23. Calls for institutional strengthening and capacity building to improve water governance and combat
corruption by means of legal and policy reforms, human resources development, training andnetworking;
24. Calls on ACP countries sharing the same water catchment area to improve coordination policies and
intervention and water resource management strategies, in particular by setting up and/or building thecapacities of regional organisations with responsibility for water policy, with a view to ensuring arbitra-tion in disputes over water use and fostering the emergence of a culture of sharing common assets andsupport for more responsible management of those assets; calls on the governments of the EUMember States and the international community to support the ACP countries in their efforts;
25. Calls for extensive dialogue among various water users at local, national and cross-border level, with
the aim of developing efficient cross-sectoral planning, providing adequate management of reservoirs,developing a database on bilateral water projects, promoting long-term institutional twinning andcooperation between higher education institutions, sharing local knowledge and conserving ecosys-
tems;
26. Instructs its Co-Presidents to forward this resolution to the ACP-EU Council, the European Commis-
sion, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the African Union and all organisations responsiblefor water management.
RESOLUTION (1)
on the review of negotiations on Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs)
The ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly,
— meeting at Bridgetown (Barbados) from 20 to 23 November 2006,
— having regard to Article 17(2) of its Rules of Procedure,
— having regard to its resolution of 21 March 2002 adopted in Cape Town (South Africa) (2),
— having regard to Article 37(1) of the Cotonou Agreement, which states that the EPA negotiations shall
take place ‘during the preparatory period which shall end by 31 December 2007 at the latest’,
— having regard to the Declaration by the Trade Ministers of the Member States of the African Union
adopted in Nairobi (Kenya) on 14 April 2006,
— having regard to the resolution of the European Parliament of 23 March 2006 on the development
impact of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) (3),
— having regard to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), in particular Article XXIV
thereof,
— having regard to the decisions, resolutions and declarations adopted by the ACP Council of Ministers at
its 83rd session, held in Port Moresby from 28 to 31 May 2006, in particular Decision No 2 onEconomic Partnership Agreements,
A. whereas carrying out critical evaluation of EPA negotiations is necessary,B. noting that in most regions the negotiations on EPAs have reached virtual deadlock in view of disagree-
ments on what is understood by the ‘development dimension’, which should be central to discussions
on EPAs,
C. whereas firm and specific undertakings have so far not been provided by the European side on the
financing of the development dimension,30.12.2006 C 330/36 Official Journal of the European Union EN
(1) Adopted by the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly on 23 November 2006 in Bridgetown (Barbados).
(2) OJ C 231, 27.9.2002, p. 41.
(3) OJ C 292 E, 1.12.2006, p.121.
D. whereas the Cotonou Agreement addresses the question of support for economic development and
regional cooperation in the ACP countries, in particular in Articles 21, 22, 25, 29, 30, 33 and 35,
E. having regard to the concerns that are apparent among States, and in civil society and the private
sector, in the light of the conclusions of impact assessments conducted at national and regional level,
F. whereas the main objective of EPAs should be to contribute to the sustainable social and economic
development of ACP countries, through the promotion of greater value addition to goods and servicesproduced in ACP countries for national, regional and international markets,
G. whereas the agricultural sector is the engine of development for most ACP countries because it makes
a significant contribution to national GDP and is the main source of employment and income for
many people,
H. whereas EPAs should ensure that benefits of increased trade and economic growth contribute to
poverty reduction in order to fulfil Cotonou commitments,
I. whereas the level of education and training of the population is a fundamental factor for competitive-
ness and in some ACP regions is being undermined by the growing HIV/AIDS crisis,
J. whereas the establishment of a genuine regional market, within a customs union, represents an essen-
tial basis for the success of the implementation of EPAs,
K. whereas the increase in intra-regional trade intended by the EPAs is hindered by weak intra-regional
infrastructures and a wide range of non-tariff barriers to trade,
