WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has quietly announced the introduction of a new advisory body aimed at formally integrating civil society input and concerns into U.S. trade negotiations.

The move comes in response to years of criticism from a broad range of health, environment, labor and public interest groups, warning that U.S. trade negotiations are both overly secretive and overly selective in terms of who is privy to their details. These groups say that pro-business and industry groups receive early access to both negotiating texts and government negotiators during trade talks, while others are allowed no details whatsoever.

Such criticisms have strengthened over the past two years, as Obama officials have carried out talks toward what could eventually be the world’s largest free-trade arrangement. The 12-member Trans Pacific Partnership could constitute some 40 percent of global gross domestic product.

The TPP talks, which concluded another inconclusive round in Singapore on Tuesday, have been held under unprecedented secrecy. (The government says such measures are necessary to ensure that delicate negotiations between multiple sovereign states can proceed at all.) Though talks cover a spectrum of issues integral to social fabric and well-being, the process has offered no opportunity for substantive public input from any of the participating nations.

The announcement of the formation of a Public Interest Trade Advisory Committee appears aimed at directly assuaging such concerns.

“During this administration, our door has been open to the broadest range of stakeholders possible. Having said that, we believe there is always room to do better,” U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman said last week during a talk at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank here.

“I’m pleased to announce that we are upgrading our advisory system to provide a new forum for experts on issues like public health, development and consumer safety. A new Public Interest Trade Advisory Committee will … provide a cross-cutting platform for input in the negotiations. We are calling on NGOs, academics and other public interest groups to submit their candidates to be founding members of the PITAC.”

In addition, Froman announced that, in order to “improve public understanding of our work,” his office would be “re-chartering” the extant advisory committees the administration uses to guide its trade-related negotiations. He also pledged new efforts at making public any progress in trade talks, stating that his office will be providing a public update on the TPP “in the coming days.”

Froman pushed back on certain lines of criticism, stating that the U.S. trade representative has briefed Congress on the TPP more than 1,150 times and emphasizing that any member of Congress can request to see negotiating texts from those talks at any time.

‘No meaningful input’

As yet, little information on the mechanics of the new public interest committee has been made public. A USTR spokesperson told MintPress News, “Representatives of public health, development and consumer organizations serve on various advisory committees, but PITAC will, for the first time, create a cross-cutting advisory committee … to focus on public health, development and consumer issues.”

The spokesperson also clarified that all advisory committee members, including those on the public interest committee, would have access to the text of U.S. negotiating proposals.

Some U.S. lawmakers known for their strong consumer advocacy have offered reserved welcome for the creation of the new commission.

The PITAC is “a step in the right direction toward making sure transparency, health and consumer interests become central issues in the trade negotiation process,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), the powerful new chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said following the announcement. “I have long fought to ensure that these interests are better represented in our trade negotiations. I am pleased that USTR is beginning to get the message that transparency and broader public participation is in everyone’s interest.”

Likewise, prominent civil society watchdog groups feel that the formation of the new PITAC legitimizes many of their past criticisms of the USTR’s negotiating practices. But they are also expressing frustration that the committee’s structure and restrictions will do little to resolve these concerns. Indeed, groups with whom MintPress News spoke are planning not to apply to participate in the PITAC, citing worries that doing so will hamstring them from further advocacy work.

“We have no intention of applying to join. If we were to join one of these advisory committees, it would not give us meaningful input,” Jesse Prentice-Dunn, a policy analyst with Sierra Club’s responsible trade program, told MintPress News.

“As a member, you only get to see proposals put forward by the United States, and in many cases these bear no resemblance to the actual text. Further, requirements for participating would limit our ability to communicate with our stakeholders — [greater access] does us little good if we’re not able to talk with our members.”

All members of the trade advisory committees, including the new PITAC, are required to sign non-disclosure agreements regarding any information they become privy to regarding ongoing trade talks. Further complicating any public oversight regarding these advisory committees is the fact that communications between government negotiators and industry representatives are exempted from Freedom of Information Act requests.

Uneven advising

There is also an inherent discrepancy at the heart of the overall USTR advisory committee structure, which critics worry will continue to undermine the effectiveness of any civil society input.

These advisory committees are split into three levels, the lowest of which is a single grouping of 32 broad-based representatives, including 20 from industry. The second level, in which the PITAC will be included, provides similar public interest-related advising, including committees on labor and the environment.

The most powerful level of advisory committees is made up of 16 industry-only panels focusing on major sector-specific issues, such as intellectual property or energy. Critics say the continued overwhelming representation of industry in this three-tiered structure remains unacceptable.

“While it is useful to have a committee of public interest advisors, I doubt that it’s going to have 600 members. The current advisory committees total some 600 members, with all but one from industry,” Ed Mierzwinski, director of the consumer program at the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), told MintPress News.

“Ultimately this is a modest step forward for Mr. Froman, but it’s not what we asked for. We asked for a public interest advisory committee but also for the negotiating texts to be made public in real time, so one wouldn’t have to be on one of these committees to get the information.”

Further, civil society groups have long called for consumer and non-industry representation in each of these 16 issue-specific panels, on the rationale that doing so would offer broad-based analysis on each of these subjects. As American University professor Sean Flynn recently stated, President Obama put forward such a proposal in 2010, but it was rejected by industry representatives.

Instead, industry pushed for a single body that would “provide a forum for seeking the advice of NGOs and other non-industry groups.” With last week’s announcement, it now appears that the USTR has decided to go with the industry recommendation.

Afterthought

More broadly, the Obama administration’s notable sluggishness in agreeing to introduce the new PITAC has raised inevitable questions about its broader views on the importance of civil society input in trade negotiations.

At Tuesday’s conclusion of the Singapore round of TPP talks, the 12 trade ministers involved in the negotiations reiterated that they’re closing in on a conclusion. Indeed, U.S. officials had previously been stridently pushing for a 2013 deadline for the talks, which would have made the recent call for greater civil society participation irrelevant to these negotiations.

“We’re over four years into the TPP negotiations, and my understanding is that the basic structure for much of the pact has already been decided,” Arthur Stamoulis, executive director of the Citizens Trade Campaign, a watchdog group here, told MintPress News.

“Clearly, another advisory panel is not a sufficient solution to the massive lack of transparency in today’s trade negotiations. Giving a handful of people access to facts is not democracy,” he explained.

Still, Stamoulis says he’s willing to be surprised by the efficacy of the new public interest committee.

“Nothing is over till it’s over,” he said. “We want to see a transparent trade negotiating process and agreements that support workers, consumers and environmental sustainability. If we get that, we’ll be satisfied.”