24th meeting of the ACP-EU Economic and Social Interest Groups

Brussels, 28-30 June 2005

Report by the IFAP Secretariat

Introduction

An IFAP delegation including 9 Farm Leaders from ACP countries as well as one representative from the IFAP Secretariat, Nora Ourabah Haddad, participated in the 24th meeting of the ACP-EU, held in Brussels June 28th- 30th in Brussels, organised by the Economic and Social interest groups. This meeting gathered approximately 200 delegates including representatives from the 77 ACP countries, members of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), members of ACP Economic and Social Councils, representatives from the European Institutions, the ACP Secretariat  as well as from the ACP –EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly and representatives from the international socio-professional organisations (employers, unions, farmers and consumers) and NGOs .

 

The main objectives of this meeting were as follows:

  • Inform delegates on the Cotonou Agreement and on the ACP-EU relations
  • Assess the implementation of the Cotonou agreement and the participation of Non State Actors (NSA)
  • Follow the EPA (Economic Partnership Agreements) negotiations
  • Engage in a dialogue on the consultative process and social dialogue
  • Examine the issue of “regional integration and sustainable development” on the basis of two reports elaborated during the ACP-EU Follow up Committee
  • Assess the work achieved by the ACP- EU Follow up Committee during its last mandate and formally adopt the work program for the 2005-2006 period.

 

This meeting was noted by the high level of attendance in the person of the two European Commissioners for Development and Trade namely Mr. Louis Michel and Mr. Peter Mandelson. Both Commissioners recognised the importance of the role of Non State Actors (NSAs) at all levels of decision making processes from formulation to implementation and follow up. They also expressed their willingness to involve them in the discussions pertaining to trade and development issues. They committed themselves into facilitating their integration in different processes and negotiations.

 

Participants felt that the meeting was successful both on the content and intensity of discussions as well as on the space given to NSAs to express their views. Also, delegates including the IFAP delegation expressed their satisfaction with the conclusions adopted at the end of the meeting.

 

1- ACP-EU preparatory meeting: group 3 “various interests” (farmers and consumers), Morning 28th June

 

The preparatory meeting of Group 3, representing farmers and consumers was Chaired by Mr. Nilsson, President of EESC Group 3, a farm leader. It was in the form of a brainstorming discussion meant to highlight the main issues at stake for this interest group to be raised during the meeting from June 28th-30th.

The main issues raised are as follows:

  • G 8 meeting in the UK (3rd-8th July)
  • The need for the up-coming G 8 meeting in the UK (3rd-8th July) to give priority to better and more targeted aid towards agriculture in the process of redistribution plans following the decision to eradicate of 14 African countries.  In fact, it is essential to recognise agriculture as the motor for development.
  • The need to remove unfair trade rules
  • The need for greater transparency by ensuring that aid goes to the right target. Therefore, monitoring is key. In brief, beneficiaries need “aid that helps them come out of the need for aid”. Developing countries need to participate in the international arena in an independent and dynamic way so as to retrieve their dignity.

 

  •  Linking consumers and farmers

Participants all agreed on the necessity for farmers and consumers to adopt common stand points so as to strengthen their impacts on decisions pertaining to food issues e.g. labelling, sanitary measures, change of attitude of consumers towards food ….Farmers expressed their willingness to hold a discussion with consumers in order to come up with common solutions on the issue of the costs of food production in particular.

 

  •  Inequalities in EPA negotiations at the regional level

Certain regions are more advanced in the process of integrating NSAs in the negotiation processes on EPAs. Some regions such as Central Africa have not even started to structure their civil society. Therefore, debates have not even taken place. Farmers’ organisations in the region are very weak. Very often, they are not involved in these negotiations.

There is a need for the EU to initiate impact studies on the effects of EPAs on small scale farmers.

 

  • Lack of participation of Non State Actors

Participants unanimously recognised the lack of participation of civil society organisations in the Cotonou Agreement negotiation and implementation processes.

Thus, they called for:

    • Real involvement of all NSAs from formulation to implementation and monitoring so that they can assess the impacts of the negotiations.

