EU market access regulation for African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries pose a threat to development, says British NGO, Oxfam in a press release, Thursday.
Development campaigners warn these deals may devastate livelihoods and undermine future growth.
EN FÆLDE
– The interim agreements are a trap, says Marc Maes of 11.11.11 in Belgium (En paraplyorganisation for belgiske NGO´er, red.)
He adds that the EU refused to offer more time for the negotiations or to consider alternative arrangements.
It has pushed dozens of poor countries into signing very unfavourable deals just to protect their existing exports.
Those that have not signed face disruption to exports and possible job losses, since they face reintroduction of tariffs on their exports to the EU.
UTILFREDSHED I AFRIKA
The ACP Council of Ministers meeting last week officially expressed “serious concerns” about the negotiations.
In their declaration the Ministers deplored the enormous pressure that has been brought to bear on the ACP States by the European Commission.
They also observed that the European Union’s mercantilist interests have taken precedence over the ACP’s developmental and regional integration interests.
Third World Network in Ghana says:
– The interim agreements have been rushed through on the basis of draft texts proposed by the Commission at the last minute. ACP negotiators have not had the chance to examine or amend them properly.
The result is bad agreements that require onerous commitments from developing countries and offer little protection for vulnerable sectors.
As they are mostly signed by individual countries rather than full regions they will not just undermine those countries’ economic development, but also undermine regional integration.
KRITISK OXFAM-ANALYSE
Analysis carried out by Oxfam International shows that the interim agreements:
* Commit the ACP countries to liberalising their imports from the EU deeper and faster than could be expected from earlier statements (in most cases even more than 80% percent of imports is to be liberalised, mostly within fifteen years)
* Do not offer adequate protection for infant industry or food security as they do not contain proper safeguards
* Do not contain a clause for the modification of the tariff commitments
* Demand the reduction or elimination of export restrictions (reducing the possibilities for reserving raw materials for local processing)
* Do not contain an EU commitment to reduce or eliminate export subsidies
* Only contain minor improvement of rules of origin, limiting cumulation to countries that have signed interim agreements
* Oblige ACP countries to negotiate services, investment, government procurement and other issues even though the Cotonou Agreement does not contain such an obligation
* Remain vague on development cooperation and impact assessment
OPFORDRER TIL OMTANKE
– Significant damage could be done to subsistence farmers’ livelihoods and fledgling industries as a result of these agreements. Furthermore, the obligation to negotiate on services and other issues next year, could harm poor countries’ economic prospects, says Luis Morago of Oxfam International.
– We urge the EU to show flexibility and allow problematic clauses to be renegotiated. If they don’t then the ACP would have every right to consider refusing to ratify the deals, he adds.
BAGGRUND
A full agreement was concluded with the Caribbean region on 16 December.
It involves 14 Developing Countries (DCs) and 1 Least Developed Country (LDC), Haiti.
Of the remaining 51 ACP countries involved in the negotiations, 12 DCs and 8 LDCs initialled interim agreements, 11 DCs and 30 LDCs did not.
Of the 11 DCs that did not initial, 10 will see tariffs on their exports to the EU re-introduced (Cook Islands, Niue, Marshall Islands, Palau, Micronesia, Tonga, Nauru, Nigeria, Gabon, Congo Brazzaville).
Exports form South Africa to the EU will continue to be governed by their trade agreement signed in 2000.
Kilde: www.oxfam.org
