Bridges Weekly Trade News Digest • Volume 6 • Number 15 • 23rd April 2002
GATS: Leaked EC Draft Requests Bring Mixed Reactions
On 16 April, a storm of protest amongst civil society groups erupted after a set of confidential draft "requests" prepared by the European Commission were leaked to the non-governmental organisation (NGO) Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) — which subsequently made the EC documents publicly available on its GATSwatch website (see http://www.gatswatch.org/requests-offers.html). NGOs such as Oxfam UK, the World Development Movement (WDM), Attac and Friends of the Earth International (FOEI) subsequently voiced considerable concern over the EC’s services-related requests to some of its WTO trading partners. By contrast, responses from Geneva delegations of the countries which were to receive the requests were mixed, with most delegates not surprised by the EC papers, while others were content to see the types of requests to a broad range of trading partners.
The EC’s 29 requests to various Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) states and developing countries such as Brazil, China, Malaysia and Venezuela were drafted by the European Commission in the course of the ongoing services negotiations mandated by the Doha Declaration (para 15). This first series of draft requests to the so- called Group 1 — i.e. specially targeted — countries had originally been circulated amongst EC member states for review, but with the explicit requirement to "ensure that this text is not made publicly available and is only circulated to the officials concerned."
The confidential documents contain detailed requests to other WTO Members to make substantial commitments in sectors such as professional and business services, telecommunications, construction, distribution services, financial services, tourism, energy, and environmental services.
NGO and press responses
NGOs involved in the trade debate were outspoken against the EC paper. "The scope of these documents is truly terrifying," Dave Timms from WDM stated, adding that he was "shocked by how the EU is preparing to trample over its claims to be in favour of sustainable development in the naked pursuit of the interests of the European multinational service corporations." The consumer group Council of Canadians called the EC demands "chilling", while a writer close to Oxfam UK described them in an article published in the British newspaper The Guardian as "extraordinarily aggressive".
FOEI pointed out that the leaked requests focussed on "eliminating trade barriers and regulations that restrict trade in services in WTO Member countries," including "controversial matters such as water, energy, tourism and transport." The Guardian, a British weekly newspaper, argued that the EC was "demanding full-scale privatisation of public monopolies across the world as its price for dismantling the common agricultural policy" during the ongoing trade round.
Commenting on some of the reactions, European Commission spokesman Anthony Gooch said that "the allegations in the [The Guardian] article are incorrect", especially as the EC requests "do not involve requesting or demanding that public services in developing countries be done away with," he added. In an official reaction posted at the GATSwatch website, the EC further stated that "it strongly regret[s] this leak" as the EC’s internal processes "are not yet complete and the papers are still being discussed between the Commission and Member States". As a result, "these documents do not yet reflect official EU positions."
Geneva reactions
Trade delegates from developing country Members of the Group 1 interviewed for this report did not entirely share the criticism emerging from civil society groups. Generally commenting on some of the NGO reactions, WTO delegates emphasised that some of the statements revealed a great deal of misconception about the concept of services trade liberalisation, on the one hand, and privatisation as well as deregulation on the other. The latter were "not addressed in the GATS and the related negotiations," one source pointed out. On the draft requests themselves, all interviewed country delegates principally stated that those were "not striking at all", as their countries had anticipated "extensive" and "across-the-board" requests from the EC — particularly as the EC had hinted to them in previous bilateral talks that its requests would be rather "ambitious".
Further, delegates did not regard the draft requests as inappropriate, taking into consideration that they were addressed to OECD and stronger developing countries only, and that they were part of the initial requests-offer phase where it was expected that everyone would try to maximise its bargaining position. Nevertheless, delegates indicated that they expected the next set of EC requests directed to weaker developing countries and least-developed countries (LDCs) to be much less comprehensive.
One delegate said that it was very useful now to have the chance to compare its own EC request with the other 28 documents so as to have a good argument to reject a very ambitious demand in a certain area where the EC’s requests to other Members were more reluctant. As such, some delegates from the EC’s trading partners appeared to be thankful for the early release of the draft requests, as "things would have been much more difficult if the requests would have arrived on 30 June at midnight," a trade official remarked. Para. 15 of the Doha Declaration provides that Members "shall submit initial requests for specific commitments by 30 June 2002.
Delegates further said that the EC requests would be a good indicator for forthcoming requests from the US, which Members expect to "be at least as ambitious" as the draft EC demands. A South American delegation indicated that the US requests were likely to contain regulatory elements in the form of requesting trading partners to adopt so-called reference papers — an instrument that had already been used during the post-Uruguay round negotiations on basic telecommunication services (see also related WTO In Brief, this issue).
For a compilation of the various NGO and press responses, visit the GATSwatch website at http:// www.gatswatch.org/ECleaknews.html.
"A Privatisers’ Hit List," THE GUARDIAN, 18 April 2002; "EU Plays Down "Leaked Trade Plan, Green Angry," REUTERS, 18 April 2002; "The Bananas For The Banking Agenda," THE GUARDIAN, 17 April 2002; "Secret Documents Reveal EU’s Tough Stance On Global Trade," THE GUARDIAN, 17 April 2002; "Leaked EU Requests On Service Liberalisation In The WTO Reveal Threats For People, The Environment And Democracy," FOEI RELEASE, 16 April 2002; "Leaked Confidential EU Documents Confirm Controversial Character Of GATS Negotiations," GATSWATCH RELEASE, 16 April 2002. ICTSD Internal Files.