TTIP Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Fast Track

TTIP: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Fast Track to Deregulation Hell! Hilda Palmer Co-ordinator GMHC Acting Chair National Hazards Campaign mail@gmhazards. org. uk; info@hazardscampaign. org. uk

TTIP + TPP = Neoliberal noose around the world and workers necks TTIP, TPP, CETA, Ti. SA – toxic alphabet soup of new types of free trade treaties ‘You can have free trade OR free people’ http: //www. waronwant. org/campaig ns/trade-justice/more/inform/18078 what-is-ttip

TTIP – What is it? • A ‘Free Trade Treaty’ between EU and USA • 12 March 2013, European Commission adopted a draft negotiating mandate for TTIP with the USA • Sold as a ‘Free Trade Treaty’, to remove barriers to trade, scrap tariffs, harmonise regulations, boost GDP – 0. 2 to 0. 5% -& family incomes- 500 Euros - increase jobs, get us out of recession black hole that unregulated banking/finance sector collapse created; set the rules for future global trade, retain global power viz China • TTIP negotiators contacts - 92% with Business lobbyists to 4% for public interest

Corporations and neoliberal governments want TTIP not Trade Unions, citizens or civil society

A new study from the Sunlight Foundation found that the top 200 politically active corporations received a mind-boggling $4. 4 trillion (that's trillion with a "T") in federal business and support over a period of just six years. Source: http: //sunlightfoundation. com/blog/2014/11/17/fixed-fortunes-biggest-corporate-political-interests-spend-billions-gettrillions/

TTIP- Why are we worried? Secrecy & negotiations by unelected officials & corporate lobbyists Investor State Dispute Settlement Public Services opened for privatisation e. g. NHS, Education, Very few tariffs – it’s all about regulations and standards Regulatory Harmonisation/Coherence/Cooperation –EU H&S, employment, food/env. Regs & standards far higher than US which also has not signed many ILO Conventions; US financial regs stricter • ‘Living document’- sets EU-US ‘institutional framework’ for future regulatory cooperation – Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation Council RCC in which corporations & business wants will dominate • Race to Bottom- Reduction EU Regs & standards; prevention of improvements or new protective regulations • • •

TTIP- Why are we worried? • Supposed economic benefits small or negative; risks HUGE • US- different H&S regulation, federal/state enforcement & much higher death/injury rate than EU(3 x at least); not ratified many ILO conventions, has ‘Right to Work’ states, very low unionisation • Business/Corporations given power in making regulation • Extends UK/EU deregulation – attacks on HSE & H&S system , EU REFIT deregulatory prog; Stoiber Group - all SMEs exempt from all employment & H&S regs – cutting enforcement • Part of Neoliberal Globalisation project for last 30 years • Benefits business not citizens health, safety, environment or rights • Anti-democratic corporate power grab • NAFTA failed- 1 million US manufacturing jobs lost, Mexican farmers dispossessed, no gains except to big corporations

The only ones to benefit from lack of regulation, enforcement and scrutiny are unscrupulous employers.

Since 2010 Hazards Magazine/Campaign has warned of, and campaigned against deregulation and its deadly effects

Demented Business Daleks squawk: ‘Deregulate, deregulate ’ Government obeys - exterminates Health & Safety ?

“The crusade against ‘red tape’” CEO http: //corporateeurope. org/sites/default/files/attachments/red_tape_crusade. pdf

CEO TTIP: Regulations Handcuffed

ISDS- Investor-State Dispute Settlement • Investor- State Dispute Settlement an instrument of public international law that grants foreign investor or company the right to initiate a dispute settlement proceedings against foreign government to be heard not in court, secret arbitration tribunal – Kangaroo Court - 3 corporate lawyers. • Tribunal rules on effects on investors profits of government actions - national laws, international obligations, health, environmental, social concerns count for nothing; • If ISDS adopted in TTIP, corporations could sue EU member states that adopt rules/laws/measures that protect the health and safety of workers, or environment, food safety, reverse privatisations, or increase social provisions and protections; • ISDS could stop EU and member states improving existing regulations that protect workers H&S , public health or environmental health; and introducing new regulations on nanoparticles, EDC, MSDs

ISDS • EU’s own Commission is publically divided on ISDS and even the ultra-free-market Cato Institute have come out against. The Economist wrote: • “If you wanted to convince the public that international trade agreements are a way to let multinational companies get rich at the expense of ordinary people, this is what you would do: give foreign firms a special right to apply to a secretive tribunal of highly paid corporate lawyers for compensation whenever a government passes a law to, say, discourage smoking, protect the environment or prevent a nuclear catastrophe. ”

