The Progressive Post

New trade agreements: A threat to democracy

27/02/2014

The proposed new trade agreements, the TPP for the Pacific region and the proposed T-TIP for the US and the EU, have little to do with trade and a lot to do with dismantling the capacity of governments to regulate markets in a broad public interest. In this, they are extending a path already well-trodden by the World Trade Organization. Though T-TIP is a government-to-governnent exercise, the agendas have seen set primarily by private industry and finance. The negotiating process is closed and non-transparent, with the agendas set mainly by corporations. There is bias in who is deemed an expert advisor to the official negotiators, with an insider role being given to corporate elites. There are more than 600 official U.S. corporate trade advisors with security clearance to see draft agreement texts. NGOs, trade unions and environmentalists are largely excluded.

When the WTO was established in 1994, few were aware of the expansive obligations contained in the 900 pages of non-tariff rules. Since then, many WTO requirements and outcomes have surprised governments, the press and the public. Of the 186 completed disputes, a government policy was ruled to violate WTO rules in 92 percent of cases. Of these, 53 involved public interest policies from food safety to medicine patent policies, and environmental standards to development policy. The WTO ruled against 98 percent of these policies.

Building on the WTO, a Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA) has been a longstanding project of the Transatlantic Business Council. The TBC provides a forum for the largest U.S. and EU corporations to coordinate a joint attack on the best consumer, environmental, climate, and other public interest policies on both sides of the Atlantic. Among the goals for T-TIP-TAFTA are rollbacks of EU consumer data privacy protections, limits on Internet freedom and new pharmaceutical firm rights to contest national healthcare drug reimbursement list approvals and prices. The stated goal for T-TIP-TAFTA is to eliminate what they call “trade irritants” that limit their ability to move a product between the U.S. and EU or to operate as service providers, investors or manufacturers in both zones under the same rules without government interference. These supposed trade irritants are in fact the fundamental food safety, environmental, health and other policies comprising the social compact on which we all rely. They also call for T-TIP to impose a ceiling on such safeguards by replacing domestic U.S. and EU policies with trans-Atlantic standards that are better for business.

An attack on the public interest

Corporations would be empowered to directly attack domestic health, financial, environmental and other public interest policies that they view as undermining their new foreign investor rights by dragging the U.S. and EU governments before extrajudicial tribunals. These tribunals organised under World Bank and UN rules would be authorized to order unlimited taxpayer compensation for domestic policies or government actions seen as undermining corporations’ “expected future profits.” The tribunals are comprised of three private sector attorneys, unaccountable to any electorate, many of whom rotate between serving as “judges” and bringing cases as private attorneys on behalf of corporations against governments. In the normal democratic process, this would be rejected as a flagrant conflict of interest and an assault on the independence of the judiciary.

So what lessons can be learned from 20 years of WTO and bilateral deals? How can consciousness be raised about the true goals and consequences of T-TIP and similar agreements? There is also a more fundamental question to be asked – about whether trade agreements could or should be a force for raising standards in social, labour and environmental matters, among others. We propose a joint project of European and U.S. progressive leaders to discuss how awareness might be raised about the consequences of TTIP, how such trade agreements might be used to raise rather than lower social standards, and how coordination among European and American critics could be improved.

Find all related publications
Publications
05/03/2024

A European feminist foreign policy?

The need for a progressive and transformative approach
01/03/2024

The transformation of the mainstream right in Western Europe

Implications for social democracy
01/03/2024

Next Left Vol. 15

Progressive Ambition: How to shape Europe in the next decade
29/02/2024

The European political community

Informality as a key to success
Find all related news
News
18/03/2024

FEPS President on Euronews talk-show ‘Brussels, my love?’

NATO extension, Portuguese elections, far-right and gender equality were the topics of the debate
08/03/2024

Discover the updated EU Care Atlas!

07/03/2024

Call for videos – Your Call to Europe

This call closed on 24/03/2024
04/03/2024

FEPS at the PES Election Congress in Rome

Find all related in the media
In the media

Women leaders in CSOs—overworked, overwhelmed

by Social Europe 27/03/2024
This article published in the digital media Social Europe focuses on the findings of FEPS policy study 'Women CSO leaders for systemic change'

The EU pursues make-believe in Bosnia

by Financial Times 23/03/2024
Financial Times featured our policy brief 'Bosnia-Herzegovina', which analyses the journey of BiH's EU membership and the necessary reforms to make it happen

AI won’t replace quality journalism, but sector needs safeguarding, says socialist think tank head

by Euractiv 18/03/2024
Interview with FEPS President on the role of media in Europe’s future

FEPS President on Euronews talk-show ‘Brussels, my love?’

by Euronews 16/03/2024
FEPS President Maria João Rodrigues discusses NATO expansions and elections in Russia and Portugal on Euronews talk-show ‘Brussels, my love?‘