News
BackThe negotiations on the Free Trade Agreement between EU and Canada, which began in 2009, seem to have reached their conclusion. The intention is to declare the negotiations on the Agreement officially concluded within the scope of the EU-Canada Summit on 26.9. The text has been leaked; however, officially it has not yet been made available.
In spite of the fact that civil society, labour representations and NGOs have been strongly protesting against the planned Free Trade Agreements with the USA (TTIP) and Canada (CETA) and also argued heatedly in the Consultation on ISDS, the Commission has been ignoring these protests and wants to bring CETA to a conclusion. Last week, the Commission even refused to register the European Citizens' Initiative against the planned Free Trade Agreement.
CETA still contains many controversial issues. Apart from that, the Commission ignores the discussion process regarding the Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). As a reaction to the massive resistance against ISDS, the Commission has initiated a public consultation, which resulted in 150,000 participations (the Commission expected 200), almost all of them against ISDS. The Commission stands by ISDS in CETA in spite of this resounding result and ignores all points of criticism. The words of Trade Commissioner Karel de Gucht in his speech in the plenum of the European Parliament on 16th September sound like mockery: “On investment, the agreement establishes a system that sets a new standard for investor-to-state dispute settlement procedures. We are well aware of the concerns that exist. This agreement directly addresses all the concerns that have emerged so far.” (Original available under http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-603_en.htm) Whilst de Gucht is still in favour of ISDS, many of the objections especially concerned this issue. In contrast, the Austrian MEP Jörg Leichtfried (S&D) stressed in the plenum that the European Social Democrats did not only have great concerns in relation to ISDS, but that they would regard ISDS as a threat to democracy and constitutionality. In response to the statement of the Conservative MEP Ruža Tomašić that according to her knowledge there had not been any negative experiences with ISDS so far, Leichtfried provided her with numerous examples.
Further points of criticism of the Chamber of Labour on CETA concern the vague exemption clauses with regard to public services, ambiguities in respect of regulations as well as the lack of securing standards for the protection of employees, health and environment. A particular cause for concern: in contrast to the Canadian proposals, the chapters “Trade and Labour” as well as “Trade and Environment” are not subject to the general dispute settlement mechanism of the Agreement. CETA does not provide for any sanctions in these chapters; there is not even agreement in respect of the ratification of the eight internationally recognised ILO minimum labour standards. However, this was not reflected in de Gucht’s statement: “The EU-Canada trade and investment relationship will not come at the expense of environmental or social and labour standards. We are both aware that we have a responsibility here. It is the highest standard we have in trade agreements and it’s more than what Canada has done before.” (Original available under http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-603_en.htm)
The comments of the Trade Commissioner show how important broad resistance against this approach and against the contents of the Free Trade Agreement is.
More information:
AK Position paper on CETA
AK Consultation contribution on ISDS
CETA in the plenum of the EP on 16.9.2014
Article no2isds
CETA still contains many controversial issues. Apart from that, the Commission ignores the discussion process regarding the Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). As a reaction to the massive resistance against ISDS, the Commission has initiated a public consultation, which resulted in 150,000 participations (the Commission expected 200), almost all of them against ISDS. The Commission stands by ISDS in CETA in spite of this resounding result and ignores all points of criticism. The words of Trade Commissioner Karel de Gucht in his speech in the plenum of the European Parliament on 16th September sound like mockery: “On investment, the agreement establishes a system that sets a new standard for investor-to-state dispute settlement procedures. We are well aware of the concerns that exist. This agreement directly addresses all the concerns that have emerged so far.” (Original available under http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-603_en.htm) Whilst de Gucht is still in favour of ISDS, many of the objections especially concerned this issue. In contrast, the Austrian MEP Jörg Leichtfried (S&D) stressed in the plenum that the European Social Democrats did not only have great concerns in relation to ISDS, but that they would regard ISDS as a threat to democracy and constitutionality. In response to the statement of the Conservative MEP Ruža Tomašić that according to her knowledge there had not been any negative experiences with ISDS so far, Leichtfried provided her with numerous examples.
Further points of criticism of the Chamber of Labour on CETA concern the vague exemption clauses with regard to public services, ambiguities in respect of regulations as well as the lack of securing standards for the protection of employees, health and environment. A particular cause for concern: in contrast to the Canadian proposals, the chapters “Trade and Labour” as well as “Trade and Environment” are not subject to the general dispute settlement mechanism of the Agreement. CETA does not provide for any sanctions in these chapters; there is not even agreement in respect of the ratification of the eight internationally recognised ILO minimum labour standards. However, this was not reflected in de Gucht’s statement: “The EU-Canada trade and investment relationship will not come at the expense of environmental or social and labour standards. We are both aware that we have a responsibility here. It is the highest standard we have in trade agreements and it’s more than what Canada has done before.” (Original available under http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-603_en.htm)
The comments of the Trade Commissioner show how important broad resistance against this approach and against the contents of the Free Trade Agreement is.
More information:
AK Position paper on CETA
AK Consultation contribution on ISDS
CETA in the plenum of the EP on 16.9.2014
Article no2isds