Proposition 54K3087

Projet de loi portant assentiment à l'Accord de partenariat économique entre l'Union européenne et ses États Membres, d'une part, et les États de l'APE CDAA, d'autre part, et à l'Acte final, fait à Kasane le 10 juin 2016.

General information ¶

Submitted by

MR Swedish coalition

Submission date

May 8, 2018

Official page

Visit

Subjects

ACP-EU Convention ACP countries trade agreement international agreement cooperation agreement (EU)

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

July 18, 2018 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Tim Vandenput, rapporteur, refers to the written report.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, Mr. Minister, we have already had this discussion in committee for a long time, but I would nevertheless like to return to some elements that I find important.

First of all, I would like to clarify that, contrary to what some of my colleagues or Mr. Minister may sometimes think, the PS is obviously not opposed to partnership agreements. Far from there. But what my group wants are partnership agreements. Unfortunately, what we find too often is that it is primarily and above all operating agreements rather than real partnerships.

The philosophy underlying these Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) is in the same logic of maximum liberalization of the markets of the countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (the so-called ACP countries). However, these countries are most often among the least developed countries.

Of course, all this is presented to us in a beautiful package: that of the development of African countries, the least developed countries. These agreements would in one way or another favor these countries, allowing them to increase their exports to the European Union. This beautiful package would try to make us think that they will enable a strengthening of regional integration for these countries.

But when we scratch the lacquer a little bit, we find above all and above all that several elements are missing in these agreements, while the provisions that appear there are completely contrary to what we are trying to make us believe.

These agreements contain what is called the principle of reciprocity. This principle implies that the requirements are the same, whether for a country of the European Union or for an ACP country. All these countries must be liberalized. And so, we find ourselves in a situation where countries that are among the poorest are directly put into competition with countries that already have well-established economies.

In response to this, we will be told that this is not important, because there is in these agreements what is called a backup clause. Unfortunately, this safeguard clause, which may indeed diminish the perverse effects of this principle of reciprocity, is only valid for 12 years. Consequences: The European Union succeeds in achieving the maximum opening of the markets of non-industrialized countries, among the world’s poorest.

For example, countries such as Lesotho or Mozambique will see their markets completely open, without any preparation for the consequences that this situation may entail.

This type of agreement generates another consequence: the situation of these countries will be ⁇ ined or aggravated, and their dependence on the export of raw materials will be much greater.

Furthermore, these agreements do not provide for any monitoring or monitoring mechanisms: a categorical rejection by the Commission persists in this regard. At the same time as these EAPs are concluded, parallel processes of agreements between the European Union and countries are being implemented, undermining the idea of regional integration and eliminating the possibility of protecting sensitive sectors from liberalization. The reference to human rights and sustainable development is made in relation to an agreement that will expire in 2020, the famous Cotonou agreements.

Finally, we do not have any answers on certain elements. For example, what will be the involvement of civil society? What about the non-binding nature of human rights and sustainable development standards? What about a monitoring or monitoring mechanism that is not planned at all?

These agreements are completely unbalanced. They respond primarily and above all to the economic interests of large European companies and unfortunately not sufficiently to the real needs of our fellow citizens and those of the ACP countries. That is why my group will oppose the project that is presented to us today.

I will not return to all that has already been said in the committee. I would simply remind, since this is repeated in the plenary session, that these agreements are asymmetric agreements, in which the European Union gives a much greater openness than partner countries. This is very logical. We want to help these countries in their development. That is why market opening is less, including at the end of the period, in these partner countries. They also retain customs duties for products sensitive to international competition.

Of course, they contain a number of transitional backup clauses, but also permanent, definitive backup clauses. These are all trade defence instruments provided by WTO rules and bilateral safeguards.

Finally, I would like to recall the importance of the Sustainable Development chapter, in which all partners undertake to respect international rules, in particular the International Labour Organization. I regret that not everyone supports this type of partnership which, I repeat, encourages a number of developments in African countries that are in great need, in this case Southern Africa.

We will, of course, conduct negotiations on the post-Cotonou agreements. As I said in the committee, we obviously cannot expect the content of these agreements before these negotiations have been conducted. The Belgian approach is, in any case, always in the preservation of an important African component as well as a component of development support to African countries that are in great need.