Brussels, 04/01/2008 (Agence Europe) - Adoption by the EU of the market access regulation for ACP countries that have initialled an interim agreement on gradual trade liberalisation - the first step towards concluding an Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the EU (EUROPE 9571) - gives rise to criticism from the Greens/EFA Group at the European Parliament. In a press release dated 1 January, the Greens/EFA criticise tariff increases for products from middle income ACP countries remaining on the fringe of these free trade preparatory agreements. In their view, such tariff increases penalise the poor countries due to failed negotiations for which the Commission itself bears the responsibility. Also, allegations whereby the introduction of higher tariffs from 1 January is inevitable do not stand up to scrutiny. The WTO would have been unable to act immediately and the Commission would have had to take advantage of this time to resolve the “mess it created”. “The Commission had previously given a guarantee that no ACP country would have to accept terms less favourable than the status quo. It subsequently reneged on this pledge in saying there are no alternatives to EPAs”, said Caroline Lucas (British Green member) disapprovingly, saying “non-trade issues must be dropped from the agenda for all ACP countries that do not want to negotiate on these issues”.
The ACP States, for their part, have not had their last word. Meeting in Brussels on 13 December, the ACP ministers had deplored the enormous pressure put on ACP States by the European Commission so that they initial interim trade agreements in breach of the ACP-EU spirit of partnership, saying that the European Union's interests have prevailed over interests defended by ACP States on regional integration and development. Taking Commission President José Manuel Barroso at his word when, at the EU-Africa Summit in Lisbon (EUROPE 9561), he assured discussions on EPAs would continue, ACP ministers plan to seize this opportunity to negotiate provisions that might prove incompatible with the development objectives of ACP States and regions, in line with the binding provisions of the Cotonou Agreement. In their view, it is appropriate to give priority to the ACP regional integration process underway rather than to the system of free trade with the Union. This would be in the interest of the regional markets, the importance of which is underlined by ACP countries. It is also appropriate that the EU should keep its commitments while ensuring that the ACP States not able to sign an EPA have a trade framework that is at least equivalent to the existing situation. (A.N.)