Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

7. To ask the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation his plans to ensure transparency and openness, in and about the trade talks, relating to the transatlantic trade and investment partnership, TTIP; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6093/15]

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have broached the subject a number of times. It was interesting to see comments by the former Ombudsman, Emily O'Reilly, who said: "One should not forget that traditional methods of conducting international trade negotiations, characterised as they are by confidentiality and limited public participation, are ill-equipped to generate the legitimacy necessary in such high stakes talks." She argues that things need to be different from now on and that citizens need a stronger role. She has been critical of the lack of citizen participation in the TTIP negotiations to date.

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

To be fair, that has been reflected in the approach of Commissioner Malmström. There is a whole new approach being adopted, with greater engagement by citizens than has occurred previously in trade negotiations. The purpose of the TTIP negotiations is to generate jobs and growth by reducing barriers to trade and investment. As I mentioned to Deputy Seamus Healy, there is potential for 400,000 jobs across the EU and 8,000 additional jobs in Ireland from an ambitious trade agreement.

I welcome the wide interest in these negotiations and the opportunities it presents for constructive engagement and discussion on issues arising in the negotiations. I have sought to provide opportunity for open discussion. During the course of the past year, I have briefed the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Union Affairs. In June 2014, I hosted a conference in Dublin Castle for stakeholders, including Oireachtas Members. Last December, I participated in a round-table discussion with a range of stakeholders organised by the European Parliament’s office in Dublin. I plan to continue these engagements with the Oireachtas and MEPs. The publication in the next few weeks of the study commissioned by my Department on the opportunities of the TTIP for Ireland will provide further opportunity for engagement and openness on the issues of interest to us in these negotiations.

The European Commission is the EU’s negotiator in TTIP. Last November, the European Council of trade Ministers, which I attended, underlined the importance of better communicating the scope and the benefits of TTIP and called for enhanced transparency and dialogue with civil society. Commissioner Malmström’s response to this call for improving transparency and openness in the negotiations has been positive. The European Commission is making public more EU negotiating texts and is providing access to TTIP texts to all Members of the European Parliament. Fewer TTIP negotiating documents are classified as EU restricted.

Engagement with stakeholders during the TTIP negotiating rounds is now a permanent feature. Last week in Brussels, during the eighth round, in excess of 80 stakeholders from both sides of the Atlantic presented their views on the various aspects of the negotiations. This provides further opportunity for openness and transparency in direct stakeholder engagement with the negotiators.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister is telling us that everything is open and transparent but many people feel otherwise. The Minister is aware of the group, Corporate Europe Observatory, which has taken a close look at this. There is fierce opposition to the far-reaching rights for foreign investors in this treaty. There are fears they will be given the right to undermine existing legislation. It is almost as if they will be given the opportunity to write their own legislation.

Going against what the Minister says in his answer, Ms Emily O'Reilly has raised the point that the US has sought to veto access to some documents. She is concerned. For the US to say that it will be unhappy if certain documents are disclosed is, according to Ms. O'Reilly, not good enough. It gives the US a veto over disclosure of certain documents, which is worrying. Coming up with the final document, presenting it to people, telling them that this is what we are doing and letting them say "Yes" or "No" to it at that stage is not good enough. There must be greater engagement with the citizens throughout the process if people will be content with the final outcome.

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

There is exactly that. We have had eight rounds and after every round there has been an open and transparent opportunity for people to express views. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. It is a rolling process.

I acknowledged that there are people who are critics but I ask the Deputy to look honestly at what is in the document. I quoted to Deputy Healy what went into the Canadian document to protect investors. They can only call on the investor dispute mechanism if they are faced with a fine denial of justice in criminal or administrative procedures, if there has been a fundamental breach of due process, if there has been manifest arbitrariness in the way they have been treated, or if there has been targeted discrimination. The elements that go into the improved investor-state dispute settlements, ISDS, over time are narrowing the ranges where they can pursue complaints and these elements are improving the process. In the mandate, we have excluded rafts of things that the agreement cannot enter into, including GMO, the right to regulate or the right to have public services provided through the public sector.

These things have been ring-fenced and are not party to these negotiations. One must distinguish between opposition that simply is opposed to any trade and that which is founded on elements and consideration of weaknesses or whatever. This is an important distinction, and the reason there has been so much consultation is in order that there can be a rational debate in which people examine each item. It is a negotiation, and not everything will be fully in the open. The Deputy will not know final positions until the end, and if he ever has been in negotiation, he will know that that is the way negotiations evolve.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not radical to state that, generally speaking, large corporations in the developed world and probably in the undeveloped world have more power than ordinary people. That is not rocket science. I am not against everything but I am concerned about whether the interests of the citizen will be best protected by whatever we end up with. In her latest book, Naomi Klein has addressed the point that the TTIP and many other extant trade and investment rules actually make it difficult to challenge corporations in how they deal with fossil fuels, for example, and so on. They have incredible rights.

I believe there probably is more discussion on this issue in Europe than in Ireland. Given that the mainstream media do not appear to have an interest in the TTIP, can the Minister provide for Members an analysis of his perceptions on what has been negotiated thus far and what is being discussed? Can the Minister give Members a breakdown of what it currently means to Ireland in black and white? There is confusion at the moment. If the Minister could do away with the confusion, he might get greater acceptance from those who are in opposition to this process. It would be great if the Department were able to state how this would and would not affect Ireland.

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

One can be sceptical of enterprises and investment, but just a moment ago Deputy Healy stated that there was not enough international investment and that big corporations were not coming in and investing enough.

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

What I said was that we were not getting our fair share of it.

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

Investment is good for countries, but it will only come if there is a reasonable level of protection. That is why these things have been there. Investors must be protected from arbitrary actions by Governments or other bodies such as courts. That is why investment protection is part of these agreements. Ireland has not needed it because it has a strong Constitution that provides that to people, and we have not had experience of huge exploitation or abuses by foreign enterprise investing in Ireland. These mechanisms are designed to ensure that rules are applied in a fair manner. That is their purpose, but to take the Deputy's point, the Department has commissioned work that will provide a sector-by-sector indication of opportunities and threats for Ireland, which will be published in the near future. I hope this will add to the debate. Moreover, of course there are concerns. As the Deputy is aware, there are concerns about beef coming into Ireland, but there also are hopes in respect of cheese going to the United States. Any such trade negotiation is a two-way process and, ultimately, the Government must balance them out. That is always an element of negotiation.