General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFood and TPP: "Are You Sure You Want to Eat That?"
<snip>
But not all nations have the same food safety standards as ours, and if the controversial trade deal known as the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) goes into effect, some of the food in our stores may not be safe to eat.
The TPP puts the interests of Big Food ahead of yours and mine. Thats because it wasnt negotiated in the publics interest. The TPP is instead intended to allow corporations to expand into new markets and make more money. If passed, it will overwhelm already overtaxed border inspectors, flood our food system with potentially unsafe imports and even empower other countries to challenge our common sense food safety protections as illegal trade barriers.
Suspicious Imports
Food & Water Watch recently released new data on the volume of meat and poultry imports rejected at the border by USDA food safety inspectors. We found that U.S. border inspectors rejected nearly 30,000 shipments, totaling more than 69 million pounds of imported food from other nations in the 18 months between January 1, 2015 and June 10, 2016. Nearly 64 million pounds of this meat, poultry, catfish and egg products were rejected for serious food safety violations.
Much of the rejected food came from nations that are a part of the TPP. Even more disturbingthe tainted shipments were stopped by a mere 70 USDA inspectorsan inadequate number for tackling our current volume of food imports, let alone the additional shipments that the TPP would encourage.
Currently, many food imports, particularly seafood from Vietnam and Malaysia, are rejected because they contain residues of drugs banned in U.S. food production. Last Friday we received word that food safety inspectors had also stopped over 40,000 pounds of catfish products from being imported into the U.S. from Vietnam. The shipment tested positive for malachite green, a veterinary drug banned for use in food animals in the U.S. because it is potentially carcinogenic. Vietnam, another TPP member country, is notorious for raising seafood in farms with chemicals and antibiotics prohibited in the United States.
Unraveling Our Food Safety Net
It doesnt make sense. The U.S. has worked hard to create a regulatory system that protects us from getting sick from the food we eat. Why undermine that food safety net with imported fish tainted with carcinogenic chemicals and allergens? But the TPP empowers foreign governments to challenge the very policies that prevent us from eating tainted imported foods. If the TPP goes into effect, Vietnam could have sued the United States over our ban on malachite green and for rejecting last weeks shipment; even worse, it might have prevailed.
Similarly, the TPP allows exporters to challenge the authority of the border inspectors that detain potentially unsafe shipments for further examination or laboratory testing. According to our nations trade ambassador, the TPP would let exporters intervene when food is stopped by border inspectors and clear up the problem and allow shipments to move forward. This really just means that more unsafe food could enter the U.S. food supply as exporters second-guess decisions to further test their products
<snip>
http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/news/are-you-sure-you-want-eat
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)TPP is an opportunity for America to launch a race to the top, encouraging other countries to move toward our higher standards. TPP will in no way weaken our food safety laws or regulations. Instead, the agreement is an important tool to help improve food safety systems in other countries.
TPP allows the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S. Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to continue to effectively provide Americans with one of the safest food supplies in the world, including by working to better align food safety systems in other countries with our own.
TPP helps improve food safety systems in countries we trade with by better aligning their standards with U.S. safety and regulatory systems. For example, Vietnam is already developing stronger food safety regulations in preparation for TPP.
Learn more about how TPP ensures food safety: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Ensuring-Food-Safety-Fact-Sheet.pdf
Link: https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership/frequently-asked-questions-on-the-trans-pacific-partnership-eddc8d87ac73#.19lt2r4zv
Read the entire, non-secret Trans-Pacific Partnership yourself at: https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership
msongs
(67,420 posts)yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)as soon as they put it online - like the "super secret TPP."
villager
(26,001 posts)Given the relationship of our benighted corporations to "transparency..."
snot
(10,530 posts)This is basically like the EU: we can pass laws protecting our food safety and environment, regulating banksters, etc., but if our laws conflict with this treaty written by and for big corporations, any disputes will NOT necessarily be decided by US judges or other governmental representatives directly or indirectly answerable to the people, but by panelists selected per processes defined by and for big corporations.
But more fundamentally, once a treaty is adopted, it becomes part of national law and supersedes other national laws to the extent of any conflict.
So yes, if the food, environmental, labor, and other standards in the TPP are HIGHER than a nation's local law, the higher standards will apply and may help the people who live there. If, however, they are LOWER, then the nation or its citizens will have no meaningful power to enforce their higher standards against a foreign company wanting to operate according to the lower standards of the TPP.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)I don't think so.
Disputes between countries are settled in US courts? Never!
https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership/dispute-settlement-a5b4569a9a55#.6i4efmqz0
snot
(10,530 posts)which I think is what you're saying, unless you're being sarcastic?
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)they never are.
You proposed an alternative to the common Dispute Resolution process no country would ever agree to.
Elwood P Dowd
(11,443 posts)They spend a few years at USTR pushing crap like TPP, and then they go back to places like Citigroup and make millions.