Hi John,
Last week the UK took the final step needed to trigger its accession to the Pacific trade deal, meaning it will formally join the 11-country trade bloc in December.
We’ve been warning about the dangers of this deal for years – including risks to the climate, to food standards, to democracy and to global inequality. (1)
But it’s not too late to stop its most perilous provisions: the corporate courts which leave our government open to being sued by companies based in a whole swathe of member countries.
In opposition, Labour expressed concern over the inclusion of corporate courts in this trade deal. But now they’re in government they’ve gone quiet.
Can you take action now to tell the new business and trade secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, to drop corporate courts from this deal?
|
|
Corporate courts, also known as investor-state dispute settlement or ISDS, allow companies to sue governments for introducing policies which harm their profits. Together we fought the Energy Charter Treaty, a giant corporate court deal used by the fossil fuel industry to sue for billions, and forced the UK to withdraw. Now we need to remove these corporate courts from all the UK’s trade and investment deals.
Under the previous government, Labour shadow ministers heaped scrutiny on ISDS clauses in the Pacific trade deal – amongst other concerns like food standards and deforestation – while it was going through parliament.
But now the new trade minister is singing the praises of this deal from the same old hymn sheet: big new deals equal economic growth, and never mind the human, environmental or even fiscal cost. (2)
In fact, over a full fifteen years the deal is set to add only a pitiful 0.08% to the UK economy. At the same time, it will lock us into the risk of costly claims against progressive policies by overseas investors, that will fall on the public purse.
The good news is, even as it is pressing ahead with this deal, Labour can act on removing the risk of ISDS from the Pacific trade deal.
The UK has already signed ‘side letters’ with Australia and New Zealand, under the previous Conservative government, disapplying the ISDS provisions with these countries at their request. There is no technical barrier to the new government doing the same with the other nine countries in the Pacific deal.
Just earlier this year, Labour shadow ministers said ISDS “poses a formidable challenge to our national sovereignty and regulatory autonomy” and they were particularly concerned by its “implications for the NHS, the environment and workers’ rights”. (3)
Now that they are the ones steering the ship into a well-forecasted storm, they shouldn’t need reminding of the dangers ahead. But we need to make our voices heard.
Can you help by calling on the minister to take the simple and crucial step to exclude the UK from corporate courts in the Pacific trade deal?
|
|
Thank you for helping us keep up the pressure.
In solidarity,
Cleodie Rickard,
Trade campaigner at Global Justice Now
Notes
1. The Pacific trade deal is also known as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), comprising Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. See our briefing: What’s wrong with the Pacific trade deal?
2. Jonathan Reynolds: Greater trading options are crucial to the rebuilding of the country, Guardian, 25 August 2024.
3. Trade (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership) Bill [Lords] – in a Public Bill Committee at 9:25 am on 20 February 2024. |
|
At Global Justice Now we’re proud to be outspoken
We take on issues that others are afraid to touch and we don’t make compromises.
By joining us, you can fight for regulations that put people before profit, and build public pressure against corporate greed.
Become a member and join others standing up to injustice.
|
|
|
|
|
