 Well good afternoon. I'm Merit Jayno, Dean of the School of International Affairs at Columbia University and a former member of the WTO Pellet Body. So it's a really a great pleasure for me to moderate this afternoon's discussion with five individuals who are really, couldn't be more involved in the international trading system from very different perspectives and experiences. So we're entering into this conversation today on rebooting international trade in a moment when the external environment is experiencing a slowdown in the pace of trade growth. World Bank studies are showing that trade is growing now more slowly than the global economy which is perhaps the first time in decades that this has been the case. But it's an extraordinarily active moment in international trade policy and negotiations. We saw a year ago a conversation of this kind here and we were congratulating Director General Acevedo for the conclusion of the Bali Ministerial and the Trade Facilitation Agreement in the period since. Of course the United States and India have been able to come to an interpretation of the peace clause on food security that seems to have gotten that process back on track. There have been further substantial negotiations in the mega regional negotiations, the transatlantic and the trans-pacific, as well as other regional negotiations involving Japan, China and Korea. And of course a profound conversation in the world about the relationship between these regionals and the multilateral system and serious negotiations and consultations at the multilateral level as well about services, plurilaterals and next steps in the Doha development agenda. So I can't imagine a more expert group to engage this conversation today and I just want to welcome you briefly that we have the Director General of the WTO Roberto Acevedo, Frank Apil Apel, excuse me I'll call you Frank so I don't abuse your name, who is the Chief Executive Officer of the Deutsche Poes DHL and Broad Global Experience as a company all over the world. Of course Ambassador Michael Froman, US Trade Representative. Minister Muhammad, who's the Minister of International Trade and Industry of Malaysia and Mark Weinberger who's the Global Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Ernst & Young. So thank you all very much for being with us today. I think to start us off I'd like to invite each of you briefly to share with us what is on the top of your minds with respect to how we could overcome existing obstacles and support inclusive economic growth by engaging the international trading system and if I could invite Director General Acevedo to get us started. Yeah well thank you very much and I agree with you that these are very important topics in that we need to discuss them in depth. The number of opportunities for the multilateral system to contribute to economic growth and expansion of trade and welfare in developing countries and developed countries is immense. Right now we have several opportunities. Let's start with the implementation of the Bali results that's already a very big outcome that we have before us. Let alone the results which are very important for the least developed countries that came out of Bali the trade facilitation agreement is emblematic. We're talking about an agreement that could inject into the world economy about one trillion dollars a year. Its estimates are of a creation of 21 million jobs around the world. 18 million of those jobs in developing countries. So that in itself is once implemented is going to be a big boost. We have a mandate to finalize a work program to conclude the Doha development round by July. Not concluded round by July but they'll conclude the work program by July of this year and if we do that if we do that in a very specific way very detailed manner I think we would be well positioned to conclude the round in a short period of time. On top of that we have a ministerial conference in Nairobi. The 10th ministerial conference in December in Nairobi it will be the first time that we're going to have a ministerial conference in Africa the whole African continent is involved is aware of the opportunities that trade bring to them in terms of development of social inclusion so this is very important and we also have other initiatives that we are working on we are working on the expansion of the information technology agreement which has it's not fully multilateral but the results of that agreement are multilateral so they apply to everyone and that is an agreement that would expand the the coverage by 200 products which would involve amounts of around again one trillion dollars a year so it's a huge agreement that we hope we can finalize this year. We're working on that as well there are other things we're working on the environmental goods agreement as well proletarily some members are working on that again with a multilateral result so even if the number of participants is not the whole membership the results are applicable so the liberalization is applicable to all 160 members so we have a lot going on and it's an opportunity to seize this momentum and actually deliver multilaterally. Thank you very much. When I'm talking about that two things always come to my mind and that is peace and growth you know being born in race in Hamburg Germany in 1961 you know I lived in a country and was racing a country which has you know you know created the worst worst and biggest war ever on our planet and if you now look you know what free trade agreements have achieved I think the single biggest reason why this planet is a more peaceful planet is global trade and connectivity somehow and in addition what the Director General said we can stimulate at the same time growth tremendously so we do once a year a study which we call DHS Connectedness and what you see there you know the most connected countries in the world have the highest human development index. Neverland is the number one and they have very high social standards they have very little inequality this is a very liberal open country and you can see that you know other countries there are Sweden UK Germany and that comes to growth actually if you look into the list of a top ten all of them you know have shown tremendous resilience in the last financial crisis and why because if you're open to others in any dimension and we are measuring not only trade we are merging information flow how many people are talking to other countries financial flow what you see you generate resilience in your country because you are adapted to change free trade open borders are creating you know the pressure to change and adapt and you are better prepared if the financial crisis comes then if it's difficult if you look into the list again when we are assessing 140 countries you can guess where we have at the moment conflicts many of