TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret • Hacker News Board

Re: TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret

#181

Post by dalke » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 6:28 PM UTC

TheLogothete wrote: post #157

dalke wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He probably didn't say that. As http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/04/universe-einstein/ points out, the original saying was attributed to a "great astronomer", then followed by "To-day we know that this statement is not quite correct. Einstein has proved that the universe is limited." These later got merged. In any case, you are making a fallacious argument from authority. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arg…

In fact, I don't care that Einstein told it. Or didn't. I quoted it because it sums my thesis pretty well. People are very, very stupid. You cannot count on them not being swayed by some pretty words and blowing the whole treaty out of the water with some misguided protests. Perhaps if you frequent HN, you don't know how stupid people are, because you only talk to the the smartest 10%.

Do the smartest 10% cherry pick misquotations in order to defend their arguments via a logical fallacy?

Re: TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret

#182

Post by snowwrestler » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 6:59 PM UTC

AnAfrican wrote: post #173

dragonwriter wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The United States Congress does not really get line-item veto on giant international trade agreements that affect dozens of countries, all of whom also must ratify the treaty. Its not a treaty. If it were a treaty, it would have to be ratified by a 2/3 vote in the Senate, and could, indeed, not be modified on a line-item level. What is put before Congress is a regular US law, not a treaty ratification, that needs a…

> The US Congress does, really, have line-item authority over regular US laws. I don't think legality was the issue. The issue is that there are dozens of countries that need to vote on the same exact text for it to have an effect. Surely the US Congress could modify it but then the other players will at best ratify a different version and at worse change items here and there themselves. In both cases, what you get i…

> In both cases, what you get is not an international trade agrement. You may as well vote "no" or not even try to negotiate a deal.

Right, which is the exact point of this whole tiresome conversation about negotiations.

People who don't want TPP (or TTIP) to become law have figured out that it's easier to attack the process than to attack the substance[1], and the outcome would be the same.

[1] Not because the substance is unassailable, but because talking about it requires informing the listener, whereas invoking fears of secret cabals does not.

Re: TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret

#183

Post by TheLogothete » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 7:01 PM UTC

Silhouette wrote: post #177

TheLogothete wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are comparing domestic and international legislation...

No, I'm demonstrating that if an entire programme of complex proposals can routinely become law after open debate among thousands of participants with often conflicting views and preferences, the idea that a single trade agreement can't be hammered out without resorting to secrecy and subterfuge by a small group of mostly unidentified participants is absurd.

It is a very different playing field. In one case you have agenda for the UK, in the other you have for the UK and Romania. Local forces will escalate the tension and break up all talks.

Re: TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret

#184

Post by snowwrestler » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 7:04 PM UTC

Silhouette wrote: post #130

TheLogothete wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. Make them public. Every populist party in every member state would have a wonderful time catering to tin foil hats and making everyone with half a clue miserable. This is not how negotiations work. You don't make preliminary talks public. Many of the things in those talks are outrageous and no one believes they will be in the final draft. It's how you negotiate. You ask for X, then the opposing side tells you n…

This "negotiations must be secret to work" principle seems an odd argument to make. In the UK, for example, our national laws go through several stages of development in Parliament. Over the course of many months or years there will often be thousands of comments contributed by MPs, Lords, civil servants, independent subject matter experts, special interest groups, and the general public. There are no draconian restr…

Whether on purpose or not, you're moving the goalposts.

By the time a law arrives at the first public comment stage, even in the UK, it has already been the subject of a lot of conversation and negotiation behind closed doors. MPs do not have cameras in their offices and public file servers. Bills introduced for consideration do not spring fully-formed from the forehead of one MP, surprising everyone around them. They are talked about at length before even being drafted.

