For reasons that are easy to appreciate, the word "failure" was in the air following the Seattle experience. And it is true that there was no lack of problems.

First of all, organizational problems: the delay in launching the activities, an inability to get the 135 participating countries involved, inadequate circulation of information, a preparatory process that was as difficult and tiring for the delegations as for the Director-General and his assistants, a swamped secretariat, and so forth.

But above all, basic problems: absence of a shared vision of the goals to pursue, serious differences on subjects such as agriculture, North-South relations sorely tested on issues such as textiles, etc.

The fact remains that the WTO is still a sound organization, enjoying the support of a great many governments and having to its credit a significant improvement of the global economy, especially since the Uruguay Round. It is an organization of which many countries want to become members, a fact that implies acceptance of its system of rules and obligations.

Still, the somewhat varied and even mutually incompatible projects of the Seattle conference participants highlighted the requirement for a common, genuinely shared inspiration, if we wish to be in a position to address the most sensitive issues: liberalization in agriculture and textiles, for example, the anti-dumping provisions, dispute settlement mechanisms, and so forth.

2. After Seattle: taking stock

How have things changed since Seattle? What is the situation right now?

• New negotiations are not likely to open for at least another year, but the WTO remains a locus of promise for all that.

• The scheduled negotiations on agriculture and services will begin as planned. Important negotiations will proceed regarding the admission of various countries, including China (which will probably highlight the ambivalence in American political circles).

• The implementation of agreements reached during the Uruguay Round will continue, as is clear from the progress made on the issue of market access.

• The elements of political uncertainty regarding the work programs on electronic commerce or the deferral of regulatory timelines (for example, for trade measures concerning investment) remain after Seattle, or no decision has been made about them; but it is generally agreed that caution is the watchword.

• Interest in the bilateral and regional free trade agreements is keener than ever. For many years, Canada and Europe have stood as leaders in this field. What is more, we are making every effort to facilitate our economic relations, for example, under the aegis of ECTI [European Union-Canada Trade Initiative].

• Canadian policy is clear here: our bilateral and regional initiatives complement our multilateral initiatives. All of these would be an inspiration, even a model, for the WTO's upcoming multilateral projects.

• In short, it is necessary to renew support, both regionally and multilaterally, for the liberalization of trade and investment, as well as support for development of the rules of discipline that must govern this new context.

The short term

What are the next steps? To the extent that it is unrealistic to launch a new round of negotiations this year, so it is reasonable to plan this operation for next year.

In the meantime, to optimize the chances of success of the next negotiations, we must work to rebuild national and international support for the global trade system, particularly in developing countries.

To do this, we must not hesitate to make use of the current WTO program, for this will serve to keep the international commitment very much alive.

• We must focus first on the negotiations on agriculture and services.

• With respect to agriculture, it is in the interest of the European Union for the negotiations to be productive, since the demands following from the Community's expansion will increase (with consequences to be expected for a common agricultural policy). It is also in Canada's interest for this to work well, given the difficult situation of Canadian farmers on account of domestic and export subsidies paid to the agricultural sectors of other trade partners, the effect of which is to fundamentally distort the markets.

• With respect to services, we must ensure that the rules evolve in step with technology and the new economy.

• Second, we must proceed by stages, first establishing the process for the negotiations, then determining the procedures for exchanging information and proposals, and lastly agreeing on specific timetables -- all prosaic measures, but essential to any negotiation. The progress made in these areas will lay the groundwork for more serious commitments in the negotiations. These measures will serve to create a favourable momentum and demonstrate that the system can work.

• Third, we must continue the work now underway, continue to facilitate trade and thereby enable companies to immediately derive certain benefits from increased liberalization, revise certain agreements in accordance with credible schedules, persist in our efforts to make the WTO and its activities more transparent, and tirelessly see to the implementation of the measures and concessions adopted in the Uruguay Round.

In short, this means building solid foundations for the negotiations ahead. It is not spectacular work, but it is essential.

The long term

Fundamentally, we must strengthen the global trade system as well as the markets and economies of developing countries. We must, furthermore, take into consideration the needs of those who are less advantaged within our societies as well as across the planet.

• Integrate the less developed countries into the world economy. This is a necessity.

The liberalization of trade and the establishment of rules must serve to relieve poverty while supporting sustainable development. Trade offers part of the solution to the problem we must address. The history of the development of the countries of Asia and Latin America demonstrates that open economies progress faster than closed ones.

That same history also tells us that we must improve governance if we want our trade liberalization efforts to bear legitimate fruit; in any case, it is our responsibility to learn from the Asian crisis. The economic growth to be expected from freer trade will make it possible to improve the major social systems (education, health and so forth) and thereby enhance "human capital" as well as social security. This will reinforce the trend to democracy. And by a reciprocal effect, social security and democratic life will reinforce participation in general economic development.

• Improve the WTO

It is necessary to note here the increasingly gruelling and complex workload that is falling to the WTO. Not to mention the fact that the WTO is subject to demands and expectations that are often contradictory! In fact, its agenda is expected to be a faithful reflection of trade itself, which leaves its mark on everything -- from food standards to culture itself. And those are not examples taken at random: our publics are as concerned about the impact of trade rules on culture and on food quality, as about other issues. On culture, in particular, Canada and a few others share the same objective, which is to encourage the development of an international consensus on the principle of promoting cultural diversity: it is only in this way that we will be able to demarcate culture and trade and avoid needless disputes.

To return to the WTO, we must, nonetheless, find a way to improve management and decision-making processes, for consensus is something that is difficult to achieve with 135 members. The key problem is to find a way to reconcile effectiveness and consensus. There are various ideas circulating on this subject.

Because of the major role that trade plays in the global economy and in development, we must improve co-ordination with the other international agencies -- the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and so forth. Our exchanges with these organizations must become more regular. The various policies of these great international bodies must be harmonized and made complementary. The challenge is enormous. That is why trade ministers must discuss them among themselves at the international level, as well as with their colleagues in each country and with the leaders of the world organizations. For my part, this is what I have begun to do with Mr. Camdessus of the IMF, Mr. Wolfensohn of the WB, Ms. Fréchette of the UN, etc.

Our goal for the 21st century is to build a world where everyone not only shares in the wealth, but is guaranteed good health, a clean environment, safe working conditions, justice and the respect of human rights.

A period of transition

In closing, let me just say that I believe the year 2000 will be a year of transition. It will afford an opportunity to resolve a few structural problems, strengthen the international trade system, integrate developing countries in the global economy so they can benefit from it, and improve the consistency of all of our policies for the benefit of all the citizens of the world.

Canada intends to make very special use of the present slowdown in discussions to help the developing countries participate effectively and profitably in the multilateral trade system. Those countries were clear in Seattle: they will have a voice regarding the directions that future negotiations will take. Furthermore, we will soon proceed with consultations with developed and developing countries alike, to finalize formulas for providing support to the less advantaged countries, and in particular to improve access to world markets for their products.

Thank you.

2006 - 2005 - 2004 - 2003 - 2002 - 2001 - 2000 - 1999 - 1998 - 1997 - 1996

Print friendly version - Printing Tips



Last Updated: 2006-10-30	Top of Page	Important Notices