them at the bottom of that list because the people don't understand that the world might be different and conflicts are linked to that and actually the more connected the world is and yet coming back to a piece you know a business usually have not a tendency to destroy your own investment somewhere so and that's the reason why we're half a different situation if you have foreign investments all over the place people don't want to destroy their own investments and we see that in the current conflicts to a certain extent as well that it doesn't escalate in some places too much because you know there is economic interest all over the place so I think you know these are two things I always think about you know the growth opportunity and globalization and open borders have been one if not the most important rather why this planet is a much more peaceful place thank you very much master from well we're we're approaching the trade agenda from the perspective of very importantly opening markets furthering liberalization to promote growth to promote jobs to create good well-paying jobs for our for our people and create opportunity for them but also as a way of raising standards around the world whether it's labor and environmental standards whether it's strengthening intellectual property rights while at the same time ensuring access to to innovation whether it's putting disciplines around state-owned enterprises to make sure when they act commercially they when they operate in the commercial world they act on a commercial basis and have a level playing field with private firms whether it's to promote a free and open internet and the flow of information across borders we see these trade agreements whether it's TPP our t-tip and I'll come back to the WTO in a moment as ways to both in to promote economic growth and prosperity also they have strong strategic importance bringing countries closer together at a time when there's a lot of geopolitical instability in the world so it's very much core to our economic strategy about promoting growth creating jobs strengthening our economy but also a key part of our overall strategic approach the WTO is a critical part of that our pursuit of TPP and t-tip is all intended so that we can move forward on trade liberalization move forward on raising standards and developing new rules in a way that's supportive ultimately of the multilateral trading system and we all know that multilateral trade liberalization is the highest and best form of trade liberalization and I think the WTO is at a critical moment when all the member states are looking at each other and looking at the Director General to determine can we take into account changes that have occurred over the last decade or two ways to how to incorporate those changes whether it's the rise of the emerging economies and the kinds of responsibilities and obligations that they should have to the international economy but also new issues that are on the agenda that also need to be addressed we want to make sure we're promoting the development agenda but there's a debate out there among developing countries about what is the link between development and trade we see it in Latin America where a number of Latin American countries have identified trade and investment liberalization is absolutely key to development and others have gone in a different direction so we need to have that debate in Geneva as well as it happening around the world and then we need to look at the whole agenda the Doha development round agenda see where the countries are and determine what is the best way forward what's going to be doable what's pragmatic what's realistic in order to move the agenda and the institution forward because it's very important from our perspective that the WTO be not just a dispute settlement mechanism as important as that is but also a mechanism for solving problems and for advancing the economic prosperity and so figuring out what is the right scope of the agenda for moving forward I think will be absolutely critical thank you very much minister mohammed thank you married I did not claim to be representing the developing world but I'm the only one from this group of countries and from Malaysia and part of ASEAN so let me talk a bit about the developing perspective in the context of obstacles and that your opening words you know what do we see as obstacles one can look at this from two perspectives one would be sectoral I mean the issues on sectors agriculture and others that could be an obstacle secondly of course levels of development different levels of development so of course Doha round is meant to promote the development agenda including the least developed countries and to move 160 countries together of course it's a tough act and that's why that's one reason why there's been many obstacles in the last 10 years or so so that's my first point in as far as obstacles a concern one can look from point of view of sectors or where you belong in this development ladder next let me say a few words about I mean I agree Frank I'm connected and the human development index or development the correlation between development and openness and connected you know connectivity I think it's clear I mean that's a given and no one would dispute that but the difficulties we have all of us want to get the maximum I mean promoting our national interest and in the end it's a matter of finding a middle ground and it's difficult to find a middle ground and all of us would like to get the best in any trade deal and we all know that trade is good for us and it has effect that openness has resulted in a higher level of development and connected being connected of course as you say Netherlands you know the best in terms of human development index we all agree with that the but issue is I am from ASEAN I mean we are 10 countries and this year we're going to declare ourselves as a community and I just want to share with you the approach we've taken it's a modest you know in terms of a level of ambition it's a modest we operate the consensus and that's why we've been able to progress but we've been progressing in the area of trade partly because we have a modest level of ambition and we have a field treatment among ourselves we've gone to Japan Korea China and now we got RCEP which is Regional Convincing Economic Partnership 10 countries and ASEAN plus another six countries and in ASEAN we recognize the centrality of ASEAN is driven by the ASEAN agenda and that's why we've been able to achieve a bit more progress finally I would like to say a few words about Michael we've been talking a lot about modern high quality in 21st century this is an issue that that because US has been talking quite a bit in the last four or five years and this is posing again talking from the developing country perspective yeah we want