http://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201212/20121219ATT58328/20121219ATT58328EN.pdf
3.1 Public Procurement
There was a strong point of disagreement between one of the experts – Mr Chaitoo – and the European Services Forum2 regarding the prospects for growth in public procurement trade under the CETA. Whilst the European Services Forum said that they expected strong growth in the number of opportunities for their members in Canada, Mr Chaitoo was more pessimistic about the growth opportunities in this field due to the control of services by professional bodies; it was Chaitoo’s view that the CETA would not impact on the public procurement of services, unless specific provision was made in the agreement to overcome these issues. By contrast, Ambassador Plunkett and Mr Dupuis argued that the provisions currently being negotiated over public procurement (and big procurement projects) were wide, unique, and offered a tangible example of the gains that should be made under the CETA. One of the MEPs who spoke was supportive of the efforts to open up public procurement, but wanted to ensure that all Canadian provinces would be subject to these provisions.
3.2 Pharmaceutical industries
Representatives from the pharmaceutical industries were present at the workshop. Whilst being covered by the common umbrella of ‘big pharma’ they demonstrated the diversity within their industry, which has to be captured either in the negotiation or in the implementation of the CETA. There were speakers from the Canadian generics industry (those manufacturers who cheaply mass-produce medicines which are out of patent protection), and from the EU’s research intensive pharmaceutical industries who rely on restrictive patent periods to not only recoup the cost of their research and development but also to create sufficient surplus for profit and further research work. The representative from the Canadian generics industry was particularly concerned by two (linked) issues: 1) that the European regulatory system affords up to 15 years of patent protection (which is out of kilter with the Canadian average patent protection period of 12.4years, and the US average of 11years. The concern here was that if the negotiations settled on an adoption of the EU average the generics industry would be denied two and a half years of revenue from any particular manufactured medicine. Countering this claim, a Commission represenative stated that the coverage of the patent did not equate to time on the market – there were many regulatory hurdles that prevented pharmaceutical companies bringing drugs to market quickly. 2) that the EU does not have a system of ‘patent linkage’, which means that a manufacturer can claim 24 months of patent protection without having to provide any evidence of originality, which again the representative from the Canadian generics industry feared would damage the Canadian pharmaceutical industry if adopted within the CETA. It is important to note that the opinion polling data compiled by IPSOS Reid in September 2012, showed that the support from CETA amongst the Canadian public dramatically dropped fifty points to 31%, with now 35% saying that they were strongly opposed, when the respondents were given the proposition that Canadian drug-pricing could potentially increase because of the CETA. Whilst these figures are stark, they merely demonstrate the sensitivity of the negotiations to certain sector-specific interests within the contracting parties. The representative of the European research intensive manufacturers said that his industry was
2 See, the European Services Forum website: http://www.esf.be/ (accessed 22 October 2012).
10
3.3
EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement
sensitive to the need to reduce healthcare costs, particularly in this age of austerity, but that better health outcomes were served by advanced research into drugs technology.
Anti-globalisation NGOs, Business and Trade Union opinion
It should be noted that there was representation from non-governmental organisations at the workshop. Those who spoke from civil society activist groups broadly held positions that were both opposed to the CETA and concerned – more generally – with free trade. This opposition to free market globalisation has manifested itself in this instance to concerns about the proposed EU-Canadian CETA, and in particular has clustered around three areas of concern: 1) the accusation that the negotiations are opaque, 2) the accusation that the negotiating parties are seeking to reactivate the rejected ACTA provisions through the CETA, and 3) that the CETA will have a particularly detrimental impact on the environment in Canada. The INTA Chairman, Professor Moreira, the Commission negotiator Philippe Dupuis, and the Canadian Ambassador Plunkett all replied to the accusations around transparency by pointing to the opportunities that had been afforded to all interested stake-holder parties to contribute to the policy process (including the workshop to which this report refers). Moreover, all international negotiations require a degree of trust between contracting parties which mitigates against an on-going public discourse about the state of the negotiation. Commission negotiator Dupuis rejected outright the accusation that the CETA was an attempt to bring ACTA back onto the legislative table, and his view was supported by Members such as Professor Moreira. The civil sanctions attached to the CETA concerning intellectual property were a matter for member governments, and whilst the Commission had recommended to member governments that these be removed they cannot compel them to do so.
The true weight of opposition presented by the anti-globalisation NGOs is difficult to judge. Whilst the ability of NGOs to project the impression of a large internet presence is not in doubt, particularly after the campaigning on ACTA, the degree to which these groups present a useful contribution to rational policy making or to representing a constituency of public opinion is open to challenge. The focus of scholarly and media attention around the public perceptions of CETA has unfortunately focussed on these NGOs, and has shied away from scrutinising the views of the business and labour community. The business community on both sides of the Atlantic has warmly welcomed the progress being made on CETA, with strong evidence of support being provided by the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters body, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce to name but a few. Similarly this research found that every major Canadian newspaper had published editorial comment supporting the liberalisation of trade with the EU. A Joint study from the European Federation of Public Service Unions, the Canadian Union of Public Employees, the National Union of Public and General Employees and the Public Service Alliance of Canada, published in 2010, focused on standard trade union concerns such as their desire to protect jobs on both sides of the Atlantic (from an analytical concern that free trade equates to a reduction in workforce numbers) and equally that they judge that free-market measures equate to a reduction in workforce protections and terms and conditions. This particular issue was not touched upon during the workshop, but in response it might be noted that the operation of the European single market has resulted in many additional protections for the European labour force (such as the working time directive, for example).
11
Policy Department DG External Policies
4. SUMMARY
The European Parliament and the Canadian Parliament have important roles to play within the CETA process in providing technical scrutiny and a forum for stakeholder interests to be openly played out, prior to the CETA becoming a fully-fledged international treaty. This workshop was one of the ways in which the European Parliament, in particular, discharges this function. In taking a lead role in scrutinising and providing technical support to the negotiations both Parliaments are taking strong steps to creating a new pattern of mature trade agreements across developed trading states. It is clear that there would also be strong reasons for the EU to open talks with the United States to enter into a CETA with them as well. This would overcome some of the regulatory convergence and standardization issues that were raised during this workshop. The Canadian delegation stated during the workshop that they believed that they were a good entry point for the EU into a negotiated process with US. Either way, additional CETA are clearly desirable for the EU as it seeks to overcome its economic stresses at this time.
The involvement of the European and Canadian Parliament in providing scrutiny to these negotiations is the kind of advanced engagement that also makes it more likely that such a partnership would achieve its final goal, which is the creation of jobs and growth so that the voters can experience and improvement in their quality of life from EU ventures. The workshop heard an update from representatives of the negotiating parties of the Commission and Canadian government and all the participants offered a frank appraisal of where the current successes lie, as well as the current frictions and obstacles in the negotiations. The negotiators have set themselves an ambitious timetable for agreement, and there is every indication that they will meet these goals despite the challenges in converging divergent regulatory regimes. The importance of reaching such an agreement is clear though: He argued that the urgency of the situation is self-evident; the task is clear; now it is the responsibility of political leaders to show that progress is possible.
12
No comments:
Post a Comment