As rumours had already suggested, Haiti and Guyana both did not sign the EPA. Haiti's decision not to sign was not surprising, as the country will still be able to trade with the EU under the “everything but arms scheme”.  But the fact that Guyana has not signed the EPA yet, means that they are very serious about their concerns and objections to the Agreements as it is now. The concerns raised by Guyana relate, among others, to the lack of a strong development dimension within the EPA. Another concern regards the “Services” component. Guyana’s service industry has not had the chance to fully establish and develop itself, therefore making it difficult to be able to compete on a more global scale. Furthermore, the Most Favoured Nations (MFN) clause raises concerns, as this clause would implicate that Guyana will no longer be able to trade with other developing nations under more favoured conditions, as if it does, these same conditions would have to be applicable to the EU as well. Finally the Singapore issues were raised. The Singapore issues are not purely trade related. They involve government procurement, trade facilitation, investment and competition. The fear is that should these issues be part of trade agreements, Guyana and other developing nations may not be able to live up to them.

Guyana has acknowledged that its concerns have been taken into account, and that negotiations have and are taking place. Guyana added that favourable outcomes are to be expected. For these reasons Guyana expects to be able to sign the EPA before its deadline by the end of October.

There have been many concerns relating to the development aspects of the EPAs in the last couple of years, ever since the EPA negotiations have started.  These concerns include the lack of a level playing field making fair negotiations very unlikely, the composition of the sub-regions - as these regions are often far from integrated as their economies are very diverse - and the financial consequences for the developing countries at stake as many market adjustments are needed.

The EU has committed itself to promoting and harnessing policy coherence for development. Meaning that all of the policies constructed in any EU policy field, should be coherent with the objectives of the EU’s development policy. However, it is questionable whether the EPAs are coherent with the EU’s development policy as the trade concerns seem to prevail over the development concerns. MEP David Martin (PSE) recently addressed the issue of the CARIFORUM EPA in a couple of written questions towards the European Commission. He stated; EPAs are likely to have a serious impact on food security, as small agricultural enterprises, can no longer be protected, because of the loss of policy space due to the implementation of the EPA. Another concern is the amount of money spent on the EPA implementation out of the EDF budget, as this money should only be allocated to pure development aid purposes.

How this first full EPA will work out in practice for the CARIFORUM region, will have to awaited until the first monitoring results are available. Until then it is important that the voices of all the actors involved are heard and taken into account.

Please see the attachements below for the Joint EC - CARIFORUM declaration, a media release from Guyana on their reasons for not signing the EPA, and a joint statement of both Haiti and Guyana on the CARIFORUM  EPA.