September, 19 2016, 09:45am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Joe Karp-Sawey, media manager,Tel: +44 (0)7711 875 345,Email:,joe.karpsawey@globaljustice.org.uk
Canada-EU Deal Likely to Result in 'Deluge' of Big Business Cases Brought Against European Governments
Over 300,000 across Germany demonstrate against trade agreement
A new trade deal about to be signed between Canada and the EU will open the floodgates to Canadian and US corporations suing European governments. Those are the findings of a new report released today by European campaign groups including Global Justice Now and Corporate Europe Observatory. The report is released after a weekend of demonstrations across Europe which involved well over 300,000 protestors opposed to the deal.
The Comprehensive Economic & Trade Agreement - known as CETA - is due to be signed off by European governments in October, and the European parliament over the Autumn. But the massive campaign against CETA's better known sister agreement TTIP, a deal between the US and EU, has now thrown the CETA deal into question too. On Saturday, over 300,000 citizens protested against CETA in Germany, where warfare has broken out in the country's centre-left SPD party over the deal.
CETA contains many similar provisions to TTIP, including a special legal system allowing Canadian corporations to sue European governments for introducing laws deemed damaging to their profits. Today's report, published by campaign groups including Corporate Europe Observatory and Transnational Institute, says this system "could dangerously thwart government efforts to protect citizens and the environment".
The report finds that:
- Under a comparable treaty, Canada has been sued 37 times, mostly for trying to introducing better environmental regulation. Billions of dollars are currently sought from Canada. In many ways, CETA gives corporations even clearer powers to sue.
- Financial regulation is particularly under threat under CETA which hands big banks more power to challenge financial regulation they don't like
- European states also risk being sued by thousands of the biggest US multinationals through their subsidiaries in Canada.
Nick Dearden of Global Justice Now said:
"CETA would open up our government to a deluge of court cases by North American multinational corporations and investors. It presents a threat to our ability to protect the environment, to protect the public and to limit the power of big banks. It's thoroughly undemocratic and must be stopped.
"Particularly incredible is that the British government - which says it wants to reclaim powers from the EU - is actually trying to implement this deal before a vote, or even debate, in Westminster has taken place. They want to lock us into this deal so it still applies after Brexit, and no government would be able to get out of CETA without giving a 20 year notice period. How is that 'taking back control'?"
Global Justice Now is a democratic social justice organisation working as part of a global movement to challenge the powerful and create a more just and equal world. We mobilise people in the UK for change, and act in solidarity with those fighting injustice, particularly in the global south.
020 7820 4900LATEST NEWS
Mills Suspends Flailing US Senate Bid, Clearing Platner's Path to Nomination
"Now let's unify to defeat Susan Collins," said one progressive.
Apr 30, 2026
Maine Gov. Janet Mills on Thursday officially suspended her campaign for the US Senate, clearing the path for progressive candidate Graham Platner to secure the Democratic nomination.
In a statement posted on social media, Mills claimed that she no longer had the financial resources to continue with the campaign, which multiple polls projected she was losing badly to the upstart Platner.
"I step back from campaigning with unending love, admiration, and hope for Maine people," wrote Mills, "a people whose hearts are filled with love and whose integrity and humility is surpassed only by their kindness, generosity, and compassion."
Shortly after Mills announced her decision, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) released a statement supporting Platner's candidacy.
“After years of allowing Trump’s abuses of power, Senator Collins has never been more vulnerable," they said, "and we will work with the presumptive Democratic nominee Graham Platner to defeat her."
Mills' decision to suspend her campaign came less than a week after she vetoed a bill passed by the Maine Legislature that would have imposed a statewide moratorium on building artificial intelligence data centers.
Mitch Jones, the managing director of litigation for Food & Water Watch, described Mills' veto of the data center moratorium as symbolic of her out-of-touch Senate campaign, saying "it is no wonder" that the Maine governor's "political career seems to be limping to a feeble conclusion."
While Mills' decision to end her Senate campaign was not entirely unexpected given how badly she trailed Platner in both opinion polls and fundraising, some observers nonetheless found it a stunning development given that she's a two-term Maine governor running against a populist oyster farmer who has never held political office.
"A sitting two-term governor recruited by the leader of the Senate Democrats just lost to a Bernie Sanders-endorsed guy who started the race with zero name ID," wrote Zeteo News reporter Prem Thakker.
Kevin Robillard, senior politics editor at HuffPost, said that Mills' campaign will go down as "one of the most stunning flops in recent political history."
