Nuestra investigación se basa en una serie de diálogos sobre políticas y en consultas realizadas por el ICTSD en los últimos quince años y en particular en estos últimos dos años, con ministros, formuladores de políticas y otros actores importantes de los países productores y exportadores de banano. Este trabajo llamó la atención del Ministerio de Coordinación de la Política Económica del Ecuador y constituye los fundamentos para el documento que se presenta a continuación. El Ministerio y el ICTSD facilitaron el diálogo entre el profesor Anania y diversos actores de la industria bananera nacional. Las discusiones con actores del sector privado y público llevaron a la reformulación de algunas de las preguntas principales y al descubrimiento de nuevas rutas de investigación. De esta manera, el profesor Anania ha sido capaz de abordar temas que aún no se han tratado en la literatura existente.

National governments, Regional Economic Communities (RECs), the private sector and other non-state actors throughout Sub-Sahara Africa (SSA) are confronted with a myriad of related and overlapping efforts to improve and develop their services sector. This includes trade in services negotiations on multiple fronts taking place at the same time as various cross- cutting and sector-specific policy and regulatory reform processes.  WTO members among the SSA states are taking part in the GATS negotiations in the framework of the Doha Round. LDCs are also actively engaging in this work, in particular in furthering the implementation of the LDC modalities (vis-à-vis the proposed LDC waiver).

At the same time, the services reform agenda under regional integration (RI) is moving ahead, with various RECs across the continent looking to better integrate their respective services markets via trade and common regulation. Regional integration is also being pursued at higher levels, such as the COMESA-EAC-SADC Tripartite Agreement as well as the African Economic Community. Another layer of negotiations are also on-going with third parties, such as the EU in the context of EPAs and the possible inclusion of services (and investment) in Comprehensive EPAs.

These reform and negotiation processes run at different paces, use different legal structures and follow different patterns. They also often engage different stakeholders with seemingly divergent views and as a result, may even work at odds with one another. With services sector development (helping to support inclusive growth and poverty reduction) as the ultimate objective, how can the tools of trade negotiations and regional integration best be deployed?  How can the various strategies, contents and sequencing of interventions be adequately designed so as to deliver the intended results? And how can decision-makers and other stakeholders adequately equip themselves to promote informed decision-making across a diverse range of sectors – each with its own peculiarities, regulatory challenges and knowledge specificities

An important initial step in this chain is better understanding of the different processes at play and their associated implications for one another. A particularly pertinent question for the trade community revolves around the role of (trade in) services negotiations and related reforms in promoting broader sector development.

Objectives

This 3-day SSA-wide workshop is aimed at providing participants with an overview of various efforts to reform and integrate services in SSA. It also seeks to facilitate an enhanced understanding  on  the  linkages  between  services  reforms,  negotiations,  and  sector development, while promoting greater coherence in the use of services negotiations and integration as a tool for service sector policy development.
Organisation and Participants

The meeting is being organised by International Lawyers and Economists Against Poverty (ILEAP) and the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), with support – on behalf of the  German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) – from the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).

The meeting will  be attended primarily by capital - and REC-based experts and officials responsible for services negotiations and regional integration. It will also be attended by select non-state actors from the private sector and civil society, as well as researchers in academia, think tanks and regional research networks working on trade and regulatory policies. A small number of non-African experts from international organisations, think tanks, NGOs, and donors and their implementing agencies will also attend.

US Trade Representative Ron Kirk, speaking on Tuesday, insisted that he was optimistic that the three FTAs would be able to pass when Congress returns from its recess in September. “We believe we have a framework for an agreement that will allow us very quickly when Congress reconvenes in September to approve and have a vote on Trade Adjustment Assistance and allow us to move forward on the free trade agreements at the same time,” Kirk said.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican, confirmed in a statement on 21 July that the trade pacts will likely wait until Congress is back in session in September. “We’ve got a lot of other urgent business to take care of around here. So I don’t expect to finish any of this before August. Still, I think the Administration should submit them anyway as a show of good faith with our trading allies in Korea, Colombia, and Panama. Then we can work to pass them when we return,” he said.

The Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) programme, which provides assistance to US workers displaced as a result of foreign competition, has been in place for several decades. An extension that, among other changes, added workers displaced by services competition to those covered under the programme, was passed in 2009; the extension, however, expired earlier this year.

