Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE EU-CANADA TRADE agreement or CETA came into force on Thursday. It will bring undeniable economic benefits for Europe and Ireland: a predicted annual €12 billion GDP boost for the EU, with an estimated €1.2 billion boost in exports for Ireland.
Ireland has an export-orientated economy. 80% of everything we produce is exported and tens of thousands of Irish jobs depend on trade and agreements. Ireland is also Canada’s fifth largest investment recipient.
Additionally, CETA will be a tool for better investment opportunities and increased competitiveness, development of the knowledge-based economy and innovation.
CETA’s geostrategic impact
CETA is also hugely important for its geostrategic impact at this very point in time. Over one-fifth of our exports go to the US. Yet we now face legitimate concerns that President Donald Trump’s protectionist policies will affect Irish businesses, exports and foreign direct investment.
The negative implications of Brexit on Ireland are well documented, but it is worth restating that we cannot ignore the severity of the impact Brexit will have on this country. The UK is also aware that leaving the EU means cutting off highly valuable trade links. In the last few days, Prime Minister May indicated that the UK basically intends to copy and paste CETA in a bid to establish a post-Brexit trade deal with Canada.
Elsewhere, new world powers such as the BRIC countries of Brazil, Russia, India and China, continue to rise while turbulence persists in the Middle East, Turkey and elsewhere.
The EU needs to take such factors into account, and secure reliable trading relationships in order to preserve our economic competitiveness and our status as the world’s largest economy.
Scaremongering with inaccuracies
I am not an absolutist. Although free trade brings peace and prosperity, I do not deny that effects of rapid technological development have taken its toll on manufacturing jobs, which people then link to globalisation.
Anti-CETA campaigners advocate an anti-trade position without presenting the facts or perhaps offering so-called “alternative facts”. Scaremongering with inaccuracies and half-truths is irresponsible in the least, and worryingly commonplace in this era of fake news.
If we exclude ourselves from global trading opportunities, are we “standing up for Ireland’s rights or sovereignty” as claimed by some opposed to CETA. I would not be so sure. We should strive to reach a middle ground, to shape globalisation, rather than be shaped by it.
CETA will allow us to grow even more
Ireland has seen how much trade can help to secure and create jobs, and CETA will allow us to grow even more. Every €1 billion in exports supports 14,000 European jobs. It is a fact that the EU-South Korea trade deal resulted in 210,000 new jobs in Europe.
Perhaps certain sectors may not benefit as significantly as others, but this does not mean that any sector will be sacrificed for another.
Small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) will benefit most. Removing the barriers to trade and providing clear rules for SMEs will create a more competitive trade and export environment. 99.7% of Irish businesses are SMEs and they need our support to continue to drive growth, innovation and job creation.
The basis of the CETA is threefold: improving market access and eliminating trade barriers, ensuring cooperation between the EU and Canadian regulators, and establishing international trade rules.
After 7 years of negotiations, with the full inclusion of various stakeholders including trade unions, NGOs, government officials and more, a very advanced, extensive trade agreement was achieved with CETA.
The worst kept secret in the world
On the question of transparency, the European Commission negotiates trade agreements on behalf of the EU, providing regular public updates. The European Parliament and member states have their say along the way as well as final ratification or rejection powers.
Therefore, the process of negotiating involves all of the EU institutions, governmental and non-governmental actors and is fully democratic. After seven years of negotiations and consultations with stakeholders, some still try to mislead the public and refer to CETA as a “secret deal” – if that is the case, it must be the worst kept secret in the world.
Secondly, the EU has very strict laws on hormone-fed beef and GMOs and this will not change under CETA. While trade arrangements can be a cause of concern for sensitive sectors like agriculture, they offer huge opportunities too. Exports are essential for the Irish agricultural sector. Previously, EU food and agricultural exports faced between 10 and 20% tariffs with Canada.
CETA will eliminate almost 92% of tariffs. However, certain sensitive sectors, such as beef and pork, will remain under limited quotas as agreed. Furthermore, CETA will not open up the market for poultry and eggs in the EU or Canada.
Thirdly, the EU is currently working on establishing a multilateral investment court, which would replace all the bilateral Investment Court Systems (ICSs) and the existing ISDS provisions in older agreements.
Strengthening European and Canadian ties
CETA specifically foresees the establishment of such a court. It will ensure cases are treated in a transparent manner by publicly appointed, independent professional judges in public hearings.
Consistency of judicial decisions will be ensured and jurisdictions respected. The sovereign right of governments to legislate in the public interest will be safeguarded.
CETA will be fully implemented once the parliaments in all member states ratify the deal according to their respective requirements. It will bring prosperity, strengthen European and Canadian economic ties and reinforce Europe’s position in a changing and increasingly globalised world.
Seán Kelly MEP is a member of the European Parliament, representing the Ireland South constituency. He is the Leader of Fine Gael Delegation in the European Parliament and the only Irish member of the Parliament’s Committee on International Trade.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Great pilot to land plane a hero. Great job
@Thomas Linehan: She’s an ex F18 fighter pilot – one of the first female F18 pilots. Heard some of the radio communications of the flight. She sounded completely cool and in control. After the flight she spoke personally to every passenger before they left the aircraft. A wonderful pilot.
@Deborah Blacoe: Well said! Hopefully it will shut up some of those ‘ Woman can’t fly a plane/drive a car’ idiots.
@Michael Evans: They still exist?!
@Deborah Blacoe: fantastic , but again as I commented yesterday there was a time where if there was a catastrophic engine failure of this kind that they would immediately ground the planes with these engines as its too much risk allowing passengers to fly when they dont know the cause and level of risk but it looks like they are putting the dollars before the safety !!!! They were so lucky the whole plane didn’t go down killing all on board – the business model for Southwest ( and Ryanair followed ) is that they use the same type plane for fleet and same engines – this means that the business effect of having to ground the whole airline is simply too big and costly and they are taking risks keeping these up in the air until they identify with some certainty they are safe. Remember they tested these engines a week before the crash and they passed the tests yet exploded mid air killing one and lucky to avoid a whole castrophe – pretty shameful to take such risks until its resolved – id be pretty piiiiised if I lost a family relative because the airline is taking these risks with faulty engines .
@Dave Hammond: checking engines can be done on a stepped basis. They airline is given a set amount of flying hours within which to check engines. If the check hasn’t been completed by then, the aircraft is grounded.
@Deborah Blacoe: the point Deborah is that this engine had been checked days beforehand and passed as safe ????? They don’t know what caused the engine to disintegrate midair ?? You are also missing the other key point – with the evolvement of low cost airline business models – the airline uses ONE TYPE of engine / plane in the fleet to reduce business complexity for parts / maintenance etc – but when there is a catastrophe like this they are unable to ground the effected planes because it means the whole fleet cannot fly – (previously they always grounded a particular plane /engine type when there was an accident / deaths …..but not now. You are falling for the spin / nonsense that they can ‘ check them on a stepped basis ??? Now Think about that for a second ?? The test that was done on this engine days before PASSED !
@Dave Hammond: I am not missing any ‘point’. I am stating a fact. I have never commented on the rights or wrongs of it.
I think OMG’s reference is to the last picture in the article where three people are shown with the oxygen mask over their mouths, not noses and mouths as demonstrated in the safety briefings..
@Kevin O’Doherty: it depends on the size of the mask.
@Michael Lang: and what’s the excuse for having the elastic strap just dangling down rather than around their head?
@Colm O’Leary: putting it on quickly? Passenger partially panicking and just placing the mask against their mouth as getting the air was their highest priority?
You know what, who knows, and I doubt the various aviation safety ‘experts’ commenting on here know either.
I just about to say – None of them have the mask over their noses!
Spot the passengers who were reading the newspaper/chatting to their friends while the safety briefing was been conducted.
Never fails to amaze me how thick some people are.
@OMG!: I’ve been on a lot of planes in my time and I’m pretty sure there has never been any instruction on what to do if you get partially sucked out of a broken window. The lady in question was wearing her seat belt so I’m struggling to see the merit of your comment.
@OMG!: seriously that must be one of the dumbest comments ever on this site. Show some respect
@OMG!: frequent flyers don’t need to listen to such briefings.
@Bingobango: I could be wrong, but I think he’s talking about the fact the people in the photo don’t have their oxygen masks on correctly…
@Bingobango: be interesting to see if seatbelt was been worn at the time and if it would have changed the outcome if it was.
@Davy MacIomhair: The plane was most likely at a safe level of flight where oxygen masks are not required. The pilot descended as soon as cabin pressure was lost, that is the procedure. There doesn’t seem to be mass hysteria or panic here so I stand by my comment and feel the original posters comment was without merit in the context of this tragedy.
If you read more carefully it says that seatbelt was worn by the woman sitting next to the window.
@Ted Logan
@Bingobango: yet the oxygen masks still dropped from the ceiling…. So what do you expect people to do… Sit there and say.
“Hmmm.. I reckon we’re at a safe level of flight, I don’t need these masks…”
Good man.
@Davy MacIomhair: Of course they dropped, the cabin had a explosive decompression. There is only enough oxygen for 15 minutes so I’m pretty sure they were at a safe level of flight when this photo was taken. People harping on about not listening to the safety instructions and complaining that their oxygen masks aren’t fitted correctly are just being ridiculous. Good man.
@Bingobango: but their masks *arent* fitted correctly, and you’re assuming that photo was taken at a safe level of flight. Stop assuming stuff.
@Davy MacIomhair: Can we say a prayer for all those on the flight that lost their lives due to incorrectly fitted oxygen masks.
@OMG!: maybee they are frequent flyers .it amazes me how many people have to be told something before it sinks in .are you one of them.I know the drill off by heart.it never changes.
@Bingobango: I was reading it blew at 38000ft. I’d imagine that loosing a window at that altitude would result in pretty explosive decompression.
@Nauris Serna: Exactly. Hence why the poor woman got sucked out.
@Nauris Serna: It blew out at FL320 or 32000 feet, In the event of such an incident/accident you decent to FL100/10000 feet were the body can breath easily without using supplemental oxygen.
They do have a relatively young fleet but they would be concerned that the business model they use was a direct copy of Southwest – standardise the number of planes/engine types in the fleet etc – and they should be concerned that this engine passed the safety test days before this happened ?? I would suggest they would know that the business risk is huge on two levels – one is that the public react and question / doubt or lose confidence that low cost operators model isn’t compromising the safety of passengers with how far they can use these engines etc before a tragedy like this ? And secondly that they find something what caused the accident here is some fundamental flaw to the engines that may need global mandatory grounding because their exposure would be fairly significant.
What about our airline that flies B737s…Do they have this type of engine.
@tom McCormack If you mean Ryanair yes they also use the CFM engines.
@tom McCormack: that aircraft was nearly 20 years old afaik..ryanair has a relatively young fleet
have your say