"Suspending a Senate campaign because you ran out of cash is something that happens to gadfly state legislators," he observed, "not sitting governors running with the endorsement of party leaders."
Tommy Vietor, a former National Security Council staffer under President Barack Obama and cohost of Pod Save America, questioned Mills' claim that she was suspending her campaign due to lack of resources.
"Her problem was lack of support from Maine voters," Vietor wrote, "not money."
Faiz Shakir, a longtime adviser to US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), graciously welcomed Mills' concession.
"Tough to make these kinds of decisions, but kudos to her for making the right one," wrote Shakir. "Now let's unify to defeat Susan Collins."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Republicans Advance New 'Slush Fund' for ICE While Taking Food Aid From Millions
"They don’t need more funding," one Democratic lawmaker said of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, "they need to be disbanded."
Apr 30, 2026
House Republicans on Wednesday passed a budget resolution that sets the stage for GOP lawmakers to draft and approve more funding for immigration enforcement without any support from Democrats, who condemned the proposal as another "blank check" for rogue agencies.
The resolution, which cleared the GOP-controlled Senate last week, gives Republicans the ability to allocate up to $140 billion total to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), agencies that President Donald Trump has unleashed on American cities with deadly consequences. Republicans have said they plan to allocate roughly $70 billion total to the immigration agencies, which Democrats have refused to fund through the normal appropriations process without reforms.
The new GOP legislation will proceed through the budget reconciliation process, which is exempt from the Senate's 60-vote filibuster, enabling Republicans to fund ICE and CBP without Democratic backing.
Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said in a statement that the GOP's proposal "does nothing to protect healthcare, help families struggling with groceries, gas prices, and everyday expenses, or make our communities safer."
"House and Senate Republicans just paved the way to hand ICE and CBP another $70 billion without any reforms or accountability," said Boyle. "Republicans keep telling working families we cannot afford healthcare or relief from the cost-of-living crisis they continue to make worse, but they never seem to have a problem writing massive checks for these out-of-control agencies. I will keep fighting every step of the way to stop this reckless bill."
The forthcoming reconciliation package marks the second time Republicans have used the filibuster-proof budget process to ram through their agenda. Last summer, Republicans passed a sprawling budget reconciliation measure that included unprecedented cuts to Medicaid and nutrition assistance as well as tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans.
The previous legislation also contained $75 billion for ICE—making the agency's budget larger than that of the militaries of Canada, Australia, Spain, and other nations.
“Last year, Republicans gave ICE a $75 billion slush fund, transforming the agency into Donald Trump’s personal army in essence,” Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) said Wednesday. “We have seen agents execute US citizens in the streets, snatch mothers from their children in our communities, and use excessive force against peaceful protesters. Now, they want to pass another $70 billion for this cruel and lawless agenda—holding up pay for our hard-working TSA officers and Coast Guard until ICE gets another blank check. I have opposed ICE since its inception."
"They don’t need more funding—they need to be disbanded," Larson added. "Congress should focus on paying our civil servants and troops and taking on the high prices squeezing families thanks to the failed Trump agenda, not billions for ICE."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) echoed that message in floor remarks criticizing the Republican plan:
Today, Republicans are working to jam through a budget resolution that hands another $70 BILLION to ICE and CBP on top of the $170 billion they got in the Big Bad Betrayal bill.
The same ICE and CBP that killed Americans in the street in MN have terrorized communities across… pic.twitter.com/IsImSvYcTH
— Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) April 29, 2026
House Republicans passed their budget blueprint as new data showed that their first reconciliation package has spurred the steepest decline in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participation in decades.
An analysis released Wednesday by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) shows that SNAP participation fell by more than 3 million people across the US between July 2025 and January 2026. The think tank noted that "it took over three years for the caseload to drop by over 3 million people (or 7%) between its peak in December 2012 and February 2016, during the recovery following the Great Recession."
The new Republican budget reconciliation package would do nothing to ameliorate the damage inflicted by the previous bill. The GOP is also already considering what House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has described as "reconciliation 3.0," a new package that could include additional cuts to safety net programs.
Meanwhile, in the regular appropriations process, House Republicans voted to advance government funding legislation that would take food aid from millions by cutting the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
“Parents are already making impossible choices at the grocery store—skipping meals, stretching food, and worrying about how to feed their kids," said Ailen Arreaza, executive director of the advocacy group ParentsTogether. "Cutting WIC’s fruit and vegetable benefit means taking fresh, healthy food off the plates of new mothers, babies, and young children at a time when families need more support, not less."
