Does anyone know or feel any better about the information about it, or the impact from it?

Apparently, it is a go-ahead in July. Not that they were never NOT going to go ahead with it. But, get ready as it is just a matter of time.

To put it very simply, it is the CSME 1/2 X 50 + and a step under the WTO.

Does anyone know or feel any better about the information about it, or the impact from it?
Apparently, it is a go-ahead in July. Not that they were never NOT going to go ahead with it. But, get ready as it is just a matter of time.
To put it very simply, it is the CSME 1/2 X 50 + and a step under the WTO.

I am still very confused and conflicted on EPA.
I think both the PLP and the FNM should have done a better job informing the Bahamian public on EPA and its implications....I mean come one what is BIS for?

I am still very confused and conflicted on EPA.
I think both the PLP and the FNM should have done a better job informing the Bahamian public on EPA and its implications....I mean come one what is BIS for?

Who tells you they know any better? There are allot of issues, left un touched and un-analyzed in this agreement.

My three pet peeve's are:
1. We did not take a central role in negotiations
2. The public is still fuzzy on "which" industries are bound and unbound; which ones are to be liberalized opposed to the ones left out of liberalization
3. Where did they get their trade data from?

This is before we discuss the impact and what to expect, from our new partners, who are the ones who created the document for us, and the ones, who are essentially our competitors in fisheries, tourism and financial services.

The agreement I read, when I had time, was not a very good deal. In fact, it is way intrusive and could have been synched up, in regards to allot of the ambiguous tenets and their version of dispute settlement.

But, it is signed. That's unfortunate. Not that I am against it [international trade and globalization], but everyone clearly knows this was a bum job imposed on us by the Europeans and Jamaica/Trinidad and South Africa.

We have to open up, but it has to be done right. Done right, and based on credible, and above reproach information and analysis.

Something, I am not very comfortable with!

JMO!

Does anyone know or feel any better about the information about it, or the impact from it?
Apparently, it is a go-ahead in July. Not that they were never NOT going to go ahead with it. But, get ready as it is just a matter of time.
To put it very simply, it is the CSME 1/2 X 50 + and a step under the WTO.
Check out the overseas development Institute site...they have a good briefing paper. I will lookk for the link!

Check these links out..from here you may find some other info.


http://www.odi.org.uk/Publications/briefing/bp_june07_EPAs2008.pdf

http://feeds.odi.org.uk/ODI_Trade

http://www.agriculture.go.tz/TATIC/Resources/Potential%20effects%20of%20EPA%20-%20What%20quantitave%20models%20says.pdf

Who tells you they know any better? There are allot of issues, left un touched and un-analyzed in this agreement.
My two pet peeve's are:
1. We did not take a central role in negotiations
2. The public is still fuzzy on "which" industries are bound and unbound; which ones are to be liberalized opposed to the ones left out of liberalization
3. Where did they get their trade data from?
This is before we discuss the impact and what to expect, from our new partners, who are the ones who created the document for us, and the ones, who are essentially our competitors in fisheries, tourism and financial services.
The agreement I read, when I had time, was not a very good deal. In fact, it is way intrusive and could have been synched up, in regards to allot of the ambiguous tenets and their version of dispute settlement.
But, it is signed. That's unfortunate. Not that I am against it, but everyone clearly knows this was a bum job imposed on us by the Europeans and Jamaica/Trinidad and South Africa.
We have to open up, but it has to be done right. Done right, and based on credible, and above reproach information and analysis.
Something, I am not very comfortable with!
JMO!

Interesting. You clearly know more about the EPA than I do.

So (I think you might have a thread about this already but) do you know what the major benefits for the Bahamas and Bahamian businesses are?

I was to a townhall meeting at the Choices dining room at COB with Minister Laing, Chamber of Commerce dudes, Small Business Association folks and some other ppl who gave presentations on what its all going to be about. BIS filmed it, not sure if they aired it or not .
The place was very packed however and too bad i cant remember what was said exactly.

Check these links out..from here you may find some other info.
http://www.odi.org.uk/Publications/briefing/bp_june07_EPAs2008.pdf
http://feeds.odi.org.uk/ODI_Trade
http://www.agriculture.go.tz/TATIC/Resources/Potential%20effects%20of%20EPA%20-%20What%20quantitave%20models%20says.pdf

Saw them last night. Thanks!


Interesting. You clearly know more about the EPA than I do.

So (I think you might have a thread about this already but) do you know what the major benefits for the Bahamas and Bahamian businesses are?

Some folks, Laing in particular, called it [trade] "simple"...if it was that simple, we would not have this controversy over international trade, worldwide, now would we!?!

That being said, from what I heard, we have had folks "recite" the agreement. That's all fine and dandy. I know how to read, too. However, when you want to analyze the issues the document is supposed to impact, you would want to- at least I hope so- take it issue by issue, service by service and good by good. I have not gotten that yet. But, there is still some time left, for our folks to get up to speed.

When it gets to that phase of the presentation, there's allot of handwringing and "I don't know's".....especially when they try to assess international trends and flows, actors and regimes and their "other" binding agreements--- like how you have in Asia in the "noodle/spaghetti bowl"....Not that Europe is that complex now, but enlargment and loss of comparative advantage and manpower (immigration) makes a different scene, and this can affect the way we do business and how best we extract marginal benefits. Simply is all we ask, is show us what you've done.....and why you've done it. If you sought to protect fish, then why did you give up salt. If you've sought to protect Real Estate, why did you give up Construction; considering the type of workers we have in construction, putting them at risk of joblessness, would BEG for more crime.