The White House announced in May that it wanted the TAA extension to be reauthorized before the ratification of the three FTAs; many Democrats have since pushed for the worker aid programme to be attached to the FTA with Korea - the largest of the three - to ensure its passage. (See Bridges Weekly, 1 June 2011)

The free trade pacts, which are expected to bring a US$13 billion boost to US export revenue, struggled their way through the mock mark-up in committee earlier this month, with Republicans pushing against the inclusion of TAA in the same implementing legislation of one or all of the trade pacts (see Bridges Weekly, 6 July 2011)

While last week 12 Republican US Senators, led by Rob Portman of the US state of Ohio and Roy Blunt of Missouri, came forward to say that they would not oppose TAA - a move that would ease the passage of the bill in the Democrat-held Senate - the administration of US President Barack Obama has insisted on more specifics from leaders in both chambers of Congress.

On 27 July, House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp, a Republican, outlined for the first time a possible way forward for both the FTAs and TAA for when Congress is back in session in September. Speaking to the US Chamber of Commerce, Camp discussed a general agreement among congressional leaders that the worker aid programme would first pass in the Senate, after which Obama would send the trade pacts to Congress for ratification. The House would vote on the trade deals and TAA simultaneously, though as separate bills.

Talks between the White House and congressional leadership on how to proceed were still ongoing by the time Bridges Weekly went to press on 28 July, however.

Sallie James, a trade policy analyst at the Washington-based Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, commented to Bridges that, should TAA be sent to Congress first and fail, it is difficult to predict what might happen. This uncertainty could explain part of the White House’s reticence to agree to compromise until knowing more specifics about the plan on a procedural level. The situation is further complicated by “both sides hav[ing] fairly entrenched positions on Trade Adjustment Assistance” that, to a degree, reflects their “ideological stance on trade.”

While the fight over TAA has dominated many of the headlines regarding the trade pacts, some critics find that the discussion is merely a distraction from some of the other issues at play. Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, described the worker aid controversy as a “tactical diversion.”

She commented to Bridges that many of the provisions in the FTAs are still a source of controversy among Democrats, such as concerns over labour standards with regards to the Colombia trade agreement and potential limits on financial services regulation. She added that, the closer it gets to the 2012 presidential election, the more difficult it will get to pass the agreements.

Debt talks continue to dominate Congressional agenda

The US national debt situation has provided an additional dimension to the talks, with Republicans unwilling to agree to spending money on the TAA extension in a time of fiscal difficulty. The debt talks have dominated talks in Washington over the past couple of weeks, making it difficult to move other legislation forward.

Obama has spent the last several weeks attempting to negotiate both a series of deficit reduction measures and a possible raising of the federal debt limit. Should the discussions fail to lead to a deal by 2 August, the US government may default on its debt - a result that some warn might lead to another global recession.

Credit rating agencies have cautioned that they might downgrade the United States’ famously strong triple-A sovereign credit rating, and some market analysts predict that this could occur that even if a deal is reached by the 2 August deadline.

James commented to Bridges that, in the current spending climate, given the level of spending that would be required to fund the TAA extension, “a lot of Republicans are questioning, in my mind quite rightly, the rationale of this programme” - i.e. why single out only those workers displaced by foreign competition for assistance. She noted that this question is key to the debate on TAA, though spending and efficiency are still key dimensions of the discussion.

James also noted that the political dynamic regarding these trade bills remains difficult, despite the repeated push to get these agreements ratified soon: “What does it say about Washington when they can’t pass these programs even when they agree on them?”

Growing EU-South Korea trade creating fear that US is falling behind

Frustration, meanwhile, is growing among the trade deals’ supporters over the delay, as Colombia, Korea, and Panama build their relationships with other trade partners. Korea’s FTA with the EU, which went into force on 1 July, has already caused double-digit growth in trade between the two countries within the first two weeks of its implementation, according to South Korean customs data.

Meanwhile, the leader of South Korea’s main opposition party is calling for a major overhaul of his country’s agreement with the US, according to the Wall Street Journal. Soh Kay-kyu, who chairs the opposition Democratic Party in South Korea, stressed that while his party does not disagree with the FTA overall, they would like to see some changes.

Among the changes that the opposition party would like to see are new Korean laws that would provide assistance to companies and individuals hurt by the trade deal’s effects- i.e. a Korean version of the worker aid programme that has caused such controversy in the US.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, speaking at the US Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong last week, pushed for the US-Korea FTA - the largest of the three - to move forward, noting that this trade deal “isn’t simply about who pays what tariffs at our borders. It is a deeper commitment to creating conditions to let both our nations prosper as our companies compete fairly.”

