Moscow Mayor's Myopic Motivations for Banning GMOs Reflects Political Protectionism at Work; Will Also Harm Russian Biotech Market Advances

http://www.eurasiabio.org/media/news/moscow_mayor__going_to_exclude_transgenes_from__muscovites_ration/


Moscow mayor going to exclude transgenes from Muscovites’ ration


Source: AMI TASS


March 20, 2008


Jury Lushkov has proposed to completely ban the sale of GMO containing products in Moscow.
He pointed out that about 6 per cent of products in sale in Moscow contain GMO. Indicating that such products are prohibited in many countries and cities. .Moscow mayor insists this dangerous and still not fully investigated component to be expelled from the capital.


Over 12,8 thousand titles of products have been checked. The GMO level exceeding the 0.9 per cent mark was revealed in 750 articles, mostly diary products.


The bans and limits for transgene cultures in several EG countries are linked to the ecologists' doubts that their uncontrolled dissemination can endanger the ecology balance in Europa.


At the same time the representatives of Institute of Nutrition, Moscow State University, Gamaleja Institute of microbiology and epidemiology stress, that there exists no study proving the GMO danger for the human health.


[MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY SCIENTISTS ARE CORRECT IN CITING THAT THERE ARE NO PROVEN HUMAN HEALTH OR ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS POSED BY GMOS]


[See, e.g., LA Kogan Presentation at Moscow State University – BASIC DIRECTIONS OF MODERN BIOTECHNOLOGY: BIOTECHNOLOGY - A SCIENTIFIC & PRACTICAL PRIORITY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION (June 29, 2007), at:
http://www.itssd.org/Programs/BasicDirectionsofModernBiotechnology-KOGANPresentationMoscowConferenceJune29,2007.ppt

Exporting Europe's Protectionism

http://www.itssd.org/Publications/Kogan%20TNI%2077FINAL.pdf


Exporting Europe's Protectionism


Lawrence A. Kogan


The National Interest Journal


Number 77, Fall 2004, pp. 91-99


Due to its different view concerning the role of 'science' in assessing and managing public risks, the EU has effectively challenged the U.S./WTO risk evaluation framework seeking to establish the precautionary principle, a 'better safe than sorry' rule, as an absolute international standard by which all products, no matter where they are produced, are determined to be safe or harmful.


This challenge threatens the competitiveness of U.S. and other non-EU industries because it seeks to transform the current predictable risk-based evaluation system premised on objective empirical (technical) science, exposure data and, to a large extent, economic cost benefit analysis, into a subjective framework in which pre-risk assessment screening based on cultural moral values and demographic risk aversion (consumer fear perceptions) and hazard profiling based on intrinsic substance characteristics prevails.


The EU has endeavored to change the current framework by embedding the precautionary principle into overly stringent health and safety and environment regulations and technical product standards (in excess of international standards), and then exporting those regulations and standards abroad down industry supply chains throughout the world via international treaties, international standardization bodies and bilateral technical capacity building intiatives.


Examples of this include EU biotech labeling and traceability regulations that implement EU obligations under the Biosafety Protocol to the U.N. Biodiversity Convention and the proposed EU REACH regulation, which is intended to serve as a template for global chemicals management.


In essence, the EU exports the high cost of precautionary regulation and standardization abroad in order to 'level the global economic playing field' (as a form of protectionism to compensate) for its lagging, less cost-efficient or otherwise technologically underdeveloped industries.


Lastly, the EU and its member states also fund non-governmental environmental groups, both in Europe and other countries, that are actively engaged in pursuing antiglobalization and anti-technology campaigns. These campaigns threaten government and company technological innovation and research and development programs.

European Commission Considers Import Carbon Tariffs

European Commission Considers Import Carbon Tariffs


http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/01/09/european-commission-considers-import-carbon-tariffs


Environmental Leader



January 9, 2008


The European Commission is contemplating a carbon tariff on goods from countries where greenhouse gas emission policies do not equal European standards, according to Business Week. The tariff system would force companies that export products to Europe to buy EU emissions permits through the Emissions Trading Scheme.


France strongly supports the tariff. European Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson said that such a scheme would be hard to implement and could lead to trade disputes.


The European Commission is also considering an expansion of the ETS, according to Reuters.


