[asia-apec 1207] Mike Moore - New WTO D-G?

[Gatt Watchdog]

For more information on Mike Moore, read on
Please feel free to crosspost, forward etc


New Zealander Mike Moore appears likely to become the next
Director-General of the WTO. Who is he?

Moore was the caretaker (perhaps better described as the
undertaker) Prime Minister in the dying days of the Labour
Government which introduced Rogernomics (radical neo-
liberalism) into New Zealand, having deceived the electorate
in 1984. In 1990 it was emphatically thrown out; Moore was
put in by his party just before the election (the third
leader in short succession) to try to prevent the loss being
too great. He has never repudiated the policies followed by
Lange/Douglas Labour Government, and remains, awkwardly, as
the core of the right wing of the Labour Party.

In his campaign for the WTO leadership he appears to have
gathered a reputation for being a trade unionist perhaps
because it suits the current U.S. agenda of token
recognition of labour rights in trade agreements. It is not
clear where he got this reputation: he does not have that
reputation at home. He has been a professional politician
for most of his life. Immediately after leaving school, he
had about seven years of work experience as a freezing
worker (meat packer to people in the U.S.) and social
worker. He became New Zealand's youngest member of
parliament at age 23 in 1972, and has remained so with a
break of only three years early in that period.

While advocating some mild government intervention at home,
and coupling that with a populist position on crime and
indigenous (Maori) rights, but strong anti-racism, he is
still a fundamentalist on globalisation, and supports a
monetarist line and an open economy.

Some of his quotes and media statements relevant to the WTO
appointment follow below.

For example, the position he recommended to the Labour
caucus on the MAI, as their spokesperson on Foreign Affairs
and Trade, contained passages quoted below (along with
vitriolic, and inaccurate attacks on named opponents of the
MAI). His increasing isolation in the Labour Party was
emphasised by their overruling his position, which asked
only for reservations for the Treaty of Waitangi (which
protects Maori rights), and the right to impose special
conditions on privatisation of assets. The Labour Party
adopted a position of support for the MAI, as long as it
protected New Zealand's current (very weak) foreign
investment provisions, had recognition of labour rights and
environmentally sustainable development in the preamble, a
commitment "not to drive down" environmental or labour
conditions, reservation of Maori rights under the Treaty of
Waitangi, and debate on it in Parliament. They supported it
being moved to the WTO, and "matched by ongoing work" in the
ILO and UN Earth Summits. It is important to note that even
this weak and equivocal position was a strengthening of
Moore's recommendation, forced on the Labour Party by strong
opposition to the MAI in New Zealand. Moore's later
statements often avoided expressing his party's
reservations.

Moore is an ardent supporter of the Bretton Woods
institutions and the WTO. He has a na<vely expressed faith
in the ability of these institutions and free trade and
investment to bring prosperity, peace (etc, etc) to
the world. His books quote liberally from the extreme right
(such as Davidson and Rees-Mogg's "The Sovereign
Individual") through to the centre-left. As Minister of
Overseas Trade in the 1984-1990 Labour Government, Moore was
regarded as "one of America's best allies" by the US special
trade negotiators in agricultural matters. A former US
Ambassador to New Zealand congratulated the New Zealand
Labour Government on its influence in pushing Third World
nations to "economic reform".

The statements quoted below are verbatim. Please do not ask
me to explain them! You are being introduced to the world of
Moore.

Bill Rosenberg
w.rosenberg at its.canterbury.ac.nz


>From "MAI - Proposed Caucus Position" by Moore, 17 November
1997

"The MAI's central purpose is to ensure that foreign
investors are not the subject of discriminatory or
xenophobic behaviour on the part of governments in the host
country... This is not a new wave of colonisation or the
rise of corporatist world government. The Agreement is
designed to PROTECT and ENCOURAGE foreign investment because
it is such investment that has helped fuel global economic
growth and the increasing globalisation of wealth. Fifty
years ago the United States was literally the only wealthy
nation; now Europe, North Asia, and South East Asia can all
genuinely be described as wealthy regions, with Latin
America and East Asia fast becoming economic powerhouses as
well. Foreign investment is the instrument of this economic
success, and international agreements liberalising trade and
investment have played key roles: the GATT, APEC, ASEAN,
NAFTA, MERCASUR, CER it could even be argued that the post-
war Marshall Plan had this effect (from which the OECD was
formed). Small nations need institutional rules.

