Trade Justice Movement (TJM)
TRADE JUSTICE:
The British Government Briefing Paper of November 2nd 2005,
associated with the Mass Lobby of Parliament on that day, and
the Statement issued by Alan Johnson MP, Secretary of Trade and Industry, entitled Trade Justice and Hong Kong Trade Talks:
Response by Chester World Development Forum.
Among the welcome points in the Briefing Paper are the references in the opening paragraphs to the three "crucial building blocks" of Government policy on international development, which echo those of the Make Poverty History Campaign. After noting the increases in debt relief and aid, the paper homes in on "fairer trade" and the "Trade Justice Movement".
Labour's General Election Manifesto is quoted on the way to lift poor countries out of poverty by generating growth. "Fairer trade rules and private investment" are said to be necessary for this process. Markets open to exports from poorer countries, reform of rich countries' subsidies and a "sequencing" of trade reforms in developing countries are essential, rather than enforced liberalisation. This seems generous in intention and practical. But what is not clear is the nature of the "private investment". Is it internal investment, in which case the generated income could be expected to circulate internally to a significant extent ? Is it foreign investment, or a mix of the two? How much local regulation and control is foreseen - with respect to guardianship of local assets, workers' rights, and environmental protection?
And already it is assumed that global trading is unavoidable and normally an unalloyed good in itself. The problems experienced in the past are just details which can be dealt with.
The Section: Labour's Priorities on trade, develops the argument with points about cutting protectionist tariffs and rich world subsidies, especially those of the USA and Europe. And we know that the British Government has worked towards this within the EU, notably on the CAP.
Again it is stressed that liberalisation should not be forced and not done too quickly, but again it is assumed that it must be done eventually. This is here, as elsewhere in recent times, presented as dogma, and there is no alternative in view. The fact that local production and consumption could be a major part of any national or regional economy is not considered. The inability of local consumers to buy local goods has been cited as a reason for facilitating international trade; during World War 2, the US Government tried a different approach - price controls.
The Government's Response to key demands of the TJM expands these themes with some very welcome remarks: not forcing free trade by negotiations or aid conditionality; respecting local decisions on trade, poverty and environment; allowing the protection of farming and infant industries; and food security. But it does not advert to possible conflict between local food storage programmes and foreign aid in the form of food rather than cash.
The expectation that "the current voluntary arrangement for trade in services" allows benign liberalisation is extraordinarily optimistic. This assumes that all the players have equal economic and political weight and comparable sophistication (in law, administration, technology, etc.), when as campaigners so often assert - negotiations in this area are more like matches between Chelsea and a school team than a meeting of equals. We take the same view of the WTO mechanisms. The "democracy" asserted in the paper is superficial. The voters concerned are anything but equal, although they have found that if enough of the larger developing nations combine they can at least frustrate attempts to railroad them into dangerous agreements. Hence the recent strategy of bilateral negotiation.
There is also no mention in the Briefing Paper of the fierce and effective lobbying by corporations and corporate alliances. The text reads as though there were no plan to "free up" trade in forest products so that the damage done already by illegal logging would be intensified, in Brasil, Tanzania, the Congo and Indonesia. Even nations considered to be "developed" or "semi-developed" have communities which depend on unspoiled forests for their livelihood and culture integrity, and the whole world needs the environmental integrity of the wild resource now at risk.
To risk this is not just short-sighted but grossly irresponsible, suicidal.
There is no mention in the Briefing Paper of the damage done to Mexico by a Free Trade Agreement. Millions of maize farmers have been bankrupted in the 11 years since NAFTA. The country has become hopelessly dependent on food from abroad and on "imported" jobs which are precarious and poorly paid. It has in effect lost much of its national sovereignty. Several cases against the state have already been brought by multinationals because it dared to invoke national laws. Now Central America is threatened by CAFTA, and everyone not on the side of the ignorant or the quislings line up in opposition.
As for the disturbing record of water privatisation: we find now that the EU wants to make GATS commitments legally binding. This is because there have been resistance to privatisation and foreign control in Latin America, the West Indies and Africa. The fact that the poor majority should not have access to their own water seems not to matter as much as the tragic failure of corporations to see a profit on their investments.
The good intentions and diplomatic work of the British Government are impressive in the light of the widespread indifference of other governments. But we feel that our Government has to go a good deal further in working for an equitable outcome in Hong Kong and beyond.
Campaigners will keep on until we get justice. The just and equitable outcome we hold in view requires reform of WTO and the World Bank and a re-assertion of the role of the UN.
Note: Chester World Development Forum is an umbrella group that exists to support the work of around 18 organisations active in the Chester area who share an abiding interest in development issues and work in various ways to encourage "local action for a fairer world". More information on the make-up and work of the Forum can be found at www.chesterwdf.org.uk
29th November 2005