Current trading of carbon credits on the ETS market is worth $37 billion annually, and the commission is considering a proposal that would greatly increase that value by decreasing the percentage of free carbon credits that are distributed to European power generators and manufacturers. 90 percent are currently given out for free whereas 60 percent would be auctioned off annually beginning in 2013.


Only a few months ago, the European Union gave parliamentary approval to a plan that requires airlines flying to and from Europe to offset some of their emissions by buying CO2 allowances on the open market.

Environmental Demagoguery: Measuring and Labeling Wine's Carbon Footprint is Needless Undertaking; Will Raise Consumer Costs & Reduces Quality of Life

Bordeaux To Measure Wine’s CO2 Footprint


Environmental Leader


January 29, 2008


http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/01/29/bordeaux-to-measure-wines-co2-footprint


The Bordeaux Wine Board (CIVB) is launching a project to measure the GHG the region’s industry is producing. The project, called “Bilan Carbone” in French, will run for the next six months in association with the French Environment Agency, and the CIVB says the results will be released in September.


The aim of the study is to give an overview of all emissions resulting from growing and tending vines, making wine, and bottling, storage and delivery. It will also look at associated activities such as personnel, packaging, vine treatments and waste management. According to Roland Feredj, CIVB director, the study will cost about $70,000.Last November, the first-ever attempt at a carbon neutral vineyard in France began in Bordeaux’s Medoc region.

[MORE FRENCH PROTECTIONISM]


Another Bordeaux winemaking family, the Despagne Family, has already launched a carbon reduction project, planting 25 acres of sunflowers that will be used to produce fuel for tractors, but they said studying carbon emissions was a challenge. The Despagnes are using an Australian protocol, developed by Australian wine industry consultant, Provisor, and the Yalumba Wine Company, to measure their GHG and compare them with global standards.

*************************************************************************************
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gnFLyvTdnNFpzMEUeeN5bbRa0teg

Associated France Presse


Bordeaux to measure wine's CO2 footprint

BORDEAUX, France (AFP) —

The Bordeaux region, one of France's premier wine growing regions, is launching an ambitious project to measure the industry's greenhouse gas emissions to bolster its environmental standards.

The Bordeaux Wine Board (Conseil Interprofessionel des Vins de Bordeaux or CIVB) said it wanted to find out just how much carbon dioxide, one of the main culprits in global warming, it generated.

"We know we produce 756 million bottles of wine per year and that 40 percent of that is exported," said Laurent Charlier of the CIVB, who will be working with environmental consultant Jean Marc Jancovici on the project.

"This study should give a clear idea of what different methods of production or shipment mean, in terms of environmental cost," he said.

[THIS IS NOTHING MORE THAN FRENCH CLIMATE CHANGE CHICANERY - THE FRENCH WINE INDUSTRY IS UNDER INCREASING COMPETITION FROM LOWER COST PRODUCERS FROM AROUND THE WORLD...]

The project, called "Bilan Carbone" in French, will run for the next six months in association with the French Environment Agency (ADEME), and the CIVB says the results will be released in September.

Jancovici, who has worked with the French government, France Telecom, Sony, Alcatel and luxury goods company LVMH, was also responsible for a similar project for producers in the Champagne region.

CIVB director, Roland Feredj, said the launch in October last year of France¹s national environmental action plan was in part responsible for the CIVB initiative but there is a practical side as well.

"Everyone is concerned with the costs of (wine) production, so if we can find ways of saving money and reducing carbon emissions, that would be ideal."

The aim of the study, which Feredj said would cost about 50,000 euros (70,000 dollars), are to give an overview of all emissions resulting from growing and tending vines, making wine, and bottling, storage and delivery.

It will also look at associated activities such as personnel, packaging, vine treatments and waste management.

"We intend to find out the carbon emissions for making different styles of wine," Charlier said. "And at what stages we need to concentrate our efforts to mitigate the emissions."

One Bordeaux winemaking family that has already launched a carbon reduction project, planting 10 hectares (25 acres) of sunflowers that will be used to produce fuel for tractors, welcomed the move, but said studying carbon emissions was a challenge.

"We think it's good and we are going to be part of the study group," said Aymeric Fournier for the Despagne Family which owns 300 hectares of vineyards in Bordeaux.

