PEOPLE’S NEWS pm News Digest of the People’s Movement www.people.ie | [email protected] No. 126 31 May 2015 EU development ministers put profits projects. This shift towards private-sector and privatisation first finance risks putting public services out of reach for the poorest people, who are unable EU development ministers have adopted a joint to pay the user fees associated with it. The position on how to finance the planned private sector cannot, and should not, replace sustainable development goals before the governments’ duty of providing essential conference on Financing for Development in services, such as health services and education, July in Addis Ababa. The stated aim is not only especially when there are no safeguards to to end poverty in all forms everywhere by 2030 ensure that this is done responsibly. but also to introduce specific environmental and social goals, such as reducing economic Joe Costello (Labour Party), minister for inequality. state at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade with responsibility for trade and develop- The content of the sustainable develop- ment, was part of the decision-making process. ment goals will be decided at a UN summit meeting in New York in September, which is The EU is also trying to sell its ailing carbon- intended to set the international development trading system to developing countries as a way agenda for the next fifteen years. Decisions on to curb emissions. It would be more convincing how to finance the goals will be made at the if it spent the revenue wisely, spending some of summit meeting in Ethiopia. the money raised to help poor countries adapt to climate change. Instead the primary But the insistence of EU states on emerging emphasis is on privatisation and profits. countries providing their “fair share” while they continually fail to reach their own aid targets is Secrecy—the EU’s modus operandi a backward step. European countries know how important overseas aid is to fighting The EU’s ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, has poverty and inequality, yet they continue to fail opened an investigation into the secret to carry out their promises. meetings between EU institutions to shape laws, known as “trilogues.” These are the main means used for formulating EU legislation, but they take place behind closed doors, with very little public information about the negotiation process. O’Reilly says that the level of transparency of trilogues “has been drawn to my attention by several MEPs [and] MPs from some member states as well as by business and civil society groups.” The investigation will try to map what The EU is intent on “blending” public and documents exist before putting to the test private development funding, ensuring that its which of those should be public. own companies profit from overseas aid Trade Unions, meeting in Sydney, Australia on the 19th May 2015 considered the implications for millions of workers and their families arising from impending “Free Trade Agreements’’ known as TPP, TTIP and CETA and decided to oppose the ratification and implementation of these deals at all forums in which they participate; to take further steps to familiarise their members with the contents of these deals Amazingly, O’Reilly couldn’t say what that will empower international corporations to should be released, because “I don’t know grow their profits while diminishing the pay what is released, what is withheld, or what is and conditions of workers, inform the relevant even recorded.” She sent letters to the government agencies of their opposition to institutions last week asking them to provide a them; to coordinate common actions in list of trilogues, which documents are created, opposition; to encourage other trade unions to and which are or can be published, and in join the campaign of opposition and calls for which language the trilogues take place. their cancellation. The ombudsman’s office will concentrate its investigation on two files closed in 2014: the Mortgage Credit Directive (on consumer protection for mortgages) and the Clinical Trials Regulation (rules on clinical trials for medicines). Once this is done the ombudsman will decide whether further steps are needed to improve transparency—which is quite a way Congress resolution from eliminating the secrecy. The Congress of Global Power Trade Unions, O’Reilly noted that a balance needs to be meeting in Sydney, having considered the struck between accountability and speed, as implications for constituent unions of the the trilogue process is popular with the EU elite proposed TPP, TTIP and CETA “Free Trade” deals for its ability to speed up the legislative notes the following and resolves as follows: process. In the past five years there have been The inclusion of an ISDS [investor-state 1,500 trilogue meetings. On the morning of dispute settlement] provision in any of these O’Reilly’s announcement a trilogue resulted in agreements merits their rejection; agreement on the EU’s new investment fund. That Regulatory Cooperation poses a International meeting of trade unions potentially serious risk to the health and rejects TTIP welfare of our members and its inclusion in any of the deals merits its rejection; On the proposal of an Irish trade union, the The loss of the Precautionary Principle Technical, Engineering and Electrical Union, the through TTIP would merit rejection of the deal; following resolution was adopted by the International Congress of Global Power Trade That the major focus of trade union Unions and the following public statement was opposition is the ISDS provisions, while the issued: Regulatory Cooperation provisions pose a serious longer-term threat; Public statement That CETA negotiations having been The International Congress of Global Power completed, this deal, incorporating ISDS, being, 2 most likely, the first to be ratified, poses the grounds of some cosmetic promises by the EU most immediate threat and demands our commissioner for trade, Cecilia Malmström. immediate attention. To reach the agreement the Socialist Group Motion gave up their original rejection of the ISDS The constituent unions of the Global Power mechanism. In return, the European People’s Trade Unions will oppose the ratification and Party accepted language submitted by the implementation of TPP, TTIP and CETA at all Socialist Group, stating that the parliament forums in which they participate; take further takes into account “the EU’s and the US’s steps to familiarise their members with the developed legal systems … to provide effective contents of the deals, inform the relevant legal protection based on the principle of government agencies of their opposition to democratic legitimacy [and] efficiently and in a TPP, TTIP and CETA—as appropriate; coordinate cost-effective manner.” common actions in opposition; encourage The compromise also includes a weakened other trade unions to join us in opposition and call for the creation of an international trade calls for their cancellation. court to hear investment dispute cases. The final text says that, “in the medium term, a Listening to the concerns of “EU public International Investment Court could be citizens”! the most appropriate means to address investment disputes.” The Socialist Group had Members of the EU Parliament gave their previously stated that such a court “is the most support to talks on the proposed Transatlantic appropriate means”; this is now reduced to Trade and Investment Partnership in a surprise “could be.” vote on Thursday and have backed away from a confrontation with the EU Commission over The resolution, backed by the EU Parlia- investor-protection rights. ment’s main groups, including the centre-right EPP and the Socialist Group, calls for a transparent legal mechanism for disputes, where cases would be heard by “publicly appointed, independent” judges, with the opportunity for decisions to be appealed. It also suggests that a public international investment court would be the “most appropriate” means of handling investment disputes in the medium term. However, ISDS would still be part of the deal—and that is the nub of the problem, which no amount of tinkering about will address. Earlier this month Malmström unveiled a plan to set up a global court that would decide on disputes between investors and govern- ments in an attempt to defuse the controversy, The Trade Committee voted by 28 to 13 to although US officials have stated that they do support a non-legislative report, which is not support the reopening of the ISDS regime. expected to have significant influence on the Backing the compromise following days of vote by the parliament on 10 June. The Socialist back-room wrangling with the EPP (of which Group turned tail on ISDS, apparently on the Fine Gael is a member) is a significant U-turn 3 by the Socialist Group. The draft report by Berd What is Malmström proposing on ISDS? Lange of the Socialist Group had originally called for ISDS to simply be excluded from the remit of negotiations. The vote was hailed as a “victory for free trade” by the EPP’s spokesperson on the committee. The business lobby group Business Europe (of which IBEC is a member) also welcomed the report. “Today’s vote shows we have come a long way and positive dynamics are back,” said its CEO, Markus Beyrer. In the formal proposal published by Cecilia Critics of ISDS warn that it allows firms to Malmström last week the Commission suggests take governments to court if they discriminate steps that can be taken to transform ISDS into a against them or introduce new laws that system that functions more like traditional threaten their investments, saying it could have courts. That involves the appointment of grave implications for consumer protection, permanent arbitrators, with similar qualifi- environmental and health legislation.