|
It’s hard for me to believe now that less than three years ago I nearly voted to abolish Ireland’s Seanad (Senate, for my non-Irish readers). Fortunately, a more informed colleague talked me out of my rash decision at the last minute, but at the time I could see no value in retaining a tax-payer funded Seanad that seemed to have no power to influence government policy.
|
|
While our Seanad produced lots of great ideas, as far as I could tell it was the place where good ideas went to die. Despite promises of reform following the 2013 Seanad referendum, I’ve yet to be convinced anything has changed, but I’m willing to give the Seanad a chance because Ireland desperately needs a better system of checks and balances in government.
This week, I've discovered a new respect for Ireland's Seanad. Their unfortunate lack of influence in government policy makes their recent motion on the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) all the more remarkable. Championed by Senator Alice Mary Higgins, the Seanad has found a way to potentially make global impact within a system that gives them very little power. Finally, we have a morsel of good news in a world of broken politics.
This week, I've discovered a new respect for Ireland's Seanad. Their unfortunate lack of influence in government policy makes their recent motion on the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) all the more remarkable. Championed by Senator Alice Mary Higgins, the Seanad has found a way to potentially make global impact within a system that gives them very little power. Finally, we have a morsel of good news in a world of broken politics.
What is CETA?
|
CETA is a modern trade agreement between Canada and Europe modelled after the more well-known Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). CETA aims to eliminate 98% of tariffs between Canada and Europe and in some cases increase quota allocations.
|
|
While negotiations between the two regions concluded in August 2014, the agreement has dragged on because it requires approval from European Parliament, European Council and each of the 28 Member States. In July 2016, the European Commission adopted the CETA text and formally proposed to the Council of the EU the signature and conclusion of CETA by October 2016.
The ratification by Member States could take several more years to complete, so the Council has the option to apply all or parts of CETA “provisionally” in the meantime. This means CETA could be implemented immediately after Council approval in October without waiting for approval of European Parliament or Member States.
The European Commission is in a hurry to avail of the benefits that could come from CETA and is pushing the Council to provisionally approve CETA asap. Given that an EC commissioned independent report predicted only a 0.02-0.03% increase in Europe’s GDP from CETA, it’s hard to understand the need to rush CETA through an undemocratic process, particularly given all the other rights we trade away in the process.
The ratification by Member States could take several more years to complete, so the Council has the option to apply all or parts of CETA “provisionally” in the meantime. This means CETA could be implemented immediately after Council approval in October without waiting for approval of European Parliament or Member States.
The European Commission is in a hurry to avail of the benefits that could come from CETA and is pushing the Council to provisionally approve CETA asap. Given that an EC commissioned independent report predicted only a 0.02-0.03% increase in Europe’s GDP from CETA, it’s hard to understand the need to rush CETA through an undemocratic process, particularly given all the other rights we trade away in the process.
Why worry about the world of CETA?
Modern free trade agreements (FTAs) such as CETA and TTIP are bad news for citizens across the globe because they give far more legal rights to corporations at the expense of citizens. I’ve blogged and v-logged my concerns about TTIP and FTAs in general already, but there are some unique elements of CETA that potentially make it one of the worst FTAs of all.
The day before the Seanad motion, I briefed Senators and TDs in the Dail on the potential environmental impacts of CETA. You can listen to the 7min audio briefing on Sound Cloud, or read on below for a summary of concerns with respect to environmental protection and ultimately the protection of public goods and health.
The day before the Seanad motion, I briefed Senators and TDs in the Dail on the potential environmental impacts of CETA. You can listen to the 7min audio briefing on Sound Cloud, or read on below for a summary of concerns with respect to environmental protection and ultimately the protection of public goods and health.
Three major risks to our environment in the world of CETA:
1. The Investor Court System, formerly known as ISDS
Since the 1960s, trade treaties typically include an ‘investor-state dispute settlement’ mechanism or 'ISDS.' The CETA and TTIP version of this is now called the Investor Court System as its been slightly modified from previous ISDS mechanisms to increase transparency. The ICS or ISDS is a special trade court that allows companies to sue foreign governments when their profits are compromised if a government introduces new laws or practices.
