Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)

I appreciate the opportunity to debate these issues in plenary session as they go beyond the detailed consideration of a select committee. At a meeting yesterday of the select committee I suggested we not sign until there had been signature by the African side. I also stated that in so far as these agreements have not been processed by the European Parliament that the European Parliament's opinion is important, in particular in terms of the connection between development and trade.

It is important I state immediately that I did not suggest in my contribution yesterday at committee, nor do I do so now on behalf of the Labour Party, that the African countries should rely on development only or that I am against trade. I am in favour of development that facilitates fair trade and enables renegotiation within a new international economic order or that which takes into account the present situation in regard to economic theory, economic development, economic strategy and economic policy. In regard to legal obligations, what is at issue is the process. A number of the countries involved have expressed reservations that are based not on technical details but on fundamentals such as what is required of them by way of timescale in terms of the reduction of tariffs, limited capacity, putting in new charters, the standstill clause, the new clauses in regard to tariffs on, for example, extractive industries and, the protection of infant industries, on which we do not agree in terms of whether this has happened.

I was influenced at a meeting on 3 June by the east African community which asked Ministers not to sign until these issues have been resolved. There are issues within the interim economic partnership agreements that will in turn pass on to full economic partnership agreements and there are further implications from what might be regional economic partnership agreements. There are issues in regard to transparency. I welcome that we are discussing these; it is what we should be doing. Ireland has a magnificent and well earned reputation in regard to development practice and theory. We should be debating where we are in terms of the linking of aid, trade, climate change and so on. That is the purpose of this debate. I want this House to engage in full debate on African issues and so on. I also want us to listen to the debate going on in Africa and to be able, post-Lisbon, to link our debate and the African debate with the European Parliament.

What is proposed in the text is not confined to what is required of the World Trade Organisation, WTO. There are other issues involved. This opens the door on a whole serious of other issues in regard, for example, to services. There are aspects of the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, which are additional to the WTO. Without being too technical, there are a whole range of issues involved. The Labour Party is not suggesting that anybody should break international legal obligations. We are simply saying let us have a discourse that brings everything forward, is transparent and shows that trade will not operate in such a hegemonic way as to defeat development issues. Let us not have a discussion on trade that reflects an asymmetrical relationship in regard to negotiation power.

Many agreements have been bundled together in this motion, which is unusual. If, for example, an issue had arisen yesterday in regard to Ireland's moment of joining the European Union how would we, if a whole bundle of countries are to be treated the same way, have dealt with this? The three agreements are not the same. They are textually different. Also, they differ in terms of the degree to which they have been processed with only some having been initialled. There are ways of dealing with the issue. Only ten countries of the 47 concerned have become involved in any type of EPA process. We are at one in terms of the everything but arms agreement and the special agreement on preferences. There are other mechanisms open to us. It is not a doomsday situation. If we delay long enough, we will have appropriate input and transparency in Africa, Europe and Ireland. For this reason, I am happy this motion is being discussed in plenary session. I hope this is not the last time this will happen.

See this speech in context