CONCLUSION OF THE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP
AGREEMENT
By BRIAN KAJENGO
After ten years of preparations and negotiations, the
Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) between the SADC EPA Group and the EU was
‘initialled’ by the Chief Negotiators on 15 July 2014 in Pretoria , South Africa .
The initialing of
the Agreement signals that the negotiations concluded. The timing is
significant because it pre-empts the 1 October 2014 deadline imposed by the EU after which Botswana , Namibia
and Swaziland
would have lost preferential access to the EU market for their exports of beef,
fish, sugar on which their economies depend heavily. The EU has assured us all
that the act of initialling ensures that the current market access will
continue until the agreement enters into force.
Second, we sought to
improve our access to the EU market over and above what currently obtains under
the bilateral Trade, Development and Cooperation Agreement (TDCA). More
specifically, we sought improved access for South Africa ’s agricultural
products.
The EPA outcome achieves these objectives. It preserves
SACU’s functional coherence, particularly in regard to maintaining the common
external tariff, although the EU continues to provide the other Members of the
SADC EPA Group better access to its market than it offers South Africa .
Nevertheless, the outcome marks an improvement for South Africa over the TDCA in
important ways.
Furthermore, the EPA rules of origin improve on the TDCA as
they will facilitate intra-regional trade and industrialisation across in
southern and eastern Africa in particular. The
new rules also contain provisions that will encourage South African clothing
exports. Several other restrictive trade rules under the TDCA eased under the
EPA.
The EPA provides a
degree of greater flexibility than the TDCA to deploy export taxes on eight
products for a period of 12 years with some exception for exports to the EU. In
addition, we obtained an agreement that the EU will eliminate export subsidies
on agricultural goods destined to SACU, as well as more effective safeguards to
address damaging surges of imports.
South Africa agreed to negotiate a Protocol on
GIs because we have an interest in protecting the names of the many South
African wines we export to the EU, and we have a growing interest to protect
the names of specialised South African agricultural products (such as rooibos
and honeybush).
The
outcome of the GI negotiations will not affect the product names currently used
by producers in South Africa
and importantly, for our stakeholders, we established a mechanism to address
non-tariff barriers that inhibit trade in wine.
In terms of the process and timeframe for entry
into force, the Agreement first subjected to a two-month legal vetting process.
Thereafter, the Agreement presented to the Cabinet and, if approved, submitted
to the South African Parliament for ratification. Once ratified, the Agreement be
signed, and it will enter into force once all Parties have concluded their own
respective national approval processes. The timeframe for this process is
likely to be around eight months
No comments:
Post a Comment