LAST Thursday, Ghana and the European Union (EU) signed an initial agreement as a stepping stone towards the much talked-about Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA). The agreement was dubbed, the "Stepping Stone Economic Partnership Agreement".
The arrangement is intended to give Ghana some time to allow for more discussions with the EU on concerns over the EPA. Under the agreement, Ghana will be entitled to export goods such as bananas and canned tuna on quota basis and duty-free, while protecting all sensitive Ghanaian sectors and products.
Over the last few months or so there have been fierce arguments for and against the EPA, while a school of thought, led by civil society groups, made it clear that it would not be forced by the legal deadline of December 31, this year, to abandon the pragmatic development ambitions of the country.
The group believes that in a globalised economic environment, Ghana cannot continue to close its doors to trade with the outside world because as the people feel passionate about protecting local industries such as rice and poultry, there are other local producers who need the EPA in order to sell on the European market.
Whichever way one looks at the arguments, there could be two sides to the debate in the real sense. There is no doubt that local producers such as rice and poultry farmers have borne the brunt of the unbridled liberalised regime being practised in the country, thereby reducing our markets to a dumping ground for cheap and shoddy products from all over the world.
The Daily Graphic has been alarmed about the level of the debate over the EPA, particularly when all the interest groups have taken entrenched positions. Thus the debate has become very ideological, instead of the groups adopting pragmatic positions that will enable us to recognise different regional needs and interests, as well as those with particular vulnerability among African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries, while keeping our overall objective of using our resources to promote development.
It is very difficult to appreciate the position of those opposed to the EPA in view of the fragile economies of most ACP countries. For instance, are these countries in a position to offer subsidies to their producers, so that their products could compete on the European market? Presently, one wonders whether, in the case of Ghana, the government has the capacity to support rice and poultry farmers with the required assistance to become competitive.
In the 1990s when the debate for a form of protection to be introduced to safeguard the interest of local producers came up, an eminent economist asked those advocacy groups whether they had considered how the state was going to fund the extra cost of protection.
The initial cost of protection will be higher prices of goods and services, but if the people are ready for these sacrifices and will not raise their voices against the government for the initial hardships, then the idea of protection appears very plausible.
The Daily Graphic reiterates that the EPA processes and outcomes should facilitate sustainable human development, regional integration and economic growth in the West African sub-region. Everything must be done by governments in the sub-region to avoid any fundamental alteration in the way of trading between the parties, to the detriment of small-scale producers.
It is not out of place to say that the EPA negotiations, both at the national and regional levels, have not adequately and effectively been as inclusive as expected. That is why we recommend to all the interested groups to demand that the proposals already on the table be open to public debate and scrutiny before the signing of the final agreement.
In all, the Daily Graphic calls on the government to take steps not to endanger the livelihoods of small-scale producers, undermine food security and sovereignty, reduce revenue through the reduction and/or removal of tariffs on imports from the EU, as well as take away the government’s sovereignty to use policy decisions to leverage the negative impacts of trade liberalisation.
The expectation of all is that the EPA or its alternative will not be oppressive but will be a just trade regime to serve the people better.
No comments:
Post a Comment