Written answers

Tuesday, 7 July 2015

Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation

International Agreements

Photo of Finian McGrathFinian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

175. To ask the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation given that Ireland does not have any investor-state dispute settlement agreements with the United States of America, and that the level of investment from the United States of America in Ireland still stood at $204 billion, while Irish investment in the United States of America stood at $25 billion in 2011, if he now supports the inclusion of an investor-state dispute settlement in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership that would be binding on Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27291/15]

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

According to assessments made by the EU Commission, a comprehensive TTIP could over time boost EU GDP by 0.5% per annum bringing significant economic gains as a whole for the EU. This converts into 400,000 jobs across the EU. A study commissioned by my Department estimates that these benefits in Ireland will be proportionally greater than in the EU as a whole. It suggests growth in Irish exports of almost 4%, increases in investment of 1.5% and increase in real wages of 1.5%. It estimates somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 additional export related jobs.

The EU Commission’s mandate to negotiate with the United States on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) includes in the scope (paragraphs 22 and 23), investment protection and investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). The stated aim of negotiations on investment is to negotiate investment liberalisation and protection provisions on the basis of the highest levels of liberalisation and highest standards of protection that both sides have negotiated to date.

The mandate makes it clear that the inclusion of investment protection and ISDS will depend on EU interests being met and on the final balance of the Agreement. Importantly, the mandate states that the objectives of any investment protection provisions would be without prejudice to the right of EU and the member states to adopt and enforce measures necessary to pursue legitimate public policy objectives such as social, environmental, security, stability of the financial system, public health and safety in a non-discriminatory manner.

This means that the type of investment arbitration system under TTIP will be a vast improvement on investment protection in existing Bilateral Investment Treaties, some of which date back to the 1950s.

The Commission’s Concept Paper, “Investment in TTIP and beyond – the path for reform”, published on 6 May, sets out the context for this reform and, building on the important progress that has been achieved in the investment agreements with Canada and Singapore, sets out four areas for further improvement: Governments’ right to regulate, establishment and functioning of tribunals, relationship between national judicial systems and an ISDS system, and an appellate mechanism.

These improvements are aimed at fixing the problems with investor dispute settlement in order to create a new modern system of investment arbitration. Ireland already provides the highest protection for investors by virtue of Article 43 of our Constitution, so the policy intention of the Commission in these negotiations is not new to Ireland.

The inclusion of an acceptable model of ISDS would provide a common floor across the 28 Member States and at federal and state level in the US.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.