A broad coalition of social movements and civil society organizations assailed the current negotiations for Non-Agricultural Market Access or NAMA under the World Trade Organization and demanded that the Philippine government led by our chief negotiator Trade Secretary Peter Favila oppose any such deal from moving forward in Hong Kong. In a letter personally delivered by around 200 members of the Stop the New Round! Coalition, the group pointed out critical areas in the NAMA negotiations that belie the interest of the Philippines.
According to SNR "The NAMA report prepared on the own responsibility of Ambassador Stefan Johanneson, Chair of the NAMA negotiations, which came out recently and became the basis for the draft ministerial text on NAMA, reflects a clear bias in favor of developed countries. It represents an attempt on the part of Johanneson to steer the negotiations towards an ambitious NAMA agenda. The report is not so much an assessment of the actual state of play, where there actually is huge and widening divergence on the critical issues, but a reflection of the state of power play in the NAMA negotiations-where the interests of the developed countries could once again triumph over those of developing countries."
The NAMA negotiations now revolve around discussions on three main elements –the formula, the flexibilities, and the binding of unbound tariffs. A consensus on these three elements is necessary to move the negotiations forward.
SNR pointed out however that "the heart of the NAMA debate is clearly between the aggressive push for liberalization by highly industrialized countries on the one hand and the defensive position of developing countries who fear the spectre of de-industrialization on the other hand. This is the more fundamental question behind the disparate positions on these three critical elements. The report however, steers clear of this more fundamental question and instead reduces the debate to a discussion on numbers."
Another area of concern is the limits that the current text puts on flexibilities for developing countries. By linking the issue of tariff reduction formula to the issue of paragraph 8 flexibilities, the text effectively curtails the right of developing countries to have greater flexibilities under the principle of "less than full reciprocity".
We in SNR share the belief of developing countries that these paragraph 8 flexibilites should be stand-alone provisions and represent the minimum flexibilities for developing countries. The aggressive push to curtail these flexibilities represent yet another case of bullying from developed countries that are becoming so common in the WTO" said Josua Mata of the Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL)
The coalition also pointed out the issue of tariff binding as another area of concern for the Philippines. In their letter to Secretary Favila the coalition pointed out that "NAMA would force us to bind these tariff lines previously outside the ambit of the WTO. This would include 95% of tariff lines for fisheries that are still unbound. It is our view that binding is a major concession that the Philippine government should not be making. Binding our remaining tariff lines would be tantamount to closing our policy options for future development of our industries."
"We are also seriously concern over the push for sectoral negotiations in such critical areas like fisheries. May we remind your office that small, subsistence fishers are also part of the fisheries sector and not just the aquaculture sector and commercial fishing sector geared for export. We fear that sectoral liberalization of fisheries would further undermine the livelihoods of millions of small fishers across the country" remarked Buddy dela Cruz of Kilusang Mangingisda.
SNR characterized the negotiations on NAMA as moving from bad to worse. "In Cancun, then Secretary Manuel Roxas II, remarked what has now began a rallying cry for developing countries " no deal is better than a bad deal". We hope that you as our chief negotiator bear this in mind and oppose any new trade deal that would be inimical to our national interest" the coalition said.
Contact person:
Joseph Purugganan of the SNR secretariat at 433-1676 or email at josephp@focusweb.org
+++++++++++
6 December 2005
Hon. Peter Favila
Secretary
Department of Trade and Industry
Dear Secretary Favila,
In about a week from now, the Philippines will take care part in the 6th Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Hong Kong.
The Stop the New Round! Coalition , a broad coalition of around 34 national civil society organizations and social movements, has been monitoring the Doha negotiations since 2003, and has expressed its strong opposition to the proposed new trade liberalization agreements under the WTO.
We in the coalition are alarmed over the latest twists and turns in the on-going trade negotiations under the WTO. The recently released draft ministerial text issued by Pascal Lamy attempts to define consensus in critical areas of negotiations despite huge divergences in many areas.
