TAFTA / TTIP: a trade with a lot of concerns
The Transatlantic Free Trade Area,
or the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership are in focus this week,
with Barack Obama’s visit in Sweden. It is lobbyism on high level here in
Sweden, with Barack Obama’s visit. And there are a lot of focuses on the new
trade. Media are focusing on how this new trade will strengthen growth, both in
Sweden and in the EU.
Swedish article
The Swedish government states that
we, all Swedish households, will receive 4500 SEK/year, thanks to this new
trade. Obviously something several people thinks will be great, without
considering the negative effects.
Chairman in TABD (Transatlantic
Business Dialogue) Hans Stråberg is very persistent in emphasizing that this
trade will be particularly positive for small and middle-sized companies. Of
course, since most people probably would react negative if he said that it is
the international, large companies that will make the biggest profit. Still,
this is probably what will happen. Media have already pointed out that Volvo
will gain 700 million SEK.
President Obama feels that European
politicians should not be narrow-minded, but instead see the big picture, but
an important question for the EU is if we through this trade also will be
forced to accept GMO-products, which are allowed in USA.
Europes non-GMO agriculture is
actually also more productive then USA:s GMO.
There are also concerns that WTO
(world trade organization) will not be seen as equally important, which will
result in poorer countries to loose export due to the new trade.
The Organization Corporate EuropeObservatory defines the TAFTA as a benefit for companies, which in long term
will threaten democracy and the best interest for European citizens. CEO says
that conflicts like this has increased with 250% since year 2000.
Through TAFTA companies will gain a
possibility to invest in USA/EU, but if they find that their profit interest is
threaten by national laws, for instance public health or climate policies, they
might as well try to bring the conflict to court. This has already happened,
for instance Lone Pine Resources and their demand for compensation when Canada
did not want fracking in their sensitive environment or Philip Morris who
claimed they did not make as big profit as they should have, due to Uruguays
and Australias legislation towards cigarette smoke. Or of course the Swedish
company Vattenfall, and its “loss” in Germany.
We have also already had a minister
(Maria Larsson) who recently claimed that the EU:s suggestion for new tobacco
rules, with 75% warning label, would be in conflict with Swedish legislation
(that is, the companies right to have an own label). Maria Larsson is Minister
for Children’s Right… I think it could be a nice touch to consider Children’s
Right to not be forced to have cigarette smoke in their lungs.
Swedish article
This constant demand on growth is
in direct conflict with our planet’s ability to deal with mankind’s destructive
and greedy life style.
