On 16 January, the trade agreement between the EU and Canada (CETA) returned to the European Parliament for a short presentation on the impact of the first 6 years of provisional application of the trade section of the agreement. And a resolution, initiated by a Spanish Social Democrat MEP, in favour of rapid and definitive ratification of the agreement was adopted by a large majority (391 + 157 -) the following day.
With the exception of a Green MEP who urged the Parliament to examine in greater depth the reasons why ten countries have still not ratified the agreement, the speeches given were unanimously complimentary of CETA and called for full implementation of the agreement.
A picture a little too golden
CETA is presented as a victory for free trade and an economic success. The main points highlighted are the increase in trade:
- "66% more trade in goods
- 64% increase in agricultural trade
- 62% increase in trade in services".
These figures should be treated with caution. These increases calculated in monetary terms do not take inflation into account. In quantitative terms, trade actually increased more before the CETA (over the period 2012 - 2017) than since its provisional application (2017 - 2022 - see the detailed report by the Veblen Institute).
Above all, the increase in trade should not be welcomed in the same way depending on the sector of activity. "Imports from Canada went up by 25% during 2022, notably for raw materials and energy products.", which translates, for example, into an increase in imports of oil from the tar sands or uranium.
An agreement that goes beyond trade barriers
But the disagreements over the impact of CETA also concern " other dimensions, such as cooperation on trade-related environmental issues, the adoption of recommendations on gender equality and the incorporation of other topical issues such as artificial intelligence and cybersecurity [...] recently we also sealed the digital partnership and EU-Canada Green Alliance."
This Green Alliance, signed on 23 November 2023 at a bilateral summit in Saint-John’s, is mainly symbolic, because while it renews the two regions’ commitments to sustainable development, it "does not, nor is it intended to create any rights or obligations under domestic or international law and has no financial implications for either Partner" (1).
The new geopolitical context (be it the pandemic or more recently the war in Ukraine) is also used to underline the importance of a stable partnership with Canada.
Investment protection
The resolution adopted by the European Parliament calls on the ten EU Member States that have not yet done so to ratify the agreement as quickly as possible, with the aim of triggering full application of the agreement, including the provisions on investment protection. This call comes at a time when this part of the agreement already appears obsolete and in contradiction with the recent orientations of the European Union, as shown by the announced withdrawal of 10 European countries from the Energy Charter Treaty.
Note