Policy recommendations

  • All elements that are not required to make the EPAs WTO compatible should be taken out of the EPAs. This requires a review of the current provisions on export taxes, and the MFN and rules of origin clauses.
  • EPAs must ensure that ACP regional groups have maximum flexibility over their own market opening. The EU should therefore offer all ACP regional groups a period of 20 years or more for market opening, on an unconditional basis. Each regional group should be offered this full period. Moreover, the liberalisation scheme should be linked to development benchmarks instead of a fixed timeframe.
  • The EU should cut subsidies on products competing with local products, especially in agriculture. As long as the EU subsidises its sectors, ACP countries should not be asked to liberalise tariffs on products that have to compete with EU products.
  • There should be an effective safeguard mechanism for ACP countries to use if faced with a surge of subsidised EU imports.
  • The EU should stimulate regional integration in all ACP regions by approaching regions as collective partners but at the same time acknowledging their differences in economic and social terms. Therefore enough policy space should be provided during the negotiations and no differentiation in terms of EPAs and iEPAs which influence the individual negotiation positions should be pushed for.
  • Investment, competition and government procurement should be removed from the negotiations, unless specifically requested by an ACP regional negotiating group. It is for ACP regional groups to judge the development benefits of any agreements on these issues and the EU should not push for them to be discussed. If included, any negotiations on government procurement should be subject to transparency.
  • A review mechanism for EPAs - with full ACP regional group ownership and participation - should be introduced to ensure the EPAs are delivering the intended developmental benefits.
  • The Commission should be ready to provide an alternative to an EPA at the request of any ACP country. Any alternative offered should provide no worse market access to the EU than is currently enjoyed under Cotonou preferences.

Case: Economic Partnership Agreements

02-10-2008 Written questions MEP David Martin: CARIFORUM and the EPAs

02 October 2008

On the 2nd of September, MEP David Martin (PSE) posted a whole range of written questions to the Commission concerning the consequences of the implementation of the Economic Partnership agreement (EPA) for the Caribbean region represented under CARIFORUM.

In his questions he refers to the effects of the implementation (which is currently taking place) of the EPA concerning food security, small and medium sized businesses, and the instalment of a monitoring mechanism, to monitor the trade as well as the development aspects around the implementation of the EPA.

There have been many concerns relating to the development aspects of the EPAs in the last couple of years, ever since the EPA negotiations have started. These concerns include the lack of a level playing field making fair negotiations very unlikely, the composition of the sub-regions - as these regions are often far from integrated as their economies are very diverse - and the financial consequences for the developing countries at stake as many market adjustments are needed.

The EU has committed itself to promoting and harnessing policy coherence for development. Meaning that all of the policies constructed in any EU policy field, should be coherent with the objectives of the EUs development policy. However, it is questionable whether the EPAs are coherent with the EUs development policy as the trade concerns seem to prevail over the development concerns. Like MEP David Martin addresses in his questions posted; EPAs are likely to have a serious impact on food security, as small agricultural enterprises, can no longer be protected, because of the loss of policy space due to the implementation of the EPA. Another concern is the amount of money spent on the EPA implementation out of the EDF budget, as this money should only be allocated to pure development aid purposes.

The EPAs have been created in order to merge development policy and trade policy into a more comprehensive framework under the Cotonou agreement. The progressive elimination of tariffs and non-tariff barriers, both between the ACP countries and between the ACP regions and the EU, should eventually result in the establishment of regional free-trade areas. The EPA negotiations have taken quite some time before they were actually being implemented as many ACP countries and regions faced serious constraints in their capacity to prepare for EPA negotiations and implementation. As of January the 1st 2008, the EPAs should have been implemented; however only one full agreement has been signed, between the EU and the Caribbean region represented under CARIFORUM. Other countries have signed individual EPAs or are currently in the process of implementing these.

The questions asked by MEP David Martin are of great relevance, and are similar to the policy recommendations that the EU Coherence programme has suggested. The EU Coherence programme, urges the European Union to closely monitor the implementation of the EPAs within the various countries and regions, in order to make sure that the development dimension of the agreements is taken care of, as MEP David Martin is also addressing in one of his questions. Besides the EU coherence programme is concerned with the money spent on EPA implementation out of the EDF budget, as no EDF money should be spend on the implementation measures of the EPAs, EDF money should be allocated to pure development purposes. Finally the transition periods for sensitive products and sectors should stay in place.

Fair Politic EU monitors the efforts of the MEPs to address policy coherence regarding development in their daily work. The question addressed to the Commission by MEP David Martin deals with the incoherence between the EPAs as part of the EUs trade policy and the development space for the ACP countries as part of the EUs development policy. For this reason MEP Martin is granted a coherence star.

The full questions of Mr. David Martin can be read below

By: David Martin
To the Commission
Subject: Prices of agricultural products and biofuels
Date: 2 September, 2008.

Subject: Cariforum EPA food security E-4823/08

Does the Commission agree with the analysis by South Centre(1) that implementation of the Caribbean EPA will entail a loss of policy space for the Caribbean states that severely diminishes their capacity to realise development policies, which would for example have a negative impact on the ability of the Caribbean states to provide agricultural protection and ensure food security?//

Subject: Cariforum EPA services: small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) E-4824/08

Can the Commission explain how the clauses on services liberalisation in the Caribbean EPA take into account the specific interests of small and medium-sized enterprises?

Subject: Cariforum EPA aid for trade E-4831/08

Can the Commission provide the finalised funding figures to be allocated to each of the Cariforum countries under the National Indicative Programme (NIP) for EPA-related activities, as well as for regional integration and private sector development? Additionally can the Commission detail which Cariforum countries will receive funding under the wider Aid for Trade budget?

Subject: Cariforum EPA monitoring mechanism E-4827/08

Can the Commission detail what mechanisms will be put in place to monitor the trade as well as the development aspects of the Cariforum EPA? How does the Commission envisage any new monitoring mechanisms linking into the existing EU African Caribbean Pacific (ACP) institutional structure established under Cotonou?

Subject: Cariforum EPA 10th European Development Fund (EDF) E-4826/08

Of the EUR 900 million allocated to Cariforum in the 10th EDF, how much will be used for EPA‑related activities? Can the Commission clarify the dispersal mechanism for distributing the funds within the Cariforum countries?

For more information on the EPAs see our case study

Visit the website of MEP David Martin

Visit the website of the European Parliament