 

  • Market access
    • As one farm leader mentioned, it seems that “the more farmers produce, the poorer they are”.
      Farmers are faced with the real problem of getting secure access to markets. This underpins the issue of capacity. And yet, agriculture is the backbone of the African economies and farmers represent the weakest element in the food chain.
    • Participants called for special preference for developing countries in terms of market access of agricultural products.
  • Impacts of conflicts and weather instability (climate) on agriculture
    • Conflicts and instability are at the source of the increase of poverty in ACP countries. Direct impacts on agriculture and farmers should not be ignored. They hamper any advancement in negotiation and economic integration processes.
    • Insurance policy issues are important for the farmers as natural hazards have direct effects on the food security of farmers.

 

  •  Quality issues
    • The issue of the labelling of products has a cost for the consumer. The latter, through WTO should be able to make informed choices.
  • Regional integration and sustainable development

Mr. Kiriro, nominated two years ago as rapporteur of Group 3, for the paper on “Regional integration and sustainable development”, outlined the following key issues developed in the last version of the draft:

    • Taking advantage of immediate markets is essential. Farmers of different ACP countries try to implement the integration process but this process faces difficulties in trying to bring people together. 
      Despite these difficulties, 4 sub-regional farmer networks have emerged in Africa. These networks have developed linkages amongst themselves and work together in particular on common agricultural policies at the NEPAD level. This initiative is aimed at developing regional trade relations in order to counterbalance competitive agricultural products coming from some Latin American countries on ACP markets (Africa in particular).  
    • There is a growing awareness and involvement of NSA. However, there is a need for a better involvement of other actors namely trade unions and employers which represent the engine of the African economies. 
    •  Capacity building
      Encouraging signs in the form of funding at the sub-regional level are being allocated for participation purposes.

 

In conclusion, Mr. Kiriro mentioned the need to tackle trade issues and in particular support to agriculture. There is a need to ensure effective support for the agricultural sector to benefit farmers all over the world.

 

2- Inaugural session

This session was opened by Mrs. Sigmund (Austria), President of the EESC. She insisted on the need for more structured dialogue with NSAs and called on the European Commission to do more to reassure ACP countries and to propose improvements to EPAs.

Mrs. Hay Webster, Co-President of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly focused her intervention on the assessment of the results of the implementation of the Cotonou Agreement. The improvement of socio-economic actors’ integration in the EPA negotiations and more priority for the regional integration process are among these positive results. She also highlighted some of the negative aspects including the lack of efficiency in the use (quantity and quality) of the EDF (European Development Fund) funds and lack of coordination within the European bodies.    

Mr. Engeldinger, Deputy Director for Cooperation and Development, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Immigration of Luxemburg, Presidency-in-office of the EU Council, insisted on the fact that the ACP-EU Agreement is a good model but that greater coherence is needed between the EU and its partners from the ACP region.  He welcomed the recent initiative by the EU to facilitate access to funding for NSAs. This translates the European Commission’s (EC) willingness for greater flexibility in the mechanism for the management of aid, as well as a willingness to simplify procedures and to clarify the roles and responsibilities of National Authorising Officers. To close this inaugural session, Mr. Theodorakis from the EC pointed out the importance of coherence within the EU bodies and policies. In particular, it is important to link up EU development policies with poverty objectives. The greatest challenge is to translate words into action.

 

3- Regional integration and sustainable development

Two papers on “regional integration and sustainable development” were presented respectively by M. Ehnmark (Sweden), member of the EESC follow-up Committee of the EESC and M. Kiriro (Kenya), Vice-President of IFAP and member of the ACP-EU follow up Committee of the EESC (see drafts attached).

The main issues which came out of these two presentations are:

  • Process: Need for a partnership that gives a role to each of the parties:
    Public sector: facilitation role
    Non State Actors: participation and involvement

For this important approach to succeed there is a need for countries to facilitate:
Access to information, capacity building to set up credible dialogue and the creation of a mechanism or a space for policy dialogue development. All this relates to a transparent and democratic process.  

