REPA Booklet - Stop Epa

Preface
In 1996 the European Commission released a Green Paper on future relations with Europe’s former African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP)
colonies. This signalled its intention to replace 30 years of one-way preferential trade and aid arrangements that had been provided through
a series of Lomé Conventions with two-way free trade treaties that are euphemistically called Economic Partnership Agreements. The
Commission predicted that:
The future partnership will fit into a long transition process which will transform not only the economic organization of the country
but also society itself.
The framework for this radical transition is set out in the Cotonou Agreement 2000 and ties some of the poorest countries in the world to a
market-driven model of ‘development’ that has manifestly failed them.
This report was commissioned by the World Council of Churches, Office in the Pacific, to examine the negotiations between the European
Union and the Pacific ACP states for a Pacific regional Economic Partnership Agreement that have resulted from the Cotonou Agreement.
These negotiations were formally launched in September 2004.
The terms of reference reflect the church’s commitment to transformation from the ‘development’ model of neo-liberal globalisation that is being
promoted by the European Union - one which serves powerful governments and mega-corporations - to an agenda for development that
is sourced in the values and ethics of social justice and solidarity with people and earth. That vision is articulated in the Pacific Churches
Islands of Hope. A Pacific Alternative to Economic Globalisation and the preparatory documents for the World Council of Churches
Assembly in 2006 God’s AGAPE - Alternative Globalisation Addressing Peoples and Earth.
This report uses a question and answer format to provide churches, NGOs, unions, politicians and other activists with the knowledge to
intervene critically and effectively in the process, which they can then translate into more accessible and creative forms for their own
communities.
The report draws on documents that were available to me, supplemented by interviews, to provide a critical assessment of the current
negotiating strategies with particular attention to key sectors of sugar, fisheries, tourism and temporary migration of workers. I am acutely
aware that this critique could be used as a justification for governments to say ‘no’ to an EPA and PACER, and do nothing. To the contrary,
it urges governments to develop a Pacific-centred response to the very real challenges that face the region.
At the same time, it has been written for use beyond the Pacific, as a further antidote to the European Commission’s move to divide and
conquer by isolating the Pacific from the African and Caribbean countries that are also involved in the Cotonou negotiations.
A People’s Guide to the Pacific’s Economic Partnership Agreement should also be read as a companion to A People’s Guide to the Pacific
Agreement on Closer Economic Relations (PACER) (2004). The agendas and impacts of the Pacific EPA and PACER are inextricably
linked and their combined effect could determine the future of the South Pacific and its people.
Part I examines the historical backdrop to the Pacific negotiations, from the Lomé Conventions through to the Cotonou Agreement, and the
largely unsuccessful attempts of the ACP countries to cement in a common baseline position during Phase 1 of the negotiations.
Part II focuses on the Pacific Islands. The Cotonou negotiations are one of many hugely burdensome trade treaties and negotiations that
threaten to submerge the Islands. The most ominous is the prospect that negotiations with the European Union may trigger a parallel process
with Australia and New Zealand, whose effects could be devastating. Drawing on documents and interviews, the report examines some of
the strategic options that are available to the Pacific Islands with particular attention to key sectors of sugar, fisheries, tourism and temporary
migration of workers.
Part III highlights the failure, once again, of the Forum Secretariat and national governments to conduct genuine, locally informed social
impact studies before they decide on their negotiating positions and table their proposals. It stresses the importance of open, informed and
vigorous debate that goes beyond the current ineffectual consultations with ‘non-State actors’ and calls on governments to empower the
people whose lives are most directly affected to express their views. An equally urgent challenge faces the ecumenical church in the Pacific
to educate, mobilise and inspire its congregations, not simply to reject EU-style globalisation, but also to spell out what genuine transformation
means for their lives.
I would like to thank those who have offered their knowledge and insights to assist in this research and those who reviewed drafts of the text.
Professor Jane Kelsey
January 2005
4
A People’s Guide To The Pacific’s Economic Partnership Agreement