"The MAI will be of the greatest long-term benefit to
developing nations. They are not currently covered by
negotiations but will be anxious to join up as soon as they
can... Over the past two decades, open economies grew by an
average of 4.5% while other economies grew by an average of
0.7%. Developing countries now account for one-quarter of
world trade where the figure was 20% a decade ago. At
present rates it will reach 40% in 2010 and 50% in 2020.
What has fuelled this growth? Liberalisation of markets for
their goods, and a TREBLING of foreign direct investment.

"The MAI is good for the developing world. It regulates
foreign investment and subjects it to internationally agreed
and transparent processes. It encourages infrastructure
investment by offering some assurances against changes in
volatile political landscapes. As a direct result, it will
also therefore have the effect of discouraging short-term,
speculative investment made often with the collusion of
corrupt local officials. It is this short-term investment
that all too often damages the economy and the environment
of the host economy. As long as investment in the developing
world is beholden to political interference and patronage,
it will engender corruption and unethical practice..."

(Moore's emphasis.)


>From an address by Moore to a Department of Economics,
University of Canterbury seminar on "International
Liberalisation", 25 August 1997.

"Crazy literature is being sent to MPs by wacko, conspiracy
types suggesting the MIA [sic] will copyright the DNA of
Maoris, sell our National Parks and there's a secret deal
being, or even done...

"The [MAI] agreement sets firm rules that will work to the
advantage of small and developing countries. Small guys need
the Police, need clear rules, or they are picked off by the
big guys.

"I have fought for economic openings, not only because I
believe it is good for New Zealand, but because I believe it
is the best way of assisting poor and developing countries.
A deeper motivation is that it will build a more secure,
safe, peaceful and growing world...

"Internationalism and globalisation will be to the 21st
Century what Nationalism was to the 20th Century. Thus
mankind has learnt the most profound lessons of this century
from the great depression and the second world war. It can
even be argued that the twin tyrannies of our century,
Fascism and Marxism came out of the economic failure of the
great depression. The great depression was accelerated and
made deeper by protectionist legislation, in the United
States and elsewhere. During the second world war, the great
war time leaders met to discuss a post war world. In that
post war world they dreamed of great and noble institutions,
such as the United Nations, the World Bank, IMF, and the
World Trade Organisation. I see economic liberalism as
continuing that high ideal. Democratic global institutions
are needed to give legal life to globalisation. No Nation,
not even the great Nations can prosper alone or isolated.
Pollution, aids, cancer, or refugee problems cannot be
solved by one Nation alone.

"Far from weakening the integrity of a nation's state and
allowing the great multi-nationals to ravage the world, I
believe the GATT and the World Trade Organisation does the
opposite. Small countries need rules. World Trade
Organisation rules prevent the super economies from muscling
and pushing around the smaller nations... Far from
exploiting developing countries, the opposite is true. It's
developing countries with their tropical products and
manufacturing skills that have the most to gain..."

"The lesson of the last 25 years tells us that no individual
country can anymore successfully prime an economic pump,
even Mitterand discovered this in the 80s when, by priming
the French pump, all he did was flood his country with
imports from Italy and from Germany. He reversed that
position. Tony Blair, a modern Social Democratic Labour
Leader has discovered that too. The irony is that Blair's
Government is going through the same process as the Labour
Government did in New Zealand. He is called progressive, we
were called reactionary. The 1987 stock market crash was
greater and deeper than the
Wall Street crash of the 20s. But, the world did not plunge
into lasting depressions. Leaders nerves held, there wasn't
an orgy of protectionism and tariff increases which
exacerbated the 20s crash. Governments now have Reserve
Banks. The G7, GATT, World Bank, IMF held firm. We got
through it, we have learnt."


