die Nederlandse parlement het ook 'n mosie goedgekeur waarin die voorlopige toepassing van die ooreenkoms verwerp word, wat dit moontlik maak om dit te implementeer voordat die parlement kans kry om daaroor te stem.

David Cameron neem die aggressiefste standpunt in teenoor Ceta - ondersteun dit nie net heeltemal nie, maar dring aan op voorlopige toepassing in die Verenigde Koninkryk. Op grond hiervan kan Ceta vroeg volgende jaar in Brittanje van krag word sonder 'n Westminster -stemming. Selfs as die Britse parlement Ceta afgestem het, bly die korporatiewe hofstelsel nog drie jaar van krag. Cameron se Brexit -rebelle gaan nie so baie hou nie.

Die probleme van die G7 toon dat baie van ons erken het dat handelstransaksies die wêreld 'n speelplek vir die superrykes gemaak het-dit is deel van ons ongelooflik ongelyke ekonomie. Maar die G7 kan nie verder dink as die belange van die wêreld se elite nie. Dit is aan ons om ons demokrasie as burger terug te neem, en die bewegings teen TTIP en Ceta is die voorpunt.


Dink TTIP is 'n bedreiging vir demokrasie? Daar is nog 'n handelsooreenkoms wat reeds onderteken is

Aangesien die groot moondhede in Japan vergader het vir die G7 -beraad van verlede week, is 'n reeks massiewe handelsooreenkomste van alle kante aangeval. En tog, van Donald Trump tot Jeremy Corbyn, is daar 'n erkenning dat 'handel' weinig meer geword het as 'n sinoniem dat groot ondernemings steeds meer beheer oor die samelewing kan neem.

Die TTIP-ooreenkoms tussen die VSA en Europa (die Trans-Atlantiese handels- en beleggingsvennootskap) is die bekendste van hierdie sogenaamde 'nuwe generasie' handelstransaksies en het 'n beweging geïnspireer. Meer as 3 miljoen Europeërs het Europa se grootste petisie onderteken om TTIP teë te staan, terwyl 250,000 Duitsers verlede herfs die strate van Berlyn binnegegaan het om hierdie ooreenkoms te probeer onderdruk. 'N Nuwe meningspeiling toon dat slegs 18% van die Amerikaners en 17% van die Duitsers TTIP ondersteun, vergeleke met 53% en 55% net twee jaar gelede.

Maar TTIP is nie alleen nie. Die kleiner susterooreenkoms tussen die EU en Kanada heet Ceta (die omvattende ekonomiese en handelsooreenkoms). Ceta is inderdaad net so gevaarlik as TTIP, dit is in die voorhoede van transaksies in TTIP-styl, want dit is reeds onderteken deur die Europese kommissie en die Kanadese regering. Dit wag nou op bekragtiging oor die volgende 12 maande.

Die een positiewe ding van Ceta is dat dit reeds onderteken is en dit beteken dat ons dit mag sien. Die 1500 bladsye wys ons dat dit 'n bedreiging is vir nie net ons voedselstandaarde nie, maar ook die stryd teen klimaatsverandering, ons vermoë om groot banke te reguleer om 'n ander ongeluk te voorkom en ons mag om nywerhede te hernasionaliseer.

Net soos die Amerikaanse ooreenkoms, bevat Ceta 'n nuwe regstelsel wat slegs oop is vir buitelandse ondernemings en beleggers. Sou die Britse regering 'n besluit neem om gevaarlike chemikalieë te verbied, voedselveiligheid te verbeter of sigarette in gewone verpakking te plaas, kan 'n Kanadese onderneming die Britse regering dagvaar vir 'onregverdigheid'. En deur onregverdigheid beteken dit eenvoudig dat hulle nie soveel wins kan maak as wat hulle verwag het nie. Die 'verhoor' sou as 'n spesiale tribunaal gehou word, onder toesig van korporatiewe advokate.

Die Europese kommissie het veranderinge aangebring aan hierdie stelsel vir 'korporatiewe hof', wat volgens haar regverdig is. Maar navorsers het bevind dat dit geen verskil sou maak aan die tientalle sake wat die afgelope jare onder soortgelyke stelsels teen lande aanhangig gemaak is nie. Kanada self het onder die Noord -Amerikaanse vryhandelsooreenkoms (Nafta) talle sake van Amerikaanse ondernemings beveg en verloor, byvoorbeeld vir die verbod op kankerverwekkende chemikalieë in petrol, herbelegging in plaaslike gemeenskappe en die verwoesting van steengroewe. Onder Ceta is sulke gevalle hier onderweg.

Die hele doel van Ceta is om die regulering van sake te verminder, met die idee dat dit dit makliker sal uitvoer. Maar dit sal veel meer as dit doen. Deur die aangename klinkende "regulerende samewerking" word standaarde oor die algemeen verminder, omdat dit 'handelshindernisse' is. Dit kan voedselveiligheid, werkersregte en omgewingsregulering insluit.

Oorweeg net finansiële regulering. Die regerings se vermoë om banke en finansiële markte te beheer, word verder benadeel. Deur die groei van banke wat “te groot om te misluk” te beperk, kan 'n regering in 'n geheime tribunaal beland.

Die aanslag het inderdaad reeds begin. Teer sandolie is een van die mees vernietigende fossielbrandstowwe ter wêreld, en die meerderheid van hierdie olie word in Alberta, Kanada, onttrek. Daar is tans min teersand in die EU, maar dit verander. Toe die EU onwettige nuwe regulasies voorstel om teerstrande na Europa effektief te stop, het Kanada Ceta as 'n bedingingsbrief gebruik om die voorstel te blokkeer. As Ceta slaag, word die besluit opgesluit - 'n ramp vir klimaatsverandering.

Laastens, deur iets wat 'n 'ratelklousule' genoem word, sou die huidige privatiseringsvlakke 'ingeslote' wees vir dienste wat nie spesifiek vrygestel is nie. As Kanadese of EU -regerings sekere dienste in openbare besit wil terugbring, kan dit die voorwaardes van die ooreenkoms oortree.

Waarom het so min mense van Ceta gehoor? Grootliks omdat Kanadese en Europeërs dink dat hulle baie dieselfde is. Hulle is nie bevrees vir die oorname van hul ekonomie soos wat hulle doen wanneer hulle 'n handelsooreenkoms met die VSA onderteken nie. Maar dit is 'n groot fout, want hierdie handelstransaksies handel nie oor Europeërs versus Amerikaners of Kanadese nie. Hulle handel oor groot ondernemings teenoor burgers.

