 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
We hope to be able to make progress at the WTO by continuing to pursue the most trade-liberalizing environment for e-commerce. But the real key to the future of e-commerce will be the ability of governments to stay out of the way. Ultimately, the fate of e-commerce should be decided by a cumulative world consensus developed in a number of fora -- such as the Global Business Dialogue on E-Commerce, OECD, UNCITRAL, WIPO, APEC, FTAA, and others. Fortunately, the private sector is well represented in each. And it is up to the private sector to stay engaged -- to step forward and accept the responsibilities that e-commerce demands. A smoothly running system with few abuses is the way to forestall government intrusion. Services Now let me turn to services, which is the one area where we have a surplus that is likely to expand as other countries develop and demand more imports of our services. IIE recently produced a study that emphasizes the importance of negotiating reductions in barriers to international trade in services to reducing our trade deficit. You point out that in 1998, services were one-third of our exports, 55 percent of corporate profits, 75 percent of U.S. real GDP, and 80 percent of non-agricultural payroll employment. We need to liberalize a broad range of sectors -- in addition to telecommunications, finance and transportation. Health care, computers and high tech, environmental services, the professions, construction and others come to mind -- as many as the innovative and competitive American mind can devise. We need to work to ensure that GATS rules anticipate development of new technologies which can create new categories of services. We need to prevent discrimination against specific ways of delivering services, and to develop ways of broadly liberalizing services, such as agreements on transparency and good governance across a range of services. Trade and Labor The protestors now massing outside Seattle are fueled mainly by ignorance and fear, but they have got some of their facts right. One of the legitimate issues raised by the AProtest by the Puget" crowd is the concern that some countries gain a competitive trade advantage from a failure to respect internationally recognized worker rights. This concern has undercut support for free trade in our country. At the same time, our efforts to address it multilaterally have caused consternation on the part of our trading partners who worry that we are moving toward a regime of sanctions for worker rights violations. The President has called for a working group on trade and labor in the WTO, and for greater collaboration between the ILO and the WTO. He is hoping to gain support for this proposal in Seattle . Up until recently we have been one of a very few lone voices on this issue -- both within the WTO and the ILO. The EU is moving closer to our own position -- proposing a joint ILO/WTO analytical Aforum" to examine trade, globalization and labor issues. And Japan has been supportive. However even the moderate developing countries remain opposed, even to ILO/WTO collaboration. The goal of our proposal is not to create new WTO rules or sanctions. We want instead to study whether -- as we believe -- countries that do enforce labor standards are at least as competitive as countries that do not. And we also want to focus on carrots rather than sticks -- in the form of technical assistance and training -- to encourage countries to do better. It is worth noting that this is, in fact, a longstanding U.S. priority. The U.S. proposed a GATT Council Working Party on Worker Rights as far back as 1987, under the Reagan Administration. Environment New WTO head Mike Moore has pointed out that poverty, not trade, is the enemy of the environment. AEvery WTO member government supports open trade because it leads to higher living standards for working families which in turn leads to a cleaner environment," he has said. Essentially, our approach on this issue is pursuing Awin-win" opportunities that provide both more open markets and the promise of environmental benefits. Examples would be eliminating tariffs on environmental goods and fishery subsidies that contribute to over-fishing. We are also proposing that the WTO's trade and environmental committee help identify environmental implications as the Round proceeds; And we'll insist that the WTO continue to recognize the right of members to take measures to meet environmental standards higher than those required by international standards. So that, as the President has said, Aspirited economic competition among nations never becomes a race to the bottom in environmental protection." Conclusion The road to Seattle is not smooth, no matter where you're travelling from. We have domestic protesters massing at the gates, and various interests around the world and in our own country picking at virtually every item on our agenda. Is it worth it to push for such a detailed and ambitious agenda? Should we back off and cut back -- lower our expectations? Of course it is worth it. Look at the progress we have made in 50 years and look how much can be made in the next 50. And for every notch we lower our expectations, we are consigning somebody, somewhere in the world to an extra measure of poverty and misery. Harry Truman said, if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. We can stand the heat that will be generated in Seattle . And because we can stand the heat, the world will benefit from the light that will be produced. It's a big, broad ambitious agenda. And we can do it.
|