Main issues that came out from the discussion following these presentations:

  • Participation

Instability hampers participation and regional integration
Participation and involvement of NSAs in dialogues is not effective everywhere. There is a need for national governments to set up civil society forums for these dialogues to happen as well as participation mechanisms in order to help Non State Actors (NSAs) to participate themselves in fighting poverty.

  • Before developing exchanges, we should first think of building common agricultural projects. This would partly solve the problem of imports. Therefore, we should think about how to produce locally before thinking about marketing internationally. This way, countries will benefit better from market openings.
    There is a need for harmonisation of agricultural policies at the sub-regional level before implementing EPAS and therefore before facing liberalisation. ACP economies are not yet consolidated. The question of sequencing is of utmost importance.
    Therefore, it is necessary to find the right mechanisms and develop a strong agriculture along with preferential systems for ACP products, so as to protect agriculture to some extent without distorting markets (in conformity with WTO rules).
  • Removing supply side constraints is crucial for the regional integration process to be completed. Indeed, foreign investors are attracted when local investment is successful.
  • There is a need to remove barriers and bottlenecks especially the ones related to bureaucracy. Capacity building to help achieve decentralisation of administration and financial powers is thus essential.
  • The issue of representativity of NSAs was raised

 

4- Assessment of the implementation of the Cotonou Agreement

The European Commission presented its assessment report on the Implementation of the Cotonou agreement highlighting progress in the involvement of NSAs. However, some shortcomings have been acknowledged by the European Commission as future challenges to overcome. The new financial perspective 2007-2013 represents further opportunities for better integration of NSA.

The President of the follow up Committee of the EESC presented the EESC Evaluation report of the involvement of NSAs.

This report has been the result of a survey which followed a bottom up approach. One of the highlights of this report are: Dialogue with national authorities has progressed, the European Commission has facilitated access conditions for funding.

Finally, the ACP Secretariat presented its own report on the same topic. Main issues are: expansion of cooperation with the EU, there is more room for regional integration, rationalisation of support to the private sector, NSA are encouraged for implementation of the Cotonou Agreement, EDF has not been totally spent, National Indicative Programs (NIP) are subject to a Mid Term Review.  

The needs are as follows: Gain preferential access to EU market, increased coherence between finances and trade policies, involvement of NSA in the definition of cooperation policies, implementation of Cotonou is perceived negatively by the ACP countries.

 

In conclusion, there are certain constraints remaining which are linked to new instruments introduced by the European Union. Non-State Actors are thus needed for the improvement of the implementation of the Cotonou Agreement. 

The discussion from the floor highlighted the following elements:

 

  • Procedures to access funding are far too complex. There is a necessity to simplify them.
  •  HIV-AIDS is a serious issue which affects the workplace
  • There is a lack of coherence and coordination between the National Indicative Program and Regional Indicative Programs.
  • For EPAs to be more profitable to ACP countries, they should go beyond their commercial aspect. The agreement on “Everything but Arms” is important but not sufficient. Greater importance should be given to capacity building. In particular, institutional, human resources, and issue based capacity building are badly needed. Therefore, financial capacity building is necessary but not sufficient.
  • There is a need for a continuous update of the information on Cotonou to the benefit of NSAs
  • The decision to appoint a resource person in charge of relations with civil society organisations, in each delegation of the European Commission in the ACP countries, has been approved but not yet implemented. Participants urged the Commission to take appropriate measures in this regard.
  • Aid should be more efficient in that it should represent an investment. Aid should be distributed to those civil society organisations which achieve previously set objectives impact analysis, development of dialogues, capacity building and training programs. These organisations have a key role to play in the ACP countries. The EESC should be more active in promotion views towards the European Commission. 
  • The European Commission recognises the lack of implementation of a participative approach. It recognises that mapping studies are needed in order to better identify the real needs and problems of NSAs and then set up a proper funding request.

 

5- The participatory approach: promotion of the consultative function and social dialogue

This session was marked by the intervention of the Commissioner for Trade, Mr. Mandelson. His speech was meant to reassure participants, mainly from the ACP region, about the importance of the social dimension built into EPAs and the importance of “bringing them to life rather than looking at them on paper”. He insisted on the flexible dimension of the EPAs and on the fact that they should be seen as an opportunity to fast track the ACP to economic integration. This also includes the possibility for ACP countries to take the time to open their markets.  

