Ever heard of the oversold idea and all above-our-heads, TTIP?
Some definitions to clear the air from mysterious abbreviations: TTIP stands for Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership, his half-brother is TPP or the Trans-Pacific-Partnership (China excluded), whilst their half-sister is TISA or the Trade in Services Agreement.
The present position: The not-so-benevolent Uncle Sam and his retinue, who keep him well groomed and who presumably stand to gain, forcefully tell us that the benefits grossly outweigh the drawbacks (if any at all). On the other hand, MaltaToday of 31st January carried a feature which reported that Malta will be the sole loser from such an agreement! The Economy Minister was all out for it (!), but a respected ex-prime minister was not that convinced and called for an open debate on the matter. Since January, we’ve seen much vocal opposition in major cities throughout Europe; hopefully, sometime in the near future, here in Malta, we might catch up once the antidote to our proverbial lethargy starts working!
The carrot: We’re told that the basic idea is to reduce the cost of exporting; hence, TTIP would encourage more commerce. Almost all import levies applied between the US and the EU will be eliminated. But bigger gains are envisaged coming from reducing the so-called non-tariff barriers. The big-heads seem to think that they can promote trade through what they call regulatory co-operation. However, as we’re fully aware, complying with regulations involves a cost. On another plane, rules in Europe and the US seem to achieve the same level of consumer safety and product quality, but differ in their technical details and their methods for ensuring that firms abide by the rules. TTIP aims to reduce this burden on business, possibly by recognising one another's standards. Closer co-operation is envisaged on new regulation. Furthermore, we’re told that the idea encourages transatlantic foreign investment!
The whip: TTIP is about enshrining an investor-rights regime in the host countries and ensuring the corporations can run wild in the respective economies with very little regulation or impingement by government or authority. One of the most criticized and controversial aspect of TTIP is the Investors States Dispute Settlement (ISDS). This tribunal allows such corporations to sue states for anything which they claim affects their investment! This is a new power that will be handed over to US corporations to sue the governments of Europe in a parallel judicial system which is available to them alone. Neither the people, nor the domestic firms and, for that matter, neither the governments of the host countries have access to it. It’s just there for foreign investors, in this case, US corporations!
So quite clearly, the TTIP undermines governments' right to regulate in the public interest, giving business groups a disproportionate influence over new legislation. Put in plain language, should a government want to reverse any arrangements, it might risk being sued under ISDS! TTIP is an absurd, outrageous, indecent and hence an unacceptable proposition which installs a mechanism purposely devised to be above the law of the land. TTIP is all about being 100 per cent anti-democratic!
Moreover, TTIP is most likely to lead to a lowering of standards for (1) consumers, (2) environmental protection, and (3) safety at work. This in the bottom line translates as a net ‘downward harmonisation’. Europe would actually be worse off, also in terms of economic activity, wages and government revenue as serious doubts linger on whether a TTIP agreement would stimulate growth in real terms. Surely enough, in the UK, there is particular concern about the impact of ISDS on the NHS.
Put in a nutshell! With TTIP in place, we’re irrevocably annexed to the US sphere of influence, irrespective of who might be sitting in the White House, be he/she a sage or a maniac. So, in truth of fact, can we afford to surrender our European sovereignty, our centuries-old cultures and traditions for a song, to a nation whose foreign policy seems to be still under the spell of those far-fetched heroics of some old cowboys and Indians movie? Evidently, TTIP is not for us and we’ll do far better do without it.
What to do, for a start – As Patrick Henry once so aptly put it: “The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them!” As this still holds true today, could our Ministry for Foreign Affairs, which presumably is involved in dealings of this size, decently illuminate us as to what is actually going on behind our backs?
Ramon Borg-Bartolo