As u 'n bewys nodig het dat moderne handelsooreenkomste eintlik niks anders as 'n verskoning is om groot sake -mag op ons koste oor te dra nie, hoef u nie verder as Ceta te soek nie. Geen wonder dat die publieke oproer toeneem nie, en die verset teen TTIP spoel oor na die Kanadese ooreenkoms.

Toe Ceta einde Junie na die EU -raad (van alle EU -regerings) gaan vir bekragtiging, het Roemenië - wat met Kanada geskil is oor visumkwessies - gedreig om dit te veto. Die Waalse parlement het 'n kritiese mosie oor hierdie ooreenkoms gestem wat die hande van die Belgiese regering kan bind en die onthouding kan dwing. Die Nederlandse parlement het ook 'n mosie goedgekeur waarin die voorlopige toepassing van die ooreenkoms verwerp word, wat dit moontlik maak om dit te implementeer voordat die parlement kans kry om daaroor te stem.

David Cameron neem die aggressiefste standpunt in teenoor Ceta - ondersteun dit nie net heeltemal nie, maar dring aan op voorlopige toepassing in die Verenigde Koninkryk. Op hierdie basis kan Ceta vroeg volgende jaar in Brittanje van krag word sonder 'n Westminster -stemming. Selfs as die Britse parlement Ceta afgestem het, bly die korporatiewe hofstelsel nog drie jaar van krag. Cameron se Brexit -rebelle gaan nie so baie hou nie.

Die probleme van die G7 toon dat baie van ons erken het dat handelstransaksies die wêreld 'n speelplek vir die superrykes gemaak het-dit is deel van ons ongelooflik ongelyke ekonomie. Maar die G7 kan nie verder dink as die belange van die wêreld se elite nie. Dit is aan ons om ons demokrasie as burgers terug te neem, en die bewegings teen TTIP en Ceta is die voorpunt.


Dink TTIP is 'n bedreiging vir demokrasie? Daar is nog 'n handelsooreenkoms wat reeds onderteken is

Aangesien die groot moondhede in Japan vergader het vir die G7 -beraad van verlede week, is 'n reeks massiewe handelsooreenkomste van alle kante aangeval. En tog, van Donald Trump tot Jeremy Corbyn, is daar 'n erkenning dat 'handel' weinig meer is as 'n sinoniem dat groot ondernemings steeds meer beheer oor die samelewing kan neem.

Die TTIP-ooreenkoms tussen die VSA en Europa (die Trans-Atlantiese handels- en beleggingsvennootskap) is die bekendste van hierdie sogenaamde 'nuwe generasie' handelstransaksies en het 'n beweging geïnspireer. Meer as 3 miljoen Europeërs het Europa se grootste petisie onderteken om TTIP teë te staan, terwyl 250,000 Duitsers verlede herfs die strate van Berlyn binnegegaan het om hierdie ooreenkoms te probeer onderdruk. 'N Nuwe meningspeiling toon dat slegs 18% van die Amerikaners en 17% van die Duitsers TTIP ondersteun, vergeleke met 53% en 55% net twee jaar gelede.

Maar TTIP is nie alleen nie. Die kleiner susterooreenkoms tussen die EU en Kanada heet Ceta (die omvattende ekonomiese en handelsooreenkoms). Ceta is net so gevaarlik soos TTIP, dit is in die voorhoede van transaksies in TTIP-styl, want dit is reeds onderteken deur die Europese kommissie en die Kanadese regering. Dit wag nou op bekragtiging oor die volgende 12 maande.

Die een positiewe ding van Ceta is dat dit reeds onderteken is en dit beteken dat ons dit mag sien. Die 1500 bladsye wys ons dat dit 'n bedreiging is vir nie net ons voedselstandaarde nie, maar ook die stryd teen klimaatsverandering, ons vermoë om groot banke te reguleer om 'n ander ongeluk te voorkom en ons mag om nywerhede te hernasionaliseer.

Net soos die Amerikaanse ooreenkoms, bevat Ceta 'n nuwe regstelsel wat slegs oop is vir buitelandse ondernemings en beleggers. Sou die Britse regering besluit om gevaarlike chemikalieë te verbied, voedselveiligheid te verbeter of sigarette in gewone verpakking te plaas, kan 'n Kanadese onderneming die Britse regering dagvaar vir 'onregverdigheid'. En deur onregverdigheid beteken dit eenvoudig dat hulle nie soveel wins kan maak as wat hulle verwag het nie. Die 'verhoor' sou as 'n spesiale tribunaal gehou word, onder toesig van korporatiewe advokate.

Die Europese kommissie het veranderinge aangebring aan hierdie 'korporatiewe hof' -stelsel wat volgens haar regverdig is. Maar navorsers het bevind dat dit geen verskil sou maak aan die tientalle sake wat die afgelope jare onder soortgelyke stelsels teen lande aanhangig gemaak is nie. Kanada self het onder die Noord -Amerikaanse vryhandelsooreenkoms (Nafta) talle sake van Amerikaanse ondernemings beveg en verloor, byvoorbeeld vir die verbod op kankerverwekkende chemikalieë in petrol, herbelegging in plaaslike gemeenskappe en die verwoesting van steengroewe. Onder Ceta is sulke gevalle hier onderweg.

Die hele doel van Ceta is om die regulering van sake te verminder, met die idee dat dit dit makliker sal uitvoer. Maar dit sal veel meer as dit doen. Deur die aangename klinkende "regulerende samewerking" word standaarde oor die algemeen verminder, omdat dit 'handelshindernisse' is. Dit kan voedselveiligheid, werkersregte en omgewingsregulering insluit.

Oorweeg net finansiële regulering. Die regerings se vermoë om banke en finansiële markte te beheer, word verder benadeel. Deur die groei van banke wat “te groot om te misluk” te beperk, kan 'n regering in 'n geheime tribunaal beland word.

Die aanslag het inderdaad reeds begin. Teer sandolie is een van die mees vernietigende fossielbrandstowwe ter wêreld, en die meerderheid van hierdie olie word in Alberta, Kanada, onttrek. Daar is tans min teersand in die EU, maar dit verander. Toe die EU onwettige nuwe regulasies voorstel om teerstrande na Europa effektief te keer, het Kanada Ceta as 'n bedingingsbrief gebruik om die voorstel te blokkeer. As Ceta slaag, word die besluit opgesluit - 'n ramp vir klimaatsverandering.

Laastens, deur iets wat 'n 'ratelklousule' genoem word, sou die huidige privatiseringsvlakke 'ingeslote' wees vir dienste wat nie spesifiek vrygestel is nie. As Kanadese of EU -regerings sekere dienste in openbare besit wil terugbring, kan dit die voorwaardes van die ooreenkoms oortree.