Re: TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret

#185

Post by Silhouette » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 8:09 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #184

Silhouette wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "negotiations must be secret to work" principle seems an odd argument to make. In the UK, for example, our national laws go through several stages of development in Parliament. Over the course of many months or years there will often be thousands of comments contributed by MPs, Lords, civil servants, independent subject matter experts, special interest groups, and the general public. There are no draconian restr…

Whether on purpose or not, you're moving the goalposts. By the time a law arrives at the first public comment stage, even in the UK, it has already been the subject of a lot of conversation and negotiation behind closed doors. MPs do not have cameras in their offices and public file servers. Bills introduced for consideration do not spring fully-formed from the forehead of one MP, surprising everyone around them. The…

Of course, but the point isn't really what happens before the first useful draft is available, it's how much more happens afterwards, and in particular, how much realistic scope there is for scrutiny and public opinion to be taken into account and the details amended before anything becomes law.

Re: TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret

#186

Post by Silhouette » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 8:18 PM UTC

TheLogothete wrote: post #183

Silhouette wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I'm demonstrating that if an entire programme of complex proposals can routinely become law after open debate among thousands of participants with often conflicting views and preferences, the idea that a single trade agreement can't be hammered out without resorting to secrecy and subterfuge by a small group of mostly unidentified participants is absurd.

It is a very different playing field. In one case you have agenda for the UK, in the other you have for the UK and Romania. Local forces will escalate the tension and break up all talks.

And yet, again, we have both bilateral and multilateral negotiations going on all the time in international relations, without the same level of controversy that the likes of TPP and TTIP have attracted.

Discussions in the UN about issues as big as imposing sanctions or going to war have taken place with more transparency than we're seeing here. National politicians who have defied public opinion on such matters have sometimes paid a heavy price for it at the next elections.

I mean, seriously, we're talking about a bilateral trade deal here, not the fate of humanity. Yes, each party has some internal political structure and local variations, but the point of both the EU and the US is to have regulated, harmonious local variations so the whole can still function effectively.

Please tell me, if everything is above board, what is so secret about this kind of a deal that it justifies obstructing not only the public but their elected representatives from watching it develop? For that matter, why should those elected representatives not then block the entire thing on principle, if they are only to be asked to rubber stamp the results without substantial scrutiny or a meaningful opportunity to actually represent the interests of their electorates?

Re: TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret

#187

Post by TheLogothete » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 8:37 PM UTC

Silhouette wrote: post #186

TheLogothete wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a very different playing field. In one case you have agenda for the UK, in the other you have for the UK and Romania. Local forces will escalate the tension and break up all talks.

And yet, again, we have both bilateral and multilateral negotiations going on all the time in international relations, without the same level of controversy that the likes of TPP and TTIP have attracted. Discussions in the UN about issues as big as imposing sanctions or going to war have taken place with more transparency than we're seeing here. National politicians who have defied public opinion on such matters have…

The UN example is especially apt. Are you sure you are not arguing my point?

Also, this is getting very tiresome. Representatives have enough time to familiarize themselves with the draft and decide what to vote. This whole "the secret cabal is making treaties without you" is nothing more than sensationalist FUD. Only the negotiations are in secret. As they should be.

Re: TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret

#188

Post by Silhouette » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 8:45 PM UTC

mason240 wrote: post #179

Silhouette wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it is. The trouble is, we know that there is a credible threat of international agreements being used to subvert previous national positions in general, but we don't know what the real proposed wording says in specific areas of this particular agreement. It's impossible to have a rational debate on the subject under these conditions.

It is untrue. A businesses in foreign countries CAN sue a national governments if pass protectionist regulations that favor domestic businesses. For example: The US can pass environmental regulations blocking all logging on Federally owned land. They can not pass regulations that only allow US-based companies to log on Federally owned land. If they did, then foreign companies could sue for being excluded. >It's impos…

It is untrue.

As I have consistently said, that may be the case.

But the fact is that I don't know that for sure, and unless you're both one of a very select group and violating an explicit confidentiality agreement by posting here, neither do you.