ICTSD reporting; “Deal or no deal? US downgrade looking likely,” ASSOCIATED PRESS, 27 July 2011; “Republicans clear way for worker aid, trade bills,” ASSOCIATED PRESS, 23 July 2011; “Camp Outlines Plan to Move Trade Pacts,” CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY, 27 July 2011; “Senate Republicans vow to break trade impasse; Dems not sold,” THE HILL, 22 July 2011; “Kirk hopes for September approval of trade deals,” REUTERS, 26 July 2011; “Republican senators won’t block US retraining bill,” REUTERS, 22 July 2011; “Korean Opposition Knocks U.S. Deal,” THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, 21 July 2011; “White House, Congress Creep Closer to Trade Deal,” WALL STREET JOURNAL, 28 July 2011; “Clinton terms Korea-US FTA ‘model agreement,’” YONHAP NEWS, 25 July 2011.

There is little doubt that the country’s banana industry would significantly benefit from Ecuador reaching a trade agreement with the EU similar to those agreed by Peru, Colombia and the Central American countries.

However, the political decision of signing a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the EU needs to be based on an assessment of the overall costs and benefits Ecuador will face.

The paper focuses on how a trade deal between Ecuador and the EU could impact trade in bananas as well as the competitiveness of the industry. This study should be of use to policy makers, negotiators and other stakeholders and we hope you find this a useful contribution to a sensitive, yet critical, discussion.

Le nombre d’ACPr notifiés à l’OMC n’a cessé d’augmenter ces dernières décennies. En 2010, près de 300 accords commerciaux préférentiels (notifiés et non notifiés) étaient en vigueur. On estime ainsi que chaque membre de l’OMC est engagé dans 13 ACPr en moyenne. Plus de la moitié du commerce mondial s’effectue maintenant dans le cadre d’accords commerciaux préférentiels.

Lors de la présentation du rapport, de nombreux intervenants ont cependant souligné que la prolifération d’ACPr et la baisse généralisée des tarifs commerciaux font que les ACPr  deviennent de moins en moins avantageux pour les pays signataires. Si les préférences commerciales ne constituent plus une raison suffisante pour établir des ACPr, qu’est-ce qui pousse donc tant de pays à continuer d’en signer ?

Selon le rapport, de nombreux pays cherchent maintenant à établir une « intégration en profondeur » avec leurs partenaires. Ces accords ne concernent plus tant les droits de douane mais davantage les politiques intérieures telles que la réglementation dans le domaine des services et de l’investissement, la protection de la propriété intellectuelle, les régulations environnementales, le marché du travail et la politique de concurrence. Ainsi, ces accords évoluent vers une véritable intégration en profondeur, à la fois politique, économique et technique. Le développement des réseaux de production mondiaux à été l’une des causes de l’explosion des ce type d’accord, pouvant fournir une meilleure réglementation et une meilleure supervision dans les domaines cités ci-dessus.

La Secrétaire Générale de l’Union Douanière d’Afrique Australe (SACU) Tswelopele Moremi s’est ainsi félicitée des bons résultats en matière d’intégration régionale atteints par les pays d’Afrique Australe qui se sont rapprochés de plusieurs autres zones de coopération économique comme le Mercosur, avec lequel la SACU a établi des accords ambitieux en matière de tarifs commerciaux, de politiques relatives à la compétition, d’assistance administrative et de règlement des disputes.

Toutefois, le Directeur-Général de l’OMC Pascal Lamy a expliqué que la prolifération d’ACPr pouvait représenter un danger pour le multilatéralisme, et a souligné que l’OMC se devait donc d’intervenir pour assurer « une plus grande cohérence entre les régimes réglementaires non concurrents mais divergents qui entraînent, dans la pratique, une fragmentation géographique ou une hausse des coûts commerciaux ».

Pour ce faire, le rapport propose de remédier aux lacunes du cadre juridique de l’OMC, d’adopter une approche plus nuancée et non contentieuse pour examiner les ACPr dans le contexte de la transparence et de l’échange d’informations dans le cadre de l’OMC, d’accélérer le programme multilatéral non préférentiel d’ouverture et de réglementation commerciale, et enfin étendre à d’autres parties, de manière non discriminatoire, les accords préférentiels existants.

