Transcript
8 June 2009
Door Stop Interview, Bali, Indonesia
Subjects: Cairns Group Ministerial Meeting; Special Safeguard Mechanism; Export Subsidies; Doha Round; G20; Australia-Indonesia FTA; Beef Exports
SIMON CREAN: We've had very good discussions today, including with the Director-General of the WTO, as to what the options are for going forward. And also, we've had our dialogue with the the US Trade Representative, Ambassador Ron Kirk. I'm meeting later today with India and the other special guests, but so far there is a clear commitment on the part of the Cairns Group and of Ambassador Kirk to re-engage at official level before the summer break to try and bring this round to a conclusion. There's a very strong desire to conclude the round, there's a realisation that there's a number of issues to be resolved. But what is emerging is a preparedness to embrace a clear direction to our officials to work to resolve those differences and for us as Ministers to keep meeting on a regular basis to review the progress of that work and to intervene to address any logjams. This is a very important development, in our view, and we'll wait and see what the final outcome is this afternoon, but that seems to be the clear direction of the meeting so far.
QUESTION: What's the prospect of resolving the special safeguard mechanism?
SIMON CREAN: Well, that's the key to resolving the modalities question. We've been negotiating now for seven years. There's been a lot of work go in. There are issues that still have to be resolved, but, quite frankly, some of them can only be resolved if there is a greater intensity of negotiation at the bilateral and the plurilateral level. There still are issues that need to be resolved and can be resolved through the multilateral framework, but until we're also then prepared to engage through other mechanisms to resolve outstanding differences, or to address uncertainties, or to engage in serious negotiations, we won't conclude it. There's been a very good discussion, not just about the issues still to be resolved, but the processes and the options for resolving them. The fact that we're having discussion about content as well as process, I think, is a reflection of the determination that we're all undertaking seriously to try and move ourselves forward. This is the first political gathering since the G20 mandate. And it won't be the last. There are meetings scheduled with Trade Ministers around the OECD meetings in Paris, there is the G8 meeting in July, there are the APEC-related meetings of Trade Ministers again in July, later in the year, so there are a number of opportunities for the political engagement, if you like, to deal with it. But I'm very pleased with the resolve in the meeting so far.
QUESTION: Did the US give any sign of a preparedness to relax their stance on subsidies?
SIMON CREAN: They gave a very strong commitment to want to re-engage to resolve the differences.
QUESTION: And how is Australia's commitment towards the eliminating of the subsidies (inaudible) like the Indonesian government is asking for the elimination of the export subsidies?
SIMON CREAN: Well if the Doha Round is concluded, export subsidies will be eliminated. So the sorts of measures that have been undertaken by the EC, with the retaliation by the US, and the dairy subsidies, that would not be able to be done in the future under a completed Doha Round. Now, we can talk all we like, and urge them, the fact is, we're stuck with the fact that they argue that they can do this under existing guidelines. And that's one example. Imagine where the options are with other people saying as their response to the global economic crisis, "oh well, we've got a capacity to do these things." That's why it's so important to conclude the round. Rather than continue to have flexibility to increase protectionist measures, we need a new discipline to reduce the protectionist tendencies and that is what is in prospect if we can conclude this Round. Already on the table is a significant commitment to reduce the level of trade distorting subsidy and market access limitations.
QUESTION: Do you think Doha can be concluded within six months?
SIMON CREAN: I don't want to put a timetable to that. This is fraught with danger when one tries to put the timetable. We've posed these questions. But we will conclude it if we can maintain the momentum of the political will, sending new instructions to our lead negotiators. This is a complex set of negotiations. This, more than anything that has been tried before, is so complex because it seeks to put a whole new set of disciplines in. All of them had their own flexibilities. That's where the problem in terms of the negotiations concluding is occurring, because there is still uncertainty about what those flexibilities might mean in terms of a country to country relationship. That's why we're saying that we need to engage at the bilateral level, to try and understand what the meaning is, but also have the political will to resolve those differences. Not just to clarify them, but to resolve them. We haven't had a mechanism for dealing with that element of the negotiations up until now. So what we are grappling with is how do we develop that mechanism, and clearly out of today's discussions we are emerging with what I believe will be, can be, a good position for dealing with it. In the end though, it still requires the political will, it requires the work, it requires the clarification, it requires the commitment to negotiate. So we've got to use today's meeting, if you like, as a starting point for what is going to be a period of intense negotiation at the technical level and at the political level.
