EU Parliament resolution on TTIP is a diplomatic blunder

Today the European Parliament adopted a non-binding resolution on the trade agreement with the United States (TTIP). Based on this resolution we could have a discriminating and expansive investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system, rigged to the advantage of the United States. A diplomatic blunder. (adopted ISDS amendment)

First, discrimination. ISDS gives foreign investors — and only foreign investors — the right to bypass local courts and challenge governments before supranational investment tribunals.

ISDS compromise threatens democracy

Martin Schulz, the president of the European Parliament proposed a compromise amendment on investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS). [1]

The amendment calls on the EU commission to replace ISDS with ISDS: “to replace the ISDS-system with a new system for resolving disputes between investors and states”. The president’s proposal discriminates: only foreign investors would have access, local investors, states or citizens won’t. [2]

It is also anti-democratic and a slippery slope. Supranational fora fall outside a democratic context.

France proposes empty ISDS reforms

The French government published a proposal for investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) reforms: Towards a new way to settle disputes between states and investors, May 2015. (pdf, French: Le Monde)

Summary

The French proposal would grant for-profit arbitrators, working in a system that creates perverse incentives, vast discretionary powers. This creates a serious risk on expansionist interpretations. Foreign investors would be able to use this biased system to challenge governments. As it is practically impossible to withdraw from trade agreements, the EU would be locked in.

A week of fundamental critique on trade negotiations

Last week the European Parliament postponed the vote on a resolution on the EU-US trade agreement (TTIP). The vote was postponed because many social democratic members oppose investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS). The US House voted a fast-track package down. This week various authors criticised fundamental aspects of ongoing trade negotiations. The geopolitical argument: China

Lawrence Summers and George Soros pointed out that the use of anti-China language is dangerous.

S&D ISDS amendments are seriously broken

Wednesday the European Parliament will vote on a resolution on TTIP, the agreement with the US under negotiation. The EU commission wants to add investor-to-state dispute settlement, or ISDS, to this agreement. This would give foreign investors the right to bypass local courts. In the resolution the Parliament will express its view on TTIP and ISDS. Here is the text of the draft resolution (the report of the trade committee) and the amendments; on ISDS the social democrats (S&D) tabled amendments 114-116.

ISDS: diplomatic blunder Malmström threatens democracy and privacy

The EU commission published a concept paper on investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS). In my opinion the plans are a diplomatic blunder which threatens our democracy and privacy. ISDS would give foreign investors – and only foreign investors – the right to bypass local courts and challenge governments before supranational investment tribunals. ISDS “solves” incidental discrimination against foreign investors through structural discrimination against local investors, governments and citizens. The commission wants to go ahead with the trade agreements with Canada and Singapore.

Social democrats propose dangerously flawed ISDS reforms

Social democratic ministers from six EU countries published reform proposals for the highly controversial investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism. ISDS gives foreign investors the right to bypass local courts and use international arbitration to fight out conflicts with states. The claimants have a 50% influence on the make up of the arbitral tribunals. For the short term the social democrats from Germany, Sweden, The Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark, and France propose to ratify the agreements with Canada and Singapore. These agreements are seriously broken.

TPP ISDS is rigged to advantage U.S.

Update: final text is out, just as rigged. ————————————

Wikileaks has released the “Investment Chapter” from the secret negotiations of the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) agreement. It contains the highly controversial investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS), which makes it possible for multinational to sue states for international tribunals. For a first analysis see Public Citizen. I will point out one aspect of the TPP ISDS section: it is rigged to the advantage of the U.S.

Rigged

The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) is the most used ISDS forum.

International investment court plan threatens our democracy

The European Commission investigates a permanent international investment court as a replacement of the controversial investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS). The plan for a court and the road map towards it are fundamentally flawed. To protect our democracy the European Parliament has to reject both ISDS and court. Former vice-president of the European Commission in charge of justice and now member of the European Parliament international trade committee Viviane Reding proposed to replace ISDS with a permanent international investment court. Commissioner for Trade Malmström supports the idea.

Commissioner Malmström defends rigged ISDS in CETA

Today EU commissioner Malmström gave a speech in the European Parliament trade committee on investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS). ISDS gives foreign investors the right to use arbitration against states, instead of using local courts. Malmström made clear that she does not want to change the trade agreement with Canada (CETA), which contains a highly controversial ISDS section. The CETA text was used for the ISDS consultation. If CETA is ratified, multinationals from the US and other countries will be able to use the ISDS mechanism in CETA against the EU and its member states.