In summary:
The UK government fails to address the fundamental concerns with Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) that have been consistently raised by developing country governments, academics, unions and non-governmental organisations.
The UK government should recognise that EPAs as currently proposed will not help to end poverty and should call for an alternative.
In particular:
Poor countries need the right and space to choose economic polices that benefit their people.
We welcome the UK Government’s commitment to providing market access to developing countries, which is essential to helping millions of poor producers.
However EPAs hamper the ability of these countries to choose their own economic policies and build up local industries that can compete globally.
EPAs also undermine the ability of African countries to trade with each other, threatening regional trade links that the UK government publicly supports.
Poor countries need trade deals that are tailored to their individual needs and do not include arbitrary deadlines.
While the UK government has pushed for flexibility within EPAs in the past, these agreements still fail to reflect the specific development plans of the countries involved. For example, while protecting 20% of sensitive products may be enough for some countries, it is not for all.
Arbitrary deadlines and limits have plagued EPA negotiations, with the negotiating team from the European Commission often taking a stance that is anything but open-minded.
Trade deals should not be forced on poor countries.
Pressure has been piled on developing countries to sign EPAs to prevent a legal challenge at the WTO, which could affect their ability to access rich countries’ markets.
However this seems to be a threat to rush the conclusion of the negotiations – so far no such challenge has been made and one does not appear imminent.
The UK government should lead the way in exploring alternatives to EPAs that are development-friendly and WTO compatible.