Press releases from http://www.newsroom.co.nz/main.html

Moore - US Trade Negotiations

Press Release: New Zealand Labour Party Date: Tuesday, 11
November 1997 Time: 5:36 pm NZT

RT HON MIKE MOORE LABOUR'S SPOKESPERSON ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS &
TRADE MP for WAIMAKARIRI

"The decision by the US Congress to deny President Clinton
the right to negotiate trade treaties is a setback, but not
a fatal one. My understanding is that the President will win
this authority early next year," Mike Moore Labour's Foreign
Affairs and Trade spokesperson said today.

Mr Moore said: "It's inconceivable that President Clinton
would be the first President since Harry Truman not to have
this authority. The US Congress gave its President the right
to negotiate trade treaties, but review that right every now
and again. Congress demands the right to ratify trade
treaties or to reject them, they cannot amend them. This is
the commonsense approach, because in President Kennedy's
time, Congress were amending treaties to protect vested
interests. That became impossible.

"I support the New Zealand Government in investigating a
free trade arrangement with America. There were discussions
in the corridors about this during my time as Minister. New
Zealand would be an overwhelming winner out of it.

"However, the Minister of International Trade, Dr Smith,
ought to realise that times have changed. We now have an MMP
Parliament and there ought to be Select Committee
consideration of the virtues of such an agreement. The
debate on the MAI shows how things can get out of hand and
be misunderstood if we are not open about negotiations. This
will improve the quality of Government.

"I also would like to know why the Minister, Dr Smith,
before the negotiations began, said that he would be
prepared to abolish the Dairy Board's monopoly on exports if
requested by the United States. It may well be a position we
arrive at, but playing the strongest cards before the talks
begin is a curious position. A free trade arrangement with
the US is a possibility, although Chile and Singapore
joining such an agreement should be done in parallel. It
should not contradict our APEC ambition. We should go ahead
with it, despite the reluctance of Australia to follow,"
concluded Mr Moore.



Moore: Euro good, but an ANZAC currency? Tuesday, 29
December 1998, 10:34 am Press Release: New Zealand Labour
Party

Labour MP Mike Moore said today that the implementation of a
European common currency this Friday is a milestone in the
history of a continent where for centuries the great white
tribes have been at each other's throats.

"The advent of the Euro will see one of the most profound
and historic decisions in the turbulent history of Europe
implemented.

"This is good for Europe and therefore good for the rest of
the world. Where Europe has integrated there is peace in
peace and prosperity, where it has not there is still
tension, lower growth, injustice, even war.

"This great event will probably go unnoticed, as the war in
Kosovo makes better headlines. Wars and conflict have been
the historic norm in Europe for centuries, while peace has
historically been unusual.

"The advent of a common currency in Europe will excite lazy
thinkers to talk of a common currency in this part of the
world - an ANZAC monetary unit for Australia and New
Zealand. This idea has been raised before, mainly from
Australia.

"What they are talking about is not a common currency but
New Zealand having Australia's currency. That's not on, it's
not a starter. The Australian dollar is driven by different
imperatives and a different market and product mix from New
Zealand's.

"A common currency is a different matter and Australia would
never agree to such an arrangement. This would mean the two
countries would have to agree on deficit, debt and even tax
regimes and tax levels.

"Australia wouldn't surrender these decisions to joint
agreement with New Zealand as an equal partner. Our self
interest dictates that we should have a dollar and wage
rates beneath those of Australia. We have to be more
competitive, more aggressive because Australia has economies
of scale and mineral resources beyond our imagination. The
attacker has the initiative, the advantage. The small guy
must be smarter and New Zealanders are," Mike Moore said.

Contact: Mike Moore, 03 352 4696



World economic crisis calls for new approach Sunday, 30
August 1998, 1:59 pm Press Release: New Zealand Labour Party

A new form of economic diplomacy is needed to cope with the
economic problems faced by the battered economies of Asia,
Russia and most likely Latin America, Labour's foreign
affairs and trade spokesperson Mike Moore said today.

