Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)

This morning I submitted a letter to The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, who are currently accepting submissions on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP).

My letter advocated that the TPP’s is not in Australia’s public interest and threatens our democracy.

I don’t know if my letter will make any difference, but when looking at the details of the deal, I feel a responsibility to do something.

Do you know much about the TPP? Are you for, or against? Why or why not?

For more information on the TPP (and the argument for & against) visit;

Treaty under consideration – Trans Pacific Partnership, Parliament of Australia – http://www.aph.gov.au/…/9_Febru…/Treaty_under_consideration…

Treaty tabled on 9 February 2016, Parliament of Australia –http://www.aph.gov.au/…/Comm…/Joint/Treaties/9_February_2016

The Trans-Pacific Partnership explained, Vox, 6 November 2015 –http://www.vox.com/…/…/what-is-the-trans-pacific-partnership

Trans-Pacific Partnership will barely benefit Australia, says World Bank report, Sydney Morning Herald, 12 January 2016 –http://www.smh.com.au/…/transpacific-partnership-will-barel…

Advertisements

17 responses to “Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)

  1. NAFTA was sold to the American people on the following premise.
    This trade agreement would LIFT the wages and working conditions in Mexico, thereby increasing US trade to Mexico without hurting American workers. It would demand that goods not be “dumped” and that workers in Mexico would have comparable benefits as US workers. A win-win for all.
    Guess what? Workers in Mexico DO have comparable wages and benefits…because wages and benefits declined in the US due to the cheap Mexican labor competition. And business did thrive in Mexico…US businesses that left for cheaper costs.
    I don’t know much about the TPP but if anyone thinks that trade deals will help the consumer or worker I think you may be wrong. The governments that write these trade deals are not run by the consumer or worker. Not hard to figure out.

    • Very valid points and something that is currently on the minds of many people in relation to the TPP being implemented here in Australia (and relevant regions)

      Your example also demonstrates the importance of learning from past experience.

      Thanks for taking the time comment, Joseph. Much appreciated.

  2. We have similar legislation being perused at the moment too. Europe seem to be heavily in favour of it and even our UK Government seems to be in favour and yet I don’t understand why. This agreement puts far too much power in the hands of big business rather than Government. Can you imagine a firm like Monsanto suing the Government because it won’t allow them to poison water tables? That’s what it could amount to if it claimed it’s sales were being affected by legislation.
    All I can suggest is that there’s darker secret like Directorships for the current Government who don’t care what happens to future ones.
    It seems big business will stop at nothing to ensure it can sell anything it wants and then claim compensation if it doesn’t sell enough, claiming it’s the Government who have prevented it. We could never get rid of firms like Monsanto if these agreements are signed.
    We must not allow them to be slipped in through the back door either like the UK Government tried recently while the news was focused elsewhere. Thank heavens for the House of Lords that people were so anxious to abandon not so long ago. Without them rejecting it, this might already have been signed.
    xxx Huge Hugs and good luck Miss Lou xxx

    • I think we have very similar thinking about this, David.

      I’m very concerned about the amount of power that big business has over our Government here in Australia (and it appears to be a theme systematic throughout the world.)

      I also hold grave concerns about Monsanto, so completely understand why you’ve used them as an example in your comment.

      Thanks for taking the time to comment, David. I appreciate it 🙂

      Miss Lou
      *Hugs*

  3. I applaud your action. 🙂 I recently signed an online petition about reductions in mental health spending. I don’t know if it made any difference, but last week the Minister decided ( out of the goodness of his heart we are led to believe) that we could have more funding in Christchurch. So better to try than not to try at all.

    • Thank you Gallivanta. I agree – better to try than not to try at all.

      Congratulations on the win you have had with regard to mental health spending. We also have a real problem with mental health in our country. Resources are constantly cut to services.

      I find this frustrating because when you have a mental illness, it affects every other aspect of your life, including the contributions we make to our communities. We need to be investing MORE not less.

      Then there’s priorities, right?

      Weighing this up against a $12.4 billion dollars worth of spending on 58 more F-35 Joint Strike Fighters (JSF) just doesn’t sit well with me.

      Particularly when it was recently reported that the jets have ejector seats that have a 1 in 4 chance of killing anyone under 135lbs AND that there are serious problems with it’s software. (Another post entirely)

      Thanks for taking the time to comment.

      ML
      xx

    • Properly reviewing our past policy decisions and having a clear list of Pros & Cons can be help inform future decisions.

      Sometimes with time and turnover in government, we can loose that important learning.

      Thanks for taking the time to comment Dan.

      ML

Whaddya Reckon?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s