Outgoing US Ambassador to WTO Says Initiative to Liberalize Trade in Health Unneeded
The Ottawa Group, which includes the European Union, Japan, Brazil, Korea, Mexico, Switzerland, Canada and others, is arguing that a coordinated global response is needed to COVID-19, including cooperating on vaccine distribution, and trade in other medical supplies, and says regulatory compatibility on these goods should be improved so that the world will be ready for the next pandemic.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
“There is value in ensuring that we do not undermine the versatility, diversity and resiliency of supply chains and that we do not act in ways that negatively affect access to medical supplies,” they wrote, and said it seems that 70 countries still have export restrictions on medical supplies, medicines or food. They said officials should analyze “the objectives and effects of policies affecting trade of medical supplies in response to the current pandemic,” and said the World Trade Organization should recommend policies based on what is learned.
In the communication they filed at the WTO recently, they said some countries in the group are interested in lowering tariffs on health-related goods and liberalizing “relevant logistics, distribution and transport services.”
Dennis Shea, the outgoing U.S. ambassador to the WTO, questioned the relevance of the submission, arguing that most countries have allowed trade to flow freely during the pandemic, even in these goods.
“Against this backdrop, it’s not clear what problem the cosponsors aim to solve, nor how the proposed measures would solve that problem,” he said in a speech Dec. 17. “For example, supply chain resiliency doesn’t seem to be about lowering tariffs, or increasing Secretariat monitoring, or encouraging vague cooperation between the WTO and other international organizations. It’s about how to prevent disruption when production somewhere beyond your shores is shut down due to an unexpected shock, or when a supplier beyond your shores is suddenly unreliable.
“As of today, more than 1.6 million people have died around the world, including more than 300,000 in the United States. Against this backdrop, we question the prudence of asking Members to put new constraints on their rights under the WTO Agreement -- not to mention on their duty -- to undertake measures to protect human health and life. For example, the idea that such measures might be granted a period of validity of three months seems to misunderstand the moment.
“We take a different view. WTO rules may not have been drafted with a pandemic at front of mind, but our initial observation is that the WTO Agreement seems fit for purpose. Its balance of rights and obligations, if adhered to by Members, will continue to provide stability and predictability as we navigate this very difficult period and, finally, recover.”