Hon Chairperson, I was tempted to ask the previous speaker if we were going to write a test on all the information she imparted. Luckily we don't have to.
South Africa should not only strive to consolidate our hard-won democracy, but also to establish an ethical framework for the 21st century within which we operate globally. Such a framework should distinguish between right and wrong in the present-day interdependent world, where power has become a widespread phenomenon. In a time of cynicism, South Africa is an example of hope triumphing over fear and tolerance triumphing over prejudice. Emerging from a bitterly divided past, we have made a widely admired transition from authoritarian rule to becoming a beacon of human rights.
Yet, as inspirational as we may be, and while our local social and economical challenges persist, it is important to note that the global landscape has been transformed. Conditions have been recast by the events of the Arab Spring and South Africa has to consider its response to the changed world.
It is in this light that we should also carefully analyse our strategies with regard to our global, political and economic partnerships. I believe this is particularly true in respect of our role regarding the Cotonou Partnership Agreement of the European Union, EU, with the countries of the African, Caribbean and Pacific, ACP, regions. South Africa and most of the ACP countries will have to weigh up its role in terms of these agreements and also the role that the EU plays in promoting the benefits that should be accruing to the constituent ACP countries and their regions.
I have stated before in other fora that I am still the new kid on the block in terms of Parliament's role in respect of these agreements, but during the last visit of our representatives to the ACP-EU meetings in Brussels, and especially at the meetings of the three joint structures that the House Chairperson earlier referred to, it was quite noticeable that very few EU Members of Parliament were in attendance. This matter was raised by a number of speakers from the ACP countries, but only poor excuses were presented in reply.
If the Speaker were here today, he would recall that during the visit that he led to the EU earlier this year, at the meeting with Mr Louis Michel, a Minister of State and the European Commissioner for Development Policy and Relations with ACP countries, I posed this very conundrum to him. His response was that very often meetings of the ACP-EU coincided with some other important EU business, which results in the poor attendance by EU MPs. This is obviously a matter that the technical and logistics teams of the ACP will have to look at. However, it is also quite evident that some EU representatives consider themselves to be in the role of Big Brother when it comes to terms of negotiation.
The other speakers of our forum will be alluding to more technical details, much like the Chairperson before me had done, so I will avoid delving too much into that field. However, I would like to highlight a number of important aspects. When the Cotonou Partnership Agreement was signed in 2000, there were high hopes that it would invigorate political dialogue, as well as dialogue between non-state actors, and in this way promote a more effective platform for development. But the significant changes that have since taken place within the institution of the EU, especially after the Lisbon Treaty of 2009, have undermined these hopes and even the unity of the ACP.
The EU has since sought so-called comprehensive, deep-integration free- trade agreements that go beyond what was foreseen by the Cotonou Partnership Agreement, causing delays in the conclusion of trade partnership agreements. ACP countries have consequently raised concerns that the EU's new approach is a one-size-fits-all, paying too little attention to individual challenges faced by each individual ACP member state.
At the same time serious concerns have been raised about the extent of administrative, institutional, legal and even constitutional reforms that would be required if ACP countries were to agree to the EU's revised approach to trade.
Another precondition, as was mentioned before, to this trade agreement is regional grouping, but there are very few ACP regions that are at that stage in their development. In fact, it is believed that most ACP countries are not at the right stage in their development to be able to even benefit fully from the trade agreements offered. Many ACP countries lack the requisite infrastructure and technological capacity required.
It is therefore feared that these economic partnership agreements - or EPAs, as they are called - may harm local producers by offering more advanced EU exporters unlimited access to their markets too quickly. All of these fears are deepened by the EU's threat to withdraw preferential market access from ACP countries if they do not ratify EPAs by the end of next year.
So, South Africa will have to weigh up its options very carefully, particularly with regard to the value of the Cotonou Partnership Agreement's economic partnership agreements and how they world benefit ACP regions. There is a growing feeling that the erstwhile Lom Agreement was less complicated and more favourable to ACP countries.
As far as South Africa itself is concerned, it must be borne in mind that we have little or nothing to gain from economic partnership agreements between the EU and regions or groups of SADC countries such as the Southern African Development Community, Sadec, because South Africa has entered into its own EPA directly with the EU.
In conclusion, it must therefore be noted that the Cotonou Partnership Agreement in its present form comes to an end during the year 2020, which is highly significant, because that will be just one year after the DA will have succeeded in taking over the government of this country, and we will have to make a decision about this agreement. [Interjections.] At this stage I cannot confirm what our decision will be, but I can categorically confirm that, under the DA government, it will be the right one. [Applause.]