Europa > European Union in the World > European Union @ United Nations > Commissioner Lamy's Speech on Economic Partnership Agreement between the EU and ECOWAS

Site map | A-Z Index | Internships/Jobs | Links | Contact us

English Español Français

 

 

Commissioner Lamy's Speech on Economic Partnership Agreement between the EU and ECOWAS

His Excellency the President of Benin,
The President of the of the ECOWAS ministerial meeting,
The Executive Secretary of ECOWAS,
The President of UEMOA,
The Ministers,
Ladies and Gentleman,

It is my great pleasure to mark the opening of negotiations for an Economic Partnership Agreement between the EU and ECOWAS in Cotonou. Cotonou is a symbolic city of the partnership between Europe and the ACP countries, the wonderful coincidence of which Poul Nielson has just highlighted.

The objective we pursue today is an ambitious one. It is a matter of transforming West Africa into an economic hub which both attracts investment and mobilises private initiative; a centre of economic activity ensuring sustained growth, and the drive behind more long lasting economic, social and environmental development.

We have decided to pursue this objective through a three pronged approach:

• widening existing markets, as the narrowness of markets is a major obstacle to economic development
  
  
• establishing a stable, transparent and predictable framework for economic activity, since the existence of such a framework is a precursor to the development of any competitive economic activity, and
  
  
• facilitating trade between the EU and West Africa, in the knowledge that the common market is and will probably remain the preferential market for your countries' exports.

This will of course be done by building on your own achievements.

The countries in the UEOMA zone have extensive experience in integration, strong institutions, a common currency, an up and running customs union since the year 2000, a decision making mechanism that is well adapted to the definition of regional policies and a free-trade policy. It is most probably one of the more advanced processes within the integration zones throughout Africa.

Likewise, ECOWAS has a long history of its own. It plays a major role in preventing and resolving conflicts, even if, let's face it, the results are less impressive in the economic arena. Thus the EU has understood and taken note of President Obasanjo's initiatives along with the Ghanaian President, which aim to accelerate economic integration in West Africa by bringing UEMOA member and non-member countries closer together. I look on these initiatives with great interest as I am not convinced that linguistic barriers necessarily constitute economic barriers, and I am even less convinced that economic integration in West Africa without the participation of Nigeria for example, the greatest economic power in the region, or Ghana, a country surrounded by UEMOA members, would gather much momentum. For this reason I welcome the decision taken at the Heads of States' Conference in 1999 to create a full scale common market including all West African countries, likewise, I welcome the decision taken at the Heads of States' Conference in 2001 to negotiate an EPA between the EU and ECOWAS.

Of course, a lot remains to be done. For example, I am aware that preparation of a working calendar for the establishment of common external tariffs for ECOWAS by 2007 is currently underway, but that the concretisation phase has not yet begun.

Aside from this, many other measures still have to be put into effect in order to achieve real economic integration at West African level, and even more measures to reach the objective you have set yourselves of establishing a common market across West Africa.

Here is where the main objective of an Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) is to be found: supporting the creation of a real regional market and organising its interaction with the rest of the world.

It is thus essential for us to use EPAs in order to achieve the integration objectives that you have set yourselves. I am clearly referring to your integration objectives, since the EPAs cannot decide which integration model is best suited to the specificities of your region. In other words, we need to use EPAs to consolidate and strengthen economic integration in your region according to your own objectives, in such a way that your region becomes that economic hub, that centre of economic activity which I referred to earlier.

We should proceed with utmost determination. Under no circumstances should we question your region's existing achievements. Economic integration within the framework of ECOWAS is undoubtedly more advanced in several areas. Here, I am thinking of the realisation of the customs union or the competition policy for example. I do believe it would be good for West Africa to benefit from experience gained by ECOWAS in these areas. We could achieve these objectives by remaining flexible and pragmatic, and, where necessary, applying the principal of variable geometry. In any case, we have to ensure that EPAs promote the convergence of the two economic integration processes that are currently at work in West Africa, and that they enable a real regional market at West African level to emerge.

It is obvious that regional economic integration is not an end in itself as no region can afford to be or should be completely shut off. The regional integration that we should be pursuing has to be a regional integration that is open, towards neighbouring countries and the rest of the world. Regional EPAs should thus place the African Union and NEPAD objectives at the forefront within the context of the Lagos action plan. They should avoid heading towards a fragmentation of Africa. On the contrary, they should pave the way to facilitating pan-African integration. The European Commission shall seek to improve its dialog with the African Union Commission in this and other areas. In the same way, EPAs should pave the way to facilitating the integration of ACP countries in the global economy. Any other alternative would be inconceivable on a political level and irresponsible on an economic level.

