Well there is a lot about creating common standards and regulations that otherwise interfere with exports and imports. So that makes trade easy. The problem is that what happens is that manufacturers and other organisations see this as an opportunity to weaken those standards in stead of strengthening them. And (some) politicians and consumer organiasations see them as an opportunity to strengthen those standards, and otherwise inject a lot of their policies. So then you get an decade long negotation process where some win and some lose. But mostly the politicians and public servants lose, since they cannot handle the way the high priced lawyers hired by the industry are able to deal with the negotiations...
Let's have an example, and see how this would have played out! (I do not pretend to know, but perhaps others or EU experts can tell)
The example is right here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/14/romanian-village-blocks-canadian-firm-mining-for-gold
A tomanian village and a Canadian mining opreation are in conflict over an open cast mine:
"Last July, the company filed a request for international arbitration to obtain compensation from Bucharest over the delays to the project.
Initially in favour of the mine, Romania’s former leftwing government abruptly changed its position in 2013 following a wave of unprecedented protest across the country"
What (American(?) people seem to not see, is that treaties are also a deft workaround for things your interest group does not seem to get accomplished within your own country, since a treaty supersedes local law. This is a route that has been in use un the EU for a few decades now, and the telecom part of the TTIP seems to be not only aimed at the EU, but in my opinion more directly at the FTC. The (US) telcos already lost big last year when the FTC reclassified internet access as common carrier http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/02/fcc-votes-for-net-neutrality-a-ban-on-paid-fast-lanes-and-title-ii/ So it is not very unusual to direct efforts at an international treaty where your nefarious conspiring will (hopefully) stay below the radar until it is too late, since consumer organizations are conspicuously absent from these negotiations.
Re:
Well there is a lot about creating common standards and regulations that otherwise interfere with exports and imports. So that makes trade easy.
The problem is that what happens is that manufacturers and other organisations see this as an opportunity to weaken those standards in stead of strengthening them. And (some) politicians and consumer organiasations see them as an opportunity to strengthen those standards, and otherwise inject a lot of their policies. So then you get an decade long negotation process where some win and some lose. But mostly the politicians and public servants lose, since they cannot handle the way the high priced lawyers hired by the industry are able to deal with the negotiations...
Rela Life example: Why not show ho this would go down?
Let's have an example, and see how this would have played out! (I do not pretend to know, but perhaps others or EU experts can tell)
The example is right here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/14/romanian-village-blocks-canadian-firm-mining-for-gold
A tomanian village and a Canadian mining opreation are in conflict over an open cast mine:
"Last July, the company filed a request for international arbitration to obtain compensation from Bucharest over the delays to the project.
Initially in favour of the mine, Romania’s former leftwing government abruptly changed its position in 2013 following a wave of unprecedented protest across the country"
Treaties also work to get things done inside one's own country
What (American(?) people seem to not see, is that treaties are also a deft workaround for things your interest group does not seem to get accomplished within your own country, since a treaty supersedes local law.
This is a route that has been in use un the EU for a few decades now, and the telecom part of the TTIP seems to be not only aimed at the EU, but in my opinion more directly at the FTC. The (US) telcos already lost big last year when the FTC reclassified internet access as common carrier http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/02/fcc-votes-for-net-neutrality-a-ban-on-paid-fast-lanes-and-title-ii/
So it is not very unusual to direct efforts at an international treaty where your nefarious conspiring will (hopefully) stay below the radar until it is too late, since consumer organizations are conspicuously absent from these negotiations.
The New Carl Hiaasen?
This story actually reads like a subplot in a Carl Hiaasen Novel....