Parliamentary Conference on the WTO
Annual 2011 Session
21-22 March 2011, WTO Headquarters, Geneva
Summary of Discussions
DEBATE ON SUBSTANTIVE THEME (A):
Multilateralism in midst of rising tide of bilateral and regional trade pacts
Senator Luis Alberto Heber (Uruguay),
Mr. Paul Rübig, Member of the European Parliament and Mrs. Ditte
Juul-Joergensen, acting Director, WTO Affairs, Directorate-General for Trade,
European Commission provided statements on the topic and a debate followed.
As the international trading system
looks increasingly fragmented and multi-layered, the question is to know if
regional trade agreements and bilateral arrangements present a challenge to the
credibility and viability of the WTO. Generally, parliamentarians agreed that
there has been an increase in bilateral and regional agreements because of the
protracted WTO negotiations. However, the Multilateral Trade System (MTS)
remains the preferred option for many since it allows small countries to be
treated equally, and it is a better forum to address certain topics such as
trade distorting subsidies.
For some participants it is better to
control bilateral agreements than to delay them. While the MST must remain the
foundation for global trade, many parliamentarians indicated that bilateral and
regional agreements are here to stay. They must not be seen as obstacles;
rather, they must be drafted in a way that makes them complementary to the MTS.
A good bilateral agreement must be ambitious (comprehensive in terms of products)
and in compliance with WTO rules.
Nevertheless, some participants have
cautioned that the longer the Doha negotiations last, the more credibility the
MTS loses. For those participants, a reason why regionalism has not been a
problem is that the MTS has remained solid during the recent economic
downturn. Yet, a side effect of the proliferation of bilateral agreements may
be a diminished interest in the MTS, and one way to slow down this movement is
a successful conclusion of the Doha negotiations.
DEBATE ON SUBSTANTIVE THEME (B):
Rebalancing the rules of MTS in favour of the poor
Mr. Lormus Bundhoo, MP (Mauritius), Mr.
Helmut Scholz, Member of the European Parliament, and Ambassador Anthony Mothae
Maruping (Lesotho), Chairman of the WTO Committee on Trade and Development
provided statements on the topic and a debate followed.
The objective of development, with
particular focus on trade-related needs of the least developed countries, is
central to the Doha Development Agenda, which seeks to redress asymmetries and
imbalances affecting these countries. Despite the promise made at the start of
the Doha Round, tangible results in the area of development are yet to be seen.
The discussions focused on reforms necessary to ensure that developing
countries can benefit from the increase of their share of world trade.
Participants proposed various solutions, but for many, trying to create a level
playing field and expecting that developing countries will catch up must not be
the only solution.
Senator Frank Mahovlich highlighted
Canada’s current policy of duty-free, quota-free (DFQF) for least developing
countries as one of the most far-reaching in terms of eligible countries,
product coverage, rules of origin and ease of administration. According to some
participants, DFQF policies are important but there is also a need to reduce
non tariff barriers and to ease the rules of origin. Other suggested that DFQF
policies for 99% of products are not enough if they are not opened to services.
Participants also suggested other
solutions including:
·Better policy coherence between trade and other
issues such as labour or environmental issues, and between agreements;
·A more democratic global monetary system;
·Policies to help developing countries wean themselves
from custom duties as their main source of revenue;
·Increased aid for trade commitments; and,
·A resolution of the cotton issue.
DIALOGUE WITH WTO NEGOTIATORS: Trade and sustainable
development: From collision to cohesion
Ambassador Manuel A.J. Teehankee
(Philippines), Chairman of the Special Session of the WTO Committee on Trade
and Environment, Ambassador David Walker (New Zealand), Chairman of the Special
Session on Agriculture, Ambassador Hiswani Harun (Malaysia), Chairperson of the
WTO Committee on Trade and Environment, and Mr. Bruce Christie, Deputy
Permanent Representative of Canada to the WTO provided statements and answered
questions from the floor.
Sustainable development is at the core
of the WTO's mission. However, the pace of negotiations under the Doha mandate
related to the environment leaves much to be desired and appears to be linked
to progress on other negotiation tracks. Panelists pondered on the linkage
between the need to promote international trade and sustainable development.
Issues that were addressed include:
·The environmental dimension of the Doha round of
negotiations (for example, the environmental impacts of fish subsidies);
·The relationships between WTO rules and
multilateral environmental agreements;
·The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete
the Ozone Layer. The protocol was held up as an environmental agreement that
did not affect trade negatively;
·Trade being part of the solution to sustainable
development, notably through comparative advantages (production occurs where it
makes more economic sense, particularly where resources are most available);
and,
·Reducing barriers to trade on environmental
goods.
