Dáil debates

Thursday, 12 February 2015

Ceisteanna - Questions - Priority Questions

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership

10:00 am

Photo of Séamus HealySéamus Healy (Tipperary South, Workers and Unemployed Action Group)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

5. To ask the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation if he will withdraw his stated support for the inclusion in the transatlantic trade and investment partnership negotiations of a new investor state dispute settlement mechanism, which allows corporations to sue Governments for loss of revenue, bypassing the Irish courts, when Government regulations are seen to affect expected profits; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5842/15]

Photo of Séamus HealySéamus Healy (Tipperary South, Workers and Unemployed Action Group)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Minister provide an update on the transatlantic trade and investment partnership negotiations and, specifically, the proposed investor state dispute settlement mechanism?

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The purpose of the negotiations on a transatlantic trade and investment partnership, TTIP, is to reduce barriers to trade and investment in order to generate jobs and growth. Based on European Commission estimates, an ambitious TTIP could generate 400,000 jobs. The gains for Ireland could be double this in proportionate terms, approximately 8,000 additional jobs, because of the significant flows of trade between Ireland and the US.

The scope of the European Commission’s mandate to negotiate with the United States on a TTIP includes investment protection and investor state dispute settlement, ISDS. The aim is to promote more two-way investment between the US and EU with high standards of protection for investors. This mandate has been supported by all member states, including Ireland. All of the EU’s free trade agreements seek to provide EU investors abroad with a level of protection similar to that which they would obtain in the EU. This is important for Irish investors abroad.

Ireland does not have bilateral investment treaties. In Ireland, guarantees to investors that they will not be treated in a discriminatory manner are provided by virtue of Article 43 of our Constitution. However, in other EU member states this protection is provided through bilateral investment treaties with third countries that include ISDS. Nine member states have such treaties with the US. TTIP would replace these.

International experience points to a wide disparity of bilateral investment agreement provisions. Some cases taken by investors under some of these have justifiably brought criticism of ISDS as a mechanism. The TTIP negotiations give the EU an opportunity to make improvements and create a new generation ISDS model that addresses the weaknesses identified in other agreements. Indeed, the existing mandate already provides important provisions protecting the right of government to regulate sectors. I support the European Commission in its continuing work to modify and improve the existing models and through the public consultation which it has conducted.

In the case of the recently concluded negotiations between the EU and Canada, for example, a breach of the fair and equitable treatment obligation could only arise when there is denial of justice in criminal, civil or administrative proceedings; a fundamental breach of due process, including a fundamental breach of transparency, in judicial and administrative proceedings; manifest arbitrariness; targeted discrimination on manifestly wrongful grounds, such as gender, race or religious belief; or abusive treatment of investors, such as coercion, duress and harassment. In addition, in the Canada agreement, there is provision for a list of arbitrators pre-agreed by the EU and Canada.

The European Commission has indicated it will engage in further consultations with member states, the European Parliament and other stakeholders and that, following these consultations, it will develop specific proposals for the TTIP negotiations. I very much welcome this approach and it is important to take time to have open and constructive discussion following the Commission’s report that will inform the next steps. At this stage, there are no negotiations taking place with the United States on this aspect of the proposed agreement. Ultimately, this element, as indeed other elements of the mandate, will only be included if the overall outcome is satisfactory to the EU.

Photo of Séamus HealySéamus Healy (Tipperary South, Workers and Unemployed Action Group)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are serious and significant concerns about these negotiations in a variety of areas, including the prospect of the displacement of 1 million jobs in the European Union which will affect this country too. There is a concern that low-grade, hormone-injected and genetically modified beef products from the US may gain access to the Irish market. Questions have arisen about the investor state dispute mechanism which would appear to undermine the democratic foundations of the State. Questions have also arisen over the reduction in wages and conditions of employment for workers. There is considerable concern that transnational corporations could bypass the courts through the dispute resolution mechanism.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The idea of low-grade or genetically modified beef coming into Europe has been explicitly excluded in the mandate. That is not an eventuality that the EU would countenance. In respect of wages and employment conditions, the Department has commissioned some research into this which indicates there would be benefits through improvements in wages, employment, exports and growth. The balance sheet is positive on all aspects of employment and working conditions.

I recognise there are concerns in any trade negotiations because barriers will come down. Obviously, those sectors behind some large barriers will face more competition. Other opportunities, however, will arise in sectors where Europe can now get into US markets, where previously there were substantial barriers to European businesses. It is a two-way process and there will always be some level of trading to be agreed. Both sides will have to be satisfied that the reduction in trade barriers is an improvement. Every assessment would show the reduction of such barriers improves the opportunities in both countries. Trade barriers are not helpful by pushing up costs and representing a loss. While I understand the Deputy’s concerns, these are negotiations which will be done in a very open and transparent way and people will have an opportunity to input into them.

Photo of Séamus HealySéamus Healy (Tipperary South, Workers and Unemployed Action Group)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a concern these negotiations are secret. Is the Minister prepared to advise the Dáil on an ongoing, say quarterly, basis on the conduct and the progress of these negotiations?

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As Deputy Mick Wallace has a later question on this very topic, I do not want to encroach on it now. Suffice to say, these have been very open negotiations. There are briefings after every session and the information is available on the public record to Members of the European Parliament. I have engaged in several consultations with the relevant committees. I am happy to appear before any committee again at any point on these discussions.