[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Buster

Of course. That's what the gap between negotiations and ratification is intended to address. I think it should be a good discussion.

However, I think many of the critics of the deal forget what a trade deal is all about.

It is designed to reduce barriers to other markets, at the same time reducing barriers in our own. It can't -by definition- be good for everyone on our side, otherwise there would be no need to for an agreement. In general, however, most of Canada's protected industries are protected with a net cost to the Canadian consumer. Milk is an excellent example of this.

So generally with trade deals, you have a highly vocal minority, with entrenched and rent-seeking interests who conduct a fear mongering campaign about specific details. The silent majority, however, will likely benefit from the arrangement, when everything is netted out.

Well if the trade deal is about better benefits for these countries, sure it sounds good but this seems to be a deal brokered by lobbyists for the benefit of world corporations where their agenda is for their benefit, not the countries involved.

Critics note that under the TPP, corporations will be empowered to file lawsuits against governments to block laws that could impair future profits. The lawsuits would fall under special tribunals set up by the World Bank.
Many of the former clients of the trade officials now negotiating these agreements stand to gain immensely.

https://theintercept.com/2015/04/16/tpp-revolving-door/

Backers of the emerging trade accord, which is supported by a wide variety of business groups and favored by most Republicans, say that it is in line with previous agreements that contain similar provisions. But critics, including many Democrats in Congress, argue that the planned deal widens the opening for multinationals to sue in the United States and elsewhere, giving greater priority to protecting corporate interests than promoting free trade and competition that benefits consumers.