Transcript Hazards Campaign on TTIP Nov 2015

TTIP:
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
Fast Track to Deregulation Hell!
Hilda Palmer Co-ordinator GMHC
Acting Chair National Hazards Campaign
[email protected]; [email protected]
TTIP + TPP = Neoliberal
noose around the world
and workers necks
TTIP, TPP, CETA, TiSA – toxic
alphabet soup of new types of
free trade treaties
‘You can have free trade OR free
people’
http://www.waronwant.org/campaign
s/trade-justice/more/inform/18078what-is-ttip
TTIP – What is it?
• A ‘Free Trade Treaty’ between EU and USA
• 12 March 2013, European Commission adopted a draft
negotiating mandate for TTIP with the USA
• Sold as a ‘Free Trade Treaty’, to remove barriers to trade,
scrap tariffs, harmonise regulations, boost GDP – 0.2 to
0.5% -& family incomes- 500 Euros - increase jobs, get
us out of recession black hole that unregulated
banking/finance sector collapse created; set the rules for
future global trade, retain global power viz China
• TTIP negotiators contacts - 92% with Business lobbyists
to 4% for public interest
Corporations and neoliberal governments want TTIP
not Trade Unions, citizens or civil society
A new study from the Sunlight Foundation found that the top 200 politically active corporations received a mind-boggling $4.4
trillion (that's trillion with a "T") in federal business and support over a period of just six years.
Source: http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2014/11/17/fixed-fortunes-biggest-corporate-political-interests-spend-billions-gettrillions/
TTIP- Why are we worried?
•
•
•
•
•
Secrecy & negotiations by unelected officials & corporate lobbyists
Investor State Dispute Settlement
Public Services opened for privatisation e.g. NHS, Education,
Very few tariffs – it’s all about regulations and standards
Regulatory Harmonisation/Coherence/Cooperation –EU H&S,
employment, food/env. Regs & standards far higher than US which
also has not signed many ILO Conventions; US financial regs stricter
• ‘Living document’- sets EU-US ‘institutional framework’ for future
regulatory cooperation – Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation
Council RCC in which corporations & business wants will dominate
• Race to Bottom- Reduction EU Regs & standards; prevention of
improvements or new protective regulations
TTIP- Why are we worried?
• Supposed economic benefits small or negative; risks HUGE
• US- different H&S regulation, federal/state enforcement & much higher
death/injury rate than EU(3x at least); not ratified many ILO conventions,
has ‘Right to Work’ states, very low unionisation
• Business/Corporations given power in making regulation
• Extends UK/EU deregulation – attacks on HSE & H&S system , EU REFIT
deregulatory prog; Stoiber Group - all SMEs exempt from all employment
& H&S regs – cutting enforcement
• Part of Neoliberal Globalisation project for last 30 years
• Benefits business not citizens health, safety, environment or rights
• Anti-democratic corporate power grab
• NAFTA failed- 1 million US manufacturing jobs lost, Mexican farmers
dispossessed, no gains except to big corporations
The only ones to
benefit from lack
of regulation,
enforcement and
scrutiny are
unscrupulous
employers.
Since 2010 Hazards Magazine/Campaign has warned of, and
campaigned against deregulation and its deadly effects
Demented Business Daleks squawk:
‘Deregulate, deregulate, deregulate ’
Government obeys - exterminates Health & Safety ?
“The crusade against ‘red tape’” CEO
http://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/attachments/red_tape_crusade.pdf
CEO TTIP: Regulations Handcuffed
ISDSInvestor-State Dispute Settlement
• Investor- State Dispute Settlement an instrument of public international
law that grants foreign investor or company the right to initiate a dispute
settlement proceedings against foreign government to be heard not in
court, secret arbitration tribunal – Kangaroo Court - 3 corporate lawyers .
• Tribunal rules on effects on investors profits of government actions national laws, international obligations, health, environmental, social
concerns count for nothing;
• If ISDS adopted in TTIP, corporations could sue EU member states that
adopt rules/laws/measures that protect the health and safety of workers,
or environment, food safety, reverse privatisations, or increase social
provisions and protections;
• ISDS could stop EU and member states improving existing regulations that
protect workers H&S , public health or environmental health; and
introducing new regulations on nanoparticles, EDC, MSDs
ISDS
• EU’s own Commission is publically divided on ISDS and even
the ultra-free-market Cato Institute have come out
against. The Economist wrote:
• “If you wanted to convince the public that international
trade agreements are a way to let multinational companies
get rich at the expense of ordinary people, this is what you
would do: give foreign firms a special right to apply to a
secretive tribunal of highly paid corporate lawyers for
compensation whenever a government passes a law to, say,
discourage smoking, protect the environment or prevent a
nuclear catastrophe.”
