• Home
• Media releases
• Transcripts
• Speeches
• Statements
• Current Minister
• Department

Mr Crean

Today's meeting confirmed the desire of all those present to try to keep finding ways in which we can conclude the Doha Round. We had a very frank discussion about the sorts of difficulties that prevent us from doing that, but we've also taken note of the fact that important flexibility in the process of dealing with these outstanding issues was opened up last year, and what's needed is the intensification of using that process to move to the substance. Clearly, there are opportunities, and not just out of this meeting of political engagement. They present themselves next week at the APEC meeting and they present themselves beyond that at the two G20 meetings that are scheduled for this year. Agriculture and NAMA are still the core issues but it's also understood that the mechanism that has given us the ability to look at the horizontal approach enables us to deal with other outstanding issues as well, in particular, services. But we've identified a number of ways forward to progress that and the horizontal mechanism is another layer if you like beyond the negotiating groups and beyond the bilateral discussions. So I'm very encouraged by the discussions that we've had today. I think we do meet in a different environment this year than last year. There is global recovery and the OECD has put out its report around this Ministerial Meeting identifying that global recovery. The key challenges are how to inject into the sustainability of that recovery the importance of trade. And all of the evidence points to the significance of trade and the liberalisation agenda that facilitates trade being an important economic stimulus; a stimulus that does not impact upon the budget; a stimulus that has sustainable and lasting impact, and on all the evidence, and despite the fact that there have been disagreements about how much the value of the Doha Round on the table is worth, there is no doubt that trade not only sustains and strengthens economic growth, it also creates job opportunity.

So, in that context we see this as an important support mechanism for the G20 search for that which is going to provide the sustainable economic recovery. We also note the fact that the G20 has signified on previous occasions significant buy-in to concluding the Doha Round a requirement for Trade Ministers to conclude it. And because of the significance of it to recovery, there is a preparedness by leaders to get involved themselves if need be. Clearly, we're not at the point where that call should be made. There is still too much that remains unresolved. But what we have determined today is to find and use new mechanisms to try to advance us in closing those gaps and hopefully to conclude the Round. So I will now pass to Pascal Lamy, the Director General of the WTO, who also participated in the meeting, to add his comments.

Mr Lamy

Well, unsurprisingly and in the same vein, I won't disagree with anything you've been saying, Simon, starting with the background of this discussion, which is of course the world economy — last year's events and this year's events. Last year the WTO system contributed to mitigate this crisis and the fact that discipline worked reasonably well in preventing any significant protectionist surges is a plus and I think we are now all convinced that we avoided the sort of protectionist tit-for-tat risk which was there and remains there and will remain as long as the unemployment situation does not improve. Switching to this year, I think all ministers — and they all mentioned it — believe that more trade opening can accelerate the exit of the crisis. But we moved from a defensive way in 09 to I think an offensive way in 2010, though recognising the dire situation of public finances across the world, not only but especially here in Europe.

Given the fact that in many countries domestic consumption will remain constrained for various reasons. Growth equals jobs equals trade and that's where the reason for concluding the Round is even more appealing than it was before. On the negotiation itself, I think the ministers have had a lucid discussion starting with the assessment that we are in an impasse and things have not been moving much in recent times.

The key focus was given and that fits with the sort of common result which Simon just mentioned. The discussion focussed on how we can move towards conclusion. And I think there are clearly two conditions for that which are open to discussion. First, there needs to be quite a bit of quiet diplomacy — bilateral, small group, the testing of possible landing zones. ‘What if I were to do this? What if I ask you to do this?' I know this is terribly frustrating for you. You hate quiet diplomacy but I'm afraid this is one of the two conditions to move forward. The second which Simon mentioned is the horizontal approach. There is no way, as we near the finish line, to keep looking at each part of the negotiation separately and what politicians will bring to their constituency, to their parliament is not a piece of the package but a global horizontal package and I think there is quite a nice convergence on this.

Finally of course we know that the next occasion Ministers will have to discuss this is APEC next week and then going forward, to the G20 for which they are reasonably well-prepared today on top of the normal challenges of the preparation of the G20.

Mr Crean

Okay, questions.

Journalist

Australia is champion and leader of the Cairns group but recent comments don't seem to support that. Do you represent the Cairns group or are you simply preparing for the G20?

