David Malone (aka, Golem) The Death of Democracy

[johnhemming2]

One more reason to vote LEAVE in June.

If you prefer a trade deal negotiated in secret by the UK government to one negotiated in secret by the EU then indeed you could argue that this is a good reason to leave the EU.

[vtsnowedin]

The general idea of TTIP, and TPP and all the other trade agreements for that matter, is that we pay and the corporations rake it in. It designed to transfer all wealth into the pockets of corporations. What they will do with all that money, I don't know, because they will kill the system that makes their money worth something! They, the corporate bosses and the oligarchs, should all be sent to mental institutions in my opinion.

Well wait a minute. They do have to manufacture, transport, and sell you the products that are being traded, and you do get to use and consume them.

......
........
Are you actually trying to defend this shit?

Good summary of the video.
No I'm not trying to defend it just discuss it using all the facts. Your line.

. It designed to transfer all wealth into the pockets of corporations.

Is over the top and makes it sound as if the corporations were stealing ALL your money while doing nothing in return.
Now of course having all that power in the hands of just a few dozen men is certain to be corrupting and needs to be rectified but some such system operated in public and with checks and balances is probably necessary.

[UndercoverElephant]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjUA3RU4B8E

[careful_eugene]

One more reason to vote LEAVE in June.

If you prefer a trade deal negotiated in secret by the UK government to one negotiated in secret by the EU then indeed you could argue that this is a good reason to leave the EU.

I agree, the tories will still go for this whether we are in the EU or not. Given their track record on negotiation (Hinkley Point) I would expect the outcome to be worse.

[Little John]

No, whatever the Tories might do (and I have no doubt this would involve them trying to unilaterally tie us up to TTIP), the fact remains that it would no longer be possible for any independent UK parliament to fob the UK people off (if, following an election, where a stated aim of the winning party was to dump TTIP) with the excuse the "the EU wont let us".

Furthermore, there is a reason why the Yanks are desperate for us to stay in the EU to the extent that Obama is coming over here in few weeks to interfere with the democratic process by making pro-EU speeches. It's because they know that if they get the EU to sign up to TTIP, they will have effectively usurped the democracies of many countries simultaneously. They know full well how harder it will be to enforce that same treaty across several different parliaments.

[johnhemming2]

There are a number of issues with TTIP. The first one is to what extent it over enforces property rights. This is essentially the question in Article 1 Protocol 1 of the European Convention of Human Rights. There is also a question within that as to whether that is done in an open court like the ECJ or in a secretive arbitration system. The latter should result in TTIP being vetoed

Beyond that are the questions in detail as to what extent it undermines useful regulation and how it is subject potentially to future modification.

[Little John]

There are a number of issues with TTIP. The first one is to what extent it over enforces property rights. This is essentially the question in Article 1 Protocol 1 of the European Convention of Human Rights. There is also a question within that as to whether that is done in an open court like the ECJ or in a secretive arbitration system. The latter should result in TTIP being vetoed

Beyond that are the questions in detail as to what extent it undermines useful regulation and how it is subject potentially to future modification.

As usual, you are obfuscating around details, as if they matter in the broader context of the central issue. This is a now familiar tactic of yours.. In other words, focussing attention on the trees in the hope nobody sees the woods beyond. Once again, in doing this, you make your allegiances abundantly clear. Either that or you really are some kind of odd savant fool, which I don't believe.

This thing is an affront to democracy in principle. This is factually and logically true irrespective on one's opinion about any other merits it may have. Even if such arbitrations were held in open, this would still be true. However, the fact that such arbitration are held in secret with no judge, no jury, no right of appeal and no requirement to provide the reasoning for any judgement. Indeed, no requirement for it to be made public that an arbitration is even taking place is evidence enough that the architects of this treaty know full well that if the public were to be fully aware of what is being done to their democratic rights, they would never stand for it. In other words, if such arbitrations were held in public, TTIP would cease to exist in a day.

But, then, whatever your protestations to the contrary, I am pretty sure you already know this. Either that or, as I said.....

[johnhemming2]

This thing is an affront to democracy in principle.

International agreements do constrain the countries bound by them. That does not matter whether the countries are democracies or not. International law is intended to stop countries acting in a way that is contrary to it.

Trade agreements are a special case of the general case of international agreements. They will, of course, have an effect on the ability of the country concerned to democratically decide to do something contrary to the agreement.

In many ways that is why the structures of the EU are better than the structures of a normal trade agreement. They have much more transparency. They also try to take into account producer interests as well as trade interests (eg the social chapter) and also try to be guided by environmental concerns.

The processes by which the EU changes the trade rules are much more transparent, accountable and flexible.

Trade rules are an important part of law.

Property rights are enforced by the UK courts the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice.

I don't personally agree with the ISDS mechanism as it is not transparent. However, a TTIP with an ECJ type structure is potentially acceptable.