He also mentioned that EPAs have to be tailored to the particular regional contexts and needs. The reciprocity dimension of EPAs is necessary to comply with WTO rules and regulations. EPAs can help gain stability and predictability of African markets in order to build the confidence of investors.

EPAs’ main objective is to boost competitiveness in a context of building markets and improving South-South trade.    

Commissioner Mandelson would be prepared to meet the 6 groups representing the different sub-regions of the ACP. The 2007 deadline is close and there is pressure to speed up the work towards the implementation of EPAs.

The Commissioner expressed his willingness to listen to what NSAs had to propose in order to fully involve them in trade policy in general.

The discussion which followed raised the following issues:

  • Participation of NSAs: Mr. Mandelson argued that, to face the lack of integration of NSA in certain ACP countries, there is a need to institutionalize social dialogue at the regional level. This dialogue should reach the individual farmers. There is no possibility of removing barriers overnight. The most important thing for farmers is to put their products onto the markets and get a decent income. Any changes in trade relations have to be managed properly through setting up preliminary measures.
  • On market openings: EPAs are asymmetrical vary among countries. He argued that the benefits of market openings should be seen as a long term stepping stone, with incremental moves.
 

All in all, the main message of the Commissioner was that market forces do not by themselves create prosperity. We have to be careful about what he calls “unforeseen consequences of what looks good on the paper” since there can be the result of not without taking into account people views and reactions on what has been written on paper.

 

6- Presentation of the Negotiations of the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs)

Representatives of DG Trade of the European Commission (EC), Mr. Dihm, and Mr. Wagner, followed Commissioner Mandelson’s keynote speech, insisted on the flexible dimension of the EPAs which have to be taken as a development tool. EPA negotiations are a complex process which doesn’t involve individual states but are negotiated at the sub-regional level.

They also pointed out the importance of predictability of rules so as to offer an attractive investment environment in the ACP region. He reaffirmed the willingness of the Commission to dialogue with stakeholders; in particular, he mentioned the ongoing exchange on impact analysis.

In contrast to the reassuring speech of the EC, Mr. Jeetun, member of the ACP-EU Follow up Committee, representing the Employers’ group on the ACP side, expressed concern towards the existing heterogeneity of situations between regions and countries as well the lack of trade relations within the ACP region.

EPAs should have been built upon existing structures, emanating from the grassroots level, he said. despite the complexity of the EPA process, NSA should definitely participate in the negotiations as these will have impact on trade and agriculture.

Mr. Dantin, member of the ACP-EU follow up Committee, representing the European side made a presentation on “How to integrate social aspects into the EPAs”. 

He started by saying that the announcement of the integration of social issues into the EPAs was very good news. In order to achieve efficient economic progress, social development is a prerequisite. EPAs are going to lead to structural changes in the ACP countries, especially if no social support measures are undertaken. Therefore, civil society should be involved at different levels: from formulation to follow up and implementation on the ground.

He added that negotiations are long and tedious. It is unlikely that the 2008 deadline will be respected. Therefore, there is a need to carefully plan for a transitional period beyond 2008.

On participation, Mr. Dantin pointed out that NSAs in most ACP countries, are either not organised or have badly organised. EPA negotiations could turn out to be an opportunity for them if they fulfil the following criteria for development:

           Respect of fundamental human rights

           Respect of basic rights for workers according to ILO

Poverty eradication

           Working conditions (social security, gender equality..)

There is a need for an efficient participation methodology aiming at coordinating civil society’s position on the EPA negotiations.

There is a need to create a space such as a regional Committee for social dialogue where Non State Actors are able to meet to discuss and debate on such important issues as agriculture, environment and other crosscutting issues of relevance to them. The creation of such a Committee which would play the role of a task force has been proposed by the EESC.   