Waarom het so min mense van Ceta gehoor? Grootliks omdat Kanadese en Europeërs dink dat hulle baie dieselfde is. Hulle is nie bevrees vir die oorname van hul ekonomie soos wat hulle doen wanneer hulle 'n handelsooreenkoms met die VSA onderteken nie. Maar dit is 'n groot fout, want hierdie handelstransaksies handel nie oor Europeërs versus Amerikaners of Kanadese nie. Hulle handel oor groot ondernemings teenoor burgers.

As u 'n bewys nodig het dat moderne handelsooreenkomste eintlik niks anders as 'n verskoning is om groot sake -mag op ons koste oor te dra nie, hoef u nie verder as Ceta te soek nie. Geen wonder dat die publieke oproer toeneem nie, en die verset teen TTIP spoel oor na die Kanadese ooreenkoms.

Toe Ceta einde Junie na die EU -raad (van alle EU -regerings) gaan vir bekragtiging, het Roemenië - wat met Kanada geskil is oor visumkwessies - gedreig om dit te veto. Die Waalse parlement het 'n kritiese mosie oor hierdie ooreenkoms gestem wat die hande van die Belgiese regering kan bind en die onthouding kan dwing. Die Nederlandse parlement het ook 'n mosie goedgekeur waarin die voorlopige toepassing van die ooreenkoms verwerp word, wat dit moontlik maak om dit te implementeer voordat die parlement kans kry om daaroor te stem.

David Cameron neem die aggressiefste standpunt in teenoor Ceta - ondersteun dit nie net heeltemal nie, maar dring aan op voorlopige toepassing in die Verenigde Koninkryk. Op hierdie basis kan Ceta vroeg volgende jaar in Brittanje van krag word sonder 'n Westminster -stemming. Selfs as die Britse parlement Ceta afgestem het, bly die korporatiewe hofstelsel nog drie jaar van krag. Cameron se Brexit -rebelle gaan nie so baie hou nie.

Die probleme van die G7 toon dat baie van ons erken het dat handelstransaksies die wêreld 'n speelplek vir die superrykes gemaak het-dit is deel van ons ongelooflik ongelyke ekonomie. Maar die G7 kan nie verder dink as die belange van die wêreld se elite nie. Dit is aan ons om ons demokrasie as burger terug te neem, en die bewegings teen TTIP en Ceta is die voorpunt.


Dink TTIP is 'n bedreiging vir demokrasie? Daar is 'n ander handelsooreenkoms wat reeds onderteken is

Aangesien die groot moondhede in Japan vergader het vir die G7 -beraad van verlede week, is 'n reeks massiewe handelsooreenkomste van alle kante aangeval. En tog, van Donald Trump tot Jeremy Corbyn, is daar 'n erkenning dat 'handel' weinig meer geword het as 'n sinoniem dat groot ondernemings steeds meer beheer oor die samelewing kan neem.

Die TTIP-ooreenkoms tussen die VSA en Europa (die Trans-Atlantiese handels- en beleggingsvennootskap) is die bekendste van hierdie sogenaamde 'nuwe generasie' handelstransaksies en het 'n beweging geïnspireer. Meer as 3 miljoen Europeërs het Europa se grootste petisie onderteken om TTIP teë te staan, terwyl 250,000 Duitsers verlede herfs die strate van Berlyn binnegegaan het om hierdie ooreenkoms te probeer onderdruk. 'N Nuwe meningspeiling toon dat slegs 18% van die Amerikaners en 17% van die Duitsers TTIP ondersteun, vergeleke met 53% en 55% net twee jaar gelede.

Maar TTIP is nie alleen nie. Die kleiner susterooreenkoms tussen die EU en Kanada heet Ceta (die omvattende ekonomiese en handelsooreenkoms). Ceta is net so gevaarlik soos TTIP, dit is in die voorhoede van transaksies in TTIP-styl, want dit is reeds onderteken deur die Europese kommissie en die Kanadese regering. Dit wag nou op bekragtiging oor die volgende 12 maande.

Die een positiewe ding van Ceta is dat dit reeds onderteken is en dit beteken dat ons dit mag sien. Die 1500 bladsye wys ons dat dit 'n bedreiging is vir nie net ons voedselstandaarde nie, maar ook die stryd teen klimaatsverandering, ons vermoë om groot banke te reguleer om 'n ander ongeluk te voorkom en ons mag om nywerhede te hernasionaliseer.

Net soos die Amerikaanse ooreenkoms, bevat Ceta 'n nuwe regstelsel wat slegs oop is vir buitelandse ondernemings en beleggers. Sou die Britse regering besluit om gevaarlike chemikalieë te verbied, voedselveiligheid te verbeter of sigarette in gewone verpakking te plaas, kan 'n Kanadese onderneming die Britse regering dagvaar vir 'onregverdigheid'. En deur onregverdigheid beteken dit eenvoudig dat hulle nie soveel wins kan maak as wat hulle verwag het nie. Die 'verhoor' sou as 'n spesiale tribunaal gehou word, onder toesig van korporatiewe advokate.

Die Europese kommissie het veranderinge aangebring aan hierdie 'korporatiewe hof' -stelsel wat volgens haar regverdig is. Maar navorsers het bevind dat dit geen verskil sou maak aan die tientalle sake wat die afgelope jare onder soortgelyke stelsels teen lande aanhangig gemaak is nie. Kanada self het onder die Noord -Amerikaanse vryhandelsooreenkoms (Nafta) talle sake van Amerikaanse ondernemings beveg en verloor, byvoorbeeld vir die verbod op kankerverwekkende chemikalieë in petrol, herbelegging in plaaslike gemeenskappe en die verwoesting van steengroewe. Onder Ceta is sulke gevalle hier onderweg.

Die hele doel van Ceta is om die regulering van sake te verminder, met die idee dat dit dit makliker sal uitvoer. Maar dit sal veel meer as dit doen. Deur die aangename klinkende "regulerende samewerking" word standaarde oor die algemeen verminder, omdat dit 'handelshindernisse' is. Dit kan voedselveiligheid, werkersregte en omgewingsregulering insluit.

Oorweeg net finansiële regulering. Die regerings se vermoë om banke en finansiële markte te beheer, word verder benadeel. Deur die groei van banke wat “te groot om te misluk” te beperk, kan 'n regering in 'n geheime tribunaal beland.

Die aanslag het inderdaad reeds begin. Teer sandolie is een van die mees vernietigende fossielbrandstowwe ter wêreld, en die meerderheid van hierdie olie word in Alberta, Kanada, onttrek. Daar is tans min teersand in die EU, maar dit verander. Toe die EU onwettige nuwe regulasies voorstel om teerstrande na Europa effektief te keer, het Kanada Ceta as 'n bedingingsbrief gebruik om die voorstel te blokkeer. As Ceta slaag, word die besluit opgesluit - 'n ramp vir klimaatsverandering.

