Once Again, Public Interest Groups Kicked Out When Trying To Present Concerns About TPP
from the no-respect-at-all dept
It's really quite astounding how terribly obnoxious supporters of the ridiculous TPP agreement have become. This Trans Pacific Partnership agreement is being negotiated entirely in secret -- even as the USTR lies and claims the process is transparent at an "unprecedented" level. Of course, it seems that transparency only extends to big industry lobbyists who support the agreement's concepts already. For everyone else, we're told it's a matter of national security. Furthermore, rather than be transparent, it appears that the TPP negotiators are bending over backwards to (a) not allow those representing the public to even speak, while (b) spending as much time as possible with Hollywood lobbyists. It's as if the USTR and other TPP negotiators are so sure they've completely rigged the process that they're showing off just how little they care about the public.Honestly, the whole thing is a scandal in the making.
In February, a bunch of groups representing public interests scheduled a public hearing about concerns with TPP in the same hotel where the TPP negotiations were going on... and the USTR apparently contacted the hotel and had them kicked out. The night before all of this? The negotiators went and partied at a Hollywood studio with the key lobbyists. Yeah, the USTR can't even stand to be in the same building as those concerned about the public, but will party with the lobbyists. A few weeks later, some big corporate interests hosted a dinner for ACTA negotiators. Public interest groups found out about it at the last minute and were told they were not welcome. When questioned about this in a Senate hearing, the USTR Ron Kirk took a totally condescending attitude, still insisting unprecedented transparency, even as Senator Wyden pointed out that wasn't even close to true.
And, of course, it gets even worse. One of the things that the USTR had talked about in the past was about how "transparent" they were when holding various "stakeholder" sessions that let people express their concerns. Of course, most of these are free-for-all's and they're positioned to limit the exposure of the concerns -- but at least there was some attempt in the past to offer people a voice. Not any more. As we noted recently, the US has done away with the stakeholder meeting. So the public interest groups are, once again, left out.
Now, the very latest is that during meetings in Chile, public interest groups once again sought to host a stakeholders meeting, and got an agreement to host it at the University of Chile School of Law. The whole thing was organized, and they even had a big name local politician signed up as the keynote speaker. The dean of the school was all for it... and then, two days before the meeting, the University canceled the meeting. Once again, the public interest groups were shut out. It's not entirely clear why, but there is tremendous speculation that the cancellation was due to a faculty member who consults heavily with the pharmaceutical industry.
Either way, it seems clear that there is influence peddling going on here, and it's astounding that the USTR seems to think that these moves won't backfire and just make it look worse. In talking to someone who was in Chile working with the public interest groups, it's been claimed that many of the delegates had no idea this would happen -- and were quite upset that the USTR had basically hijacked the process. The organizers of the event were actually able to find an alternative, but it is too bad that they had to spend days scrambling to figure this out.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: chile, national security, negotiations, tpp, transparency, ustr
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So when Google hosts an event for lawmakers to talk about its position on SOPA, then public interest groups like the Copyright Alliance and Creative America are entitled to attend?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
and I don't mind the groups you mention attending. No one is saying they can't or shouldn't attend. They should be allowed to attend, these policy meetings should be open to the public for anyone to attend. They should also be recorded and broadcasted on public television and the Internet, since broadcasting spectra should be used for the public interest and not simply for the interests of big corporate entities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They should be allowed to attend too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Are you speaking from experience?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So in Chile, a faculty member tells the Dean of the school the way things are going to be? Add another layer of foil to that hat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I never realized that lack of clarity equates with clarity. To me it seems counterintuitive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Informing the public about the government-industrial complex's selfish agenda is not whining, it's an important component of democracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We'll wait until May 8th to see just what information booths
are actually allowed to be there. The pattern has been to allow those with alternate ideas there with lip service only. When the day actually comes, however, they're are asked to leave with no explanation. When that happens, I can't wait to see how you respond here.
To Mr. Masnick ....
" Either way, it seems clear that there is influence peddling going on here, and it's astounding that the USTR seems to think that these moves won't backfire and just make it look worse. "
I think we've reached the point where they feel they no longer have to care how it looks. They are certain that no matter how it looks, there isn't anything we can actually do about it. I'm not so sure they're wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Corruption
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sad little troll your are mike, of thats right, your an opinion blog when called out on things, but a reporter when you feel liek getting on your soap box, which seems to be everyday
[ link to this | view in chronology ]