1. World Economic Forum and S11.
2. Parliamentary Inquiry on the WTO.
3. Report on AFTINET lobbying in Canberra August 31.
4. WTO negotiations and international day of action.
5. Corporate Code of Conduct Bill tabled.

1.  World Economic Forum

The World Economic Forum regional meeting of transnational corporate executives, politicians and media, and the alternative events and demonstrations around it provided many opportunities to raise issues about the role of corporations in the WTO and other international institutions.

The media coverage started badly. The Sydney Morning Herald, for example distributed a (presumably) paid magazine insert on 4 September which was an advertisement for the WEF, having published several editorial pieces by Gerard Henderson, Paddy McGuiness and others rubbishing any alternative views. This was clearly overkill and they received many letters of protest, some of which were printed along with some alternative opinion pieces.

Many alternative voices were heard on the ground in Melbourne, starting with the ACFOA seminar on Development Challenges in the Global Economy on 7 September, and continuing with the Public First Peoples’ Conference on 9 September, both of which were attended by 300 people who heard from a wide range of speakers. Pat Ranald gave presentations on the WTO and distributed material about AFTINET at both of these. Two thousand people attended a public meeting at the Regent Theatre on 10 September, which was addressed by national and international speakers, including Vandana Shiva from India and Walden Bello from the Philippines, both of whom also presented critical analysis of the WTO.

Over 10,000 people attended the demonstration on 11 September. Contrary to the media reports, this was overwhelmingly peaceful, with demonstrators standing or sitting around the entrances to the casino which were blocked by police. The police did not attempt to charge through the demonstrators. There was a carnival atmosphere with music and street theatre. There was one confrontation when Premier Richard Court ordered his driver to attempt to drive through a large crowd of demonstrators. His car was damaged by some individuals and police were called to get it out. Of course it was this confrontation which was featured by the media.

Some politicians and media commentators attacked what they saw as the passivity of the police on Monday and the fact that some WEF delegates had not been able to get into the Casino. On Tuesday 12 September the police had orders to get delegates in by force. They removed their identity tags and charged demonstrators with batons and horses, causing injuries to many. Again these images dominated the media, not the peaceful trade union rally attended by over 5,000 people.

Legal observers said the police used excessive force. In one incident, an unmarked police car ran over a woman and failed to stop. The Victorian Ombudsman subsequently announced an inquiry into police behaviour and the legal firm of Slater and Gordon said it would act on behalf of those wishing to sue for damages. Unions and ALP branches criticised Premier Bracks for his support of police action.

Overall, the WEF and the protests raised the level of public debate about the major issues of global inequality, free trade and human rights and the role of transnational corporations. The media had to acknowledge these issues and feature alternative views. The public hearings for parliamentary inquiry into the WTO will be the next opportunity to keep these issues on the agenda.

2.   Parliamentary Inquiry on the WTO

The AFTINET submission was distributed with AFTINET Alert no 7 and is also available on the website www.aftinet.org.au The first batch of almost 200 submissions received in August is on the parliamentary website at www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jsct/

The secretariat says that they have received hundreds more in September which should be put on the website over the next two weeks. Many network members have made submissions.

The schedules for public hearings in various cities should also be available on the website after the committee meets next week. It will be important for as many organisations as possible to appear at hearings, do media releases and maximise media coverage.

3.  Report on AFTINET lobbying in Canberra August 31.

AFTINET representatives met with the Trade Minister’s advisor, the Shadow Minister for Trade, Senator Cook, Deputy Secretary of DFAT, David Spencer and other DFAT officers, and Democrats Senator Vicki Bourne’s advisor. The delegation presented AFTINET’s principles to the major political parties and sought their responses.

Minister Vaile’s advisor listened but did not make any firm responses in the absence of the Minister who was overseas.

Senator Cook emphasised his general support for free trade principles. However his reponses to specific issues were based on the recently adopted ALP policy, which despite media reports, did contain some important changes. He responded positively on the need for more social and environmental input into trade advisory committees. He also agreed that WTO structures including the disputes process should be more open and that that developing countries lack influence and resources in the WTO. Australia should support change to address these issues. He emphasised ALP policy that public education, health and social welfare should not be included in the trade in services agreement. On investment he did not support the MAI, but believes there is a need for a different kind of investment agreement.

