Letter: Gung-ho trading
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Diane Coyle (Business, 22 January) tries to convince us that the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) is a benign instrument. Such wishful support for this initiative by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), together with tacit support for the World Trade Organisation's (WTO) gung-ho assault on the real cultural concerns of sovereign governments and, more importantly, those of their peoples, takes us back a hundred years.
Sure, let's open up markets and, by so doing, give indigenous peoples a conduit to the global forum. But where do worker's rights, obligations to child health and education, diligent use of fertilisers and pesticides and other broadly-supported UN initiatives fit in here? Silence.
The refusal of the WTO to countenance linking into the UN system and the determination of the OECD to implement its programmes despite the complaints of non-members makes the article partial, to say the least.
DAVID WARDROP
London SW6
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments