Secret Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) - Financial Services Annex

[b0g]

game or fact?

[commondenom]

http://www.independentlabour.org.uk/...e-trade-deals/

[commondenom]

Originally Posted by b0g

[SIZE="3"] At present, many European and American factories produce different versions of their products for the two different markets, because each has its own set of manufacturing standards. Harmonising these standards will make them more efficient, the argument goes, allowing them to produce more with less.

that's all well and fine but which way would the manufacturers be forced to go??

we all know that the USA puts profit before ANYTHING else which is why the food out there is so poor. It's also why 'made in america' is a joke...no-one wants to have cooking pots that are going to poison you or medicine that will give you cancer...european standards are much stricter and aimed at actually protecting consumers as opposed to making as many sales (and thus tax) as possible...

[b0g]

the lobbies of the big brands and tbtf banks want to force the norms and standards their way - less is more
it's about them getting bigger while forcing the smaller out of bizz.
=> less diversity and monoculture , which might explain why US food is "so poor".

the relation you try to lay bt higher European standards and less sales (where?) is in my opinion rooted in ideology. Please don't get angry about this view.

European standards are much more about worker safety, environment protection, protection of lower and middle class, ...

But the fundamental thing here is worse: less than 10% of the elected members of EU parlement have access to the nego. papers and meetings.

And to this that the new commission president Juncker has been building for 20 years the Luxemburg tax(less) heaven as Lux. minister. A joke.

Suppose the ISDS gets approved: so in a few years my comp. can sue the US government bcs the FED reserve is of has been keeping interest rates art. low so debasing the $ vs € and my comp wants redemption for that, for future and past losses.

[b0g]

