Ljubljana, 18/03/2008 (Agence Europe) - There was great frustration among MEPs and ACP (Africa, Caribbean, Pacific) parliamentarians at the debate in Ljubljana on 17 March of the Joint Parliamentary Assembly on the progress in negotiations on economic partnership agreements (EPAs), preparing the way for free trade between the EU and six ACP regions. That European Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson had not travelled to the meeting to respond to questions and criticisms from MEPs and their ACP counterparts, on both the content of the interim agreements and on the European Commission's strong-hand methods of negotiation was condemned by many.
It was, then, with satisfaction that European Development Commissioner Louis Michel was welcomed by parliamentarians on Tuesday 18 March. British Labour MEP Glenys Kinnock, JPA co-chair, warmly thanked him for his “commitment” in issues on development involving the JPA. Nevertheless, Michel did not give an inch on the Commission's objectives: 2008 must see the conclusion of full EPAs with the six regions that are negotiating. In the coming weeks, it will be urgently required to present a proposal for signature to the Council of the EU for the full EPA initialled by the Caribbean for some 20 interim agreements. Claude Marten, head of unit at DG competition, had spelt it out for MPs. Michel confirmed as much on 18 March, extinguishing the hopes of many parliamentarians, like Mr Assarid (Mali) that the waystage agreements, providing, for ACP countries, for 80% liberalisation of trade over 15 years, should be revised. Messrs Cavuilati (Fiji) and Sithole (South Africa) wondered what followed on from the commitment given by Commission President José Manuel Barroso at the EU-Africa Summit in Lisbon on 8-9 December, to return to the thorny issues. Kinnock herself, convinced that the revision of the interim agreements was essential, said she was awaiting an opinion from Parliament legal services to know whether it was possible to revise an initialled waystage agreement.
During the debate, Mr Seck (Senegal) stressed that the initialling by the Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana threatened the exemplary integration process of the ECOSAP. The Caribbean representative pointed out that her region and the EU would never presume to say that their EPA was a model for the other regions. Alain Hutchinson (PES, Belgium) said he thought that the Caribbean had signed under duresse. How did transitional agreements fit in with regional integration, he wondered, opining that the Commission's stubbornness seemed doubtful. He called for real dialogue on the development priority of these countries. Kinnock was concerned about the creation, in the EPA initialled by the Caribbean, of a new parliamentary committee which undermines the role of the JPA.
Mohamed Ali of Ethiopia denounced the unacceptable pressure brought by the Commission and the eleventh hour agreement initialled hastily, leaving lots of contentious issues unresolved. He said that the interim agreements contained lots of binding arrangements which eroded the political space of the ACP states. Hence his region's desire to have negotiations concentrate on the constraints linked to the offer on services and on regional integration.
Fiona Hall (ALDE, UK) referring to the argument published by DG Competition to debunk six incorrect ideas on EPAs, denounced the paradox that, on the one hand, the European Commission said that it always worked for regional integration while, on the other, it created confusion by signing agreements with some countries. Hall said that the case of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) was the worst because the existing customs union was disintegrating. Neighbouring countries, she said, were now subject to different rules of origin. This was still far from the EPA that promoted regional integration, she said.
Bernadette Lahai from Sierra Leone spoke about a recent extraordinary ministerial meeting of Western African countries devoted to the memorandum on the ECOSAP's common external tariff and the follow-up to the interim agreements initialled by Ghana and the Côte d'Ivoire. She said that there had been agreement that, by June 2008, the region would have to have developed a common external tariff. Given that most countries of the region had not signed an interim agreement, the role of parliaments was very important, she stressed.
Mr Diallo (Guinea) said that EPAs were in contradiction with the fight against poverty and overall integration. He highlighted the need to, “protect essential products such as agricultural products and services” and explained that, “EPAs led to the disintegration of economies, confounded our attempts to create integrated markets and perpetuated the dependency of our countries on raw materials”. According to Diallo, the “long agony of African agriculture and food insufficiency” caused fear of EPAs. This has led to the call from the national Guinea assembly to not plan on concluding “an EPA in their current shape, and for those who have initialled the temporary agreements, to think of their people”. Rithjof Schmidt (Greens, Germany) was astonished that timescale was used as an argument to oppose Africans who want adjustments, although Commissioner Mandelson was planning on notifying the WTO about the initialled agreements by the beginning of April at the earliest or even June.
