REPA Booklet - Stop Epa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

38 Swimming Upstream Would the Pacific governments’ strategy be workable if the Europeans are prepared to agree? No. Their proposals still put markets, competition and profits at the centre and assume that development flows as the benefits trickle down to the masses at the bottom. Pacific people cannot survive, let alone thrive, under those conditions. Markets, trade and exchange are essential elements of social life. But when they are the primary determinants of social relations, community, environment, culture, wellbeing and self-determination it is time to say ‘no’. The challenge then is to generate a viable, more acceptable alternative. “First say no to negotiations but failing that we should stop them from being ratified. Campaigns are not won on intellectual input but on the strength of mobilisation.” (Tetteh Hormeku, TWN Africa 2004) Is that possibility being discussed in other parts of the ACP? There is real concern, especially among social movements and NGOs, that governments have backed themselves into a corner because they have no idea what else to do. Moses Teke from TRADES CENTRE in Harare has pointed out that the European Commission has a coherent position to which it is intractably committed; the ACP has a sense of what they don’t want, but no clear and agreed alternative: The outcome of the negotiations again indicate the failure of ACP to determine their own development ideology, take initiatives and assert sovereignty in national economic policy formulation and implementation. … The Lomé Convention has become an instrument through which ACP countries are further locked into a development ideology that is not suitable to their development concerns. Isn’t it unrealistic to say ‘no’? Is it more realistic for Pacific Island governments to sign agreements and make commitments which they know they don’t have the capacity to implement and that will create human suffering, social unrest and political instability if they try? At present, the only ‘WTO-compatible’ agreement that commits them to this agenda is PICTA, and that can and should be renegotiated. If they lock themselves into further agreements with other, powerful governments the only policy choices available to them will be more of the same. Does the Cotonou Agreement allow the Pacific Islands to say no to the European Union? There is no obligation to sign anything with the European Union. The Least Developed Countries (Kiribati, Samoa, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu) would be eligible for the Everything But Arms option. The remainder of ‘developing’ countries could opt for the European Union’s revised General System of Preferences. These are not perfect and do not provide long-term security; but they don’t carry the costs that are likely to accompany a Pacific Economic Partnership Agreement. The European Union may well try to cut back aid to the Pacific in return. That will be a major test of its development rhetoric. But aid is likely to dwindle anyway as Europe refocuses its attention elsewhere. Where would that leave the prospect of negotiations with Australia and NZ under PACER? Most Pacific Islands governments now recognise that their future cannot lie within the framework that was foisted on them through PACER. That can be reversed but only if governments collectively resolve to withdraw from the agreement. Australia and NZ cannot afford to turn their backs on the region – nor should the region want them to. But their agenda will become progressively more dominant if the Pacific Island governments do not assert themselves now. Won’t the Pacific face new problems if preferences and aid disappear without replacements? Again,is it better for Pacific Islands to begin absorbing some of those costs now or when they have gone further down a path of neoliberal globalisation that few of their governments seems to believe is genuinely good for their country and their people? It comes down to an exercise of sovereign responsibility. Isn’t it unrealistic to pretend that the small dependent Pacific Islands have any real sovereignty? Sovereignty is not some abstract notion that empowers élites to run their countries to serve their own interests, bank balances and egos. The sovereign authority of governments comes from their people. Governments cannot ‘simply’ give that away without a mandate to do so. That is what good governance really means. The Biketawa Declaration set out very clearly a set of foundational principles for participatory democracy that trade negotiations sweep aside. Increasingly, these trade agreements even contradict the fundamental principles, values and responsibilities that are embodied in national constitutions. 74 A People’s Guide To The Pacific’s Economic Partnership Agreement
“The power of the churches’ spirituality and ethics of life for all provides the basis to confront the power enshrined in unjust trade relationships and accumulated wealth. … Transformation compels us as Churches to move beyond the difficultbut-conceivable to imagine, discover, embrace and embody the truly liberating, and then to make the liberating become the possible.” (Islands of Hope, Pacific Council of Churches, 2001) Do Pacific Island governments recognise that? Some. In a speech in 2004, the Chief Executive of Ministry of Foreign Affairs and External Trade, Isikeli Mataitoga, spelt out the constitutional dilemma this poses for Fiji: Fiji’s constitution recognizes that in the area of law making, the Fiji Parliament is supreme in that regard. It’s the Fiji Parliament only that is empowered to make laws for the good order of the land and its people. It is also true generally and especially in the area of trade policy formulations and regulations that agendas are set in accordance with the dictates of the Bretton Woods Institutions [World Bank, ADB, WTO etc]. The domestic law making that follows that agenda setting are more in the nature of rubber stamping rather than a critical evaluation of what is best for the country... ...The principles of the Separation of Powers of State and the supremacy of parliament within that is under threat. How do we engage this change while remaining true to these cardinal principles of our constitution? Are there other ways for the Pacific Islands to survive in this hostile global environment? Very real issues confront the people of the Pacific. The future may well lie in regional configurations and alliances, the pooling of resources, sharing institutions and power. But it needs to be on their own terms, according to a model of development that is based on true Pacific values. In former years, it was this kind of debate that inspired the movements for decolonisation and drove the successful demand for self-determination. That same level of courage and vision, based on prophetic traditions, is what the Pacific Churches called for in Islands of Hope. What is the Island of Hope? The WCC in conjunction with the Pacific Conference of Churches organized a consultation on economic globalization in order to accompany the Pacific churches’ efforts to find alternatives to globalization. Their concept, the Island of Hope, holds up life-centered values deeply rooted in Pacific communities as a viable source for a just and sustainable economy and life in dignity. “Spirituality, family life, traditional economy, cultural values, mutual care and respect are components of the Island of Hope which prioritizes relationships, celebrates the quality of life and values human being and creation over production of material goods. The Island of Hope is an alternative to the project of economic globalization which entails domination through an unjust system...” “On our Island of Hope, life is valued and celebrated in maneaba (Kiribati), the fale (Samoa), the cava ceremony (Fiji and Tonga), the bilum and sam celebrations (Papua New Guinea) and the nut celebration (Solomon Islands)... These symbols and rituals are living examples of the ethos of communal life and communal economic and social relations; sharing and caring; celebrating life over material wealth; communal ownership of resource bases and high levels of intra-community interaction and solidarity… The Pacific Churches see the ‘Island of Hope’ as fitting expression of the global, ecumenical concept of the Kingdom of God in the Pacific context… The best of our traditional values are like seeds of the kingdom of God which, as Christians, we can offer to the world.” Could that be achieved through the Pacific Island Forum’s proposed Pacific Plan? It is difficult to know quite where that is heading. The draft ‘Pacific Plan for Strengthening Regional Cooperation and Integration’ was released for consultation in February 2005. It was extremely vague, which suggests that nothing much had been happening. The most concrete proposals involve economic integration and the common provision of services (including a common labour market) through PICTA, an EPA with the European Union, and subsequent discussions with Australia and New Zealand. Behind the scenes a more detailed document is being developed with more concrete proposals for regional integration; it is not clear how the Pacific governments will respond. Those who advocate alternative development agendas for the Pacific need to engage with this broader debate – urgently. A People’s Guide To The Pacific’s Economic Partnership Agreement 75
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 and 12:
The description of reciprocal trade
Page 13 and 14:
2 The Lomé Convention Did the same
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: $ We strongly support the stand of
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?