Latest on TTIP

05 June 2015

This morning 38 Degrees published a full-page advert in the local press that resorts to misinformation and scaremongering. In an acceleration of a name-and-shame campaign launched last week on Facebook, the organisation claims I voted to back secret courts that allow corporations to sue governments. This is factually incorrect.

The campaign makes reference to a huge trade deal that is currently being negotiated by the European Commission and the United States, also known as TTIP.

Firstly, there has been no vote on TTIP yet, nor will there be for a very long time. Negotiations have barely begun, and are unlikely to be concluded before the end of the current European Parliament in 2019. Only once the final text is presented to the European Parliament will MEPs have the chance to support, or oppose, the deal. Until this happens, there is no TTIP to vote for or against.

Second, Members of Parliament (MEPs) have no role in TTIP negotiations, which are led by the European Commission. What we can do in the meantime is to outline what we would and would not be willing to accept in a future deal. This is where we find ourselves at now: next week MEPs in the European Parliament will adopt an official position on TTIP.

Last week I supported a report by the trade committee, which is the text that will be put to vote in the European Parliament on 10 June. The text includes key protections for the NHS and public services and binding labour safeguards. Importantly, it states that we trust national courts in the case of investor protection disputes, which ends the role of special ISDS tribunals. The report doesn't go far enough on ISDS, but it is an important step in the right direction

I am categorically opposed to private courts for multinationals and have tabled key amendments that explicitly rule out ISDS from any trade deal with the US. The amendments read as follows (in italics):

Amendment 115

"... to propose a permanent solution for resolving disputes between investors and states – without the use of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) private arbitration – which is subject to democratic principles and scrutiny..."

Amendment 27

" ensure that foreign investors are treated in a non-discriminatory fashion and have a fair opportunity to seek and achieve redress of grievances, while benefiting from no greater rights than domestic investors; to oppose the inclusion of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in TTIP, as other options to enforce investment protection are available, such as domestic remedies..."

Between now and then I will be working hard to gather as much support as I can from MEPs in all political parties in order to get these amendments through. But we need your help, too. You can do this by contacting your MEP and telling them why ISDS must be opposed.

For more information on TTIP, ISDS and what we are trying to achieve, see:

To see 38 Degrees' original Facebook post, see

Do you think the North East needs its own voice in the EU exit negotiations?

Latest Tweets

Borders are deceptive, difficult and dangerous places. Why? @PaulBrannenNE explains in his latest column for… 17 hours 13 min ago
Watch @Jude_KD's full speach from yesterday's hearing in the @EP_Petitions committee, where she called for a guaran… 17 hours 24 min ago
RT @Jude_KD: My thoughts after the @ep_petitions debate yesterday on right to vote for @BritishinEurope on any #PeoplesVote: 'If there's a… 19 hours 6 min ago
RT @Classthinktank: 'Clock is Ticking to sort out #Brexit Shambles' - new blog by Jude Kirton-Darling MEP @Jude_KD 19 hours 44 min ago
RT @PaulBrannenNE: Hadrian's Wall, the bloody history of the English-Scottish border, the Iron Curtain, all once danger zones & now Brexit… 19 hours 44 min ago

Sign up to our Newsletter