ISDS examples
• Philip Morris suing Australia over plain packaging for
cigarettes
• Veolia suing Egypt over increasing the minimum wage
• Vattenfall suing Germany over suspension of nuclear
programme after Fukushima
• 1997 under NAFTA Ethyl Corporation sued Canadian
government which banned MMT a toxic, proven health hazard
petrol additive, for ‘expropriation of assets. 1998 Canada
withdrew the banning law and paid Ethyl Corp US$ 13 million
• Slovakia was sued by Dutch insurer over renationalising
aspects of its health service – an election manifesto promise
ISDS Examples
Canadian Company uses
UK – Romania treaty to sue Romania
• Canadian mining company Gabriel Resources
is seeking over $2.5 billion damages from
Romania after it rejected a vast gold mine at
Rosia Montana, writes Oliver Tickell.
Incredibly, it is taking legal action under a UKRomania trade agreement.
•
http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_round_up/2984989/romania_faces_256bn_claim_for_failed_
gold_mine.html
ISDS threats
• Government- i.e. Tax Payers, us - may have to
compensate investors when it wishes to regulate,
protect or re-nationalise in our interests
• lSDS threat may stop governments regulatingRegulatory Chill e.g. on EDCs, Carcinogens, MSDs
• Domestic courts/judicial system are bypassed by
the ISDS Kangaroo Courts
• Private companies can drain state treasuries
• Number of ISDSs increasing
• Canada most sued country
ISDS’s enrich corporations
TTIP Aims Claims
• EU-USA want to eliminate, reduce or prevent
unnecessary regulations
• Objective is to go for policies which include
‘regulatory coherence’ by making regulatory
systems more compatible, minimising differences
and reducing costs
• Building a more integrated transatlantic
marketplace that respects each side’s right to
regulate the protection of health, safety and the
environment at a level it considers appropriate
TTIP Aims Claims
• To be achieved via following mechanisms:
 Cooperation in areas that will bring
efficiencies and cost savings to regulators and
industry
 Greater compatibility between US and EU
regulation
 Promotion of transparency in development
and implementation of regulations
TTIP Aims Claims
 Elimination of remaining tariffs
 Reduction of cost of unnecessary regulatory
differences
 Establishment of mechanisms for future
progress
 Continuation of regulatory cooperation
initiatives where appropriate
TTIP- Chemical regulation as example
• EU and US keen to ‘enhance regulatory compatibility’ in
various sectors:
• medical devices,
• cosmetics,
• pharmaceuticals,
• pesticides,
• information and communication technologies and
chemicals
• EU has higher standards on chemicals than US:
• EU REACH 2007 vs USA TSCA 1976
TTIP- Chemical regulation as example
• REACH = Registration, Evaluation Authorisation of
Chemicals require:
• Chemical producers & importers to register new and
existing chemicals ‘NO DATA: NO MARKET’
• Information compiled in registration dossier that must
be updated on regular basis
• Substances of Very High Concern - carcinogens,
mutagens, reproductive toxins – are banned by default
• Risk assessments are mandatory
• Precautionary principle enshrined
TTIP- Chemical regulation as example
• Toxic Substances Control Act 1976 • Allows chemicals on market without proof
that they are safe;
• TSCA is totally is outdated, not updated
• Applies to 84,000 industrial chemicals but
allows 60,000 – in use in 1976- to be used
under presumption of safety
• TSCA hasn’t banned a chemical for 40 years
TTIP- Chemical regulation as example
• Proving that a chemical is dangerous is
responsibility of the Environment Protection
Agency EPA- ‘US scientific certainty vs EU
precautionary principle ‘- but many obstacles
make it excessively difficult including absolute
certainty takes years/bodies & industry influence
and interference = no chemicals banned for 40
years
• By 2010 only 1% of all chemicals on US market
had been tested
TTIP- Chemical regulation as example
• How can TTIP bring such conflicting laws and
regulatory regimes on chemicals together ?
• Regulatory coherence or Mutual recognition of
Regs and/or future action via the Transatlantic
Regulatory Cooperation Council - now called
Regulatory Cooperation Board
• EU’s lead negotiator & public position paper ruled
out use of these tools for chemicals but CIEL
leaked text shows that they propose to use all of
them! DANGEROUS
TTIP Dangers for Chemicals
(and other OHS issues?)
• 110 public health& env. orgs in EU & US object to inclusion of the
chemicals sector in any of TTIP’s relevant chapters, including Regulatory
Coherence & Investment. These orgs evaluated industry proposals,
concluding rather than improving chemical regulation, TTIP is poised to:
• 1) Freeze development & implementation of stronger, more healthprotective laws;
• 2) Derail European leadership on hormone (endocrine) disrupting
chemicals, nanomaterials & other urgent and emerging issues;
• 3) Block US states & EU Member States from taking action in face of
inaction by US federal government and European Commission;
• 4) Limit public access to info. on toxic chemicals, impeding innovation;
• 5) Erase important differences between EU and US laws; and
• 6) Create duplicative inefficiencies, providing no added value to the
general public.