Laastens, deur iets wat 'n 'ratelklousule' genoem word, sou die huidige privatiseringsvlakke 'ingeslote' wees vir dienste wat nie spesifiek vrygestel is nie. As Kanadese of EU -regerings sekere dienste in openbare besit wil terugbring, kan dit die voorwaardes van die ooreenkoms oortree.

Waarom het so min mense van Ceta gehoor? Grootliks omdat Kanadese en Europeërs dink dat hulle baie dieselfde is. Hulle is nie bevrees vir die oorname van hul ekonomie soos wat hulle doen wanneer hulle 'n handelsooreenkoms met die VSA onderteken nie. Maar dit is 'n groot fout, want hierdie handelstransaksies handel nie oor Europeërs versus Amerikaners of Kanadese nie. Hulle handel oor groot ondernemings teenoor burgers.

As u 'n bewys nodig het dat moderne handelsooreenkomste eintlik niks anders as 'n verskoning is om groot sake -mag op ons koste oor te dra nie, hoef u nie verder as Ceta te soek nie. Geen wonder dat die publieke oproer toeneem nie, en die verset teen TTIP spoel oor na die Kanadese ooreenkoms.

Toe Ceta einde Junie na die EU -raad (van alle EU -regerings) gaan vir bekragtiging, het Roemenië - wat met Kanada geskil is oor visumkwessies - gedreig om dit te veto. Die Waalse parlement het 'n kritiese mosie oor hierdie ooreenkoms gestem wat die hande van die Belgiese regering kan bind en die onthouding kan dwing. Die Nederlandse parlement het ook 'n mosie goedgekeur waarin die voorlopige toepassing van die ooreenkoms verwerp word, wat dit moontlik maak om dit te implementeer voordat die parlement kans kry om daaroor te stem.

David Cameron neem die aggressiefste standpunt in teenoor Ceta - ondersteun dit nie net heeltemal nie, maar dring aan op voorlopige toepassing in die Verenigde Koninkryk. Op hierdie basis kan Ceta vroeg volgende jaar in Brittanje van krag word sonder 'n Westminster -stemming. Selfs as die Britse parlement Ceta afgestem het, bly die korporatiewe hofstelsel nog drie jaar van krag. Cameron se Brexit -rebelle gaan nie so baie hou nie.

Die probleme van die G7 toon dat baie van ons erken het dat handelstransaksies die wêreld 'n speelplek vir die superrykes gemaak het-dit is deel van ons ongelooflik ongelyke ekonomie. Maar die G7 kan nie verder dink as die belange van die wêreld se elite nie. Dit is aan ons om ons demokrasie as burgers terug te neem, en die bewegings teen TTIP en Ceta is die voorpunt.


Dink TTIP is 'n bedreiging vir demokrasie? Daar is 'n ander handelsooreenkoms wat reeds onderteken is

Aangesien die groot moondhede in Japan vergader het vir die G7 -beraad van verlede week, is 'n reeks massiewe handelsooreenkomste van alle kante aangeval. En tog, van Donald Trump tot Jeremy Corbyn, is daar 'n erkenning dat 'handel' weinig meer is as 'n sinoniem dat groot ondernemings steeds meer beheer oor die samelewing kan neem.

Die TTIP-ooreenkoms tussen die VSA en Europa (die Trans-Atlantiese handels- en beleggingsvennootskap) is die bekendste van hierdie sogenaamde 'nuwe generasie' handelstransaksies en het 'n beweging geïnspireer. Meer as 3 miljoen Europeërs het Europa se grootste petisie onderteken om TTIP teë te staan, terwyl 250,000 Duitsers verlede herfs die strate van Berlyn binnegegaan het om hierdie ooreenkoms te probeer onderdruk. 'N Nuwe meningspeiling toon dat slegs 18% van die Amerikaners en 17% van die Duitsers TTIP steun, teenoor 53% en 55% net twee jaar gelede.

Maar TTIP is nie alleen nie. Die kleiner susterooreenkoms tussen die EU en Kanada heet Ceta (die omvattende ekonomiese en handelsooreenkoms). Ceta is inderdaad net so gevaarlik as TTIP, dit is in die voorhoede van transaksies in TTIP-styl, want dit is reeds onderteken deur die Europese kommissie en die Kanadese regering. Dit wag nou op bekragtiging oor die volgende 12 maande.

Die een positiewe ding van Ceta is dat dit reeds onderteken is en dit beteken dat ons dit mag sien. Die 1500 bladsye wys ons dat dit 'n bedreiging is vir nie net ons voedselstandaarde nie, maar ook die stryd teen klimaatsverandering, ons vermoë om groot banke te reguleer om 'n ander ongeluk te voorkom en ons mag om nywerhede te hernasionaliseer.

Net soos die Amerikaanse ooreenkoms, bevat Ceta 'n nuwe regstelsel wat slegs oop is vir buitelandse ondernemings en beleggers. Sou die Britse regering besluit om gevaarlike chemikalieë te verbied, voedselveiligheid te verbeter of sigarette in gewone verpakking te plaas, kan 'n Kanadese onderneming die Britse regering dagvaar vir 'onregverdigheid'. En deur onregverdigheid beteken dit eenvoudig dat hulle nie soveel wins kan maak as wat hulle verwag het nie. Die 'verhoor' sou as 'n spesiale tribunaal gehou word, onder toesig van korporatiewe advokate.

Die Europese kommissie het veranderinge aangebring aan hierdie stelsel vir 'korporatiewe hof', wat volgens haar regverdig is. Maar navorsers het bevind dat dit geen verskil sou maak aan die tientalle sake wat die afgelope jare onder soortgelyke stelsels teen lande aanhangig gemaak is nie. Kanada self het onder die Noord -Amerikaanse vryhandelsooreenkoms (Nafta) talle sake van Amerikaanse ondernemings beveg en verloor, byvoorbeeld vir die verbod op kankerverwekkende chemikalieë in petrol, herbelegging in plaaslike gemeenskappe en die verwoesting van steengroewe. Onder Ceta is sulke gevalle hier onderweg.

Die hele doel van Ceta is om die regulering van sake te verminder, met die idee dat dit dit makliker sal uitvoer. Maar dit sal veel meer as dit doen. Deur die aangename klinkende "regulerende samewerking" word standaarde oor die algemeen verminder, omdat dit 'handelshindernisse' is. Dit kan voedselveiligheid, werkersregte en omgewingsregulering insluit.