"This will give us an overview of the situation but it is a complicated thing to do," he warned.
"We started seriously in the spring of 2007 -- although we had already planted the sunflowers -- to look at our carbon emissions but deciding how far to take each measurement is not easy," Fournier said.

"For example, with any of the products needed for the vineyard we need to ask, how far has this come, how much carbon was emitted in its making? Or take the different cars and different distances that employees drive to work. It is a very detailed calculation," he said.

The Despagnes are already using an Australian protocol, developed by Australian wine industry consultant, Provisor, and the Yalumba Wine Company, to to measure their greenhouse gas emissions and compare them with global standards.

"It is quite a piece of work but we are determined to go ahead with it. It helps so much to have this kind of framework. We were a bit stumped as to where to go next before we saw this," Fournier said. "

EU Farming Subsidies Likely to Continue

EU farming subsidies likely to continue


The future of farming subsidies for the EU is still in the balance even though their efficiency has been brought into question recently (see related article ). But, with support from large farming markets like France, subsidies are likely to remain. Farming subsidies have also been at the center of the climate change debate (see related article) and, therefore, some EU countries are trying label subsidies under environmental schemes even though they are not.


France pressing for farm subsidies after 2013


http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/2008/01/04/108898/france-pressing-for-farm-subsidies-after-2013.html


FarmersWeekly, UK

January 4, 2008


Momentum is beginning to build within the European Parliament that the European Union should continue to give financial support to agriculture after the current arrangements end in 2013.


Speaking at the Oxford Farming Conference on 3 January, Conservative MEP for the south west and current chair of the European Parliament's agricultural committee, Neil Parish expressed confidence that support was likely to continue after 2013.


"There will be a payment after 2013, it will be a lesser one and it will probably be spread too thinly," he told delegates.


France is understood to be taking the lead on the issue with strong support from the new member states.


The €40bn currently allocated to the Common Agricultural Policy budget is likely to be the starting point for negotiations with France likely to argue for it to continue in something close to its currant form.


However, Germany, as the primary funder of the CAP, is likely to argue that any arrangements should be based on co-financing principles which would reduce its burden.


The UK is likely to object to any continuation of support payments and insist that any future payments are directed only at environmental schemes.


Furthermore, unless any co-financing arrangements are made compulsory it is unlikely that UK farmers would receive anything more than minimum available.


For more on the Oxford Farming Conference visit the FWi landing page by clicking here

“Zeroing” In: The Future of a Questionable Anti-Dumping Methodology

“Zeroing” In: The future of a questionable Anti-Dumping methodology


Just last month, a WTO Panel ruled in favor of the US in a zeroing dispute case with Mexico (Link to Article). This is a fairly significant step for the US. Since the US began to impose its zeroing methodology, many WTO countries have rallied staunchly in opposition questioning the legality and fairness of this practice. So the question remains: how will zeroing be treated in the ensuing Doha Round negotiations?


Anti-dumping row roils WTO, isolates U.S.


http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSL1044224620080110?sp=true


Jan 10, 2008


By Jonathan Lynn - Analysis


GENEVA (Reuters) - An arcane row at the World Trade Organization (WTO) pitting the United States against the rest of the group's members on how to deal with unfairly priced imports has raised temperatures like few other issues there.


The tussle has unnerved U.S. consumer and retail bodies, seen a WTO dispute panel ignore rulings by the body's top court and created another big hurdle in the WTO's long-running Doha round to open up world trade.


Trade experts said it was difficult to imagine the United States succeeding in embedding its controversial practice of "zeroing" in WTO rules.


The term refers to the practice of only taking into account imports priced at a lower level than in their home markets (dumped goods) and ignoring or "zeroing" any offset from imports which are priced higher than in their home markets.


Some trade experts believe the row can be defused as countries realize that in a changing economy they can equally be the target as well as the initiator of anti-dumping measures.


"Zeroing has been on the ropes for a long time because there have been multiple rulings against the U.S.," said Brendan McGivern, an expert in international trade disputes and a partner in the Geneva office of lawyers White & Case.


"It's wildly optimistic of the U.S. to think they'll get this back through negotiations," he told Reuters.


