Dr. Stiglitz' advice to Trudeau is that the Trans Pacific Partnership may well be the worst trade deal ever and Canada would do well to turn it down and, at a minimum, demand to renegotiate (link is external) its terms.
"I think what Canada should do is use its influence to begin a renegotiation of TPP to make it an agreement that advances the interests of Canadian citizens and not just the large corporations," he said in an interview with CBC'sThe Exchange (link is external) on Thursday.
Stiglitz takes issue with the TPP's investment-protection provisions, which he says could interfere with the ability of governments to regulate business or to move toward a low-carbon economy.
It's the "worst part of agreement," he says, because it allows large multinationals to sue the Canadian government.
"It used to be the basic principle was polluter pay," Stiglitz said. "If you damaged the environment, then you have to pay. Now if you pass a regulation that restricts ability to pollute or does something about climate change, you could be sued and could pay billions of dollars."
There were similar provisions in North American Free Trade Agreement that led to the Canadian government being sued, but the TPP goes even further.
He said the provision could be used to prevent raising of minimum wages or to overturn rules that prevent usury or predatory lending practices.
Justin Trudeau never got anybody's mandate to sign this sell-out deal, to surrender that much more of our dwindling sovereignty to the shadow state of corporatism.
The best argument that the Libs have come up with for adopting the TPP is that, if we don't, we'll be screwed. Actually Canada will be truly screwed - by our own government at that - if the Liberals throw us to the wolves and sign the TPP.
Let's remember the essay written by Robert Reich (link is external) from just two weeks ago in which he stripped the veneer off these corporatist deals. Free trade agreements began with the promise of increasing trade, increasing jobs, and raising wages. Today's agreements, like the TPP, do none of that.
The benefit of these deals flows to the transnationals at the expense of the public.
"I think what Canada should do is use its influence to begin a renegotiation of TPP to make it an agreement that advances the interests of Canadian citizens and not just the large corporations," he said in an interview with CBC'sThe Exchange (link is external) on Thursday.
Stiglitz takes issue with the TPP's investment-protection provisions, which he says could interfere with the ability of governments to regulate business or to move toward a low-carbon economy.
It's the "worst part of agreement," he says, because it allows large multinationals to sue the Canadian government.
"It used to be the basic principle was polluter pay," Stiglitz said. "If you damaged the environment, then you have to pay. Now if you pass a regulation that restricts ability to pollute or does something about climate change, you could be sued and could pay billions of dollars."
There were similar provisions in North American Free Trade Agreement that led to the Canadian government being sued, but the TPP goes even further.
He said the provision could be used to prevent raising of minimum wages or to overturn rules that prevent usury or predatory lending practices.
Justin Trudeau never got anybody's mandate to sign this sell-out deal, to surrender that much more of our dwindling sovereignty to the shadow state of corporatism.
The best argument that the Libs have come up with for adopting the TPP is that, if we don't, we'll be screwed. Actually Canada will be truly screwed - by our own government at that - if the Liberals throw us to the wolves and sign the TPP.
Let's remember the essay written by Robert Reich (link is external) from just two weeks ago in which he stripped the veneer off these corporatist deals. Free trade agreements began with the promise of increasing trade, increasing jobs, and raising wages. Today's agreements, like the TPP, do none of that.
The benefit of these deals flows to the transnationals at the expense of the public.
