More transparency needed on the provisions of TPP

THE passage of a US Senate bill proposing to give US President Barack Obama his Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) has cheered Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) proponents no end. Yet despite the current optimism, it is obvious that many obstacles - both in the United States and among its partners - remain. The TPA bill - a resolution that would limit the American legislature to a yes-or-no vote (and without the ability to amend it) - has yet to pass the US House of Representatives, where opposition remains fierce.

On top of that, a grassroots movement is gearing up to do battle. Last week, 250 US technology companies signed a petition demanding transparency about the deal. Specifically, they want changes to the broad regulatory clauses, seen in leaked documents. The IT community there is also incensed at the idea that the TPP would make it a crime to reveal corporate wrongdoing using a computer. Further, the firms are angry at the prospect of the TPP's investor dispute settlement arrangement, which, it is claimed, would foist an international legal system to override national sovereignty. This particular provision is also being opposed by several partners to the talks as well.

Certainly, the big international tech companies such as Apple, Google and Facebook are not signatories to this petition. But then Apple and some of the others are members of Mr Obama's Trade Advisory Committee (which advises the Oval Office on matters relating to industry). They, presumably, have access to the current text of the negotiating document and are, perhaps, not concerned by such provisions.