![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
With the UK presidency of the EU Council of Ministers pending (July 2005), EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson is coming under increased pressure to modify the European Commission’s approach to Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) negotiations with African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries. Criticism and pressure for change is not only coming from an increasingly vocal and active campaign by non-governmental development agencies in the UK, Europe and Africa (see http://www.stopepa.org/ for details of the campaign), but also from several more official sources. These include the Africa Commission established by prime minister Tony Blair, the inquiry by the House of Commons Select Committee on International Development into EU-ACP EPA negotiationsFootnote1 and the joint position paper adopted by the UK Department of Trade and Industry and Department for International Development.Footnote2
Commissioner Mandelson has responded to this criticism by modifying and extending the rhetoric on the centrality of development concerns to the EC’s approach to EPA negotiations. However it is still unclear to what extent the Commissioner’s rhetoric is being taken up in practice by EC trade negotiators and EC aid officials. As the Zambian trade minister, Dipak Patel, has recently declared:
what Peter has said in his speech to the LSE [London School of Economics] was excellent, but perhaps his negotiators need to read it more than we do. Footnote3
Notes
2. See UK DTI/DfID position paper (March 2005) for all quotes from this document http://www.dti.gov.uk/ewt/epas.pdf.
3. See ‘Trade Commissioner Revels in Role on World Stage’, Raphael Minder and Alan Beattie, FT, 21 April 2005.
4. See Trade section of the UK Commission on Africa report for all sources of quotes http://213.225.140.43/english/report/thereport/15chap8.pdf.
5. Trade section of the UK Commission on Africa report http://213.225.140.43/english/report/thereport/15chap8.pdf.
6. For all quotes form the House of Commons Select Committee report see the following webpage: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmintdev/68/68.pdf.
7. See speech by Commissioner Mandelson (SPEECH/05/241–19 April 2005): http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/05/241&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en.
8. Cited in the Key Events in the Past Month for May 2005 on the CTA agritrade website http://agritrade.cta.int.
9. See speech by Commissioner Mandelson (SPEECH/05/241–19 April 2005): http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/05/241&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en.
10. Ibid.
11. Speech Commissioner Mandelson (LSE, 4 February 2005): http://europa.eu.int/comm/commission_barroso/mandelson/speeches_articles/temp_mandels_speeches_en.cfm?temp=sppm013_en
12. Ibid.
13. See ‘Preparing for Economic Partnership Agreements’ by Chris Stevens and Jane Kennan: http:// www.ids.ac.uk/ids/global/pdfs/CSEPARECBP1.pdf
14. See speech by Commissioner Mandelson (SPEECH/05/241–19 April 2005): http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/05/241&format=cHTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en.
15. Ibid.
16. See IDS review of the Africa Commission report by Chris Stevens: http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/news/CFA%20Response/StevensResponse.pdf.
17. Ibid.
18. See speech by Commissioner Mandelson (SPEECH/05/241–19 April 2005): http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/05/241&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en.
19. See speech by Commissioner Mandelson (SPEECH/05/241–19 April 2005): http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/05/241&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en.
20. See speech by Commissioner Mandelson (SPEECH/05/241–19 April 2005): http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/05/241&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en.
21. Speech, Commissioner Mandelson (LSE, 4 February 2005): http://europa.eu.int/comm/commission_barroso/mandelson/speeches_articles/temp_mandels_speeches_en.cfm?temp=sppm013_en.
22. Ibid.
23. See Key Events in the Past Month for March 2005, on the CTA agritrade site at http://agritrade.cta.int/
24. Cited in the Key events in the Past Month for March 2005, on the CTA agritrade site at http://agritrade.cta.int/.
25. See article in Trade Negotiating Insights for a summary of this report (Vol. 4, No. 1, January-February 2005) http://www.ictsd.org/tni/tni_english/TNI_EN_4.1.pdf.
26. Ibid.
27. Ibid.
28. Ibid.
29. Ibid.
30. Ibid.
31. Speech Commissioner Mandelson (LSE, 4 February 2005): http://europa.eu.int/comm/commission_barroso/mandelson/speeches_articles/temp_mandels_speeches_en.cfm?temp=sppm013_en.
32. This even applies to the Caribbean island economy of St Kitts and Nevis, where the last sugar harvest is already underway.
33. EU-25 production was 287.3 million tonnes.
34. Significantly more in the case of poultry production, but less for production of cheese which is affected by quota restrictions on milk production.
35. Extracted from tables in the EC report ‘Prospects for EU-25 Agricultural Markets’ (December 2004): http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/publi/caprep/prospects2004b/fullrep.pdf.
36. See speech by Commissioner Mandelson (SPEECH /05/238–19 April 2005): http://europa.eu.int/comm/commission_barroso/mandelson/speeches_articles/temp_icentre.cfm?temp=sppm021_en
37. Ibid.
38. Ibid.
39. Ibid.
40. Ibid.
41. Ibid.
42. The EC revealed in February 2004 that from 2000–2002 only 6 of 51 FLEX applications were considered eligible, with a mere euros 35.65 million being committed. It was acknowledged that more flexible eligibility criteria would have resulted in some euros 255 million being paid in response to 51 applications for support. According to the Commission this would have represented a 600% increase in the use of the instrument. While the FLEX system has been reformed there is no evidence to date this has significantly increased commitment rates given the disagreement within EU institutions on the application of the new criteria.
43. Ibid.
44. Ibid.