Oorweeg net finansiële regulering. Die regerings se vermoë om banke en finansiële markte te beheer, word verder benadeel. Deur die groei van banke wat “te groot om te misluk” te beperk, kan 'n regering in 'n geheime tribunaal beland word.

Die aanslag het inderdaad reeds begin. Teer sandolie is een van die mees vernietigende fossielbrandstowwe ter wêreld, en die meerderheid van hierdie olie word in Alberta, Kanada, onttrek. Daar is tans min teersand in die EU, maar dit verander. Toe die EU onwettige nuwe regulasies voorstel om teerstrande na Europa effektief te stop, het Kanada Ceta as 'n bedingingsbrief gebruik om die voorstel te blokkeer. As Ceta slaag, word die besluit opgesluit - 'n ramp vir klimaatsverandering.

Laastens, deur iets wat 'n 'ratelklousule' genoem word, sou die huidige privatiseringsvlakke 'ingeslote' wees vir dienste wat nie spesifiek vrygestel is nie. As Kanadese of EU -regerings sekere dienste in openbare besit wil terugbring, kan dit die voorwaardes van die ooreenkoms oortree.

Waarom het so min mense van Ceta gehoor? Grootliks omdat Kanadese en Europeërs dink dat hulle baie dieselfde is. Hulle is nie bevrees vir die oorname van hul ekonomie soos wat hulle doen wanneer hulle 'n handelsooreenkoms met die VSA onderteken nie. Maar dit is 'n groot fout, want hierdie handelstransaksies handel nie oor Europeërs versus Amerikaners of Kanadese nie. Hulle handel oor groot ondernemings teenoor burgers.

As u 'n bewys nodig het dat moderne handelsooreenkomste eintlik niks anders as 'n verskoning is om groot sake -mag op ons koste oor te dra nie, hoef u nie verder as Ceta te soek nie. Geen wonder dat die publieke oproer toeneem nie, en die verset teen TTIP spoel oor na die Kanadese ooreenkoms.

Toe Ceta einde Junie na die EU -raad (van alle EU -regerings) gaan vir bekragtiging, het Roemenië - wat met Kanada geskil is oor visumkwessies - gedreig om dit te veto. Die Waalse parlement het 'n kritiese mosie oor hierdie ooreenkoms gestem wat die hande van die Belgiese regering kan bind en die onthouding kan dwing. Die Nederlandse parlement het ook 'n mosie goedgekeur waarin die voorlopige toepassing van die ooreenkoms verwerp word, wat dit moontlik maak om dit te implementeer voordat die parlement kans kry om daaroor te stem.

David Cameron neem die aggressiefste standpunt in teenoor Ceta - ondersteun dit nie net heeltemal nie, maar dring aan op voorlopige toepassing in die Verenigde Koninkryk. Op grond hiervan kan Ceta vroeg volgende jaar in Brittanje van krag word sonder 'n Westminster -stemming. Selfs as die Britse parlement Ceta afgestem het, bly die korporatiewe hofstelsel nog drie jaar van krag. Cameron se Brexit -rebelle gaan nie so baie hou nie.

Die probleme van die G7 toon dat baie van ons erken het dat handelstransaksies die wêreld 'n speelplek vir die superrykes gemaak het-dit is deel van ons ongelooflik ongelyke ekonomie. Maar die G7 kan nie verder dink as die belange van die wêreld se elite nie. Dit is aan ons om ons demokrasie as burgers terug te neem, en die bewegings teen TTIP en Ceta is die voorpunt.


Dink TTIP is 'n bedreiging vir demokrasie? Daar is 'n ander handelsooreenkoms wat reeds onderteken is

Aangesien die groot moondhede in Japan vergader het vir die G7 -beraad van verlede week, is 'n reeks massiewe handelsooreenkomste van alle kante aangeval. And yet, from Donald Trump to Jeremy Corbyn, there is a recognition that “trade” has become little more than a synonym for big business to take ever more control of society.

The US-Europe deal TTIP (the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) is the best known of these so-called “new generation” trade deals and has inspired a movement. More than 3 million Europeans have signed Europe’s biggest petition to oppose TTIP, while 250,000 Germans took to the streets of Berlin last autumn to try to bring this deal down. A new opinion poll shows only 18% of Americans and 17% of Germans support TTIP, down from 53% and 55% just two years ago.

But TTIP is not alone. Its smaller sister deal between the EU and Canada is called Ceta (the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement). Ceta is just as dangerous as TTIP indeed it’s in the vanguard of TTIP-style deals, because it’s already been signed by the European commission and the Canadian government. It now awaits ratification over the next 12 months.

The one positive thing about Ceta is that it has already been signed and that means that we’re allowed to see it. Its 1,500 pages show us that it’s a threat to not only our food standards, but also the battle against climate change, our ability to regulate big banks to prevent another crash and our power to renationalise industries.

Like the US deal, Ceta contains a new legal system, open only to foreign corporations and investors. Should the British government make a decision, say, to outlaw dangerous chemicals, improve food safety or put cigarettes in plain packaging, a Canadian company can sue the British government for “unfairness”. And by unfairness this simply means they can’t make as much profit as they expected. The “trial” would be held as a special tribunal, overseen by corporate lawyers.

The European commission has made changes to this “corporate court” system that it believes makes it fairer. But researchers have found it would make no difference to the dozens of cases that have been brought against countries in recent years under similar systems. Canada itself has fought and lost numerous cases from US corporations under the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) – for example, for outlawing carcinogenic chemicals in petrol, reinvesting in local communities and halting the devastation of quarries. Under Ceta, such cases are on their way here.

The whole purpose of Ceta is to reduce regulation on business, the idea being that it will make it easier to export. But it will do far more than that. Through the pleasant-sounding “regulatory cooperation”, standards would be reduced across the board on the basis that they are “obstacles to trade”. That could include food safety, workers’ rights and environmental regulation.

Just consider financial regulation. The ability of governments to control banks and financial markets would be further impaired. Limiting the growth of banks that have become “too big to fail” could land a government in a secret tribunal.

Indeed the onslaught has already started. Tar sands oil is one of the most environmentally destructive fossil fuels in the world, and the majority of this oil is extracted in Alberta, Canada. There is currently little tar sands in use in the EU, but that’s changing. When the EU proposed prohibitive new regulations to effectively stop tar sands flowing into Europe, Canada used Ceta as a bargaining chip to block the proposal. If Ceta passes, that decision will be locked in – a disaster for climate change.

Finally, through something called a “ratchet clause”, current levels of privatisation would be “locked in” on any services not specifically exempted. If Canadian or EU governments want to bring certain services back into public ownership, they could be breaking the terms of the agreement.

