Global

The text of the 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement was publicly released late last week, prompting intense scrutiny as stakeholders attempt to understand the deal’s implications, both for TPP countries themselves as well as for the global economy.

The military is not just a prolific user of oil, it is one of the central pillars of the global fossil-fuel economy. Today whether it is in the Middle East, the Gulf, or the Pacific, modern-day military deployment is about controlling oil-rich regions and defending the key shipping supply routes that carry half the world’s oil and sustain our consumer economy. 

“The TPP is an act of climate denial,” said Jason Kowalski, the U.S. policy director at 350.org.

“It denies the scientific imperative to leave fossil fuels in the ground by granting corporations incredible powers over the sovereign right of countries to fight climate change on their own.”

At issue is the investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism included in the trade deal. ISDS’s allow foreign investors to use a secret tribunal to launch a lawsuit if they believe government actionsmight affect their future profits.

Let’s be clear about the just-released, negotiated-in-secret Trans-Pacific Partnership deal. Despite how it’s being referred to by journalists, officialsand academics, as Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz and economist Adam Hersh have noted, it is definitely not a “free-trade” agreement. It’s much more than that.

What are Dr. Stiglitz and others arguing, and why does it matter? Simply put, calling the TPP a free-trade agreement overplays its benefits, plays down its problematic aspects and fundamentally misunderstands what the deal is actually about.

Suncor Refinery outside of Fort McMurray with the Syncrude Refinery visible in the background. Photo by Colin O'Connor, Greenpeace.

Alberta and its oil sands needs to be the focus of the Trudeau government's climate action if it is serious about helping limit dangerous planetary warming to two degrees this century, warned a national group of environmental thinkers.

(Editors: Check out this video on the TPP)

View lecture at https://youtu.be/Y-aaZN67y-c  

[Webpage editor's note: A good summary of the history of this project.] 

After seven years of acrimonious court battles, profligate spending and hardball political lobbying, the Keystone XL pipeline is dead. U.S. President Barack Obama rejected the proposal, as most suspected he would.

"Several years ago, the State Department began a review process for the proposed construction of a pipeline that would carry Canadian crude oil through our heartland to ports in the Gulf of Mexico and out into the world market," said Obama in a press conference on Friday November 6.

The Obama administration has rejected TransCanada's application to build the Keystone XL pipeline, capping a seven-year saga that became an environmental flashpoint in both Canada and the U.S.

Speaking from the White House on Friday, Obama said Keystone "will not serve the national interests of the United States." 

Obama said the State Department rejected the proposed pipeline, saying it would not make a meaningful long-term contribution to the U.S. economy.

The U.S. president said he has informed Justin Trudeau of the decision.