In my opinion, the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) is one of the biggest, most realistic and well-defined opportunities to boost growth and create jobs in the EU.
However, in order for it to succeed, negotiators and politicians on both sides of the Atlantic must be extremely committed and focused. The window of opportunity to agree on TTIP is narrow, due to the US political calendar and ratification procedures in the EU.
Looking beyond 2015, closing the technical negotiations would create many additional challenges.
"Contrary to popular belief, TTIP will not lower any labour, consumer or environmental standards"
TTIP is much more than cheaper electronics or clothes. This agreement will create the biggest market ever. It will further enhance the already exceptional cooperation between the two biggest and most developed economies in the world.
Contrary to popular belief, TTIP will not lower any labour, consumer or environmental standards. I see no reason not to trust both the EU and US negotiators on the issue. Both have made clear public commitments in that regard.
The partnership agreement will bring about reduced bureaucracy for companies, common standards and procedures and more regulatory cooperation. This will pave the way for new opportunities for businesses, especially small and medium sized enterprises, currently unable to enter the US market.
We must also look at TTIP in a broader, global perspective. This agreement will determine the standards for future free trade agreements. Globalisation will progress further whether we like it or not. By setting the global rules in a transatlantic deal, Europe can shape it according to its values. This particular point was made by a participant during the European forum for new ideas in Sopot. I could not agree more. This is our chance to take a leading role in global trade.
Unfortunately, lately TTIP has been heavily criticised. Dozens of myths are swirling around about the agreement. I fully support as much transparency in the negotiations as possible, but no one should expect detailed, difficult trade negotiations to be undertaken publicly. This is impossible both from a political and a technical point of view, as it could expose the European side to possible damage and weaken its negotiating position.
The commission should provide more information about the progress of the negotiations in order to garner European citizens' support for the deal. Civil society consultations on each round of talks would be helpful.
One of the most controversial aspects of TTIP is investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). I am very surprised at the negative emotions that this particular part of the deal arouses. Dozens of similar bilateral regulations are already in force and work effectively, and no one claims that they threaten the democracy and sovereignty of any state.
Perhaps there is room for improvement when it comes to the definitions or procedures involved. We should use the time available to analyse the scope of possible modifications rather than threaten citizens with a possible 'loss of sovereignty'.
The importance of ISDS in TTIP is also linked to the global context of the agreement. Europe will not be able to demand such provisions in similar agreements negotiated in the future (for example with China or Russia) if TTIP does not include ISDS.
In conclusion, I would like to highlight that TTIP is the most realistic and achievable short-term tool to provide impetus for growth in the EU and, consequently, to deliver the jobs we so desperately need.
In order to communicate better on TTIP, the commission should create a coalition with the social partners, the large majority of whom support the deal. The European and US sides both recognise the positives coming from TTIP.
US trade unions are not opposed to the agreement. They are merely raising doubts that should be dispelled. Together, we can debunk the myths and bring the discussion on TTIP back to reality.
Read the most recent articles written by Jacek Krawczyk - Cast your vote