(Classified as Creative Commons, their link.) So I’m pasting in the entire text without the quote function, and offer thanks to both organizations.
From Public Ecomonies, I put it through Bing Translator:
It is important to say that the terms of Transatlantic Investment Treaty and Trade TTIP / TAFTA are secret and that the information that I have come from internal documents leaked and located on the Internet, so the mere publication of such information could change any negotiation strategy by the European Commission.
The document to be analyzed has 46 points and is entitled “GUIDELINES FOR THE NEGOTIATION OF A GLOBAL TRADE AND INVESTMENT AGREEMENT CALLED TRADE AND INVESTMENT TREATY AND ASSOCIATION BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”(Directives for the negotiation on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Between the European Union and the United States of America) and describe the basic lines to be followed by the delegation of the European Union in the bilateral negotiation of TTIP / TAFTA.
The first thing that stands out in the document is the constant call to the World Trade Organization, WTO, supranational organization that defines itself as “The World Trade Organization (WTO) is the only international organization dealing rules governing trade between countries” but forgets tell you the fact that access to this involves the acceptance of all treaties so that once the income of an approved country “”, the parliament of that country is outside negotiations of any new WTO rule, falling this responsibility to the executive powers of the country, and even though I disagreed with the new regulations would have to assume or leave the organization. Spain is a member of the WTO since 1995.
As we see, one of the key references for negotiation does not seem to be too democratic in its functioning and neither is about transparency and that there is no possibility of access to the databases of the WTO.
If anyone have doubts the importance of the WTO, the document on your second point says: “The agreement will be ambitious, comprehensive, balanced and fully consistent with the World Trade Organization rules and obligations (WTO)” As seen not speech or the U.S. Congress or the European Parliament.
Once the main reference guide to the basics of negotiation of certain Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty TTIP / TAFTA go into the claim for negotiation. The first thing that makes it clear that the document is intended to liberalize markets Treaty on European Union and the United States by creating a free trade area where there are no tariff barriers and regulations which standardize.
As intended the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty TTIP / TAFTA achieve the objectives described in the previous paragraph, first gradually eliminating tariffs between the two parties to products exported so that on one hand the parties hereto and specifically Spain, imports from the United States in 2012 were 9,878 million euros, so that the exemption of tariffs would be a new setback for the public coffers, already remove depleted.
The elimination of tariffs will not only to Spain and the European Union all decreased revenue for the public purse, but it will make American companies can enter unhindered in the Spanish market. Do But this liberalization of the Spanish market, why should cause fear, if while Spanish companies have free access to the U.S. market?
The answer is simple and obvious, Spanish entrepreneurs are too used to live in public bodies, this makes their R + D + I are zero or near zero. Moreover, the crisis has Funcionários the lack of adaptability of the Spanish business to new challenges so that seems complicated skin type bull employer can face the most aggressive, innovative and adaptive to market incidences American businessman.
This overview of entrepreneurship Spanish does not apply to big companies like telephone or banks like Banco Santander to which it opens a world of opportunity at a great price.
From the above, the first conclusion that can be obtained is that while 99% of Spanish businessmen are likely to be adversely affected by the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty TTIP / TAFTA, unlike large companies to which opens up a market that will allow them to grow and improve their profits.
In terms of growth for the European Union, the public position of the European Commission indicates that the benefit of the Treaty will be an impact of 1% of GDP, but the current figures used by the experts themselves from the European Commission and are careful to keep secretly was 0.1% impact on GDP in the first year.
As for Spain, what benefit will you get? In the best case, the loss of their legislative autonomy and subjection to the Treaty will leave that 0.1% of GDP, which are about 1,000 million euros, probably similar to what obtained in bilateral trade tariffs.
So as we have been able to try on our own skin Spanish citizens, the benefit of the 1% prevail absolutely over the position of the current government and anyone else who is in the hands of most of the current political parties. I say most, if not all accounts.
Second, the Transatlantic Investment Treaty and Trade TTIP / TAFTA aims to match the laws between the European Union, more protective in terms of individual and work rights and American law where individual rights are always subject to the interests of corporations and work practically nonexistent.
In this sense in order to hide this legislation equalizing downward by the European Commission negotiators indicated that “The Commission must also ensure that nothing in the Agreement shall prevent the Parties from applying their national legislation, regulations and requirements regarding entry and stay, provided that doing so does not nullify or impair the benefits accruing under the Agreement.”
This confusing paragraph says on one hand that does not prevent the parties from applying their laws, but also makes clear that Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty TTIP prevail / TAFTA providing that doing so does not nullify or impair the benefits accruing Agreement. It seems clear that the new precedence Treaty on European or national legislation.
It is likely that the preeminence of the rules of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty TTIP / TAFTA the Spanish CEOE this jumping for joy because finally achieved one of its main objectives, the liberalization of the labor market and the significant reduction of wages workers.
A third aspect of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty TTIP / TAFTA, notable is the investment protection standards established to provide the highest possible level of protection and legal certainty. Of course, when European trading guide, speaking of European companies, but logically, they expected the same counterparty required.
These standards of fair treatment, legal protection against expropriation, etc, includes so-called “umbrella clauses” (umbrella clause) who introduced that allow the clause to appeal directly to Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty TTIP / TAFTA as standard top and binding over any national law character.
As mentioned earlier, national rules apply provided they do not impair the benefits of the Treaty, so that American and European companies come to Spain may be removed by the umbrella clause any legislative problem that causes them not only Spanish legislation, but even the Constitution itself and which would become a standard lower than the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty TTIP / TAFTA range.
