The NDP and the new international trade agreement

[ToadBrother]

I don't see a problem with courts but this agreement has to be passed in the legislatures of every country that has signed it. Rice to the Japanese is much more than a food, it's importance is as much cultural as economic, so I see some push back there. We all know the obstacles the present Congress puts in front of anything originating in the Obama administration. Who knows what domestic opposition other governments face. Does this whole deal fall apart if one government fails to ratify it or do the others just carry on. The benefits of this agreement are not directly reciprocal. For example, country A gives up an advantage to country B in order to get an advantage from country C. What happens if C fails to ratify, does A still give up its advantage to B?

I think this agreement still has a long way to go.

Considering the markets that open up to Japan, I'm sure they'll have no problem. You seem to be reaching for any kind of obstacle you can think of.

[waldo]

Precisely. The last couple of posts have truly disappointed me.

WOW. I'm very disappointed in humanity today.

such hyperbole! A clarification was offered concerning full text... perhaps you should read it. Also, your other baseless concern was also clarified in terms of a balance between communication and compromising negotiations. Your repeated want to carve out your own self-serving interpretations has me... as you say, truly disappointed... not to your humanity level... a tad more localized to your posts.

[Wilber]

Free trade brought in with America hurt a lot of mom and pop businesses, I don't remember anyone getting any compensation? I am sure the dairy farmers and I know lots can compete and if not why cant they when others do.

Some dairy farmers have quota handed down to them or they bought many years ago. Younger farmers who came later or have expanded their farms have had to borrow millions to buy it. Banks have loaned millions to farmers to buy quota and taken it as collateral for those loans. Do you pull the rug out from under all that just because those farmers played by the rules governments imposed, and made the investments necessary to start and build their businesses.

[ToadBrother]

such hyperbole! A clarification was offered concerning full text... perhaps you should read it. Also, your other baseless concern was also clarified in terms of a balance between communication and compromising negotiations. Your repeated want to carve out your own self-serving interpretations has me... as you say, truly disappointed... not to your humanity level... a tad more localized to your posts.

There is no full text. There won't be for weeks or months. When they have an actual draft of the agreement, it will have to go back to all the countries involved to make sure it is correct and reflects the agreement as it was understood today. Most of the countries involved use languages other than English, so that is going to mean translating it into official languages as diverse as Spanish and Japanese, and thus skilled translators are going to have to go through the translated drafts to make sure the actual agreements are identical. It's a monumental job. If it only takes a few months I'll be amazed.

[waldo]

unconditional compensation... no need to even show negative impacts! Whether it actually comes to fruition, it's sure a "smoothing attempt" in the face of a concern over lost votes!

[waldo]

There is no full text. There won't be for weeks or months. When they have an actual draft of the agreement, it will have to go back to all the countries involved to make sure it is correct and reflects the agreement as it was understood today. Most of the countries involved use languages other than English, so that is going to mean translating it into official languages as diverse as Spanish and Japanese, and thus skilled translators are going to have to go through the translated drafts to make sure the actual agreements are identical. It's a monumental job. If it only takes a few months I'll be amazed.

considering my clarification was in response to your posted reply... you now choose to come back with this? Again:

distinctions were made to highlight this wasn't an 'agreement in principle'... that this was the final deal. And no, not today... but to presume to get full details "weeks from now", well beyond the election date, presumes some degree of hype sensitivity in just how much Harper Conservatives presume to leverage it within the final lead-up to election day. That will happen, right?

even at the highest level, where is the official Harper Conservative government response. I earlier offered up a somewhat high-level, but lengthy and detailed, objectives reference put forward by the U.S. government (simply as a point in how poorly Harper Conservatives were communicating to Canadians). I guess I'll need to do the same again: Office of the United States Trade Representative - Summary of the TPP agreement

[ToadBrother]

considering my clarification was in response to your posted reply... you now choose to come back with this? Again:

distinctions were made to highlight this wasn't an 'agreement in principle'... that this was the final deal. And no, not today... but to presume to get full details "weeks from now", well beyond the election date, presumes some degree of hype sensitivity in just how much Harper Conservatives presume to leverage it within the final lead-up to election day. That will happen, right?

even at the highest level, where is the official Harper Conservative government response. I earlier offered up a somewhat high-level, but lengthy and detailed, objectives reference put forward by the U.S. government (simply as a point in how poorly Harper Conservatives were communicating to Canadians). I guess I'll need to do the same again: Office of the United States Trade Representative - Summary of the TPP agreement

Thanks for the summary. It is, however, a summary.

