News
BackDue to the fact that they are afraid of dismantling democracy and cuts in social services and a lowering of quality and standards in particular in the care sector, non-profit welfare organisations have been very critical of the Free Trade Agreements mentioned. The opening of the protected welfare sector to profit-oriented companies through the backdoor will pose a great risk to the current system.
In his keynote speech, the Vice President of AWO, Thomas Beyer, referred to the justified concerns the welfare organisations would have. Not least in times of humanitarian crises, it is they who are doing the good work. “TTIP must under no circumstances lead to a scenario where social welfare is no longer determined by common but by capital interests!” This would pose a massive threat to Germany's welfare state.
In his keynote address, Wolfgang Stadler, Chairman of AWO declared: “Nobody has a problem with reducing trade tariffs and barriers. However, this must not result in a decline of the welfare sector in social and democratic terms as well as in terms of data protection and environmental laws and in respect of occupational safety and health.” He was concerned that in future exactly these standards would be regarded as a trade barrier. Apart from that he demanded that neither TTIP nor CETA or any other agreement would be allowed to affect the EU law on public procurement.
Matthias Machnig, State Secretary at the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy made an attempt to dispel these concerns: free trade would create jobs; the economy would depend on this Agreement. Without Free Trade Agreements, Europe would be at a disadvantage compared to China, Japan or India. Without such agreements, especially small and medium enterprises would often not have any opportunity to invest abroad. He pointed out that the final decision concerning the agreement would still be with national parliaments: “Even the controversial regulatory cooperation was only a technical committee, which would provide ongoing assistance to national parliaments!”
On behalf of the European Parliament, Bernd Lange, Chairman of the Committee on International Trade in the European Parliament, informed within the framework of the debate that a resolution had already been adopted on 8 July 2015, which indicates that a liberalisation of public welfare will not find agreement and that thereby the position vis-à-vis the European Commission had been clearly expressed. His wish was for a regulation of international trade, which could succeed with TTIP.
Ska Keller (Member of the European Parliament) and Erich Fenninger (Managing Director of Volkshilfe Austria) basically criticised the lack of transparency – for example, it was difficult to understand why only a selected group of people, only under strict conditions, in extra especially set up reading rooms would be allowed to inspect the negotiation documents. The concern that in future committees (which have not been democratically legitimised) would decide whether a legal requirement or a regulation had to be regarded as a trade barrier is viewed just as critically and rejected. In addition, the different definition of public welfare is discussed. Nowhere in Europe has it been established in the same way as it is understood in Germany or Austria. The subject of negative lists – which is strictly rejected by the Chamber of Labour – was also discussed. For Fenninger, not only the number of newly created jobs through free trade is relevant, but also their quality.
The problems brought up and discussed in the discussion show that any developments in the public welfare sector have to be scrutinised to prevent any weakening or reduction of this pillar of the welfare state.
Further information:
AWO Workers' Welfare Federal Association (German only)
Volkshilfe Austria (German only)