Bruxelles, 19/10/2011 (Agence Europe) - The 79 ACP states (Africa/Caribbean/Pacific) linked to the European Union through the Cotonou Agreement, together with sugar producers from the Least Advanced Countries (LACs), have expressed their concern and disappointment at the Commission proposal to end sugar quotas by 30 September 2015 as part of of the CAP reform (see EUROPE 10472). This is, they say, a serious blow to the economic interests of developing countries, some of which are the poorest countries in the world and in violation of Lisbon Treaty provisions. They argue that these proposals, which will lead to a fall in the price of suger will seriously damage the prospects of these countries of achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015. Consequently, the ACP and LAC sugar producers call for sugar quotas to be kept until at least 2020. They argue this timescale is essential to facilitate trade liberalisation without compromising the hoped-for benefits of the reform of the sugar industries currently being undertaken in their countries.
In a joint press release published on 18 October, the ACP and LACs express the view that the elimination of sugar quotas from 2015 disregards EU market reality, the economic development objectives of the EU's commitment to their countries and the key CAP objective of food security. Indeed, they go on, these proposals seriously jeopardise the EU market balance and the future of the sugar industries of the ACP/LACs.
ACP and LAC protesters explain that it has only been two years since the drastic reduction in sugar prices engendered by reform of the European sugar market and that market conditions have been difficult. They also explained that, “it is only thanks to market management tools (of which quotas are the core) that it has been possible to cushion the impact of world market disturbances. The removal of quotas at this time would be premature, unnecessary and almost certainly counterproductive. The Commission offers no valid justification for its proposals or for their timing. Its 'Impact Study' which purports to illustrate the benefits that might accrue is flawed in many aspects and insufficient care has been taken to ensure policy coherence as mandated by Article 208 of the treaty of Lisbon”. They also claim that Commission's proposals also ignores the resolution passed by the European Parliament in June and constitutes a deterrent to ACP and LAC to invest in increased efficiency - an objective which the EU supported with an allocation of €1.2 billion to finance accompanying measures. They explain that, “as it is, investment in the sector require 10 years to come to full fruition and the Commission's proposal will undermine all potential growth as a result of a lower priced and more volatile EU sugar market”. For those who have already ratified and are implementing Economic Partnership Agreements (only Caribbean countries are affected at the moment: Ed.), these changes are tantamount to a unilateral modification of an international treaty, the ACP countries say. They also add: “For those countries still in negotiation, they will increase doubts about the benefits of EPAs since duty free quota free access is worthless without a remunerative and predictable market price which for many EPA 'Everything But Arms' suppliers represents the only source of income”.
In September 2007, the European Union denounced the sugar protocol, an inter-governmental agreement in force since 1975, which guaranteed the 18 ACP sugar-producing countries preferential access to the European market. This decision by the EU Council, which came into force on 1 October 2009 , forms part of the sugar market reform begun in 2005. The draft CAP reform puts the finishing touches to this reform and sounds the death knell for ACP preferences over a four-year period. (AN/transl.fl)