TTIP unfairhandelbar | 6 March 2014
Common Welfare over Economic Interests: Stop the TTIP and CETA!
A message for candidates running in the 2014 European Parliament elections
At the moment, the European Union is negotiating with the United States of America and Canada the terms of far-reaching trade and investment agreements (TTIP and CETA).
1. As public citizens, we demand an end to negotiations behind closed doors and the democratic restructuring of EU trade policies.
2. A weakening of existing workers’ rights, environmental- and consumer protection standards, as well as financial market regulations through the TTIP or CETA is absolutely unacceptable. We also reject reductions in future political scopes of action.
3. Banks and corporations should not be granted additional rights of action against States (Investor-State-Dispute-Settlement, ISDS), which would enable them to thwart democratically taken decisions.
4. Hence, the negotiations of the TTIP and CETA must be stopped immediately. We demand that the members of the EU parliament take a public stance against these negotiations and that they reject the agreements, if presented with the terms for ratification.
Sign on here: http://www.attac.de/sign-against-ttip
The negotiations of the TTIP and the CETA are currently being held behind closed doors, under the influence of business lobbies. Neither public citizens nor parliamentarians have access to important negotiating papers.
The cutting of tariffs plays a rather marginal role in the negotiations. The adjustment of standards bares much greater importance. On the negotiating table are workers’ rights, environmental- and consumer protection standards, as well as financial market regulations. The possible consequences of these agreements range from the undermining of social standards and financial market regulations to the approval and import of genetically-modified food and the expansion of fracking to extract natural gas.
The Investor-State-Dispute-Settlement (ISDS) would grant foreign banks and corporations additional rights of action against States. These rights would be a powerful weapon against democratically taken decisions. Existing legal systems would be undermined; and taxpayers would be forced to pay billions in damages to international investors.