AK and ÖGB had a full house on Wednesday evening, when they presented a study and hosted a discussion around a hotly debated topic: The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement CETA and its potential benefit for EU citizens. A high-profile panel discussed the AK Study on the economic effects and the political implications of the agreement. Minor economic effects were confronted with massive concerns on the side of the trade unions. The Commission was not willing to listen to reason.

On Wednesday, 7thSeptember, the new Study by the Austrian Research Foundation for International Development (ÖFSE) was presented and discussed at an event hosted by AK EUROPA, the Brussels Office of the Austrian Federal Chamber of Labour and ÖGB Europabüro, the Brussels Office of the Austrian Federation of Trade Unions. When presenting the Study, its author, Werner Raza, Head of ÖFSE made it clear that the economic effects of CETA would be minor at best. He and his team based their conclusions on the analysis of the studies commissioned by the European Commission and on their own calculations. According to calculations by the EU Commission, CETA would generate economic growth of 0.03% to 0.08% in a period stretching over six to ten years. This would be equivalent to an additional per capita income of about EUR 20!

“However, this minor effect has been estimated still to largely” criticized Raza. Unrealistic exceptions and ignoring any possible impact on employment would lead to an overestimation of any benefits CETA might have. Making their own prognosis, the researchers came to the conclusion that CETA, based on the best-case scenario for Austria would generate real income growth of about 0.016% and a slight growth in employment of 0.013%. This was equivalent to EUR 6 per Austrian and a total of 450 full-time jobs. This predominantly would benefit the automobile, food and engineering sectors. On the losing side would be people with a lower education as they would be the first to be threatened by unemployment and a loss of income caused by the Agreement.

A heated debate with clearly drawn battle lines

The participants in the discussion made their positions clear. The social-democratic MEP Karoline Graswander-Hainz questioned CETA: “Fair and just trade looks differently!” Frank Bsirske, Chairman of the Service Trade Union ver.di, also rejected CETA in its current form. Both demand renegotiations with regard to investor protection, securing public services and communal services. Frank Bsirske stated clearly that based on the double privileging of foreign investors and the undermining of the precautionary principle a line has been passed. As things stood, the trade unions would be unable to support such an Agreement.

The representative and CETA chief negotiator of the European Commission Mauro Petriccione rejected the accusations and expressed his belief that the Commission had negotiated the best possible agreement. He was clearly hurt by the lack of trust in the work of the Commission. In his opinion, the negotiated agreement does not enforce liberalisation nor does it undermine EU Standards. Hence, the Commission would not be willing to renegotiate the agreement at his point. Now, it's up to the European Parliament and the governments of the Member States.

Further information

The Study

CETA – Rights for foreign corporations to sue governments

CETA – No agenda to secure our labour standards

CETA – Public services under pressure

CETA – Regulatory cooperation is a danger to democracy and standards