Questions and answers

Transcription

1 GSP+ Report on sustainability, human rights and good governance Questions and answers What are the countries subject to EU monitoring? The report covers 14 countries that benefited from GSP+ preferences in 2014 and 2015: Armenia, Bolivia, Cabo Verde, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Georgia, Guatemala, Mongolia, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and the Philippines. Six countries analysed in the report have now exited the GSP+ arrangement. Those are Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panama, and Peru. For the future monitoring, the EU will continue engaging with them on the basis of sustainable development provisions in the free trade agreements that they have concluded with the EU. What are the areas to which the monitoring applies? The report includes detailed assessment of each country's progress and shortcomings as regards implementation of 27 international conventions: Seven conventions on human rights, including prohibition of genocide, torture, and discrimination, respect of women, children, and minorities' rights, freedom of expression and association, the right to a fair trial, and judicial independence. Eight fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organisation, including conventions prohibiting forced and child labour, ensuring workers' rights to collectively organise and bargain, and further two conventions that protect workers from discrimination at work, and ensure that women and men receive the same remuneration for work of equal value; Eight conventions on environmental protection and climate change including monitoring of hazardous waste and harmful pollutants, safeguard of biodiversity and endangered species, as well as UN commitments to tackle climate change; As regards good governance, the UN Convention against corruption, as well as three UN conventions seeking to control illegal drugs. 28 /01/2016

2 Who has been involved in the preparation of the report on the GSP+? This technical report on the effects of the GSP+ has been jointly produced by the European Commission and the European External Action Service. As a starting point, the Commission has taken the reports by the conventions' international monitoring bodies, which have been carefully prepared and verified by experts from the monitoring bodies themselves. Additional information has also been directly received from beneficiary authorities themselves, civil society, European Parliament, EU Member States, and local EU delegations. As with all GSP+ monitoring, civil society plays a crucial role. International and local organisations have provided a great deal of information on the practical effects of the GSP+, including beneficiaries' implementation of the conventions. As part of the GSP+ monitoring process, civil society is encouraged to submit information to the Commission at any time. EU Member States have had the opportunity to steer the report's production and development through the Council Working Group on GSP, and the European Commission's Expert Group on GSP. Member States' representations in GSP+ beneficiary countries have worked closely and shared information with EU delegations. Finally, the European Parliament's Committee on International Trade (INTA) leads parliamentary scrutiny of the report. What is the final conclusion of the report? Formulating final conclusions for all countries together would be difficult. The problems the EU wants to tackle via GSP+ are complex and require several steps to be solved. For instance, at present, creation of appropriate institutions responsible for implementation of the conventions, even if in itself does not solve the problems, is one of the necessary steps. Also, each beneficiary seeks to meet its GSP+ commitments in its individual context facing different issues, challenges, and constraints. Ranking or comparing their performances of different countries against each other would not be appropriate or constructive. The report therefore draws separate conclusions on the progress and challenges for each beneficiary on implementing each group of conventions relevant to the GSP+. 2

3 How does the GSP+ report fit with the existing GSP+ monitoring process? How does this monitoring process work? The GSP+ report is a key part of the ongoing GSP+ monitoring process. GSP+ monitoring seeks to create a cooperative and willing environment among beneficiaries in order to encourage progress on the effective implementation of the international conventions. This allows the benefits of the GSP+ to be maximised, assisting developing countries to meet their sustainable development and good governance commitments. The monitoring mechanism involves two interrelated tools. The first is the "scorecard", an annual exchange of information on beneficiaries' shortcomings on each of the 27 conventions, as identified in particular by the international monitoring bodies. Beneficiaries are encouraged to provide information on their progress against the shortcomings, and details of future plans. Responses to this GSP+ report will be welcomed through their replies to the next scorecards. The second tool is the "GSP+ dialogue". This is a close engagement between the EU and the beneficiary countries to support them to tackle their shortcomings, discuss difficulties, and recognise progress made. The GSP+ dialogue seeks to build a relationship based on trust and cooperation, and makes use of existing bilateral fora (e.g. on trade, human rights, and labour rights). The exact objectives of GSP+ monitoring vary between beneficiaries. It is essential that beneficiaries' challenges and achievements are seen in their own national contexts. GSP+ monitoring takes place over two-year cycles. This GSP+ report summarises the effects of the first monitoring period, running from 2014 to A further report will be published at the end of the second reporting period, in late What's the expected follow up on the GSP+ report? Will the beneficiary countries have a chance to provide their reactions? The contents of the report are likely to be familiar to beneficiary countries. The report is the result of two years of close collaboration between beneficiaries and the EU. It is largely based on information provided by beneficiaries to international monitoring bodies, or by beneficiaries directly to the EU. However, the beneficiary countries will have a chance to respond to the report as part of the ongoing GSP+ monitoring process. The Commission will particularly encourage the beneficiaries' responses to the areas the report highlights for improvement, including future plans and envisaged actions. A formalised exchange of information (the "scorecard" process) will take place in spring

