TTIP and legislative‒executive relations in EU trade policy

Abstract

This paper analyses Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations in order to assess how the move towards tighter economic integration within the EU‒US strategic partnership impacts on legislative‒executive relations in EU trade policy. The analysis examines the institutional, substantive and party political dimensions of national parliaments’ scrutiny of the Common Commercial Policy. Based on insights into both domestic and EU channels of parliamentary monitoring of TTIP negotiations, the paper argues that, although the government remains the central object of democratic control, the involvement of national parliaments in transatlantic trade extends to encompass the EU’s own transatlantic and trade policies. This is rooted in the legislatures’ legal capacity to constrain the executive in the negotiation, conclusion and, where applicable, ratification phases of EU trade agreements. It is argued that national parliamentary influence takes the shape of politicisation of the legitimacy of the expected policy outcomes of these agreements.

Keywords:

• TTIP
• national parliaments
• transatlantic relations
• EU trade policy
• mixed agreements

Notes

1. Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 29 June 2015 (PL 114–26, 19 USC 4201).

2. European Commission, ‘Trade for All – Towards a More Responsible Trade and Investment Policy’, October 2015.

3. Yet this is not the case with countries with a strictly ‘dualist’ approach to international law, such as Canada or the UK, where parliaments have an ex post role in implementing agreements.

4. Article 207(1) Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

5. Article 218 TFEU.

6. Article 207(4) TFEU.

7. Article 207(5) TFEU.

8. Case C-268/94, Portugal v. Council [1996], ECR I-6177.

9. Karel de Gucht, ‘Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – Solving the Regulatory Puzzle’, 10 October 2013, press release SPEECH/13/801, 6.

10. COSAC, 23rd Bi-annual Report (LIII meeting, 31 May‒2 June 2015, Riga), 42–47 and 52.

11. COSAC, Contribution (LIII meeting, 31 May‒2 June 2015, Riga), paras. 3.4, 3.5, 3.9, 3.10, and 3.11.

12. HC 804, 11th Report of 2014–2015, 25 March 2015, para. 4.

13. Ibid., paras. 47–48.

14. HC 857, 9th Report of 2014–2015, 10 March 2015, para. 16.

15. Ibid., para. 38.

16. See oral evidence sessions in: HC 292 of 11 June 2014, HC 1084 of 26 February 2015, and HC 553 of 21 October 2015.

17. HC 918, 38th Report of 2014–2015, 25 March 2015, para. 61.

18. HC 695, 8th Report of 2013–2014, 3 April 2014, para. 53.

19. See: http://tradeinvest.babinc.org/ttip/all-party-parliamentary-group.

20. HL Paper 179, 14th Report of 2013–2014, 13 May 2014, paras. 33 and 74.

21. AN Résolution européenne 155, 12 June 2013, point 5.

22. AN Résolution européenne 156, 15 June 2013, points 22 and 23.

23. AN Résolution européenne 339, 22 May 2014.

24. AN Résolution européenne 487, 19 March 2015, point 16.

25. Sénat, Résolution européenne 164, 9 June 2013.

26. Sénat, Résolution européenne 57, 3 February 2015.

27. Sénat, Résolution européenne 83, 4 February 2016.

28. EurActiv, ‘British Candidates Embrace TTIP as “Biggest Prize” for UK in Europe’, 23 April 2015, http://eurac.tv/n6M.

29. HC Deb 25 February 2014, Commons Hansard, cols. 186–234.

30. Kate Clark, col. 221.

31. Jeremy Corbyn, col. 232.

32. William Bain, col. 230.

33. HC Deb 15 January 2015, col. 1118.

34. HC Deb 15 January 2015. See reactions by Anne Main (col. 1076), Robin Walker (col. 1081), and Robert Walter (col. 1085).

35. HL Deb 17 June 2014, Lords Hansard, cols 727–63.

36. ‘Les conditions du groupe S&D sur le TTIP’, 19 May 2014, http://www.parti-socialiste.fr/articles/les-conditions-du-groupe-sd-sur-le-ttip.

37. The Greens had one MP in parliament after the 2010 general election.

38. See interventions by Pierre Lequiller and Joaquim Pueyo in: AN Commission des affaires européennes, Compte rendu 63, 28 May 2013, http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/europe/c-rendus/c0063.asp#P23_1089.

39. Based on Commission data: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/relations/relations_other/npo/index_en.htm.

40. Bundesrat, Resolution of 11 July 2014, Doc. No. 295/14, points 9 and 12.

41. Letter of 20 March 2015, C(2015) 1665.

42. AN, Compte rendu 202, 15 April 2015, http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/europe/c-rendus/c0202.asp#P5_289.

43. Sénat, Compte rendu, 17 February 2015, http://www.senat.fr/compte-rendu-commissions/20150216/europ.html#toc2.

44. Tweede Kamer, ‘Letter in the Framework of the Political Dialogue: The Role of National Parliaments in Free Trade Agreements’, 25 June 2014.

45. Letter C(2014) 7557, 16 October 2014.

46. Karel de Gucht, ‘The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: The Real Debate’, 22 May 2014, press release SPEECH/14/406, 5.

47. EurActiv, ‘Malmström: We Can Finish TTIP during the Obama Administration’, 28 July 2015, http://www.euractiv.com/section/trade-society/interview/malmstrom-we-can-finish-ttip-during-the-obama-administration/.

48. AN, Compte rendu 217, 17 June 2015, http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/europe/c-rendus/c0217.asp.

49. Presidency Conclusions, Speakers Conference, Rome, 20–21 April 2015, points 4–5.

50. Presidency Conclusions, Speakers Conference, Luxembourg, 22–24 May 2016, point 27.

51. Personal correspondence with Commissioner Malmström, Gothenburg, 15 March 2016.

52. See: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1230 and http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11103-2013-DCL-1/en/pdf.