[Wilber]

Considering the markets that open up to Japan, I'm sure they'll have no problem. You seem to be reaching for any kind of obstacle you can think of.

I'm not reaching for anything, I'm just being realistic. There is tremendous controversy over this agreement in this country and depending on how this election turns out, it might not get through parliament. This has to be ratified by twelve different governments, why do you think this agreement won't be just as controversial in those countries?

I think this agreement has a shot and I think we probably did about as well as we could but I also think it has a ways to go. My question still stands, if one government pulls out, does the agreement collapse because everything about it is interlocking. Pull the right block out of the foundation and the whole building can fall down.

[ToadBrother]

I'm not reaching for anything, I'm just being realistic. There is tremendous controversy over this agreement in this country and depending on how this election turns out, it might not get through parliament. This has to be ratified by twelve different governments, why do you think this agreement won't be just as controversial in those countries?

I think this agreement has a shot and I think we probably did about as well as we could but I also think it has a ways to go. My question still stands, if one government pulls out, does the agreement collapse because everything about it is interlocking. Pull the right block out of the foundation and the whole building can fall down.

No, the agreement wouldn't likely fail. The provisions in the agreement that applied to that country would be removed, however.

In reality, in Canada at least, and I'm presuming Australia and New Zealand as well, ratification requires no vote in Parliament, though any legislative changes that may be required will obviously have to be voted on.

[waldo]

Thanks for the summary. It is, however, a summary.

recently found the Harper Conservative "summary" - talk about fluff... Technical Summary of the Agreement

[Wilber]

No, the agreement wouldn't likely fail. The provisions in the agreement that applied to that country would be removed, however.

In reality, in Canada at least, and I'm presuming Australia and New Zealand as well, ratification requires no vote in Parliament, though any legislative changes that may be required will obviously have to be voted on.

It's not that simple. In this agreement countries have made concessions to some countries in order to get concessions from others. If you remove one country, the whole basis for the agreement changes and you have to re negotiate.

[bush_cheney2004]

Thanks for the summary. It is, however, a summary.

No worries...I am sure that a very detailed communication of TPP provisions will be sought...and found...in the United States.

[waldo]

No worries...I am sure that a very detailed communication of TPP provisions will be sought...and found...in the United States.

good on ya for reinforcing the lack of detailed communication being provided by the Harper Conservative government.

[TimG]

I must say it is incredibly unethical for Muclair to be fostering opposition to the TPP deal with dog-whistle politics.

Edited October 5, 2015 by TimG

[PIK]

They just agreed, give them time to put it down on paper. This is as dumb as trudeau saying he will negotiate thru the newspapers.

[-1=e^ipi]

35 million Canadians are affected by unnecessarily high prices on milk, eggs, cheese and poultry.

This especially harms the poorest of Canadians, who pay proportionately the highest on basic food.

It is also know that there are significant health externalities to ensuring that your population has adequate nutrition.

Continuing supply management also has acted as a barrier to trade for the TPP and the EU agreement.

If we were willing to give up supply management, what would we have been able to gain in the TPP as compensation?

But no, we have to continue this stupidity because... ?

[scribblet]

A deal involving 12 countries representing 800 million people and $28.5 trillion in GDP seems like a strong deal that will create Canadian jobs across a broad range of sectors so can’t be all bad.

Tom Mulcair’s promise to tear up the deal is irresponsible and would impair our trade relationships with the U.S. et al as it would leave our auto sector out in the cold on global trade. This should disqualified him from becoming Prime Minister as it proves he’s submitting to his radical union Bosses.

On auto, Canada secured:
* more market access for Canadian vehicles and parts, especially into Japan - the world's third largest economy;
* the strongest protections against any unfair auto trade
* more support to Canadian parts companies to compete globally
Canada now becomes the only G7 country to complete the trade trifecta: access to the

EU, North America, and Asia-Pacific.
Highlights:
* Japanese non-trade barriers to our auto parts and vehicles take direct hit
* rules of origin harmonized among all partners at 45% for finished vehicles and priority auto components, 40% for secondary parts
* a permanent priority dispute resolution mechanism
* import surge protection
* and tariff "snap back" - a first for a Canadian trade deal - to ensure our partners respect trade rules
* Canada-Japan working group oversight of the agreement's implementation
With the TPP Canada now has trade partners, like Japan, who must be bound by rules when trading. And any new country wishing to join this trading bloc, including China, would enter on the rules established by the TPP, not its own.
http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/tpp-ptp/benefits-avantages/index.aspx?lang=eng

[The_Squid]

This trade agreement sounds as if it reinforces Canada's role as natural resource supplier to the world... always highly volatile...

Harper should be focusing on hi-tech industries and value-added manufacturing...

More raw logs to Japan? Very limited benefit to Canada, except to a very few.

[TimG]

Harper should be focusing on hi-tech industries and value-added manufacturing...

Now why would anyone set up a factory in Canada to ship globally if Canada is not part of the TPP? Seems to me that not signing the TPP will ensure that a lot of manufacturing will relocate to the US to take advantage of the TPP. In fact, not signing the deal would great for Mexico because cars shipped from Canadian factories to the US would be subject to the 60% rule but cars shipped from Mexico would only need 45% which would presumably make the Mexican cars cheaper and/or more reliable. Opposing this deal would be an extremely dumb move for anyone who cares about Canadian manufacturing jobs. Edited October 5, 2015 by TimG

[Springer]

Well, so far, as seen on CTV...

President of Dairy Farmers of Canada pretty much endorses the deal, noting that they recognize that Canada was under extreme pressure from other nations over supply management, but still managed to preserve most of it. Also noted that there are huge benefits for the rest of our agricultural industries.

Representative for pork producers very supportive.

Representative for CD Howe Inst. very supportive, noting lots of potential for aerospace and technology sectors.

Perin Beatty, Canadian Chamber of Commerce, very supportive.

And no doubt there will be many more endorsements.

Game changer. Good for CPC, yet again proven their acumen at getting the job done, and most voters can easily understand why this is an essential deal for Canada. And Harper knows this file inside out.

Not so good for NDP, albeit it might suck some support from the Liberals. The NDP's isolationist and backwards, if not archaic, approach to free trade persists, and yet again leaves them on the outside looking in. Of course, Mulcair has no choice; his core support is at stake.

Loser in this is Trudeau and the Liberals, which will bleed support in both directions. Listening to him this morning, it's patently obvious that he doesn't have a clue in hell, and will have to be spoon fed talking points for the balance of the election. The contrast with Harper is stark, and not lost on very many.

CPC majority on the way.

[hitops]

Now why would anyone set up a factory in Canada to ship globally if Canada is not part of the TPP? Seems to me that not signing the TPP will ensure that a lot of manufacturing will relocate to the US to take advantage of the TPP. In fact, not signing the deal would great for Mexico because cars shipped from Canadian factories to the US would be subject to the 60% rule but cars shipped from Mexico would only need 45% which would presumably make the Mexican cars cheaper and/or more reliable. Opposing this deal would be an extremely dumb move for anyone who cares about Canadian manufacturing jobs.

Exactly, but seeing that long time view is beyond the will (and perhaps capability in some cases) of those favoring protectionism. Protectionism only makes us weaker, less relevant, less competitive and decrease economic opportunities for Canadians in the long run. We hurt ourselves in the long run.

The left will always favor tons of guarantees and worker benefits for manufacturing for example, failing to understand that this is precisely why most manufacturing has left the western world. They will never quite register the fact that insisting in various benefits is not helpful when it causes your pay to go to 0$ after your job leaves or is replaced by a robot.

Edited October 5, 2015 by hitops

[ToadBrother]

Loser in this is Trudeau and the Liberals, which will bleed support in both directions. Listening to him this morning, it's patently obvious that he doesn't have a clue in hell, and will have to be spoon fed talking points for the balance of the election. The contrast with Harper is stark, and not lost on very many.

CPC majority on the way.

Well, you certainly get marks for fiction.

[angrypenguin]

Trade minister on Power and Politics said that they are pushing hard to be able to release details before the election. He said it was very probable.

(about 10 minutes ago)

[Argus]

So why do they pay so much?

It's called graft and corruption. The US pharmaceutical industry basically bought off congress, who agreed to pass a bill written by the pharmaceutical industry. Among the features of that bill us federal agencies are not permitted to negotiate lower prices for bulk purchases of drugs. The US congressman who fronted for the bill quit immediately after its passage to take a $1 million a year job as a lobbyist for the industry.

[angrypenguin]

I didn't know the auto industry in Canada exported over 85% of stuff we make in Canada prior to learning about the TPP!

Edited October 6, 2015 by angrypenguin