TTIP is Fast Track Deregulation
and continues into future
• TTIP is deregulatory initiative just like EU REFITRegulatory Fitness & Performance Programme,
Stoiber initiatives, and the UK’s massive
deregulatory and enforcement slashing on H&S
and other laws, and comes on top of weakening
of all regulatory structure, tripartite systems
• Will aid the privatisation AGENDA
• Benefits especially Trans National Corporations
• Will set in stone existing situation and prevent
improvements and reversal, e.g. of privatisation,
deregulation, enforcement slashing
TTIP: European Disintegration,
Unemployment and Instability
TTIP would lead to net losses in terms of net exports after a decade, compared to the
baseline “no-TTIP” scenario. Northern European Economies would suffer the largest
losses (2.07% of GDP) followed by France (1.9%), Germany (1.14%) and United
Kingdom (0.95%)
• TTIP would lead to net losses in terms of GDP. Consistently with figures for net
exports, Northern European Economies would suffer the largest GDP reduction (0.50%) followed by France (-0.48%) and Germany (-0.29%)
• TTIP would lead to a loss of labor income. France would be the worst hit with a loss
of 5,500 Euros per worker, followed by Northern European Countries (-4,800 Euros per
worker), United Kingdom (-4,200 Euros per worker) and Germany (-3,400 Euros per
worker)
• TTIP would lead to job losses. We calculate that approximately 600,000 jobs would
be lost in the EU. Northern European countries would be the most affected (-223,000
jobs), followed by Germany (-134,000 jobs), France (- 130,000 jobs) and Southern
European countries (-90,000)
TTIP: European Disintegration,
Unemployment and Instability
TTIP would lead to a reduction of the labor share of GDP reinforcing a trend that has
contribute to the current stagnation. The flipside of this decrease is an increase in the
share of profits and rents in total income, indicating that proportionally there would
be a transfer of income from labor to capital. The largest transfers will take place in UK
(7% of GDP transferred from labor to profit income), France (8%), Germany and
Northern Europe (4%)
• TTIP would lead to a loss of government revenue. The surplus of indirect taxes (such
as sales taxes or value-added taxes) over subsidies will decrease in all EU countries,
with France suffering the largest loss (0.64% of GDP). Government deficits would also
increase as a percentage of GDP in every EU country, pushing public finances closer or
beyond the Maastricht limits.
• TTIP would lead to higher financial instability and accumulation of imbalances.
With export revenues, wage shares and government revenues decreasing, demand
would have to be sustained by profits and investment. But with flagging consumption
growth, profits cannot be expected to come from growing sales. A more realistic
assumption is that profits and investment (mostly in financial assets) will be sustained
by growing asset prices. The potential for macroeconomic instability of this growth
strategy is well known
Jeronim Capaldo October 2014 The Global Development and Environment Institute of Tufts University http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/policy_research/TTIP_simulations.html; Exec Summary
http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/wp/14-03CapaldoTTIP_ES.pdf
Campaign against TTIP
#NoTTIP!
• All UK Trade Unions oppose TTIP; TUC opposes TTIP
• ETUC wants good trade treaty doesn’t oppose TTIP outright
• War on Want, Global Justice Now, Friends of the Earth Europe
and UK, 38 Degrees leading NGOs
• #Stop TTIP and NGOs leading European Citizen’s Initiative
totally against TTIP, including seeking 1 million signatures –
has 2.3 million in one year, closed
• Campaigning led to consultation on ISDS; responses crashed
website, 95% said NO to ISDS, negotiations suspended, EU
came up with ISDS light
European Citizens Initiative
WE MUST #STOPTTIP:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
UK Tory Government for TTIP, free trade, promoting hard including ISDSs.
US Government supporting - problems with TPP – now concluded negotiation
& published
Green Party oppose TTIP completely; Labour Party supported ‘good TTIP’ ‘no
reduction in standards’, said opposed ISDSs, wants NHS exempt – Corbyn
/McDonnell more opposed
Juncker President, and new Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom of
European Commission, opposed ISDSs now wavering ….
US, UK, EU and business promoting hard
CETA finished & contains full-blooded ISDS so can act as backdoor even if TTIP
excludes or has ISDS Lite option
When finished, European Parliament must vote, then member states…
WE MUST #STOPTTIP:
‘The only people who benefit from deregulation and lack of scrutiny are
unscrupulous employers ‘
Useful Sources/Contacts
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
CEO Corporate European Observatory: http://corporateeurope.org/aboutceo;
http://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/attachments/red_tape_crusad
e.pdf
http://corporateeurope.org/international-trade/2015/01/ttip-regulationshandcuffed
CIEL Centre for International Environmental Law http://www.ciel.org/
Hazards Magazine: No deal
http://www.hazards.org/workingworld/nodeal.htm
War on Want – John Hilary booklet updated 2015:
http://www.waronwant.org/campaigns/trade-justice/more/inform/18078what-is-ttip
Stop TTIP: https://stop-ttip.org/
Global Justice Now (was World Development Movement:
http://www.wdm.org.uk/
TPP TEXT: https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/transpacific-partnership/TPP-Full-Text