Not to be pedantic on dis Tuesdee morning, but I have not had someone, go that deep with this thing, YET. Both sides opposed and pro. We had Hank Ferguson and James Smith, say "da gubment won't sign anything it feels is not in the country's best interest"....but, they gave us FATF and OECD before. In addition, on a more sober note, people who support the theory forced compliance/reform, like Fred Mitchell and a few others, who have not realized that in this regard, we may push ourselves into a further state of partial reform, where the domestic industries and actors, we want to put the clamp on and force them away from their position of autarky. They may end up blocking crucial reforms due to their new collective action powers.

This is before I get to the agreement itself, and the rhetoric and empty clauses it has -which is ironic, seeing that the the "trust agenda" and "good governance agenda" was vague to say the least- but also to the specific industries affected and would be further affected and later to be affected, and how that plays out tot he Bahamian society in a progressive trends' analysis.

Our part of the agreement has been hidden (or at least they tried to hide it like all other countries) for the most part; I don't know exactly why. I have in reach the full agreement, without the Bahamas and Haiti specific clauses, but nothing new on what we would be giving up and gaining. Perhaps I should just do a google on this again, or visit the EU site again.

I have really turned my mind off of it, since they were already going to sign it, with or without any input, anyways.....so, why waste my time following it up. However, my mind is sharp, and, if you ask me, I will tell you no lies!
:)

I haven't really been following the details of this agreement (I know, I know, shame on me) but can someone please tell me if this is the agreement that was to be signed allowing Bahamians to visit European states without the need for a visa?

I haven't really been following the details of this agreement (I know, I know, shame on me) but can someone please tell me if this is the agreement that was to be signed allowing Bahamians to visit European states without the need for a visa?

Shengen visa's are a separate issue. But, this would be a crucial first step and in fact, should be top priority on the agenda in regards to our gain!

We have to, if anything, secure that!

Alien,

No one has pointed out the fact that the unbound services are only unbound for a finite period of time. The agreement calls for an expiration of the unbound designation. Therefore, after a period of time those protected services will be unprotected before long.

Alien,
No one has pointed out the fact that the unbound services are only unbound for a finite period of time. The agreement calls for an expiration of the unbound designation. Therefore, after a period of time those protected services will be unprotected before long.

This is what I know. This is what makes allot of goods and services, open for competition in a matter of time. In fact, the entire agreement, allows for the blocking of subsidization of industry and the removal of tariffs- patently obvious. However, if we, as a developing country, can't subsidize, we would have to put up tariffs and if we can't do either, to foster domestic industry- with or without FDI- then the matter of bound or unbound, is simply a matter of time. In fact, does not secure national domestic industry securitization, at all.

For some reason, there is this idea, that Bahamians are not being allowed to grow their own economy. Something has to be wrong with that sentiment.

We can't be against globalization, but actually show some competence, some analysis, some foresight and give the Bahamian people the relief and comfort, that their best interest is at hand---saying it, does not satiate their want. It has to be done right and gain what the Bahamian people, need!

Shengen visa's are a separate issue. But, this would be a crucial first step and in fact, should be top priority on the agenda in regards to our gain!
We have to, if anything, secure that!

I know right?

Check out the overseas development Institute site...they have a good briefing paper. I will lookk for the link!
SUGAR YOU GAT TIME TA ANSWER DEM TALKS!! DA TIME FER US TA "GROW DA HELL UP" GLOBALLY AND STOP BEING A BUNCHA "CRY BABIES"

THERE ARE SOME GOOD PAPERS ON EPA ALL OVA DA PLACE. . .DEM JESS GATTA KARRY THEY AZZES AND READ FER THEYSEF!!

ALIEN DEM JESS BEING "DETRACTORS". . .BECAUSE I KNOW HE KNOWS BETTER DAN WHAT HEEM SAYIN. I EEN GAT NO PROBLEMS WITH DA DEAL. . .I HAVE WORKED AND FUNCTIONED AMONG EM PEOPLE ALREADY AND DEM EEN GAT SHED ON MA WORK ETHICS OR SKILLS! SO LET DEM COME. . .I READY FER DEM!!!:cutie::cutie:

SUGAR YOU GAT TIME TA ANSWER DEM TALKS!! DA TIME FER US TA "GROW DA HELL UP" GLOBALLY AND STOP BEING A BUNCHA "CRY BABIES"
THERE ARE SOME GOOD PAPERS ON EPA ALL OVA DA PLACE. . .DEM JESS GATTA KARRY THEY AZZES AND READ FER THEYSEF!!
ALIEN DEM JESS BEING "DETRACTORS". . .BECAUSE I KNOW HE KNOWS BETTER DAN WHAT HEEM SAYIN. I EEN GAT NO PROBLEMS WITH DA DEAL. . .I HAVE WORKED AND FUNCTIONED AMONG EM PEOPLE ALREADY AND DEM EEN GAT SHED ON MA WORK ETHICS OR SKILLS! SO LET DEM COME. . .I READY FER DEM!!!:cutie::cutie:

Look,

Of course I can read for myself, it is why we have questions about it. Duh! Furthermore, it is not, at least, I am not against the issue that these agreements have to come, its the way in which it was done---which no one has been able to make anyone feel comfortable with, aside from the fact that "we should trust the government" and "the government, would not walk you into a path of destruction"......we have to look at issues like Iraq in the USA and the OECD and FATF issues in the Bahamas, for us to know that governments much up from time to time.

Don't ever get it in your mind, that any government official, because they have control, or, access to information, would have better and more informed analysis and opinion on an issue a any time.

There is a reason why we privatise; because the government can't assess market needs. There is a reason why academia, not only trains people but has strong research and development departments; because governments, are not in the business of informed decisions at many times. They are int he business of results, based on political expediency.

That being said, we can talk about the issue, with out the randomness. I don't think the politicians, are as stupid and partisan as the regular folks, are.