to be a modern country we want to be in the 21st century we want high quality and there are some challenges and for a developing country of course that's another that could not get that could be another obstacle in terms of achieving progress so I thought I would like to share with you some developing country perspectives including the ASEAN and this year Malaysia is chair of ASEAN and we are hoping to take a leadership position in achieving a greater progress in the area of economic integration among 10 countries and of course with our trading partners thank you thank you very much Mark may I invite you to speak from your perspective thank you global services company absolutely Mary thank you so you asked quickly two or three minutes challenges and opportunities I think the biggest challenge to trade agreements is politics you know we talk about the benefits of trade to growth and that's tremendous and we all believe it when you study it but that's diffuse and the dislocation that comes with trade is specific and that's difficult so I read the interest in the newspaper on the way down here actually about you know we're US and Cuba starting to open up discussions about how to start doing more trade together and it talked about how Cubans are very excited about having US tools to be able to do more fish and farming well there's a great example helps US experts helps productivity in Cuba opens more markets creates more opportunity but that's not something that translates into just saying growth so you have to multiply that times the opportunity you have by these bigger trade deals and there's great stories they're hard to get out there so I think that's a challenge we have great trade negotiator great ambassadors I have no concerns there but we need to help on the business community to back that up second would be with the minister talked about and ambassador talked about the challenges today's trade agreements are more difficult than they've ever been businesses aren't any longer focused on tariffs quotas and subsidies is the real problem it is open markets it is state owned enterprises it is IP protection it is a whole bunch of issues that are barriers to investment that have to be dealt with to really open up the borders and so that's on the table that's great but that does as the minister said make a more complicated and so it's harder to get multinational agreements when you're opening up all these issues so that's another challenge so now the opportunity I think the regional approach has been terrific at getting domestic issues on the table in these regional agreements that hopefully someday will build to a larger global agreement and it is easier to tackle in smaller bite-sized pieces hopefully as a laboratory moving towards the more global agreements and so I think the approach that we've seen in the progress when we're not over the finish line yet on TPP or TTIP or anything else has really given confidence again that we can get some of these things done and brought politicians people to focus on it so I think there's a real opportunity there as well. Well thank you very much why don't we start a little our conversation really about the multilateral and if I could invite Roberto as you say that you see the period between now and June is a critical period to really identify a work plan to to really hopefully get over the finish line with some conception of the Doha development agenda what do you do between now and June? Well I think the first thing we need to do is realize that we cannot just resume this conversation by getting the old instructions you know dusting the books and then reading you know from old positions the world changed really for the last six years and certainly over the last 13, 14 years since the round started but what does that mean is that we were converging I think until 2008 clearly the negotiations were bringing us to a kind of result that was manageable at that point in time I was at that point in time a negotiator Pascal who's sitting here was leading the process he was the director general at the time and we were approximating but I think that at that point in time and particularly after the financial crisis we began to drift apart and clearly the reality changed and at that point in time I think we began to have different types of sensitivities different types of policy decisions that now are completely different bring us to a completely different scenario what we have to do now is look at what we have today and see whether what we have today in terms of sensitivities in terms of ambition is compatible with what we were doing before I think that we have to start that conversation I think Michael made the point that we have to be open minded we have to be creative and be realistic and pragmatic about what can be done today the worst case scenario for me is one of immobility is paralysis that I think is the worst case scenario for the WTO and for the global system and for the economy for the global economy so let's be creative let's be open minded between now and July figure out where we are today what is achievable and then engineer rules and disciplines and agreements that are compatible with that kind of landmark that we have established for ourselves I think yours is one of the most difficult jobs in the world you have 160 jurisdictions and and really a bully pulpit to convince can you give us a little more flavor where you think there is more consensus than other places could you give us or is this not the moment for that tough question I think we all consensually agree that unless we are engaged and unless we talk honestly about these things we're not going to go anywhere and and I think that the more I talk to people and I went to to India just last week and to Cairo I met with five different ministers from African countries they all realize that we need to do something different and that we need to be ready to negotiate now each one has a different perspective about what we can do in agriculture what we can do in industrial goods what we can do in services etc etc but without the conversation then clearly we're not going to be in a position to establish what common ground could exist in each of these areas and I and I think that that's what we have to do now sit down and talk okay thank you very much well you have someone sitting next to you whose voices is significant in this process Mike can you share with us how you're thinking about advancing and I and I note that you said very recently in the press again what you said today which is we have to be realistic we have to move this forward it's been a long time in negotiation it's really a time to act and suggestive that if it doesn't move forward you know that you're thinking hard about what that means so could you share a little bit more about your thinking well I think