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

16-11-2010 Commissioner de Gucht acknowledges EU needs to change position towards EPAs

In a debate organised by the Peace Centre and the dienst Europa Direct of the province Antwerp, Commissioner Karel de Gucht openly presented his views on trade and development. Regarding the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) de Gucht said that he inherited this difficult dossier from the last Commission. To re-open negotiations with the ACP countries, de Gucht mentioned two points. Firstly de Gucht mentioned that the fixed figure of 80% market opening is now discussable. Secondly the EPAs should for the time being only focus on goods. Services and investments could be implemented in due time.

De Gucht continued by stating that trade is not the only answer for development. It should be a combination of trade and development assistance. However the quality of the assistance policies and the implementation must improve. According to the Commissioner, Multinational Corporations (MNCs) could play an important role in development as well, but only if there is strong national and international government policy to regulate this. To illustrate de Gucht talked about the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). This initiative was welcomed by the Commissioner, yet too often it remains unclear where under what conditions the materials were extracted. Besides too much revenue of MNCs in the extractive industries is disappearing from developing countries, decreasing opportunities for development. 

The Commissioner ended with a warning. During the Cold War Europe focused on strategic positions while competing with the Eastern Bloc. Dictators who were claiming to be on our side were because of this wrongfully supported. In the nineties, this shifted and conditions were set on good government, democracy, and human rights. Now, with the upcoming competition from China, Europe must hold on to these conditions for development aid and cooperation.  

These are very interesting remarks considering the deadlock the EPA discussions have been in and considering the European Council meeting of 22 October, where the European development ministers discussed the future of the EPAs in a informal meeting. After this meeting Charles Michel, acting Belgian Minister for Development Cooperation and Andris Piebalgs, European Commissioner for Development gave a press conference. According to Michel the most important points discussed were that fostering regional integration and the aid for trade package both remain key points. There is also need for a balanced and flexible timetable for the negotiations, and trust and confidence in the EPAs. It is a mechanism for development, and the EU is not trying to pose its ideas on the ACP countries. Commissioner Piebalgs added that de Gucht is committed to finalise the EPAs, with the interests of development taken into account in every aspect of the agreements. (For the entire press conference on among others topics the EPAs, click here)

Fair Politics has found an unexpected ally in Commissioner de Gucht, we share the views expressed by the Commissioner in this debate. Hopefully these views will be put into European trade policies with real attention for development, starting with reviewing the purpose and direction of the EPAs. Although the Member States seem to need more persuasion.

Our case study on the EPAs is currently being updated and should be available soon. Until then please find on this website the case study on the EPAs or the Ghana impact study which contains a chapter on the EPAs specifically about the case of Ghana.

For the entire report on this debate click here (in Dutch only).