Examination of Witnesses (Questions 456-459)
Professor Jean-Pierre Lehmann
11 JULY 2008
Q456 Chairman: Professor
Lehmann, thank you very much for coming to talk to us, we do appreciate
it. The rules of this particular game are that Sue is taking a
note of every word you say and there will be a full transcript.
As soon as you have seen it, and cleared it, we will put it on
our website and it will appear as part of the evidence to the
report. Would you like to start with an opening statement about
anything you like or shall we start with the questions?
Professor Lehmann: Thank you very much
for inviting me. It is a pleasure and, indeed, an honour. All
the more so a pleasure in that, I feel rather passionately about
these issues. I think there is as much importance in terms of
the symbolism of Doha as there is in terms of the substance. There
was a recent article by Pascal Lamy which appeared in the Herald
Tribune a couple of days ago where he does raise this question,
which I have raised all along, that if we cannot agree to collaborate
on what are, after all, relatively straightforward, relatively
simple matters on the trade front, and most of which are win-win,
then the chances of collaborating on some of the much more challenging
issues, climate change, security, et cetera, are not likely. That
is where I come from, if you like. I see this not only as an intellectual
exercise but an important exercise for the planet.
Q457 Chairman: Against that background,
do you believe that we will get a breakthrough during the Ministerial
at the end of the month?
Professor Lehmann: No, I do not think
so. I spent a lot of time in the Arab region and I suppose I should
say, "Inshallah" because it really will be up to him.
There would have to be something really quite dramatic happening
in the course of the next week between now and 21 July. The obstructionism
is very strong on the part of various players. As you know, and
as I must confess, I am a citizen of France and my position does
not necessarily reflect that of my government, or vice versa.
There is quite a lot of obstruction. Moreover, I do not think
anybody is willing to push it, to champion it, to champion the
conclusion, to stick his or her neck out to try to get a conclusion
during the course of July.
Q458 Chairman: Except, of course,
Monsieur Lamy.
Professor Lehmann: Yes, but I am talking
about the ministers. Lamy is doing what he can, I guess, in terms
of trying to move this forward, but ultimately it is the Heads
of State and Government rather than the trade ministers. If you
look at the recent meeting of the G8, for example, I do not think
there was any particular signal that I would take as being encouraging.
There was the usual rhetoric and usual ritual, but I did not see
anything that led me to think this could perhaps lead to a breakthrough.
Probably of that lot the most favourable to the conclusion of
Doha would be the UK Prime Minister. Angela Merkel in a way, I
think her heart is in the right place, the problem is they are
bogged down in their own political domestic problems and Doha
and the WTO is not something you are going to win points on in
domestic politics.
Q459 Chairman: Would these difficulties
include President Bush who might, after all, wish to leave a legacy?
Professor Lehmann: I am sure he would
like to leave a legacy. I have asked American "insider"
friends of mine and beyond the rhetoric they do not see him giving
Susan Schwab instructions saying, "This has got to go through".
I know he tried to veto the Farm Bill but it could be another
failure, it does not have fast track or whatever it is called
now, trade promotion authority. The risks for him could be that
this would not ensure a legacy or a victory in any way and it
is not a particularly popular issue in the United States with
60 per cent of Americans, according to the polls, seeing trade
as a threat rather than an opportunity.
|
