Latest update March 28th, 2024 12:59 AM
Oct 20, 2008 News
Implementation cost, revenue loss yet to be determined
– President Jagdeo
With 11 days left before Guyana accedes to the controversial Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) or face the Global System of Preference (GSP), the cost of the EPA implementation and the revenue to be lost as a result of the increased liberalisation of access to the country’s market of services and goods are yet to be determined.
This is according to the Head of State, President Bharrat Jagdeo, during a recent press briefing.
According to Jagdeo, revenue loss is complex to calculate and is dependent on a significant amount of variables. He, however, estimates that it could amount to a billion dollars.
During a recent consultation, Professor Clive Thomas had warned of the huge amounts that CARIFORUM countries would have to spend to implement the EPA.
President Bharrat Jagdeo has long opposed the EPA, saying that it lacked the developmental aspects which were embedded in previous trade agreements.
“If there was not a threat of imposing tariffs on our exports, Guyana would never be part of the agreement,” Jagdeo said.
President Bharrat Jagdeo did not sign the controversial Economic Partnership Agreement with the European Union on Wednesday last when the other CARIFORUM countries affixed their signatures.
The President said that he intends to sign the agreement by month end, which would allow for the avoidance of the Global System of Preference (GSP).
He also expressed what he called to some extent a “vindication of Guyana’s struggle in that it achieved a substantial improvement of the agreement (EPA).”
Jagdeo noted that one aspect of the victory was the five-year review of the EPA with a view to improve it as time progresses.
“We won a mandatory review, not a review based on European whims and fancies, but a mandatory review which would take place every five years, and a commitment that would provide for the impact, should it be adverse, to change the EPA and its provisions, were the implementation of the EPA to impact negatively on our people.”
According to Jagdeo, without the clause that Guyana fought for and won, it would have been an agreement without any mandatory review.
The European Union has also agreed to take note of the Treaty of Chaguaramas as it relates to the conflicts with the EPA.
The main opposition party yesterday questioned the effectiveness of the clauses, given that they were not legally binding and that the EU would not be obligated to abide by them.
Jagdeo did say, however, that he was satisfied with the European commitment, and even if they were to renege, then there is the option of repudiating the agreement.
The EPA was negotiated between the EU and the CARIFORUM countries between 2004 and 2007, after previous trade arrangements failed to stimulate development and were challenged as discriminatory at the World Trade Organisation.
It is a binding international agreement that, according to the EU, fully complies with WTO rules and provides security for Caribbean traders and investors.
The deal includes chapters on trade in goods; trade in services; investment; competition; innovation and intellectual property; public procurement and development aid.
The other country that did not sign the agreement is Haiti, despite its having initialled the agreement at the end of December last.
THIS IDIOT TELLING GUYANA WE HAVE NO SAY IN THE 50% PROFIT SHARING AGREEMENT WE HAVE WITH EXXON.
Mar 28, 2024
Minister Ramson challenge athletes to better last year’s performance By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports – Guyana’s 23-member contingent for the CARIFTA Games in Grenada is set to depart the...B.V. Police Station Kaieteur News – The Beterverwagting Police Station, East Coast Demerara (ECD) will be reconstructed... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – In the face of escalating global environmental challenges, water scarcity and... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]