Brussels, 29/098/2014 (Agence Europe) - By pledging to restore the confidence of European citizens in EU trade policy and to enhance transparency in free-trade negotiations with various third partners, first and foremost the United States, the commissioner-designate for trade, Swedish Liberal Cecilia Malmström, was successful in her hearing before the international trade (INTA) committee of the European Parliament, on Monday 29 September. However, she rather sat on the fence on the controversial issue of the investor/state dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS), which is overshadowing current discussions on the trade agreement with Canada (CETA), formally concluded on 26 September and due for ratification in 2015, and on talks for a free-trade agreement with the United States (TTIP), which Malmström will be called upon to give a new shot in the arm, whilst getting a hostile general public on board.
Guaranteeing increased transparency in trade negotiations for the citizens, giving a shot in the arm to the multilateral process at the WTO, negotiating a decent investment agreement with China, “an important but complicated partner”, negotiating good free-trade agreements with Japan and the emerging economies of Asia and with the neighbours on the southern shore of the Mediterranean (Morocco, Tunisia, Jordan), in the interests of major European companies, SMEs and citizens alike, making the EU's trade defence instruments “sharper and more effective”, making sure that trade is an effective development tool: all of this, or nearly all of it, featured in Malmström's initial presentation. Apart from a few things she left out, such as relations with Latin America and negotiations with Mercosur, the outgoing home affairs commissioner came out with a certain amount of aplomb before her audience, whose barrage of questions about the TTIP and the concerns it has raised she was able to field.
“Where the trade commissioner needs to be most careful is over the TTIP. From a distance, I was astonished by all that I heard: that the Commission was negotiating watered-down standards of regulations behind closed doors. I know that that is not the case, but I know that we have to reassure public opinion”, Malmström began. She pledged to continue negotiations for a “broad and ambitious” transatlantic agreement which will, in her view, have obvious benefits for growth and employment in Europe. “There are many different studies, but all of them point in the same direction”, she replied in response to MEP Emmanuel Maurel (S&D, France), who had earlier criticised the “wild candour” of the outgoing trade commissioner, Karel De Gucht, who vaunted the merits of the TTIP by claiming that the agreement would guarantee €325 a year for every European household. However, Malmström also sought to provide guarantees, both on the enhancement of transparency and that social, environmental and food safety standards will not be watered down. “We need to show that we are not negotiating an agreement in secret behind the general public's back”, she stressed.
However, Malmström declined to be drawn on the controversial issue of including an investor protection clause (ISDS) in the agreement concluded with Canada and in the negotiations underway with the United States, which would allow multinational companies to bring legal challenges against public policies they felt were harmful to their interests. “This issue is extremely worrying”, she admitted to British Socialist David Martin (S&D), who had previously suggested that investment protection be negotiated separately, as was the case in the free-trade negotiations concluded with Singapore. “I agree, there are problems with the ISDS, because there have been abuses in the use of this system. It is not very clear where it comes to the right to make rules in the public interest. This left too much leeway for interpretation, things need to be changed to limit the scope for abuse (…). We have to make sure that the ISDS does not make it impossible to regulate in any field of public policy”, said Malmström.
“Will [the ISDS] stay in the TTIP? I don't know. I do not exclude that it will not be there”, she said, calling for the question to be broadly debated in the light of the results of the public consultation, of which she has promised a first reading by the end of the year. “Let's talk about it”, she said, arguing that it is “too soon” to make any decision at the moment. “It is possible to set in place a system which avoids abuse and guarantees full transparency. This is what we did with the commercial agreement with Canada”, she added, calling for the agreement with Canada not to be unravelled. “If we reopen it, we are running the risk that other chapters will be opened and the agreement could topple; and this is an extremely important agreement to Europe”, she warned.
Over in the ranks of the ALDE Group, however, doubt remains over this question. “It is extremely shocking that the EU-Canada agreement was devised without having the results of the public consultation and without knowing whether the CETA would be a mixed agreement. We must not accept that tomorrow, private courts could take precedence over our laws”, warned French MEP Marielle De Sarnez. “I am extremely critical of this and I wonder whether we really need a ISDS in the TTIP”, said Marietje Schaake of the Netherlands.
Malmström's position was described as “worrying” by French MEP Yannick Jadot (Greens/EFA), who argued on Monday in favour of a “real EU commercial policy strategy to assess the real consequences of earlier agreements”. “Ms Malmström seems aware of the main dossiers, but she is already stuck in the mould created by her predecessors: a politically unacceptable step backwards on ISDS, the sustainable development chapters which must remain non-binding, unshakeable faith in the absolute virtues of free trade”, he criticised. (EH)