We can look at NAFTA which has been in operation for 22 years and has an investor dispute system to evaluate the potential impact of ICS:
The ICS mechanism is especially concerning for climate change and the low carbon transition. Given the ratification of the Paris Climate Agreement in Europe, we know that each signatory country now has to change their laws and practices accordingly. However, under ICS foreign corporations have legal mechanism challenge anything that might negatively impact their profits and could therefore undermine the Paris Agreement, which (unlike CETA) is not legally binding.
CETA will impede our efforts to reduce fossil fuel extraction and fossil fuel use in the future by offering investor protection to energy and mining corporations without similar protection for environment and public health. CETA also specifies a “technology neutral approach” to energy cooperation, which compromises Europe’s transition to a society powered by renewables. For example, In 2012, the U.S. oil company Lone Pine used NAFTA to challenge Quebec’s fracking moratorium.
A final concern specific to CETA’s ICS is that even if TTIP is defeated (which looks possible), 40% US companies have subsidiaries in Canada and can therefore avail of CETA’s ICS to sue European governments as an alternative to TTIP.
We can look at NAFTA which has been in operation for 22 years and has an investor dispute system to evaluate the potential impact of ICS:
- Canada is facing $2.6 billion in challenges from American corporations under NAFTA, including challenges on bans against environmental harmful additives to gasoline, exports of hazardous PCBs and lawn pesticides, and moratoriums on fracking. Two-thirds of cases taken under NAFTA are on environmental issues
- Across the border, TransCanada recently announced it was suing the US government for $15bn after the Obama administration rejected the Keystone XL pipeline to pump oil from the tar sands of Canada on environmental grounds.
The ICS mechanism is especially concerning for climate change and the low carbon transition. Given the ratification of the Paris Climate Agreement in Europe, we know that each signatory country now has to change their laws and practices accordingly. However, under ICS foreign corporations have legal mechanism challenge anything that might negatively impact their profits and could therefore undermine the Paris Agreement, which (unlike CETA) is not legally binding.
CETA will impede our efforts to reduce fossil fuel extraction and fossil fuel use in the future by offering investor protection to energy and mining corporations without similar protection for environment and public health. CETA also specifies a “technology neutral approach” to energy cooperation, which compromises Europe’s transition to a society powered by renewables. For example, In 2012, the U.S. oil company Lone Pine used NAFTA to challenge Quebec’s fracking moratorium.
A final concern specific to CETA’s ICS is that even if TTIP is defeated (which looks possible), 40% US companies have subsidiaries in Canada and can therefore avail of CETA’s ICS to sue European governments as an alternative to TTIP.
2. Public services and utlities
CETA is the first trade agreement to take a negative list approach to the privatisation of public goods and services, which means any if a Member State ever wants to be able to turn a privatised service back into a public service it has to designate that sector in CETA’s annex already. This is intended to allow the maximum degree of liberalisation benefits for corporations.
As an example, the remunicipalisation of energy grids across Europe is becoming popular in places like Germany in an effort to broaden community owned power. This broadening of community owned power is also an aim of Ireland’s Energy White Paper. CETA could severely curtail efforts of community owned power in countries who failed to itemise energy distribution grids in CETA’s annex.
Unfortunately, Ireland’s Trade Minister Charlie Flanagan did not make a reservation for energy distribution grids under CETA, which contradicts our vision under the Energy White Paper. Nor did Ireland make a reservation for things like waste disposal, gas or oil, or waste water treatment. In general, Ireland has listed very few exemptions compared to other countries and this puts us at risk should we allow something to be privatised and then want to put services back into public ownership at a later date.
As an example, the remunicipalisation of energy grids across Europe is becoming popular in places like Germany in an effort to broaden community owned power. This broadening of community owned power is also an aim of Ireland’s Energy White Paper. CETA could severely curtail efforts of community owned power in countries who failed to itemise energy distribution grids in CETA’s annex.
Unfortunately, Ireland’s Trade Minister Charlie Flanagan did not make a reservation for energy distribution grids under CETA, which contradicts our vision under the Energy White Paper. Nor did Ireland make a reservation for things like waste disposal, gas or oil, or waste water treatment. In general, Ireland has listed very few exemptions compared to other countries and this puts us at risk should we allow something to be privatised and then want to put services back into public ownership at a later date.
3. Risks to European agriculture
As our largest indigenous sector, CETA’s impacts on agriculture are particularly important in Ireland. Under CETA, the EU agreed to eliminate 92% of agricultural duties on most products. For some products such as dairy, a combination of tariff reduction and increased quota will be applied.
