Dr. Tom Healy:

First, to address what happened and why it happened yesterday, my understanding is that the European Parliament has the right to veto TTIP but not to change any parts of it. In the build-up to yesterday's planned discussion and vote, more than 100 amendments were proposed to a motion which would clarify the desired outcome from the point of view of the European Parliament in order for the European Parliament to endorse TTIP ultimately. It appears that the situation became far too complex and far too wide-ranging and consensus just was not possible. At the heart of that, it is certainly the case that ISDS was the major concern. That alone, perhaps, demonstrates that this is a complex issue. It is not quite so straightforward that certain things are off the table or certain things are impossible, because it is noticeable that there has been a shift in the debate in the past 12 months, particularly with the arrival of the new Commissioner. Certainly the emphasis is very much on claiming transparency and that the form of ISDS would be different, more analogous to the comprehensive economic trade agreement, CETA, involving the EU and Canada, and that therefore the concerns that were expressed are without foundation. The difficulty is that it is impossible to comment with finality or authority on any matter until we see the concrete final agreement and then subject that to various tests. At this point, it is far from certain that the concerns have been addressed. With regard to regulation on environmental standards and areas such as genetically modified organisms, for example, the assurances are in place but it is still not entirely clear what the final shape of any agreement will be. There is obviously trading, negotiating and bargaining to be done in a very complex environment with different laws and regulations on both sides of the Atlantic.

The Vice Chairman mentioned the local authorities and local services. That is an example of the uncertainty, because education and health are said to be excluded. That is also a reference to the 1994 GATT exemptions, which already provide for general economic services. Where a local authority is providing a service for which there is a charge, already there is a certain sense in which the market in a particular service or provision has been opened up in terms of commercial activity. I am not certain that would not be liable to a contest, using even some sort of arbitration mechanism. Many of those assurances that have been given in the case of the National Health Service in Britain have failed to convince, rightly or wrongly, many sectors of civil society in Britain. It is significant that German and British MEPs appear to be among those with some of the biggest concerns about the implications of TTIP.