for the the health of the system which we all care about it's important that we do find a way to move forward and that's why the kind of conversation that we're referring to of having an honest frank discussion about where the member countries are are willing to go and where they're not willing to go no country is going to get you know backed into a corner to agree to something that that crosses a red line so let's have that conversation about where are our red lines where are our sensitivities where can we take this agenda going forward I think over the last few years there's been there's been a lot of creative thinking going on in Geneva that has led to plural laterals and you know more honest conversations about fresh credible approaches to moving the agenda forward and that's the kind of thing that that that needs to crystallize now to determine how best to do that how best to do that also in a way that's consistent with the development imperative so that we're addressing the development issues and how to make sure that the system moves forward in a healthy way you know again no country is going to be forced to take on obligations against its consent but nor should we allow one country to block other countries moving forward if there's a willingness and a desire to do so thank you very much minister Mohammed what is your perspective about next steps in the multilateral process multilateral there are some challenges Bali there's been progress but some say it's limited but you know something's better than nothing so we are very supportive of this process building block kind of you start small and you move to bigger things what is important is I think to convince countries this is win win you know developing countries developed countries and that's a difficult part and where is the middle ground and then this issue of developed versus developing countries least developed countries there's got to be a understanding of the need to bring up the level development of the least developed countries well there's been broad agreement on that but when it comes to details we run up into some problems so one is to convince countries and in the end of course our people that it is win win develop and developing least developed the other will be this issue of small minimum prices that is going to benefit of course we cannot possibly benefit everyone but the the vast majority of people including small minimum enterprises will have to be convinced they need to be convinced that you know there's something to over them so the way forward is to strike a balance compromises transparent realistic and unfortunately that there's got to do the level of ambition we have very high level of course in any negotiation but in some of these negotiations I think over the years we become more and more realistic and in some cases we've been able to find the middle ground so that's a challenge yeah to convince our stakeholders that it is beneficial it's mutually beneficial it's not a one-sided agreement thank you this is a very diplomatic conversation I'd like to I'd like to encourage our business executives you know business hasn't always been that encouraging of the Doha agenda I would say I mean there have been periods when it's been hard to find business leaders really putting their weight into advancing so I'd like to invite both of you how how resolute do you see support for moving ahead on the multilateral issues which are very you know expansive agriculture services tariff reductions many areas so where do you see private sector support to be most obvious and engaged yeah sure I'll start praying you maybe correct me I think I'm pretty confident that the business sector is very much behind it but it's like you know either tax reform or entitlement reform which is dealing with the difficult issues of seeing you know paying for senior benefits everyone's for the concept and then when you get to the details it gets a lot more complicated and that's where you see I think business start to worry about splintering that being said so in the U.S. I sit on the business roundtable which is the largest businesses in the U.S. we have three priorities tax reform is one trade is the second and immigration is the third there's a lot of other sub priorities but what we are convincing the businesses to do is to put aside our separate agendas for the benefit of overall trade and what we see happening how these negotiations are occurring under Ambassador Fromans in the U.S. standpoint we believe there's real opportunity and so you're seeing an excitement and optimism and a real desire to get something done recognizing that there's going to be some people who want to agree with everything that's in it but it's rare to get to the top of the agenda and it's right up there. Thank you very much. May let me add to that because you know what you're right Mary that it has changed particularly for small and mid-size enterprises from being in its dangers for multinationals are coming in my market and take my business away to due to the internet and the transparency now this is an opportunity so they said in the mid-size when I'm talking to them as well and smaller companies see that as a tremendous opportunity so what I think the problem for the business is that we are not vocal enough we take that as a no-brainer anyway you know there's always good and we are not strong enough to advocate or being ambassador for open markets and you know that we need common standards and that's the challenge I think the businesses faces you know the politicians don't get enough verbal support the wrong people saying it's all dangerous jobs are going away it's the opposite but we are not talking about that enough so that's I think has changed from it's only for the multinationals now the small and mid-size enterprises see that as a big opportunity but none nobody is talking about that because we see it as a no-brainer. Okay very good time to talk more than can I just build on on Frank's point because I think it's very important large corporations have the resources to navigate the complexities of the global economy it's the small and medium-sized businesses that stand to benefit the most from these agreements whether it's the trade facilitation agreement at the WTO or TPP where we are specifically focused on small and medium-sized businesses on e-commerce which is the way that many small medium-sized businesses engage with the international economy or in t-tip where a lot of the focus is on trying to bridge divergences in the regulatory or standards regimes without lowering the level of protection in such a way that firms don't have to maintain two separate production lines that they're able to do products once or test products once rather than twice they don't have to hire people in order to navigate multiple different sets of regulations