Mar 25, 1998

EC WANTS HIGH-LEVEL TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT MEET

Geneva, 23 Mar (Chakravarthi Raghavan) -- The European Commission vice-president and trade commissioner, Sir Leon Brittan proposed Monday a high-level trade and environment meeting in Geneva this autumn, "to break the log-jam" in the WTO's consideration of trade and environment issues.  

Such a meeting, he said, should be prepared by the WTO's Committee on Trade and Environment.  

Brittan, made the proposal at a non-official meeting organized by the Bellerive Foundation and the Global forum, wanted the high-level meeting to tackle the problems of trade rules and multilateral environment agreements (MEAs), eco-labelling, the application of the 'precautionary' principle.  

The EC trade commissioner also spoke on the need to eliminate "trade obstacles to environmental goods services and technologies" and advocated removal of tariff and non-tariff barriers to such trade in goods and services.  

The way Brittan presented his proposals on some of the issues, and concerns voiced by Northern environment groups, appeared to imply a logjam at the WTO's Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE), caused by the developing countries who oppose solution to these questions. 

As part of the accords to conclude the Uruguay Round, the EC and the US had pushed for a narrow of range of issues, and possible changes to trade rules, to be considered under a trade and environment agenda.  

However, developing countries insisted on the entire range of WTO agreements to be looked by the CTE - including trade in goods, services and intellectual property issues - in terms, not only of environment protection, but sustainable development. 

Even the conclusion of the Uruguay Round became possible only when a CTE with a comprehensive agenda was agreed upon.  

Before Marrakesh, and after, in the runup to the first Ministerial Conference at Singapore, the CTE discussions have got bogged down by the attempts of the EC, US, and the industrial world, to deal with a narrow range of issues - general exceptions from trade rules to Multilateral Environment Agreements (MEAs), with or without universal membership, issues of eco-labelling (public and private). 

But there has been resistance, using the consensus requirements, on either not allowing other issues to make progress at equal pace or to block actions on them -- including on issues of technology transfer of environmentally sound technologies for sustainable development, where the core issue is one of intellectual property protection and change in TRIPs rules for these and/or making TRIPs consistent with the needs and requirements of the Convention on Bio-diversity. 

The EC for example has blocked within the CTE, making public (and thus creating the much advocated transparency) a study of the WTO secretariat on the question of environmental benefits of ending subsidies (agricultural and non-agricultural). 

The non-official forum was intended to bring the differing viewpoints to the table for a dialogue. 

But the format of the meeting resulted in the three exponents of the trading system and today's corporatist global economy and neo-mercantalism of powerful countries -- the WTO Director-General Renato Ruggiero, Sir Leon Brittan, and the Chairman of the Davos Symposium -- coming and delivering their views, but not being around to answer questions from the audience or respond to views of panellists with opposing views.  

And even the choice of panellists and commentators was such that no one was there fully familiar with the details of the WTO rules and the actual functioning of the system who could challenge these views.  

Earlier, Mr. Ruggiero projected the WTO as a 'rule-based' rather than 'power-based' system, and the increasing share of developing countries in the world trade and the faster growth of their exports, to argue that it was all a "virtuous circle of globalization". He cautioned against blaming globalization for all social and economic ills, and against seeking solutions to environment and social problems at the WTO. He also spoke of the decisions in the system based on consensus and the agreements being ratified by Parliaments, and thus "transparent". 

Ruggiero however did not address, and there was no one around to ask, how the actual Uruguay Round agreements were 'negotiated' within a small group of countries, without any transparency and the public not aware of any moves and accords until it was all over. 

He did not also address the issue, raised by many governments at Singapore, and since then at the informal consultations to prepare for the May ministerial meeting, about the lack of transparency in the consultation processes, and developing countries being faced with decisions reached within a small group and told not to upset the balance, but accept it by consensus.