4 How will the GSP+ monitoring develop over the next two years? The Commission plans to further strengthen the GSP+ monitoring process though a closer dialogue with beneficiary countries. This could include more frequent monitoring missions to beneficiary countries, and greater contact with civil society. During the next monitoring period, the Commission will focus on ensuring that beneficiaries are able to make the best use of the administrative and institutional structures they have set up during this period, in order to deliver concrete and tangible results against their commitments on the international conventions. What happens if a GSP+ beneficiary does not meet its commitments? The GSP+ report is a summary of how beneficiary countries have performed over the first monitoring period. For many beneficiaries, during this first reporting period, the first step has been to establish the internal procedures enabling their compliance with the GSP+ obligations. Following this, the Commission will focus on helping them ensure that these structures deliver concrete progress in implementing the international conventions. However, beneficiaries must demonstrate a positive record of compliance with the commitments made upon entry into the GSP+. Under the GSP Regulation, if at any time the Commission has reasonable doubt that a beneficiary is not respecting its binding undertaking to comply with the reporting obligations under the international conventions, or to cooperate with the relevant monitoring bodies and the Commission, or to maintain ratification and ensure the effective implementation of the relevant international conventions, then the Commission shall open an investigation into whether a beneficiary is complying with its GSP+ undertaking. Following this investigation, GSP+ preferences may be temporarily withdrawn, until the beneficiary demonstrates compliance with the GSP+ commitments. How does this report fit in the overall monitoring of GSP implementation? The Commission is publishing two separate reports in January The main GSP Report provides an overview of the effects of the reformed Scheme, in particular its three arrangements in 2014 and 2015 the Standard GSP, the GSP+, and the Everything But Arms arrangements. The technical report (the "Staff Working Document") focuses on the functioning of the GSP+, following the first period of enhanced GSP+ monitoring, which took place from January 2014 to December It has been jointly prepared with the European External Action Service (EEAS). The Commission will publish a further report on the application of the GSP by the end of 2017, which will include a detailed analysis of all three arrangements. It will take into account the implications of the scheme for the development, trade and financial needs of its beneficiaries, based on a detailed economic analysis. The Commission will consider the rationale for reviewing the scheme, and 4

5 whether there is a case for temporarily withdrawing tariff preferences. This report will also cover specific developments during the second GSP+ reporting cycle ( ). What about the economic impacts of the GSP scheme? Is there any data or analysis available? The reformed GSP scheme started to apply in January 2014, and has only been in operation for two years. Given the need to prepare the report in advance of publication, only one full year's worth of data (from 2014) was available, so meaningful economic analysis has not yet been possible. However, by late 2017, the Commission will publish a report on the application of the reformed GSP five years after its entry into force. At this point, sufficient data will be available to enable a full statistical analysis of the GSP's economic effects. How is the Commission supporting beneficiaries in their efforts to better implement the international conventions? The GSP+ is designed to offer long-term support through its 10-year initial lifespan, and its continuous monitoring process. Beneficiaries' challenges to implementation are underpinned by long-term and complex problems, which cannot be solved within the first two-year monitoring period alone. Beyond support through GSP+ monitoring, the Commission has launched several capacity-building projects to support beneficiaries. For example, two projects are currently running in partnership with the International Labour Organisation, working to strengthen labour rights in El Salvador, Guatemala, Mongolia, and Pakistan. Other projects are under consideration. How will the EU continue to support the sustainable development of GSP+ beneficiaries transitioning to Free Trade Agreements? Several GSP+ beneficiaries have recently started to apply Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with the EU Costa Rica, El Salvador, Georgia, Guatemala, Peru, and Panama. All have remained in the GSP+ for a transition period, while starting to use the alternative preferences under their new agreements. As countries develop, a different trade relationship can evolve. Moving from GSP+ to an FTA is a significant step forward: the EU's engagement is no longer unilateral. Instead, the relationship becomes an equal partnership, where both parties seek to promote their values. FTAs provide a more permanent basis for engaging trade partners on issues such as labour and the environment, through their chapters on Trade and Sustainable Development ("TSD chapters"). Like the GSP+, they include commitments to uphold international agreements on labour rights and environmental protection. However, they cover labour and environmental issues more widely than 5

6 the GSP+, as TSD chapters are not limited to ensuring compliance with certain conventions. Crosscutting clauses on respect for human rights and democratic principles are also included. Furthermore, dedicated structures have been set up to ensure an ongoing dialogue and a productive follow-up to the agreements. Under the TSD chapters, specific provisions foresee the active participation of civil society in these structures, which is not the case under GSP+. 6