so it's really in our country we have 300,000 firms that export 98 percent of them are small and medium-sized businesses businesses with fewer than 500 people and yet only a very small percentage of all of our small and medium-sized businesses export and most of them export to only one country so there's huge potential here if we can use these various mechanisms at the WTO regionally Asia with with Europe to make it easier and more efficient for these firms to gauge the the vast majority of the customers that live outside their country and that's what this is really all about and that's where a lot of the opportunity is to be created. Thank you well if you don't mind we'll shift now to talk about some of these regionals you started to mention them and it does seem that there is a lot more energy focused on the regionals and it makes one wonder if we have to get over at least some of them reach some conclusion before you can really advance the multilateral are they and what is the relationship how is it how are the dynamics between the negotiation of the mega regionals and the multilateral. I note even here in in Davos I've been to several sessions where we've had European leaders say that concluding the t-tip is a high priority and seen as a really important step that could be taken to stimulate growth without additional expenditures at that point has been made several times and I guess there's an expectation that the trans-Pacific one is farther along than the transatlantic that the coverage in areas are somewhat different and of course the economies that are members of it are different what is your sense Mike of where we are in the trans-Pacific and negotiations how close are we what's next and how do we advance this further. Well we are we are quite far along with the negotiations we are certainly in the end game which doesn't mean that there aren't difficult issues to resolve the issues that are left are manageable in number but the ones that are left at the end of course are always the most challenging whether it's in market access or on the rule side and we're working very closely with minister Mustafa and our 10 other counterparts to find landing zones work through solutions consult with our our publics and our stakeholders and our in our case congress in other cases their parliaments to be able to find an outcome here that meets the high standard ambitious comprehensive objectives that we set out so we're very much and as Mustafa would I'm sure concur our teams are working very very actively our leaders got together in November to discuss the the timetable and the work program and we're all working very hard to reach a conclusion there again there are hard issues still left to resolve but we're making very good progress minister could you speak to this it do you see these as a as the first priority or do you see this as an equal priority to the WTO do you feel like this has got more momentum from your perspective how do these relate to each other we are frank and honest and transparent here I think the problem is you know in the WTO is the number of countries 160 is tough so we've been stuck in the Doha for more than 10 years and that's why in where I come from in ASEAN our priority will be ASEAN next we say our dialogue partners and now we're doing RCEP but for us in Malaysia it's not just the RCEP is the 10 plus 6 ASEAN countries plus Japan Korea China Australia New Zealand in India we are we are 18 months into that so that's a priority for all ASEAN countries 10 of us for Malaysia and for the three other countries we are also in TPP Brunei Singapore Vietnam and Malaysia so the question is why are you in both firstly WTO we firm believers in the material system but because it's not moving as fast therefore it makes sense I mean we do not want to be stuck forever I mean we are many of us are open training nations we are dependent on trade I mean if you wait for this this day to be to reach the promised land is going to take a while so for us ASEAN is a priority RCEP and for four of us we are doing TPP in parallel so first best will be WTO but to be realistic because some of us might be impatient yeah so that's why we are four of us in ASEAN involved in both the regional as well as the trans-specific partnership thank you thank you very much hey mr. Acevedo you have a challenge here how do you reconcile how do you have the WTO play a role with respect to these regions that you think would be helpful to the entire system well the regionals are not a novelty always had them and we will continue to have them in my view they complement what we do multilaterally they don't substitute clearly what we do for me the most important is to reactivate the negotiations in the WTO and people ask me is are the regionals and these mega blocks a threat to the multilateral system and I always respond no the threat to the multilateral system is the WTO itself if the WTO does not deliver that's the biggest threat that you would have so we have to begin to deliver results which are meaningful in which are of significance to all all members I think these regional agreements in fact are helpful because I said today in an interview the trade liberalization is contagious because it's about the frame of mind it's about a set of policies and to the extent that you have important players and important an important number of countries and regions involved in trade liberalization it helps the the the environment in Geneva and it inspires the negotiations in Geneva what we have to figure out is how to take account of the different realities we are actually 160 members but I don't think that we are we are where we are because of the number if we were just 12 members we would still be in the same situation because it is deep differences between the core group that are paralyzing us if we figure out how to bridge those differences in the core group I think you can multilateralize that conversation rather quickly so I think there is a potential for synergies between the the regional agreements these these free trade agreements and the multilateral system they do not fight against each other in fact they could be helping each other thank you one of the things I have heard ambassador from and say and others involved in in these negotiations is that they go farther than the WTO that they're representative of deeper integration more responsive to the economy today than the Uruguay round agreements which are already now 14 years old and of course one of those areas it has to do with supply chains relevance to your to your sector what does deep integration look like and how is that do you see that being engaged by these regional arrangements I think deep integration means that you know the whole discussion is not any longer about duties and tariffs it's really about standardization I I think