DON'T be put off by the dull name. On the face of it, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is extremely boring: a deal to remove certain barriers to trade between the Europe Union and the United States.
But look a little closer, and your eyes will unglaze. TTIP is huge, and its effects could be dramatic, because those barriers include provisions designed to protect public health and safeguard the environment (see "TTIP: The science of the US-European trade megadeal").
That sounds worrying. But it can be argued that harmonising transatlantic rules will lead to better risk analysis than the confused and sometimes politicised regimes we have in place now. Combined with the estimated economic benefits, there might be a strong case to be made in TTIP's favour.
But we can't be sure about that, because the talks are being held behind firmly closed doors. If a deal is struck, it is most likely to be approved summarily, with little opportunity for public feedback.
So critics of TTIP's economics, as well as those worried about its deference to corporate interests, are free to fear the worst. But whoever is right, the approach is wrong. In democracies, pro and con arguments should be aired, not stifled. Talks as important as these should be in the open.
This article appeared in print under the headline "Free to fear the worst?"
- New Scientist
- Not just a website!
- Subscribe to New Scientist and get:
- New Scientist magazine delivered every week
- Unlimited online access to articles from over 500 back issues
- Subscribe Now and Save
If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.