HEART OF THE SYSTEM


The dispute goes to the very heart of the global trading system umpired by the WTO to ensure that trade is fair for all.


It turns on the methodology for calculating the duties that countries are allowed to impose on imports that are sold at unfairly cheap prices in their markets.


Zeroing, now mainly used by the United States, leads to excessively high compensatory duties, other countries say.


The United States has now lost a dozen WTO disputes over zeroing, rulings strengthened on appeal in some cases by the WTO's top court, the Appellate Body.


Last month a key group of countries issued a statement denouncing zeroing for undermining the central goal of the Doha round -- trade liberalization.


Washington will therefore find it difficult to find supporters in the WTO, which operates by consensus, who will spell out a role for zeroing in a new deal when it has been ruled out of court in litigation, said McGivern, former head of dispute settlement in Canada's WTO mission.


Another case is brewing, with Japan unhappy that the U.S. has not dropped zeroing in line with an Appellate Body ruling last January.


As a result the United States has now abandoned zeroing in some cases. But it insists zeroing is allowed under WTO rules.


The head of the U.S. WTO mission, Peter Allgeier, denounced last month the "severely flawed legal reasoning" of the Appellate Body and told WTO members that a new trade deal would not get through the U.S. Congress without zeroing.


ENCOURAGED


The Americans have been encouraged by two things.


Firstly, the chairman of the Doha round talks on rules, which include anti-dumping, Guillermo Valles Galmes, issued a draft negotiating text at the end of November that allowed zeroing in certain circumstances.


Secondly, in the latest zeroing dispute at the WTO, a Mexican complaint about U.S. anti-dumping duties on stainless steel, the dispute panel last month ignored previous rulings from the Appellate Body and allowed zeroing in some cases.


Valles, who is Uruguay's WTO ambassador, saw his proposals on zeroing slammed by a range of countries from the European Union to India and Japan.


He is holding another round of negotiations in the week of January 21 where he expects key countries to propose the balance they say is missing from his paper.


Valles's proposals also upset the United States by retaining some bans on zeroing, introducing a limit of 10 years on anti-dumping measures instead of allowing them to run indefinitely, and calling for consumers as well as affected competitors to be consulted on the measures.


Valles points out that the negotiations on rules are different to the rest of the Doha Round. Whereas the long-term aim is to reduce tariffs and subsidies to zero, rules will always be there, evolving to meet changing circumstances.


"The challenge is for countries to imagine where they will be in 15 or 20 years," he told Reuters. "The object is that rules are used in a transparent and predictable way, with no country just a user or a target."


Indeed, some U.S. business lobbies are already calling on Washington to ensure that WTO rules such as zeroing cannot be abused to put up barriers against U.S. exports.


The National Retail Federation noted in November that the U.S. is now the third biggest target of anti-dumping actions.


And frequent targets China and India are increasingly bringing actions against other countries.

(Editing by Matthew Jones)

The French Protection: The Resurgence of Colbertian Statist Economics

http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=367


Economic Brief: French Protectionism


Report Drafted By:


Erich Marquardt, Dr. Federico Bordonaro


15 September 2005


On August 31, France announced that it would protect from buyouts by foreign companies domestic industries it considers as strategic. French Finance Minister Thierry Breton stated that the country's "very sensitive sectors" would be shielded from foreign bids. While the complete list of protected industries has not been made public yet, some of the protected industries were leaked to the media. As reported by Les Echos, the protected industries include defense, biotechnology, space technology, telecommunication companies, casinos, encryption, IT security, and antidote production.



France's turn toward protectionism follows a global pattern where states with advanced economies are shielding their domestic industries from foreign competition and from potential state rivals.


French Protectionism Returns


For many observers, the ongoing wave of "economic patriotism" advocated by French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin is nothing else but the renewal of French-style protectionism marked by the Colbertian tradition of statist direction of the national economy.


After rumors circulated in the summer of 2005 about a possible bid from U.S. drinks giant PepsiCo Inc. for French food giant Danone, and a Wal-Mart bid on supermarket chain Carrefour, many in the French political landscape called for an immediate reaction by the current administration so that France's industrial gems could be saved from American takeover. Therefore, on July 27, de Villepin announced that he would gather all available forces to launch a new economic patriotism.