So why have so few people heard of Ceta? Largely because Canadians and Europeans think they’re quite alike. They don’t fear the takeover of their economy in the way they do when signing a trade deal with the US. But this is a big mistake, because these trade deals are not about Europeans versus Americans or Canadians. They are about big business versus citizens.

If you needed proof that modern trade agreements are actually nothing more than an excuse to hand big business power at our expense, you need look no further than Ceta. No wonder the public outcry is growing, and opposition to TTIP is spilling over to the Canadian deal.

When Ceta goes to the EU council (of all EU governments) for ratification in late June, Romania – which is in dispute with Canada over visa issues – has threatened to veto it. The Walloon parliament voted a critical motion on this deal that could tie the hands of the Belgian government and force its abstention. The Dutch parliament has also passed a motion rejecting provisional application of the deal, which would allow it to be implemented before parliament had a chance to vote on it.

David Cameron takes the most aggressive position on Ceta – not only supporting it entirely but pushing for provisional application in the UK. On this basis, Ceta could take effect in Britain early next year without a Westminster vote. In fact, even if the British parliament voted Ceta down, the corporate court system would still stay in effect for three years. Cameron’s Brexit rebels are not going to like that much.

The G7’s problems show that many of us have recognised that trade deals have made the world a playground for the super-rich – they are part of our staggeringly unequal economy. But the G7 is unable to think beyond the interests of the world’s elite. It’s up to us to reclaim our democracy as citizens, and the movements against TTIP and Ceta are the frontline.


Think TTIP is a threat to democracy? There’s another trade deal that’s already signed

A s the great powers gathered in Japan for last week’s G7 summit, a series of massive trade deals were under attack from all sides. And yet, from Donald Trump to Jeremy Corbyn, there is a recognition that “trade” has become little more than a synonym for big business to take ever more control of society.

The US-Europe deal TTIP (the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) is the best known of these so-called “new generation” trade deals and has inspired a movement. More than 3 million Europeans have signed Europe’s biggest petition to oppose TTIP, while 250,000 Germans took to the streets of Berlin last autumn to try to bring this deal down. A new opinion poll shows only 18% of Americans and 17% of Germans support TTIP, down from 53% and 55% just two years ago.

But TTIP is not alone. Its smaller sister deal between the EU and Canada is called Ceta (the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement). Ceta is just as dangerous as TTIP indeed it’s in the vanguard of TTIP-style deals, because it’s already been signed by the European commission and the Canadian government. It now awaits ratification over the next 12 months.

The one positive thing about Ceta is that it has already been signed and that means that we’re allowed to see it. Its 1,500 pages show us that it’s a threat to not only our food standards, but also the battle against climate change, our ability to regulate big banks to prevent another crash and our power to renationalise industries.

Like the US deal, Ceta contains a new legal system, open only to foreign corporations and investors. Should the British government make a decision, say, to outlaw dangerous chemicals, improve food safety or put cigarettes in plain packaging, a Canadian company can sue the British government for “unfairness”. And by unfairness this simply means they can’t make as much profit as they expected. The “trial” would be held as a special tribunal, overseen by corporate lawyers.

The European commission has made changes to this “corporate court” system that it believes makes it fairer. But researchers have found it would make no difference to the dozens of cases that have been brought against countries in recent years under similar systems. Canada itself has fought and lost numerous cases from US corporations under the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) – for example, for outlawing carcinogenic chemicals in petrol, reinvesting in local communities and halting the devastation of quarries. Under Ceta, such cases are on their way here.

The whole purpose of Ceta is to reduce regulation on business, the idea being that it will make it easier to export. But it will do far more than that. Through the pleasant-sounding “regulatory cooperation”, standards would be reduced across the board on the basis that they are “obstacles to trade”. That could include food safety, workers’ rights and environmental regulation.

Just consider financial regulation. The ability of governments to control banks and financial markets would be further impaired. Limiting the growth of banks that have become “too big to fail” could land a government in a secret tribunal.

Indeed the onslaught has already started. Tar sands oil is one of the most environmentally destructive fossil fuels in the world, and the majority of this oil is extracted in Alberta, Canada. There is currently little tar sands in use in the EU, but that’s changing. When the EU proposed prohibitive new regulations to effectively stop tar sands flowing into Europe, Canada used Ceta as a bargaining chip to block the proposal. If Ceta passes, that decision will be locked in – a disaster for climate change.

Finally, through something called a “ratchet clause”, current levels of privatisation would be “locked in” on any services not specifically exempted. If Canadian or EU governments want to bring certain services back into public ownership, they could be breaking the terms of the agreement.

So why have so few people heard of Ceta? Largely because Canadians and Europeans think they’re quite alike. They don’t fear the takeover of their economy in the way they do when signing a trade deal with the US. But this is a big mistake, because these trade deals are not about Europeans versus Americans or Canadians. They are about big business versus citizens.

If you needed proof that modern trade agreements are actually nothing more than an excuse to hand big business power at our expense, you need look no further than Ceta. No wonder the public outcry is growing, and opposition to TTIP is spilling over to the Canadian deal.

When Ceta goes to the EU council (of all EU governments) for ratification in late June, Romania – which is in dispute with Canada over visa issues – has threatened to veto it. The Walloon parliament voted a critical motion on this deal that could tie the hands of the Belgian government and force its abstention. The Dutch parliament has also passed a motion rejecting provisional application of the deal, which would allow it to be implemented before parliament had a chance to vote on it.

David Cameron takes the most aggressive position on Ceta – not only supporting it entirely but pushing for provisional application in the UK. On this basis, Ceta could take effect in Britain early next year without a Westminster vote. In fact, even if the British parliament voted Ceta down, the corporate court system would still stay in effect for three years. Cameron’s Brexit rebels are not going to like that much.

The G7’s problems show that many of us have recognised that trade deals have made the world a playground for the super-rich – they are part of our staggeringly unequal economy. But the G7 is unable to think beyond the interests of the world’s elite. It’s up to us to reclaim our democracy as citizens, and the movements against TTIP and Ceta are the frontline.


Think TTIP is a threat to democracy? There’s another trade deal that’s already signed

A s the great powers gathered in Japan for last week’s G7 summit, a series of massive trade deals were under attack from all sides. And yet, from Donald Trump to Jeremy Corbyn, there is a recognition that “trade” has become little more than a synonym for big business to take ever more control of society.

The US-Europe deal TTIP (the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) is the best known of these so-called “new generation” trade deals and has inspired a movement. More than 3 million Europeans have signed Europe’s biggest petition to oppose TTIP, while 250,000 Germans took to the streets of Berlin last autumn to try to bring this deal down. A new opinion poll shows only 18% of Americans and 17% of Germans support TTIP, down from 53% and 55% just two years ago.