Synthèse ENDA

Source : Rapport OMC 2011 ; http://wto.org/french/res_f/booksp_f/anrep_f/world_trade_report11_f.pdf

Discours de Lamy lors du lancement du rapport  http://wto.org/french/news_f/sppl_f/sppl202_f.htm

Cette session sera l’occasion pour les négociateurs européens de se prononcer sur la dernière offre d’accès au marché proposée par l’Afrique de l’Ouest lors de la session précédente. Cette offre s’élève à 70 % d’ouverture sur 25 ans.

L’Afrique de l’Ouest pourrait à son tour être appelée à donner son avis sur la proposition de formulation de l’article 106 du texte de l’accord par lequel l’UE propose à l’AO d’engager des négociations avec tous les pays avec lesquels elle est en union douanière.

Cette session pourra aussi être l’occasion pour les parties de la période nécessaire pour l’élaboration de nouvelles règles d’origines, objet de l’article 6 du texte de l’accord.

Les hauts fonctionnaires qui se retrouveront le 29 juillet devront aussi se pencher sur le protocole PAPED.

Note  ENDA

El CAT funciona como una medida compensatoria ante los gastos que efectúan los exportadores por concepto del pago de tasas. Cada empresa exportadora que lo solicite recibirá un certificado por el 80% del valor pagado en aranceles en tanto el monto no exceda el 15% del valor FOB declarado en la liquidación aduanera, para el caso de productos agropecuarios, y un 25% en lo referente a bienes manufacturados.

Al usar este esquema, las empresas exportadoras podrán pagar varias obligaciones tributarias que incluyen el Impuesto al Valor Agregado (IVA), el Impuesto a la Renta y el Impuesto a los Consumos Especiales (ICE). De igual forma, podrán obtener liquidez por medio de la venta del CAT en el mercado de valores.

De acuerdo con Mauricio Peña, viceministro Coordinador de la Producción de Ecuador, los registros oficiales incluyen 1.300 empresas exportadoras que disfrutaban de los beneficios de la ATPDEA. Aún cuando no se conoce la cifra exacta de cuántas de estas compañías van a optar por CAT, el gobierno dispone de un fondo que asciende a US$ 18 millones para atender dichas solicitudes.

La implementación del CAT ha requerido el diseño de un mecanismoque garantice eficiencia en el proceso, lo cual incluye un proceso de vinculación institucional entre el Ministerio de la Coordinación, Producción, Empleo y Competitividad (MCPEC), el Servicio de Rentas Internas (SRI) y el Banco Central.

Las empresas exportadoras deben completar un formulario para la solicitud del Certificado de Abono Tributario, así como otros documentos que acompañan el proceso de exportación.

Al respecto, declaraciones dadas por representantes el sector floricultor apuntan a que la solicitud del CAT plantea retos comparables con la pérdida de las preferencias arancelarias. Según argumentaron, las características de los bienes a exportar imposibilitan la entrega de los documentos de transporte que acrediten la fecha efectiva de exportación, dado que la carga viaja consolidada - un embarque puede llevar el producto de hasta 30 fincas -  por lo que el importador tendría que enviar los reportes de pago de aranceles totales y los exportadores tendrían que desagregar la información en el Ecuador para determinar los montos que cada uno pagó. El gobierno requerirá dicho documento para determinar cuánto pagó cada empresa.

Los CAT como propuesta seguirán un proceso de validación entre las partes. No obstante, aunque en países como Colombia y Costa Rica los resultados han sido negativos, es claro que el éxito del CAT dependerá de la capacidad de las empresas exportadoras y del gobierno de conducir un proceso ordenado que estimule positivamente las ventas de bienes ecuatorianos en el exterior.

Reportaje de ICTSD y CINPE; fuentes consultadas:

El apoyo a los exportadores rige desde ayer (2011, 20 de julio). El Comercio. Abono tributario que beneficia a exportadores afectados por ATPDEA  entra en operación. (2011, 20 de julio). El Ciudadano.com.

Luego de que el pasado 19 de julio el Senado mexicano escuchara los pros y contras de más de 50 representantes del sector privado y autoridades estatales para la ratificación del tratado de libre comercio (TLC) con Perú, y después de no conseguir un acuerdo para examinarlo por la vía rápida (fast track), la decisión llega a un impasse político que difícilmente será solucionado en las próximas semanas.