A third is curious as negotiation you Geile procurement point. At that point states that “The Agreement shall be to the mutual improved access to public procurement markets in ali administrative levels (national, regional and local), and in the areas of public services, covering the relevant operations of companies working in this field and to ensure no less favourable treatment than that accorded to suppliers locally.” This point probably squeak many Spanish companies that live primarily in government procurement and seems genuine private hunting. I would bet that Spain has any amendment to this effect and that this equality of opportunity would open this hunting other hunters with better opportunities, leaving pretty bad off “The National Shotgun” Berlanga.
Fourth and may be the best known part of the sections devoted to pesticides, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, products etc. This part of the Treaty in which environmental groups have become more emphases.
Before you begin to highlight the most worrying points is to say that companies move in this area, primarily American, German and Swiss, work as lobbyists on both sides of the Atlantic, so the influence on both sides of the negotiation probably exercised jointly by the lobbyists.
Eleven clear the influence of lobbyists, the following paragraph scandalous European trading guide which says: “including the requirement that SPS measures of each party based on science and international standards or scientific risk assessments, while recognizing the right of Parties to assess and manage risk in accordance with the level of protection that each party deems appropriate, including where relevant scientific evidence is insufficient” , but applied only to the extent necessary to protect human health, animal or vegetable or health, and developed in a transparent manner, without undue delay. “
As you can see, this paragraph shows the direct hand of lobbyists to establish that the evidence on safety are in the hands of the generators of the same and in any case, had health hazard, be extended without too much delay that period.
This line is practiced in the United States and led by example some drugs approved for human use as finished prohibiting product showed side effects of continued use over time, as well as consequences for accumulation in the human body of substances from the same.
This approval system based on no extension in time of the experiments before being fully tested create alerts that would be unnecessary with the current legislation.
In terms of technical signal regulations to curiosity that we have suffered in Europe and refers to the product labeling and that such labeling does not lead to consumer deception.
This idea that handles the European Commission and it seems not only reasonable, but an example of transparency in consumer advocacy, and seems to conflict directly contradict the actions of the Commission itself and included the European parliament when making real the transparency of information in the case of foods and establish clear criteria on what color were the healthiest components in the composition of foods, what they did was adopt as the Lobby of the indicated power and established the CDR (Consumption Maximum Recommended) system confusing and lacking in information about the possible damage to the health of consumers.
Honestly, if this is the transparency that seeks the Commission when dealing with Monsanto, Bayer and other multinationals with negligible power, think and evidence I refer, that labeling will not only be clear to the consumer, but that provoked in him to misleading perception of the impact on your health or the consequences thereof.
To conclude this section point to a sentence of sub section “Sectoral provisions.” In that paragraph speaks again matching rules, elimination of tariffs, etc., but make mention of something that I think is important for Spain and I mean that says sectoral provisions apply not only to pharmaceutical companies, but also “other health industries”.
Why am I concerned about this sentence? I think it’s obvious, if fully opens the field of health in Spain, this would allow the current government the start of the transfer of private management of public hospitals to U.S. companies with extensive experience in the sector. I remember that in these negotiations determined that there must be equal opportunities for providers in public and do not forget that allotments to tender for the award of management or hospital is just a contract.
Moreover, the Treaty can open the field of sale of public hospitals to private companies. In the United States the sale of hospitals is common, as it veden and buy as anything else.
Another important issue that may help us to improve the understanding of the transparency of the documents of the European Commission is the part concerning the rights of intellectual property. In this case, the guide leaves open all possibilities for creating commitments that give patent holders the maximum coverage. In his own words “The agreement reflects the high value placed by both parties in the protection of intellectual property and will build on the existing EU-US dialogue on this matter.”
This position by the European Commission shows how you intend to content distribution over freedom, freedom of information and public utility rights of private companies to manage all types of patents and increase the scope of its protection and punishment level in all European countries.
This section on “protecting intellectual property” to some other aspect of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty TTIP / TAFTA, the individual will develop in different articles.
Finally, I try to make the reader understand that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty TTIP / TAFTA is to direct atetado against Citizen Sovereignty and displacing most decisions that affect their daily lives of citizens of national parliaments, directamente en negotiated in secret by the European Commission and the Department of Commerce of the United States and in their own words makes a treaty be able to override those decisions of a sovereign people, simply because they go against the benefits of Treaty Treaty beneficin that only large corporations such as International Banking, International Investment Funds, pharmaceutical industries, food industries, chemical, etc. In short, the economic power against citizens.
What if someone doubt on this point, literally repeat the guidelines set by the European Commission to loa European negotiators Transatlantic Investment Treaty and Trade TTIP / TAFTA: “The Commission must also ensure that nothing in the Agreement shall prevent the Parties from applying their own national legislation, regulations and requirements regarding entry and stay, provided that doing so does not nullify or impair benefits under the Agreement”.
Their site shows the documents, and they add:
Those who want to download the original document should do so at your own risk. Such documents will find hosted on an external server that has nothing to do with this blog or the author of this article. You can download the basic document of trading date June 15, 2013 can do so by clicking here . You can download the draft with corrections for the preparation of the final document and tien (sic) of May 2013, you can do it here.
Please feel free to distribute this at will, including to Lori Wallach at Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch. and other trade watch organizations. Perhaps Wikileaks and Snowden’s revelations have caused the potential signatory nations to TAFTA to look far more askance at the ‘trade agreement’, but if it passes, it will still be very bad for the 99% both here and in the eventual signatory nations if it goes through.
Me, I’m too pooped to participate much further at the moment. Life and exhaustion beckon, O, my.
From Michael Ratner, ACLU. (me, too.)
Jesus loves Wikileaks http://t.co/t6ObbyKtSi—
Michael Ratner (@justleft) December 24, 2013