"You can’t say you want to make America healthy again while reducing access to the very foods that help children grow and thrive," Arreaza added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Hegseth Touts Autonomous Warfare Command, Human Rights Expert Pushes Civilian Protections
Responding to other recent remarks from the Pentagon chief, the expert warned that “a sole focus on achieving maximum lethality is inherently incompatible with civilian protection.”
Apr 29, 2026
As the US military accelerates its adoption of autonomous weapons systems amid a growing global artificial intelligence arms race, one expert told Common Dreams on Wednesday that "greater action needs to be taken urgently" to protect civilians and ensure meaningful human control over rapidly developing technologies.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told congressional lawmakers Wednesday during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on the proposed $1.5 trillion Pentagon budget for 2027 that the military will soon have a new "sub-unified command" dedicated to autonomous warfare.
Hegseth, who advocates “maximum lethality” for US forces, has expressed disdain for what he called “stupid rules of engagement” designed to minimize civilian harm. He has overseen the dismantling of efforts meant to mitigate wartime harm to civilians—hundreds of thousands of whom have been killed in US-led wars during this century, according to experts.
This "maximum lethality" ethos, combined with AI-powered systems allowing for exponentially faster and more numerous target selection, has raised concerns that have been underscored by actions including Israel Defense Forces massacres in Gaza and Lebanon, and US attacks like the cruise missile strike on a school in Iran that killed 155 children and staff.
"A sole focus on achieving maximum lethality is inherently incompatible with civilian protection," Verity Coyle, deputy director of Human Rights Watch's (HRW) crisis, conflict, and arms division, told Common Dreams. "If the United States truly seeks to protect civilians, it should forgo this limited focus and ensure it has guardrails in place that assess the proportionality of its actions and guarantee a distinction between civilians and combatants."
"Under international humanitarian law, civilian protection requires that military actions abide by the principles of distinction and proportionality," Coyle noted. "In other words, military actors must distinguish between civilians and combatants and ensure that the resulting harm to civilians from their actions would not be excessive in comparison to the perceived military gain."
Experts on lethal autonomous weapons systems—commonly called "killer robots"—stress the need for meaningful human control. However, with industry-backed efforts afoot to ban state and local governments from placing guardrails on AI development, retaining such control could become increasingly difficult as the technology advances.
"The lack of serious guardrails... shows a troubling lack of concern for these real and immediate risks to civilians both in the United States and abroad," Coyle said. "While we have seen some Congress members and state legislators express concern over these developments, greater action needs to be taken urgently."
Asked about the "if we don't build it, they will" mentality of many US proponents of unchecked AI development that is reminiscent of the Cold War nuclear arms race, Coyle said the United States is ignoring its "ability to set the global agenda and international humanitarian law norms."
"As we see greater integration of AI in the military domain and resulting civilian harm, we need strong international leadership to respond to these threats, not states relinquishing their responsibilities," she asserted.
Coyle continued:
Throughout [HRW's] decades of work in banning weapons that cause indiscriminate civilian harm, including the Mine Ban Treaty and Convention on Cluster Munitions, we have seen that even when some major military powers object to new international law, other states are able to band together and create new norms that major military powers eventually abide by. In this moment, the United States needs to decide if it will stand up for the principles of civilian protection and a rules-based order, or if it will walk away from the system it helped create and that has served to protect civilians for several decades.
There is also a danger that companies will proceed with risky AI weapons development, both in pursuit of profit and out of fear of getting left behind if they don't push forward. For example, Anthropic—maker of the AI assistant Claude—lost a $200 million Pentagon contract and is facing a government blacklist and legal battles after the company refused to loosen safety restrictions on autonomous weapons and surveillance.
Meanwhile, OpenAI, which makes the generative AI platform ChatGPT, rewrote its “no military use” policy to allow “national security” applications of its products, opening the door to lucrative Pentagon contracts.
Asked what civil society can do now to rein in reckless AI development, Coyle said that while HRW remains "focused on educating decision-makers and the public," there are "clear steps states can take, including supporting an international legally binding instrument on autonomous weapons systems and regulating the military use of AI."
"Through the Stop Killer Robots Campaign—a coalition of 270+ organizations focused on banning and regulating autonomous weapons systems and AI in the military domain—we are working globally to address these challenges," she noted.
While loss of human control over AI systems still appears to still be well over the horizon, Coyle said that "every day we see a world inching closer to this reality."
"Our message to states is that now is the time to take immediate, robust action to address this risk and protect civilians before it is too late," she stressed.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular