EU Policy Topic · ATLAS

Free trade agreements (FTAs)

Score 0-20 Statement openly promotes increased trade restrictions. OR, statement uses emotional language or criticism to enhance the sense of urgency or threat of trade liberalisation to sway views in this direction.
Score 21-40 Proposal subtly, discretely or indirectly favors increased trade restrictions and does not use emotional language.
Score 41-60 Statements that are roughly neutral, whose bias on either side is roughly insignificant.
Score 61-80 Proposal subtly, discretely or indirectly favors trade liberalisation and does not use emotional language.
Score 81-100 Proposal that openly promotes trade liberalisation. OR, proposal uses emotional language or criticism to enhance the sense of urgency or threat of restrictions to sway views in this direction.

How positions are measured

One poleCondition or limit free-trade agreements: subject them to binding environmental, climate, labour, human-rights and sanitary standards, protect EU farmers with mirror clauses and safeguards, and reject deals exposing EU producers to lower-standard competition.

Other polePursue ambitious free-trade agreements: open markets to boost growth, exports, food security and competitiveness, avoid attaching conditions that delay or block deals, and rely on open trade rather than protectionism.

Legislative files on this topic (2)

See where policymakers stand on this topic →