HEARING WITH THE WTO DIRECTOR GENERAL
Mr. Pascal Lamy, Director General of
the WTO made a presentation and answered question from the floor.
Mr. Lamy first gave a brief overview of
the state of play of the negotiations. According to Mr. Lamy, the rule based
aspect of the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) is as valuable as the market access
aspect, but the discipline on fisheries and the special safeguard mechanism in
agriculture are some of the trickiest remaining issues. The next step for the
chairs of the negotiating groups is to capture the level of progress thus far
in draft texts by the end of April 2011. This would provide a picture of the
remaining gaps, and a tool to move into a more horizontal phase of
negotiations.
Mr. Lamy then highlighted the many
reasons why countries should conclude the round: It would boost the global
economy, give a vote of confidence to the multilateral trade system, and
confirm the value of the WTO as an insurance policy against protectionism. He
views the WTO as a catalyst of trust and unity that contributes to a stable
world. He also pointed to the benefits of trade for food security (free movement
of food from surplus to deficit areas), climate change (exchange of tradable
green technology), and for least developed countries (aid for trade). He
indicated that the DDA is as relevant today as it was 10 years ago when it was
launched, and asked parliamentarians to assist in its conclusion. . Mr. Lamy
then answered questions on the following issues:
·The current round of negotiations: Mr. Lamy
highlighted what has currently been agreed upon i.e. 97% of tariff lines will
be duty-free quota-free for products originating from least developed
countries, and export subsidies will be eliminated. He stressed that there is
no plan B if the DDA fails. He also indicated that many countries are waiting
to become members of the WTO, and that a successful resolution of the DDA would
make it more desirable for countries to join the WTO.
·The current WTO rules: Mr. Lamy discussed how
the WTO system might affect domestic regulations regarding emerging issues such
as cloned animals, carbon tax and other domestic taxation policies. He stressed
the importance of the dispute resolution system to address these issues as they
may not be covered explicitly in WTO agreements.
·Developing countries: Mr. Lamy indicated that
the dispute resolution system is a good measure of the amount of trade in the
world and that more and more developing countries are using it. However, market
access for developing countries is one thing, and transforming that access into
tangible trade is another. He stressed the importance of Aid for Trade to help developing
countries take a bigger role in global trade. He indicated that Aid for Trade
has increased by 50% since 2005 without undermining other types of aid.
However, progress must be made on measuring the impact of Aid for Trade, and on
increasing the private sector’s involvement.
·The global trading system: in response to
various questions Mr. Lamy pondered the role of the WTO to regulate commodity
price volatility, the influence of the global monetary system on trade, and the
relations between bilateral trade agreements and the WTO.
·Relations with parliamentarians: Mr. Lamy
stressed the benefits of a deeper implication of parliamentarians. The WTO has
created various initiatives for parliamentarians for the past six years. For
example, developing countries can include workshops for parliamentarians in
their request for technical assistance program.
INTERACTIVE PANEL DISCUSSION: Connecting to society: Trade
policy-making in the era of mass communication
Mr. Jamil Chade, journalist, "O
Estado de S. Paulo" (Brazil), Mrs. Hedayat Abdel Nabi, journalist (Egypt),
President of the Press Emblem Campaign, and Mr. John Zarocostas, journalist,
"The Washington Times" (USA), President of the Association of
Correspondents to the United Nations made presentations and answered questions
from the floor. The discussion was moderated by Mr. Niccolò Rinaldi, Member of
the European Parliament and former journalist.
There was a general sense among the
panelists that the public and media interest in WTO has faded over the years
and that the general public does not understand what is happening. While there
has been more geographical coverage mostly in countries newly invested in the
WTO (China, Brazil, India, etc.) the overall coverage has decreased. For
example, the number of accredited journalists to cover WTO events went down
from 500 journalists at the Hong Kong ministerial in 2005, to only 30
journalists for the same ministerial five years later in Geneva. The panelists
also mentioned that some trade disputes did not attract the same attention that
they would have 10 years ago.
The panelists provided various reasons
for this situation. They explained the difficulty to understand the WTO for an
outsider and a non specialist because of the technical terminology and jargon.
The lack of transparency of the negotiating process was also mentioned as a
reason for the diminished public interest. Panelists also talked about the WTO
losing credibility because of the length of the Doha round of negotiations, as
well as the dispute resolution system, which is seen as a long procedure with
no guarantee that a win will give you what you want. The lack of identifiable
message was also mentioned as an issue: There are very few stories on the
positive or negative impacts of WTO decisions at the local level.
Potential solutions were briefly
addressed during the question period. The involvement of parliamentarians to
counterbalance the diplomats’ influence at the WTO was mentioned to improve the
credibility of the negotiating process. Other stressed the need for a
communication action plan to improve the general public’s understanding of the
WTO.