Mr Crean

Well thank you for the opportunity to respond to that, because you didn't give me the courtesy of that when you printed that in your newsletter and it's wrong. I mean, we are not challenging the mandate of Hong Kong and we recognise that there are conflicting views. Some argue that there should be more ambition. I actually, as Trade Minister for Australia support that view, but there are others quite frankly that argue that what's there is sufficient. This is a dilemma that we have to resolve and unless we resolve it we won't have a conclusion to the Round and I've made it absolutely clear that not only am I committing to the mandate but as was reinforced today, no one is arguing we should unravel what has been agreed rather that what we need to do is to build on it. And so therefore it is terribly important that we find creative ways going forward.

The negotiating groups, as important as the work that they have been undertaking is, have not been able to bring us to that conclusion. Why? Because they're looking at each of their respective roles within the silo that they've been given. The creative dimension of the horizontal process, if you like, is to try to bring those aspects together but to do it within the framework of the Hong Kong Mandate. That was the significance of the Delhi meeting last year: to recognise the importance of the horizontal process — along with the bilateral — within the multilateral framework. So there was no disagreement today to advancing that process. Indeed, the Cairns group meeting that I chaired recently in Punta del Este recently also gave strong endorsement to the horizontal process.

Journalist

Is it realistic to expect the Doha Round to be completed this year?

Mr Crean

I think what we've learnt is trying to put timelines on these things is always fraught with difficulty. I think the way I would try to address that question is that even if you accept that it's not possible to do it this year, there's no reason not to advance it this year and that's indeed what the purpose of today's discussion was about, bearing in mind these important opportunities going forward. Now, you know that we had the Ministerial Meeting in Geneva last year that called for the stock take; the stock take I think highlighted the problems that we face. We've had ministerial engagement since then — Cairns, today's meeting and APEC and the G20s. But I think the horizontal process, together with the fact that the process plus the political engagement, not necessarily just at Ministerial level, has to also intensify to try to take it forward. So rather than try to find dates, cancel dates or qualify dates, the commitment I think was very encouraging today. There were difficulties — yes — but absolute determination to try to find a way forward. There was strong endorsement of the new flexibility of process combined with using the pressure points of the political engagement that are in front of us, the opportunities that are in front of us.

Mr Lamy

If the question is will it be done, that's for the negotiators and political appointees to answer. If the question is, can it be done, which is a more technical question, with my limited expertise, the answer is yes, it can be done.

Journalist

Given the current economic context and its effects, does anything need to change in the world economy?

Mr Lamy

I would say not what can the world economy do for trade but what can trade do for the world economy. That's the way to see things. Trade is, at the end of the day, the transmission between demand and supply. There's not much we can do in the WTO about demand and supply but we are specialised — our part of the contribution — is making sure that when demand is there, when supply is there, that transmission works well. That there's no barrier, no restriction or lack of trade finance, which is why we've stepped in to this debate.

I think if you look at the world economy today, what you see is that the main sources of growth are in the third of the world economy, or the 40% of the world economy, which is in developing countries. These developing countries are more dependent on trade than others which is, by the way, why keeping trade open during the crisis has been a very positive mitigating factor of the crisis.

Journalist

The US can't sell the current global package to Congress and countries like Brazil, India and China feel they're being asked to give too much. Given the current impasse and instability, how can you bridge the gap between the Northern and Southern countries?

Mr Crean

Keep persisting to resolve the fundamental difference, that's what you do. And the fact that there was agreement to do that today, I think is significant. The other thing of course is we know the difficulties, what we've been grappling with is a mandate, a framework that's been set for us and that, despite the difficulties, to still keep progressing to find the solution, the way forward. Today was an important discussion, I think, in terms of advancing this along those directions. We've found a commitment not only to keep at it but a new, if you like, less defensive way to bring substance into the process that was determined last year, because the outcome is too important to sustainable economic recovery — too important to the reinforcement mechanism and a rules based system strengthened was the most effective insurance against a reversion back to protectionism in the midst of the global financial crisis. So we're driven by two fundamental factors: trade is an economic stimulus that produces its own dynamic, a dynamic in terms of jobs, a dynamic in terms of economic growth, a dynamic in terms of higher real wages. That's the positive side. On the second side, to ensure that we strengthen the insurance policy, the insurance policy has stood us in good stead, and strengthening that insurance is desirable in its own right.

ENDS

Media inquiries

• Trade Minister's Office: (02) 6277 7420
• Departmental Media Liaison: (02) 6261 1555