The European Parliament’s trade committee has been accused of not trusting Europe’s national courts with safeguarding the rights of international investors after it called for the controversial Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clause to be retained in the proposed EU-US trade deal.
The European Commission’s latest contribution on the investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) scheme is a disappointing, recycled 12-page document that visibly struggles with the contradiction that is inherent in claiming that ISDS under the EU-Canada trade deal (CETA) is of the highest standard while also acknowledging that the problems with ISDS under TTIP are far from resolved.
Germany’s environment agency UBA has expressed serious concern that the EU’s position on the emerging Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) deal could weaken environmental protection standards in Europe. The UBA is also suggesting that any TTIP agreement should include a list of areas where cooperation on environmental standards would benefit both America and Europe.
The Fuel Quality Directive (FQD) was first proposed in early 2007 as part of the so-called “integrated approach”, to ensure that the oil industry would also contribute to the fight against climate change. Its implementation has been frequently and quietly delayed until the end of 2014 due to massive amount of lobbying by oil interests.
Speech at European Parliament International Trade Committee hearing on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) on 18 March 2015 by T&E director Jos Dings.
The EU is under remarkable pressure to drop a clause on investor protection from its proposed US trade deal after the overwhelming majority of responses to its public consultation expressed opposition to so-called investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS).
The findings of the public consultation on investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in the EU-US free trade negotiations, published today, leaves no room for any other conclusion than that ISDS should be excluded from any such trade agreement, two members of the European Commission’s own advisory group have said. The European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and Transport & Environment (T&E) called on the EU to heed the views of the almost 150,000 European citizens who participated, a record in the history of European public consultation.
Two proposed trade deals – the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Trade and Economic Agreement (CETA), and the United States-European Union Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – have attracted widespread international criticism by threatening to give unrivaled, unfettered "investment" rights to multinational corporations, including the world's worst polluters. While the text of CETA has been finalized and made public and TTIP is in an earlier phase of secretive negotiations, both still require formal ratification. It's not too late – the EU, U.S. and Canada should eliminate corporate-empowering rules from trade agreements rather than falsely claim that the rules have been "reformed" for the better.
A wave of corporate lawsuits against the EU, its member states and Canada could result from the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions in the European Union-Canada trade, a new analysis has revealed.
An EU-wide coalition of civil society organisations representing a broad spectrum of public interests have joined their voices to face the democratic threat posed by the current Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations. To promote social justice, environmental sustainability and human rights it is imperative that investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), a regulatory co-operation council and the deregulation of standards are clearly excluded in a transparent fashion from TTIP.