back to TiSA: annexed a analysis by Prof. Kelsey in pdf

LEAKED: Secret Negotiations to Let Big Brother Go Global
by Don Quijones • December 25, 2014
http://wolfstreet.com/2014/12/25/lea...her-go-global/
The ugly ramifications of the Trade in Services Act (TiSA)
By Don Quijones, freelance writer, translator in Barcelona, Spain, and editor at WOLF STREET. Mexico is his country-in-law. Raging Bull-Shit is his modest attempt to scrub away the lathers of soft soap peddled by political and business leaders and their loyal mainstream media.
Much has been written, at least in the alternative media, about the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), two multilateral trade treaties being negotiated between the representatives of dozens of national governments and armies of corporate lawyers and lobbyists (on which you can read more here, here and here). However, much less is known about the decidedly more secretive Trade in Services Act (TiSA), which involves more countries than either of the other two.
At least until now, that is. Thanks to a leaked document jointly published by the Associated Whistleblowing Press and Filtrala, the potential ramifications of the treaty being hashed out behind hermetically sealed doors in Geneva are finally seeping out into the public arena.
https://data.awp.is/filtrala/2014/12/17/19.html
If signed, the treaty would affect all services ranging from electronic transactions and data flow, to veterinary and architecture services. It would almost certainly open the floodgates to the final wave of privatization of public services, including the provision of healthcare, education and water. Meanwhile, already privatized companies would be prevented from a re-transfer to the public sector by a so-called barring “ratchet clause” – even if the privatization failed.
More worrisome still, the proposal stipulates that no participating state can stop the use, storage and exchange of personal data relating to their territorial base. Here’s more from Rosa Pavanelli, general secretary of Public Services International (PSI):
The leaked documents confirm our worst fears that TiSA is being used to further the interests of some of the largest corporations on earth (…) Negotiation of unrestricted data movement, internet neutrality and how electronic signatures can be used strike at the heart of individuals’ rights. Governments must come clean about what they are negotiating in these secret trade deals.
Fat chance of that, especially in light of the fact that the text is designed to be almost impossible to repeal, and is to be “considered confidential” for five years after being signed. What that effectively means is that the U.S. approach to data protection (read: virtually non-existent) could very soon become the norm across 50 countries spanning the breadth and depth of the industrial world.
Big Brother Goes Global
The main players in the top-secret negotiations are the United States and all 28 members of the European Union. However, the broad scope of the treaty also includes Australia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Hong Kong, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Liechtenstein, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, South Korea, Switzerland, Taiwan and Turkey. Combined they represent almost 70 percent of all trade in services worldwide.
An explicit goal of the TiSA negotiations is to overcome the exceptions in GATS that protect certain non-tariff trade barriers, such as data protection. For example, the draft Financial Services Annex of TiSA, published by Wikileaks in June 2014, would allow financial institutions, such as banks, the free transfer of data, including personal data, from one country to another. As Ralf Bendrath, a senior policy advisor to the MEP Jan Philipp Albrecht, writes in State Watch, this would constitute a radical carve-out from current European data protection rules:
The transfer and analysis of financial data from EU to US authorities for the US “Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme” (TFTP) has already shaken EU-US relations in the past and led the European Parliament to veto a first TFTP agreement in 2010. With the draft text of the TiSA leak, all floodgates would be opened.
The weakening of EU data protection rules through TiSA goes further than “only” the financial sector. According to sources close to the negotiations, a draft of the TiSA “Electronic Commerce and Telecommunications Services Annex” contains provisions that would ban any restrictions on cross-border information flows and localization requirements for ICT service providers. A provision proposed by US negotiators would rule out any conditions for the transfer of personal data to third countries that are currently in place in EU data protection law.
Given Edward Snowden’s startling revelations of the scale and scope of NSA snooping on European citizens, companies and political leaders – much of it facilitated by its junior surveillance partner, the UK’s General Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) – the prospect of completely unhindered cross-border information and data flows should set off alarm bells across the old continent. Unfortunately that isn’t the case, for the simple reason that most people are blissfully unaware of it, thanks in large part to the near-complete absence of mainstream coverage and public debate on the issue.
The End of Privacy As We Know It?
As for the EU, divining its real intentions concerning data protection is an almost impossible task. Publicly it is in favor of strengthening data protections. There have even been proposals to introduce changes to the routing of internet data packets, so that they take a certain path and remain within the EU. In the European Parliament an amendment was tabled by the Green Party to encrypt all Internet traffic from end to end and was adopted as part of a compromise on the committee vote in February.
As regards national security, the Council of Europe ministers responsible for media and information society stated in November 2013 that:
Any data collection or surveillance for the purpose of protection of national security must be done in compliance with existing human rights and rule of law requirements, including Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Given the growing technological capabilities for electronic mass surveillance and the resulting concerns, we emphasise that there must be adequate and effective guarantees against abuse which may undermine or even destroy democracy.
In private, however, EU trade negotiators – that is, the people with real power – are coming under intense U.S. pressure to sign away virtually all European data protection rights. As Bendrath notes, U.S. lobbying efforts, through groups such as the Orwellian-named “Coalition for Privacy and Free Trade”, have been pushing for “interoperability” between European and American rules on both sides of the Atlantic. That basically means a mutual recognition on the respective rules on both sides of the Atlantic. The only catch: in the United States there are currently no comprehensive data protection laws in place.
If the U.S. negotiators get their way – and let’s face it, when it comes to its dealings with its so-called “allies,” Washington invariably does – multinational corporations will have carte blanche to pry into just about every facet of the working and personal lives of the inhabitants of roughly a quarter of the world’s 200-or-so nations. Such a prospect should worry us all: exploitation of big data serves today to shape our consumption; it can reveal our whereabouts at all times, our conduct, preferences, feelings or even our most intimate thoughts. If TiSA is signed in its current form – and we will not know what that form is until at least five years down the line – that data will be freely bought and sold on the open market place without our knowledge; companies and governments will be able to store it for as long as they desire and use it for just about any purpose.
Perhaps the most perverse irony is that while the corporations and their servants in our elected (or in the case of the EU, unelected) governments seek to turn our lives into a vast open book of actionable or monetizable data, their own actions are increasingly being conducted behind an impenetrable blanket of darkness and secrecy. And as John F Kennedy once said during a little known speech on the grave threat posed by the Soviet Union, “the very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society.” By Don Quijones
In Spain, the Orwellian-titled “Law for Citizen Security,” or more aptly “Gag Law,” is opposed by 80% of the people, but no problem. Read… Spain Takes a Giant Step Backward, Towards Its Dark Past

