What do you think about the 11-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement that went into effect on Dec 30, without the U.S.?

I don't understand why, when this kind of agreement affects the taxpayer/consumer so greatly, it's not decided publicly, but negotiated in secret.

Why weren't we consulted?

I can understand why the US has pulled out of TPP. It is one sided and stacked in favour of Japans interests. (As it has been for years).

Japan has a 15 year grace period to lower tariffs on imported beef, and even at the end of 15 years there is still a 9% tariff.

Yet Japan expects other countries in TPP to remove tariffs with immediate effect.

Any institution, partnerships, organisations, trade agreement s etc. etc. where there are exceptions to the rule, and "special cases" just becomes more problematic in the future.

Ex_Res,

Couldn't have said better myself. Tarrifs are usually put in place to protect the local produce. However, many products imported do not have an equivalent produced like many types of cheeses. Other items that are not in competition should be tarriff free whether a trade agreement or not. How about rice like Basmati and Jasmine which is not grown in Japan. Would they be tarriff free ?

Without the U.S. it's not really Trans-Pacific, is it?

I honestly don't know enough about it, but I do like the idea that you have a trade agreement in which things like IP are protected to an extent that is greater than any other trade agreement to date.

I also think it offers an alternative to RCEP, if that goes forward and it helps to bring South American countries and Asian/ASEAN countries into closer contact which is a positive in general.

I don't think, speaking strictly in terms of economics, it will do anything much positive for developed economies.

The figures I have seen for a positive impact on the Australian economy is something like 1% added to GDP. A drop in the bucket in other words. Vietnam as predicted probably stands to gain the most.

If it is to grow, you need a couple heavy hitters to get onboard in each region, like Indonesia in ASEAN and Brazil in South America.

Without the U.S. it's not really Trans-Pacific, is it?

America should get back on-board for the IP provisions alone. That benefits America enormously.

And while America not gain a great deal in terms of GDP based on current TPP membership, they aren't projected to lose GDP either and the TPP is likely to force a realignment in global trade patterns which could benefit the U.S more than originally predicted, especially if other players get on board, which they are more likely to do with the U.S as a player, particularly the South Americans.

@Bertie - Of course none of us were consulted. These treaties serve the purpose of further enriching the rich and powerful and those connected to the political class. They are not to help or improve the life of the average citizen.

In the U.S. members of congress were not allowed to take out the TPP or take in anything that could record (i.e. cell phone or camera) the documents.

The illusion that we have any say in governance or how the world is run has long ago been shattered