CIVIL SOCIETY MEETING MEETING ON THE TRADE SIA IN SUPPORT OF A DCFTA BETWEEN THE EU AND RESPECTIVELY MOROCCO AND TUNISIA, DRAFT INCEPTION REPORT Date: 09/04/2013 Time: 14:30-16:00 Location: Charlemagne Building, room Sicco Mansholt, 170 Rue de la Loi, 1049 Brussels Lead Speakers Ms Sofía Muñoz Albarrán, Deputy Head of Unit, South Mediterranean and Middle East, Directorate-General for Trade Ms Colette Seyler, Co-ordinator of bilateral trade relations with Morocco, Directorate-General for Trade Mr Olivier Sautière, Co-ordinator of bilateral trade relations with Tunisia, Directorate-General for Trade Ms Virginie Poirier, Evaluation Coordinator, Internal Audit and Evaluation Unit, Directorate- General for Trade Dr Koen Berden, Project Director, Ecorys Mr Jurgen Vermeulen, Team leader Morocco, Ecorys Ms Nora Plaisier, Team leader Tunisia, Ecorys Mr William Douni, Expert, Ecorys Moderator Mr Didier Bloch, Policy Officer, Information, Communication and Civil Society unit, Directorate- General for Trade Panel Presentation Ecorys made a presentation on the draft inception reports and opened the floor for comments. DG Trade (SMA) reported on the progress related to the launch of the negotiations for DCFTAs with the two countries. The negotiations with Morocco were officially launched on the 1 st of March 2013 and the first round of negotiations will take place in April. For Tunisia, the preparatory phase is still on-going, so negotiations will start later.
Discussion Highlights / Questions and Replies The meeting was then opened to the floor for general comments and remarks. European Peace building Liaison Office (EPLO) requested clarification on the methodology used by Ecorys for the analysis of the civil society landscape for both Morocco and Tunisia. In addition, it enquired on the sources used for this analysis. Ecorys replied that the work had been based on existing literature, interviews with the EU Delegations in both countries and input from the local consultants that are part of the project team. The assessment of the civil society landscape is available online. Ecorys invited stakeholders to comment on it and to provide feedback through the website or via email. EPLO asked whether civil society could make suggestions for topics, issues and participants for the workshops that would be organised in both countries. It also enquired whether the workshops would be aimed at specific sectors. Ecorys answered that it would be very interested to hear about any suggestions and/or feedback with respect to stakeholders and topics to discuss. However, it noted that participation of all companies or institutions is not guaranteed since it is important to have a fair representation of all types of organizations and places are limited. The workshops will have some sector focus applied, but will also cover general topics. The final selection of sectors that will be studied in more detail will be made at the end of Phase 1. It was therefore not possible for Ecorys to name the sectors at this stage. EPLO enquired on the distribution of the welfare effect in both countries and in particular whether Ecorys had already identified those groups that will be mostly affected by the DCFTA. If this was the case, it asked for information on how Ecorys intended to address the issue. Ecorys replied that different communication channels had already been put in place together with the local partners in order to involve the people affected the most by the DCFTA. From their experience, the most practical way of involving them was through their representative organisations, or other organisations that work with them frequently. These organisations are generally more easily accessible and have a better understanding of the issues related to the DCFTA. But these people may also be included directly, as had been done in other previous TSIA studies. EPLO asked the European Commission to expand on how the changes in policy would affect the different ways of conducting the negotiations since both countries have already negotiated DCFTAs. DG Trade (SMA) responded that trade was one of the main components of the response to the Arab spring. The three M s (mobility, money and market) were an example of a tool used for economic integration. The preparatory discussions had been launched from the date a signal was received on the Mediterranean side, which was early 2012, with the condition to launch a political assessment on the democracy criteria that were established in 2011. The conclusion of any agreement would thus be subjected to this assessment. In addition, these negotiations were not looking at market access issues, but rather at domestic reform processes. Market 2
access would rather be an accompanying process to domestic reforms. The fight against corruption in the case of Tunisia is a good example. Eurogroup for Animals noted that Morocco is the main corridor of wild life trade between the EU and the rest of Africa. Keeping this in mind, it enquired whether Ecorys had considered including wild life trade in the study. It offered to contribute data for this purpose, in the case that the consultant included this issue in the model. Ecorys replied that, unfortunately, it is not possible to address wildlife trade as a separate sector in the quantitative model since there is no separate sector on these products in the GTAP database. Since the model is a general equilibrium model, one needs similar data for a lengthy period of time for all countries in the world. However, it would be interesting to include it in the environmental analysis. The consultant therefore welcomed any relevant information on this issue related to the DCFTA. However, it noted that the sectors for in-depth analysis had not been selected yet and it was therefore difficult for them to address the issue into much detail at this