Los detractores aducen falta de protección en 16 productos considerados como sensibles para México, los cuales se verán severamente afectados tras la entrada en vigor del tratado. El Presidente del Senado, Manlio Fabio Beltrones (Partido Revolucionario Institucional), advirtió que el TLC no será ratificado hasta que el gobierno excluya los productos sensibles que demandan los agricultores y exista un acuerdo entre las partes.

Por su parte, el Gobernador del estado de Zacatecas, Miguel Alonso Reyes, solicitó vehementemente al Congreso exceptuar estos productos como muestra de su solidaridad con el agro mexicano. Concretamente solicitó la exclusión del frijol, ajo, chile seco, cebolla y uva.

En contraste, el secretario mexicano de Economía, Bruno Ferrari, fue enfático en señalar que la urgencia de firmar el acuerdo ya que: “hoy por hoy las empresas mexicanas  han invertido alrededor de US$ 10 mil millones de dólares en la economía peruana, sin que exista un esquema legal que las proteja a cabalidad, tal como lo haría el acuerdo que propusimos al Senado”.

Además de la ratificación del tratado por parte del Senado, la subsecretaría mexicana (viceministra) de Comercio Exterior de la Secretaría de Economía, Beatriz Leycegui indicó que el proceso no es tan rápido como se considera, pues además de la ratificación todavía “faltaría emitir una serie de instrumentos” sobre el marco jurídico del acuerdo comercial.

Pese a que el presidente de la Junta de Coordinación Política del Senado, José González Morfín (Partido Acción Nacional), presentó una  propuesta de decreto legislativo para que la Cámara Alta sesione de manera extraordinaria el próximo 26 de julio para ratificar el acuerdo, el pasado 20 de julio el presidente peruano Alan García hizo pública la ratificación del Acuerdo, ya publicado en el Diario Oficial de su país.

Reportaje de ICTSD y CINPE; fuentes consultadas:

El Gobierno mexicano ve difícil concretar este mes la ratificación del TLC con Perú. (2011, 19 de julio). Agencia EFE. Piden legisladores condicionar TLC con Perú (2011, 20 de julio). La Crónica. TLC con Perú debe satisfacer a agricultores (2011, 20 de julio). El Economista.

Republicans have long been in support of these trade deals. However, the prospect of reauthorizing an extension of the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) programme, which provides assistance to workers displaced by foreign competition, has various Republicans balking, anxious about the increased spending such a measure would require in an era of spending cuts. Over the last several weeks, US President Barack Obama has been pushing for the worker aid bill to be passed concurrently with the FTA legislation (see Bridges Weekly, 1 June 2011).

On 30 June, Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee boycotted a hearing to review the trade pacts, objecting to the limited period of time that Democrats on the committee were allotting for the discussion of various proposed amendments to the legislation. One of these amendments would involve the attachment of the TAA programme to one of the trade deals.

The same day, all eleven Republicans on the committee jointly sent a letter to Obama on the subject, stating that, “while we may share different views regarding our support for these agreements and on trade adjustment assistance, we are united in our opposition to inclusion of expanded Trade Adjustment Assistance in this implementing bill submitted to Congress under Trade Promotion Authority [i.e. the fast track process for approving FTAs].”

The boycott came as a bit of a surprise, given that White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney had issued a statement just two days prior suggesting that a compromise on the matter had been reached: “as a result of extensive negotiations, we now have an agreement on the underlying terms for a meaningful renewal of a strengthened TAA.”

The White House deal would reauthorize the extension of TAA between old funding levels and levels set by the 2009 version of the bill, though details regarding how scaled back the programme would be from its 2009 levels have yet to be released.

Meanwhile, the US House Committee on Ways and Means will begin considering the US’ free trade pacts with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea tomorrow, 7 July, without the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) package that Obama has been pushing for.

Scott Lincicome, a Washington-based international trade lawyer, commented to Bridges that, “at this point, both sides [Democrats and Republicans] are firmly entrenched. It’s very difficult to tell who is posturing and who isn’t.” Given both sides’ firm stances on the TAA subject, “we’re heading for a big showdown.”

Lincicome added that the ongoing negotiations on raising the US debt ceiling are “the wildcard” in this process, adding another layer to the worker aid bill discussion as Congress pushes to cut government spending.

