Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

This week, EU and US negotiators are meeting in Washington DC to hold a third round of talks on the transatlantic trade and investment partnership, TTIP. In an open letter, nearly 200 environmental, consumer and labour groups have urged European Trade Commissioner, Karel De Gucht, and the US Ambassador, Michael Froman, not to include an investor-state dispute settlement, ISDS, mechanism in the deal. They argue that not only does the ISDS mechanism have very little to do with trade and tariffs, it also undermines democratic decision-making while giving corporations the power to undermine domestic and international policies designed to protect the public interest. Their open letter states:

ISDS grants foreign corporations the right to go before private trade tribunals and directly challenge government policies and actions that corporations allege reduce the value of their investments. Even if a new policy applies equally to domestic and foreign investors, ISDS allows foreign corporations to demand compensation for the absence of a 'predictable regulatory environment.' [...]

ISDS forces governments to use taxpayer funds to compensate corporations for public health, environmental [energy, financial regulation], labor [land use, transportation] and other public interest policies and government actions.

I can tell the Minister of State that they are not traditional trade issues.

Corporate Europe Observatory, a research group, published a leaked version of the European Commission's communication strategy regarding the TTIP. On Friday, 22 November, the European Commission held talks with EU member states to discuss the PR strategy for the trade deal in order to "reduce fears and avoid a mushrooming of doubts", and the Commission proposed to "further localise our communication effort at Member State level in a radically different way to what has been done for past trade initiatives". Fortunately, the Corporate Europe Observatory leaked the report discussed by EU member states. In it we see a direct attempt by the European Commission to mislead the public with the assistance of the governments of member states. The public relations programme is outlined in an enlightening paragraph as follows:

The aim is to define, at this early stage in the negotiations, the terms of the debate by communicating positively about what the TTIP is about (i.e. economic gains and global leadership on trade issues), rather than [...] about negotiating data privacy [and] lowering EU regulatory standards". For the approach to be successful it needs to be both proactive and quickly reactive, involving monitoring of public debate, producing targeted communications material and deploying that material through all channels including online and social media.

It is not surprising that the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, parroted the EU line and will not engage with the obvious problems and dangers posed to Irish sovereignty and the public interest by this treaty, particularly the threat posed by ISDS. It is also interesting that the Irish media have not discussed the trade deal in a critical manner at all. A search for the term "TTIP" in the LexisNexis news database, limited to Irish publications and with the sole condition that "TTIP" had to be included in the first three paragraphs of the article - in other words, that it was the subject of the piece - resulted in one article. Mr. Stephen Carroll of The Irish Timeshad written it, and it read as if tailor-made for the European Commission's propaganda guidelines, the only source quoted being the same Karel De Gucht, no less than five times.

While the Government and the Irish media show no signs of being interested in clarifying some of the issues surrounding this secret trade deal, it is clear what the driving force behind it is, the implications it will have for the Irish, and what this says about the ideology of the Government. The TTIP is the political project of a transatlantic corporate elite which, on the unfounded promise of increased trade and job creation, will attempt to reverse social and environmental regulatory protections and redirect legal rights from citizens to corporations.

Speaking of a complicit media, a lot of ideological work is required for the powers-that-be to convince the population that austerity is good for them or to reduce the intensity of protest against it. All major news outlets in Ireland are right of centre. While that is bad for those who want to know what is really going on, it is good for those who want a favourable spin on their policies. Neither Fine Gael nor the Labour Party was in favour of excessive austerity before the election. They were wiser then and realised that austerity attacks ordinary people by cutting Government spending on social services, health care and welfare. It seeks to make labour more flexible by dismantling and downgrading work conditions and protections to give more power to employers over employees. It raises regressive taxes such as VAT and encourages privatisation of State-owned enterprises, which are often sold to investors at bargain prices.

An interesting study by UCD lecturer Dr. Julien Mercille details how the Irish media have promoted austerity. The study examined more than 400 editorials and opinion pieces in Ireland's three leading newspapers, The Irish Times, the Irish Independentand the Sunday Independent, and found that only 12% of articles opposed fiscal consolidation, 55% supported it, and 34% did not voice any clear opinion. Worse, these numbers arguably overestimate the extent of the small opposition to austerity because many of the articles opposing fiscal consolidation simply rejected specific cuts without proposing any alternative policy. It is astonishing that only 3% of all articles supported an increase in Government spending, which could form the basis of a Keynesian stimulus programme. The media debate thus revolves around how best to implement austerity without questioning it. Totalitarian regimes would surely be impressed by the effectiveness of this information control.

The media have not been shy about announcing their role in convincing the public that austerity is good for them. At the outset of the crisis, in November 2008, an editorial in the country's newspaper of record, The Irish Times, called for a campaign to educate the population about the need for austerity and civic discipline. The problem was that Irish people did not appreciate the possible extent of the economic downturn because only 10% of them thought the budget should be tougher while two thirds thought it should be less tough, according to a national poll. The editors thus concluded that the Government would have a major job to do in educating public opinion about unpalatable economic realities and the need for civic discipline.

There is little doubt that austerity has led to the socialisation of private losses of elite institutions. This is still taking place. These developments, including the proposed TTIP agreement, are part of a wider moulding of national and legal structures to facilitate corporate business at the expense of the rights of citizens. In effect, the Government has colluded in the international race to the bottom in social protection while simultaneously transforming Irish law into a commodity to be put up for sale on the international market. The process is best exemplified in the annual report of the World Bank, Doing Business - Measuring Business Regulations, which grades 178 countries. We recently lauded ourselves when Forbesput us at the top of the list, but people should remember that in order to win this dubious accolade, Ireland must simultaneously rank among the worst countries in the world for social protection and financial regulations. This was left out of the discussion.

See this speech in context