L. acknowledging the right for the European Union to have high phytosanitary and other health standards
and therefore calling for increased assistance to ACP countries to comply with such regulation in order
to be able to export their products to the European Union,
M. whereas the reciprocal freedom of trade between the developed countries of the European Union and
the ACP developing countries constitutes a serious risk until the ACP countries become competitive,
N. whereas the EPA configurations are not a reflection of existing regional economic integration arrange-
ments,
O. whereas the ACP must resolve questions of overlapping membership of regional groups and establish
long-term frameworks for regional harmonisation for any EPA to be successful and workable,
P. whereas the waiver accorded by the WTO in Doha in 2001 to allow for preferential trade relations
between the EU and ACP countries was meant to last three years longer (until 2007) than the Doha
Round negotiations (to be concluded in 2004) launched at the same time,
Q. whereas the pressing problem of availability and timely disbursement of financial resources remains a
serious stumbling block,
R. whereas the parallel conduct of the EPA negotiations and the WTO cycle of negotiations has been
interrupted by the suspension of the Doha Round, giving rise to valid concerns about the commit-
ments that should be made under the EPA negotiations,
S. understanding ACP reluctance to negotiate, bilaterally or otherwise, on issues which have been jetti-
soned at a multilateral level,
T. recognising that a positive outcome to negotiations could help redefine what a multilateral develop-
ment round should consist of; recognising further that EPAs should be complementary to an agree-
ment on Doha and not an alternative,30.12.2006 C 330/37 Official Journal of the European Union EN
U. having regard to the setting-up of EPA adjustment mechanisms to address the loss of government
revenue resulting from EPA-induced trade liberalisation and structural adjustment and to providesupport for economic development and regional cooperation in the ACP countries,
V. whereas Article 2 of the Cotonou Agreement provides for differential treatment, taking into account
the different levels of development of ACP countries,
W. whereas the EPAs should facilitate the reduction of existing inequalities between men and women in
the economic and social sectors,
X. noting that, as far as the European side is concerned, the implications of the EPAs have not yet been
clearly determined at this stage of negotiations,
Y. whereas the EPAs will in any case increase the financial needs of the ACP countries to carry out
enhanced regional integration policies and economic reform,
Z. whereas parliamentarians, as representatives of the people and their institutions, should be kept
informed throughout the negotiations,
AA. whereas in Port Moresby the ACP Council called for the ‘full and comprehensive’ review required
under Article 37(4) of the Cotonou Agreement to ‘be all inclusive and consultative with all stake-
holders including non-state actors and parliamentarians’ and whereas, in view of there being little
evidence of this occurring, it welcomes a second JPA resolution on EPAs,
AB. whereas EU common agricultural policy reform and subsidies for products of export interest to the
ACP have a significant bearing on ACP agricultural exports to European markets,
1. Understands that the EPA negotiations stem from the need to make ACP-EU trade relations compatible
with WTO rules but calls on the Commission to be vigilant that the issue of compatibility does not
take precedence over the overall aim of sustainable development; calls for the pacing, timing andextent of liberalisation schedules to be in line with ACP regional harmonisation schedules to minimiseharmful shocks;
2. Calls on the Commission not only to focus on compatibility with WTO rules but also, in cooperation
with developing countries, to aim to improve the rules of the WTO so that they work better for devel-opment;
3. Recalls that, under the Cotonou Agreement, EPAs should be aimed essentially at economic growth and
poverty reduction in countries, most of which are classified as LDCs;
4. Calls for priority to be accorded in the negotiations to supporting the structural transformation of ACP
economies, thereby supporting ‘sustainable economic and social development’; considers that EPAs
should be devised and negotiated as development agreements rather than trade agreements;
5. Recognises that, whether it be liberalisation of services or of competition and government procure-
ment, robust regulatory frameworks are needed before any liberalisation takes place and calls on theCommission to support and monitor independent regulators as part of any change to current provi-sions;
6. Calls for negotiators to work together to develop a strategy to increase ACP agricultural competitive-
ness that goes beyond market access and addresses real development issues for ACP agriculture such as
