Nov 3, 2005 - East Anglia Daily Times: Small
issues must not deflect fromn big picture
Decisions made at the WTO talks affect everyone
from Aldeburgh to Addis Ababa
Once again the French are stirring up trouble, threatening
to single-handedly bring world trade talks to a standstill and preventing
poor countries from helping themselves by refusing to stand up to their
staunchly stubborn protectionist farmers.
At the same time, Peter Mandelson is destroying European
agriculture by allowing cheap imports which don't satisfy our safety
standards.
Soon, all our food will come from Brazil, while everything
else will be imported from China.
This may be an exaggeration, but it is made to highlight
one of the big problems with the World Trade Organisation meeting
due to be held in Hong Kong next month.
How can 148 diverse countries
with different needs reach a solution that will benefit them all?
It is a momentous task.
These talks started in 1996 and are still
continuing.
The amount of spin involved is truly extraordinary - no
wonder Mr Mandelson seem to enjoy his job so much!
What is scary is that decisions taken on the basis of
the highly technical and complex information presented to us really matters
and will affect everyone, from Aldeburgh to Addis Ababa.
The aim of these talks is to out trade at the service
of development.
This will be the sixth ministerial conference attended
by leading political figures from all over the world who are trying to reach
multilateral trade agreements.
But we don't seem to be getting much closer to achieving
it.
Some experts argue it is impossible, but we must continue
striving to do so in order to benefit those parts of the world suffering
from poverty.
For example, if we could increase Africa's share
of world trade by 1%, it would lift millions out of crippling poverty.
It is always hard to make changes, particularly if you
are going to lose out to some extent.
Trade is where nice sounding policies
meet economic realities and often this marriage is not a happy
one.
Furthermore, many of the changes that we are seeing in
the world don't seem to be good ones; free trade sounds good in
theory, but what if free trade isn't fair?
If we want to make trade fairer and help the poorest people in the world,
why are we changing our sugar regime to bankrupt our own producers
and put African, Caribbean and Pacific Island farmers out of business?
Some are saying that the WTO doesn't work, that we should
go back to the drawing board and start again.
Others urge patience as we inch towards a compromise that
might please no-one but could be another small step in the right direction.
Both arguments have a desirable element but we mustn't
allow smaller issue, such as a dislike for Peter Mandelson or stroppy French
farmers, to get in the way of the big picture.
