|
|
Release No.
0313.03
of
|
|
You know, we are happy to answer any questions by press. On any subject. I think that is probably the better way to proceed, than to disrupt the press that is trying to get the message to the public. So let's start afresh.
Since this morning, Secretary Derbez held a meeting of the heads of delegation, of all the delegations, to explain how he plans to move forward with the work. And this is an important instrument of transparency, so that everybody -- all the delegations -- know what will be the mode of work. He asked each of the facilitators to give a report on their consultations, their individual consultations, and how they plan to proceed. All of them will proceed by holding open-ended, informal meetings. All delegations are invited to participate, and the facilitators will flesh out for us what they see as the key issues that we need to negotiate in each group after they have had these individual consultations. And so, at these informal meetings, we will then begin to vet these issues and to start the real negotiating process.
So that format is one that is being followed in each of the groups. We fully support that approach. We think it is an effective way to proceed, and one that gives all countries an opportunity to participate in the negotiations. That is the work program for this afternoon. In the meantime, of course, we are continuing to consult with the full range of countries. So I think that I would limit my opening remarks to that, and would be happy to answer any questions that people have.
Let's proceed with the questions and answers. Let's proceed
with the questions and answers. I believe that you were going to start
with a question.
Q: [inaudible question]
ALLGEIER: O.K., thank
you. Well, first of all, you certainly are correct, I think, that in the
minds of most countries the agricultural issues are the central issue
right now. Not to say that there are not other important issues, but this
is a central focus of many countries -- including both Brazil and the
United States -- in terms of seeking very substantial agricultural reform.
In terms of how the Chair, how the facilitator, George Yo, will proceed.
I can't speak for him, but I think our assumption is that all of the facilitators,
as I said, will try to refine the issues that still need to be negotiated,
where countries feel that there is not an adequate consensus in terms
of the negotiating framework. How they will proceed then, whether they
will compose their own papers, or they will work with other papers, I
don't know. That will be a decision for each of the facilitators.
Other questions?
Q: [inaudible question
about how the United States consults with small farmers]
ALLGEIER: O.K. Well, there
are a number of ways that we do that. We have a very extensive network
of private sector advisors, which include all sectors including agriculture,
and they get down to the level of commodity-specific advisors. And those
advisors are not just large farm groups, but they are also smaller interests.
And we have that on the industrial side as well. We use other methods
of consulting with the farm community, and I will ask J.B. in a minute
to describe some of the things the USDA does. But we go out into the states
and localities and meet with people. We invite comments from people on
the internet, and we consult very intensively and frequently with the
key committees in Congress and members from farm states. But J.B., perhaps
you would want to add to that.
UNDER SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE
J.B. PENN: Just very briefly, I would note that we are told that
there are some 700 people from the United States representing the private
sector here, and over 300 of those are from agriculture and food industry.
And it includes the heads of the major farm organizations. It includes
virtually every organization that has some representation in agriculture.
So, not only do we consult with them, as Peter said, as we are formulating
our proposals -- the proposal that we submitted in July of last year --
but we are consulting with them here, as the negotiations are ongoing.
I think it is fair to say that everybody that has an interest in this
issue, from any aspect of agriculture, has had ample opportunity to weigh
in and make their views known. We have met, as Peter said, individually,
with groups of all stripes and all sizes representing again, the crop
side, the livestock side, all aspects of agriculture. So, we have had
pretty extensive consultations, and I think that it is safe to say that
most of American agriculture is fully supportive of the United States'
proposal at this point in time, and in what we are trying to do here.
Scott Miller, The Wall Street Journal.
Q: It looks like the G-21 has become quite a force over
the last couple of days, with obviously, a rather unbending position.
Do you interpret that as just public posturing, are you detecting some
flexibility that the same position [inaudible]?
