[asia-apec 1111] NZ Government NGO Strategy on APEC Exposed

[Gatt Watchdog]

Government NGO Strategy on APEC 1999 Exposed - Aziz Choudry, GATT
Watchdog & Aotearoa/New Zealand APEC Monitoring Group

Official documents show Government strategies to bring about "constructive
participation by NGOs in the APEC process" to be a cynical cosmetic exercise.  

While consulting with businesses about their priorities for APEC 1999, it does
not propose to consult with NGOs or Maori about issues of substance - but
wants to bring them onside in promoting the supposed benefits of APEC's free
trade, free market agenda. The more people and organisations that it can get
to participate in this year's APEC meetings, the more support Wellington will
claim for APEC's free-market goals.  
  
APEC promotes a regional version of the New Zealand Experiment.  APEC's
supporters say that what is good for business is good for the peoples of the
region, that inequality is inevitable and desirable, and that there are no
alternatives to the free market.

To engage with APEC and seek to change it from within is to misunderstand the
nature of the forum.  As Joan Spero, US Undersecretary for Economic, Business
and Agricultural Affairs told US Congress in 1995 "APEC is not for
governments; it is for business.  Through APEC, we aim to get governments out
of the way, opening the way for business to do business."  

To become involved in the APEC circus is to help legitimise and stabilise a
forum which lacks political legitimacy - and to accept its redefinition of
basic rights on APEC's terms. As a community of "economies" APEC conveniently
excludes from consideration the social, political, environmental, and
cultural effects of its narrow economic programme.

Robert Reid argues that trying to get a seat at the APEC table for "civil
society" "will be as successful as urging a tiger to become a vegetarian.  For
those organising at the grassroots...exploitation, discrimination and
repression in the workplace are the natural consequences of globalisation, not
an unfortunate byproduct that can be fixed by a social contract".  APEC is a
creature of the market.  It has always been heavily influenced and its work
programme directed by private sector free marketeers.  

Previous APEC host governments have tried to stave off criticism of the
secretive, anti-democratic nature in which APEC operates, sometimes throwing
the mildest critics a bone - a marginal role on the fringes of official
events. Some unions and environmental NGOs sympathetic to APEC's goals have
been selected to take part in low-level APEC working groups. 

The government has hired an NGO Liaison Officer for the APEC Taskforce whose
job is to co-opt NGOs into the APEC programme.  It believes that:

"ensuring constructive participation by NGOs in the APEC process will be a
critical part of communicating the what, why and how of APEC to the New
Zealand community. It would also serve to demonstrate to the international
community New Zealand's ability to accommodate debate and dissent among a
variety of NGOs".  

This will require "engaging effectively" with "responsive" groups
and "helping to meet, as far as possible, their own objectives of being seen
to influence outcomes...and "involves building broad public support for APEC
and actively managing the risk of disruption."

Cabinet papers on the APEC NGO strategy state: "It will be important to avoid
getting bogged down in long, resource-intensive consultations." The government
has absolutely no intention of engaging seriously with informed analysis or
debate about the package of reforms which APEC promotes. 

After all:  "Advertising and public relations activities will be required to
get the APEC 1999 brand in the market place as quickly as possible, but will
not focus on the complex substance of the APEC process such as trade
liberalisation or facilitation."  

Such moves must be seen in the context of the crisis of credibility engulfing
APEC and other forums promoting unrestricted trade and investment.  And it's
election year.

The economic model underpinning APEC is being challenged. Many governments
have become more ambivalent about further trade and investment liberalisation.
For years, people's movements, many NGOs, unions and community groups
throughout the region have condemned APEC as yet another forum which puts
economic growth and a "free" market over the rights of the peoples of the
region and the environment. APEC's solution to this crisis? Better public
relations strategies.

At the November 1997 Vancouver APEC Summit, APEC ministers endorsed a public
relations campaign because "support among the people of the region for
continuing trade and investment liberalisation is essential."

Last May, the Singapore-based APEC Secretariat called for proposals from
communications consultants to help raise "understanding and support for
liberalisation".  And in Kuala Lumpur last November, APEC ministers "tasked
officials to develop effective communication strategies to build community
understanding for liberalisation". 

So government overtures to NGOs to get involved with APEC are driven by
desperation. Other APEC host governments, notably the Philippines
and Canada, have tried to mute debate and dissent about APEC by
funding parallel People's Summits in Manila, Vancouver and Kuala Lumpur.
Official documents show that the Canadian government saw such moves as useful
to "vent steam" and display an image of democratic debate to domestic and
international audiences.

The quest is on to find new ways to sell the message that APEC is good for us
all.

Through APEC, the government wants to showcase "the New Zealand Experiment" to
internationally. This April, Jenny Shipley told the Christchurch APEC
Ministerial Meeting to follow New Zealand-style reforms, urging other
APEC countries to go further and faster down the free trade and investment
track.

While community organisations are being expected to provide relief for the
many casualties of free market policies, the government apparently views the
same groups as potential vehicles for selling APEC to the public.  As it
retreats from the provision of social services, as health and education become
market-driven and the privatisation of the country's infrastructure continues,
it wants the same NGOs to operate as the social safety net which is rapidly
being ripped asunder, and to compete with each other for funding and political
power.

There are alternatives to APEC's global freemarket agenda. But they are
emerging from the grassroots peoples' struggles. Organisations like GATT
Watchdog, the Aotearoa/New Zealand APEC Monitoring Group and Corso have long
been promoting open, informed, genuine debate about the market model and
globalisation.

But as we work to build just alternatives in our communities, perhaps we need
to ask some hard questions about the real motives of the government in
promoting "constructive engagement" and "dialogue" with NGOs about issues like
APEC.