WTO Ministerial Conference 13-18 December 2005 - Hong
Kong
|
Special
focus by the United Nations Office of the High Representative
for Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing
Countries and Small Island Developing States |
|
| News |
 |
|
|
|
Caribbean: Sugar price cut unconscionable, devastating
CHRIST CHURCH, BARBADOS – “The
decision of the EU to proceed with such a hefty price cut is
outrageous and unconscionable, and as though to add insult to
injury EU beet sugar producers will now receive compensation
covering 64.2% (inclusive of an additional €2.2 billion)
of the loss incurred by the price cut. In contrast, a meagre
€40 million has been offered to ACP sugar producers as
compensation.” This was the reaction of Guyana’s
Minister of Foreign Trade and CARICOM Ministerial Spokesperson
on Sugar Hon. Clement Rohee to yesterday’s decision by
the EU to move ahead with a 36 percent price cut in respect
of its sugar regime. A decision was also taken to extend the
transition period from two to four years.
The Caribbean has reacted with dismay to the announcement,
as it puts at risk the livelihoods of tens of thousands of farmers
and their families across the Region, as the centuries old Caribbean
sugar industry faces an uncertain future, with export earnings
now at risk of being undercut. More so, the decision is a betrayal
of the long-standing relationship between
Europe and the Caribbean, in respect of a key commodity export.
While the EU has said the decision would strengthen its position
at the forthcoming Sixth World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial
Meeting in Hong Kong, it has weakened the EU’s standing
amongst the world’s smallest and most vulnerable countries.
This latest action by the EU in response to pressures of liberalization
under the WTO has forced the Caribbean to question whether rich
countries and the multilateral trading system have any empathy
for their trade and development concerns. At a time when a Development
Round is
being negotiated under the WTO, the decision is a bitter blow,
in that the interests of the small and vulnerable are not being
taken into account.
The implications of the decision for Least Developed Countries
(LDCs) are also sobering, again raising doubts about the sincerity
of rich countries in helping advance the development of poor
nations, during what supposedly are
global trade talks centred on development. Reportedly, there
are provisions in the deal for Europe to restrict imports from
LDCs, if they increase by more than 25 percent each year. The
decision is particularly hard for the Africa, Caribbean and
Pacific (ACP) Group to fathom, as certain EU member states were
offered an additional €2.2 billion to a package that had
already committed to over €5 billion, while in stark contrast
a paltry €40 million in accompanying measures has been
earmarked to be shared amongst the eighteen ACP sugar supplying
countries. “It seems that the Commission has
got its way by throwing extra billions in compensation at European
farmers and industry. The ACP are left with a draconian price
cut and a paltry €40 million in assistance to share. [The
ACP are] by far the biggest losers in
this reform,” said Ambassador George Bullen, Chairman
of the ACP Consultative Group on Sugar and Ambassador of the
Eastern Caribbean States to Brussels.
Chief Executive Officer of the Sugar Association of the Caribbean
Dr. Ian McDonald characterized the deal reached yesterday as
an outrage. The sugar executive lamented that the ACP was not
allowed to participate in discussions of a “life and death
nature for its sugar farmers.” Dr. McDonald charged that
the decision was a “betrayal of the Cotonou Partnership
Agreement, which advances the notion of safeguarding the benefits
of the Sugar Protocol. The decision harshly discriminates against
small, vulnerable ACP sugar supplying countries and European
sugar supplying countries, given the pittance of a package –
the €40 million - allocated for the ACP. The decision clearly
runs counter to the EU’s call for poverty alleviation
and in that vein supporting the Millennium Development Goals
in poor countries.”
In the coming weeks, the ACP sugar group will impress on the
EU and more particularly on the Commission to deliver on their
promises, with concrete proposals on specific resources to be
made available upfront to enable the ACP to adapt to the reform.
“Without timely and adequate assistance, our industries
are doomed, our economies in turmoil, and the socio-economic
fabric of our countries in tatters,” added Ambassador
Bullen.
This latest action by the EU has strengthened the resolve of
the Caribbean to work to influence the outcome of the Hong Kong
Ministerial, to ensure that the development dimension of the
Doha Round is put in focus and irrevocably entrenched in any
future mandate. “The EU cannot expect to progress at Hong
Kong at the expense of the ACP,” Ambassador Bullen
cautioned. At the 2005 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting
(CHOGM) currently underway in Malta, Caribbean Heads are signalling
that preferential access to markets in the European Union for
Bananas and Sugar will be an important plank for the Region’s
positions at the Hong Kong Ministerial. “Long-standing
preferences constitute a vital concern for the ACP as a whole,
and the Caribbean has supported the Group’s position to
not join any consensus decision on Agriculture [in WTO talks]
unless the erosion of preferences is effectively addressed,
through concrete and meaningful
measures to mitigate the impact of reform on the preference
receiving countries. Failure to do so would impose a disproportionate
share of the costs of reform on some of the poorest and more
vulnerable Members of the
WTO,” Minister Rohee underscored.
Returns to news
|