Trade globalisation may have reached a plateau as the incremental improvements that both developed and developing countries benefitted from in the last few decades seem to be slowly evaporating. Increasing frustration is creeping in because of the lack of progress in multilateral trade relations.
So it is unsurprising that leaders of the EU and the US agreed in 2011 to set up a working group “to find ways to increase growth and competitiveness”. As both the US and EU economies struggle to show signs of revival and respectable economic growth, the latest attempt to promote robust transatlantic trade is the speeding up of the signing of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, better known as TTIP.
Malta has a special interest in this proposed agreement as a recent study by the World Trade Institute concluded that Malta is likely to be the only EU country not to benefit from the agreement. I am not surprised by this conclusion as the profile of the Maltese economy does not lend itself to the proliferation of trade between Malta and the US.
Apart from a few companies that trade internationally with ease, the Maltese economy is characterised by a multitude of micro businesses that see the US market as a mirage rather than a viable export target. Local operators in financial services may be an important exception and they could certainly be affected if the EU and the US agree on common ways of regulating these operators.
What worries me about the proposed TTIP are the implications that it may have on the lives of ordinary people who are consumers of the goods and services that are the end result of trade. Let me mention some examples.
Our national health system undoubtedly needs to be underpinned by robust financial strategies to make it viable in the long term if it is to provide adequate free medical services to all. The US expensive private medical system is notorious for its unfairness. The last thing we need is to impose the US model on countries in the EU that still provide their citizens with health care that is free at the point of delivery. Since one of the main aims of the TTIP “is to open up Europe’s public health, education and water services to US companies”, then I want more than the European Commission’s reassurance that “public services will be kept out of TTIP”.
Both the US and EU economies struggle to show signs of revival and respectable economic growth
Food and environmental safety is another major area that could be affected by the TTIP. When US and EU politicians and bureaucrats speak about ‘regulatory convergence’ they simply imply that EU standards on food safety and the environment should come in line to those of the US. US food safety regulations are much more liberal. For example, 70 per cent of all processed foods sold in the US supermarkets now contain genetically modified ingredients. The EU hardly tolerates GM foods.
Visitors to the US are often impressed by how much cheaper food is when compared to most EU countries. But who wants to eat US beef that has been treated with growth hormones that have been linked to cancer? EU farmers, especially in France, may be pampered by their governments, but what really matters to consumers is that the food that they consume is safe.
The issue of personal privacy is another area of concern if and when the TTIP comes in force. In 2012, the European Parliament – in one of the rare occasions when it justified its existence – threw out by a large majority the ACTA (the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement). The public anger against an attack on individual privacy where internet services providers would be required to monitor people’s online activity managed to stop the obscure manoeuvring of EU bureaucrats to control people’s lives. Some analysts argue that the proposed TTIP will try to overturn the ACTA banishment through the back door by easing the data privacy laws that exist in Europe.
European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker solemnly declared: “Under my presidency, the Commission will negotiate a reasonable and balanced trade agreement with the United States of America. It is anachronistic that, in the 21st century, Europeans and Americans still impose customs duties on each other’s products. These should be swiftly and fully abolished.”
Juncker and his team should concentrate more on instilling confidence in ordinary European citizens by finding solutions to the growing EU unresolved problems rather than by making it easier for US multinationals to flood EU markets.
johncasarwhite@yahoo.com