The European Union remains committed to start talks on Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement with India, Cecilia Malmstrom, Trade Commissioner, EU, told Sriram Lakshman in an e-mail interview. The EU is also ready to conclude a balanced Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the Obama administration. Excerpts:
India's Commerce Minister, Nirmala Sitharaman, recently told Parliament that she is awaiting confirmation from the EU that BTIA negotiations can proceed and she sent a letter to you in April asking for dates for a meeting between the chief negotiators. Has there been a response from your side and have specific dates been set for talks (apart from a possible meeting along the sidelines of g20 talks later this year in China)?
I replied to Minister Sitharaman's letter on 4 May 2016, and my reply is publicly available together with all my correspondence
In her letter, Minister Sitharaman reiterated India's request to resume negotiations without preconditions. I reassured her that the EU remains committed to resuming negotiations for an ambitious and broad agreement. This has been clearly spelled out also in the latest EU trade and investment strategy Communication “Trade for All”. But before we are ready to make this step, we need to see meaningful progress on our respective key outstanding issues so as to ensure that a resumption of negotiations has a realistic prospect to lead to their successful conclusion. I believe we owe this to our constituencies, both in the EU and in India, in order to avoid false expectations nine years after the launch of the negotiations. As I wrote to Minister Sitharaman, resuming negotiations without any prior agreement on how to move forward on the key outstanding issues would only postpone a problem, the resolution of which might eventually jeopardize the whole negotiating process.
I would say that the ball remains on the Indian side of the court.
I remain open to engaging and am convinced that once India is ready we will be able to advance at a good pace. Therefore, I look forward to my next exchange with Minister Sitharaman.
Trade in services is extremely important to the Indian side and the Indian government wants to see greater ease of movement of skilled workers across borders. A trade spokesperson from the EU told a group of visiting journalists in April that the demands, as they were phrased by the Indian side, were not acceptable to the EU. The Indian side holds that the temporary movement of skilled workers across borders is a necessary element for a trade deal. Is the EU willing to make an offer that will incorporate this?
The EU has consistently acknowledged the importance that India attaches to services provided in the EU by Indian skilled professionals. President Juncker himself confirmed, at the recent EU-India Summit, the readiness of the EU to explore flexibilities on key Indian demands provided we see willingness on the Indian side to make progress on the EU demands as well.
The EU has wanted greater market access in certain sectors (car and car parts, wines and spirits for example). Can you confirm that a phase-wise reduction or elimination of tariffs (i.e., long transitional periods) in the automobile and wines/spirits sectors as well as asymmetric reductions will still be acceptable to the EU?
I can confirm that the EU remains ready to explore with India the precise modalities for the liberalization of duties in these sectors, including asymmetrical liberalization in favor of India, provided of course that the overall balance of the negotiations is right.
Sentiment in New Delhi is that (i) 'Brexit' (ii) TTIP negotiations have contributed to delays in the BTIA negotiations. Are these at least partially responsible for the delays? Will you be appointing a new Chief Negotiator who will focus specifically on the BTIA?
The EU is ready to devote energy and resources to trade and investment negotiations with any trade partner that is willing and committed to ambitious, broad and meaningful Free Trade Agreements that have the potential to deliver concrete benefits to both sides. Over the last two years, and in parallel with TTIP negotiations, the EU has managed to conclude negotiations for ambitious and far reaching Free
Trade Agreements not only with Canada and Singapore, but also with Vietnam; and, more recently, to launch negotiations with the Philippines and soon with Indonesia.
A new Chief Negotiator dealing with the EU-India FTA, Ms Helena König, was appointed in November 2015, and the hand-over of responsibilities was formally communicated to the Indian authorities on 18 January 2016.
MEPs who are members of the European Parliament's Delegation for Relations with India have suggested that India and the EU might be better off pursuing a watered- down free trade agreement if the contours of the deal under discussion are too ambitious. Would the EU consider a "BTIA Light"?
