Make Poverty History vs WTO

MAKEPOVERTYHISTORY and the Trade Justice Movement statement on the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Ministerial meeting in Hong Kong (18 December 2005)

NO END TO POVERTY AS RICH COUNTRIES REFUSE TO DELIVER TRADE JUSTICE

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) Ministerial meeting in Hong Kong (13-18 December) could have been a turning point in making poverty history. Rich countries had the capability to correct some of the gross imbalances in world trade at a strategically important moment in the so-called Doha ‘development round’ of trade talks. But the potential for justice for the world’s poorest people was squandered.

The WTO meeting failed to deliver the trade justice deal needed in 2005 to make poverty history. The intransigence of rich countries means the agreement reached is far from just for the poor of the world.

The positions taken by the major developed countries in Hong Kong favoured the rich over the interests of the world’s poor.

Outrageously, the developed countries, particularly the European Union (EU) and the United States (US), tried to use the WTO meeting to aggressively push forward their agenda to open the markets in developing countries for the interests of their corporations. This shameful abuse of power showed no respect for poor countries’ right to decide their own trade policies to help lift millions of people out of poverty and stop environmental damage.

Rich countries did not end the dumping of their agricultural products in developing countries. The EU and US have retained domestic agricultural subsidies that damage poor and vulnerable farmers in developing countries. Given this, the agreed date for ending export subsidies of 2013 amounts to a symbolic gesture. Until the dumping of all subsidised crops and products on to poor countries’ markets is ended, small-scale farmers face worsening poverty.

In one area trade justice campaigners have been calling for, special measures to protect vulnerable farmers in poor countries from liberalisation, there was some useful progress.

Despite standing together, the demands and concerns of developing countries have been repeatedly sidelined. In Hong Kong, strong-arm tactics and pressures were used to obtain agreement to the market-opening proposals of the developed countries.

The conduct of the EU negotiators was in such direct contrast to their stated commitment to development, that the Global Call to Action Against Poverty (of which MAKEPOVERTYHISTORY is the UK arm) demanded Europe’s trade commissioner Peter Mandelson remove the white band he wore in Hong Kong.

EU decision-makers have been quick to echo the words of trade justice campaigners when responding to the demands of the general public in 2005 but they have not changed their policies and practices.

The eyes of the growing global movement for trade justice will remain focused on the decision-makers who were in Hong Kong. Trade justice is crucial to make poverty history. Campaigners, encouraged by the solidarity shown across developing countries, will continue to stand alongside people across the globe in calling for an end to unfair trade.

As the WTO reconvenes at its headquarters in Geneva, we will continue to press the UK Government to act on all issues we are calling for - not just agriculture – in order to deliver trade justice as negotiations continue. It is equally vital that the UK Government take the necessary action within the EU to deliver a fair deal in these talks. We are not satisfied with empty rhetoric and political posturing. We need to see that they have a concrete understanding of the issues and the actions they must take to deliver trade justice.

The end of the Hong Kong WTO meeting marks the start of a renewed call from millions of people around the world as part of a bigger and stronger global campaign for trade justice.

The responsibility for the WTO failing to deliver trade justice in Hong Kong rests with rich countries. In Hong Kong, rich country governments did not show willingness to deliver trade justice. They have to take responsibility for the fact that the WTO, once again, failed to make the necessary changes to the unequal world trading system.

In 2005 G8 and other rich country leaders made several statements of principle against forced liberalisation and economic policy conditions attached to aid and debt relief. For developing countries to be able to protect and cultivate their economies, these words needed to be turned into action in Hong Kong. The need for such action is even more urgent as negotiations on the rest of the WTO round continue.

The continuation of injustices in trade will perpetuate poverty for generations. The progress in 2005 through increased aid and cancellation of some debt will not make poverty history without trade justice being delivered and no longer delayed.

For further verdicts and reports on the WTO from Trade Justice Movement member organisations see www.tjm.org.uk.

The demands of the campaign

For the World Trade Organisation (WTO) talks in Hong Kong (13-18 December 2005), MAKEPOVERTYHISTORY and the Trade Justice Movement called on the UK Government and its partners in the European Union (EU) to:

• Stop pushing poor countries to open their economies through world trade talks and respect poor countries' right to decide on trade policies to help end poverty and protect their environment

In particular, the UK Government was called upon to use its influence within the EU to:

• Allow developing countries to shape trade policies that protect vulnerable farm sectors and promote national industries
• Allow countries to choose the best policies for poor people and the environment in services such as water, health and education

Throughout 2005, MAKEPOVERTYHISTORY and the Trade Justice Movement demanded an end to the export and other subsidies that result in dumping, damaging the livelihoods of poor rural communities around the world.


Outcomes at the WTO Hong Kong meeting on the demands of the campaign

The right for developing countries to choose the best policies for poor people and the environment in services such as water, health and education

The services negotiations were one of the most contentious of the WTO meeting. Developing countries came under immense pressure to open up their markets to the developed countries’ multinational companies.

Despite their repeated rejection by developing countries, proposals put forward by developed countries continued to reappear in the declaration undemocratically. This result will threaten essential services throughout the world as poor countries will be pushed into negotiations that could see essential services such as water, health and education opened up to foreign competition. The outcome could also now impact drastically on the freedom of governments to choose pro-poor public policies.

The right to protect vulnerable farmers and promote national industries

The WTO meeting introduced the most extreme method of cutting the tariffs that stop industrial goods flooding into poor countries and destroying the sustainable development of their local businesses. This unfair competition from the established multinationals of rich countries raises the threat of massive job losses and lost revenue to poor country governments. What emerged in Hong Kong was the spectre of de-industrialisation rather than development.

There was some progress at the WTO in deciding the ways that farmers in poor countries might gain special protection. However, while useful, much remains unresolved and the threat to rural livelihoods in poor countries remains from liberalisation and products being dumped into their markets.

Ending the export and other subsidies that result in dumping

The EU and the US have retained the right to keep their domestic agricultural subsidies that damage poor and vulnerable farmers in developing countries. This means the dumping of agricultural products will still go on. In this light, a 2013 end date for the export subsidies is too late to be much more than a symbolic gesture. Until all dumping of subsidised crops and products on to poor countries’ markets is ended, poor farmers will be pushed further into poverty.

The strength of the campaign for trade justice

Campaigners in the UK and global civil society demanded throughout 2005 that rich countries fundamentally change their approach to trade talks for trade justice to be delivered and a genuine pro-poor trade deal to be reached.

2005 has been a unique year in the global fight for poverty eradication. Trade justice has the potential to play the leading role in making poverty history. Changes in international trade policy could dramatically improve the lives of millions of the world’s poorest women, men and children.

Over 35 million people worldwide took action this year to demand changes in international trade through the groups and alliances worldwide that are working together in the Global Call to Action Against Poverty alliance that includes MAKEPOVERTYHISTORY.

Campaigners across the world called for trade justice – for trade rules and policies that ensure the right of developing countries to pursue their own development agendas, putting their people’s interests first.

Ahead of the December 2005 WTO meeting Nelson Mandela said: “In Hong Kong there is a chance to make decisions that will lift billions of people out of poverty. Trade can be part of the solution to poverty but at the moment it’s part of the problem. Hong Kong is a chance that must not be missed. The whole world will be watching.”

The world was watching. But rich countries did not make the decisions that would start to lift millions of people out of poverty. Instead they chose unjust trade policies.

The global campaign for trade justice continues into 2006, galvanized by both the need to win against such resistant opposition and the strength of the campaign so many more millions joined in 2005. Political leaders will see increased pressure on them to not act undemocratically against the interests of the world’s poorest people but to finally deliver trade justice. We will not give up until this victory is won.

UK Government

In 2005 the UK Government changed the language it uses on trade justice. This included positive public statements on reducing European agricultural subsidies, a changed policy position on conditionality (the strings attached to financing) and new important statements on stopping forced liberalisation. The Trade Justice Movement and MAKEPOVERTYHISTORY urgently called for these statements, particularly that of no forced liberalisation, to be put into action at the WTO ahead of and at the Hong Kong meeting.

In April Prime Minister Tony Blair signed the Africa Commission report which states: 'Forcing poor countries to liberalise through trade agreements is the wrong approach to achieving growth and poverty reduction in Africa, and elsewhere.' Labour's 2005 election manifesto stated: "We do not believe that poor countries should be forced to liberalise." However, these words have been frequently contradicted by the actions of the UK Government and the EU in trade negotiations at the WTO.

In services negotiations, the UK Government verbally committed itself to opposing mandatory approaches. Yet the EU continued to demand mandatory targets for the liberalisation of trade in services at the WTO in direct opposition to the explicit call of developing countries that this was unacceptable. This was just one example, amongst many, of how the promise of a ‘development round’ turned into a betrayal by rich countries of the needs of poor countries.

Did the UK Government do anything to stop the forced liberalisation agenda of the EU on industrial goods and services in Hong Kong? There is certainly no evidence that it did. The UK did support the right of developing countries to protect key farm products. This was a direct result of pressure from MAKEPOVERTYHISTORY and the Trade Justice Movement.

The Government’s promise to the UK electorate on no forced liberalisation was undermined by the EU’s favouring of corporate interests at the expense of both the millions of people living in poverty around the world and of the environment.

The UK Government’s commitment to making poverty history through trade justice and no forced liberalisation will be tested immediately in 2006 as trade talks move back to the WTO headquarters in Geneva.