And we drop the precautionary principle on issues where we have traditionally said things are not permitted until they can be shown to be beneficial. The CPTPP way is for anything to be permitted until it is shown to cause harm.
That is good. We return to the standard English way, everything that is not illegal is legal. Common Law, not Roman.
Excellent.
This, of course, is ‘Tater getting it wrong:
Perhaps worst of all, we submit ourselves to secret courts that let companies sue our government for having such things as environmental protections and labour standards that those companies can claim cause them a loss of profits, meaning they can demand compensation. And all that will happen in courts that we cannot challenge, which was the great Brexit paranoia.
No. What arbitration does is allow someone to sue a government for breach of contract in a court that is not controlled by the government being sued. And that’s all it does.
It doesn’t say the company will win, nor the government. It just provides a neutral forum for the case to be heard – that’s all ISDS is.
Why would the ‘Tater be against the law?
I see the usual suspects are complaining that the EU is a bigger market without bothering to compare the costs of entry for each. As far as I’m aware we haven’t ceded sovereignty to an unelected body on entry to CPTPP and that we can leave anytime we like without great drama.
The more I hear about CPTPP, the more I like it.
Captain Chips wants a world in which the government cannot be sued at all.
@ BiFR
I doubt that – there is a stream of tendentious or worse lawsuits from Murphy’s co-conspirators suing the UK government to prevent it governing. What he appears to want is that capitalists should have the same property rights as Jews in Hitler’s Germany (he hasn’t yet, to my knowledge, proposed gulgs or concentration camps).
There is no fucking precautionary principle – the very idea is nonsense on stilts.
Anyhoo: “everything that is not illegal is legal. Common Law, not Roman.”
Where do people get this idea about Roman Law? Scots Law is mainly Roman Law and yet it too holds to “everything that is not illegal is legal”.
I’m with Dearieme on the Romans being misnamed. What’s hilarious about this (among many things) is that the ‘precautionary principle’ is about as traditional as a Filofax. It comes directly from the 80s. He’s like a man without a sense of time.
And we drop the precautionary principle on issues where we have traditionally said things are not permitted until they can be shown to be beneficial.
Good – now show that the precautionary principle is beneficial.
Is it me, or is “CPTPP” not simply the sound a dog/cat/kid makes when you fed them something they don’t like? (surprised “yuck!”face optional)?
“And we drop the precautionary principle on issues where we have traditionally said things are not permitted until they can be shown to be beneficial.”
Its funny, the precautionary principle didn’t seem to apply to all the covid measures or the vaccines………
He doesn’t know what the precautionary principle is.
It’s is ‘not permitted until you prove it does no harm’.
Not ‘until you show it is beneficial’.
I imagine his life must be horrible – too much self-importance to be down here with us common rabble, not enough capability to hang with the elites.
Bloke in the Fourth Reich said:
“Captain Chips wants a world in which the government cannot be sued at all.”
Oh, I’m sure he’s quite happy with his chum Jolyon suing the government.