The NAMA report which served as Annex B to the draft ministerial text, prepared on the own responsibility of Ambassador Stefan Johanneson, Chair of the NAMA negotiations, reflects a clear bias in favor of developed countries. It represents an attempt on the part of Johanneson to steer the negotiations towards an ambitious NAMA agenda. The report is not so much an assessment of the actual state of play, where there actually is huge and widening divergence on the critical issues, but a reflection of the state of power play in the NAMA negotiations-where the interests of the developed countries could once again triumph over those of developing countries.
The NAMA negotiations now revolve around discussions on three main elements –the formula, the flexibilities, and the binding of unbound tariffs. The heart of the NAMA debate however is clearly between the aggressive push for liberalization by highly industrialized countries on the one hand and the defensive position of developing countries who fear the spectre of de-industrialization on the other hand. This is the more fundamental question behind the disparate positions on these three critical elements. The report however, steers clear of this more fundamental question and instead reduces the debate to a discussion on numbers.
Another area of concern is the limits that the current text puts on flexibilities for developing countries. By linking the issue of tariff reduction formula to the issue of paragraph 8 flexibilities, the text effectively curtails the right of developing countries to have greater flexibilities under the principle of "less than full reciprocity". We share the belief of developing countries that these paragraph 8 flexibilites should be stand-alone provisions and represent the minimum flexibilities for developing countries.
The issue of tariff binding is also very critical. As you very well know, 39 % of our non-agricultural tariff lines remain unbound. NAMA would force us to bind these tariff lines previously outside the ambit of the WTO. This would include 95% of tariff lines for fisheries that are still unbound. It is our view that binding is a major concession that the Philippine government should not be making. Binding our remaining tariff lines would be tantamount to closing our policy options for future development of our industries.
We are also seriously concern over the push for sectoral negotiations in such critical areas like fisheries. May we remind your office that small, subsistence fishers are also part of the fisheries sector and not just the aquaculture sector and commercial fishing sector geared for export. We fear that sectoral liberalization of fisheries would further undermine the livelihoods of millions of small fishers across the country.
We feel that the negotiations on NAMA have gone from bad to worse. In Cancun, then Secretary Manuel Roxas II, remarked what has now began a rallying cry for developing countries " no deal is better than a bad deal". We hope that you as our chief negotiator bear this in mind and oppose any new trade deal that would be inimical to our national interest.
Signed
STOP THE NEW ROUND! COALITION
Action for Economic Reforms (AER), Akbayan! Citizens Party, Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL), Alternate Forum for Research in Mindanao (AFRIM), Alab –Katipunan, AR Now!, Bayanihan International Solidarity Secretariat, Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino (BMP), Bukluran sa ikauunlad ng sosyalistang isip at gawa (BISIG), Center for Agrarian Reform, Empowerment and Transformation (CARET), Coalition Against Trafficking of Women (CATW), Confederation of Independent Unions in the Public Sector (CIU), Focus on the Global South, Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC), Global Network-Philippines, Greenpeace Southeast Asia, Integrated Rural Development Foundation (IRDF), Isis International, Kalayaan, Katapat, Kilusang Mangingisda (KM), Kilusan para sa Pambansang Demokrasya (KPD), Kilusang Makabansang Ekonomiya (KME), Labor Education and Research Network (LEARN), Migrant Forum Asia (MFA), Pambansang Katipunan ng mga Samahan sa Kanayunan (PKSK), Partnership for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development Services (PARRDS), PATAMABA National Network of Homeworkers, Peoples' Global Exchange (PGX), Philippine Network of Rural Development Institutes (Philnet-RDI), Philippine Peasant Institute (PPI), Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement (PRRM), Rural Enlightenment and Accretion in Philippine Society (REAPS), Sandigan at Ugnayan ng Magbubukid sa Pilipinas (SUMAPI), Sanlakas, Sarilaya, Southeast Asia Regional Initiatives for Community Empowerment (SEARICE), Tambuyog Development Center (TDC), WomanHealth Philippines Individuals:Jessica Reyes-Cantos, Prof. Rene Ofreneo, Prof. Miriam Coronel Ferrer, Prof. Perlita Frago , Verna Dinah Viajar, Sharon Quinsaat, Provincial and Regional Formations: SNR- Batangas, SNR-Cebu, SNR-Nueva Ecija, SNR-Mindanao
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comment here: