Washout puts Gisborne/Napier line in jeopardy - Rail and Maritime ...

neWs
SO serious are the implications
of the Trans Pacific Partnership
Agreement (TPPA) that more
than 100 jurists from New Zealand
and other countries including some
of their most eminent lawyers, have
sent an open letter to the negotiators
calling for the right of investors to sue
governments directly to be excluded.
Secrecy abounds
This key clause, and indeed the
whole agreement, has been negotiated
in secret and will not be revealed, it
is believed, until four years after it is
signed.
Of major concern is that the Americans
will insist (as they have done with
other similar agreements) that this
agreement should allow foreign corporations
to stop our Government (or
any future government) from changing
New Zealand law in a way they think
might undermine their value.
“You may recall how Warner Brothers
stepped in when The Hobbit was
threatened by strike action and how our
Government was forced to change OUR
laws to suit these foreign bullies,” said
RMTU general secretary Wayne Butson.
Meanwhile the government is selling
the TPPA as a free trade between friendly
countries and denying any questions about
the small print.
Far-fetched
In November last year, Prime Minister
John Key described as “far-fetched” the
idea that investors could sue the New
Zealand government directly in a secret
international tribunal to enforce rules in
the proposed TPPA.
Under standard US terms for such
agreements, investors can claim millions
in compensation from governments on the
grounds that new regulations adversely affected
their investment. Under a TPPA that
would apply to investors from all participating
countries, including our largest sources
Selling our souls
Why the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement is worrying
community and legal leaders
remit to labour Party
The RMTU has put its full support behind
an EPMU-remit to the Wellington Regional
Conference of the Labour Party in June. If it
is accepted and passed it will then go to the
national conference.
The remit asks voters to consider a number of
factors before supporting such an agreement
including:
n Increased access for our agricultural exports
to the US market;
n That it does not undermine health costs and
measures;
n Does not favour overseas investors or suppliers
over domestic ones nor expand intellectual
property rights and enforcement in excess
of current law;
n Does not weaken our public services nor
reduce our flexibility to support local development;
n Contains enforceable labour and environmental
clauses;
and more.
of investment, the US and Australia.
Under these arrangements, an American
corporation, for example, would be given
far more extensive rights against our government
than any New Zealand company
would ever have. It would mean that a
future government, perhaps elected to
change policy in an area like environmental
protection or health and safety (maybe
smoking), could be threatened with a crippling
lawsuit unless it backed off.
A worry for lawyers
Bryan Gould in the NZ Herald writes:
“A particular worry for lawyers is that our
courts, too, could be overruled. The foreign
investment tribunals have decided that
courts are part of a country’s government
(riding roughshod over any doctrine of
the separation of powers) and that they,
too, must comply. Even if our courts
had upheld the validity of a law properly
passed by Parliament, that decision could
be challenged by a foreign corporation
"These sorts of agreements
are giving unbridled power
to multinational, mainly
American-owned,
companies."
alleging it breached their rights under
the TPPA. Even a jury decision in private
litigation could be challenged and lead
to the Government paying millions in
compensation.”
He cites a case brought recently by
Chevron where a tribunal ordered the
Ecuador Government, in defiance of its
constitution, not to enforce a ruling by
Ecuador’s Appeal Court that Chevron
must pay $18 billion to clean up toxic
waste in the Amazon Basin.
Power to
multinationals
“These sorts of agreements are giving
unbridled power to multinational, mainly
American-owned, companies,” said Butson.
“These companies have far too much power
already and the more they get the more they
want. If our own elected representation
cannot combat their influence we are in
real danger of losing our independence.”
“The concessions made in secret by today’s
Government would permanently lock
New Zealand into a marketplace controlled
and dominated by foreign corporations.
Voters would be left without any possibility
of redress,” writes Gould. “We have already
sold off into foreign ownership a higher
proportion of our national assets than any
other developed country. The TPPA could
mean that control over what remains, now
and into the future, would in effect be
handed over to international corporations.
This is a heavy price to pay for a trade deal
in which our partners, at most, commit to
buy what they want to buy anyway.”
13
The Transport Worker June 2012