Dr. Cecilia Malmström:

It will be monitored, as it is monitored in the European Union. We do not have European police going around but we have ways of controlling it. We follow up complaints. We have ways of monitoring it and this will happen.

European legislation states GMOs are tested by the European Food Safety Authority, EFSA. If EFSA states a GMO product is safe it can be used in Europe, but if it states it is not it will not be allowed in Europe and this will not change. It is forbidden to sell on the European market products which are forbidden in Europe, be they GMOs, hormones or other products. This will also be monitored, as it is today. We trade with many countries every day.

Irish standards are very high; they are higher than those of many other countries in the EU. It would be difficult to impose Irish rules on the US, but we can impose European rules and work within the EU. At present the European Parliament is doing important work on antibiotics.

The Chairman asked about transparency. This has been criticised and we are trying our best to change it. All European Union texts are online, including legislative proposals, background proposals, common positions, many explanatory notes and references to various reports. We will continue to put such documentation online as we develop common positions. In some areas we have not yet developed common positions but as we do we will share them with the US and put them online. It is an ongoing exercise. Prior to every round of negotiations our chief negotiator and his team meet the trade policy committee, which has representatives of all member states, and the European Parliament to brief them on the forthcoming negotiations and the team reports back afterwards. Together with the European Parliament President's secretariat we are increasing the number of MEPs with access to the few texts which are not public.

With regard to the timetable, we want to conclude this under the Obama regime if possible. There are many factors, including the actual progress of the negotiations, the electoral calendar in the US and whether it will be possible to conclude it during an electoral year. We are working at full speed to see if it is possible.

We believe SMEs will be the biggest winners, because tariffs and red tape hurt small companies much more than bigger companies. The agreement has a special chapter on SMEs and we are looking at various ways to facilitate them, such as a joint database which includes all of the rules, regulations and opportunities. We will also examine with member states how to help small companies to benefit from and implement the opportunities in TTIP and other trade agreements.

I did not write the Copenhagen report so I cannot sign off on every figure. It is a way of calculating based on solid experience of predicting these issues. It contains much interesting information and members can examine it for Irish specific information. I would say it makes a very good case for Ireland.

Member states unanimously said investor-state dispute settlement, ISDS, should be part of the agreement under certain conditions. Two days ago I discussed my thoughts on reform of ISDS with all of the Ministers and they were very positive. I will not go into what Minister said what. The US and EU have very advanced judicial systems. Normally if there is a conflict it should go through the judicial system, but trade agreements are not automatically national law. There are issues whereby European companies, as foreign companies under US law, will not be protected against discrimination with regard to nationalisation or expropriation. There is a need for very limited specific possibilities to seek arbitration elsewhere. This is why ISDS exists. We are examining whether it can be reformed. There have been very few cases since 1959 and companies have seldom won. Usually the country wins.