Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160-169)
MS AMANDA
BROOKS AND
MR ROBERT
LOWSON
20 JULY 2006
Q160 Joan Walley: That is a difficult
one. If we are not going to resolve this through a challenge,
one of the options that have been presented has been to set up
some international body that could somehow or another supersede
or conciliate through these different issues. Do you think there
should be a new body established to look at the interface between
Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the WTO?
Mr Lowson: There already is such
a body because you have the WTO's judicial processes which are
unique—
Q161 Joan Walley: That is not environmentally
geared is it?
Mr Lowson: It is not environmentally
geared.
Q162 Joan Walley: I am talking about
an environmentally geared body.
Mr Lowson: If it were simply an
environmentally geared body it would not be in a position to deal
with the fundamental lack of clarity about the compatibility of
Multilateral Environmental Agreements with the WTO rules. The
place where that could be done is the WTO appellate process, should
there be a challenge under the WTO to any actions pursued under
a Multilateral Environmental Agreement, of which, as I have said,
there has not been an example of so far.
Ms Brooks: I think one thing to
add is that while there is not an agreement yet within the Doha
round on this, that is not to say that there will not be. Like
many issues under negotiation, at the moment, they have not been
resolved, but that is not to say they cannot be.
Q163 Joan Walley: What would you
say to a proposal that there should be a new body which is able
to act as an impartial dispute settlement body when there are
these conflicting issues to do with environment at the heart of
trade negotiations?
Mr Lowson: In practical terms
of resolving issues that might emerge, I do not see how the creation
of a new body would help. In terms of trade policy, Amanda may
have something to add.
Ms Brooks: The only thing I would
say is that you would have to then resolve the relationship between
that body and the WTO disputes settlement body, which just gives
us another problem to solve along the way. So in terms of who
would have primacy to rule on whose rules, I think it is a complex
solution that there is not an easy answer to.
Q164 Joan Walley: Are these discussions
going on anyway about the creation of a body that could do this?
Mr Lowson: Not the creation of
a body with that particular function. There is a lot of discussion
going on about the institutional arrangements at an international
level for dealing with environmental issues, but not particularly
focused on—
Q165 Joan Walley: Who is leading
on those?
Mr Lowson: There are two main
strands of this, both happening in the UN context: on system-wide
coherence and about the possible creation of a UN environmental
organisation. So far as I am aware, in neither of those two strands
is there consideration of a dispute settlement procedure.
Q166 Joan Walley: Finally, really,
there seems to be quite a lot of concern about a lack of political
will at the highest level to deal with sustainable development
issues in trade. Would you say that that was a fair conclusion
when looking at the lack of progress on these issues inside the
WTO?
Ms Brooks: I do not think there
is any shortage of political will for a whole range of issues
within the WTO. We saw the statement from G8 leaders at the weekend
affirming their political will to get movement towards a deal.
That must include trade and environment because it is part of
the Doha agenda and, therefore, I do not see that as being an
issue. I think the problem at the moment is we have to translate
the political will into some action to take this forward.
Q167 Joan Walley: Do you feel happy
about the way that the WTO exists at the moment or do you think
there is scope to have a complete reassessment of all its aims
and all its processes so that we can perhaps get a long-term strategy
for how international trade could be used to adequately balance
the economic developmental issues with environmental issues? Is
the WTO still fit for purpose or should we be reviewing it in
the light of what we now know to be a real challenge from global
warming?
Ms Brooks: I think the reality
is that the previous director general of the WTO began to look
at what reform might be necessary for the WTO to meet a whole
range of today's challenges. That report, chaired by Peter Sutherland,
was issued just about a year ago. The view of many WTO members
at the time, and the UK agreed with this, was that the middle
of a negotiation was not the time to start a debate about WTO
reform and where next. However, I think, as we head towards the
conclusion of a round that debate will become live and will include
many of the questions you have mentioned.
Q168 Joan Walley: Do you see any
scope for that further discussion being undertaken within the
context of the Stern Review and in the context of what we now
know to be the case about the dangers from global warming?
Mr Lowson: I do not think in those
two particular contexts, no. I think there is a lot of thinking
that needs to be done about giving the absolute priority that
needs to be accorded to climate change issues and how these need
to be reflected in our approaches to trade policy. I do not think
these are institutional questions so much as questions about the
approach which members of the WTO take. I would not be that eager
to throw the baby out with the bath water as far as the WTO itself
is concerned. It is a body which engages a vast majority of trading
countries in the world, it has got extensive coercive powers which
most international agreements lack which are based on a firm body
of law and, as we have said repeatedly, its agenda is set by its
members, so if the international agenda moves then the issues
which the WTO can pay attention to move with it. I worked with
the GATT in the Tokyo round, and at that time the notion of using
trade measures to promote development was in its very infancy
and the international machinery reflected in the WTO has come
an enormously long distance since then. So it is a piece of international
apparatus which is capable of adapting to the pressures within
the international community.
Q169 Joan Walley: There is a very
wide gap at the moment, is there not?
Mr Lowson: I am not sure that
there is a wide gap at present. I think if there is a gap there
is a gap between our ambitions to ensure that sustainability and,
particularly, environmental sustainability issues are reflected
in the focus of the negotiation and the views of some of our partners.
Chairman: Thank you both very much for
a very interesting session. Hopefully we will get a very good
report out of it, too. Thank you.
| 
