Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday August 29 2016, @01:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the not-surrendering-to-corporations-for-now dept.

Common Dreams reports

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said [August 25] that the U.S. Senate will not vote on the 12-nation, corporate-friendly Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) this year, buoying progressive hopes that the trade deal will never come to fruition.

[...] McConnell told a Kentucky State Farm Bureau breakfast in Louisville that the agreement, "which has some serious flaws, will not be acted upon this year".

Common Dreams also reports

Germany's Vice Chancellor and Economic Minister said that the controversial Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) has "de facto failed", admitting that negotiations between the U.S. and E.U. have completely stalled.

"Negotiations with the U.S. have de facto failed because, of course, as Europeans, we couldn't allow ourselves to submit to American demands", Sigmar Gabriel told the German news station ZDF [1][2] in an interview that will air at 7pm German time [August 28], according to Der Spiegel. [1]

"Everything has stalled", Gabriel said.

[1] In German [2] Content behind scripts

Reported by BBC, in English.

In 14 rounds of talks, the two sides had not agreed on a single common chapter out of 27 being discussed, Mr Gabriel said. "In my opinion the negotiations with the United States have de facto failed, even though nobody is really admitting it," said Mr Gabriel.

He suggested Washington was angry about a deal the EU struck with Canada, because it contained elements the US does not want to see in the TTIP.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by dry on Wednesday August 31 2016, @02:25AM

    by dry (223) on Wednesday August 31 2016, @02:25AM (#395556) Journal

    You're assuming that the 34%/66% is in seats, it can just as easy be in votes, with one party getting 34% of the vote and the other 66% of votes split between the other parties.
    And a no-confidence vote doesn't always mean another election as sometimes the opposition gets a chance to form government, which was the plan the other year, except the PM prorogued Parliament before the vote.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 31 2016, @08:29AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 31 2016, @08:29AM (#395620)

    Yes, but if those 34% cant get at least some of the 66% to agree with their legislation, none of it will get anywhere.

    Yes the 66% get a chance to form a government, thats the point. If they can agree on a platform that their voters will support good. If not voters still get to try again, but this time less people will vote for the uncompromising waste of time 34%.
    You do realise that the 34% don't just get to 'form a government' because they got the biggest number, they still have to get a majority of the parliament to agree to let them for the government in the first place. They have to have confidence to lose in the first place, but once they step out of line it's game over for them. You can't get a 34% dictatorship, unless another 16% also want it and then it's not a dictatorship anymore but a democracy.

    • (Score: 2) by dry on Thursday September 01 2016, @12:15AM

      by dry (223) on Thursday September 01 2016, @12:15AM (#395948) Journal

      Yes, if a party has less then 50+% of seats, they have to work with at least one other party to pass legislation and there is usually trade offs and things are good unless the party is very good at bullshitting the public so the public blames the other parties for calling a non-confidence vote.
      There is still the problem where the party gets 51% of seats with 34% or less of the the votes.