Interesting to see that after all of the emotive debate about whether Scotland or England should rule over each other, that both are currently signing their sovereignty away through CETA - more appropriately called Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement. Negotiated behind closed doors in Brussels - signed away by Cameron - agreed to by Salmond, and being contested by Germany. The terms of this agreement will weaken our democracy by putting corporate rights first, restricting the abilities of municipalities to control their own procurement policies or to provide public services. CETA would force areas to privatize basic services like water. Countries, under the terms of this agreement, would lose the ability to ban products. Monsanto is, at this moment, attempting to sue the EU for banning their bee killing pesticides. Philip Morris has sued Mexico for revenue lost as a result of anti smoking posters. All of this corporate dictatorship is strengthened by the terms of this agreement. All of this signed in secret - circumventing normal democratic channels, and raising the futuristic nightmare of a World in which there are no governments only corporations. All of this has been agreed to by the British government whilst at the same time making all of the right noises with regard to sovereignty issues between England and Scotland - they have collectively sold another part of our sovereignty down the drain because if the UK or Scotland, or anywhere else, wants to ban a product for health reasons, environmental reasons or those of safety - then that corporation can now take governments to court for lost revenue - and it is not Cameron who pays the fine but you.
Large multinational corporations have much more power than most governments, and they have the advantage of not having to worry about elections unless they fail to provide the large institutional investors with enough profit. So, to answer your question Brian, the people with the power will make more money, that is why they agree to it.
Ouch ! This is true Leo - in some ways I wish that the EU had never actually been formed, the Euro was unnecessary, and I would much rather be walking around with Deutschmarks in my pocket. However, it does exist, and we must make the best of it - which means being active and reclaiming Europe for its citizens, which cannot be done from outside. By the way Farage also supports this free trade agreement - so, Britain even outside of Europe would still be drawn into it. The German position has always been to contest the legal validity of this agreement on the grounds that every member state has to sign for it to be valid - in Germany's case this would lead to a referendum here. It appears though that in many other countries the subject is being kept under raps - and is not receiving any media coverage despite its importance.
Its been going on in Davos for all our lifetimes. You really believe that the world is not driven from the few in Davos? I remember 30 years ago it definitely was....
I should also point out Leo that Ukip is playing a double role here. On the one hand they are trying to portray themselves as the party protecting the common man. On the other they are supporting an agreement which gives US companies, taking over the health services, the right to sue British Governments outside of Britain, with no right of appeal, and in fact not requiring the presence of one British citizen. Ukip is also supporting something which gives absolutely no protection against the import of US. products which do not reach European standards of health or safety - such as chicken pieces washed in chemicals, hormone stuffed beef or genetically modified crops. Whilst I am sceptical over the EU - there is every reason to assume that Britain, outside of Europe, would want to lock itself even closer to America. The only party which opposed both TTIP and CETA in England is the Green Party - which does not suggest that Britain is being dragged into this by Europe.
We will not lock ourselves into USA until Obama stops the lawyers coming after BP, Cameron has been way too weak on this issue, no support for USA until they stop the witch hunt should have been made clear.
Even the government here is signing this scheme. The Canadians are worried about the number of fish we could sell them, and the ability the Spannish and Portugals have to process fish.
Just looked up CETA and it seems to me to be a fairly comprehensive Free Trade Agreement. Needs EU and every single (28) member state ratification. That does not seem undemocratic to me. Negotiated behind closed doors is an emotive term. How are you supposed to negotiate - in a public park? The provisions are shown on line so if you can be bothered to read it - it is all there. Seem many good and sensible bits to it to me - protection of Intellectual Property and so on. We live in a world where people do business internationally and so opening up trade and reducing barriers appears laudable. I guess those against it are those who want to live in little communes.
I read that CETA is a project to get all nations except China in agreement about many trade things and then they can go to China with one voice and try to change the way China behaves in international markets.
Leo there are the TTIP and Ceta - one is with the USA the other is with Canada. They are locked together in the same package. They are more than just a free trade agreement (although I would oppose even that). The main worries are: 1. The threat to European Social and environmental standards (which are more stringent). 2. The inbuilt inclusion of ISDS - Investor-State dispute settlement, which would allow firms to sue governments - as in the examples I have given. 3. The perceived lack of transparency (ie. the lack of public debate - despite its importance even you had to look it up !) It is exacty the right of veto which Germany is fighting for - because there is some confusion on this. The EU Ombudsman has demanded that the EU council & Commission publish at least some of their negotiating directives. It is an agreement which allows multi national companies to break in on markets at the expense of consumer protection, food safety and all environmental concerns.
I could not see threats to standards ISDS is just an arbitration method for disputes - that is a good thing surely Well I had to look it up because I don't follow every economic treaty etc and this is the first time I saw this represented as something bad - and easily found a wealth of information - so much that I cannot be bothered to read it all. Tha tis what we have experts for isn' it? If the UK has to ratify it then it is similar to any trade agreement - I wont like all of everything but am generally in favour of treaties which make trade more open and barriers reduced. I know that Greens don't like international trade but that is their issue - not mine. I favour international trade. Germany has its own special reasons to dislike it it seems - on the other hand Portugal seem to be moaning that it is being stalled.
Leo, the main problem is the ISDS built into this. In concrete terms it means that if a product is banned or prevented from coming onto the market because of either safety, health, or environmental concerns then the country doing this can be sued by the firm. This is not just hyperthetical - Mansanto is doing this right now because of objections raised over their pesticides. Are you telling me that you believe countries should be punished for protecting either their citizens health or their environment ? Health and safety rules are very different between the USA and Europe and we do not want their goods dumped upon us without any measure of control whatsoever. You are right in as much as that we will never agree upon the concept of international trade or growth. You see freedom of choice - hands across the sea etc. I see restricted choice through monopolies - I see an increase in the number of container ships spewing out 170,000 litres of diesel per hour (each ship) and think also about the freedoms of future generations to live in a clean environment. Please do not place all Greens in one camp here - some believe in 'Green' growth (particularly here in Germany) alternative technology (as some kind of technofix solution) - I do not, because I believe that am some stage the question of unrestricted growth must be opposed with a radical alternative.
