Looks Like Canada & Mexico Will Be Blocked From Next Round Of TPP Negotiations As Well
from the why-do-people-put-up-with-this-crap? dept
Last month, we noted that the US had agreed (after resisting for a while due to Hollywood pressure) to let Canada and Mexico join the TPP negotiations, with significant restrictions on their ability to go back and debate previously agreed upon terms. Both countries agreed to sign on... but were then forced to sit out the recently concluded negotiating round in San Diego.That should already be a concern, because now you have two countries who have agreed to sign on to an agreement, without the right to object to clauses already agreed upon... and then allowing a negotiating round to take part in which they can't participate. Basically, then, they're agreeing to accept whatever comes out of that negotiation without being able to have real input. That's pretty crazy for a sovereign nation.
And now it gets even worse.
As Michael Geist has discovered, Canada isn't just being blocked from the San Diego round, but from the next round as well, which will be held in September in Virginia. One has to assume that Mexico is in the same boat, as it's likely that both were given the same 90-day period in which they are excluded. I really can't fathom how either country could agree to such terms, or how the citizens of Mexico and Canada put up with such things. Their governments have bound them to an agreement over which they don't know what's being agreed to, which they have no say in what's being negotiated for two rounds, and which they cannot object to once it's finally let in the door.
Who agrees to such things?
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: canada, mexico, negotiations, tpp
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
also, people seem to have something against nations that are actually manageably sized and insist on empire-esque monstrosities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Big Mistake ! Won't be doing this again.I want to live long enough to see both Democrats and Republicans thrown out onto the Streets where the Corrupt assholes deserve to be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
paid for arse holes that think so little of their country and even less of the people in it, but will do whatever it takes for personal 'fame and fortune'. they forget that whatever stigma they get is passed to future generations of their family!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You really don't know?
You can't be seriously asking that question. Politicians are relatively cheap. They cost far less than your average IP law firm.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You really don't know?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You really don't know?
And isn't it interesting how many of them as holding directorships in banks, insurance, defense, transportation and hollywood companies? Along with universities with close ties to them and to governments?
And then a few more in the same industries in the UK and universities there. After all, the US and the UK sell some of the shiniest high tech, expensive military toys to be found anywhere. Which need banks, insurance companies and all the rest, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Legally binding
By replying, you acknowledge the agreement and are obligated to carry it out
After agreeing the details will be finalized
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Legally binding
.
.
.
Oops!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"sign and bind" as and when the final text is presented.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"sign and bind" as and when the final text is presented.
Then there's no reason not to have allowed them to participate in last week's sessions nor the September sessions.
It's ridiculous. Why would you support this crap?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's just see them try it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
stop this now
All agreements and discussions must be made public before any signing of an agreement is made at least 90 days before the agreement is to be voted on.
Fuck this , it is so easy to stop these trade agreements from being done in secret.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who agrees to such things?
• Who just clicks the “I agree” button on EULAs ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who agrees to such things?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can't speak for Mexico...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Are you paying attention to our own backyard?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reminds me of...
"No taxation without representation!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Nor did I suggest it did. I'm questioning why any sane government would agree to such policies that clearly are against their own interests.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The TPP involves a myriad of issues, so I am not sure how it can be said that what appears to have been agreed upon to date is against their own interests. Only they can make that determination. The final determination will, of course, be made as and when the discussions conclude.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Anyone who agrees to join a negotiation in which they are not allowed to question any decisions made before they join AND in which they have to sit out the next two negotiations is working against their own interests. You cannot debate that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Simple
[ link to this | view in chronology ]