Mr. Arthur Gray - Director, Foreign Policy and External Economic Relations, Caribbean Community Secretariat (CARICOM), Guyana

"CARICOM and Preparations for FTA Negotiations."

Comments

Mr. Anselm Francis asked about the mechanisms being created to work out regional positions for trade negotiations, such as with regard to the North American Free Trade Area.

Mr. Gray pointed to the formation of working groups (primarily at the technical advisory group level) and the provisions being made for consultation with all relevant organisations including trade unions and non-governmental organisations, as well as within academia.

Dr. Arnold McIntyre expressed concern that working groups were exhaustive, highly bureaucratic and expensive, burdening member states who had limited resources. Who would provide necessary support and financing? He also asked whether CARICOM was building upon its past experiences. Why , for example, was there no institutional support for trade within the Caribbean and with Latin America? In addition, he asked for a more detailed description of the "technical unit": its anticipated size, location, financing and staffing.

Mr Gray did not share Dr. Mc Intyre's perception of an unwieldy CARICOM bureaucracy. A more pressing concern was locating adequate human and financial resources. A proposal had been made and the decision already taken to house the technical unit at the Secretariat. These arrangements and agreements were only at the preliminary stage and most of the logistics, including financing, were still to be worked out. Since Governments had shown little respect for the private sector, CARICOM was experiencing difficulty involving it in the negotiating process.

Mr. Trevor Harker inquired about the difficulties experienced with involving labour unions, academics and the private sector in the negotiating process, and whether these difficulties originated with government or business.

Mr. Gray opined that a society's political culture determined the nature of its members' participation in the process.

Dr. Carlos Moore argued that NGOs had been co-opted by the region's technical and governmental structures and had now become "regulators of peoples' action" . Who, therefore, was expressing the voice of the people in the negotiating process? Why, with all of its structured units and bureaucracy, wasn't CARICOM doing the research needed to understand people's views?

Mr. Gray discounted Dr. Moore's assertion that NGOs were being co-opted. His perception was that NGOs were actually being more effective in reaching government and other agencies which hitherto had ignored them and their concerns. He also recognised the work of academic institutions in providing research and information, but acknowledged that this was inadequate and that more could be done.

Mr. Errol Tiwari inquired about Mr. Gray's perception of a loss of influence of regional groups and states in international issues. Mr. Tiwari also called for the training and sensitisation of the private sector and non-governmental organisations on the FTAA process.

Mr. Gray noted that in the 1960s and 1970s CARICOM states had been active participants as well as leaders in addressing Third World issues but that the Caribbean had abandoned the radicalism of the 1970s. It was no longer able to ride on OPEC and Group of 77 negotiating power. Additionally, with the demise of the Cold War the region had lost its main negotiating leverage. A major contemporary concern had therefore become the use of the FTAA to strengthen the Caribbean's international position.

Dr. David Lewis wanted to know how we could "catch up" with other regions who were further ahead in this process. How were we learning from their experience and example?

Mr. Gray spoke of the need for a new FTAA orientation. CARICOM had not done any ground work in preparation for the new trading reality. It was necessary to augment CARICOM's trade negotiating skills and expertise by sourcing people trained in trade diplomacy.

Mr. Felipe Noguera criticised the actual methodology of the regional trade approach as manifested in the hierarchy of "working groups". He argued for the expansion of the negotiating base reflecting collaboration and co-ordination between government representatives, the private sector and regional groups. Secondly, he suggested that CARICOM make overtures to SADAC given our common history of Non Alignment and Lomé. Thirdly, he called for the involvement of the region's youth in meetings such as this if only as observers.

Mr. Gray projected that all these elements (social organisations; youth) would be co-opted into the process and encouraged to collaborate. Responding to Mr. Noguera's question about CARICOM-SADAC relations, Mr. Gray admitted that this region had been slow to capitalise on trading opportunities with South Africa. He noted, however, that a trade and investment delegation was scheduled to visit South Africa in June 1997. He further added that CARICOM, aware of the advantages to be gained from a co-ordinated negotiating position, was resisting attempts within the EU to differentiate among African, Pacific and Caribbean groupings within the ACP.

Mr. Gray responded to Mr. Noguera's third question by indicating that the issue of regional youth involvement needed to be addressed within the wider context of human resource development.

According to Dr. Anthony Gonzales, CARICOM needed to be recognised as a unitary organ, the way the European Union already was. Dr. Gonzales also argued that international representation was costly and that individual states would be better served by a single, properly co-ordinated commission presenting the regional position and reporting back to CARICOM. He further commented that the CARICOM negotiating process seemed to be undemocratic, especially in terms of representation on negotiating bodies with no clear principles and policies governing rotation.

Mr. Gray answered that the responsibility for unitary representation lay with governments but that they were still reluctant to delegate responsibility to any centre. In fact, some governments still did not recognise CARICOM itself.

Ms. Madonna Sampson wondered why CARICOM hadn't placed the development of an effective communications policy at the top of its agenda.

Mr. Gray agreed with the need for a regional communications policy but pointed to problems associated with its establishment.