Karen
@karenneemcnally.bsky.social
My family, furry & otherwise, are my world ❤️ #XDissenter
Reposted by Karen
If a new Govt tried to rule out compensation or dismantle these zones, it could face massive legal and financial challenges. ISDS is embedded in the CPTPP deals post-Brexit. x.com/EuropeanPowe...
x.com
May 12, 2025 at 2:49 PM
If a new Govt tried to rule out compensation or dismantle these zones, it could face massive legal and financial challenges. ISDS is embedded in the CPTPP deals post-Brexit. x.com/EuropeanPowe...
Reposted by Karen
As I’ve mentioned before, ISDS allows corporations to sue governments in secretive arbitration courts for billions if they believe their investments are harmed by policy changes.
The LCIA, while more transparent, still prioritises contractual obligations.
The LCIA, while more transparent, still prioritises contractual obligations.
May 12, 2025 at 2:49 PM
As I’ve mentioned before, ISDS allows corporations to sue governments in secretive arbitration courts for billions if they believe their investments are harmed by policy changes.
The LCIA, while more transparent, still prioritises contractual obligations.
The LCIA, while more transparent, still prioritises contractual obligations.
Reposted by Karen
However, there are significant hurdles. The 25-year contracts tied to these zones are legally binding, and many likely include compensation clauses or dispute resolution mechanisms like Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) or London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA).
May 12, 2025 at 2:49 PM
However, there are significant hurdles. The 25-year contracts tied to these zones are legally binding, and many likely include compensation clauses or dispute resolution mechanisms like Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) or London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA).
Reposted by Karen
This could be framed as a defense of sovereignty, workers’ rights, and environmental standards, especially given the involvement of firms like BlackRock, which I’ve previously criticised for their shareholder-first approach and financialisation of public assets (e.g., green spaces).
May 12, 2025 at 2:49 PM
This could be framed as a defense of sovereignty, workers’ rights, and environmental standards, especially given the involvement of firms like BlackRock, which I’ve previously criticised for their shareholder-first approach and financialisation of public assets (e.g., green spaces).
Reposted by Karen
A left-wing government could, in theory, rewrite the regulations governing Freeports and SEZs on moral grounds, arguing that they were established undemocratically and prioritise corporate profits over the public good.
May 12, 2025 at 2:49 PM
A left-wing government could, in theory, rewrite the regulations governing Freeports and SEZs on moral grounds, arguing that they were established undemocratically and prioritise corporate profits over the public good.
Reposted by Karen
There absolutely is an undemocratic side of how Freeports and SEZs have been set up—clandestine deals between corporations and councils often bypass public scrutiny, and that’s a major issue. Secondary legislation is the main culprit here.
May 12, 2025 at 2:49 PM
There absolutely is an undemocratic side of how Freeports and SEZs have been set up—clandestine deals between corporations and councils often bypass public scrutiny, and that’s a major issue. Secondary legislation is the main culprit here.
Reposted by Karen
Reposted by Karen
What do you think happens when a company is allowed to 'self-regulate' inside a designated free zone?
For every action there is and equal and opposite reaction.
For every action there is and equal and opposite reaction.
February 16, 2025 at 10:22 AM
What do you think happens when a company is allowed to 'self-regulate' inside a designated free zone?
For every action there is and equal and opposite reaction.
For every action there is and equal and opposite reaction.