Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 68: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if Ireland is acting against the promise of a development round by, together with the other Members of the EU, the United States and others, pursuing aggressive market opening in developing countries in industrial market access and services. [18469/06]

Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 72: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment his views on the status of the World Trade Organisation negotiations on the liberalisation of world trade; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17892/06]

Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 75: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if, as he has stated in the Houses of the Oireachtas that least developed countries should not be asked to take on additional commitments as part of the current WTO negotiations he will communicate to the European Commission the view that the EU should not request that least developed countries increase their tariff bindings as part of the current talks. [18470/06]

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 68, 72 and 75 together.

The European Union is seeking a balanced and ambitious outcome across all core areas of the Doha development agenda. The EU believes this is the only way to deliver economic growth and development gains for all participants. Ireland fully supports the EU objective.

The position has now been reached in the negotiations when all WTO members need to aim at a realistic outcome. The final package must be politically and economically attractive and sustainable for all members of the World Trade Organisation, not just for some. In particular, it must include a comprehensive and meaningful outcome on development issues.

All participants should contribute to the process according to their means. The EU believes that developing countries should do less than developed countries and that the poorest and most vulnerable should make no market access commitments at all. Emerging economies, however, have to make some contribution by offering real new market access and business opportunities for industrial goods and services.

New market access is the contribution of trade policy to the EU Lisbon Agenda of promoting growth and jobs which all EU member states have identified as the top political priority.

Progress requires real commitments in areas like services and the strengthening of WTO rules in the area of anti-dumping, for example, as well as in agriculture and industrial tariffs, if this round is to succeed in the time available.

The EU will continue to negotiate in good faith. All governments must now agree to negotiate in the realms of the possible. Every effort should be made to conclude the negotiations by the end of this year and I am confident the EU will play its part towards that objective.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to ask supplementary questions on behalf of my party colleagues Deputies Cuffe and Gogarty.

While the Minister may believe the approach of the European Commission and the European Union to the Doha talks will be based on fairness, that view is not shared by many representatives of the least developed countries. Does the Minister not recognise that there is a dichotomy between what he has already told the House — that the least developed countries should not have to pay a price for whatever agreement is reached — and the views and activities of the EU Commissioner for Trade, Mr. Mandelson?

Does the Minister recognise that because of the unhappiness among the least developed countries, there is a real chance that many of them will act in concert to ensure the Doha round does not reach a conclusion? They will use a blocking mechanism to prevent the round from happening because of what many of us feel are justifiable causes for complaint about trade.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Obviously, the situation is there to play for. We are clear about the development agenda. For example, at the last round, the Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, accompanied the Minister for Agriculture and Food and the Minister of State with responsibility for trade, Deputy Michael Ahern, to those talks to make clear the broad-based approach we were taking. The words "balance" and "ambitious" are important from our perspective. For example, Europe has made significant concessions in agriculture but one could argue that they have not necessarily been reciprocated in terms of services or industry.

Earlier, we spoke about the closure of the sugar factory. Ireland is paying a price for the reforms that are under way. The European Union has made concessions and we would prefer a greater opening of trade and services to facilitate Irish companies that want to trade overseas. We have moved to a significant degree in the agricultural debate but given the current EU mandate there is not much more room for us regarding agricultural market access. There are difficult issues involving a number of different parties. Agriculture is one of the areas concerned and, as I said earlier, trade in industrial goods and services is the other aspect. It is Ireland's sincere position, and the EU's belief, that we do not expect the poorest to have to make concessions.

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I accept what the Minister saying, particularly about agriculture. Everyone who was associated with the Doha round realised that what was agreed was bad news for farmers and agriculture in the least developed countries, as well as in the developing world generally. As regards trade based on normal industry and commerce, there still seems to be a huge difference of opinion between what the Minister represents as the Government's position and what the EU Commissioner for Trade is saying at the trade talks. What influence is the Government trying to bring to bear on Mr. Mandelson in order to reconcile those two positions? Is Mr. Mandelson negotiating on our behalf something that seems to be the total opposite of what the Minister is saying in this House?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No. There are 25 EU countries. Mr. Mandelson's task is to bring a fairly broad range of opinions into a coherent negotiating position with regard to other trading blocks. Ultimately, this issue will be resolved between the key players — the EU, the US, Brazil and a number of others. Even if they arrive at a consensus, it must to be acceptable to the wider membership of the WTO.

I am not understating the significant challenges that exist. Ireland's position is that we would like to see the round successfully concluded because, from our perspective as a country that exports the vast majority of what it produces, access to a more liberal world trade environment would be to our benefit. Equally, we want to see the WTO talks come to a conclusion that is beneficial to developing nations and countries. I do not accept that there is the chasm between our position and the EU position articulated by Commissioner Mandelson, as the Deputy suggests.