Free Trade Agreement: US and EU — Question

– in the House of Lords at 11:35 am on 23 October 2014.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Lord Anderson of Swansea Lord Anderson of Swansea Labour 11:35, 23 October 2014

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the prospects for the free trade agreement between the United States and the European Union.

Photo of Lord Livingston of Parkhead Lord Livingston of Parkhead The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

My Lords, we are pushing for a broad agreement that eliminates the vast majority of tariffs and reduces other unnecessary barriers to trade. This will help small businesses in particular and promote growth and jobs. There have been seven rounds of negotiations with good progress, given that it is slightly over a year since the negotiations started. We are aiming for an ambitious agreement in 2015.

Photo of Lord Anderson of Swansea Lord Anderson of Swansea Labour

My Lords, the Minister will be well aware that at the EU Council meeting in June 2013 the French won a signal victory by using their political veto under the cultural exemption to exclude audio-visual services from the negotiating mandate because they considered them a matter of national interest. I should also mention that the Commission was given leave to produce further changes to the negotiating mandate. Do we consider the National Health Service to be a key national interest? If so, have we tried to exclude our health service from the investment provisions? If not, why not?

Photo of Lord Livingston of Parkhead Lord Livingston of Parkhead The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

The difference between the NHS and audio-visual services is that audio-visual services were included originally, whereas the NHS was always exempted. It is probably best if I quote the EU Trade Commissioner on the matter:

“Public services are always exempted—there is no problem about exemption. The argument is abused in your country for political reasons but it has no grounds”.

Photo of Baroness Scott of Needham Market Baroness Scott of Needham Market Chair, EU Sub Committee D - Agriculture, Fisheries, Environment and Energy

Is the Minister aware that there are a growing number of anti-TTIP campaigns right across Europe and that a record 150,000 responses to the Commission’s consultation were received? Can he tell the House what the Government’s strategy is for dialogue with interest groups, with business and, above all, with citizens to make sure that concerns and worries are founded on fact?

Photo of Lord Livingston of Parkhead Lord Livingston of Parkhead The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

My noble friend is right: there are a number of concerns about TTIP, some of them genuine but some of them ill conceived. We are engaging with a number of interest groups, particularly NGOs, consumer associations and small businesses. In fact, I have a meeting within the next two weeks with some of the people who were protesting outside BIS’s offices quite recently.

Photo of Lord Tomlinson Lord Tomlinson Labour

Will the Minister now manage to put aside any concerns about the malign influence of UKIP on the Government’s policy in relation to the European Union, particularly in the light of the opinion poll in last night’s Evening Standard? That showed that, were there a referendum tomorrow on withdrawal, it would be defeated by 20 percentage points.

Photo of Lord Livingston of Parkhead Lord Livingston of Parkhead The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

The UK is a great champion in the EU of free trade and the single market. As Trade Minister, I take this role very seriously. The UK continues, and will continue, to have a lead position in promoting free trade within the EU and from the EU to other countries around the globe.

Photo of The Countess of Mar The Countess of Mar Deputy Chairman of Committees, Deputy Speaker (Lords)

Following on from the question of the noble Baroness opposite, to protect human health will the Minister ensure that the major manufacturing companies do not force on members of the EU American standards relating to food quality and chemical residues in food, which are less stringent than those of the European Union?

Photo of Lord Livingston of Parkhead Lord Livingston of Parkhead The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

The EU and the UK have been very clear: standards will not be reduced as a result of TTIP. EU laws will remain EU laws, and the US negotiators have accepted that fact.

Photo of Lord Stevenson of Balmacara Lord Stevenson of Balmacara Shadow Spokesperson (Business, Innovation and Skills), Opposition Whip (Lords), Shadow Spokesperson (Culture, Media and Sport)

My Lords, we on this side support TTIP and are reassured by the answer just given by the Minister on public services. However, for many people the proposed preferential arbitration rules for foreign investors represent all that is perceived to be wrong with international trade deals—that they are too secret, too undemocratic and too skewed to the interests of international capital over the interests of our citizens. Indeed, the ISDS clause has become a lightning rod for dissatisfaction with TTIP. Should this issue not be tackled head on by removing the ISDS clause from the deal?

Photo of Lord Livingston of Parkhead Lord Livingston of Parkhead The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

As was mentioned earlier, the EU is conducting a consultation on ISDS clauses and has received a large number of responses. I think the appropriate question on ISDS clauses is, “Which ISDS clause?”, rather than whether one should have a clause. Noble Lords should understand that, in the UK, we have 94 ISDS clauses that have in total lasted for 2,000 years. The number of cases that the UK has lost during that time is zero. Many of the claims made about ISDS clauses are based on misconceptions. The UK is pushing for is an ISDS clause that rightly balances the interests of people and organisations with the right that big business—businesses of all sizes—has to a stable investment environment. We will continue to push that, as we have recently with an excellent clause in the agreement with Canada.

Photo of Lord Avebury Lord Avebury Liberal Democrat

My Lords, if by some mischance Britain were to leave the EU at some future date, would we have to renegotiate all the bilateral agreements the EU now has or may have in the future with third parties?

Photo of Lord Livingston of Parkhead Lord Livingston of Parkhead The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

That is a hypothetical question. As the Prime Minister has stated very clearly, he will be campaigning to remain in the EU—an EU that will be founded on free trade. Free trade is a very important part of the EU and we will continue to push for that.