Print
See related documents
Resolution 2152 (2017)
“New generation” trade agreements and their implications for social rights, public health and sustainable development
1. Since the World Trade Organization
has not concluded the latest Doha round of negotiations, the world’s major
trading nations have embarked upon negotiations for new types of
regional and bilateral trade agreements. With regard to Europe,
these notably include the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA)
between the European Union and Canada and the Transatlantic Trade
and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the European Union and
the United States of America. The Provisional Agreement of CETA has
been signed by the two parties and its provisions that are within
European Union competence already apply in the European Union. However,
if the forthcoming Singapore–European Union trade deal case is so decided
in areas of shared competence, it will require subsequent parliamentary
consent by European Union member States.
2. CETA forms a template for TTIP, which is still being negotiated.
The progress of TTIP may hinge on whether President Donald Trump
wishes the United States to pursue it. The essential feature of
these agreements is not the removal of the already small tariff
barriers which would bring economic gains. Instead, the agreements
propose regulatory co-operation, harmonisation of standards and,
most controversially, new powers for transnational companies to
use arbitration courts through an Investment Court System (ICS,
the successor of the investor–State dispute settlement system, ISDS)
to sue member States for laws they pass that could impede future
profits.
3. These two trade agreements have not been negotiated transparently
and have not received public and parliamentary scrutiny. Occasional
leaks on the substance of the talks have raised many concerns, especially in
Europe. The agreements have the potential to enhance existing trade
relations between the European Union, Canada and the United States,
and economic benefits on both sides of the Atlantic may include increased
annual gross domestic product growth, the creation of new jobs and
the availability of a wider range of goods and services at lower
prices. However, the overall gains may be relatively small and the
economic impact will not be evenly distributed, creating winners
and losers. Therefore, the potentially unequal spread of the potential
aggregate benefits within European society needs to be assessed.
4. Moreover, the negotiators need to also ensure that other fundamental
costs and conflicts do not arise from these agreements. In particular,
the agreements should not empower corporate trade interests to trump public
policies protecting the environment, food safety, public health
and social rights.
5. The proposed ICS introduces a new judicial system that allows
investors to sue governments in arbitration courts for profits they
might not make as a result of laws passed to protect people – including
laws on the environment, public health and rights at work. These
proposed investor powers are regarded by some as unnecessary as
investors are already protected by established public and contract
law in the European Union, Canada and the United States. There is
concern that if it is not removed from CETA and TTIP, the ICS will
give powers in the Investment Chapter of these agreements to trump
other public-interest considerations, including the protection of
the environment and public health. The ICS provisions should therefore
be in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS
No. 5) and be included in an optional protocol to trade agreements
for exit by individual States with one year’s notice and a limited
time of continued protection for existing investments.
6. In addition, there are widespread concerns over the impact
of the regulatory co-operation included in these “new generation”
trade agreements. Therefore, the Assembly believes that there is
a need to carry out independent studies on the potential impact
of the ICS and the regulatory co-operation foreseen in CETA and TTIP.
These should include potential consequences for water/air pollution,
greenhouse-gas emissions, food safety, consumer and workers’ protection
and the sustainability of the public health system, and for the deregulation
and liberalisation of public services in the framework of changes
to public procurement provisions.
7. The agreements should not include powers for investors to
trump environmental, democratic and human rights imperatives. The
Parliamentary Assembly thus calls on the European Union negotiators
to remain firm in their determination to protect and promote the
interests of European citizens and to pay very close attention to
the precise wording of provisions regarding the environment, food
safety, public health, human rights and consumer protection, in
order to:
7.1. ensure that the provisions
of new generation trade agreements are fully compatible with and supportive
of climate policy objectives, namely with the 2015 Paris Climate
Change Agreement and do not include powers for investors to trump
environmental imperatives;
7.2. make sure that these agreements support a fair and ethical
trade system, and ultimately embrace strategies to combat international
tax evasion and tax avoidance, including the use of shell companies in
offshore jurisdictions by multinational companies;
7.3. ensure that all parties are able to maintain their highest
standards of health, food safety, environmental protection and social
rights. The mutual recognition of standards, used for harmonisation purposes,
should be applied only in cases where the safety equivalence test
is fully satisfying. Failing this, existing high European standards
must be upheld by, inter alia:
7.3.1. a stronger focus on applying the precautionary principle
in setting regulations, to be explicitly included in the text of
any agreement in order to limit the social, health and environmental
risks and maximise the public benefits of these agreements;
7.3.2. maintaining clinical trials regulations which oblige companies
to publish all clinical test reports for medicines allowed on the
European Union market, as well as guaranteeing adequate whistle-blower
protection;
7.3.3. strong safeguards in the labour rights chapter, explicitly
stating the obligation of parties to abide by and effectively enforce
the standards set in the International Labour Organization’s core
conventions;
7.4. guarantee full reciprocity as regards the opening of public
procurement to external competition, including at sub-national level
in the case of federal States;
7.5. establish a system to enable new protected geographical
indications for particular countries and regions.
8. The new generation trade agreements should be designed to
promote environmental sustainability, human rights and the rule
of democratic law, and to facilitate the mutual benefits of trade.
In order to regain the public’s trust in new generation trade agreements,
as blueprints for future world trade, the Assembly calls on member
States to open, as far as possible, negotiations to the scrutiny
of democratically elected representatives at both European and national
levels and to ensure that such agreements are subject to ratification
by national parliaments insofar as they deal with shared competences.
9. The World Trade Organization should call on parties who embark
upon negotiations for regional and bilateral agreements to ensure
that these are done transparently and under democratic control.
These principles ought to be followed in the TTIP negotiations between
the European Union and the United States.