Dear Editor,
This letter is response to the editorial that appeared in the July 15, 2014 edition of the Observer newspaper titled 'Stop fulminating and promote Investment', which provided an inaccurate portrayal of my position on the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union.
The editorial misconstrued the basis of my sotto voce response to Opposition MP Dr Kenneth Baugh during his presentation in the recently concluded sectoral debate in Parliament.
I reminded the Opposition member that the then JLP Administration, in which he was minister of foreign affairs and foreign trade, was cautioned not to sign the EPA with the European Union when it did as it was my view that it was premature. The advice given was ignored with the resultant adverse consequences for our agriculture and manufacturing sectors, which Dr Baugh was complaining about.
The editorial incorrectly and unfairly characterised my remarks as "immature" and went on to state that I should "stop fulminating and promote investment" in the economy.
The article missed the link between managing trade arrangements and opportunities for promoting investment. More importantly, the editorial missed the fact that Dr Baugh was attempting to revise history and, thereby, escape or at least obfuscate, the then government's responsibility for the consequences of signing an EPA that did not represent a balance of benefits and burdens between the parties. This view is supported by the fact that no other region of Africa or the Pacific has to date signed an EPA with Europe.
I would like to remind the people of Jamaica that at the time I cautioned against signing the flawed EPA in 2008, I did so as the Opposition spokesman on foreign affairs and foreign trade, having previously participated in the EPA negotiations as minister of foreign trade from 2001-2002, and again as minister of foreign affairs and foreign trade from 2006-2007.
Since becoming minister of industry, investment and commerce in 2012, I have focused on ensuring that Jamaica benefits as much as possible from the EPA by taking advantage of development resources made available from European Union sources to strengthen our capacity to trade under the National Export Strategy, through upgrading of the capabilities of the Bureau of Standards to create standards in new areas such as the services sector, as well as to improve its capabilities to carry out scientific testing in a number of areas critical to the ability of firms to access markets overseas with their products and processes.
Clearly, some of the preparatory activities should and could have been done before Dr Baugh and the then Government signed the EPA. This would have better enabled our local firms to take better advantage of the enhanced access that Jamaican firms were granted under the agreement. Neither was the imbalance addressed by the three-year moratorium. Also, it should be said at this point that the current push for Jamaica to become a global logistics hub will be greatly aided by the EPA through the enhanced access granted to the market of 27 developed countries in Europe.
Having read the Hansard's account of what Dr Baugh said in his sectoral presentation on the need for greater protection of Jamaica's agriculture from subsidised imports, I would be negligent in my responsibilities to the Jamaican people if I did not again remind Dr Baugh and the administration he represented of the flawed judgment in signing the EPA under the terms and conditions that they did, with the resultant consequences that he now seeks to complain about.
I affirm my belief in the correctness and appropriateness of the position I took in 2008, before the signing of the EPA, and more recently in Parliament to what I perceived as Dr Baugh's attempt to revise recent history.
G Anthony Hylton
Minister of Industry, Investment and Commerce
I stand by my statement, Observer
-->
This letter is response to the editorial that appeared in the July 15, 2014 edition of the Observer newspaper titled 'Stop fulminating and promote Investment', which provided an inaccurate portrayal of my position on the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union.
The editorial misconstrued the basis of my sotto voce response to Opposition MP Dr Kenneth Baugh during his presentation in the recently concluded sectoral debate in Parliament.
I reminded the Opposition member that the then JLP Administration, in which he was minister of foreign affairs and foreign trade, was cautioned not to sign the EPA with the European Union when it did as it was my view that it was premature. The advice given was ignored with the resultant adverse consequences for our agriculture and manufacturing sectors, which Dr Baugh was complaining about.
The editorial incorrectly and unfairly characterised my remarks as "immature" and went on to state that I should "stop fulminating and promote investment" in the economy.
The article missed the link between managing trade arrangements and opportunities for promoting investment. More importantly, the editorial missed the fact that Dr Baugh was attempting to revise history and, thereby, escape or at least obfuscate, the then government's responsibility for the consequences of signing an EPA that did not represent a balance of benefits and burdens between the parties. This view is supported by the fact that no other region of Africa or the Pacific has to date signed an EPA with Europe.
I would like to remind the people of Jamaica that at the time I cautioned against signing the flawed EPA in 2008, I did so as the Opposition spokesman on foreign affairs and foreign trade, having previously participated in the EPA negotiations as minister of foreign trade from 2001-2002, and again as minister of foreign affairs and foreign trade from 2006-2007.
Since becoming minister of industry, investment and commerce in 2012, I have focused on ensuring that Jamaica benefits as much as possible from the EPA by taking advantage of development resources made available from European Union sources to strengthen our capacity to trade under the National Export Strategy, through upgrading of the capabilities of the Bureau of Standards to create standards in new areas such as the services sector, as well as to improve its capabilities to carry out scientific testing in a number of areas critical to the ability of firms to access markets overseas with their products and processes.
Clearly, some of the preparatory activities should and could have been done before Dr Baugh and the then Government signed the EPA. This would have better enabled our local firms to take better advantage of the enhanced access that Jamaican firms were granted under the agreement. Neither was the imbalance addressed by the three-year moratorium. Also, it should be said at this point that the current push for Jamaica to become a global logistics hub will be greatly aided by the EPA through the enhanced access granted to the market of 27 developed countries in Europe.
Having read the Hansard's account of what Dr Baugh said in his sectoral presentation on the need for greater protection of Jamaica's agriculture from subsidised imports, I would be negligent in my responsibilities to the Jamaican people if I did not again remind Dr Baugh and the administration he represented of the flawed judgment in signing the EPA under the terms and conditions that they did, with the resultant consequences that he now seeks to complain about.
I affirm my belief in the correctness and appropriateness of the position I took in 2008, before the signing of the EPA, and more recently in Parliament to what I perceived as Dr Baugh's attempt to revise recent history.
G Anthony Hylton
Minister of Industry, Investment and Commerce
I stand by my statement, Observer
-->