In what ways is the Simultaneous Policy (Simpol) different to conventional methods of international treaty-making?
There are three main differences: Firstly, traditional international treaty-making assumes that, once a treaty is agreed, participating nations are completely free to implement its provisions. In the current competitive environment, however, when governments return from a Treaty Summit, they run up against the problem of competitiveness. With respect to the Kyoto Protocol on climate chane, for example, the green taxes needed to reduce emissions risk making the industries of nations implementing such taxes uncompetitive thus risking jobs (and votes) being lost. Consequently, the fear of uncompetitiveness remains and those taxes inevitably get watered down and the full provisions of the protocol then remain unfulfilled. This is why even the very modest internationally agreed targets for reducing emissions (and targets in other treaties) are continually being missed. Instead, Simpol would perhaps re-regulate global capital and transnational corporations (TNCs) thus eliminating the forces