The meeting with DFAT was mainly to obtain information about the current state of the WTO negotiations and Australia’s policy (see item 4 below).

The meeting with Senator Bourne’s advisor discussed the Democrats’ Corporate Code of Conduct Bill 2000, tabled in September, to require Australian companies operating overseas to abide by Australian standards on human rights, labour rights and the environment (see item 5 below).

Top of page

4.  WTO negotiations and international day of action

The resistance of the developing countries to a new round of negotiations in the WTO, demonstrated at Seattle, is now being acknowledged by DFAT. Apart from agriculture and services, there is no agreement on what would be included in a new round. Proposals from countries for a new round are expected by the end of the year. A new round could not start before March 2001.

The Australian Government’s priorities are agriculture, some services, and improvement in market access for trade in goods. Investment and competition policy are not high priorities because they are not expected to get support.

Agriculture and services negotiations are continuing as part of the built-in agenda from the last round, but progress is slow.

Public health, education and social services are still excluded from the trade in services agreement, although private provision in health and education was included in the last round in 1994. The government says its policy is that these public services should remain excluded from the agreement.

However, some public and private universities are pressuring for more market access overseas. To achieve this, there is a danger that the government would offer to include the public Australian tertiary education sector in the GATS agreement. The government also wants to expand the coverage of the agreement in professional services, telecommunications and financial services. This could mean that the current Australian exceptions to the agreement in these sectors could be removed. These include, for example, what little regulation remains to retain competition in the banking system through the prevention of takeover of the four main banks.

The government has also argued for more restrictions to be placed in the agreement on the powers of national government to regulate services, by requiring that regulation be "least trade restrictive". The other dangers are that the general exception for public services could be removed, or that the agreement could be changed from one which lists what is to be included to a "top-down" agreement which includes everything which is not excluded.

It is vital that the services negotiations be closely monitored by community organisations and that we voice opposition to such changes which could remove the ability of governments to regulate services in the public interest, or to retain public provision of services. This issue will be explored further through the parliamentary inquiry.

The government does not want to sign the present WTO agreement on Government procurement. Federal and state governments still have some policies which do use purchasing for local industry development, and future governments may want to develop more. The WTO agreement prevents this by its requirement that government purchasing cannot favour local firms and must be open to transnational competition. The current WTO agreement is one in which each area to be included must be listed.

However, there is a twist to this policy. The government has not signed the current agreement but would prefer a top-down agreement with exceptions having to be listed. In other words, the government prefers a more restrictive agreement than the current one. Again these negotiations must be carefully monitored as such a top-down agreement could remove the ability of governments to use purchasing for local industry development.

WTO Day of Action

An international statement which puts the case for fundamental review of WTO structures before any new round was circulated in April and August and signed by over 500 NGOs from 63 countries. It was initiated by Public Citizen in the USA and was launched in New York on 7 September to coincide with the Millennium Meeting of the United Nations. This network is calling for an international day of action on the WTO early in December - the date is yet to be set. AFTINET will keep you informed.

Top of page

5.  Corporate Code of Conduct Bill tabled

On September 6 Senator Vicki Bourne tabled the Corporate Code of Conduct Bill 2000. The Bill requires Australian companies operating overseas to abide by Australian standards on human rights, labour rights and the environment. The Bill was inspired in part by similar initiatives in Europe and the USA, but also by the environmental disasters caused by Australian companies: BHP’s OK Tedi mine in Papua New Guinea and the Esmerelda mine in Central Europe. The Bill requires companies to develop policies in these areas and report on them, and also provides for fines or civil action by those affected if they breach them. The Bill, summaries and speeches are available from Vicki Bourne’s office contact Gabrielle.Russell@aph.gov.au

The Bill is due to be referred to a Senate committee soon, which will invite public submissions. It will be important for them to get as many expressions of support as possible. These need only be brief. AFTINET will circulate an alert when submissions are needed. The bill will then go back to the Senate for debate, which will probably not be before December. Messages of support should also be sent to government and opposition Senators, especially Labor Senators whose support would give a majority to the Bill in the Senate and ensure some debate of the issues.

Top of page