Additionally, France bailed out its major engineering company Alstom in order to promote the French idea of creating "national champions," and avoided Switzerland's Novartis from buying out the French and German pharmaceutical company Aventis by backing Sanofi's merger with Aventis to create Sanofi-Aventis.


E.U. Concern


Protectionist acts from one of the leading states of the European Union have caused justifiable concern in Brussels. Gregor Kreuzhuber, spokesman for the E.U. Commission, told the press that the E.U. does not "want to see any disguised protectionism" and that the E.U. would review France's proposed economic policy.


Paris, predicting the concern in Brussels, quickly argued that its actions would comply with E.U. economic laws. French Budget Minister Jean-Francois Cope explained to the press, "Our move is completely consistent with community law. … Each country is allowed to define 'strategic' sectors in accordance with national interests -- for example in the defense or sensitive technology sectors." Cope further stated, "It's strictly within this framework that the government is considering measures which would be comparable to those in other European Union countries."


While it is obvious that France will try to argue that its protectionist measures abide by E.U. rules and regulations, there is concern that Paris' actions could set an example for other E.U. states to take similar protectionist measures. The fact that the French have casinos listed as one of their strategic industries -- under the notion that casinos could be used for money laundering -- exemplifies E.U. concern that France's actions are "disguised protectionism."


In its attempt to avoid the E.U. from blocking the passage of the new legislation, France will no doubt try to protect only its most vital industries so as to not draw the scorn of Brussels, but also to protect enough industries so as to appeal to domestic interests at home.


Why Protectionism?


French protectionism partly emanates from Paris' concern with foreign companies purchasing major firms in strategic or pivotal industries. Similar to the way that the U.S. Congress reacted to China National Offshore Oil Corporation's attempted purchase of the U.S. energy company Unocal, Paris does not want to see vital industries owned by outside companies tied to the governments of foreign states.


Additionally, however, Paris also wants to protect its domestic industries so that the country does not sustain a loss of jobs, such as factories closing down and moving operations to Eastern Europe or Asia. It provides the French government popularity in time for the upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections in 2007; tackling unemployment and successfully coping with globalization's challenges are vital to enhance the administration's credibility. In fact, without appreciable results in reducing the jobless figure in the country, de Villepin will hardly get the necessary support to achieve his ambitious industrial and energy policy. [See: "Intelligence Brief: French Energy Policy"]


As previously mentioned, de Villepin made the protection of French manufacturers a major policy goal after the PepsiCo Inc. bid was announced. After the bid was presented, President Jacques Chirac was reported saying that "the splitting up and the instability of the capital of certain large French businesses are risk factors for employment and for our industrial strength." It was then that de Villepin boldly announced it was time for France to display "real economic patriotism," or, in other words, economic nationalism. He argued, "When times are hard, when the world is changing, it is a question of gathering our strengths … and defending France and things French."


While Paris' rhetoric is very bold, in the end the French policy is similar to unspoken protectionist policies in other states with advanced economies, as was most recently seen in the protectionist bid by the U.S. and the E.U. against Chinese textile imports.


The important difference, however, is that the protectionist actions in the face of increased Chinese textile imports were taken by the E.U. as a whole, whereas Paris' "economic patriotism" idea is distinctly French. [See: "Economic Brief: Textile Quotas"]


Despite this concern, Les Echos reported that the list of protected industries it acquired did not list any food companies or, for instance, oil companies. However, the French Industry Ministry did state that it would reserve the right to prevent foreign takeovers of companies that had subsidiaries involved in any of the listed "sensitive sectors" and that the government would make the decision to bar a foreign takeover on a case-by-case basis.


The Bottom Line


After decades of dominating political discourse, economic liberalism looks now in a crisis because important decision-makers (such as in France) perceive it as fiction that conceals the hard reality of economic warfare and power relations among states. If France's republican and social-democratic traditions form an axis with the neo-Gaullist right-wing and prevail in the short/medium term over the neo-liberal reformists, look for a new social and political bloc to take shape around the "economic patriotism" policy in France, with considerable consequences for the European Union as a whole.