we have the opportunity at the moment in particular in the t-tip to create global standards which is beneficial before the world starts to develop new standard somewhere because we can't agree and we have different standards in the US and in Europe I think we should use that and that means that if we really standardize the world on certain in certain industries that really creates a deep integration because then the products are serving the same purpose with the same specification and that is what I think is deep integration it's not just tariffs and duties because that's not the issue between the US and Europe you know that's marginal anyway and it's probably also becoming less and less important for a multilateral negotiation it's much more the standardization of and the red tape which is still linked to and is actually waste yeah you know red tape is waste if you have that take it out you can reinvest it into in other stuff for more growth infrastructure education whatsoever so I think deep integration for me is really that we are agreeing on common standards and if we do so then we create global standards and if you do that I think then everybody can benefit from that and that can be then translated later on as well in multilateral standard standardizations and in multilateral agreements Mark would you care to comment on that do you see that occurring in your industry yeah absolutely so you take you know one of the most important things for us is consistent regulation we can't operate in 152 countries under different standards consistently and our clients can either so some of the debate around whether you want to have you know mute you know harmonized regulation or ret mutual recognition that debate's happening now more and I think that's appropriate and hopefully that will expand a multinational level and we'll learn from it at the at the regional level these are the issues that are at the heart of really in in our view and inhibiting cross-border investment and cross-border ability to share data you know you got the privacy issues you got the e-commerce issues all these things are now on the table which is the good thing the hard thing is now that you gotta solve it yeah and that is precisely the challenge that we have today in all these different agreements in all these different negotiating fronts because while the tariffs are let's say easier to handle because you're talking about preferences which are negotiated there the discipline making side of those agreements is much more complex because at the end of the day you're going to be creating different standards and these standards will maybe more difficult and more costly for businesses to meet these different standards than if they had the harmonized global situation so what we hope would happen and this is something that we are already beginning we're starting a study in the WTO and it's difficult because these agreements are negotiated in confidentiality so we don't have all the information but some of it is out there so we're trying to see how compatible they are how how compatible they are with each other and what kind of improvement what kind of challenges they would pose to the multilateral system and to the rules that have been negotiated globally so that is a very important contribution I think that the WTO can make which is at some point in time serve as a harmonization of standards which would actually make the waste be minimized Thank you very much Ambassador Fromman could you comment on this in the sense that has that really granular work been done to identify you know sector by sector where the differences lie say let's take the transatlantic context and how to how to work through those because they're very internal matters and you know we've done this we've tried this at different periods it's not a new idea to have mutual recognition and and they've really had difficulty moving ahead so what's different now and has the granular work been done to advance this that we're in the midst of that I'd say and and we're approaching it in a couple different ways we take the regulatory side we're looking both horizontally at regulatory process and that's really about future regulation so that we're as we look ahead have the best possible regulatory practices that hopefully can avoid unnecessary divergences going forward and then we're looking sector by sector in a number of key sectors but it's a very that process is a very labor-intensive data-driven process because none of us want to lower our health safety or environmental standards none of us got into this negotiation to lower standards and we're both all of our regulators on both sides of the Atlantic are have done very good work and are committed to maintaining high levels of of protection and so the challenge is can we find ways of bridging those divergences without lowering the standards and that is a very as I said data-driven labor-intensive process because we want to make sure we understand exactly what the data is to demonstrate whether whether a regulation is equivalent or not a safety regulation for example that takes an enormous amount of effort to determine whether they're a particular regulation can produce an equivalent level of of safety and we're committed to doing that at the same time as we look horizontally towards improving the overall regulatory process thank you we have enormous expertise in this room so I think we should invite you to ask your questions if you could please identify yourself ask a brief question to our speakers and if you wish to direct a particular individual sir please identify yourself this is David Cerrota with international business times this is for the director or ambassador from the EU recently put out a full text of its offer of an agreement in negotiations with the United States the full text for the public to see there have been critics who say that hasn't happened with the TTP and I'm wondering whether the EU if you believe the EU is right or wrong to put out the full text of their agreement and not have the text of the TPP out or is the United States and its trading partners correct in not putting out the full text of the TPP I I would anyone like to answer that before ambassador from the guy anybody before me please please like I think it's very important that as we pursue these trade negotiations we do so in a way that takes into account input from the public from our wide range of stakeholders from our political processes in our case Congress we work very closely with Congress we each have different ways that we engage in that process for example in the US we work there's probably no area of policy where there is closer collaboration between the executive and Congress than trade policy and just as an example of TPP we've had more than 1600 briefings in Congress on TPP and that's a key part