If the pundits are correct in their assumptions, thats just the tip of the iceberg. basically any country who becomes a signatory to TPP(and its various other identities) can be sued for brinigng into force any law wich causes the loss of proffit, or potential loss of profit, of the principal players , actuallyI think it even affects non participationg countries( god I hope to hell I am wrong on tnis one);
it also means that companies like Monsanto can sue small time farrmers for daring to , for example apply rotation farming where crop seed is concerned. and require that said farmers use patented products, and pay a levvy for the privelidge of so doing. and shall not be permitted to rely on local resources.ie natrually occuring seed germination.dispersion. etc.
It also means that internet content providers can be compelled to take down material that"infringes copyright" without redress to a competent, independent court or tribunal.
i havent quite got round to reading the detail because there is LOTS of meandering material therin.
given that TPP was largely negotiated in secret, I wouod be inclined to take that ward"transparency" with a very healthy grain of salt.
one can be "transparent" and yet still be very opaque.
On 05/11/201Oh 5 21:47, doug wrote:
A little snippet from the Preamble...Is this the notorious bit which allows the USA and global corporations to buy up the National Health Services etc of the signatories...one wonders...:-).
owned enterprises can play a legitimate role in the diverse economies
of the Parties
while recognising that the provision of unfair advantages to state
enterprises undermines fair and open trade and investment
owned enterprises that promote a level playing field with privately owned
es, transparency and sound business practices