Subject: WTO and labour
The Nation
Tuesday, Dec 10, 1996:

Trade-labour backers state case

   BY JAMES FAHN

   SINGAPORE - While leaders of developing countries continue to see
   linkages between trade and labour standards as a covert form of
   protectionism, trade delegates from the United States and the
   European Union yesterday said the absence of such linkages could lead to overt
   protectionism.

   In their official statements to the World Trade Organisation's (WTO)
   ministerial conference yesterday, both US Trade Representative
   Charlene Barshefsky and EU Commissioner for Trade Policy Sir Leon
   Brittan warned that the failure to take into account the social and
   environmental impacts of free trade could lead to a loss of support
   for liberalisation.

   ''Trade liberalisation can occur only with domestic support," said
   Barshefsky. ''That support, and support for the WTO, will surely
   erode if we cannot address the concerns of working people and demonstrate
   that trade is a path to tangible prosperity."

   Barshefsky said the US is not seeking an agreement on minimum wages,
   the use of protectionist measures to enforce labour standards, or
   other changes that would take away the comparative advantage of
   countries that rely on cheap labour, but rather ''a modest work
   programme in the WTO".

   ''Concerns about the environment, about labour standards and other
   apparently domestic political issues are now the legitimate concern
   of the WTO because they are the concerns of our constituents," Brittan
   said. ''Only when the WTO is seen to meet the aspirations of our
   constituents can we be sure of keeping the way open for continued
   trade liberalisation."

   However, delegates from developing countries, and also some developed
   countries such as the Britain, continued their opposition to any
   linkage between the WTO and labour standards, human rights or a
   so-called ''social clause".

   In his opening statement, Thai Deputy Prime Minister Amnuay Viravan
   stated: ''There is no relevancy in forcing linkages of this [labour]
   issue with trade, unless ... there is an ulterior motive to bring in
   the issue as disguised protectionism.

   ''All basic relevant elements of core labour standards mentioned have
   long been recognised by and witnessed in Thailand," Amnuay said.
   ''There is clear evidence to support this remark."

   Several influential non-governmental organisations (NGOs) from
   developing countries - including the Penang-based Third World Network
   and Bangkok-based Focus on the Global South - also disagreed with
   establishing linkages between trade and labour standards.

   Martin Khor, director of the Third World Network, said that the
   Singapore conference was supposed to be set up for the reviewing and
   implementation of the Uruguay Round agreements under the General
   Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Gatt) made in 1994. There are too
   many problems with the current system, he said, to start looking at ''new
   issues".

   Southern Hemisphere NGOs are particularly opposed to a multilateral
   agreement on investment, but they also said that labour issues would
   be better handled by the UN's International Labour Organisation (ILO)
   than the WTO. ''The labour issue is just being promoted by developed
   countries for publicity purposes," said Roberto Possio, a Uruguayan
   academic.

1