Click here
http://www.normangirvan.info/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/girvan-the-mandatory-review-summary.pdf
Norman
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Advocacy against the EPA with the European Union.
Norman Girvan
Oxfam International campaign articles feed - Trade campaign
Followers
Blog Archive
Monitoring the EPAs
This blog is designed to keep the average reader abreast of the negotiations between the ACP and the EU. It is believed that the EPA is an expansionist effort being perpetrated by the EU. They have reached a level of economic claustrophobia and is seeking to expand their markets, create employment and new areas of endeavour for EU citizens.
This will be done at a price to us. For example, it will bring highly competitive investment that will run much of our small and micro businesses out of the market; further erode food security by buying lands for alternative activity; make us very dependent by purchasing and controling our factors of production, etc.
This blog is dedicated to maintaining our sovereignty as a state and our dignity as a nation. Under the EPAs we are about to become the consumers to a master-supplier in a master servant relationship.
Thank you for visiting and hope you come back soon again.
This will be done at a price to us. For example, it will bring highly competitive investment that will run much of our small and micro businesses out of the market; further erode food security by buying lands for alternative activity; make us very dependent by purchasing and controling our factors of production, etc.
This blog is dedicated to maintaining our sovereignty as a state and our dignity as a nation. Under the EPAs we are about to become the consumers to a master-supplier in a master servant relationship.
Thank you for visiting and hope you come back soon again.
Posts
Hi Norman,
ReplyDeleteJust trying to clarify. Are these new provisions or were they part of the agreement all along?
Hi Roosevelt,
ReplyDeleteit is new provision--part of the Joint Declaration that was appended at the insistence of Guyana
Norman
Norman
ReplyDeleteI want to be lucidly clear on this. First, is a joint declaration an instrument that normally accompany agreements like this? Second, are you saying that the following text is what Guyana negotiated in order to safeguard CARICOM interests:
“in the context of our continued monitoring of the Agreement within its
institutions, as provided for under article 5 of the Agreement, a comprehensive
review of the Agreement shall be undertaken not later than five (5) years after the
date of signature and at subsequent five-yearly intervals, in order to determine
the impact of the Agreement, including the costs and consequences of
implementation and we undertake to amend its provisions and adjust their
application as necessary.”
I am therefore, taking it for granted that your opinion (at: http://www.normangirvan.info/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/girvan-the-mandatory-review-summary.pdf) examines the extent to which this insertion protects our interests???
Dear ROK,
ReplyDeletethe EPA contains several accomanying Joint Declarations, e.g. on Development Cooperation, on Bananas, etc. The others were there from the start, i.e. from the initialled text in December 2007.
The JD containing the paragraph you quote is the same as the JD to which Havelock Brewster refers in his piece as 'clearing the way for Guyana to sign' the EPA, which was published in your blog. This particular JD was negotiated in the final week or weeks before the October 15 signing, on Guyana's insistence. The actual negotiation, I believe, was between the Caricom Secretariat and the European Commission, but Guyana was closely involved, and the other Caricom govts agreed to it.
All this information, including the text of the JD, and Guyana's position, and the sequence of events, are in the public domain, in documents published on my website at "EPA latest".
My opinion examines the extent to which the mandatory review provided by this JD can be utilized by Caricom governments and other stakeholders, including civil society, to address the contentious features of the EPA in the future. It follows on Brewster's memorandum and elaborates on the possibilties afforded by the review commitment by referring to how far it goes beyond the review provisions contained in the text of the EPA, as originally negotiated.
My opinion has been supported by several experts--Sir Shridath Ramphal, Ambassador Havelock Brewster, and Dr Lorand Bartels, international trade lawyer at Cambdidge University, who follows WTO and EPA matters closely.
But everything depends on all stakeholders making maximum use of the mandatory comprehensive review in the coming months and years. It will not happen automatically.
Norman