ISDS examples • Philip Morris suing Australia over plain packaging for cigarettes • Veolia suing Egypt over increasing the minimum wage • Vattenfall suing Germany over suspension of nuclear programme after Fukushima • 1997 under NAFTA Ethyl Corporation sued Canadian government which banned MMT a toxic, proven health hazard petrol additive, for ‘expropriation of assets. 1998 Canada withdrew the banning law and paid Ethyl Corp US$ 13 million • Slovakia was sued by Dutch insurer over renationalising aspects of its health service – an election manifesto promise

ISDS Examples

Canadian Company uses UK – Romania treaty to sue Romania • Canadian mining company Gabriel Resources is seeking over $2. 5 billion damages from Romania after it rejected a vast gold mine at Rosia Montana, writes Oliver Tickell. Incredibly, it is taking legal action under a UKRomania trade agreement. • http: //www. theecologist. org/News/news_round_up/2984989/romania_faces_256 bn_claim_for_failed _gold_mine. html

ISDS threats • Government- i. e. Tax Payers, us - may have to compensate investors when it wishes to regulate, protect or re-nationalise in our interests • l. SDS threat may stop governments regulating- Regulatory Chill e. g. on EDCs, Carcinogens, MSDs • Domestic courts/judicial system are bypassed by the ISDS Kangaroo Courts • Private companies can drain state treasuries • Number of ISDSs increasing • Canada most sued country

ISDS’s enrich corporations

TTIP Aims Claims • EU-USA want to eliminate, reduce or prevent unnecessary regulations • Objective is to go for policies which include ‘regulatory coherence’ by making regulatory systems more compatible, minimising differences and reducing costs • Building a more integrated transatlantic marketplace that respects each side’s right to regulate the protection of health, safety and the environment at a level it considers appropriate

TTIP Aims Claims • To be achieved via following mechanisms: § Cooperation in areas that will bring efficiencies and cost savings to regulators and industry § Greater compatibility between US and EU regulation § Promotion of transparency in development and implementation of regulations

TTIP Aims Claims § Elimination of remaining tariffs § Reduction of cost of unnecessary regulatory differences § Establishment of mechanisms for future progress § Continuation of regulatory cooperation initiatives where appropriate

TTIP- Chemical regulation as example • EU and US keen to ‘enhance regulatory compatibility’ in various sectors: • medical devices, • cosmetics, • pharmaceuticals, • pesticides, • information and communication technologies and chemicals • EU has higher standards on chemicals than US: • EU REACH 2007 vs USA TSCA 1976

TTIP- Chemical regulation as example • REACH = Registration, Evaluation Authorisation of Chemicals require: • Chemical producers & importers to register new and existing chemicals ‘NO DATA: NO MARKET’ • Information compiled in registration dossier that must be updated on regular basis • Substances of Very High Concern - carcinogens, mutagens, reproductive toxins – are banned by default • Risk assessments are mandatory • Precautionary principle enshrined

TTIP- Chemical regulation as example • Toxic Substances Control Act 1976 • Allows chemicals on market without proof that they are safe; • TSCA is totally is outdated, not updated • Applies to 84, 000 industrial chemicals but allows 60, 000 – in use in 1976 - to be used under presumption of safety • TSCA hasn’t banned a chemical for 40 years

TTIP- Chemical regulation as example • Proving that a chemical is dangerous is responsibility of the Environment Protection Agency EPA- ‘US scientific certainty vs EU precautionary principle ‘- but many obstacles make it excessively difficult including absolute certainty takes years/bodies & industry influence and interference = no chemicals banned for 40 years • By 2010 only 1% of all chemicals on US market had been tested

TTIP- Chemical regulation as example • How can TTIP bring such conflicting laws and regulatory regimes on chemicals together ? • Regulatory coherence or Mutual recognition of Regs and/or future action via the Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation Council - now called Regulatory Cooperation Board • EU’s lead negotiator & public position paper ruled out use of these tools for chemicals but CIEL leaked text shows that they propose to use all of them! DANGEROUS

TTIP Dangers for Chemicals (and other OHS issues? ) • 110 public health& env. orgs in EU & US object to inclusion of the chemicals sector in any of TTIP’s relevant chapters, including Regulatory Coherence & Investment. These orgs evaluated industry proposals, concluding rather than improving chemical regulation, TTIP is poised to: • 1) Freeze development & implementation of stronger, more healthprotective laws; • 2) Derail European leadership on hormone (endocrine) disrupting chemicals, nanomaterials & other urgent and emerging issues; • 3) Block US states & EU Member States from taking action in face of inaction by US federal government and European Commission; • 4) Limit public access to info. on toxic chemicals, impeding innovation; • 5) Erase important differences between EU and US laws; and • 6) Create duplicative inefficiencies, providing no added value to the general public.

