SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
When TransCanada announced at the start of the year that it that it was demanding compensation under North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) rules for the Obama administration's decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, many observers saw it as a sign of things to come.
Indeed, critics of two pending trade deals--the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)--have already warned that other corporations could take similarly take advantage of the same mechanism to exert their power before private tribunals, demanding compensation for lost profits while supplanting democracy and trampling on workers' rights and environmental protections.
Now, a new report from the Sierra Club reveals just how many fossil fuel corporations the two deals would embolden to use these tribunals, thereby undermining U.S. commitments made under Paris climate agreement and efforts to keep fossil fuels in the ground.
Entitled "Climate Roadblocks: Looming Trade Deals Threaten Efforts to Keep Fossil Fuels in the Ground," the new report explains that the TTIP and TPP "would more than double the number of fossil fuel corporations with the power to challenge U.S policies in unaccountable ISDS tribunals," bestowing them to "100 foreign fossil fuel corporations that own more than 1,000 U.S. subsidiaries--more than the total number of fossil fuel firms that have such rights under all 56 existing U.S trade and investment pacts combined," the report states.
Described by Public Citizen as "Among the most dangerous but least known parts of today's 'trade' agreements," ISDS gives foreign corporations the right to "sue" the U.S. before a tribunal of three private lawyers for profits they say they would have earned had the climate protections not been in place.
The policies that the fossil fuel giants--who include "45 of the 50 private corporations historically responsible for the most climate-disrupting emissions"--could challenge through ISDS if the TPP and TTIP pass Congress include "restrictions on fracking, offshore drilling, federal fossil fuel leasing, and dirty pipelines. Indeed, such firms have investments in these four fossil fuel sectors across at least 36 U.S. states," the report notes.
Among the major findings as noted in the report:
"These trade deals would empower some of the world's largest polluters--including those fracking on our public lands and drilling off our shores--to use unaccountable tribunals to defend a model of fossil fuel dependency that spells climate crisis," said Ben Beachy, author of the report and senior policy advisor for the Sierra Club's Responsible Trade Program. "To keep fossil fuels in the ground, we cannot afford the new roadblocks posed by the TPP and TTIP."
The report concludes: "The fight for climate progress already faces enough obstacles without the additional roadblocks imposed by the TPP and TTIP. Replacing these toxic deals with a new climate-friendly model of trade is an essential component of the growing effort to keep fossil fuels in the ground."
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
When TransCanada announced at the start of the year that it that it was demanding compensation under North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) rules for the Obama administration's decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, many observers saw it as a sign of things to come.
Indeed, critics of two pending trade deals--the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)--have already warned that other corporations could take similarly take advantage of the same mechanism to exert their power before private tribunals, demanding compensation for lost profits while supplanting democracy and trampling on workers' rights and environmental protections.
Now, a new report from the Sierra Club reveals just how many fossil fuel corporations the two deals would embolden to use these tribunals, thereby undermining U.S. commitments made under Paris climate agreement and efforts to keep fossil fuels in the ground.
Entitled "Climate Roadblocks: Looming Trade Deals Threaten Efforts to Keep Fossil Fuels in the Ground," the new report explains that the TTIP and TPP "would more than double the number of fossil fuel corporations with the power to challenge U.S policies in unaccountable ISDS tribunals," bestowing them to "100 foreign fossil fuel corporations that own more than 1,000 U.S. subsidiaries--more than the total number of fossil fuel firms that have such rights under all 56 existing U.S trade and investment pacts combined," the report states.
Described by Public Citizen as "Among the most dangerous but least known parts of today's 'trade' agreements," ISDS gives foreign corporations the right to "sue" the U.S. before a tribunal of three private lawyers for profits they say they would have earned had the climate protections not been in place.
The policies that the fossil fuel giants--who include "45 of the 50 private corporations historically responsible for the most climate-disrupting emissions"--could challenge through ISDS if the TPP and TTIP pass Congress include "restrictions on fracking, offshore drilling, federal fossil fuel leasing, and dirty pipelines. Indeed, such firms have investments in these four fossil fuel sectors across at least 36 U.S. states," the report notes.
Among the major findings as noted in the report:
"These trade deals would empower some of the world's largest polluters--including those fracking on our public lands and drilling off our shores--to use unaccountable tribunals to defend a model of fossil fuel dependency that spells climate crisis," said Ben Beachy, author of the report and senior policy advisor for the Sierra Club's Responsible Trade Program. "To keep fossil fuels in the ground, we cannot afford the new roadblocks posed by the TPP and TTIP."
The report concludes: "The fight for climate progress already faces enough obstacles without the additional roadblocks imposed by the TPP and TTIP. Replacing these toxic deals with a new climate-friendly model of trade is an essential component of the growing effort to keep fossil fuels in the ground."
When TransCanada announced at the start of the year that it that it was demanding compensation under North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) rules for the Obama administration's decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, many observers saw it as a sign of things to come.
Indeed, critics of two pending trade deals--the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)--have already warned that other corporations could take similarly take advantage of the same mechanism to exert their power before private tribunals, demanding compensation for lost profits while supplanting democracy and trampling on workers' rights and environmental protections.
Now, a new report from the Sierra Club reveals just how many fossil fuel corporations the two deals would embolden to use these tribunals, thereby undermining U.S. commitments made under Paris climate agreement and efforts to keep fossil fuels in the ground.
Entitled "Climate Roadblocks: Looming Trade Deals Threaten Efforts to Keep Fossil Fuels in the Ground," the new report explains that the TTIP and TPP "would more than double the number of fossil fuel corporations with the power to challenge U.S policies in unaccountable ISDS tribunals," bestowing them to "100 foreign fossil fuel corporations that own more than 1,000 U.S. subsidiaries--more than the total number of fossil fuel firms that have such rights under all 56 existing U.S trade and investment pacts combined," the report states.
Described by Public Citizen as "Among the most dangerous but least known parts of today's 'trade' agreements," ISDS gives foreign corporations the right to "sue" the U.S. before a tribunal of three private lawyers for profits they say they would have earned had the climate protections not been in place.
The policies that the fossil fuel giants--who include "45 of the 50 private corporations historically responsible for the most climate-disrupting emissions"--could challenge through ISDS if the TPP and TTIP pass Congress include "restrictions on fracking, offshore drilling, federal fossil fuel leasing, and dirty pipelines. Indeed, such firms have investments in these four fossil fuel sectors across at least 36 U.S. states," the report notes.
Among the major findings as noted in the report:
"These trade deals would empower some of the world's largest polluters--including those fracking on our public lands and drilling off our shores--to use unaccountable tribunals to defend a model of fossil fuel dependency that spells climate crisis," said Ben Beachy, author of the report and senior policy advisor for the Sierra Club's Responsible Trade Program. "To keep fossil fuels in the ground, we cannot afford the new roadblocks posed by the TPP and TTIP."
The report concludes: "The fight for climate progress already faces enough obstacles without the additional roadblocks imposed by the TPP and TTIP. Replacing these toxic deals with a new climate-friendly model of trade is an essential component of the growing effort to keep fossil fuels in the ground."