India, Brazil Slam New Attempts by EU & US to Secure Green Trade Barriers at Doha

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L04357213.htm


India, Brazil slam new WTO Doha proposals


04 Dec 2007

Reuters


By Jonathan Lynn


India and Brazil criticised two new sets of proposals in the Doha round of trade talks at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) on Tuesday, signalling that wide gaps in the negotiations remain despite recent progress.


The two developing countries, who play a major role in the talks, said that a U.S.-EU proposal to free up trade in environmental goods was little more than a disguised attempt to boost sales of goods of rich nations.


They also said a negotiating text on "rules" -- anti-dumping, subsidies and fisheries subsidies -- was a step backwards that excessively accommodated U.S. concerns.


India also expressed alarm that the key agriculture talks were tilting too much towards the needs of rich countries and were ignoring the requirements of the sub-continent's millions of subsistence farmers.


India has been committed to the Doha talks, launched six years ago and now aiming for conclusion next year, said India's WTO ambassador Ujal Singh Bhatia.


"But if, God forbid, a time comes when that price of engagement is unpayable by us, then we will have to stand up and say that," he told Reuters.


NO BASIS FOR NEGOTIATION


The United States and the European Union launched a proposal in the long-running Doha talks last Friday to counter climate change by eliminating tariffs on 43 climate-friendly goods and setting up a wider agreement on environmental goods and services for developed and advanced developing countries.


"We don't think it's a basis for negotiation on environmental products," said Brazil's top trade negotiator, Roberto Azevedo. "Brazil is deeply disappointed with the proposal. We find the proposal modest, we find it biased and we find it protectionist," he told a briefing. Azevedo noted that the U.S.-EU proposal made no reference to biofuels, of which Brazil is a major producer, or the technologies to produce them, and said the list was geared to U.S.-EU products. "Anything that they don't produce is not on the list," he said.


Bhatia said India could support proposals to free up trade in goods whose sole use was countering climate change, such as solar panels or windmills, but the list could be extended over time to new models of cars or refrigerators that were more energy-efficient, and that was unacceptable.


"Their list is a disguised effort at getting market access through other means and does not satisfy the mandate for environment," he said.


Both Brazil and India expressed dismay at the rules proposal that met U.S. concerns by allowing a controversial method of calculating anti-dumping duties called zeroing. This would allow the abuse of trade remedies to foster protectionism, they said.


Washington had said it was disappointed at last Friday's proposals, but added they were a basis for negotiation.


Bhatia said the proposals on banning most fisheries subsidies, welcomed by environmental groups, would cause India difficulty as it tries to improve the living conditions of its fishermen, among the poorest people in the country.


The proposals do give some leeway to developing countries to support fishermen, but he said the conditions, such as setting up approved fisheries management schemes, were too onerous.


Senior Indian Commerce Department official Jayant Dasgupta said a disproportionate effort in the WTO's key agriculture talks was going into shielding the commercial interests of the relatively small number of farmers in rich countries.


At the same time poor countries were being squeezed on proposals to protect the livelihoods of subsistence farmers making up the majority of the population -- 65 percent in India's case.


India needed to shield such people, often living on less than $1 a day, from market fluctuations, and encourage them to stay on the land to ensure food security for the country.

EU Climate Change Chicanery: ITSSD Research Findings on European Disguised Protectionism Validated

http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2008/01/22/us_warns_eu_on_using_climate_change_as_pretext/


http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/21/business/carbon.php


US warns EU on using climate change as pretext

By James Kanter and Stephen Castle,

International Herald Tribune,

22 January 2008

Official says it has been an excuse for protectionism


BRUSSELS - The United States warned the European Union yesterday against using climate change as a pretext for protectionism, setting the stage for trans-Atlantic tension over a new package of EU measures to combat global warming.


The pointed comments by the US trade representative, Susan Schwab, after talks in Brussels, came just two days before the European Commission introduced its proposals for cutting EU emissions at least 20 percent from 1990 levels by 2020.


"We have been dismayed at a variety of suggestions where we have seen the climate and the environment being used as an excuse to close markets," Schwab said after discussions with Peter Mandelson, her European counterpart.


President Nicolas Sarkozy of France has called for a carbon tax on imports to ensure that European companies that need to comply with tough environmental rules are not undercut by foreign competitors whose governments are not capping carbon emissions.


