Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

Remarks by Honorable Ignatius Jean at the
IICA Agriculture Ministers’ Meeting
August 31st, 2005

The banana dispute of the last decade was an unwelcome irritant in relations between Latin America and the Caribbean. Both sides sought to advance their individual agendas but without being sufficiently sensitive to the concerns of the other. In the current search for a new EU banana regime, we again find ourselves on opposing sides. But in reality we share the same nightmare, that the single tariff would damage our vital banana export trade.

I firmly believe however that the time has now come to look beyond this distracting conflict and recognize the underlying commonality of our interests and needs in this hemisphere. Our region must cooperate and Member-nations be mutually supportive in order to progress. This entails working together rather than against each other if we are to succeed in achieving a better life for those who produce bananas. Today I urge that we extend the hand of friendship and cooperation and once and for all put behind us any lingering suspicion or animosity. The occasion of the review of the EU banana import regime provides the opportunity for us to make real progress in intra-regional cooperation.

There is no doubt that banana exports to Europe, our only market are absolutely vital for the economic well being of our small island countries, the Windward Islands as well as for other banana producing countries that are members of the Caribbean Community. For decades banana production has been the backbone of our economies. The current tariff quota regime ensures a reasonable degree of market stability and a price that is more profitable than in other markets. This is what has guaranteed a secure livelihood for our farmers and the regular income that has brought stability and permitted our economies to thrive. We therefore, as do our Latin American counterparts, need the European import regime to permit the continuation of our banana exports on a reliable and remunerative basis. What would be the use of a new system if it is detrimental to banana export industries of the supplying countries and consequently the future of our farmers and economies? This would be an outcome where none of us would be winners.

The European Union intends to set a high tariff as of 1 January 2006. It is true that we in the Caribbean need a high tariff in order to survive but we understand those who argue that this will not be good for many in Latin America and who fear that a high rate will damage their exports; the Caribbean know that if the tariff is set too low, their trade will be totally destroyed.

 Given what I have just said about being sensitive to each other’s concerns, I assure you that we would not wish that the price of our security is damage to the trade of some of our neighbours. However their prosperity should not be achieved at the cost of our survival.

Some still cling to the hope that a single tariff can be implemented at a level that will be fair and safeguard market access. It seems to me that in the current circumstances, there is no conceivable tariff level that will not destroy, damage or at the very least, make all of us worse off than we are now. This therefore is not the sensible way to proceed.

Europe is currently the only major market still shielded from the global oversupply so that its prices are relatively remunerative and fair.  That benefits all of us. We need to reflect carefully on the likely impact of a single tariff on the European market. The increased competition would result in a massive drop in prices, even if imports do not expand substantially. It is our farmers and economies that would endure massive losses through no fault of their own.

This is why some of us in the Caribbean have been working together to encourage the African and European producers, who currently favour a high tariff, to instead support a satisfactory transitional arrangement in which the market is safeguarded from the threat of over-supply whilst our access and remunerative prices are secured. This would be an achievable objective if we all put aside short-term ambitions to expand exports. I extend the same invitation to Latin American banana producers to also commit to the pursuit of that objective that would safeguard the interests of us all.

At the International Banana Conference held in Brussels in April, a succession of speakers from both Latin American and ACP countries insisted that they wanted a solution that enabled their trade to be maintained without harming the other side.  I fully support that view.  But I fear that such an outcome will not be achieved by sitting back and waiting to see what emerges from a second Arbitration.  The result that we need can only be achieved by actively seeking to find common ground among all suppliers on an adequate transition period to a single tariff - one that takes account of the interests of all those involved and secures market access and price stability. Taking responsibility for determining our future must be better than the leap in the dark, some might say a game of Russian roulette, which the Arbitration process could constitute. 

We can and must work together but success will only be possible if the final arrangement is one that genuinely preserves stability, rather than simply briefly postpones the looming catastrophe of the 1^st January 2006 destabilization of the market and the price collapse.

We as Ministers must display courageous political leadership, vision and a willingness to work together as developing countries of the same region to secure a better future for our farmers that is more ambitious, sustainable and worthwhile, than merely providing the lowest possible priced bananas to the European consumer regardless of the cost to our own countries.