|
|
|
|
|
by pas
3705 days ago
|
|
He's selling the line that it doesn't protect governments as if it were a bad thing. It protects the companies in those states against the other governments for example, which is a good thing. More people die because of coal/oil/gas power plants than because of nuclear ones. So now, instead of inspecting their own plants, which they have the best position to do so, they're relying on who knows what form of power generation. It's understandable that you feel that by submitting the UK to an unknown even higher court you take a risk, but a lot of people on the other hand feel that it's going to be a boon to restrict the actions (and especially future actions) of their State. And the documents are public (and there is a push to make video recordings and even live streaming of the discussions/arguments), and in English, much better than when a company has to deal with let's say the Hungarian courts. And exactly, because a lot of investment is not making its way to such countries, why the whole treaty is negotiated. |
|
The European Commission conducted possibly the largest public consultation in history and found almost unanimous opposition either to ISDS or to TTIP in its entirety, except among some organisations representing businesses, and even there the response was mixed. So who are the "alot of people" you're talking about here? They don't appear to be ordinary EU citizens, nor lawyers, trade unions, academics...
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/january/tradoc_15...
http://www.globaljustice.org.uk/news/2015/jan/13/new-levels-...