I have always been a supporter of open and fair trade and investment flows. The 'openness' I refer to means either full or partial elimination of tariffs and non-tariff barriers to trade and investment flows at once, or over an agreed transitional period. The 'fairness' stems from the rules based pillar structure that sustains the common commercial policy (CCP).
The multilateral pillar on which the CCP rests is the world trade organisation (WTO). With its binding legal frameworks for the trade in goods, services and intellectual property rights, as well as an efficient dispute settlement mechanism which helps WTO members, in particular the smallest, to avoid trade wars.
I´d also like to highlight the 'citizens' pillar' which mandates greater accountability to EU citizens, greater transparency of the decision-making process, and regular assessment of the real impact of the trade policy on growth, jobs, and our wellbeing.
The citizens' pillar in particular, needs to be strengthened in the context of large-scale unprecedented trade and investment negotiations such as the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP). Since the formal launch of these talks on 17 June 2013, parliament has already achieved tangible progress in this area.
"The role of elected parliamentarians [is] to ensure that the TTIP discussion is as inclusive as possible and as factual and evidence-based as required to root out myths."
For example, the regular debriefings in the international trade monitoring group on the US, with the EU chief negotiator, before and after each negotiation round in the presence of other parliamentary committees chairs and standing rapporteurs to ensure that ongoing negotiations are monitored properly, including the impact on the environment, job creation and the internal market as a whole, to name a few.
It is also positive that the council decided to finally publish the mandate given to the commission so that, together with the parliament's resolution, citizens have a clear idea of what is expected and what is not from such an agreement.
As regards fears that the TTIP will bring negative environmental impact and/or that the inclusion of investor state dispute settlement provisions, possibly restricting the union's or member states' right to regulate, I think these concerns have to be thoroughly analysed.
It is primarily the role of the commission to explain to parliament, the council and citizens what measures have been built in to prevent the materialisation of these fears and to clarify precisely the commitments the EU is agreeing to. Parliament will then check the results of the negotiations against the position expressed in the resolution.
Last but not least, it is the role of elected parliamentarians to ensure that the TTIP discussion is as inclusive as possible and as factual and evidence-based as required to root out myths. Sworn critics of the TTIP agreements should not forget that parliament also has the right to give or deny consent to any international trade agreement. This is a veto right, and supreme responsibility stems from it.