stage. Regarding the stakeholders involved in this process, Ecorys invited Eurogroup for Animals to look into the list of organisations identified in the inception report and make recommendations. Academics from the EU and Morocco were invited to join the discussion. Eurogroup for Animals asked the European Commission whether in the SPS chapter of the agreement, they would consider including wildlife trade given the similarities between the Mediterranean and the Eastern Partnerships. DG Trade (SMA) responded that this was not an area with binding commitments in the acquis. During the negotiation on the action plan, Morocco made clear that there is no equivalent of the concept of animal welfare in their legislation. The first round of negotiations will provide indications on the type of commitment Moroccans are willing to take. Eurogroup for Animals was invited to provide more details with respect to the Moroccan legislation in this respect. European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) stated that it was glad to see that the sustainability impact was the main focus of the study and enquired if the issues of land concentration and ownership would be taken into account in the analysis. Ecorys responded that an initial assessment of the environmental and social conditions was currently being conducted and thanked EESC for its input, which will help in focusing the analysis on the right issues. EESC asked whether in the context of the October 2012 agriculture agreement the study also focused on analysing the impacts on non-sensitive agricultural products. For example, the production of olive oil is expected to expand significantly in Morocco but it is not a sensitive product. Ecorys replied that it was difficult to analyse the DCFTA without looking at the complete picture. However, in the CGE model only a certain level of aggregation was possible since otherwise the output was too large. The 37 sectors selected could be too aggregate to single out the effect on olive oil, but it could be a product that could receive more attention in Phase 2 of the analysis. 3
International Federation for Human Rights (IFHR) stated that they regretted not to have been aware of the publication of the inception report prior to this meeting. They asked whether Ecorys could give more information about the identified risks in terms of attendance of stakeholders and freedom of expression during, e.g. the workshops. Ecorys apologised for marketing the website relatively late, but offered the opportunity to continue interacting in the coming weeks and months. The website and the Facebook pages are available now and comments were welcome. If sent by 20 April at the latest, they could still be included in the final inception report. Furthermore, Ecorys recognised the risks to stakeholder consultations as identified, but expected to be able to address them through different means. Firstly, there are different tools for engaging the stakeholders electronically. In addition, bilateral conversations had been scheduled to complement this part of the study. Civil society participation during the workshops received most attention since it would be the ultimate opportunity to voice their concerns. Working with local consultants was also important to facilitate communication. IFHR was also interested to hear whether any human rights impacts had already been identified. Ecorys responded that there were no clear results in the inception phase yet. The human rights effects would depend largely on the primary economic effects, which would be modelled during Phase 1 of the study. On the 29 th May the draft interim report would be reporting these economic effects as well as the possible effects on human rights. Federation of the European Sporting Good Industry asked the European Commission to elaborate on the Intellectual Property Rights chapter for the agreement with Morocco. DG Trade (SMA) replied that IPR and competition was already covered by the Association Agreement (AA), although it was not operational enough. Morocco was signatory of ACTA and there were no major IPR issues with this country. The IPR chapter would be along the lines of other recent FTAs such as the one with Korea. Morocco is concerned about counterfeiting (products originating from China and transiting through the Gulf States). Based on the preparatory process, this chapter would not expected to be a difficult one. IFHR requested more information on the composition of the steering committee. It further enquired why the bilateral consultations and the answers to the questionnaires had not been published as part of the final report in the previous TSIA. DG Trade (SMA) replied that the steering committee is composed of the classical DGs; including a Human Rights expert from EEAS. Ecorys added that in the annexes to the final reports of the previous trade SIAs, all feedback received during the study was available with the Ecorys response to the questions. Minutes from the bilateral discussions were not always reported, only if they were comments on the report. More general inputs are integrated into the main report. Moreover, a summary of the results from the questionnaires were available in the report. The individual submissions of the questionnaires were not, but if needed, the consultant would be able to provide more information. 4
Eurogroup for Animals enquired on the contents of the Sustainability chapter. DG Trade (SMA) replied that this chapter was likely to be based on the most recent FTAs, e.g. Korea or Central America. Morocco does not have a negative a priori on this chapter, but is reviewing their current structures for civil society consultation and wants to ensure compatibility with what would be agreed in the DCFTA. Morocco is also negotiating in parallel a fisheries partnership agreement with the EU. 5