Blog Articles

A lot has been going on in recent weeks concerning three of the major trade agreements that the European Commission is currently negotiating with third countries: the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with the United States, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with Canada and the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA). The European Commission would like to get a deal on TTIP before the end of US President Obama’s term. It would also like to conclude TiSA by the end of this year. At the same time, opposition towards these trade agreements is growing, both within civil society organisations and Member States.

On 7 July, 67 civil society organisations sent a letter of protest against the trade talks to the head of the European Parliament (EP) Martin Schulz, just ahead of the latest round of TTIP negotiations. The letter expressed apprehension about the Commission’s proposal on how to settle disagreements between companies and national governments within the context of TTIP, i.e. to replace the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) with an Investment Court System (ICS). The proposal by the Commission fails to respect the advice of the EP and the jurisdiction of EU and Member States’ courts to ensure that independent judges preside over potential cases, and that private interests do not undermine public policy objectives.

Wemove.eu has launched a petition – which has reached almost 92,000 signatures – to “say no to corporations having the right to sue states in special tribunals, whether they are called ‘ISDS’ or ‘ICS’. Please make sure that this is not part of the TTIP and CETA agreements with the US and Canada or any other European trade treaty; not now, nor ever.”

Growing opposition is also increasing at Member State level. Earlier this year, German magistrates described the Commission’s proposal on an ICS as unlawful.  On 5 July, the Commission announced that Member States’ national parliaments would have to vote on CETA before it can be definitively adopted. This compromise is a response to mounting public pressure in EU countries, most notably France and Germany, with demands for national parliaments to be consulted before any deal is enacted.

The inclusion of public services in trade agreement is another sensitive issue. Social Platform calls on the Commission to fully exclude public services (namely social, health, education and water services) from the scope of agreements, irrespective of how they are provided or funded. We are satisfied that both the EP’s resolution on TTIP and on TiSA echoed calls from civil society (see our joint press release together with the European Centre of Employers and Enterprises providing Public Services, the European Trade Union Confederation and the European Federation of Public Service Unions).

We are concerned that so far the Commission hasn’t taken on board the EP’s requests. Also, at the last exchange of views between the EP and the Commission on TiSA on 30 June, the EU’s chief negotiator, while repeating that the Commission fully shares the view that “nothing in TiSA shall affect the role of public services in the EU”, added that changing existing EU reservations (exclusions of sectors of services from the scope of agreements) bears the risk of the EU being legally challenged if new decisions go beyond what was previously agreed by the EU in the frame of the General Agreement on Trade in Services.  Member of the European Parliament Viviane Reding, who is authoring the EP’s report on TiSA, replied that the EP’s interest is to ensure a carve-out of cultural and public services. While there is a clear carve-out for cultural services, the same is not guaranteed for public services. She concluded that she does not understand the Commission’s reluctance.

Brexit demonstrates that not listening to citizens presents a real threat to the European project. I remember that, at our event in London “Social Boom or Bust? The EU referendum and the fate of social rights” ahead of the UK referendum, Nic Conner from the Vote Leave campaign pointed to the lack of transparency of the TTIP negotiations as one of the reasons for the United Kingdom to leave the EU (read our Director’s editorial).

This is a push for us to continue in our efforts, together with our partners, to ensure that the calls from civil society and the EP are taken on board in these negotiations.