Im Bereich des internationalen Handels besteht ein komplexes System weltweiter Regelungen, die im Rahmen von Vereinbarungen der Welthandelsorganisation sowie bilateralen und multilateralen Abkommen beschlossen wurden. Die Freihandelsabkommen wirken sich zunehmend auf die Bürgerrechte aus. Gemäß dem Vertrag von Lissabon muss die EU-Handelspolitik unter Berücksichtigung der Grundsätze und Ziele der Außenpolitik der Union gestaltet werden. Hierzu gehören die Förderung der Rechtsstaatlichkeit, der Menschenrechte und der nachhaltigen Entwicklung.
Der EWSA ist der Auffassung, dass dies ein Leitprinzip für die Handelsverhandlungen und ‑beziehungen der EU sein sollte. Er gewährleistet die Konsensbildung von Unternehmen, Arbeitnehmern, Freiberuflern, Landwirten, Verbrauchern und anderen wichtigen Interessenträgern und schafft damit einen echten Mehrwert. Er leitet die Standpunkte der Zivilgesellschaft und Interessengruppen sowohl bei den Verhandlungen über Handelsabkommen als auch bei deren Umsetzung auf effiziente Weise an die internationalen politischen Entscheidungsträger weiter. Er hat einen Begleitausschuss Internationaler Handel eingerichtet, um sicherzustellen, dass die Zivilgesellschaft in die Gestaltung der EU-Handelspolitik einbezogen wird. Zudem leitet er die Internen Beratungsgruppen, die auf Grundlage der Kapitel „Handel und nachhaltige Entwicklung“ in den EU-Handelsabkommen der neuen Generation eingerichtet wurden. Aufgabe dieser Beratungsgruppen, denen Vertreter der Zivilgesellschaft (u. a. aus den Reihen des EWSA) angehören, ist es, Probleme im Bereich Handel und nachhaltige Entwicklung aufzuzeigen, die bei der Umsetzung eines Handelsabkommens auftreten können.
The main goal of the opinion is to provide a good and qualitative source of information and opinion in the beginning of TTIP negotiations process.
The own-initiative opinion will focus on the impact of the TTIP on SMEs and reflect on the provisions that would need to be included in the TTIP in order to take account of the specific character of SMEs in the negotiations and implementation of an eventual EU-US agreement. The opinion will also look at how to increase the awareness of SMEs as to existing support services and programmes, and particularly about the new business opportunities that may arise with this agreement.
The EESC opinion will be dedicated to standalone investment agreements, with a particular emphasis on issues related to sustainable development and civil society involvement. It will contribute to the on-going discussion on the content and level of ambition of sustainable development chapters in the EU standalone investment agreements, as well as on civil society role in the course of negotiations and at the implementation stage.
The Information Report can serve as a tool to promote and share the rich experience of the EU and its Member States in the area of CSR with partner countries and their civil society. It can provide a basis for discussion in EESC dialogues with partner countries, as well as the Committee's contribution to the work of the monitoring mechanisms established by the recently negotiated EU trade agreements.
The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) warns against granting China market economy status (MES) and calls on the European institutions to promote fair international competition and actively defend European jobs and European values with efficient trade defence instruments (TDIs). In its opinion, adopted at its 514th plenary session on 14th July, the EESC points to the disastrous impact a possible granting of MES to China would have on Europe's industry and consequently on Europe's labour market. The EESC insists on China's fulfilment of the five EU criteria for achieving the MES.
Since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the investment policy is an exclusive competence of the European Union. The EU is aiming to include therefore in the new trade and investment agreements provisions on investor protection and investor to state dispute settlement (ISDS) which will replace existing Bilateral Investment Agreements (BIT) signed by Member States and will grant the same level of protection to all EU investors.
The EU acknowledges the increasing importance of including the EU and partner countries' companies in the GSCs. It is also emphasised that the current interdependence of the economies may further increase due to the recently negotiated and implemented EU trade and investment agreements, as well as negotiations at the WTO. The EESC also recommends cooperation between international organisations and other relevant stakeholders. This would include adopting a common language and common definitions of elements related to global value chains, GSCs and decent work, and comparison and assessment of the statistical data between the various stakeholders, such as the OECD, the International Labour Organisation (ILO), WTO, the European Commission, the World Bank and IFM. This should help avoid confusion and misinterpretation, and support elaboration of a coherent policy between diverse public bodies involved.
The Commission recently published a Communication on a Renewed Partnership with the ACP Group of countries. ACP-EU relations are currently governed by the Cotonou Partnership Agreement that will expire in 2020, therefore the Commission has published recommendations on what the future structure should be. Last year the EESC already drafted a general opinion on the post-Cotonou framework; this new opinion will have to answer specifically to the Commission's communication.
The proposal on an International Procurement Instrument (IPI) is the EU response to the lack of a level playing field in world procurement markets. While our public procurement market is open to foreign bidders, the procurement markets for foreign goods and services in third countries remain to a large extent closed de iure or de facto. The IPI aims at encouraging partners to engage in negotiations and opening participation for EU bidders and goods in third countries' tenders. A first proposal on this issue was made in 2012 (COM(2012) 124 final) but there was no agreement in the Council. The new Commission proposal incorporates some of the changes requested from the European Parliament and tries to reply to some of the concerns expressed in the Council. A number of Member States have expressed reservations as regards the principle of closing the EU market for goods and services originating in certain third countries, even if only temporarily and in a targeted way.