TTIP is Fast Track Deregulation and continues into future • TTIP is deregulatory initiative just like EU REFIT- Regulatory Fitness & Performance Programme, Stoiber initiatives, and the UK’s massive deregulatory and enforcement slashing on H&S and other laws, and comes on top of weakening of all regulatory structure, tripartite systems • Will aid the privatisation AGENDA • Benefits especially Trans National Corporations • Will set in stone existing situation and prevent improvements and reversal, e. g. of privatisation, deregulation, enforcement slashing

TTIP: European Disintegration, Unemployment and Instability TTIP would lead to net losses in terms of net exports after a decade, compared to the baseline “no-TTIP” scenario. Northern European Economies would suffer the largest losses (2. 07% of GDP) followed by France (1. 9%), Germany (1. 14%) and United Kingdom (0. 95%) • TTIP would lead to net losses in terms of GDP. Consistently with figures for net exports, Northern European Economies would suffer the largest GDP reduction (0. 50%) followed by France (-0. 48%) and Germany (-0. 29%) • TTIP would lead to a loss of labor income. France would be the worst hit with a loss of 5, 500 Euros per worker, followed by Northern European Countries (-4, 800 Euros per worker), United Kingdom (-4, 200 Euros per worker) and Germany (-3, 400 Euros per worker) • TTIP would lead to job losses. We calculate that approximately 600, 000 jobs would be lost in the EU. Northern European countries would be the most affected (-223, 000 jobs), followed by Germany (-134, 000 jobs), France (- 130, 000 jobs) and Southern European countries (-90, 000)

TTIP: European Disintegration, Unemployment and Instability TTIP would lead to a reduction of the labor share of GDP reinforcing a trend that has contribute to the current stagnation. The flipside of this decrease is an increase in the share of profits and rents in total income, indicating that proportionally there would be a transfer of income from labor to capital. The largest transfers will take place in UK (7% of GDP transferred from labor to profit income), France (8%), Germany and Northern Europe (4%) • TTIP would lead to a loss of government revenue. The surplus of indirect taxes (such as sales taxes or value-added taxes) over subsidies will decrease in all EU countries, with France suffering the largest loss (0. 64% of GDP). Government deficits would also increase as a percentage of GDP in every EU country, pushing public finances closer or beyond the Maastricht limits. • TTIP would lead to higher financial instability and accumulation of imbalances. With export revenues, wage shares and government revenues decreasing, demand would have to be sustained by profits and investment. But with flagging consumption growth, profits cannot be expected to come from growing sales. A more realistic assumption is that profits and investment (mostly in financial assets) will be sustained by growing asset prices. The potential for macroeconomic instability of this growth strategy is well known Jeronim Capaldo October 2014 The Global Development and Environment Institute of Tufts University http: //ase. tufts. edu/gdae/policy_research/TTIP_simulations. html ; Exec Summary http: //ase. tufts. edu/gdae/Pubs/wp/14 -03 Capaldo. TTIP_ES. pdf

Campaign against TTIP

#No. TTIP! • All UK Trade Unions oppose TTIP; TUC opposes TTIP • ETUC wants good trade treaty doesn’t oppose TTIP outright • War on Want, Global Justice Now, Friends of the Earth Europe and UK, 38 Degrees leading NGOs • #Stop TTIP and NGOs leading European Citizen’s Initiative totally against TTIP, including seeking 1 million signatures – has 2. 3 million in one year, closed • Campaigning led to consultation on ISDS; responses crashed website, 95% said NO to ISDS, negotiations suspended, EU came up with ISDS light

European Citizens Initiative

WE MUST #STOPTTIP: • • UK Tory Government for TTIP, free trade, promoting hard including ISDSs. US Government supporting - problems with TPP – now concluded negotiation & published Green Party oppose TTIP completely; Labour Party supported ‘good TTIP’ ‘no reduction in standards’, said opposed ISDSs, wants NHS exempt – Corbyn /Mc. Donnell more opposed Juncker President, and new Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom of European Commission, opposed ISDSs now wavering …. US, UK, EU and business promoting hard CETA finished & contains full-blooded ISDS so can act as backdoor even if TTIP excludes or has ISDS Lite option When finished, European Parliament must vote, then member states… WE MUST #STOPTTIP: ‘The only people who benefit from deregulation and lack of scrutiny are unscrupulous employers ‘

Useful Sources/Contacts • • CEO Corporate European Observatory: http: //corporateeurope. org/aboutceo; http: //corporateeurope. org/sites/default/files/attachments/red_tape_crusad e. pdf http: //corporateeurope. org/international-trade/2015/01/ttip-regulationshandcuffed CIEL Centre for International Environmental Law http: //www. ciel. org/ Hazards Magazine: No deal http: //www. hazards. org/workingworld/nodeal. htm War on Want – John Hilary booklet updated 2015: http: //www. waronwant. org/campaigns/trade-justice/more/inform/18078 what-is-ttip Stop TTIP: https: //stop-ttip. org/ Global Justice Now (was World Development Movement: http: //www. wdm. org. uk/ TPP TEXT: https: //ustr. gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/transpacific-partnership/TPP-Full-Text