The EU negotiators have to respect the mandate that the EU Member States have given to the European Commission. It was re-confirmed in the "Council Conclusions on the EU's trade and investment policy" of November 2015. In these documents, EU Member States support the conclusion of ambitious, comprehensive and mutually beneficial bilateral trade and investment agreements and call on the Commission to work to advance negotiations in Asia amongst other regions.
There have been longstanding concerns about the TTIP within Europe and presidential candidates in the United States have also voiced concerns about free trade agreements. Can the TTIP still be finalized before Barack Obama's term is over? Do you foresee similar opposition from the public to the trade deal with India if and when it progresses?
The EU is ready, willing and able to conclude a balanced and high-standard TTIP with the Obama administration. We are working at full speed to get these negotiations as far as possible in 2016. However, much work remains to be done to reach a balanced and ambitious deal. For TTIP to be successful, substance must trump speed. In the end, TTIP needs to be a solid and balanced agreement which creates business and job opportunities on both sides of the Atlantic, offering more choice for our consumers and strengthening our hand on the global stage.
We welcome the public debate in Europe on trade agreements, be it on TTIP or on the agreement with India. But we would like that debate to be fact-based. We think it is important to ensure all stakeholders/citizens understand what is being negotiated and the potential benefits. This is why we have significantly increased the transparency of our negotiations (i.e. by making public all the EU proposals among other provisions) and that we have multiplied our outreach efforts throughout all EU Member States.
India has been called 'protectionist',' obstructionist' , 'defensive' etc. , in its attitude towards trade deals, specifically with regard to tariffs on goods. The Indian government has said developed countries are extremely protectionist when it comes to certain sectors (such as agriculture) and trade in services. Comments?
The EU has always been committed to extensive liberalization in all sectors, including agriculture and services. Of course, the exact level of liberalization will also depend on what is on the table: the more ambitious the offer made by our counterpart, the higher the level of liberalization we can provide. Nevertheless, in its negotiations with India, the EU has taken and is still ready to take into full account India's development-related needs, even though India now qualifies as an emerging economy. Throughout the past negotiations, the EU has shown a considerable degree of flexibility in favour of India, be it on tariffs – where longer transitional periods could be considered in different sectors -, intellectual property rights – where it was agreed that nothing in the FTA shall be construed to impair the capacity of the parties to promote access to medicines – or services and public procurement, where the EU was ready to follow a modest approach as long as its key offensive interests were secured.
The Indian government has voiced concerns over recent changes to EU trademark law that allow the seizing of goods in transit to third countries via the EU, if their branding resembles trademark protected goods in the EU. The Indian government has said its concerns are based on the fact that trademarks are regionally applicable and Indian companies may not be aware of EU trademarks. It is also concerned that the new law could be used to confiscate generic drugs en route to Latin America and Africa. Can you clarity the EU's position on this?
The EU has clarified this issue to the Indian authorities on many occasions. In this respect, I can only regret that the Indian authorities have so far refused to enter into an annual dialogue with the EU on Intellectual Property Rights, as requested again at the EU-India Summit of this year. This dialogue would enable both parties to address their issues of concern in a constructive spirit and avoid misunderstandings.
The new EU Trademark law does not impede access by patients – and in particular those from developing and least-developed countries - to legitimately traded medicines transiting through the EU territory. According to EU law, the proprietor of a trade mark would only be entitled to stop goods that bear a trade mark which is identical to the European Union trade mark: this is to say, goods could be stopped only if they infringe existing trade mark laws, which is a fraudulent activity sanctioned by all IPR systems in the world, including in India. The new provisions do not apply to confusingly similar trademarks or other IPR such as patents. All in all, the EU is fully committed to all the efforts made to facilitate access to medicines for countries in need. The Regulation reminds customs authorities of the need to have the Doha Declaration in mind when dealing with "generic" medicines in transit.