scaling up SPS quality programmes across the ACP;
7. Calls for a strengthening of competitive production capacities in ACP countries before the removal of
customs duties;30.12.2006 C 330/38 Official Journal of the European Union EN
8. Calls on the Commission and the ACP regions to design EPAs around the principles of asymmetry in
favour of ACP regions, support for ACP regional integration and implementation of a sound andpredictable framework for promoting trade and investment in ACP regions;
9. Expresses its concern over the current EU proposals for free trade with ACP countries under the
Cotonou EPAs leading to the liberalisation of trade, including trade in agricultural products, and
considers that this policy might cause problems to ACP countries' development, relating in particularto food security and development of local industries;
10. Calls for the EPAs to be based on the principle of building and consolidating regional markets first,
before markets are opened to the EU;
11. Calls on the EU to develop more effective instruments of support to production adjustment in ACP
countries, thereby encouraging the diversification of production and promoting greater value addition;
12. Reiterates its call on the European side to provide support as regards the financing of tax and
economic adjustment costs and investments linked to the lifting of supply constraints;
13. Welcomes recent pledges of additional Aid for Trade resources specifically focused on EPA support and
calls for the arrangements and timescale for disbursement of the funds pledged to be fully explained byboth the Commission and Member States as part of a response to ACP requests for additional funds
for EPAs;
14. Calls on the Commission to look at ways of reducing the bureaucratic burden of EDF requirements
and for the ACP side to bring forward detailed, costed proposals of how and for what any additionalEPA funds would be needed;
15. Calls for further money, additional to existing European Development Fund commitments, to be made
available if necessary;
16. Calls on the EU to support the proper sequencing of the development of ACP policies in trade-related
areas in ACP countries, with the subsequent conclusion of inter-regional agreements in trade-relatedareas, so as to ensure coherence;
17. Calls on the EU not to exert undue pressure and to take steps to ensure that, in the event of negotia-
tions not being completed by 1 January 2008, existing ACP exports to the EU are not disrupted until afinal settlement is reached;
18. Urges the Commission and the ACP to use the EPA review as an opportunity to discuss openly the
obstacles to completing negotiations and bring forward detailed proposals to overcome them;
19. Recalls that the Cotonou Agreement provides that in the event that a country or region does not wish
to sign up to an EPA/FTA it should not find itself worse off in terms of market access; calls on theCommission to examine all alternative possibilities, which include improved rules of origin, including
non-reciprocal arrangements, in accordance with Article 37(6) of the Cotonou Agreement;
20. Calls on the EU to refrain from proposals which could disrupt ACP regional processes;21. Calls therefore for a real public debate in the ACP and EU countries, including civil society and govern-
mental and parliamentary institutions; calls also for the establishment of appropriate information and
consultation mechanisms;
22. Recognises that Parliamentary oversight with regard to scrutiny of, and participation in, EPA implemen-
tation will contribute to the stated aims of good governance and transparency and that the Joint Parlia-mentary Assembly is the appropriate body to formally, comprehensively and officially review the
impact and implementation of EPAs, and calls for the establishment of a monitoring group within the
JPA;30.12.2006 C 330/39 Official Journal of the European Union EN
23. Calls on the Commission to respect the position of those regions which do not want to include the
‘Singapore Issues’ in the EPA negotiations and recalls that bilateral negotiations on trade in services
should respect the right of each country freely to regulate public services;
24. Calls for the EU to undertake not to include in EPAs provisions on intellectual property rights forming
an additional barrier to access to essential medicines and to provide ACP countries with supportenabling them effectively to implement the 2001 Doha Declaration, i.e. effective use of TRIPS flexibil-ities;
25. Stresses the importance of public services for development and democracy and consequently asks the
Commission to act with caution when considering liberalisation of services and in fields such as water,
health, education, transport and energy;
26. Instructs its Co-Presidents to forward this resolution to the ACP-EU Council and the European
Commission.30.12.2006 C 330/40 Official Journal of the European Union EN