Read on Twitter
Earlier the @greenparty_ie had a debate on greening trade deals. A few arguments put forward were:
1. Ceta is as good as done, let's not waste political capital on it
2. Let's leave the #Ceta fight and push to stop #Mercosur
3. Let's focus on "greening" future trade deals https://twitter.com/meaghancarmo/status/1352996411374186498
1. Ceta is as good as done, let's not waste political capital on it
2. Let's leave the #Ceta fight and push to stop #Mercosur
3. Let's focus on "greening" future trade deals https://twitter.com/meaghancarmo/status/1352996411374186498
Let's look at point 1:
Each country has to ratify the deal, particularly the ICS mechanism. Cyprus failed to ratify. Other countries have sent the matter to their constitutional courts.
This is an absolute opportunity to use our (cont.)
Each country has to ratify the deal, particularly the ICS mechanism. Cyprus failed to ratify. Other countries have sent the matter to their constitutional courts.
This is an absolute opportunity to use our (cont.)
national competency to at the least properly review all aspects of the deal, at best stop us from locking ourselves into a legal mechanism that gives international corporations the upper hand.
This is *exactly* the kind of thing to spend political capital on. In fact, we may never get a better opportunity to systematically change how trade deals are done by rejecting Ceta, which all environmentalists agree is bad.
We campaigned on system change and this is an absolute opportunity for Ireland to place itself as a world leader on demanding high environmental standards in trade and stop the creation of dual legal systems.
The only way to do this is to vote no.
The only way to do this is to vote no.
Point 2:
Why is it either/or? And there well may be a great chance of stopping Mercosur at an EU level.
But what happens if we don't?
Does the precedent set by accepting Ceta under supposed PfG agreements then demand that we accept Mercosur too?
Why is it either/or? And there well may be a great chance of stopping Mercosur at an EU level.
But what happens if we don't?
Does the precedent set by accepting Ceta under supposed PfG agreements then demand that we accept Mercosur too?
Want to stop Mercosur? How powerful a signal would it be to Mercosur if Ceta was rejected? It would be dead on arrival.
Point 3:
Firstly, Ceta and the ICS is something we get locked into well into the future. So there's that.
Secondly, accepting the ICS mechanism makes it a hell of a lot harder to say no to the same mechanism in later deals. A precedent set now could well inhibit future greening
Firstly, Ceta and the ICS is something we get locked into well into the future. So there's that.
Secondly, accepting the ICS mechanism makes it a hell of a lot harder to say no to the same mechanism in later deals. A precedent set now could well inhibit future greening
There is no compelling argument for this deal. This is a litmus test of the Greens in government. Without the courage or strength to fight this battle now, when it is most winnable, there is little to no hope of achieving the systematic changes required in the enviro fight.
