Mullooly - "Time for cool heads on ALL EU trade deals"

 As ambassadors meet from 27 EU member states in Brussels to discuss President Trump’s threats of imposing new tarriffs, 
Midlands North West MEP Ciaran Mullooly MEP has called for calm and cool heads with no knee-jerk reactions that could damage key European industries and jobs here. 
 
MEP Mullooly reiterated his call , today Sunday Jan 17 , for the European Parliament to request a formal opinion from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the legality of the procedure used by the European Commission to seek approval of the EU-Mercosur trade agreement.
 
The call comes ahead of what is expected to be a highly charged plenary session in Strasbourg, following proposals by the United States administration under President Donald Trump to impose tariffs on EU Member States in response to European opposition to his Greenland policy. This development is likely to generate heightened anti-Trump sentiment across the Parliament, shaping several key debates during the session.
Against this political backdrop, discussions on the approval of the EU-Mercosur agreement are expected to intensify. In the short term, attention will focus on the motion seeking to refer the agreement to the CJEU for a ruling on whether the Commission’s approach complies with the EU Treaties. In the longer term, the broader political climate may also influence the Parliament’s overall stance on the agreement.
More than 145 Members of the European Parliament have raised serious concerns as to whether Mercosur should have been treated as a mixed agreement, requiring unanimous ratification by all Member States, as was the case with the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). Under EU Treaty rules, such agreements give each Member State the legal authority to delay or block ratification.
Instead, the Commission opted to divide the Mercosur framework into an “interim trade agreement,” alongside a separate “partnership agreement” covering environmental, labour, and political commitments. While the Mercosur and Canadian agreements share the same essential content and legal effect, entirely different approval mechanisms have been applied.
“The fundamental issue is not politics, but legality,” Mullooly said. “Where even a scintilla of doubt exists as to whether the Commission has acted within the Treaties, it is the duty of the Parliament to seek legal clarity from the Court.”
While next week’s debate is expected to be lively and politically charged, there remains a strong likelihood that the motion to refer the agreement to the CJEU will pass. Support is anticipated from across both the right and the left of the Parliament, alongside sufficient backing from other political groups to secure a majority.
The same political atmosphere is also expected to shape debate on the prospective EU–US so-called “Turnberry deal,” which would set a tariff rate of 15 per cent on EU goods exported to the United States, while applying a zero-tariff rate on goods imported from the US into the EU. While the agreement had been expected to receive parliamentary approval next week, there is now growing uncertainty following President Trump’s latest announcements and trade sanctions, alongside the motion of censure against Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Together, these issues are likely to define the dynamics of the plenary session.
“Europe cannot criticise others for disregarding legal norms while allowing legal shortcuts at home,” Mullooly concluded. “At a time of global trade instability, strict adherence to the Treaties is essential for the credibility of the European Union.”