The third approach of EPAs that I mentioned earlier, is that of progressively eliminating trade barriers between us. I know that this subject is of particular interest to many of you. Let me just tell you that from the EU's side, we will maintain your access to our markets. We will build on this to improve it, by getting you as close as we can to the system we operate for the "Least Developed Countries". We should also discuss among ourselves the impact of our remaining export subsidies, as well as all the measures which could act as trade barriers between us, for instance, technical norms or sanitary or phytosanitary regulations. In the quest to come up with solutions that serve both sides, we should be creative.

As for freeing the market from your side, I don't wish to preach to you about the benefits of such actions - you will undoubtedly agree with me - yet I do wish to reassure you that the EU has firmly decided to turn EPAs into a tool for development.

It is therefore our aim to carry out these negotiations with all the flexibility necessary to take into account the economic, social and environmental restrictions with which you are confronted, as well as your countries' capacity to adapt to the process of freeing markets.

Initially, to simplify the process, we started by opening up our markets to you. We are going to continue in this vain by next opening up markets between yourselves and will end the process by opening your markets to our exports, to whatever extent is necessary for your own development. We shall do all this in no great rush, but rather take our time to determine together the rhythm that best suits us all.

This of course does and will entail restructuring your economies. For this reason it is necessary to maximise on benefits through implementing sound policies that will lead towards creating real tools for economically and socially sustainable development within your countries. To use the real sense of the term, EPAs are Partnership Agreements, capable of bearing fruit only if they can rely on firm political commitment from all sides, as well as on their determination to take all the necessary measures to achieve the common objective.

Furthermore, we need to be aware of the fact that EPA negotiations are not carried out in a void. But should rather take into account the views and interests of all concerned stakeholders, be they the private sector, social partners or civil society. I understand that this ever widening approach to negotiations is already in full swing: it is foreseen to include the actors in the regional negotiating committee. National and regional workshops are being held along with the active participation of civil society, in order to inform the negotiators of all the risks and opportunities involved with EPAs, from the point of view of those directly concerned. Similarly, the EU launched an impact assessment on sustainable development in the hopes of estimating the potential economic, social and environmental effects. With this in mind we will shortly be holding a regional workshop, in early November, so as to go further in depth into discussions on the sustainable aspects of the negotiations.

Over the course of the joint ministerial meeting which will take place very shortly, we shall discuss the road map for the negotiations over the coming years. We have come to an agreement on this matter. I believe that it is a promising start: proof of a strong will to progress. It is above all a test of mutual understanding which is our real guarantee on the road we are about to begin together.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In conclusion, let me just mention some words on the relation between the negotiations that we are opening today, a bilateral process between the EU, the West African region, and the multilateral framework, after the failure in Cancun three weeks ago.

As I stated before the European Parliament and the Council of EU Member States, Cancun was a major setback for us all. We could all have gained from it, yet we all lost.

History is written far slower than press articles. And only history will tell whether it was in fact the G-90 refusal, to which your own countries belong, which signed the abrupt end to negotiations that, admittedly, had begun very slowly.

History will tell whether the G-90 attitude was guided by the desire to obtain satisfaction to your justified demands on cotton, and thus to forfeit the two so-called Singapore issues which remained on the table. Again it is history that will gauge respectively the impact of the war in Iraq and of the agricultural interests in the emergence of G-21. It will also tell whether the EU negotiators, myself in particular, acted too early or too late.

Whatever history draws from this, it will surely tell that the EU was ready to negotiate, that it moved and that it was basically the only one to do so, which is certainly not prescribed in the negotiators handbook. Let us let history take its course in peace, and let us not cast the burden of this failure on any of the 148 delegations in the plenary. Let us rather reflect together on what happened and on each others' negotiating games. Today, let us also put our heads together over the objectives of a multilateral trade agreement in view of putting development at the forefront, not only of North-South but also of South-South development. As a representative of the Commission, I have suggested both to all 25 Member States and to the European Parliament to take the time to reflect and evaluate, the time to listen and to dialog with all concerned parties before deciding on the future course of action. It would seem that Cancun only resulted in two decisions:

• access to medicines, a priority for African countries with regard to which we made commitments in Doha, even if we lost a year due to American reticence
  
  
• a meeting in Geneva on the 15th of December. This is the deadline we have in mind. It is absolutely essential that we clarify together our thoughts on the subject before then.

We have done this today among ourselves. I would like to end on a hopeful note: let the same constructive spirit preside over the coming talks within the multilateral framework.

Thank you for your attention.

| Top |

Advanced search

• Commissioner Nielson's Speech on Economic Partnership Agreement West Africa (6/10/2003)