Obama

[rascal]

Why?

Giving corporations the right to sue Government (I.e. Us) when they spit their dummy out of the pram is never a good idea.

 

[bizzaro]

Giving corporations the right to sue Government (I.e. Us) when they spit their dummy out of the pram is never a good idea.

They can already do that if government acts illegally. So what's your point?

 

[Groucho]

From what I can make of it, think of it as a bit like a supermarket. If a country says that the shop is forbidden from selling crappy American beer then that's illegal, and rightly so, but it's ultimately still the choice of the supermarket whether to stock American beer, or indeed of the shopper if they want to buy it. No one is saying American companies have to be chosen for anything, merely that they shouldn't be forbidden from tendering. The power is still in the hands of whomever is buying/commissioning the service. Granted, as far as the NHS is concerned, I'm not entirely confident in the folks doing that, but that's not really the fault of TTIP or the EU.

Yeah basically, I'd like to see the NHS protected from TTIP. That's the issue for me personally.


I'd hope, regardless of party allegiance, that any government would do that.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Giving corporations the right to sue Government (I.e. Us) when they spit their dummy out of the pram is never a good idea.

If the state doesn't act illegally then there's nothing to worry about. If, for instance, the state says to a company "yeah, build this nuclear power station and we'll guarantee prices for x years", and then a few years later, say after a nuclear melt down in Japan, decides to scrap nuclear power altogether, then you would be justified in seeking some compensation I'd say.

 

[rascal]

They can already do that if government acts illegally. So what's your point?

Yes and this would be facilitied even further by TTIP.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Yeah basically, I'd like to see the NHS protected from TTIP. That's the issue for me personally.


I'd hope, regardless of party allegiance, that any government would do that.

All depends on the government I suspect. Lets take a cleaning tender for instance. I suspect under TTIP, we wouldn't be able to limit that to only British cleaning companies, which is fair enough. The choice over whether to open clinical services up to private tender would still be down to the government though.

 

[rascal]

If the state doesn't act illegally then there's nothing to worry about. If, for instance, the state says to a company "yeah, build this nuclear power station and we'll guarantee prices for x years", and then a few years later, say after a nuclear melt down in Japan, decides to scrap nuclear power altogether, then you would be justified in seeking some compensation I'd say.

If, just for example, you're a government that sees a direct correlation between digging up minerals and poisoning the country's water supply, then you should be well within your rights to say stop that without having to fork out the equivalent of a country's health or education budget.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

If, just for example, you're a government that sees a direct correlation between digging up minerals and poisoning the country's water supply, then you should be well within your rights to say stop that without having to fork out the equivalent of a country's health or education budget.

How will TTIP prevent that from happening?

 

[Jags..class]

Tbf. Don't have a clue what best for us so which is the reason I wouldn't vote either way, it's not that I'm lazy to read as I don't know what is true and what is not. Who lying? Who scare monging? How do I benefit from either way? Would we go into recession if we leave the EU? Why is Switzerland and Noway doing fine without the EU? Did we do fine before then EU?
So if we leave the EU, no one outside our country will trade with us? Due to legal issues. There so many other countries that are not in the EU, wouldn't we deal with them? We do trade with China and they are not in the EU.

Like I said this is all confusing which is why I have to trust those who know to make the correct decision

 

[rascal]

How will TTIP prevent that from happening?

This is getting to the wider point of the investor-state dispute settlement which should be reduced.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

This is getting to the wider point of the investor-state dispute settlement which should be reduced.

The point of it is, from what I can gather, that the state shouldn't be above the law.

 

[rascal]

The point of it is, from what I can gather, that the state shouldn't be above the law.

The state should set the law, end of. If you don't like its decisions then tough titties, you can just take your ball home and poison the water supply somewhere else.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The state should set the law, end of. If you don't like its decisions then tough titties, you can just take your ball home and poison the water supply somewhere else.

Yes, and the state should not be above that law. If utilities were nationalised, would you be ok if it was them poisoning your water supplies? I doubt that. No one should be above the law.

 

[Clint Planet]

Fear is rampant right now, and fear leads to division, and division leads to conflict.

As does inequality.

 

[Clint Planet]

Why?

TTIP is a tool to open up new markets for predatory American multinationals to move in and take over - like they did in the wake of previous trade agreements. The American government has long been a tool of profiteering US companies, even bringing down governments to suit American money.