REPA Booklet - Stop Epa

32 Tourism
What kind of tourism do the Pacific Islands want to promote?
That varies widely. Fiji, the Cook Islands and (less so) Vanuatu and Palau are currently catering to the mass
tourism market. Others have a low-key approach as a result of geography, infrastructure or preference. Samoa
and Tonga are in-between. Most countries recognise the need to balance foreign investment in tourism with
protection for local firms, traditional culture, the environment and indigenous rights to land.
“The GATS has
serious
implications for
pro-poor
tourism that
attempts to
generate
benefits for the
poor. … There is
growing
consolidation
and
centralization of
the tools of the
tourism trade
among a few
players. … The
sexual division
of labour
operates at all
aspects of
travel and
tourism related
industries.”
(Williams, IGTN,
2002)
What would they want from an agreement on tourism with the European Union?
Tourism is the major foreign exchange earner for most of the Pacific Islands. Along with remittances and aid, it
keeps their economies afloat. It also provides jobs for people directly and indirectly in tourism activities and
beyond as their wages and tourist spending circulate through the economy. The Islands are pushing an
integrated plan for tourism that could operate as a stand-alone agreement with the European Union or be
incorporated into an agreement on trade in services. Their idea is to combine a cluster of tourism-related
services, ranging from construction and hotel management to marketing and finance, in a single package. This
would offer guarantees that European firms could access the Islands’ tourism ‘market’ and be treated at least as
well as local firms. It would cross-link with any provisions on investment, development assistance and training
that were contained in the ‘umbrella’ Economic Partnership Agreement or other subsidiary agreements.
Is the European Commission likely to be interested?
In Article 24 of Cotonou they promise to support such developments. Realistically, however, Fiji is the main
destination of interest to the Europeans; it has already made extensive tourism commitments in the GATS and
doesn’t have much more to offer. So the Commission may not be interested in a stand alone agreement,
especially on the terms the Pacific Islands are seeking, unless it can get very good trade-offs elsewhere.
What are the risks of a ‘cluster’ agreement on tourism?
Tourism is the world’s largest industry. It is dominated by mega-transnational corporations that operate their own
clusters through consortiums that control air transport, booking systems, franchised hotel chains, car rentals,
tour operators with their own guides, and even souvenirs made in China. Growing use of the Internet allows
these firms to control the choices available to tourists and they charge high fees for listings that local firms can’t
afford. The effect is most evident in package deals to large-scale resorts where the only local content is the
weather, some fruits and the unskilled labour force. Increasingly, luxury facilities demand priority over local firms
and communities for access to water, roading, electricity, telecoms and land. Studies show the profitability of
mass tourism can be seriously over-stated. A large percentage of tourism earnings leak out of the country to pay
for luxury imports. Often, entire packages are paid for offshore. Transnational firms have become experts at
manipulating their loans and earnings so they pay minimal local taxes and maximise their profitability. Even ecotourism
is increasingly falling into the same hands.
Are there social costs as well?
Mass tourism, especially resorts, is commonly accompanied by displacement of local communities, exploitation
of low-paid workers, growth of the sex industry, land and water pollution, corruption of traditional culture and the
marginalisation of local craft makers and food producers. HIV-AIDs is a growing tourist-related problem.
Does the Pacific Islands negotiating position address these risks?
The Pacific Islands say they need guaranteed access to the computer reservation systems and global distribution
systems so the transnationals can’t lock out their local firms, and they want the European Union to promote work
opportunities and overseas training programmes to create a pool of indigenous managers and skilled workers.
They are also insisting on control over tour guides and protecting the traditional ownership of lands. But the
social issues haven’t been addressed.
Surely the European Commission won’t try to open up Pacific Island land to foreign ownership?
The Commission’s ‘requests’ to PNG and the Solomon Islands in the current GATS negotiations asked them to
eliminate the reservation from the GATS schedule that ‘foreign nationals and foreign-owned companies may not
purchase land, but may lease from government or land-holding groups’. One Commission official was adamant
that they would not make such a demand in these negotiations. But another confirmed that the Commission was
likely to use its GATS requests as the starting point for negotiations on services in the EPAs.
A People’s Guide To The Pacific’s Economic Partnership Agreement 63