Vol. 514 No. 1
48 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the new date, if any, fixed for a meeting of the WTO following the collapse of the ministerial meeting in Seattle; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [3470/00]
108 Mrs. Owen asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the new date, if any, fixed for a meeting of the WTO following the collapse of the ministerial meeting in Seattle; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [3543/00]
I wish to take Questions Nos. 48 and 108 together.
The meeting in Seattle to which the Deputies refer was the WTO Third Ministerial Conference, which took place from 30 November to 3 December 1999.
A date has not yet been fixed for any further WTO ministerial meetings. The WTO General Council in Geneva will be the main forum for discussions on this and on the strategy for the future of multilateral trade negotiations.
The existing WTO agreements pre-commit members to certain follow-on reviews and negotiations across the so-called built-in agenda covering services, agriculture, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, intellectual property, known as TRIPS, technical barriers to trade, government procurement, investment measures, known as TRIMS, and textiles 2001-04. Negotiations in these areas have to take place, beginning in 2000, and, in line with the general philosophy of the WTO, should result in increased liberalisations.
In the absence of a general round of trade negotiations, the immediate focus within the WTO will be on these built-in agenda issues. Negotiations in these areas will be conducted through the existing WTO groups in Geneva under the direction of the General Council.
Ireland, in association with our European partners, will participate fully in the WTO Geneva process. We continue to remain committed to the launch of a comprehensive new round of negotiations involving a broad range of issues. This is the best way to address the challenges resulting from rapid and far-reaching economic changes, manage properly and effectively the globalisation process, promote equitable growth and development, and respond in a balanced manner to the interests of all WTO members, in particular the developing countries.
I take it the Minister is taking this question on its own, even though there are other similar questions on the Order Paper. I notice Deputy Michael D. Higgins has tabled an almost identical one. Will the Minister tell the House, in very simple terms, the reason the WTO talks in Seattle broke up the way they did? What was the cause of that? Also, will the Minister tell the House whether Ireland is contributing to the WTO advisory centre for poorer countries?
I am more than happy to answer the Deputy's question because I know she was following the developments in Seattle while we were imprisoned in various buildings, including hotel rooms, but we got on with our business.
Did the Minister have access to the television without paying copyright?
They were not charging a discreet charge.
I do not know, but I found myself talking to "Morning Ireland" at one o'clock in the morning. To answer Deputy Owen's question, I believe it tried to do too much. The WTO is an ideal target for criticism and protest and I understand the reason the protesters were on the street. I would exclude, however, the type of anarchistic behaviour we witnessed. There is enormous sensitivity about certain issues and for Ireland, it was agriculture. The Americans, and the CAIRNS group in particular, wanted to move on quickly on agriculture. That was one of the issues about which I found myself talking across the Atlantic to "Morning Ireland", with Tom Parlon on the other line, although we were at one on this issue. As trade Minister, I was endeavouring to protect the Irish position on export refunds, the blue box, etc. In many ways the Americans and the CAIRNS group did not get their way on that, so that was one reason.
Another sensitive issue was labour rights and the irony in that regard is that the western world wants to improve labour rights but the representatives of the developing world did not want us to get involved in that issue. The development agenda is something I am concerned about, as a former Minister for development, and on which we must make progress. Liberalisation of trade is good for Ireland but equally we have a strong voice in terms of human rights and development.
On the other question, on behalf of the Government, I was one of the signatories in Seattle to provide for an advisory centre for the 48 least developed countries. We committed ourselves to $1 million—
From Ireland?
From Ireland. The Netherlands and Norway were the other countries involved. We committed ourselves also to an ongoing contribution to running costs.
I will allow a brief final supplementary from Deputy Rabbitte.
Is time limited on this question?
The Minister has two minutes for the initial reply and one minute for subsequent replies.
Is the Minister familiar with the Official Report of 30 November when his col league, the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, assured Deputy Owen and me of his confidence that the WTO would be an outstanding success?
That is right. I have it here.
I do not think I used the epithet. The Deputy is being generous.
Deputy Rabbitte, without interruption.
Does the Minister handling the brief share his colleague's confidence that he can swing this single-handedly on behalf of both Ireland and the developing countries?
I very much appreciate the Minister of State, Deputy Treacy's confidence in me.
Total confidence.
I went to Seattle confident that we could achieve a result but I have tried in this short time to explain what went wrong.
The Minister is beginning to sound like Warren Gatland.
I am not quite that bad. The US presidential election was another consideration in that a debate on labour rights is ongoing in the US. In many ways, some of the American participants would probably prefer if things did not happen just yet with regard to development. Something good comes from all these debacles, however, and we tried to get it right on transparency, involving NGOs, civil society and greater procedures. My prediction is that we will get back to talking about a new round after the American election. In the meantime, we will work on the built-in agenda. We have left our mark in Seattle by contributing to something useful for the least developed countries in the world.
Was the Minister frightened?
No.