ALLGEIER: Well, I think we will have to wait and see how delegations conduct themselves once we start to actually negotiate. We certainly recognize that within that group there are a number of countries, not all of them, that are very firm in seeking the greatest possible ambition in agriculture. And so, we take that as an indication of how strongly they feel about it. Our hope is that all of the countries, and certainly this is true for the United States, will look to see how to bridge positions so that we can set up a negotiating framework that will not be prejudicial to people, but will give the negotiators enough guidance so when they go back to Geneva, they can actually proceed with negotiations.
Q: [inaudible]
ALLGEIER: Well, we certainly, as I mentioned this morning, have met with groups of countries and individual countries, some of them are members of the G-21, and we have certainly shared with them what we think is the most productive way to move forward, and that is, to concentrate on the substance of the issues in agriculture. Where they think that certain issues have not gotten the attention that they should, or where they think that issues have been framed in ways that they don't think lead to ambition, let's discuss those. We think that is a lot more productive than to have any sort of procedural wrangle over paper one or paper two or paper three.
Q: [inaudible from New
York Times.] Where are the countries today with subsidies, with their
positions on that? [inaudible] ... and they want immediately an interim
solution to the 300 million dollars in retribution [inaudible]. What is
your position on those two issues?
ALLGEIER: Well, we are
still in the midst of consulting with those countries and other interested
countries -- and by the way, other countries that have barriers to cotton.
And so, at this point I am not in a position to give a specific answer
to that, because we are still in the midst of these consultations.
Q: Is this outside of
the committees? Is this country to country?
ALLGEIER: Well, two things:
Number one, these consultations have been informal consultations, country
to country. Number two, today Secretary Derbez announced that the Director
General, Dr. Supachai, would be in effect, a facilitator, using his good
offices to try to help all of us come to a satisfactory solution to this,
on cotton.
(inaudible magazine) Q:
The UN Biosafety Accord does go into effect today, and includes the precautionary
principle as a reason (inaudible) being used to ban GMO foods, that is
my understanding, which would in essence, make the European ban on GMO
foods legal. Can you talk about how that conflicts with the WTO rules?
How that might affect the U.S. complaint about whether (inaudible)?
PENN: Well, I can just make a couple of remarks. What you said is correct. Today is the day that that protocol goes into effect. The U.S. is not a signatory to that, as you know, but basically it requires that living modified organisms be labeled as, "This shipment may contain living modified organisms," but it is not intended to be a restraint of trade if the product is going for some further processing, or for livestock feed, for instance, in the case of maize. For processed products, it is a different situation. But various countries are developing protocols, and I think those protocols have been fairly well worked out for some of the major trading companies. Others are still working on those. I think that the U.S., Canada and Mexico, for instance, have a protocol that is about ready to go into effect. So I don't expect this to be a major restraint of trade. I don't expect it to be in conflict with the WTO rules.
Q: (inaudible)
ALLGEIER: Well, I don't
think that one can make a generalization about "the protesters".
There is a whole range of protesters, many of which -- most of which --
are trying to be constructive in articulating their concerns, and that
is totally appropriate. And then there are some, as we have seen, who
want to be more disruptive, and get in the way of genuine dialogue between
the people participating here and the public. And so, it really depends.
And frankly, we do listen to protesters, and to people who have different
views who present them in an appropriate way. And frankly, that is the
way it should be, we believe.
Q: (inaudible)
ALLGEIER: Well now, I
don't know, the word "deals", I don't think is really appropriate,
I mean, what we are doing is, we're consulting with countries. In our
consultations, we are sitting down with countries, and as I mentioned
this morning, we have met with ASEAN, with the African countries; we've
met with individual countries: Brazil, Ecuador, Colombia, others. And
we are trying to jointly find where there is common ground. And not just
between us bilaterally, but then assessing together where other countries
are and trying to find where is the center of gravity in each of these
areas -- whether it is non-agricultural market access, or agriculture,
or Singapore subjects -- because that is what we want to do is to pull
countries to the center of gravity so we can get negotiating frameworks
in each of these areas. That's what we are doing; we are not doing "deals"
with countries.