Re: TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret

#189

Post by Silhouette » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 8:57 PM UTC

TheLogothete wrote: post #187

Silhouette wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, again, we have both bilateral and multilateral negotiations going on all the time in international relations, without the same level of controversy that the likes of TPP and TTIP have attracted. Discussions in the UN about issues as big as imposing sanctions or going to war have taken place with more transparency than we're seeing here. National politicians who have defied public opinion on such matters have…

The UN example is especially apt. Are you sure you are not arguing my point? Also, this is getting very tiresome. Representatives have enough time to familiarize themselves with the draft and decide what to vote. This whole "the secret cabal is making treaties without you" is nothing more than sensationalist FUD. Only the negotiations are in secret. As they should be.

Are you sure you are not arguing my point?

I'm not even sure what your point is any more. Looking through your comments in this thread, your argument appears to be that negotiations on international agreements must happen in secret, because reasons.

Representatives have enough time to familiarize themselves with the draft and decide what to vote.

We've already seen procedural technicalities used to set up end-runs around proper scrutiny by elected representatives, in the context of international agreements in the recent past. This has been done both in the US and the EU.

Even if those elected representatives do have ample time for scrutiny, if they have no meaningful opportunity to actually represent their electorates by advocating substantial changes as appropriate, the scrutiny is of very little value.

True or false? "When they are called on to scrutinise and approve TTIP, the directly elected representatives of people in the US and the EU member states will have available to them an effective mechanism to change the substance of the proposal in areas they do not believe to be in the interests of those they represent."

Re: TTIP Enters New and Dangerous Stage as Democracy Is Dismantled in Secret

#190

Post by germanier » Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 9:04 PM UTC

belorn wrote: post #144

germanier wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to make one thing clear: Before the treaty comes into force it needs to be voted on by the Euroepan parliament and national parliaments. Before the votes the treaty will be published. What is a highly guarded secret are the current drafts , not the final agreement. It's actually not really different from how most laws are written, especially those proposed by the government. While those are in the drafting phase…

Most law are written after years of public debates in parliaments (for those countries which has one), by a larger number of public inquiries and studies, and by appointed politicians talking about it in public speeches, conferences, personal website, news papers, social media and so on. The process is so connected to bureaucracy that we recognize it as the definition for it, with the majority of time spent in public…

I can only talk about Germany, as this is the country I know best. I suspect it's not too different in most others.

Most laws are not passed after a long public debate in parliament, certainly not years (that would make for really slow legislation). In fact, almost all laws see almost no debate at all. As an example, just today the federal parliament passed a law without plenary debate at all and with no votes against to streamline electronic communication with the patent and trademark office. The law was introduced in November and voted through all required phases as just a single line-item every time. That is not an exceptional example.

Sure, these are mostly low-profile, low-impact laws so not really comparable to TTIP.

But extremely fast lawmaking is also not unheard of. For example, the "Finanzmarktstabilisierungsgesetz" during the financial crisis was first introduced to parliament and the public on 14th October 2008 and already went in full force by 18th October 2008. And that was certainly not your regular change of traffic rules but introduced hundreds of billions euros of liability. Of course that drew a lot of criticism.

I'm not saying everything went well with TTIP (certainly it didn't). But if you talk to anyone in the EU commission they will tell you that they have been really caught off guard with the public interest which hadn't been anticipated at all. It was not that they purposefully hid the negotiations from the public to reach their goals but rather did what felt natural to them. The EU has negotiated dozens of similar treaties (though smaller and lower-impact) with nobody voicing interest in the process.

When was the last time you heard about trade agreements with Singapore, Japan, Ecuador, Kazakhstan, the East African Community, Thailand, Morocco, India, etc.? All those are currently being drafted or have just been finalized without any public debate at all. Many of those contain clauses similar to the ones criticized with TTIP.

Of course we should ask critically why they saw it that way and hope that it will change in the future to more open negotiations. But saying TTIP was created in an exceptional never-seen-before process is really stretching reality.

Drafting the net-neutrality laws is the exception rather than the norm here learned after years of public debate on certain topics.