of a process because every proposal we put on the table in TPP is previewed with our congressional committees of jurisdiction they have input they have feedback also in the US Congress created a series of advisory committees that include small businesses local and state government officials every major labor union environmental groups consumer groups healthcare groups development groups faith-based groups and they all review our proposals before we put them on the table and so we've each and then we have stakeholder events where we invite them to our negotiations to present to our stakeholders not to our negotiators not just our negotiators but negotiators from all of our countries we put out on our website for example in the case of the US we put our equivalent of our mandate our negotiating objectives for TTIP as well as TPP have been on our website for over a year and a half we put out summaries of the negotiations we put out blog posts on particular issues so we're trying to find ways that we can always do better on transparency we're trying to find ways to ensure that we get transparent that we get the input of a wide range of stakeholders and from our public and from our in our case our Congress well at the same time we're negotiating an international agreement and that we will continue to work on this issue of transparency as we move forward thank you President Zedillo no what maybe there's another one Ernesto Zedillo from Yale University well I think first congratulations Mr. Director General for what you have achieved over the last year but it seems that the organization is still under the heavy burden of the Doha round and I speak as a an initial great enthusiast I was one of my first pro bono jobs which I have had many was to be advice sort of Mike Moore and try to help to launch the round in that capacity but then 10 years ago when Dean Giano invited me to be part of a conference my article or my chapter in the book was how to save the WTO from the Doha round and that continues to be seemingly the relevant question and I say this because three or four years ago I think in this room Peter Sutherland and Jadish Bagwati presented a report that had been commissioned by the government of Germany and I think also the government of the UK where they basically say well there are two options either we conclude the Doha round with a minimum package or a heads of government should instruct their ministers that if by a certain date we don't have the round concluded it should be declared death do it or don't do it but say that you don't want to do it and again I think we are moving into a process that could be very traumatic for the organization you said we need to conclude the work program actually the Doha round was called work program so we are back to a square one how could you be mandated or the general council to say but certain date we haven't made progress forget about the Doha round we have many other things to do first and foremost to protect the organization which is a great one of the best organizations in the multilateral system and move to the new issues and to the old issues but with a different approach of governance of the WTO there are advocates of all different trends and colors that you can imagine in the organization with 160 members this conversation has happened some members have suggested precisely that others say look how are we going to move on to new issues if we haven't even figured out the old issues and some of the issues that are on the agenda are very important and some of the issues which are holding back the agenda some members do not want to give up the discussion on them one of them being agriculture so they are very reluctant to give up a discussion that involves these issues critical issues for them for example agriculture and move on to issues which would then sweep all of these problems aside and move on to a completely different agenda that doesn't give them an opportunity to solve asymmetries to solve concerns which can only be addressed if these issues are on the table so even to give up on the round you need consensus otherwise you still have it there and I think what we have to do at this point in time is to be realistic about what can be achieved and if at the end of this conversation members feel that this is unachievable then they have to handle that they have to square the situation head on and they have to face the situation head on and they will have then to decide what do we do if we are facing something which is unachievable then what do we do I don't know I don't have the answer for that but they will have to answer that question somehow and I think that that's part of the conversation anyone else on the panel care to comment on that? No over here please thank you Terri McGraw-McGraw-Hill and International Chamber of Commerce first thanks to all of the panel for your comments and two quick comments and then two quick questions comment I loved your comments on what business leaders need to be doing in terms of communication and we don't do enough in terms of that and we've got through our organizations like Roundtable and International Chamber of Commerce and like we've got to make sure we're doing that loudly and clearly I would also say from a media standpoint the media doesn't do a very good job because I don't think they think the general public really cares all that much and so they don't do that job and Mr. President and I can't believe you of all people made the comments you made and you know for Doha Development Agenda it's not a question of if it's a question of when right now we are seeing some of the greatest momentum that we have ever seen we're not talking doing a lot of bilateral free trade agreements we are now talking you know some very very serious issues of breaking down the Doha Development Agenda and building it so I think that we're on a roll at this point and the momentum that we're seeing is something to build on so I think the fact that we've got trade facilitation at this point and soon to get trade pacific you know completed is going to give T-TIP it's going to give the international trade agreement on services and IT agreement a lot of push why aren't you doing more on that one two quick questions and Director General you know in terms of trade facilitation in terms of projections and looking out in terms of the implementation of that we talk about a trillion dollars to the world economy and 21 million jobs and you know what kind of implementation and how long is it going to take to be able to realize in your opinion some of those kind and Ambassador in terms of trade pacific partnership you know the question now is because some of us optimists think that you've done such a great job that this is going to pass real quickly and so I'm talking about the rest of 2015 and getting into 2016 