REPA Booklet - Stop Epa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1 Pacific Islands,the European Union & Lomé Why are the Pacific Islands involved in trade negotiations with the European Union? It is a legacy of the British Empire. Most of the Pacific Islands used to be colonies of Britain, either directly or through Australia or New Zealand. The remainder were under French or US rule - and ‘French Polynesia’, New Caledonia, Wallis and Fortuna, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau and the Marshall Islands still are. One of the main motives in colonising the Islands was to ensure a steady supply of raw materials for their industries; there were also military and foreign policy reasons. These interests framed the trade, investment and aid policies and practices of the colonial powers. When the Pacific Islands secured their political independence, this ongoing relationship was formalised through treaties with their former colonisers. ‘’What the Pacific island governments tend to advocate is that we have had a relationship with the EU with the Lome framework, for almost 25 years. And this we do not want to stop” (Feilo’akitau Kaho Tevi, PCRC, 1999) How does that historical relationship with Britain link the Pacific Islands to the European Union? Britain joined the European Common Market in 1973. Even though its interests had shifted, Britain couldn’t just abandon its former colonies. It also still needed a secure supply of sugar from Fiji (and Caribbean countries) for its refining companies, especially Tate and Lyle. When Britain joined the Common Market, it was part of the deal that these preferential arrangements would continue. They were formalised in the first Lomé Convention between the ACP States and the European Community, which came into effect in 1975. A separate but related legal arrangement for sugar became known as the Sugar Protocol. Which Pacific Islands did the Lomé Convention cover? The first Lomé agreement in 1975 only applied to Fiji, Samoa and Tonga. Kiribati, PNG, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu acceded in 1980, and Vanuatu joined in 1985. That covered all the Pacific Islands that are members of the Pacific Islands Forum, except the Cook Islands, Nauru and Niue (which relied on their close association arrangements with New Zealand) and the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia and Palau (they were covered by Compacts of Free Association with the US). Was the Lomé Convention solely a deal for the Pacific Islands? No. Lomé’s origins lay in the Yaounde Convention (1963-75). That was a trade and aid package for 21 African colonies of the original European Common Market states (mainly France). By the time the Lomé Convention ended in 2000, it had been extended to 71 former European colonies from Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific. What is the difference between the Common Market, the European Economic Community and the European Union? Each time the European states deepened their economic and political integration the name changed. The Common Market and the European Economic Community, which was formed in 1957, became the European Community in 1967. Under the Maastricht Treaty, which was signed in 1992 and provided for a common currency and other shared policies and regulatory bodies, it became the European Union. The European Commission (EC) is the executive body that conducts international relations, including trade negotiations, on behalf of the European Union. What were the basic principles that underpinned the Lomé Convention? A body of ‘shared objectives and principles’ forms part of what is called the Lomé acquis: - the principle of ‘partnership’ between European Union and ACP States, including dialogue and joint administration; - the contractual nature of the relationship; and - the combination of trade, aid and political dimensions that operates with a relatively long-term perspective. What were the main features of the Lomé Convention? The Convention provided trade preferences for exports from ACP countries to the European Union. It also had a political dimension where, in theory, decisions were made in partnership; in practice, the Europeans dictated the terms. The third element was a related aid package known as the European Development Fund. 12 A People’s Guide To The Pacific’s Economic Partnership Agreement
2 The Lomé Convention Did the same Lomé arrangements operate continuously from 1975 to 1999? The original Lomé Convention was renegotiated three times. Lomé I, II and III each ran for 5 years. Lomé IV was for 10 years, with a mid-term review. The focus and priorities varied according to Europe’s development thinking and foreign policy interests at the time: “Lomé was unrealistic, but not for the reasons advanced by the Green Paper. It was unrealistic because it expected countries to diversify, etc. within a framework through which … Europe sought to retain these countries as providers of raw materials and overseas markets.” (Tetteh Hormeku, TWN-Africa, 1998) Lomé I (1975-1980) was primarily concerned with non-reciprocal preferential trade arrangements. Lomé II (1980-1985) continued the focus on industrial development. Lomé III (1985-1990) shifted the focus from industrialisation to self-sufficiency and food security. Lomé IV (1990-1999) reflected the post-Cold War focus on a market economy, human