Canada allows hormones in animal products, has lower production standards, and allows carcasses to be cleaned using chemicals such as chlorine. As a result of such practices, Canada produces meat 60% cheaper than EU, so it’s not hard to predict that increasing Canadian imports could impact European farmers, particularly Irish Beef which would struggle to compete on price and scale with Canadian counterparts. This could also lead to a decline in the sustainability of European agriculture in an effort to improve competitiveness.
While Canada is not a major competitor with Irish agriculture, it is the combined pressure of trade agreements between Europe with Canada, USA and Mercosur (Brazil in particular) that would really put pressure on European and Irish farmers.
Over the summer, European agricultural ministers from 20 countries called for a study to determine the impact of TTIP, CETA and the Mercosur agreement on European agriculture. That effort was led by the agricultural ministers from Ireland and France. The report isn’t due until the end of this month after CETA is voted on and it hardly seems sensible to vote without adequate analysis on impacts.
Canada allows hormones in animal products, has lower production standards, and allows carcasses to be cleaned using chemicals such as chlorine. As a result of such practices, Canada produces meat 60% cheaper than EU, so it’s not hard to predict that increasing Canadian imports could impact European farmers, particularly Irish Beef which would struggle to compete on price and scale with Canadian counterparts. This could also lead to a decline in the sustainability of European agriculture in an effort to improve competitiveness.
While Canada is not a major competitor with Irish agriculture, it is the combined pressure of trade agreements between Europe with Canada, USA and Mercosur (Brazil in particular) that would really put pressure on European and Irish farmers.
Over the summer, European agricultural ministers from 20 countries called for a study to determine the impact of TTIP, CETA and the Mercosur agreement on European agriculture. That effort was led by the agricultural ministers from Ireland and France. The report isn’t due until the end of this month after CETA is voted on and it hardly seems sensible to vote without adequate analysis on impacts.
CETA's bottom line
|
I’ve listened to Fine Gael politicians accuse those of us speaking out about CETA and TTIP as “fear mongering” and spouting “conspiracy theories”, but our voices not only include those from environmental NGOs but also health organisations, agricultural groups, trade unions, and even Nobel prize winning economists like Joseph Stieglitz.
|
|
CETA is a global trade agreement designed to advance a corporate agenda above the rights of citizens or consumers. Whereas investors have a legally enforceable global mechanism to sue governments for lost profits through CETA, both the environmental and labour rights specified in CETA are exempt from sanctions.
CETA will curtail our efforts to reduce fossil fuel use, increase community-owned power and transition to a low carbon society by providing a mechanism for corporations to block this urgently needed transition. Those who support CETA are not working on behalf of the people of Ireland but rather to fill the pockets of corporations. It's #appletax all over again, only this time we don't even get a tokenistic debate in the Dail.
CETA will curtail our efforts to reduce fossil fuel use, increase community-owned power and transition to a low carbon society by providing a mechanism for corporations to block this urgently needed transition. Those who support CETA are not working on behalf of the people of Ireland but rather to fill the pockets of corporations. It's #appletax all over again, only this time we don't even get a tokenistic debate in the Dail.
Why is Alice Mary's CETA win so important?
|
On October 5th, the Seanad approved a motion calling on the Irish government to reject provisional application of CETA. The Irish Parliament is the first in the world to take a vote on CETA. Independent Senator Alice Mary Higgins proposed the motion, which passed by one vote, garnering the support of The Civil Engagement Group, Labour, Sinn Féin, and the Greens, who all rejected the position of the Fine-Gael led government. At the beginning of the debate, Fianna Fáil spoke in support of CETA and Fine Gael’s position. However, the motion passed 17 to 16 due to the ultimate abstention of Fianna Fáil.
|
|
The Seanad’s motion sends a clear signal to the Irish government that there is opposition to CETA in Ireland. Only last week Enda Kenny was in the Seanad promising reform and a return to visit them before Christmas. Will An Taoiseach now respect the Seanad by honoring their CETA motion or will he let their good work die in the Seanad chambers? If Enda Kenny believes the Seanad's work is meaningful, he'll call for Ireland to reject CETA's provisional application in the European Council on October 18th to allow time for informed public debate, but we’ll know where he really stands on CETA and Seanad Éireann in less than two weeks.
RSS Feed