Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is Public Debate of Trade Agreements Against the Public Interest?

Posted by timothy on from the you-can-discuss-it-afterwards dept.

onproton writes The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), currently being negotiated in secret, has been subject to numerous draft leaks that indicate these talks are potentially harmful to everything from public health to internet freedom. So why isn't the public involved, and why are the terms of the agreement being debated behind closed doors? According to New Zealand's current Trade Minister, Tim Groser, full disclosure of what is being discussed would likely lead to "public debate on an ill-informed basis before the deal has been done." Leaving one to question how revealing the full context and scope of the agreement talks would lead to an increase in misinformation rather than clarity.

3 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. yeah ... Are You Kidding? by Are+You+Kidding · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So no public debate based on no disclosure is better than ill-informed debate based on full disclosure? He might as well have said that as a form of government, dictatorship is superior to democracy.

    1. Re:yeah ... Are You Kidding? by Livius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He might as well have said that as a form of government, dictatorship is superior to democracy.

      I think he did.

    2. Re:yeah ... Are You Kidding? by wierd_w · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More than that-- if you read between the lines:

      For democracy to work, the public at large must be well educated, so that they can make sound, well informed votes in the governance process.

      By making a public statement of this nature, the rep from NZ has basically stated, (implicitly), that his citizenry is not educated enough to participate in a democratic government. He is basically saying that education in NZ is a failure, and that the citizenry cant be trusted to make sound judgments.

      If that same explanation is then carried by other political figures in other countries, it means the reps from those other countries have the same exact problems.

      Rather than reform education to actually fix the problem, they instead have elected to usurp government, and destroy the foundational core of the democratic process itself.

      Educating the public so that they can make sound and valid judgments and criticisms takes too long and is too hard for these supposedly skilled and benevolent representatives to ensure, apparently.

      Everything about this statement indicates that the rep in question has no business in office, as he is not representing his citizenry, (brazenly so in fact), and is NOT acting in their best interests, by working behind their backs in secret, instead of improving conditions and overall base education to a level where they can then participate publicly.

      For the people of NZ, your representative basically just said you are too fucking stupid to be trusted with governing yourselves. He has insulted you to your faces. Do something about him.