response from my MP on TTIP, as passed to

My only concern is that the EU Commission is merely leaving ISDS until the end of negotiations.
This means they are not in our hands and we will, as subordinate members of the EU, be bound by whatever is fixed up by the likes of Juncker,who has already shown his taste for shady dealings.
email to 38 degrees
I was asked to report back on my MP’s response on TTIP
She is a Labour Whip (Yvonne Fovargue), so I assume this has been crafted on behalf of the shadow cabinet

Dear Mr Shale
Thank you for contacting me recently regarding the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
It is clear from the large number of e-mails and letters I have received that there is considerable concern about the TTIP negotiations. I agree it is important these proposals receive proper scrutiny at both a UK and EU level and that any final deal must have transparency and accountability at its heart. I also believe the Government need to do more to address these concerns and assure they are covered in the negotiating process.
I support the principles behind TTIP and I believe there are ways the agreement could bring significant benefits to Britain, including removing trade barriers between our two most important markets, boosting growth and creating jobs. It is crucial, however, that the benefits of TTIP filter down to employees, small businesses and consumers, that the deal is open and accountable and that it does not water down current labour, consumer, environmental and food safety standards.
I also believe we should only support a deal that fully protects public services — in particular the NHS. Our NHS and public services need to be more, not less, integrated and I am concerned at the worrying fragmentation of health services that is taking place under this Government. That is why I believe the Government should commit, as the Shadow Health Secretary has, to exempt the NHS from any final deal.
I know particular concern has also been expressed about the proposed inclusion of Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions in TTIP. I am not convinced that the proposed ISDS mechanism is either necessary or desirable in its current form and believe there needs to be greater transparency on this. The European Commission’s public consultation on ISDS was welcome and it is right that the European Commission has decided to temporarily suspend negotiations on ISDS until the final stages of the negotiations. I hope the Government will use this opportunity to call for far greater transparency around an exclusion for legislation in the public interest, like the NHS.
Social and Democratic Group MEPs in the European Parliament are also pressing very hard on the issue of ISDS, as the Government and EU Commission consistently state that it will never be used in a deal with the US. If that is the case, then I believe it need not be included, especially when both legal systems and contract law are similar and well developed to look into any breaches of such contracts.
The debate on TTIP in the House of Commons on 15th January 2015 was a welcome opportunity for Parliament to debate this important issue. I hope the Government now listen and respond to these concerns and ensure that TTIP delivers the jobs. growth and fairer deal for consumers that we all want to see.
Thank you once again for writing to me and sharing your views.

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: