Why does Article 133 matter?

Thursday February 19, 2004 15:24

by seedot

Bin Collection, Aer Rianta, An Post, CIE, FAS, Bord Failte, ESB - all of these bodies have their futures discussed at the Article 133 meetings. When we want to know what's behind 25% of bus routes being introduced, or the push behind service charges we HAVE to think about these meetings.

The European structures are by their nature remote and complex. After years of horsetrading in treaty negotiations, creation of an entire language ('subsidiarity', 'competences', 'QMV') many see this as the preserve of anoraks and conspiracy theorists.

During Nice II the phrase Article 133 entered the Irish political vocabulary as a short hand for the neo-liberal agenda of the EU. Referring to both an article of the European Treaties (previous to Amsterdam it was article 113) and the comittee which determines the EU negotiating position at international trade negotiations, for the first time the process of negotiating free trade agreements was discussed in the Oireachtas and referred to by campaigners.

But it's still very abstract, and after the collapse of the Cancun negotiations, seems to be even more remote to the day to day concerns of the Irish people. When questions are raised, we are assured there is nothing to worry about - it's all good and anyway there is no way that the WTO or any other body could force the liberalisation of Irish public services - sure don't they say so or their web site. And anyway, with the bin tax, bus and airport privatisation haven't we enough to be worried about with the Irish government without reading or talking about all this EU stuff.

On 29th April 2003, the EU trade commissioner Pascal Lamy outlined some results of the Article 133 negotiation process. Since Nice this committee now looked at services as well as goods and, sure enough, had decided that there should be ".. real improvements for foreign services providers in terms of access to the EU market..".
He went on to outline the sectors that foreign providers would have a legal right to enter. These included:

"air transport: the offer includes new commitments on groundhandling and airport management services. "
"The EU offers to open its market to foreign providers on waste water, sanitation and similar services. "

So Mr. Lamy went to Cancun ready to open up waste management and airports throughout Europe to liberalisation - which if agreed at the WTO would prevent any European government from regulating and interfering in these markets.

Now this is what we know about - because of the lack of transparency we're not sure what else has been offered - however we know that a range of other requests were received:
"In terms of sectors, we are responding to requests we received on financial services, computer services, telecoms, transport, distribution, postal and courrier services, professional services, and tourism. " .. EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy at the European Parliament, 14 Mai 2002.

Despite this, our politicians assure us there can be no impact. They use two arguments: one that the items are not being discussed, and secondly that even if they are discussed they will not result in forced privatisation because the WTO says so. Mary Harney and Bertie Aherne both used this argument during the Nice debate:

"The GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) expressly provides that
all WTO members can legitimately regulate economic and non economic sectors
within their territory to guarantee the achievement of public objectives. " (Bertie Aherne in the Dail in response to a question by Joe Higins on Water and Post Offices - 16th October 2002, Mary Harney in a statement issued the previous week).

The article 133 Info Group responded: "A close examination of this claim reveals a different and contrary reality. While GATS appears to exempt services supplied in the exercise of government authority, it also mandates that such services be supplied neither on a commercial basis, nor in competition with one or more service suppliers. Since commercial basis is not clearly defined, governments charging any tax or fees could be interpreted as engaging in commercial activity, and essential services could be dragged into a free trade ambit. According to Vandana Shiva, Director of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Natural Resource Policy, "Since most societies have pluralistic service providers, governments can be accused of being in competition with one or more service suppliers."

So, once this agreement is reached IT CANNOT BE REVERSED by either a national parliament or the EU.

What the Article 133 committee decides affects your bus service, your bin charges, your jobs and our public services. This committee is meeting tomorrow, in Dublin and again on 20th April. They will be discussing our lives. Demand that the Irish Government publishes the content of these discussion. Watch out for further extensions of the power of the Article 133 committeee in the proposed European constitution. Get your union and your representatives to look at Article 133 and how it will impact.