The trade pacts are currently set to go through a fast-track process, in which the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means committees both do a “mock mark-up” of the trade pact legislation where committee members propose amendments to the bills. Following these “mock mark-ups,” the White House will decide which, if any, of these amendments to keep, and submit a final version of the trade pacts for an up-or-down vote in both chambers; at that final stage, no more amendments can be added.

In a statement, US Trade Representative Ron Kirk decried the Republican boycott. “Today the agreements were there - and Senate Finance Committee Republicans were not. Americans need their leaders at work - in their seats, eyes on the ball, pushing every day to enact policies that create jobs here at home, advance this country’s economic recovery, and help our working families.”

He was also hesitant to praise the Ways and Means Committee’s push forward on the matter, “welcom[ing] the effort to move the three pending trade agreements forward,” while noting that the documents released by the committee “do not provide a path forward for the bipartisan agreement to renew Trade Adjustment Assistance, and therefore are at odds with the Administration’s stated intentions.”

Lori Wallach, Director of the Global Trade Watch programme at Washington-based advocacy group Public Citizen, criticised the potential labour losses that might come from the trade pacts, in a statement issued on 28 June. Wallach found that “pushing a deal on TAA is being used as political cover to move more NAFTA-style trade agreements that will kill more American jobs in the first place, especially given our high unemployment rates.”

Possible impacts from EU-South Korea deal

The continued setbacks to the passage of these FTAs have prompted fears that the US will fall behind, as Colombia, Korea, and Panama look to set up pacts with other trade partners. On 1 July, the EU-South Korea free trade agreement went into effect, which could put US automobiles, pharmaceuticals, and scientific equipment at a disadvantage against the US’ European competitors.

The entry into force of the EU-South Korea deal was part of the reason for trying to push the US FTAs for passage before the August congressional recess, Lincicome noted, as US exporters and consumers will soon feel the economic ramifications of Brussels having a preferential agreement with Seoul. For more on the EU-South Korea deal, please see our article later in this issue: “EU, South Korea Free Trade Pact Enters into Force.

All three trade agreements were signed during the administration of former US President George W. Bush. However, they need to be ratified before they can come into force. Earlier this year - prior to the TAA controversy - the US resolved its market access issues on automobiles and beef for the South Korea pact, set up a labour “Action Plan” for Colombia, and established a tax information exchange agreement for Panama, making Congressional ratification by some point this year appear likely.

The US-Korea pact is the largest of the three that Congress is considering. The US International Trade Commission (ITC), in a study on the US-Korea agreement, estimated that the Korea trade deal would boost US gross domestic product by between US$10.1 to 11.9 billion, with merchandise exports from the US to Korea increasing by between US$9.7 to 10.9 billion.

Overall, the White House claims that the combined impact of the trade deals would raise US exports by approximately US$13 billion.

Colombian labour rights remain a concern

While the battle over TAA extension has dominated headlines, concerns over the protection of labour rights in Colombia continue to persist in discussions over these trade deals. While the two countries have an action plan for improving labour rights in the South American nation, Democrats want to ensure that the action plan language is included in the trade pact legislation.

On 30 June, John Larson, a Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, expressed his “[extreme disappointment] that Congressional Republicans have prevented any meaningful reference to the Action Plan Related to Labor Rights in the Colombia Free Trade Agreement implementing legislation that we’re being asked to consider.”

Larson was joined by various other Democrats in insisting that the action plan language be included in the bill, promising not to vote for a deal that excludes these terms.
On 15 June, Kirk announced that Colombia has met the necessary milestones under the action plan, which aims to improve labour rights protection in Colombia, while preventing violence against union leaders. The plan, which was negotiated between the US and Colombian government, was announced in April of this year.

ICTSD reporting; “US trade official ‘dumbfounded’ by Republican move,” ASSOCIATED PRESS, 1 July 2011; “House to Debate Trade Accords Minus Worker Aid,” BLOOMBERG, 5 July 2011; “Republican Trade Boycott Derails Swift Vote,” BLOOMBERG, 1 July 2011; “Congress moves forward on free trade deals,” CNN, 29 June 2011; “Opposition to Colombian trade deal grows among House Democrats,” THE HILL, 30 June 2011; “Trade agreement meeting blocked by GOP,” POLITICO, 30 June 2011; “House Ways and Means Committee to take up 3 trade agreements but not worker aid bill,” WASHINGTON POST, 5 July 2011; “Senate Finance Committee postpones action on free-trade deals after GOP boycott,” WASHINGTON POST, 1 July 2011.