Mike Moore has recently returned from a visit to Mexico,
Chile, Uruguay, Peru and Argentina, where he met with
foreign, trade and economic ministers, and with the
President of Uruguay.

"Every nation's prosperity is based on the capacity of its
neighbour to purchase. Economic security becomes an issue of
political security, and in this regard the IMF's work in our
region is as important as that of the US Seventh Fleet,"
Mike Moore said.

"Russia's problems are predictable. New Zealand is a
shareholder in the IMF and World Bank, and we are respected
members of the WTO. All of these organisations hold the key
to stability, growth and thus security.

"New Zealand can provide leadership. We face our biggest
economic crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s and
things could so horribly wrong. But hopefully we have
learnt.

"I don't believe policy makers have though the issues
through. I've spent the last few years writing a book
entitled A Brief History of the Future, to be published this
Thursday, 3 September, which covers these new economic
conditions.

"New Zealand's representatives to the IMF and the World Bank
should insist no new money goes to Russia without Russia
agreeing to basic domestic reform, such as tax reform and
bankruptcy laws. Tax in Russia currently represents only 10%
of GDP, and only 17% of Russian companies paid their taxes
fully and on time last year.

"Corruption is endemic. Russia is a great power and her
collapse will have a severe impact on the European Union,
particularly Germany.

"Here in New Zealand politicians were once mesmerised by the
domino effect on military security in our region. This
proved to be nonsense and now the greater danger is the
domino effect of individual economies in this global age
when markets are in a state of free fall.

"The generally shallow response by many New Zealand

politicians to these developments is dangerous. They can be

forgiven for not knowing the answers but it is unforgivable

not to know which questions to ask," Mike Moore said.

Contact: Mike Moore, 03 352 4696





US withdrawal from MAI disappointing

Press Release: New Zealand Labour Party Date: Sunday, 15
Febuary 1998 Time: 4:03 pm NZT


It is disappointing that the United States is signalling it
is not going to sign the Multilateral Agreement on
Investment (MAI) because a successful negotiation, given
appropriate reservations, would have stimulated the world's
investment growth and thus jobs, Labour's foreign affairs
and trade spokesperson Mike Moore said today.


Mr Moore said he didn't believe the negotiations were over
because the world needed rules on investment just as it has
rules on airlines, fishing and most other trading areas.

"However, each country has to reserve aspects of its
economy. For New Zealand it is the Treaty, public health
system and our overseas investment laws. There are other
areas, of course, that we would reserve.

"From a distance, without checking with the OECD which I
will do tomorrow, it looks like another battle between
Europe and the US. The Europeans have raised the issue of
the trade embargo with Cuba and other trade difficulties
with Libya and Iraq because US domestic laws are being used
to impose US policies world-wide.

"This is not appropriate action by the US. We cannot expect
countries to apply their domestic law, which is motivated by
political imperatives, on other countries. This is another
reason why we need an international agreement.

"However, the Cuban trade ban is already the subject of a
WTO investigation and is probably illegal. We need to hope,
particularly because of the Asian crisis, that negotiators
in Geneva get a lot closer. The MAI, with appropriate
reservations, is no threat to New Zealand. Indeed we would
not need to change one item of domestic law to accommodate
the agreement.

"What we need is neighbours and trading partners who are
prospering and enjoying growth because of the global
economy. Every nation would welcome jobs based on the
capacity of their partners to succeed.

"It will be disappointing also if agreement is not reached
because later on many developing countries will want to sign
up. The absence of this agreement gives more power to the
already powerful corporations and powerful countries. They
can and have pressured governments to accept investment on
certain criteria. This agreement would assist in ensuring
that all countries and companies are treated equally. Thus
this is an advantage for poorer countries and weaker
economies," Mr Moore said.

                          -----

Quotes from Mike Moore's "A Brief History of the Future"


Compiled by Dennis Small

In Aotearoa/New Zealand, Mike Moore is notorious for a
string of grossly simplistic, self-serving books. His latest
is "A Brief History of the Future: Citizenship of the
Millennium", Shoal Bay Press, Christchurch, 1998, ISBN 0
908704 77 1.