QUESTION: Just to clarify you mentioned this could be resolved before the summer break.
SIMON CREAN: No, I said that we're committed to re-engage intensively and to undertake that exercise before the summer break.
QUESTION: When is the summer break?
SIMON CREAN: The summer break is at the end of July.
QUESTION: Do you think the global crisis has helped to make a commitment?
SIMON CREAN: I think that the Global Financial Crisis has heightened the urgency of concluding the round. There is no one in this room that disagrees with that view. And the reason for that is two-fold. Trade is an economic stimulus. Countries are being urged all round the world by the G20 leadership to undertake fiscal stimulus packages to inject economic activity. What we're also saying though is if you want to enhance domestic stimulus packages, you've also got to work on the multiplier. And trade is a multiplier. Trade grows faster than domestic output. So trade is a stimulus and therefore in the context of solving the global financial crisis, trade is a key part of the solution. The second reason for needing to deal with a conclusion to Doha is that it gives greater sanctioning mechanisms against the spread of protectionism. It introduces through the rules-based disciplines new restrictions, new limitations. An end to export subsidies, for example, with reductions in the amount of money - significant reductions in the amount of money - that can be put into trade distorting measures. They're the two reasons, and in its own way, out of the adversity of the global financial crisis, it has given a stronger edge to why we need a conclusion to Doha, and significantly we've got leaders saying, "conclude Doha". So we're in here trying to discharge our mandate given to us by our leaders. And so, when the G20 meets again in Pittsburgh in September, they are going to want a report as to what we've done to discharge their direction, their instruction to us. That's why we're working hard at this. That's why this meeting being convened in the first place is important, because it's the first attempt at the political level. Not at the technical level, but at the political level. It's a realisation we can't close it unless we've got active and ongoing political engagement as well as the technical engagement. This is the start again of the political engagement. A commitment to intensify the effort to conclude, and importantly a commitment to remain engaged and meeting to deal with the political logjams.
QUESTION: Were there any signs that the $250 billion agreed on at the G20 for new trade finance has actually been provided to exporters?
SIMON CREAN: No, this hasn't come up in this meeting. I think at earlier discussions we welcomed the fact that the G20 leaders not only understand the importance of concluding Doha and have said, "get it done", but they've also recognised the problem in terms of the limits on liquidity and credit, the impact it could have on trade finance. That's why the availability of the 250 billion dollar facility is terribly important. It's been welcomed by, it's something that Indonesia in particular pushed strongly for in the G20 meeting in London, and it's welcomed. Obviously, what we need to do is to make sure that it flows through properly where there are identified failures in the system to finance trade credit.
QUESTION: So we don't know yet if that's been dispensed?
SIMON CREAN: I'm not too sure at this stage that there have been specific calls on it, but it's available there for those calls.
QUESTION: (inaudible)
SIMON CREAN: Yes, I've already spoken with Mari Pangestu yesterday about that. Clearly both governments are still considering the feasibility study for the FTA. I think that there is a strong desire, based on the evidence in that report to move forward, and particularly use the platform that the ASEAN Free Trade Agreement provided to establish a new base for taking the bilateral relationship forward. But what we have seen in terms of that bilateral relationship is that it's not just going to be about trade liberalisaton. It's also going to be about capacity building. And this, I think, is the creative way forward in trade negotiations. There's no point just opening markets if countries are not competitive enough to take advantage of them. And developing countries need assistance to enable them to become more competitive. That's the structural reform agenda behind the border that all countries have to undertake, but developing countries need aid assistance packages that help them move in that direction. And that's what we've already started speaking to Indonesia about and where I believe that we can only strengthen the relationship with Indonesia. Bear in mind that the trade relationship between Australia and Indonesia, compared to the rest of ASEAN, is underdone. We can do a lot more, and both countries want to do more.
QUESTION: Did you discuss the issue of containers of Australian meat at Indonesian ports?
SIMON CREAN: We spoke at length about this yesterday, and the representations that we've made, we've been assured that this problem would be overcome, hopefully by today.
ENDS
Media Inquiries Departmental Media Liaison 02 6261 1555