[b0g]

to get the essence: start viewing at 46:00

[b0g]

House of Commons: 11th report on TTIP
and an internal note for the M E P's

[b0g]

Join the fight this Saturday 18! Global day of Action @o11DoA #A18DoA Find your event here: https://www.globaltradeday.org/

Majority in @EP_Environment voted today 14/4/15 to approve strong language opposing #ISDS in #TTIP! Will @EP_Trade listen?

Maybe this report about environment and food issues has helped.

http://ttip2015.eu/blog-detail/blog/...VI%20Food.html

extract:

TTIP and sustainable food production: water and fire?

Highlights from the "Food and Farming" conference a timely reminder of the issues at stake in the ENVI committee TTIP vote.
Bart Staes, MEP Greens/EFA Rapporteur, TTIP Opinion, ENVI Committee


The long-negotiated and disputed free trade agreement (TTIP) between the EU and US could have deep impacts on how we produce our food. Even if there are not many policy areas that have a more direct impact on people and the planet, this was one of the issues that were largely left out in the TTIP-debate. That is why the Greens/EFA group in the European Parliament organised (together with a broad range of organisations: ARC2020, Compassion in World Farming, Corporate Europe Observatory, Eurocoop, European Coordination Via Campesina, European Milk Board, Friends of the Earth Europe and Slowfood.) a conference and debate entitled “TTIP talks – What’s Cooking? – Perspectives on Food and Farming” on 10 December 2014. The Greens/EFA have now published the report that summarises the presentations and discussions of this conference.

This publication coincides with a crucial phase in the European Parliament where several committees will vote on their assessment of TTIP. These reports will be taken on board by the Trade committee which is in the lead for preparing parliament's first ever opinion on TTIP, which will most likely be voted in plenary in May.

One of the more important votes for food and health related issues is the vote in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) which takes place on April 14th. As the rapporteur for the ENVI opinion, I must secure a number of compromises with the support of other political groups, that do not compromise on democratically achieved regulations concerning food safety and public health.

In order to be able to find a compromise and safeguard our shared criticisms, we must walk on a thin rope during negotiations.

Some key compromises that the ENVI report calls for:

• Clear safeguards of our policies, principles and procedures, also specifically with regard to regulatory cooperation.

• Exclusion of five areas from the negotiations (public health services, GMOS, use of hormones in the bovine sector, chemical legislation REACH and its implementation, and cloning.

• A list of measures which we consider fundamental that must not be compromised.

• A list of measures where we call for cooperation, with a view to upward harmonisation.

• Opposition to arbitration ISDS.

• A further increase of transparency in line with recommendations by the European Ombudsman.

The report published today shows that a clear and critical stance from parliament is no luxury. It shows that is was high time to consider and discuss the main challenges and future perspectives on TTIP and its foreseeable impact on food and farming. Given the fact that the main objective of the EU – US trade deal is to remove non-tariff barriers (NTBs) to trade between the Europe and the US, this might affect producers and consumers of both sides of the Atlantic. In layman’s terms these NTBs are areas standards relating to food safety, environmental and consumer protection and public health. Therefore the TTIP project is not a traditional trade deal, because tariffs between the two trading blocks are very low on average in most sectors.

continues at http://ttip2015.eu/blog-detail/blog/...VI%20Food.html

[b0g]

TPP talks are more advanced than TTIP.
So if eg a Japanese firm sues a US firm or the Senate, you have been warned.