It is a very handy source for revealing Moore quotes (some
very ironic). Overall, his writing is full of contradictions
which reflects his notoriously muddled mind.  Here are some
expressions of his views:

(1) "Western capitalism and values have triumphed for the
present . . . Strategic resources are safe." (p.117)

(2) "However, it is clear that the powerful elite of
business people, politicians and intellectuals are out of
touch with the general population, the people who can see
the pain of these policies but not the gain.  The elite
throughout the world have more in common with each other
than with their constituents and shareholders.  This is not
new; it was also true of the princes and merchants of
earlier times." (p.9)

(3) "Critics of the WTO are often heard to claim that it
serves only the interests of the large trading powers.
Of course, the larger powers exert a stronger influence than
the smaller powers.  A system that failed to reflect certain
realities would not command the confidence of the major
powers and would drift quickly into the irrelevance that
frankly captures so many other international organisations."
(p. 73)

(4) "Like it or not, the world economy will always drive us;
we will never drive it." (p.49)

(5) "Our living standards - how we eat, our entertainment
trends, what we wear, even what we believe - are frequently
beyond our control." (p.50)

(6) "Power doesn't corrupt: it's what politicians do to get
power that corrupts." (p.107)

(7) "It's not that government in principle is bad.  It's
just that governments everywhere are incapable of
controlling the changes that are being thrust upon us."
(p.107)

(8) Critics of the World Bank and the International Monetary
Fund (IMF) are: " . . a few deranged misfits on the edges of
obscure universities, people who tuck their shirts into
their underpants, the remnants of pressure groups and a few
geriatrics who claim that Marxism, like Christianity, has
not been tried yet." (p.71)

(9) Moore goes along with the "megatrends" predicted by John
Naibitt and co., including: "the triumph of the individual";
"free-market socialism"; and "the privatisation of the
welfare state" (pp.26,27)

(10) Moore quotes enthusiastically from "The Sovereign
Individual" by James Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg,
e.g. p.89 where opponents of globalisation are condemned as
"reactionary losers".

(11) Moore on old-style protectionism: "Vested interests
will always conspire against the rest of us to protect
themselves.  It's when they combine to control both the
market and the politicians that we have to fear." (p.41)

(12) Moore approvingly quotes US Secretary of State,
Madeleine Albright: "If we choose to hide behind walls
rather than tear them down, our products will face higher
tariffs . . . we will have no success at all in promoting
higher environmental and labour standards." (p.46)

(13) "Increased equality and improved human rights will also
flow from the liberalising of markets." (p.59)

(14) Moore again quotes Madeleine Albright in the claim
that: "The evidence is clear that globalisation is not
lowering standards around the world, it is raising them."
(p.52)

(15) "Far from weakening the integrity of a nation's state
and allowing the great multinationals to ravage the world, I
believe the GATT and the WTO do the opposite." (p.72)

(16) Moore on the MAI:
"It's about jobs, a safer, cleaner environment, and a more
secure, stable, global political economic and social
environment.  The MAI was designed to protect and encourage
foreign investment because it is such investment that has
helped fuel global economic growth and the increasing
globalisation of wealth." (p.51) "Investment agreements like
the MAI will be of the greatest long-term benefit to
developing nations." (p.56)

(17) " . . . I have no doubt that overall, trade
liberalisation around the world creates jobs, raises income
levels and gives workers caught in poverty traps in
developing countries the means to extricate themselves in
the long term." (p.54)

(18) Part-time jobs have burgeoned in all Western countries
. . . Working conditions are eroded . . . Productivity has
become uncoupled from employment . . . New technologies and
the international competitive drive mean downsizing to seize
and maintain a competitive cost advantage." (p.104)

(19) "Wealthy companies often appear keen to take advantage
of lower environmental and labour standards in developing
countries in order to increase profits which could be seen
as exploitative." (p.74)

(20) "Commerce, given the correct economic signals, has the
ability to adapt and create new products and innovations to
achieve more sustainable results.  When governments try to
control and subsidise outcomes, they make things worse and
stall progress." (p.171)