“All’s well that ends well”: When the EU and Canada signed a 1,500-page free trade agreement in October 2016, the then EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker still hoped to have settled the many concerns about the agreement in the negotiations. But that was not the case in Germany.
The “Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement”, Ceta for short, has so far only been applied provisionally and without the controversial rules on investment protection. In the coalition negotiations, Ceta was one of the issues whose solution was postponed to the future.
On Thursday afternoon the time had come: the factions of the SPD, Greens and FDP reported an agreement. The ratification law should go through the cabinet before the summer break, and the Bundestag should also deal with it quickly in the first reading. Before the second and third, decisive reading, however, the parliamentary groups are placing a not inconsiderable condition: in talks at EU level and with the Canadian government, the federal government should work towards an “interpretation declaration” on investor protection.
Now the EU and Canada can seek a solution
This is to prevent misuse of the rules. One could also say: The solution is that finding a solution is passed on to Brussels and Ottawa. The situation in the past few weeks has been tricky. The FDP would have liked to have ratified Ceta long ago, and the SPD was no longer as critical of the agreement as it was during the grand coalition.
The critics were and are mainly to be found in the ranks of the Greens – especially in the parliamentary group. Many MPs fear that companies could legally challenge political decisions such as the coal phase-out or a ban on combustion engines with reference to investor protection.
Green parliamentary group leader and Ceta critic Katharina Dröge therefore wants to see the regulations on the arbitral tribunals “defused”. These bodies are designed to deal with complaints from investors. However, the corporations should not be able to use these instruments in such a way that they could put pressure on environmental regulations, said Dröge.
Robert Habeck made hints in the spring
Since Economics Minister Robert Habeck (Greens) dropped at a conference of family entrepreneurs in May that he wanted to travel to Canada this summer with a proposed solution for Ceta, it was clear that somehow this sensitive topic had to be removed from the table. In the past few weeks, there has been a lot of discussion behind the scenes. The FDP was against renegotiations, but ultimately submitted to the demands of the Greens. They had previously made it clear that they could also live with leaving the status quo, i.e. continuing to apply the agreement only in parts.
The paper published by the three factions on Thursday is not just about Ceta. It is entitled “The traffic light trade agenda” and also outlines their positions on the World Trade Organization (WTO) and free trade agreements in general. “Especially in view of the current crises, we want to reduce dependencies on individual countries and position both import countries and sales markets more broadly,” it says.
It is also clear who the preferred partners are: “We want to intensify cooperation and trade, especially with countries with which we share fundamental values of liberal democracy.” International agreements on sustainability and social standards must be anchored in all agreements “reinforced by sanctions”. .
Greens are for free trade with rules
“The Greens are for free trade and also for new free trade agreements,” emphasizes parliamentary group leader Katharina Dröge in an interview with the FAZ Agreements are.” The agreement that the EU is currently negotiating with New Zealand could become “a model free trade agreement” in this regard, according to Dröge.
The Federal Constitutional Court had ruled in March that Ceta was not objectionable in the provisional limited application. However, the verdict did not solve the problems of the coalition partners. Finally, the points that are not yet in force are disputed.