Mr William (Seychelles) said that ACP should adopt a more united approach. He declared that, “the lack of coordination between the ACP is being used by the Commission”. He appealed for implementation of a coordinated structure and involvement of ACP ministers in the process alongside negotiators and asked whether, “the Commission is prepared to work with ACP countries for better coordination in the future?”
Horst Schnellhardt (EPP-ED, Germany) said that the result of the negotiations is discouraging. Observing that development instruments included budgetary support, he stressed that, “the interim agreements only focus on goods but this is not preventing us from cooperation with ACP countries”. In his view, ACP should place emphasis on good governance, the EU should come closer to its aim of increasing official development aid to 0.7% of GDP, and the Commission should reflect on the best way to reconcile aid to trade and development aid. Liberalisation, as commissioned by the WTO, provides asymmetry, he said, pointing out that the European Parliament is calling for greater flexibility for dismantling customs duties. Josep Borell (PES, Spain) spoke of a “dialogue of the deaf between the Commission which states that everything is going fine and speaks of very flexible agreements, and those who have initialled quite another version”. “Will Commissioner Louis Michel take Peter Mandelson's place? If not, we run the risk of a political split with Africa”, he said. Speaking to the press, Wilkie Rasmussen, Foreign Minister of the Cook Islands and co-president of the JPA, had confided: “We find it very difficult to negotiate with Mr Mandelson”. He went on to speak of a “clinical approach” to negotiations, devoid of all “cultural dimension”.
Louis Michel: political and economic governance is the key to development
In response to all these questions, Louis Michel stated his trust in EPAs. A supporter of controlled globalisation “to the service of development”, the Commissioner said that “the only response for channelling this dynamic in a positive way is governance not only at political but also at economic level. Without governance, developing countries will remain in stagnation and will probably miss the unique opportunities of sustainable and equitable growth and development open to them”, he warned. He went on to warn against the “curse of having resources”, which leads to an “income economy”. He went on to say: “Will the wealth generated be reinvested in order to diversify the economy and make it worth more with a move towards manufactured products of greater added value? Will it be used to reduce poverty and move towards the Millennium Development Goals? That is the challenge faced”.
Recalling that economic development has to date been based too exclusively on exports of primary goods, mainly towards Europe, which has discouraged initiatives for the production of goods and services, the Commissioner states that “one of the most promising answers to this evolution is greater integration of regional economies and the creation of regional markets”. In his view, EPAs serve this ambition. “They are development instruments to the service of regional economic and commercial integration, fostering the setting in place of trade regimes at regional level and regional policies for management of the economic area thus delimited”, he said.
For all these reasons, the Commissioner welcomes the fact that the EPA was initialled with the Caribbean region last December, and considers it “essential” that the 20 interim agreements also initialled may be completed in good time with provisions that correspond more directly to the development and regional integration objectives of these agreements. Hence his call for everyone to rally to the cause. In order to show the importance that the Commission pays to regional integration, Louis Michel announced that the Commission will be presenting a communication in September on regional cooperation.
The Commissioner considers it “unfair to reproach the European Union for the problems of regional integration” of southern African countries. “It is up to the SADC countries to know where they want to go”, he said. To all those who express concern about the cost of adjusting reforms required by EPAs, Louis Michel points out that he is doing everything he can to rally the member states to fulfilling their promise of financial aid to trade (1 billion per year by 2010 in addition to a similar amount from the European Development Fund). He added: “The regional funds will compensate the net fiscal impact of tariff dismantling, that is, the loss from customs receipts less the new internal tax receipts, such as VAT for example”. Speaking to the representative of Niger who accused the EU of “protecting its agriculture by imposing uncontrolled liberalisation on ACP countries”, the Commissioner answered that liberalisation of 80% of trade over 15 years is “reasonable”. Although it is true that for countries such as Lesotho liberalisation will be 86% in hardly two years with three tariff lines relating to transitional periods of over ten years, it is because Lesotho has decided this would be so, the Commissioner said in answer to Josep Borrell. (A.N.)