|
The European Commission has presented the EU Council with a draft regulation on measures intended to favour better integration of the environmental dimension in the development process of developing countries. The proposed text defines the application of measures and sets down detailed rules concerning the type of action, eligibility of projects for Community funding, the beneficiaries of aid and the decision making procedure governing the granting of aid. The Commission suggests that the following should be eligible for Community funding: pilot projects in the field including those involving environmentally sound technologies; the elaboration of policies, plans and strategies for sustainable development; the formulation and guidelines aimed at promoting sustainable development and environmental integration; support for the development of and application of environment assessment tools; and inventory, accounting and statistical work to improve environmental data and indicators.
Apparently special attention is granted to the existence of a link with the overall goal of reducing poverty, local initiatives involving innovative measures, the involvement of local populations, and the role and specific contribution of women in the sustainable management and use of natural resources.
The beneficiaries of the aid may be: states, regions, public agencies, local communities, private operators, NGOs and associations representing local populations. A guide to financing, stipulating the guidelines and criteria for project selection is to be published and sent to the interested parties by the Commission and its delegations in developing countries. For sums under 200 million Euro, the Commission will be able to decide alone on the granting of aid; above that the Commission will refer to the relevant geographic committee for development. The regulation will be subject to systematic periodic assessments. After each budget year the Commission proposes to submit a report to the European Parliament (EP) and the Council on the quality and quantity of projects financed and the actors with which the contracts were concluded.
2. EU COUNCIL REJECTS COMMISSION-SOUTH AFRICA TRADE COMPROMISE
The EU General Affairs Council which met on Monday 22 February failed to endorse the compromise reached by the European Commissioner for Development, Mr Joao Pinheiro and the South African Trade Minister, Mr Alec Erwin. The German Presidency noted two categories of problems: those that require further discussion within the EU; and those that require further discussion with South Africa. On the latter, several member states were of the view that the Commission went beyond its negotiating brief concerning sensitive agricultural products such as fruit and fruit juices. Concerning porto and sherry some Member States thought that the compromise's statements, that these names cannot be used by South Africa after the 12 year transitional period, were not explicit enough. The main opponents of the compromise are Spain (names of origin, agriculture, industrial and textile products, and fisheries agreement), France (wine quota, names of origin, export refunds), Italy (fruit and fruit concentrates, wine, automatic reduction of duties for quotas) and Portugal (porto). It is worth noting that Tony Blair, the UK Prime Minister, wrote a personal note to the Heads of Government of Spain, France and Italy asking them to drop their reservations on the compromise, while recalling the commitment to conclude the EU-South Africa agreement by March at the latest and arguing that a failure would have serious implications and would be harmful to the EU's credibility.
The Commission has been asked to present proposals on how it plans to take account of opinions expressed at the Council session. Following the session, the German Presidency of the EU announced at the European Parliament plenary session, that it will do everything it can to back the Commission's effort to reach a compromise on questions still blocking the conclusion of the agreement within the given time frame agreed by the EU. The EP was informed that the Commission will have bilateral meetings with the Member State who have problems with the Commission's compromise. It was also noted that South Africa have expressed their unwillingness to amend in any way the compromise reached between it and the Commission. The South African Trade Minister has warned that if the EU Member States push for further concessions, South Africa will do the same and the whole package, that took four years to negotiate, will have to be re-negotiated.
The European Parliament subsequently expressed its wish for the EU-South Africa agreement to be speedily concluded in the adoption of a resolution on the issue. The resolution criticises the position taken by the Member States while commending the Commission's efforts to reach a compromise. The EP is of the view that the trade agreement is of great importance for social progress, the development of the poorest classes of South African society and the consolidation of democracy in the country. According to Swedish Social Democrat, MEP Mrs Theorin, the EU is using the worst kind of protectionism against South Africa after having dumped tonnes of tomatoes on its market.
3. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND WTO JOINT ROUND TABLE ON NEW TRADE TALKS
Seeking an 'Agenda for Action', the European Parliament's External Economics Relations (REX) committee hosted a joint round table with the WTO on 18 February (Brussels), to discuss the proposed new round of WTO trade talks with developing country partners. In their keynote addresses to a full chamber of MEPs, developing country officials, representatives of international organisations, civil society and others, WTO chief Renato Ruggeiro and European Commission vice-president Sir Leon Brittain, emphasised the potential benefits, a comprehensive new round of trade negotiations, could bring to developing countries. Addressing himself to those developing countries not supportive of a new round, Sir Leon stressed that the GATT system has changed to take account of developing countries interests. He sought to reassure them in stating that the new round was a “tremendous opportunity” to address areas of dissatisfaction with the trade system and arrangements.
However, neither this nor his string of announced initiatives - ranging from relaxing WTO notification requirements, to better market access and tariff reductions for developing country products, and support for legal assistance for LDCs - were sufficient to allay fears among many developing countries, that the proposed new round posed more pain than gain. This view was strongly expressed by ministers and diplomats from Jamaica, India, Mexico and South Africa who cited factors such as the inadequacy of implementation of existing WTO agreements, non-observance of the WTO's 'special and differential treatment' provisions in favour of LDCs, “harassment” through the WTO's trade sanctions system, and domestic supply-side and structural constraints that prevented them from fully benefiting from the global trading system. The current re-negotiation of the EU-ACP Lomé Convention also came under intense discussion, with the European Commission being accused of seeking to dismantle it. A major area of disappointment for civil society groups, however, was the treatment of 'non-trade' issues such as human rights, labour standards, environment, gender and social development in the discussion. On the few occasions they were mentioned, they were very inadequately responded, with most developing country delegations refusing to be drawn on them or referring to them as obstructions to trade. On the whole, the key messages emerging from the day-long discussion were all cautionary ones, namely that: the WTO must not become a fundamentalist institution (G-15 Jamaica declaration); the global trading system must become more flexible and responsive to the needs of poorer nations; countries must not be forced to liberalise faster than they are politically or socially able to do so; and that trade liberalisation must not be pursued as an end in itself but as a tool for broader societal objectives. Oxfam GB, recalling the recent decision made by some civil society groups, called on all countries present to conduct reviews of trade agreements from a sustainability, poverty eradication and gender perspective, and establish national civil society consultation mechanisms to ensure democratic decision-making in trade policy at all levels. This and other recommendations will be considered by the REX committee as it prepares its resolution on the new trade round for consideration by the European Parliament in April 1999.
Malini Mehra, Oxfam GB.
3. ACP-EU NEGOTIATIONS
The next round of ACP-EU negotiations meetings held at civil-servant level is likely to take place on 24-25 March. Further rounds are tentatively scheduled for 20-21 April, 18-19 May and 22-23 June. It is still however unclear when the meeting of ACP regional experts called for by the Extraordinary ACP Council of Ministers (see last week's PAF -121) will take place.
© Eurostep. Please address comments to [email protected]