[b0g]

UN calls for suspension of TTIP talks over fears of human rights abuses

UN lawyer says tactics used by multinationals in courts outside of public jurisdiction would undermine democracy and law
The proposed trade deal between the European Union and the United States would make the blocs the biggest free-trade area in the world.


Phillip Inman Economics correspondent

Monday 4 May 2015 17.45 BST
Last modified on Monday 4 May 2015 17.48 BST

source: http://www.theguardian.com/global/20...multinationals

A senior UN official has called for controversial trade talks between the EU and the US to be suspended over fears that a mooted system of secret courts used by major corporations would undermine human rights.

Alfred de Zayas, a UN human rights campaigner, said there should be a moratorium on negotiations over the Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership (TTIP), which are on course to turn the EU and US blocs into the largest free-trade area in the world.

Speaking to the Guardian, the Cuban-born US lawyer warned that the lesson from other trade agreements around the world was that major corporations had succeeded in blocking government policies with the support of secret arbitration tribunals that operate outside the jurisdiction of domestic courts.

He said he would becompiling a report on the tactics used by multinationals to illustrate the flaws in current plans for the TTIP.

De Zayas said: “We don’t want a dystopian future in which corporations and not democratically elected governments call the shots. We don’t want an international order akin to post-democracy or post-law.”

The intervention by de Zayas comes amid intense scrutiny in the US, Europe and Japan of groundbreaking trade deals promoted by Barack Obama. The European commission, which supports the talks, believes an agreement to lower tariffs and establish basic health and safety standards will boost trade and add billions of euros to the EU’s income. UK ministers estimate Britain could benefit from a rise in GDP of between £4bn and £10bn a year.

Under the proposed agreement, companies will be allowed to appeal against regulations or legislation that depress profits, and there are fears multinationals could stop governments reversing privatisations of parts of the health service, for instance.

The investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) scheme that includes the secret tribunals is already a cornerstone of a trade deal between the EU and Canada and is scheduled to be included in the TTIP deal, as well as a trans-Pacific deal being negotiated between the US and Japan.

EU officials said the ISDS would be part of the package when it is put to a vote in the EU parliament later this year. .

Cecilia Malmström, EU trade commissioner, has sought to dampen criticism by publishing discussion documents submitted to the TTIP talks. Amid growing calls from environmental groups, unions and MEPs for the deal to be scrapped, she has also put forward a series of suggestions to “safeguard the rights of governments to regulate” and protect public service provision from demands for competition. More than 97% of respondents to an official EU survey voted against the deal.

However De Zayas, the UN’s special rapporteur on promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, said that while these were helpful initiatives, the adoption of a separate legal system for the benefit of multinational corporations was a threat to basic human rights.

“The bottom line is that these agreements must be revised, modified or terminated,” he said.

“Most worrisome are the ISDS arbitrations, which constitute an attempt to escape the jurisdiction of national courts and bypass the obligation of all states to ensure that all legal cases are tried before independent tribunals that are public, transparent, accountable and appealable.

“Article 103 of the UN charter on human rights says that if there is a conflict between the provisions of the charter and any other treaty, it is the charter that prevails.”

De Zayas, who issued a statement last month demanding unions, health experts and environmentalists be included in the TTIP talks, conceded that the UN has had little impact on the debate so far, but hoped the publication of his report in August ahead of the EU parliament vote could alert policymakers to the flaws in the current plan.

Swedish energy giant Vattenfall is suing the German government for phasing out nuclear energy


Disputes have already cost governments hundreds of millions of pounds in compensation. The Swedish nuclear energy group Vattenfall is suing the German government following its decision to phase out nuclear energy following the Fukushima disaster, while the French waste and energy group Veolia sued the Egyptian government after it raised the minimum wage.

“There have been more than 600 such cases and most of them have been decided in favour of the corporations,” he said. “Why? Because the arbitrators are highly paid corporate lawyers, today working for the corporation, tomorrow as advocates, day after tomorrow as lobbyist, the day after that as arbitrators.
“These are classical situations of conflict of interest and lack of independence.”