rights, democracy and the rule of law. It also required the negotiation of a post-Lomé agreement to begin in September 1998. Were the Lomé Conventions underpinned by a particular economic ideology? It became more market-driven over time. In Lomé IV, especially after the mid-term revision in 1995, there was a move away from treating aid as the main instrument of ‘development cooperation’ to focus instead on trade. This reflected the European Union’s post-Cold War agenda as it faced the challenges of reintegrating Europe and the priorities set down in the Maastricht Treaty that established the European Union; to promote economic development and fight poverty through the ‘gradual integration of developing countries into the global economy’, economic liberalisation, improved commercial competitiveness, trade and investment agreements and ‘aid effectiveness’. Even then, Lomé IV stopped short of requiring the ACP to embrace neoliberal globalisation in return for preferences from the European Union. Did the negotiations for a post-Lomé Agreement begin in September 1998? Yes and they lasted for two years. The new Cotonou Agreement was signed in 2000 and set in train the current negotiations for Economic Partnership Agreements. Under Cotonou, this process must be completed by the end of 2007, with new arrangements to begin on 1 January 2008. Until then (most of) the preferences provided in the Lomé Convention continue to operate. How did/do the Lomé trade preferences operate? Under Lomé, some 99% of industrial goods from the ACP countries have unrestricted entry to the European Union, without tariffs or quotas. Agricultural products are more restricted; for example, a specific quantity (quota) of processed tuna from the Pacific Islands is allowed to enter the European Union duty (tariff) free. There are also special protocols for some agricultural products: - sugar: sugar producers can export an annual quota to the EU at guaranteed high prices that are aligned to its internal sugar price. This mainly benefits Mauritius, Fiji, Guyana and Barbados. - beef and veal: 90% of the tax normally paid on imports is refunded. This mainly benefits Southern Africa; - bananas: quotas of bananas from mainly Caribbean producers have duty free entry to EU markets. How did the political dimension of the Lomé Convention operate? The agreement established three formal mechanisms for political dialogue: - an annual ACP-EU Council of Ministers; - regular meetings of the ACP Ambassadors (in Brussels, where the European Commission is based); and - An ACP-EU Joint Assembly that meets twice a year. This is made up of Members of the European Parliament and Members of Parliament, or their delegates from the ACP’s Member States (where there is no Parliament, the State can send representatives but they must first be approved by the Assembly). What was/is the aid package from the European Union to the ACP? This is known as the European Development Fund (EDF). It had its origins in the Treaty of Rome (that created the European Common Market) in 1957, which made provision for aid to the colonies. Each allocation of the A People’s Guide To The Pacific’s Economic Partnership Agreement 13
Page 1 and 2: A PEOPLE’S GUIDE TO THE PACIFIC
Page 3 and 4: Foreword One of the callings of the
Page 5 and 6: Table of Contents Foreword Preface
Page 7 and 8: Abbreviations ACP African, Caribbea
Page 9 and 10: Spirituality, family life, traditio
Page 11: The description of reciprocal trade
Page 15 and 16: 3 African, Caribbean & Pacific Soli
Page 17 and 18: 5 Europe’s New Plan for the ACP W
Page 19 and 20: 6 Clearing a Path for Free Trade Wh
Page 21 and 22: 8 The European Union’s Base Line
Page 23 and 24: 9 The ACP on the Back Foot When and
Page 25 and 26: compromise ‘good governance’ wa
Page 27 and 28: Is there another way of interpretin
Page 29 and 30: That sounds pretty watertight. It i
Page 31 and 32: 14 Capturing the ACP’S Services W
Page 33 and 34: 15 ‘New Issues’ through the Bac
Page 35 and 36: 17 Phase 1 Negotiations It sounds l
Page 37 and 38: 18 Unequal Partnership In Practice
Page 39 and 40: 19 Learning from Others’ Experien
Page 41 and 42: 20 Europe’s Quest for Legitimacy
Page 43 and 44: PART TWO The Pacific’s Regional E
Page 45 and 46: 21 The Pacific Negotiating Context
Page 47 and 48: 22 The Domino Effect of a Pacific E
Page 49 and 50: to establish probable coverage, con
Page 51 and 52: unskilled services workers into the
Page 53 and 54: sector acting ‘in their personal
Page 55 and 56: Is the Commission prepared to come
Page 57 and 58: 28 (No) Goods What might a Pacific
Page 59 and 60: will probably approve this, especia
Page 61 and 62: PART FOUR of Origin that have to be
Page 63 and 64:
32 Tourism What kind of tourism do
Page 65 and 66:
contracts. They are usually paid th
Page 67 and 68:
PART THREE Another Way Forward KEY
Page 69 and 70:
“Studies ‘confirm the absence o
Page 71 and 72:
“It is not true that ACP countrie
Page 73 and 74:
$ We strongly support the stand of
Page 75 and 76:
“The power of the churches’ spi
Page 77 and 78:
Appendix I: Regional Pacific ACP Ne
Page 79 and 80:
Appendix III: Pacific Island Forum
Page 81 and 82:
Appendix VI: Selected References Ac
Page 83 and 84:
Nalunga, Jane, ‘Eastern and South
Page 85:
A People’s Guide To The Pacific
show all

REPA Booklet - Stop Epa

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?