ting the Maldives and other Least Developed Countries, to improve their access to European markets. As one of the world's poorest countries, the Maldives should be entitled to supply clothes for the European market without paying import taxes, but the EU insists that both the fabric and the clothing must be made in the Maldives in order for goods to qualify – a condition that the Maldives, along with other poor exporting countries such as Bangladesh and Cambodia, cannot meet. As a result, the Maldives has to pay duty on three-quarters of its sales. Sri Lanka, a non-LDC, faces a similar problem: if it imports fabric from the cheapest source – China, for example – it pays higher duty in the EU. If it sources more expensive fabric from the region, it loses competitiveness. The rules of origin should be simplified for Sri Lanka and the few other non-LDCs highly dependent on clothing exports.
Transnational clothing and footwear companies have a responsibility to defer any decision to shift production out of tsunami-affected countries. Companies, such as GAP, Victoria's Secret, ASDA, Marks and Spencers, and NIKE, source goods from Sri Lanka and Indonesia. Some might have been considering shifting their production from tsunami-affected countries to their cheaper competitors, such as China. Any relocation decision should be deferred. If and when production does move, it should be gradual, with full respect for labour rights, such as redundancy payments.
Fisherfolk are amongst the poorest people in the region. They are also one of the most negatively affected communities, particularly in Tamil Nadu, India but also in Thailand, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Somalia and the Andaman Islands.
Fisherfolk and their families have suffered tremendous loss of life and also devastation to their livelihoods, homes as well as their fishing gear and boats. The aquatic diversity of the region has also been devastated by the tsunami. Coral reefs have been destroyed by the force of the waves and are now choked with silt. Mangrove swamps and coastal breeding grounds for fish and other aquatic organisms have been severely damaged.
The impact of the tsunami has aggravated the problems already faced by fisherfolk of increasing pressures on the coastal environment from increased tourism and industrialised forms of fishing.
It is important that relief efforts channel support to fisherfolk's own existing local and regional groups and aim to support the artisanal fishing sector. This should be accompanied by a change in approach from the current marginalisation of fisherfolk communities in government and donor policies.
There is a concern in Sri Lanka, India and elsewhere, voiced by organisations of small-scale fisherfolk that relief efforts should focus on re-establishing the artisanal fisheries sector as a priority. In Sri Lanka, for example, an estimated 8000 small fishing boats, out-rigger orus, need to be replaced. The industrial fishery sector, which although an important foreign exchange earner in Sri Lanka was over-capacity and donations from the EU of decommissioned industrial fishing boats would make the situation worse.
We call on the UK government to direct its relief aid towards protecting the livelihoods, environment and markets of small-scale fisherfolk and rebuilding their boatyards, boats and fishing gear, as has been recognised as a priority by British fishing crews in their Fish and Ships initiative;
and for HMG to resist pressures to send decommissioned boats as part of the UK/EU relief effort.
It remains critical that any trade negotiations – for example on agriculture, fisheries and tourism - should not compromise the ability of communities affected by the tsunami to rebuild their livelihoods. Negotiations on Non Agricultural Market Access (NAMA), including fisheries and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) including tourism, should not compromise the ability of fishing and other coastal communities to rebuild their livelihoods. Particular attention should be given by WTO members to the right of countries to protect affected s