EU 'not capable' of signing deal says Canadian minister

Grand Mal said:

I'll take that bet.
Clinton speaks about a 'hemispheric common market with open borders' which raises the hackles of every Canadian- I mean, how in the hell dare she! And Trump- anyone who enters into a negotiation with that con man better keep one hand on their wallet and the other on the doorknob.

Click to expand...

The US Congress won't let whichever one becomes President get anywhere near reopening NAFTA. I'm not entirely sure of the mechanism, but I believe it would take a significant majority in both houses of Congress to start the process of ending or renegotiating the deal and that won't happen with Republicans in control of the House and likely retaining control of the Senate or losing it marginally.

As for other trade deals, the US is not going to want to be left out of any Pacific rim deal that includes Canada - they get none of the benefits Canada would and the Pacific rim countries would have easier access into the US markets through Canada if the US sits out. And if somehow the EU/Canada deal gets ratified, the US will double its efforts to get one of their own with the EU for similar reasons.

American politicians may be idiots and corrupt at the highest levels but when it comes to their economy they will never retrench and become protectionist knowing full well that it would damage their economy, not help it.

CanadaJohn said:

The US Congress won't let whichever one becomes President get anywhere near reopening NAFTA. I'm not entirely sure of the mechanism, but I believe it would take a significant majority in both houses of Congress to start the process of ending or renegotiating the deal and that won't happen with Republicans in control of the House and likely retaining control of the Senate or losing it marginally.

As for other trade deals, the US is not going to want to be left out of any Pacific rim deal that includes Canada - they get none of the benefits Canada would and the Pacific rim countries would have easier access into the US markets through Canada if the US sits out. And if somehow the EU/Canada deal gets ratified, the US will double its efforts to get one of their own with the EU for similar reasons.

American politicians may be idiots and corrupt at the highest levels but when it comes to their economy they will never retrench and become protectionist knowing full well that it would damage their economy, not help it.

Click to expand...

That (the bolded) is what sunk the deal, the fear that the deal would open a window that the US might come through. Wallonia doesn't have any dealing with Canada, they're just anti-American.

Grand Mal said:

That (the bolded) is what sunk the deal, the fear that the deal would open a window that the US might come through. Wallonia doesn't have any dealing with Canada, they're just anti-American.

Click to expand...

actually no.

Canada's roll in the European deal was as a loss leader for the US to move along the same path. No one, and I mean no one had any idea that one small province of Belgium could nix it.

It is a huge mistake on the EU's part as they seek agreements, if they can't find a way to deal with little Canada, there's no hope of a free trade agreement with China, the US, India...all markets Europe wants access to.

The word within the Liberal party is that some "off line" measures will be tried. Someone has mentioned compensating the 43 farmers who will be affected. {note hat is a deliberate exaggeration}

all write about "free trade" that is bull****! Ceta, same as TTIP is about might for companies. The might to influence elected governments even more than they already do. Opposing this is that what every democratic mindet EU AND Canadian Citizen should do! Every trade agreement with courts of arbitration has nothing to do with freedom but with slavery to the Companies. (shadowrun comes to my mind when I think about it)

Well done Belgium!

Democracy is expressed through politics and not through corporations. If one puts a corporate structure above any and all democratic institutions including institutions such as the ECHR or the ECJ then that is the de facto abolition of the democratic system. If the ICS gets introduced any election will be superfluous and be nothing more than a television show. It would be impossible or financially prohibitive to choose any policies which are in the public interest at a time when such policies are more necessary than they have ever been. It's an utter disgrace, not for the EU or Belgium, but for all the so-called representatives, specifically of the christian democrat, classical liberal and social democrat parties in the European Parliament that there is but one regional government opposing what is essentially high treason because they squander the political power given to them by their electorate and hand it over to multinational corporations which are already pushing the ecological, economical and social viability of our world.

Woi said:

Democracy is expressed through politics and not through corporations.

Click to expand...

But libertarians are not democrats. More precisely they think the government should have very little power, so this mechanically leaves very few things electors could act upon. For libertarians issues must be solved through money, not politics.

Sanctifying profit expectations and forcing govts to compensate corporations for their laws is, mind you, excellent in the eyes of libertarians as it can be used to effectively prohibit most of regulation. And private justice courts conducted by business lawyers are not a problem in their eyes; they are a perk.

Claiming ISDS is not free trade is absurd in my opinion. On the opposite it sanctifies free trade and put it over regulation. Personally I oppose those treaties and think that free trade must be curbed: it does bring many good things, but also bad ones.

It’s very telling that very political informed forum posters don’t know about ISDS. That in many countries there have been little debate and media coverage of trade agreements and ISDS. While big corporation have the knowledge and abilities to influence and use trade agreement and ISDS to their advantage. That it's really bad both for citizens and democracy that big business has such upper hand then it comes to trade agreements.

Also even The Economist are against ISDS.

IF YOU wanted to convince the public that international trade agreements are a way to let multinational companies get rich at the expense of ordinary people, this is what you would do: give foreign firms a special right to apply to a secretive tribunal of highly paid corporate lawyers for compensation whenever a government passes a law to, say, discourage smoking, protect the environment or prevent a nuclear catastrophe. Yet that is precisely what thousands of trade and investment treaties over the past half century have done, through a process known as “investor-state dispute settlement”, or ISDS.

Click to expand...

At the same time, academics have begun to question whether ISDS delivers the benefits it is supposed to, in the form of increased foreign investment. Foreign investors can protect themselves against egregious governmental abuse by purchasing political-risk insurance, points out Terra Lawson-Remer, an economist at the Brookings Institution. Brazil continues to receive lots of foreign investment, despite its long-standing refusal to sign any treaty with an ISDS mechanism.

Click to expand...

The arbitration game | The Economist