As negotiations heat up in Montevideo, we asked two MEPs how they consider this major deal.
Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen has landed in Latin America to finalise a trade deal between the EU and the Mercosur bloc, formed by Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay, whilst Europe’s key opponent against the deal, France, suffers government collapse.
“Touchdown in Latin America, the finish line of the EU-Mercosur agreement is in sight,” von der Leyen posted on Twitter on Thursday, adding: “Let’s work, let’s cross it. We have the chance to create a market of 700 million people. The largest trade and investment partnership the world has ever seen. Both regions will benefit.”
France is fiercely opposed to the agreement, which aims to create a free trade area between the Mercosur countries, but with its attention elsewhere, von der Leyen seems keen to press ahead to unblock negotiations which have been going on for almost two decades.
In the face of French opposition, 11 EU member states sent a letter in September to Ursula von Der Leyen urging the Commission to step up a gear. Supporters of the agreement stressed the urgency of its conclusion at a time when other powers, such as China, “gain an even stronger influence on Latin American markets, both economically and politically.”
As negotiations heat up in Montevideo, we asked two MEPs how they consider this major deal.
Would Mercosur benefit European consumers?
Jörgen Warborn (EPP, Sweden)
There are 216 million consumers on their side and 450 on our side. So it will be a huge market, the common market, that will, of course, help consumers. They will have more choices and more products to choose from. And hopefully it will also help to beat inflation
Saskia Bricmont (Greens/EFA, Belgium)
It’s difficult to exactly see the benefits because it’s lowering the tariffs to import more products issued from the agricultural sector, mainly beef, poultry, but also honey, for instance.
What impact on farmers?
Jörgen Warborn (EPP, Sweden)
It’s huge opportunity for farmers and for the food producers. When we analyze the trade agreements we have with, for example, Canada and other countries, we can see that it has been hugely beneficial. But of course there are also some sensitive products and we have to pay attention to them, and the commission has done that. So there are tariff rate quotas, meaning that there cannot be too many products coming in for the sensitive goods. And this [deal] is also introduced over a longer period of time. And there is compensation for the farmers if they are still hurt.
Saskia Bricmont (Greens/EFA, Belgium)
The farmers will be impacted by the import of products that do not respect the same social and environmental standards, using chemicals and products that the EU is exporting that are forbidden in the EU. and that will come back through soy, for instance, or also the meat production. It means that the level playing field is not respected, that there is unfair competition between the products that are imported here in Europe, when the farmers already face a lot of difficulties.
Mercosur a benefit for the climate?
Jörgen Warborn (EPP, Sweden)
I would say it is a very good package for the climate because first of all, we have a commitment to effectively implement the Paris Agreement.
ADVERTISEMENTWe have a sustainability chapter which also covers biodiversity, for example. So I think from a climate perspective, it is much better to have the agreement that not have the agreement, because then we don’t have an influence at all on what they are doing in these countries.
Saskia Bricmont (Greens/EFA, Belgium)
The Mercosur agreement is based on a 20 years old mandate, which means that climate issues, biodiversity issues are not being taken into account and that those elements are not enforceable, which means that it will have an adverse impact on climate change, mainly because of deforestation.
