Economic and Monetary Affairs: To TTIP or to not TTIP

Posted by : Alex Shaw
Country : United States
Date : 20.05.2016
Profession : Graduate Student
From : Pepperdine School of Public Policy
Target institution : European Commission, United States Trade Representative
Problem status :

TTIP aims to "liberalize one-third of global trade," creating millions of new paid jobs. The Centre for Economic Policy Research estimates that 80% of the potential economic gains from the TTIP agreement depend on reducing the conflicts of duplication between EU and US rules. This will ensure that the United States and Europe remain "standard makers, rather than standard takers" in the global economy, subsequently ensuring that producers worldwide continue to gravitate towards joint US-EU standards (Bollyky, Thomas J. and Anu Bradford "Getting to Yes on Transatlantic Trade").

TTIP contenders see TTIP beneficial for Europe. John Bruton, former EU ambassador to the US, is one of those individuals. He argues for TTIP based on 6 points: 1. It would reduce the cost of regulation 2. It would help small and medium sized businesses to break into the transatlantic market 3. The US Federal, State and local government market would open to European tenders 4. It would help high tech start-up businesses on both sides by creating a single market of almost 1 billion consumers 5. It would help keep Britain in the EU 6. It would give a confidence boost to the global economy. (http://www.martenscentre.eu/blog/why-ttip-good) (http://www.energypost.eu/defence-ttip-good-economy-climate/)

TTIP contesters identified that rather than citizens, it’s much more likely that only big corporations will benefit from it: investors will be able to sue states, corporations will be invited to co-write new laws, big businesses might gain excessive influence on the secret negotiations, the negotiations are conducted in secret, food quality standards and consumer protection could be weakened, workers’ rights and jobs could be endangered, European countries would be falling under pressure to allow high-risk technologies such as fracking, TTIP would further increase inequalities, and liberalization and privatization would become one-way streets (https://stop-ttip.org/what-is-the-problem-ttip-ceta/) (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/what-is-ttip-and-six-reasons-why-the-answer-should-scare-you-9779688.html).

One challenge regarding TTIP is how to protect investor’s rights. Most commonly used globally is the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). This would allow for multinational corporations to sue governments if their policy hurts their business as stated above. Last month, Green Peace released leaked documents of what has been negotiated for TTIP thus far. Although there is currently no Investor State Dispute Settlement provision included in the writing, people speculate that the US will bring it up again despite being dropped last year. Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have threatened to block TTIP if ISDS is included in the final draft of the agreement. An investment court system (ICS) was proposed, but skeptics saw it as no different from ISDS.

The question is should ISDS, an alternative, or nothing at all be included in the TTIP for investor protection?

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/

https://ustr.gov/ttip

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2015/march/investor-state-dispute-settlement-isds

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-5651_en.htm

https://ttip-leaks.org/

http://www.euractiv.com/section/trade-society/news/commission-lashes-out-at-ttip-leaks-as-a-storm-in-a-teacup/


What is your solution?

Fields marked with * are mandatory.

*

Explain your solution: Please, be as brief and accurate as possible. This field is limited to 1500 characters. In case you need more space, publish a second solution idea. To be considered in the policy paper, your solution should meet the three criteria that form the mission of our project:

  • be feasible: this means that it can be accomplished by the existing organizations or with help from others.
  • be valuable: it should bring value to overseers, people in general or members of various communities.
  • be sustainable: it is likely to attract public support, authority and money from the political, social or business environments.
*

Your name: We publish your name to give you credit for your solution proposal and to promote you.

*

Your country: We publish your country to see how intercultural is the participation to solve this problem.

*

Your profession: We also publish your profession to give you credit.

*

Your education: We do not publish your education, but ask for it for our statistical purposes.

*

Your email: We do not publish this information. We keep it for our own records to stay in touch with you in case we need more information about your solution idea when we issue the policy paper.

*

Your phone number: We do not publish your phone number. We store it for our own records to communicate with you  when issuing the policy paper, if needed.

Your webpage: This field is not mandatory. If you have a blog or an organization, you can promote it here. However, we will not accept websites that promote sex, violence, hatred or other inappropriate behavior.

Upload a photo of yourself: This field is not mandatory. You can upload a square-sized photo of 80x80 pixels or higher. We want to promote you and give you credit for your solution idea(s). The supported formats are JPG, GIF and PNG.

The CAPTCHA Code: To avoid spam, type in the two words that show up in the CAPTCHA box.

Thank you for having the initiative to publish a solution to this problem on Public-Policies.EU, our citizen engagement platform! Your effort is making a great contribution to fulfilling our mission, that is engaging people in providing valuable, sustainable and feasible solutions to problems of public concern. With your example, we are closer to generating public policies made by citizens!


This website has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of SMART Development Center and can in no way reflect the views of the European Union.