 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
A third, related, obstacle is that our European and Japanese partners are stirring up these North/South divisions for their own benefit - because they also want to undo the obligations they made in the Uruguay Round on Antidumping. It is particularly disappointing that Japan has called for a reopening of these agreements when they have benefitted so much from the multilateral system. Our Antidumping and Countervailing Duty laws are not only WTO-consistent, but they were negotiated -- over the course of several years -- in the WTO and reflect a balance of interests. Now that Japan sees that they consistently violate these rules three times more than any other country -- Japan accounts for almost 22 percent of our dumping orders -- they want to change the rules. This is the height of hypocrisy when less than half of one percent of our total imports and only a small fraction of Japan 's persistently high surplus with the U.S. is covered by dumping measures. That Japan should make a public outcry for reform of the Antidumping Agreement only heightens the suspicions of our Congress and domestic industries, making progress in other areas where the U.S. and Japan has shared interests more problematic. Which brings me to a last challenge, far from the least important, which is that we need to reach a consensus in the U.S. on our own objectives for the negotiations. Secretary Daley has taken a leadership role travelling around the country with his Trade Education Tour to build support at the grass roots level. He hasn't solved all the problems, but the tour has served to increase awareness of each side's concerns, which is half the battle. The private sector has also played a key part in ensuring that the New Round agenda reflects U.S. interests. We must all redouble our efforts over the next few weeks. Agriculture Let me briefly touch on what we are trying to accomplish in the negotiations. One area where we hope for extensive discussion is, as I mentioned, agriculture. We must have comprehensive reforms. The current system of tariffs and subsidies perpetuates starvation in the midst of plenty. Only open markets will ensure the variety of foods that will provide security and stability in food supplies throughout the world. We will specifically call for substantial reductions in domestic price supports, and for eliminating all export subsidies and prohibiting them in the future. We will also seek to lower and bind tariffs and to improve the administration of tariff-rate quotas. And we are calling for stronger controls on the operation of state trading operations. Another particular concern of ours is agricultural biotechnology. Biotech products have been capturing an increasing share of agricultural markets because of their benefits. They reduce the need for harmful chemical pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and fertilizers. They resist drought. They make farmers' lives healthier and easier in a number of ways, and hold similar health and convenience benefits for consumers. Biotech could increase crop yields by about 20 percent for small farmers in developing countries without environmental harm. Increased crop yields may be the most significant value of biotech in a world where the population will double to 10 billion in a little more than 30 years. Interestingly, Europe , which gives its farmers 85 percent of the world's agricultural export subsidies, has been smothering biotech beneath a welter of obfuscatory and dilatory regulatory tactics. The EU has failed to develop a modern, science-based approval system, and the regulation it has developed -- an onerous labeling system -- has been counterproductive. The WTO has already achieved a great deal on biotechnology through its principle in the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement requiring Members to Atake into account available scientific evidence" in the assessment of Arisks to human animal or plant life or health." Beyond this, we don't know what else the WTO can accomplish, although there is room for other bodies, such as the Codex Alimentarius Commission and the Food and Agriculture Organization to do more. But the issue is so important -- in my view along with e-commerce one of the two most important trade issues of the coming century -- that we will strongly raise the issue of the need for transparent, predictable and timely regulations for approval and trading of biotech products. E-Commerce Electronic commerce is, as I said, the other dominant trade issue of the next century. By 2006 almost half of the U.S. workforce will be employed by industries that are either major producers or intensive users of IT technology, according to a recent DOC study. We are seeing these changes every day even on a local level. The Lehigh Valley in Pennsylvania -- whose economic woes were immortalized by the singer Billy Joel in his angry 1982 ballad -- is now a high-technology phoenix rising on the steel shards of Easton , Bethlehem and Allentown . Four years ago, the unemployment rate was 7.7 percent. Now it s 3.7 percent, with 65 high-tech companies moving there over the last five years, representing 38,500 jobs. As we move into the next century, I predict we will see the same kind of transformation in the developing world. Our goal at the WTO is to insure that the Internet continues to be an engine of economic prosperity in the US and around the world. Specifically, the US is seeking to extend the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions, ensure that WTO members take no action to inhibit the growth of e-commerce, and ensure that developing countries benefit from the expansion of e-commerce. Unfortunately, there are some countries that want to stand in the way. Most troubling is a proposal tabled by the EU - a group of developed countries experiencing substantial economic gains from e-commmerce. In exchange for its support of the moratorium, the EU is pressing for agreement on several principles which could pave the way for duties and a burdensome regulatory regime. For example, the EU wants to label all electronic deliveries as services, which would allow them to restrict market access of audio-visual transmissions and possibly even software.
|