EU officials were not expected to propose such a measure tomorrow but were expected to keep alive the possibility of a so-called border tax to keep European industries competitive.


The EU pledge to protect European industry by 2011 at the latest will be aimed at assuaging powerful lobby groups from sectors like steel and aluminum manufacturing, which say they are facing higher costs than their overseas competitors because of the EU's determination to lead the world in climate protection.


Even so, EU officials hope to be able to avoid the issue, not least because any European border tax could be challenged at the World Trade Organization.


Instead, EU officials hope that other developed countries like the United States, which did not sign the Kyoto climate treaty, will join an international treaty by the end of the decade, making protectionist measures unnecessary.


Measures other than the border tax that are under discussion by EU officials and diplomats in Brussels include granting greater numbers of free pollution permits than planned. Officials say they believe such a method would not break world trade rules.


The EU also could condone global agreements within sectors like steel and cement, rather than between nations.


In that scenario, industries worldwide in a particular manufacturing sector would agree to cut their pollution by a certain amount, in theory leveling the competitive playing field.


EU officials say they are optimistic about a global climate accord after the recent meeting of nearly 200 nations in Bali, Indonesia, where agreement was reached on laying out a plan for negotiations that could produce a climate treaty by 2009.


But the Bali Action Plan faces high hurdles, including the persistently thorny problem of convincing the United States to take action even if fast-developing countries like China, which insists on developments getting higher priority than emissions curbs, fail to make similar pledges.


Schwab also took issue with Europe's attitude toward genetically modified foods, which she described as "perfectly safe."


She singled out France's decision to go slowly on cultivation of genetically modified corn.

Sarkozy Claims to Back Attali Commission's Liberalization Plan: But Rejects Recommendation to Scrap Precautionary Principle!

Sarkozy backs liberalisation plan [???]


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/17d878de-c9c0-11dc-b5dc-000077b07658.html


By Ben Hall in Paris


Financial Times


January 23 2008 20:04



President Nicolas Sarkozy on Wednesday gave his backing to a far-reaching plan to liberalise the French economy and raise its trend rate of growth to 3 per cent within five years.


Mr Sarkozy said he supported “in the main” the conclusions of a commission chaired by Jacques Attali, the economist and former socialist presidential adviser, and would convene a ministerial committee next month to decide which of the measures to put in place first.


The Attali commission produced 316 proposals to liberalise sheltered sectors of the economy, cut the cost and improve the flexibility of the labour market, and streamline public administration.


“If some people have been alarmed by the contents of your proposals, I find them rather reasonable in the main”, Mr Sarkozy said as he received the report from Mr Attali.


The president signalled his support for opening up regulated services, such as taxis, to greater competition, saying some professional regulations were “perfectly obsolete”. But he said this would require careful negotiation with those affected “who cannot be ignored for reasons of equity”.


Opening up regulated professions is likely to be one of the most hotly contested recommendations.


François Hollande, the opposition socialist leader, criticised “the many worrying proposals” in the Attali report.


According to Mr Attali, Mr Sarkozy disagreed with only two of the commission’s 316 recommendations: the scrapping of the precautionary principle (conferring the benefit of the doubt against technological innovations) enshrined in France’s constitution and the abolition of the department, the revolutionary-era local government unit.


However, Mr Sarkozy said nothing about the commission’s recommendation for France to open its doors to 250,000 immigrants each year as a way of lifting its growth rate by 0.5 per cent.


The Attali commission set out a blue print for cutting unemployment from 8 to 5 per cent, halving poverty and cutting public spending as a share of national output by 1 percentage point a year.


The report makes many sweeping recommendations.


To take advantage of the growth in financial services, the commission proposes that France harmonise its entire set of financial and stock market regulation with that of Britain’s two remove the competitive disadvantage of Paris as a financial centre relative to London.


Although the commission argues its recommendations are broadly cost neutral, it is counting on the Caisse des Depôts et Consignations, France’s sovereign wealth fund, to help finance ten new university “centres of excellence” and universal access to super high-speed internet services by 2016.


Some of the most radical measures relate to public services. The Attali commission wants to confer some activities, such as tax collection, to executive agencies.


It is also proposing a radical shake-up of the schools system, scrapping catchment areas and giving parents a voucher to encourage competition between institutions.