And that can be a good thing in a competetive marketplace.
**********
By Samisoni Pareti
More than a decade of negotiations for a free trade agreement between the Pacific members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (PACP) states and the European Union (EU) came to naught in Brussels last month.
Officially, the European Commission (EC)—the secretariat of the EU—told the Pacific government officials the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) negotiations have been suspended “sine die”. The EC blamed the suspension on Papua New Guinea. Brussels said Port Moresby has opted out of the Pacific ACP shared position that EPA negotiations with the EU would be negotiated regionally. Instead, PNG wanted to do it alone, preferring to stick with the interim EPA (IEPA) it had signed in 2009 and ratified in 2011. In this way, PNG says it is protecting its multi-million dollar tuna exports to Europe. This is not the first time the Pacific’s biggest member has let its smaller neighbours down. It first happened in 2009 when all Pacific members of the ACP had agreed for a common regional position on the EPA and that they should reject IEPA negotiations but go for a comprehensive one. PNG instead went behind the back of its Pacific islands neighbours and secretly negotiated an IEPA which gave duty-free and quota-free of its tuna to the European market.
Red-faced Pacific officials
Then, the Pacific’s second largest economy Fiji followed suit, agreeing to break off from the regional solidarity and joined PNG in signing an IEPA with Brussels. The Fijian Government, however, made a turnaround soon after and despite insistence by the EC, refused to ratify its IEPA. Last month in Brussels, Fiji did not follow its Melanesian neighbour, preferring instead to stick with the regional position. Pacific government officials who were in Brussels in October for meetings with EC officials said the PNG turnaround left many islands officials red-faced. Port Moresby, they said, did not offer even their Pacific islands colleagues the courtesy of informing them of their changed position. It was the EC officials who had to break the news. Confronted later, PNG officials said they had to stick with their IEPA with the EU, or they will lose the much sought-after global sourcing provisions in the interim agreement. Many observers of regional trade negotiations won’t be surprised by the PNG move. It has been long understood that PNG was the weak link, because when push comes to shove, when national interests clash with regional interests, PNG will opt for the former. Brussels had also not made a secret of its insistence that Pacific members of the ACP bloc should opt for an IEPA, not a comprehensive one. So with the EPA negotiations now suspended, where to from now? “Our Pacific Ministers have met (in Brussels) and decided to regroup in the region (Fisheries/Trade) and see where to go from here,” a senior Pacific official told ISLANDS BUSINESS. Exactly where the ministers would want to go, no one seems to know. Another official suggested that with the EPA talks suspended, Pacific officials should direct more energy and focus on negotiations with Australia and New Zealand for a PACER Plus. Brussels’ decision to call off EPA negotiations came as the European Parliament adopted its strategy on Pacific fishery on October 8. The strategy confirmed what this magazine had reported in its August 2013 edition. This motion insists that access to fishing waters of Pacific states must be part of any EPA negotiations; that it be negotiated regionally and access be offered to EU fishing boats bilaterally by Pacific ACP states. In adopting their new strategy, the EU Parliament rejected the insistence of Pacific islands states that the proposed EPA is about trade and development, and not a fishery treaty negotiation.
