Photo credit TheWikiLeaksChannel
On October 5, the 12 countries involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) reached a deal after nearly eight years of negotiations. The secretive deal now must pass the respective parliaments in the United States, Canada, Japan, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam, Peru, Chile, Malaysia, Brunei, and Singapore (China, perhaps intentionally, not included). Politicians advertise the agreement as a historic trade deal that will phase out import tariffs and enhance trade and investment, but it is far more than just a trade deal.
A Dangerous Deal
Under the deal, foreign corporations can sue governments in secret courts for effecting their investments with the costs falling on taxpayers. The deal also strengthens penalties against copyright violators with copyright extending from life of the author plus 50 years, to life plus 70 years like in the US, which is expected to cost Canadians over $100 million per year. If one infringes on copyright, then the infringer is ordered “to pay the right holder the infringer’s profits that are attributable to the infringement,” which could include lost profits, the value of the infringed good, and other legal jargon. Under article H.8, the deal provides criminal procedures to ones with unauthorized access to a trade secret, willful misappropriation of a trade secret, or willful disclosure of a trade secret, all by means of a computer system. This section is said to heavily damage free speech online and incriminate whistleblowers.
The TPP also wants to prevent cheaper pharmaceuticals from competing in the market, which may increase the price of lifesaving drugs. US drug makers already have a 12-year patent protection monopoly on drugs, but the US wants to place the same patent period to all countries in the deal. Canada currently has only a 5 year patent protection period, but some countries have shorter periods, or none at all. Thankfully, some countries (not Canada) stood up to the US and only a 5-8 year period was approved. The extension may not be as dramatic in Canada, but in developing countries like Peru, Vietnam, Mexico, and Malaysia, citizens may completely lose access to arthritis and cancer medication with no cheaper alternative available. The forced extension on drug patents to poorer nations will benefit pharmaceutical companies and cost the lives of those who cannot afford what they need. Despite the deal being terrible, it is still better than what the US initially introduced, which is a frightening thought.
The 30-chapter deal will not be made public for about a month, but Wikileaks has published what it says is the 60-page “Intellectual Property” chapter of the deal and it appears to contain monopoly protections for pharmaceutical companies, and threaten online freedom of speech. Campaign director Evan Greer of internet activist group Fight for the Future released a statement saying, “The text of the TPP’s intellectual property chapter confirms advocates warnings that this deal poses a grave threat to global freedom of expression and basic access to things like medicine and information. But the sad part is that no one should be surprised by this. It should have been obvious to anyone observing the process that this would be the result. Appointed government bureaucrats and monopolistic companies were given more access to the text than elected officials and journalists; from the outset there was no way this was going to be a good deal for the public.”
Opposition
Opposing voices have spread all over the world against the TPP and similar trade agreements. In Japan, a group of over a thousand people tried to sue the Japanese government to halt Japan’s participation in the negotiations. The group included eight parliament members and over a hundred lawyers, farmers, and celebrities. In Berlin, Germany, over a hundred thousand people (some putting the number at 250,000) protested against the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), a similar trade deal between the US and European nations that is just as secretive and dangerous as the TPP.
US presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is against it, saying that “It is time for the rest of us to stop letting multinational corporations rig the system to pad their profits at our expense.” Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton recently claimed to be against the TPP, but she was a strong supporter of the deal while secretary of state from 2009-2013, saying, “This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field.” She will say what it takes to get elected and she is saying what many voters want to hear.
Canada’s Stance
When the local federal candidates were at the university in late September, I asked Conservative MP Ron Cannan and NDP candidate Norah Bowman about the deal. Ron said “[Canada] won’t sign any trade agreement unless it’s in the best interest of Canadians,” but based on what I have listed, Ron’s statement is false. I asked Ron about the auto industry and he didn’t address it and instead talked about the deal’s benefits to the Okanagan’s cherry and wine industries. Ron did remind me that the deal must be passed by parliament and that there will be “ample time for public input [and] for public debate,” but that’s only if we get a copy of the deal to read. President Obama pledged to make the TPP public, but only after the deal is passed. And even if we get to see the deal, will our say have any effect over how the MPs vote? It didn’t for C-51. It didn’t for C-24. Ron supports the TPP and if he’s re-elected he will support it 100%.
Norah Bowman was against the deal’s secrecy and how it “doesn’t recognize the important voices of all the groups in Canada who will be affected by it.” Although she did address the damage it will cause to the auto industry, she also overlooked the issue and focused on the deal’s benefit to some farmers. She supported it at the time, but Mulcair has since said he will oppose the deal after being “enthusiastically in favour of a trade deal” at the beginning of the campaign in August. Do I believe Mulcair is truly against the deal? Not really. It’s a political stunt that makes him the only major candidate to oppose the deal and possibly acquire the many young voters who dislike it, too. Will the NDP candidates, including Norah Bowman, suddenly oppose the deal now that Mulcair opposes it? If so, then what does that say about the self-thinking of our representatives?
Prime Minister Stephan Harper said he will give $1billion to the auto sector over ten years to allow it to cope due to the TPP. Another $4.3billion will go towards the dairy, poultry, and egg industries to minimize the effects of the deal in the first place. If so much money must go into these industries due to the TPP, then it makes one wonder if it’s worth passing such a damaging deal, not including all the non-trade related additions. The Conservatives and Liberals don’t think it matters, and I personally don’t believe the NDP will hold firm to their opposition.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a secretive, corporate-swelling, citizen-infringing, government-waning deal that benefits corporations and ruins the people. I only hope that public opposition continues and politicians stand up against this heinous abomination.