english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow EU - Canada Trade: Contradictory EU Parliament Votes on CETA, after Trump asked NAFTA Review

EU - Canada Trade: Contradictory EU Parliament Votes on CETA, after Trump asked NAFTA Review

Written by ACM
Wednesday, 15 February 2017
 
ep_votes_on_ceta_400 

 *Strasbourg/Angelo Marcopolo/- Differend Majority Votes of MEPs gave in EU Parliament here a Contradictory image on a controversial EU - Canada Trade deal (CETA), "the Most Ambitious" ever for the EU "so far", as mainstream Groups' leaders observed, shortly after New US President Don Trump confirmed his pre-electoral promisse to ask for a Review of NAFTA, a similar pre-existing US - Canada Trade deal :


It's an astonishing Fact that, even if a Legaly Binding Report, by Latvian MEP Pabrics, asking to endorse that Deal, passed by Majority, nevertheless, the only Resolution (drafted by Leaders of EPP/Liberal/Conservative Groups of MEPs) which asked to "Welcome" CETA and "a Swift Ratification" by EU's 28 Member States, on the Contrary, was clearly Rejected by EU Parliament !


Already, its Committee on Employment and Social affairs had Refused to endorse CETA, earlier in Brussels, where, on the Contrary, it had been Backed mainly by the Foreign Affairs Committee, and the Environment/Health/Food safety Committee, in a Lesser degree.


Moreover, Today, EU Parliament's Plenary also Rejected a "New ..model for ...Dispute Resolution" about Investments, (§ 7 of the Draft Resolution), which had been Accused by a relevant Amendment of the "Green" Group to allegedly : "Allow claims to be made only by foreign investors, (be) based on extremely broad foreign investor rights, and (to) abrogate from the basic international law principle of prior exhaustion of domestic legal remedies", (etc).


In Addition, the MEPs who Voted "Against" or "Abstained" on the Issue of "Privatisation of Public Services" (§ 6 in the Draft), were More Numerous, than those who Voted "For" : 355 (i.e. 334 + 21), instead of Only 338, respectively.


Similarly, More MEPs Voted "Against" or "Abstained", than supported the Claim that CETA would have "Answered" the "Questions" raised by Critics, via the "Clarifications" and/or "Interpretations" given for that purpose, (§ 8 in the Original Draft) : 376 (i.e. 304 + 72) instead of just 323, respectively. (Probably because, as EFDD Group denounced, these were "Not Legaly Binding".


It's also "Against" or "Abstention" that Voted Most MEPs, instead of "For", concerning the wish to "Welcome", or Not, CETA, based on the (strongly Contested) Claim that it would have a "Potential" for "significant Benefits to the Citizens and Companies, especially SMEs", (§ 1 of the Draft) : 362 (i.e. 248 + 114), instead of just 334, respectively.


Experienced EU Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom, even if she naturaly Supported Earlier CETA as "a Good Deal", afterwards Acknowleged that "there are Many Concerns among the People" in Europe, so that EU and Canada Officials should "show" them, with "concrete Examples", that this Free Trade Agreement would bring them Benefits. But, "at any case", the still Remaining process of "Ratification, depends from (EU) Member States", (i.e. 28 National Authorities), she observed in fine.


Malmstrom said that in a subsequent Press Conference here, After EU Parliament's Votes, together with the Canadian Government's International Trade's Minister, Francois-Philippe Champagne, where they answered a Few Questions on some among the Critical Points raised in Writting by 5 Political Groups of MEPs : from the "Left" and most "Socialists", up to the "Greens", the Euro-Sceptics of "EFDD", and the Rightists of "ENF", as well as several "Independents".


Among these Critical Issues, (in addition to those who found an Expression in the Votes : Comp. Supra), were also mainly Jobs and Social standards, Agriculture, Geneticaly Modified Organisms ("GMO"s) and "Food Safety", protection of Personal Data from "Cross-Border Flows", the "Price of Medical Drugs" (allegedly the "2nd Higher in the World" at Canada), etc. 


Such concerns brought manifold Popular Protests at EU Parliament's doorstep, and even inside its Hemicycle, while, among the Countries whose most Political Leaders reportedly appear to be Opposed or Uncertain yet about CETA, seems to be also France, which is currently engaged in Crucial Presidential and Parliamentary Elections, due to be Soon Followed by the Netherlands and Germany, later this Same Year (2017), afterwards by Austria (2018), etc., in the run up to the Next European Elections of 2019.


