Search Result(s)

The UK's health is threatened by the push to privatize it's National Health Service. Here is what must be done to preserve it.

The reason why the UK's NHS is vulnerable is the fact that they signed onto the WTO GATS agreement, and also SELL commercial health insurance in the UK, which opens up a Pandora's box of problems. These commitments will end when the UK leaves the EU. That change will trigger demands for compensation for any perceived loss in "future expected earnings". Additionally, re-joining the WTO may trigger similar demands from other WTO Members. This should be obvious to anybody who is familiar with the GATS and WTO negotiations. So its quite strange that there has been nothing about it in the media.

Who traded who what in the GATS?

Its clear to me that neither Americans nor Britons have even the foggiest idea of what the GATS is or even that it exists. But it does and its one of the main reasons why everything is so broken.

Britons and (we) Americans need to know something. We have frustrated "expectancies" but increasingly, thanks to GATS, the proposed UK-US FTA, TISA and others, not any kind of real property interest in our nation's futures.

These agreements push our rights out of our future. They attempt to irreversibly gut public services like the UK's NHS and will most certainly totally block the proposed "Medicare For All" as well as procurement proposals that employ our nations workers if international temping firms bid on those jobs and win. So they will outsource millions of now stable jobs, turning them into entitlements of foreign firms to do, if they are cheaper. They replace legal immigration with temporary subcontracting and its likely that because our countries will be overwhelmed by corporate temporary migration, (GATS Mode 4) developed nations may turn against the one part of it we can control, permanent migration. So this corporate capture of migration will push out refugees and likely also temp workers possibility of permanent migration. It will also displace millions of workers in dozens of high skill service sectors, starting with professionals and fields like IT, nursing, teaching, engineering, etc, and then working its way downward, and undercut the wages of the remaining workers across the board.

What is "Services Liberalization", and what does it mean for our way of life?

Bluntly, as they describe it, the high cost of labor in the developed countries is acting like a huge weight around corporations necks, forcing capital to invest in developing countries, not in us. What is really happening is the system has become less and less dependent on any one workforce. Increased profits are motivated by both greed and increased competition for jobs.

WTO Secretariat. Health and social services: background note by the Secretariat S/C/W/50, 18 September, 1998 (98-3558)

“The hospital sector in many counties . . . is made up of government-owned and privately-owned entities which BOTH operate on a commercial basis, charging the patient or his insurance for the treatment provided. Supplementary subsidies may be granted for social, regional, and similar policy purposes. It seems unrealistic in such cases to argue for continued application of Article I:3, and/or maintain that no competitive relationship exists between the two groups of suppliers of services.” In other words healthcare "public options" like the UK's NHS must be subject to WTO globalization rules such as GATS' rules on services liberalization and competition.

Carrying a Good Joke Too Far: TRIPS and Treaties of Adhesion

"A small, unindustrialized country enters into an agreement with a significantly larger, more industrialized country. The agreement must be signed before the small country is permitted to join an exclusive, wealth- generating organization. The small country is facing an epidemic of epic proportions. Already, twenty-two million of its citizens have died as a result of a deadly virus and over thirty million of its citizens are infected. Almost three million die every year. Thirteen million children are orphaned; 15,000 new people acquire the virus every day. The average fifteen-year-old citizen has more than a fifty percent chance of dying of the virus and is more likely to die of the virus than all other causes combined. Finally, while the virus attacks indiscriminately, it impacts the country's economic driving force-its farmers, teachers, blue-collar workers, young adults, and parents -particularly hard. The disease is treatable, but at a cost well out of reach of the country's citizens. The country attempts to address this crisis by implementing two methods, parallel importation and compulsory licensing, which will drastically reduce prices and ensure the supply of drugs at affordable prices. Upon enactment, the larger industrialized country demands that the smaller country halt implementation because the methods violate its obligations under the agreement." (Sound familiar? It should.)

In speech in UK in June 2016 WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo told Britons they are in for a major ordeal by forcing themselves to go through the arduous re-accession to the trade body, but the Britons pretend he never said this.

Here he is talking about services, for example, the NHS, which has violated WTO rules for 25 years, (Like the US the UK is supposed to phase out non-conforming measures and replace them with market based measures). and one doesn't have to read through the lines much. Notice also that he starts the speech off by talking about comparative advantage.. ----cut here------ "And there could be an impact on services trade as well. In addition, the UK would also need to re-establish its terms of trade within the WTO. The UK, as an individual country, would of course remain a WTO member, but it would not have defined terms in the WTO for its trade in goods and services. It only has these commitments as an EU member. Key aspects of the EU’s terms of trade could not simply be cut and pasted for the UK. Therefore important elements would need to be negotiated". "There is no precedent for this — even the process for conducting these negotiations is unclear at this stage".

2016 Bridges Article "G-7 Leaders Warn of "Brexit" Risks to Trade, Investment Ahead of June Vote"

I'm trying to help readers learn how to read between the lines here. Come on, you all can't be that naive. You have to teach yourself to think like an oligarch. Its not about you and your suffering, its about them and their money, their investments. The addiction to "Growth" is cited but in a way that's a cover up. What they want is to kill the hope that sprung up in the last century for a better tomorrow. Kill it and nail a stake into its heart. But they can't just say that. .

Mind the GATS! (Robert Newman, The Guardian, 2000)

"Leaked WTO documents show them currently working out a list of what will be acceptable as a "legitimate" government objective for any regulation of services under GATS. That of "safeguarding the public interest" has already been rejected. If GATS goes ahead, warns economist Susan George, "then Europe can kiss goodbye its public health services". But even though that's just the start of the disaster, there has been no parliamentary debate or news coverage about GATS. (It's way too important for that.) The British government's official line is that there's nothing to worry about anyway. The DTI claims GATS won't apply to the NHS or education here because "non-commercial services" are exempt from the fiat . But GATS says that if you've got just one tiny part of a public service that's even an iddy-biddy-bit commercial then THE WHOLE THING IS UP FOR GRABS."

Like with healthcare, Brexit's influence on higher education and public colleges and universities in the UK is quite uncertain at best, because of an intentionally ambiguous WTO definition of what can be considered "public".

See the "governmental authority exclusion", "GATS Article I:3" and "Annex on Financial Services" keywords for more on this huge gotcha which also blocks proposals for free college and Medicare for All in the US (and threatens to dismantle the US's Medicare and Social Security unless they remain restricted to the retired only). How will these changes impact social mobility in the UK?