But TTIP is not alone. Its smaller sister deal between the EU and Canada is called Ceta (the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement). Ceta is just as dangerous as TTIP indeed it’s in the vanguard of TTIP-style deals, because it’s already been signed by the European commission and the Canadian government. It now awaits ratification over the next 12 months.

The one positive thing about Ceta is that it has already been signed and that means that we’re allowed to see it. Its 1,500 pages show us that it’s a threat to not only our food standards, but also the battle against climate change, our ability to regulate big banks to prevent another crash and our power to renationalise industries.

Like the US deal, Ceta contains a new legal system, open only to foreign corporations and investors. Should the British government make a decision, say, to outlaw dangerous chemicals, improve food safety or put cigarettes in plain packaging, a Canadian company can sue the British government for “unfairness”. And by unfairness this simply means they can’t make as much profit as they expected. The “trial” would be held as a special tribunal, overseen by corporate lawyers.

The European commission has made changes to this “corporate court” system that it believes makes it fairer. But researchers have found it would make no difference to the dozens of cases that have been brought against countries in recent years under similar systems. Canada itself has fought and lost numerous cases from US corporations under the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) – for example, for outlawing carcinogenic chemicals in petrol, reinvesting in local communities and halting the devastation of quarries. Under Ceta, such cases are on their way here.

The whole purpose of Ceta is to reduce regulation on business, the idea being that it will make it easier to export. But it will do far more than that. Through the pleasant-sounding “regulatory cooperation”, standards would be reduced across the board on the basis that they are “obstacles to trade”. That could include food safety, workers’ rights and environmental regulation.

Just consider financial regulation. The ability of governments to control banks and financial markets would be further impaired. Limiting the growth of banks that have become “too big to fail” could land a government in a secret tribunal.

Indeed the onslaught has already started. Tar sands oil is one of the most environmentally destructive fossil fuels in the world, and the majority of this oil is extracted in Alberta, Canada. There is currently little tar sands in use in the EU, but that’s changing. When the EU proposed prohibitive new regulations to effectively stop tar sands flowing into Europe, Canada used Ceta as a bargaining chip to block the proposal. If Ceta passes, that decision will be locked in – a disaster for climate change.

Finally, through something called a “ratchet clause”, current levels of privatisation would be “locked in” on any services not specifically exempted. If Canadian or EU governments want to bring certain services back into public ownership, they could be breaking the terms of the agreement.

So why have so few people heard of Ceta? Largely because Canadians and Europeans think they’re quite alike. They don’t fear the takeover of their economy in the way they do when signing a trade deal with the US. But this is a big mistake, because these trade deals are not about Europeans versus Americans or Canadians. They are about big business versus citizens.

If you needed proof that modern trade agreements are actually nothing more than an excuse to hand big business power at our expense, you need look no further than Ceta. No wonder the public outcry is growing, and opposition to TTIP is spilling over to the Canadian deal.

When Ceta goes to the EU council (of all EU governments) for ratification in late June, Romania – which is in dispute with Canada over visa issues – has threatened to veto it. The Walloon parliament voted a critical motion on this deal that could tie the hands of the Belgian government and force its abstention. The Dutch parliament has also passed a motion rejecting provisional application of the deal, which would allow it to be implemented before parliament had a chance to vote on it.

David Cameron takes the most aggressive position on Ceta – not only supporting it entirely but pushing for provisional application in the UK. On this basis, Ceta could take effect in Britain early next year without a Westminster vote. In fact, even if the British parliament voted Ceta down, the corporate court system would still stay in effect for three years. Cameron’s Brexit rebels are not going to like that much.

The G7’s problems show that many of us have recognised that trade deals have made the world a playground for the super-rich – they are part of our staggeringly unequal economy. But the G7 is unable to think beyond the interests of the world’s elite. It’s up to us to reclaim our democracy as citizens, and the movements against TTIP and Ceta are the frontline.


Think TTIP is a threat to democracy? There’s another trade deal that’s already signed

A s the great powers gathered in Japan for last week’s G7 summit, a series of massive trade deals were under attack from all sides. And yet, from Donald Trump to Jeremy Corbyn, there is a recognition that “trade” has become little more than a synonym for big business to take ever more control of society.

The US-Europe deal TTIP (the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) is the best known of these so-called “new generation” trade deals and has inspired a movement. More than 3 million Europeans have signed Europe’s biggest petition to oppose TTIP, while 250,000 Germans took to the streets of Berlin last autumn to try to bring this deal down. A new opinion poll shows only 18% of Americans and 17% of Germans support TTIP, down from 53% and 55% just two years ago.

But TTIP is not alone. Its smaller sister deal between the EU and Canada is called Ceta (the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement). Ceta is just as dangerous as TTIP indeed it’s in the vanguard of TTIP-style deals, because it’s already been signed by the European commission and the Canadian government. It now awaits ratification over the next 12 months.

The one positive thing about Ceta is that it has already been signed and that means that we’re allowed to see it. Its 1,500 pages show us that it’s a threat to not only our food standards, but also the battle against climate change, our ability to regulate big banks to prevent another crash and our power to renationalise industries.

Like the US deal, Ceta contains a new legal system, open only to foreign corporations and investors. Should the British government make a decision, say, to outlaw dangerous chemicals, improve food safety or put cigarettes in plain packaging, a Canadian company can sue the British government for “unfairness”. And by unfairness this simply means they can’t make as much profit as they expected. The “trial” would be held as a special tribunal, overseen by corporate lawyers.

The European commission has made changes to this “corporate court” system that it believes makes it fairer. But researchers have found it would make no difference to the dozens of cases that have been brought against countries in recent years under similar systems. Canada itself has fought and lost numerous cases from US corporations under the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) – for example, for outlawing carcinogenic chemicals in petrol, reinvesting in local communities and halting the devastation of quarries. Under Ceta, such cases are on their way here.

The whole purpose of Ceta is to reduce regulation on business, the idea being that it will make it easier to export. But it will do far more than that. Through the pleasant-sounding “regulatory cooperation”, standards would be reduced across the board on the basis that they are “obstacles to trade”. That could include food safety, workers’ rights and environmental regulation.

Just consider financial regulation. The ability of governments to control banks and financial markets would be further impaired. Limiting the growth of banks that have become “too big to fail” could land a government in a secret tribunal.

