Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership

(asked on 18th September 2023) - View Source

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, whether her Department sought a side letter similar to those agreed with the Governments of Australia and New Zealand to disapply investor–state dispute settlement provisions under the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership during accession negotiations.


Answered by
Nigel Huddleston Portrait
Nigel Huddleston
Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
This question was answered on 19th October 2023

In seeking accession to CPTPP, the UK committed to the existing standards of this agreement, including its provisions on investor protections backed by a modern and transparent investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism. These features balance the need to protect UK investors accessing and operating in CPTPP markets and to ensure that the Government can regulate in the public interest. In light of our investment relationship with Australia and New Zealand, we agreed side letters confirming that it was not necessary to have ISDS provisions between our countries in CPTPP.

Reticulating Splines