Q: (inaudible)
ALLGEIER: We have not
been getting into that sort of detail. What we have been talking about
is: What sort of modalities in agriculture could be achieved, could be
agreed, that would enable people to negotiate the sort of level, the next
level of detail? That sort of detail is something that needs to be done
in the future.
Ian Swanson, Inside U.S. Trade Q: The Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee today, said that he was disappointed in the G-21 position, and specifically said he was really disappointed countries that were negotiating closer trade ties with the U.S. were members. I am wondering if the U.S. is using the fact that perhaps South Africa is negotiating an FTA with the U.S. as leverage in negotiations to try to bring countries off the G-21 plan.
ALLGEIER: Well, I think you know that this morning Ambassador Zoellick met with all of our partners, those who are negotiating free trade agreements with us, or already have free trade agreements with us. And that certainly is a group of countries that tends to have higher aspirations for trade liberalization. They understand the benefits for their economies. It is quite interesting. You've got a real diversity of economies there; it is not as if they are all developed economies like our NAFTA partners. There are also very poor economies, such as those in Central America and in the Southern African Customs Union. And so, in those meetings we have talked about how best to move the world trading system in the direction that we are moving together in our free trade agreements. So that's been the nature of our discussions with those countries.
Yes, you had a follow-up. I'm sorry.
(inaudible) Q: Yesterday, as you probably know, a Korean farmer felt so desperate about not being heard by the WTO that he killed himself by the barriers here in front of many people. Perhaps you can tell us how you personally felt, how you reacted, to this very, very dramatic and tragic event?
ALLGEIER: Well, the word
you used is exactly right: tragic. For anyone to lose his life -- to take
their own life -- in a situation like this is extremely tragic and certainly
I think no individual here could be unmoved by that. And so we have enormous
sympathy for the man's family and for the whole Korean delegation, and
really regret very much that he took that extreme step.
(inaudible) Q: Does that
translate into any kind of change in the U.S. negotiations? Does that
modify the situation in view of this very graphic demonstration of how
desperate farmers feel?
ALLGEIER: Well, we are
convinced that opening trade, eliminating trade barriers, contributes
to the well-being of people. Therefore, we will continue to seek those
openings. We also are aware from our own experience, of the concern that
various groups have -- whether they are agricultural groups or industrial
groups -- as to how they will adjust to trade liberalization. That is
an important part of what we also negotiated, what we have at home in
terms of adjustment measures for fuller communities or firms.
(inaudible) Q: The WTO
issued a statement about the suicide yesterday, saying simply that it
was self-inflicted, making no comment on the statement of the South Korean
himself who said the WTO kills farmers. Do you have any response to the
issue he raised or any plans to meet with representatives of his organization
of South Korean farmers?
ALLGEIER: Well, I certainly am not going to comment on what the WTO had to say. I am not aware that we have received a request to meet with South Korean farmers.
(inaudible) Q: Would you be open to such a request?
ALLGEIER: We are open to meet with groups that are prepared to discuss these matters in a constructive way and we have held a large number of such meetings. Now, to be honest, we concentrate on meeting with American groups, because those are the interests that we represent, and we have not been asked either by a Korean farm group or by the Korean Government to meet with this group.
MILLS: I think we have time for one more question.
Mark Granger, Bloomberg. Q: I am wondering
if, after one day of talks here, do you think that this is turning out
to be a battle royale between the U.S. and Brazil. Do you think that if
you had a greenroom approach that you could solve these problems with
it?
ALLGEIER: Well, this is
an organization currently of 146 members, so this negotiation is among
the 146. So we certainly don't see it as a bilateral confrontation with
anyone. We certainly are aware of the interests of Brazil, as we are aware
of other countries' interests, and we seek to work with all countries
to resolve it. Whether one technique or another, the so-called greenroom
technique, is the most effective is we will have to see how things develop.
As I say, we are just starting now with this process of working with the
facilitators and having the informal meetings, so we will just have to
see which techniques are most appropriate as we move forward.
So, thank you very much and I appreciate your patience so that we got to the questions and we will continue tomorrow.
#
