• Dansk
  • NL
  • EN
  • FI
  • FR
  • DE
  • EL
  • IT
  • NO
  • PL
  • PT
  • RO
  • SL
  • ES
  • SV

Civil society calls on European Parliament environment committee to reject CETA

Trade unions and environmental organisations are calling on the European Parliament's environmental committee to reject the EU-Canada CETA, which could undermine EU environmental and public health standards. The committee is set to vote its opinion on the controversial trade deal tomorrow.

A group of trade unions, environmental, public health and animal rights groups has called on MEPs in the European Parliament's environment committee to reject the current CETA text because it is likely to work against key principles of the EU’s environmental and public health policies.

Here are some of the key concerns mentioned in their joint letter, which was sent to MEPs on 9 January:

  • On high standards of environmental protection: CETA’s environmental provisions cannot be enforced through trade sanctions or financial penalties if they are violated. Victims of environmental abuse cannot bring a claim in a similar manner. Future environment and climate policies cannot be sufficiently exempted, but will have to comply with CETA.
  • On the precautionary principle and endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs): European legislation on EDCs is under threat from CETA’s regulatory cooperation provisions because Canada considers EU regulations on EDCs a trade disruptor, rather than health protection. The EU generally takes a more precautionary approach to chemical safety than Canada does. In order to take account of trade interests of Canada and the US, the EU Commission has recently been shown to have sacrificed the precautionary principle in its proposal for criteria to identify EDCs.
  • On strict GMO laws: CETA supports a cooperation mechanism with the objective of revising and harmonising GMO rules in a way that would lower current EU standards.
  • Climate protection: CETA’s provisions on investment protection, coupled with its weak protection of the environment, may undermine or have a regulatory chill impact on future sustainable climate and energy policy, such as efforts to stop fossil fuel-based energy production and to promote decarbonisation. Its provisions therefore threaten any EU measures needed to reach the goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement.
  • Mining, fracking and other extractive activities: The extractive industry is prolific in launching arbitration lawsuits. Over 50% of global mining companies are based in Canada. The most recent example is the Canadian ‘Gabriel Resources’ company’s action to sue Romania for not approving Europe's largest gold mine project. Based on the 44 legal cases for which data are available, mining companies have sued governments for a total of EUR 50.3 (USD 53) billion. If CETA’s investment chapter goes into effect, Canadian mining companies will be able to threaten and file similar lawsuits in all 28 Member States.

The full letter can be downloaded here.

A group of trade unions, environmental, public health and animal rights groups has called on MEPs in the European Parliament's environment committee to reject the current CETA text because it is likely to work against key principles of the EU’s environmental and public health policies.Here are some of the key concerns mentioned in their joint letter, which was sent to MEPs on 9 January:On high standards of environmental protection: CETA’s environmental provisions cannot be enforced through trade sanctions or financial penalties if they are violated. Victims of environmental abuse cannot bring a claim in a similar manner. Future environment and climate policies cannot be sufficiently exempted, but will have to comply with CETA.On the precautionary principle and endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs): European legislation on EDCs is under threat from CETA’s regulatory cooperation provisions because Canada considers EU regulations on EDCs a trade disruptor, rather than health protection. The EU generally takes a more precautionary approach to chemical safety than Canada does. In order to take account of trade interests of Canada and the US, the EU Commission has recently been shown to have sacrificed the precautionary principle in its proposal for criteria to identify EDCs.On strict GMO laws: CETA supports a cooperation mechanism with the objective of revising and harmonising GMO rules in a way that would lower current EU standards.Climate protection: CETA’s provisions on investment protection, coupled with its weak protection of the environment, may undermine or have a regulatory chill impact on future sustainable climate and energy policy, such as efforts to stop fossil fuel-based energy production and to promote decarbonisation. Its provisions therefore threaten any EU measures needed to reach the goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement.Mining, fracking and other extractive activities: The extractive industry is prolific in launching arbitration lawsuits. Over 50% of global mining companies are based in Canada. The most recent example is the Canadian ‘Gabriel Resources’ company’s action to sue Romania for not approving Europe's largest gold mine project. Based on the 44 legal cases for which data are available, mining companies have sued governments for a total of EUR 50.3 (USD 53) billion. If CETA’s investment chapter goes into effect, Canadian mining companies will be able to threaten and file similar lawsuits in all 28 Member States.The full letter can be downloaded here.
 

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Over 450 public interest groups from across Europe and Canada today published an open letter urging legislators to vote against the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). They joined forces to defend people and planet against the threats posed by the EU-Canada agreement.

Report

The great CETA swindle

The EU-Canada trade deal CETA continues to draw heavy criticism. Behind the PR attempts to sell it as a progressive agreement - including recent declarations designed to reassure critics and gain support for its ratification - CETA remains what it always has been: an attack on democracy, workers, and the environment. It would be a major mistake to ratify it.

There are many potential winners of the awards for the worst lobbyist on TTIP, probably the most corporate dominated trade negotiations in history.

Business lobby groups are pushing hard for investor-state dispute settlement in TTIP and similar trade deals. If successful, this would expand the ability of corporations to sue governments in response to policies that allegedly limit their profits. Especially laws to protect human health and the environment would be on the line.

CEO welcomes the very strongly worded final ruling by European Ombudsman Emily O'Reilly in her inquiry into the Commission's implementation of UN rules for contacts with tobacco industry lobbyists.

CEO joined forces with nine other civil society organisations working for equality, non-discrimination, transparent decision-making and strong ethics rules: in an open letter to the European Parliament we urge MEPs to oppose Oettinger’s appointment as the Comission’s head of human resources.

After nine months of hearings, the draft report of the EU Parliament's inquiry into the Dieselgate scandal has it black on white: the European Commission and EU member states had known since 2004-05 that diesel cars' nitrogen oxide emissions were far above legal limits - yet neither took action.

Our new report shows how industry lobbies present employee protection against work-related cancers as an 'unnecessary' burden on companies, and explains which tactics have been used to weaken and delay the European Union's revision of the Carcinogens and Mutagens Directive.

Subscribe to our newsletter