Dr Maurice Odle was Technical Advisor to Caricom’s Regional Negotiating Machinery (RNM) which negotiated the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union in 2008, and, as such, is intimately aware of the issues surrounding its signing in 2008. It was reported that at the launch of his memoir last Wednesday, he lamented, “The benefits derived from the 2008 Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with Europe have so far been very disappointing partly because of the inherently unequal/unlevel nature of the playing field.” Bemoaning the fact that Caricom had to make numerous concessions and waivers, which were “non-reciprocal”, Odle also said this was due to “…the strategy of the Caribbean entering separate negotiations with the EU, rather than jointly with its long-standing Africa and Pacific partners of the ACP grouping, probably made for reduced bargaining power.”
What was noteworthy in Dr Odle’s presentation – and evidently also in his book – was that he studiously avoided mentioning that, at the time, Bharrat Jagdeo, then President of Guyana, had opposed the EPA strenuously on these and other grounds.
Speaking in Aug 2008 at a lecture at the Cheddi Jagan Research Centre, it was reported: “(Jagdeo) was particularly upset with the aspect of the agreement which deals with reciprocity wherein some 87 per cent of the goods imported into the CARIFORUM countries will be done so duty free. “They now have duty free access into poor countries’ markets and they can now swamp it with their domestic products…It will have a big impact on balance of trade and payment with Europe.”
On the EU negotiating with Caricom separately from the ACP, Jagdeo had noted that this was not “Caricom’s strategy”, but was rather imposed by the EU. He explained that in the Cotonou Agreement, which was the last accord with Europe as it related to trade, the EU insisted that future agreements with Europe would have to be WTO-compatible, and they would not negotiate in future with ACP (African Caribbean and Pacific) as a bloc of countries. For instance, the ACP countries under the sugar protocol had preferential access to the European market. “Their preference was to negotiate with several regions, and they set up six groupings to replace the traditional ACP…We have always resisted this, because we thought that this was problematic because they (Europe) were breaking the ACP solidarity that we had…With solidarity comes strength, especially with negotiations.”
On the issue of WTO-compatibility, Jagdeo noted that to argue for it from small developing countries was contrary to the spirit of successive international agreements, which argued that there should be special and differential treatment for these countries as it relates to international trade. “We were always opposed to those features of the agreement…But they got it signed because of Europe’s significant negotiation power…The negotiations were uneven because it was between two unequal partners, so they got their way…They can always threaten to cut off their market.”
In describing how the European Union acted in bad faith, Jagdeo noted that, in the Cotonou Agreement, there was a clause that said should anything change to alter the economic circumstances of the agreement, the parties should consult. But the EU unilaterally announced the post-Cotonou 36 percent cuts in sugar. “We will lose US$40M per year because of the cuts that were done unilaterally.” Jagdeo also called for the reinstatement of ACP, given that that would strengthen the negotiating power on the supply scale, adding that the EPA would not set a bad precedent for future negotiations with markets such as the US and Canada.
Jagdeo was the only Caricom leader to oppose the EPA, and Guyana was the sole hold out on signing. He even took his case to the UNGA that September, and declared: “The exploitation of the EU superior negotiating strength and the use of threats to get countries to sign are, ironically, how the EU hopes to start this partnership under the EPA.”
Did Dr Ogle refuse Jagdeo’s prescience because he is now an “Elder” of the relaunched WPA for the 2025 elections?