Indeed the onslaught has already started. Tar sands oil is one of the most environmentally destructive fossil fuels in the world, and the majority of this oil is extracted in Alberta, Canada. There is currently little tar sands in use in the EU, but that’s changing. When the EU proposed prohibitive new regulations to effectively stop tar sands flowing into Europe, Canada used Ceta as a bargaining chip to block the proposal. If Ceta passes, that decision will be locked in – a disaster for climate change.

Finally, through something called a “ratchet clause”, current levels of privatisation would be “locked in” on any services not specifically exempted. If Canadian or EU governments want to bring certain services back into public ownership, they could be breaking the terms of the agreement.

So why have so few people heard of Ceta? Largely because Canadians and Europeans think they’re quite alike. They don’t fear the takeover of their economy in the way they do when signing a trade deal with the US. But this is a big mistake, because these trade deals are not about Europeans versus Americans or Canadians. They are about big business versus citizens.

If you needed proof that modern trade agreements are actually nothing more than an excuse to hand big business power at our expense, you need look no further than Ceta. No wonder the public outcry is growing, and opposition to TTIP is spilling over to the Canadian deal.

When Ceta goes to the EU council (of all EU governments) for ratification in late June, Romania – which is in dispute with Canada over visa issues – has threatened to veto it. The Walloon parliament voted a critical motion on this deal that could tie the hands of the Belgian government and force its abstention. The Dutch parliament has also passed a motion rejecting provisional application of the deal, which would allow it to be implemented before parliament had a chance to vote on it.

David Cameron takes the most aggressive position on Ceta – not only supporting it entirely but pushing for provisional application in the UK. On this basis, Ceta could take effect in Britain early next year without a Westminster vote. In fact, even if the British parliament voted Ceta down, the corporate court system would still stay in effect for three years. Cameron’s Brexit rebels are not going to like that much.

The G7’s problems show that many of us have recognised that trade deals have made the world a playground for the super-rich – they are part of our staggeringly unequal economy. But the G7 is unable to think beyond the interests of the world’s elite. It’s up to us to reclaim our democracy as citizens, and the movements against TTIP and Ceta are the frontline.


Think TTIP is a threat to democracy? There’s another trade deal that’s already signed

A s the great powers gathered in Japan for last week’s G7 summit, a series of massive trade deals were under attack from all sides. And yet, from Donald Trump to Jeremy Corbyn, there is a recognition that “trade” has become little more than a synonym for big business to take ever more control of society.

The US-Europe deal TTIP (the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) is the best known of these so-called “new generation” trade deals and has inspired a movement. More than 3 million Europeans have signed Europe’s biggest petition to oppose TTIP, while 250,000 Germans took to the streets of Berlin last autumn to try to bring this deal down. A new opinion poll shows only 18% of Americans and 17% of Germans support TTIP, down from 53% and 55% just two years ago.

But TTIP is not alone. Its smaller sister deal between the EU and Canada is called Ceta (the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement). Ceta is just as dangerous as TTIP indeed it’s in the vanguard of TTIP-style deals, because it’s already been signed by the European commission and the Canadian government. It now awaits ratification over the next 12 months.

The one positive thing about Ceta is that it has already been signed and that means that we’re allowed to see it. Its 1,500 pages show us that it’s a threat to not only our food standards, but also the battle against climate change, our ability to regulate big banks to prevent another crash and our power to renationalise industries.

Like the US deal, Ceta contains a new legal system, open only to foreign corporations and investors. Should the British government make a decision, say, to outlaw dangerous chemicals, improve food safety or put cigarettes in plain packaging, a Canadian company can sue the British government for “unfairness”. And by unfairness this simply means they can’t make as much profit as they expected. The “trial” would be held as a special tribunal, overseen by corporate lawyers.

The European commission has made changes to this “corporate court” system that it believes makes it fairer. But researchers have found it would make no difference to the dozens of cases that have been brought against countries in recent years under similar systems. Canada itself has fought and lost numerous cases from US corporations under the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) – for example, for outlawing carcinogenic chemicals in petrol, reinvesting in local communities and halting the devastation of quarries. Under Ceta, such cases are on their way here.

The whole purpose of Ceta is to reduce regulation on business, the idea being that it will make it easier to export. But it will do far more than that. Through the pleasant-sounding “regulatory cooperation”, standards would be reduced across the board on the basis that they are “obstacles to trade”. That could include food safety, workers’ rights and environmental regulation.

Just consider financial regulation. The ability of governments to control banks and financial markets would be further impaired. Limiting the growth of banks that have become “too big to fail” could land a government in a secret tribunal.

Indeed the onslaught has already started. Tar sands oil is one of the most environmentally destructive fossil fuels in the world, and the majority of this oil is extracted in Alberta, Canada. There is currently little tar sands in use in the EU, but that’s changing. When the EU proposed prohibitive new regulations to effectively stop tar sands flowing into Europe, Canada used Ceta as a bargaining chip to block the proposal. If Ceta passes, that decision will be locked in – a disaster for climate change.

Finally, through something called a “ratchet clause”, current levels of privatisation would be “locked in” on any services not specifically exempted. If Canadian or EU governments want to bring certain services back into public ownership, they could be breaking the terms of the agreement.

So why have so few people heard of Ceta? Largely because Canadians and Europeans think they’re quite alike. They don’t fear the takeover of their economy in the way they do when signing a trade deal with the US. But this is a big mistake, because these trade deals are not about Europeans versus Americans or Canadians. They are about big business versus citizens.

If you needed proof that modern trade agreements are actually nothing more than an excuse to hand big business power at our expense, you need look no further than Ceta. No wonder the public outcry is growing, and opposition to TTIP is spilling over to the Canadian deal.

When Ceta goes to the EU council (of all EU governments) for ratification in late June, Romania – which is in dispute with Canada over visa issues – has threatened to veto it. The Walloon parliament voted a critical motion on this deal that could tie the hands of the Belgian government and force its abstention. The Dutch parliament has also passed a motion rejecting provisional application of the deal, which would allow it to be implemented before parliament had a chance to vote on it.

David Cameron takes the most aggressive position on Ceta – not only supporting it entirely but pushing for provisional application in the UK. On this basis, Ceta could take effect in Britain early next year without a Westminster vote. In fact, even if the British parliament voted Ceta down, the corporate court system would still stay in effect for three years. Cameron’s Brexit rebels are not going to like that much.

The G7’s problems show that many of us have recognised that trade deals have made the world a playground for the super-rich – they are part of our staggeringly unequal economy. But the G7 is unable to think beyond the interests of the world’s elite. It’s up to us to reclaim our democracy as citizens, and the movements against TTIP and Ceta are the frontline.


Kyk die video: Politici vaker ernstig bedreigd, ook door kinderen onder de twaalf (Junie 2022).