who else has to come into this who's not going to or who's going to be disadvantaged if they don't get into we've heard about Korea and Philippines Indonesia but who else and how is this going to expand and how do you look at China especially hosting the G20 next year and their involvement with TPP well we have more questions than time and we have promised our panelists that each gets about a minute to conclude to leave this session with their parting thoughts and I invite you to fold these questions into your responses but as we leave this discussion today what we what would you like all of us to be thinking about about the next steps in the international trade regime and how to advance it forward start with Mark well sure I'll talk about the things that I can control as opposed to the hard issues that they have to negotiate which is along the lines of the comments you've heard and also that Frank said earlier which we in the business community need to help in communicating in a way that people understand the benefit of trade that it is growth we won't have growth without trade and we have to be able to make the case in a way that the average citizens can understand both in developing and developed markets because it's going to take two sides I think we have the capability to do it we need to focus and get it done to support our negotiators thank you minister couple of points firstly I agree that regional and mega regional compliment what you're doing in in WTO and we have to move in tandem in parallel I think it's a very important principle I think we cannot abandon WTO I mean it's so important at the same time regional should go on that's point number one point number two I think going forward issue of standards and issue of trade facilitation these are very important issues you know part of the world we've been focusing a lot at the border issues it is a very interesting and multinational we have EY and Doshia Postia although we have different standards you know different regimes you operate in more than 100 countries and yet you're able to to not only to to do well but you are able to survive I mean what I'm saying is that there appears to be this anomaly on one hand you say you've got so many different standards cost of compliance at the same time are you able you're doing well in all these countries so it is interesting to see why is that so I mean it's just a question at eye I think it's very very important to to look at and standards are important trade facilitation and some of these things have been driven by EY and Doshia Postia and others yeah thank you thank you that's your fulfillment well I just add perhaps one way these regional agreements can continue to build momentum for the multilateral system is I think they should be considered at least in our view open platforms to which other countries who can meet the high standards that they establish can potentially accede with consent of all the with all the parties and that is as Terry and others have alluded to there are other countries that have actually expressed interest in joining TPP after the 12 of us are done their countries who've already expressed some interest in potentially joining t-tip once the US and the EU are done and I think that's a positive thing for because socializing some of the new rules some of the new standards on a broader basis with regard to China just to answer Terry's point I think our focus right now with China is very much on the bilateral investment treaty that China has agreed to negotiate on the basis of a negative list and pre-establishment and that I think will be an important exercise for fleshing out how China intends to pursue the very ambitious reform program that its leadership has announced and we look forward to engaging with them we've had a good year of negotiations for the last year we've made a good progress working through the basics of the text and this will be an important year as we engage in the negative list development and in the other issues that need to be addressed Thank you very much Director General I think our conversation today made clear how important a role the multilateral system can play and what kind of impetus it can give to the global economy at a moment when it's sorely needed and I would say that we are facing a big opportunity here this members are beginning to be open minded they're beginning we're beginning to see traction in the conversation that will require involvement and that will require involvement at the highest level of people like the officials that we have here in this in this panel ministers so there will be tough political cause and we need that kind of involvement that kind of of attention to what we're doing now in Geneva and I hope that that kind of engagement will come in answering the question about the trade facilitation agreement first of all thanks the International Chamber of Commerce for all the support it has given to the multilateral system and for the negotiations it's precisely that what we need now to get things done trade facilitation agreement is being implemented we are already receiving letters of acceptance so members now have to go through their ratification procedures domestically and accept the agreement we need two-thirds of members to get the agreement in place we're beginning to see that and a critical part will be support for technical assistance to developing countries and I hope that the private sector and the donors will be forthcoming to make this happen as soon as possible thank you yeah I think we are currently in a historic chance because we have TPP we have TTIP we have a TFA on the plate and and you know looking into the facts and figures you know the list of countries who have been successful with protectionism is empty there's not a single country you can mention which has been successful without open markets so I think we have an historic chance you know I'm coming from Hamburg which has one of the first trade agreements in Verhanze ever on this world and I am a basic believer in that and I think we all should play and you know advocate or ambassador role to convince people we can influence you know that means for me you know traveling around the world I always talk in town halls about TTIP or TPP because I think that's important and TFA and we all can do that whatever we do I think to to use that opportunity and and take that chance we have at the moment on the plate so that will be my wish from from that session that all of you are influencing the people you can influence to you know to support that we get these free agreements really through well thank you very much I think any good conversation leaves you hungry for more and I certainly am hungry for much more so many subjects we could engage in much greater depth but please join me in thanking our panel for being with us