The main issues raised during the ensuing discussion are as follows:

  • Farmers are concerned with the close deadline for the implementation of EPAs. Farmers call for more time and support from the EC to strengthen their capacities and those of their organisations to be more competitive. Farmers are willing to cooperate but they need efficient support to be considered as equal partners.
  •  Farmers expressed their concern on the lack of their involvement in the EPA negotiations process, despite the fact that agriculture is the pillar of the ACP economies. Even where farmers are involved, they are often called at the last minute for a “so called consultation”.
  • EPAs call for opening markets in a region where markets do not exist which are a result of a weak economy with increasing inequalities, a low purchasing power and so forth.
  • There needs to be a social component integrated to the EPAs so as to gain the confidence of the population.  This responsibility needs to be a shared one. Therefore, social objectives have to be set. The EC agrees. 
 
  •  In order to avoid negative impacts of EPAs on populations, there is a need to include additional elements such as food security clauses, review mechanisms, dialogue with farmer organisations.

 

7- Information session on access to EU financing

There is an obvious lack of information on funding possibilities from the EU. Procedures are complex and favour those NGOs which have the expertise and experience in sourcing these funds.

Ms. Dellicour, Head of Unit, Europaid, European Commission, made a clear presentation on the different mechanisms available for NSA to access funding. She also gave several examples of successfully funded projects which involved civil society organisations. (i.e Presentation attached).

The main lessons learned out of these projects are:

Processes are long. The EC is therefore working on a new form of cooperation.

There is a significant increase of support to NSAs in the framework of the Cotonou Agreement

A program is being prepared aimed at setting up a structure for dialogue between NSA and the State

Mapping processes to enable a better understanding of the specific context of actors

In the discussion that followed, participants highlighted the issue of representativity of NSA which should be looked at more seriously. In fact, transparent and reliable criteria should be used to select the right NSA representatives. Also participants urged the European Commission to make sure that there is a direct link between Commissioner Mandelson’s speech and projects implemented by Europaid, to ensure a continuity between political will and project implementation.

 

8- Closing session

This session was marked by the participation of Mr. Michel, Commissioner for Development who gave a speech on the future of the EU development policy.

 

He first highlighted the EU position as the world leader for development and aid (56% of the world share equivalent to 40 billion euro). He then gave his vision of development which should be seen as a “mutual dependence” relationship as opposed to unilateral aid. He thinks that the “European model of development” should serve as a model of inspiration for other countries.

He also insisted on the importance of a strong and well organised civil society. He is very much aware of the discrepancy between reality on the ground and theory. That is why, building a strong civil society through the setting up of a mechanism to identify the different types of eligible actors, represents one of the objectives of his mandate as Commissioner.

The EU is currently working on a “Common strategy for development” which will be soon published. The European Neighbourhood Policy should be included in this document.

The main objectives of this exercise include: harmonisation of rules between all the countries, sharing out of the common road map among EU members and  setting  up coherence in actions.

The discussion which followed focused on:

  • Translate political will to set up a real consumption policy into resource allocation to the benefit of consumer organisations so that they are able to put in place quality control mechanisms.
 
  • NSAs are in favour of a type of aid which helps countries come out of aid.

 

  • Farmers urge the EC to pressure national governments to give priority to agriculture as it is the motor of the development of ACP economies. Agriculture lacks equipment and adequate infrastructure. The EC recognises that agriculture is not discussed enough within the Commission. A particular focus should be given to production and marketing issues. Decentralisation is one of the Commissioner’s priorities.
    Further, there is a need for farmers’ organisations to be able to access funding for small -scale projects and farmer-to-farmer projects. Participants suggest that the EU opens a  new budget line for small projects.

 

  • NSAs are the key to economic revival and yet, they are not associated enough with impact analysis despite their expertise on the ground. It is urgent to associate NSA in all issues relating to EPAs and to help them get organised at the regional level. For this, they need capacity building and good training programs. The Commissioner suggests that the European model for social cohesion serves as a source of inspiration for the ACP countries and others. He demonstrated his willingness to listen to NSAs in the ACP and to open a dialogue with them.

 

Further information and speeches are available on the ESC website