Meanwhile, the Canadian Minister tried to Downplay and Minimize the issue notoriously raised by the New US President Don Trump's Electoral Campaign about the equivalent preexisting "NAFTA" free trade agreement in North America, by claiming that it could likely result just in another "Review" and/or "Update", more or less similar to previous ones, that had already been made before.


In that regard, Champagne pointed at a recent Press Conference, in Washington D.C., between Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau, who is currently Visiting Strasbourg, and due to Speak Tomorrow in the Pleanry of EU Parliament here, followed by a Press Conference with its New President Tajani, who has vowed to Support the Position expressed by the Majority of MEPs, as a matter of General Principle, and whose services has just published a Press Communiqué in favor of CETA's Ratification by EU's 28 Member States, (even if, at least a Part of it, is, reportedly, due to Start being Applied from March 2017, i.e. even Before that Long process of National Ratifications).

 

(../..)


***

("Draft"News, as already send to "Eurofora" Subscrbers/Donors, earlier. A mora accurate, full Final Version, might be published asap).

***


EuroStars-Eureka

Statistics

Visitors: 18098818

Archive

Login Form





Remember me

Lost your Password?
No account yet? Create account

Syndicate

RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
OPML

Other Menu

imag0218_400_01

(Opinion).

 In Democracy, the forthcoming choices for EU's Top Jobs, as the New EU Parliament's President, new EU Commission's President (+ probably EU Council's President, EU Foreign Minister, etc) should be made according to EU Citizens' Votes in June 7, 2009 European Elections, and main EU Governments' strategic policies.

At the heart of the biggest EU Countries, in France and Germany, EU Citizens clearly voted for a renovated, non-technocratic but Political Europe based on Values, declared explicitly incompatible with Turkey's controversial EU bid.

This main choice was also supported in several other small or medium EU Countries, such as Austria (cf. promise of a Referendum), Spain (cf. EPP program's reservations vis a vis Enlargment), etc., while EPP Parties won also in Poland, Hungary, Cyprus, etc.

In other Countries, whenever Governing coalitions didn't make these choices or eluded them, continuing to let a Turkish lobby push for its entry into the EU, they paid a high price, and risked to damage Europe, by obliging EU Citizens to massively vote for euro-Sceptics whenever they were the only ones to offer a possibility to promise  real change and oppose Turkey's demand to enter into the EU :

It's for this obvious reason that British UKIP (IndDem) succeeded now (after many statements against Turkey's EU bid) to become Great Britain's 2nd Party, unexpectedly growing bigger even than the Governing Labour Party, as well as the Liberal party  ! Facts prove that it's not an isolated phenomenon : A similar development occured in the Netherlands, where Geert Wilders "Party for Freedom" (PVV) became also the 2nd biggest in the country, (after EPP), boosting the chances of a politician who had withdrawn in 2004 from an older party "because he didn't agree with their position on Turkey". And in several other EU Member Countries, even previously small parties which now focused on a struggle against Turkey's controversial demand to enter in the EU, won much more or even doubled the number of their MEPs (fex. Bulgaria, Hungary, Greece, etc).

On the contrary, whenever Socialist and oher parties were explicitly or implicitly for Turkey's controversial EU bid, they obviously lost Citizens' votes and fell down to an unprecedented low.

In consequence, EU Citizens clearly revealed their main political choices, in one way or another : They voted to change for less Bureaucracy, but more Politics and Values in a Europe really open to EU Citizens, but without Turkey's controversial EU bid.

Recent political developments are obviously different from the old political landscape which existed in the Past of 1999-2004, when Socialists based on Turkish 1% vote governed undisputed not only in Germany, but also in the UK, Greece and elsewhere, France followed old policies decided when it had been divided by "cohabitation", before the 3 "NO" to EU  Referenda since May 2005, before Merkel, before Sarkozy, etc.... before the surprises of 7 June 2009 new EU Elections.

If the current candidates to the Top EU jobs promise and guarantee to respect People's democratic choices, OK.

Otherwise, Europe must find new candidates, really motivated and able to implement these democratic choices of the People.

The beginning of crucial, final Decisions are scheduled for the 1st EU Parliament's plenary session in Strasbourg, in the middle of July, and they could be completed towards the October session, when Lisbon Treaty's fate will have been fixed.


See relevant Facts also at : http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/2009electionsandturkey.html
http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/daulelections.html
http://www.eurofora.net/brief/brief/euroelectionresult.html

 ***

Polls

2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?

Results

SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.