Evidence receipt / evaluation
Published · transcript-backedDoug Irwin: evaluation
29 Nov 2017 Conversations with Tyler Doug Irwin on US Trade Policy
“The reason why developing countries want it is because it’s a way of ensuring that they can commit themselves to treating foreign investors fairly.”
Source trail
Everything needed to verify it.
- Speaker
- Doug Irwin
- Attribution
- Verified speaker
- Claim type
- evaluation
- Recorded
- 29 Nov 2017
- Publisher
- Conversations with Tyler
- Episode
- Doug Irwin on US Trade Policy
Transcript context
…Many recent, and even some older, trade agreements have embodied in them investor arbitration panels, sometimes called ISDS or investor-state dispute settlement. These panels, as you know, sometimes have the ability to override national laws or the court decisions of a national government. The possible conflicts between these panels and what some would say is democracy or some would say is constitutionalism — (a) to what extent does that worry you? And (b), in general, do you want to see ISDS in the trade agreements we’re writing or do you feel it’s somehow gone too far? Personally, I wouldn’t want them in. They distract from, I think, what is the main purpose of these trade agreements, which is to reduce trade barriers and regulatory barriers. So I’m not particularly happy that they’re in there. But I do think, on the other side, the progressive Left if you will, there’s a lot of ISDS horror stories about how it undermines democracy, it’s a terrible thing, and the US is foisting this on the international system, and other countries don’t want it. But, in fact, it turns out a lot of developing countries insist that this is in. Mexico just recently asked for this in, I believe, a new agreement with the EU or Canada. I can’t recall where I read it. The reason why developing countries want it is because it’s a way of ensuring that they can commit themselves to treating foreign investors fairly. They want to attract foreign investment, and they maybe don’t necessarily want ISDS, but they’re willing to go in for it. They ask for it because it’s a commitment device. Let’s see, I was reading also Canada and the EU, I think, their recent CETA, their agreement, also has ISDS. Once again, it’s not something the US was pushing. Many in Europe are very much opposed to these things, but it got in there for various reasons. Take a trade agreement such as TPP with or without the United States. What percentage of the gains from TPP do you think are coming from more foreign direct investment? And what percentage of the gains do you think are coming from more trade in the narrower sense of the term?…
Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.