STI's statement at APEC Ministerial Meeting

*******************************************

Statement by the Secretary for Trade and Industry, Mr Chau Tak Hay, at the 10th APEC Ministerial Meeting in Kuala Lumpur today (Saturday) - Agenda Item IV: APEC's contribution to the WTO.

Mr Chau: Allow me to start by expressing my deep gratitude to the government and the people of Malaysia for the excellent arrangements that have been made for this meeting and for the generous and warm hospitality that has been extended to the Hong Kong, China delegation.

I would like to extend a warm welcome to the three new members Peru, Russia and Vietnam.

Since its inception in 1989, APEC has always subscribed to the primacy of an open, multi-lateral trading system. In Vancouver last November we ministers of APEC reaffirmed our intention to continue pursue initiatives that support work in the World Trade Organisation. In fact, in respect of issues such as transparency in government procurement, competition policy and trade facilitation, APEC has performed and important role; its work provides useful reference for subsequent work in related areas by the WTO. The challenge now is how APEC can further its contribution to the WTO, bearing in mind that we are on the threshold of a new round of multi-lateral trade negotiations. Two ideas come to mind.

First, in respect of new issues. The paradigms of world trade have changed so drastically that continued focus on traditional border measures such as quota and tariffs is no longer an adequate response to rapid globalisation and technological advances. To ensure the continued relevance of the WTO, new issues such electronic commerce and competition policy need to be looked at. A common feature of such new issues is that the experience and stage of development of different economies differ widely. And here, I believe, APEC has an invaluable role to play. As a forum for economic co-operation, APEC is uniquely suited for capacity building and experience sharing activities. These activities can help enhance APEC members' understanding of the new issues, their implications and the potential benefits of multi-lateral trade rules.

In this connection, I am glad to note that senior officials have developed an APEC Blueprint for Action on Economic Commerce and have held workshops and seminars on competition policy and investment issues. Our continued endeavours on these fronts will go a long way towards building up member economies confidence and capacity in participating in relevant work in the WTO.

My second point concerns APEC's leadership role in progressive trade liberalisation. It is easy to discredit rhetorically beggar-thy-neighbour policy as self-defeating but the rhetoric will remain empty unless we can demonstrate with action our own determination to fight protectionism. We can not convincingly ask others to keep their markets open to us unless we are prepared to do likewise to others. Persuasion by action and leadership is particularly important now as keeping markets open will greatly help the region to trade its way to renewed prosperity.

The APEC Economic Leaders call in November 1996 for the conclusion of the Information Technology Agreement (ITA) negotiations under the WTO played an instrumental role in bringing about the successful conclusion of the ITA at the WTO Ministerial Conference in Singapore. Let us build on that good foundation and maintain APEC's leadership role in spurring progressive trade liberalisation. Therefore, I would like to call upon my colleagues here to exercise political will in completing both the WTO ITA II negotiations and our current EVSL exercise, in order that we can eventually arrive at a credible and balanced package in respect of the latter. True leadership hinges on action and it is only by action that APEC can demonstrate its commitment to trade liberalisation.

A positive signal from this APEC meeting on trade liberalisation is particularly important, as we are even now preparing for the third WTO Ministerial Conference to be held in the United States next year, at which we hope the next round of multi-lateral trade negotiations will be launched. To be meaningful, the negotiations need to embrace something of interest to every WTO member. To provide for trade-offs adequate to make the negotiations meaningful to all, I believe the next round of trade talks must be broad-based and balanced. Only then can the negotiations embrace an ambitious agenda capable of maintaining the momentum of global trade liberalisation and ensuring the relevance of the WTO in the new century.

End/Saturday, November 14, 1998

NNNN