Date: 13/11/2002
Source: Deputy Ministry of Trade and Industry
Title: Hendricks: International Trade Administration Bill, NCOP
SPEECH BY MRS LINDIWE HENDRICKS, DEPUTY MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION BILL, 2ND READING DEBATE, National Council of Provinces, 13 November 2002
Honourable Chairperson and Members
The International Trade Administration Bill has undergone extensive consultation and debate, both inside and outside Parliament, and we are pleased that the crucial moment of voting the Bill into law has now arrived.
As we get ready to pass this Bill, it bears reminding ourselves of the significant changes that this law proposes to introduce, and of the motivation for them.
In an important sense, Chairperson, this Bill is an affirmation of the current and expected contribution of international trade to South Africa's economy, and to the economies of our regional neighbours, particularly in the Southern African Customs Union (SACU). Consequently, therefore, the establishment of an effective system of international trade administration is imperative, to enable trade to contribute to economic growth and development, and to rising incomes, investment and employment.
Chairperson, Government's policy of openness to trade with the world, requires that economic operators, be they importers or exporters, be afforded certainty, efficiency and redress, to enable them to conduct their businesses, and to sustain and grow them.
In establishing such a system through this Bill, we placing trade policy in the driving seat of trade administration; that is, allowing the lowering and raising of tariffs, for example, the adjudication of unfair trade, etc, to be informed by national interests and policy objectives; and not by special interests and ad hoc lobbying of the past.
Moreover, Chairperson, our country's membership to agreements under the World Trade Organization, SADC, SACU, and with European Union, means that practically all of South Africa's trade with world is governed by binding international trade laws and disciplines. In this sense, therefore, the clarity and certainty that this Bill seeks to introduce to our trade administration, is also an obligation to our trade partners.
In essence, Chairperson, the International Trade Administration Bill is about adherence to 'good governance' that we so much seek to promote -- 'good governance' in the domestic economy and as a member of global and regional trade systems.
The requirement that the Minister consults stakeholders in issuing trade policy statements and directives, as foreseen in our Constitution and in laws like the Nedlac Act, is indeed 'good governance'. And we welcome this emphasis in the Bill from the deliberations of the two committees and from the submissions of stakeholders.
The requirement that the Minister publishes in the Gazette such statements and directives, as well as the policy mandates, procedures and decisions taken at the SACU-level, is also good governance. So is the spelling out of procedures for the investigation, evaluation and adjudication of customs duty and trade remedy applications. And so is the spelling out of the functions of the International Trade Administration Commission, and the criteria for its composition.
In the regional context, the Bill both affirms and anticipates the very significant historic changes foreseen in the new, re-negotiated SACU agreement with Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland, which was signed by our President and his SACU counterparts only three weeks ago on the 21st of October 2002.
The elevation of the signing of this agreement to Heads-of-State level symbolizes the high level of importance all of them attach to equal participation and democratic decision-making which new SACU agreement introduces. It is also an expression of the free commitment of SACU leaders to deeper regional economic integration and cooperation in our region.
Chairperson, the importance of these changes in South Africa's relations with our SACU partners is clearer when one considers the past history of virtually complete domination of the Customs Union by South Africa - because what was clearly the case is that the members of the custom union were not all equal in the arrangements of that customs union and that increasingly created difficult problems for us. A range of difficulties occurred, there being an assumption, for example, that anti-dumping actions that were taken by South Africa were also applicable in the member states. It took the policy review of the WTO to point out to us that this was not the case - that it was necessary for each member state of the Customs Union to have a national center of its own that would deal with these actions. But, it was also the case that South Africa was making decisions on tariffs without any obligations to consult with other member states of the Customs Union. Accordingly straight after 1994 we embarked on some very difficult negations around the Southern African Customs Union. There were two areas that were of concern in these negotiations and created the most difficulty. This first one was what I have just covered, that is essence the Customs Union was not democratic and did not allow for real economic integration and co-operation and secondly, that the revenue formula in that agreement from South Africa's point of view led to the possibility that we would be required to pay out funds that in fact had not been collected.
Furthermore, one would need to consider NEPAD and its challenge for regional economic integration in Africa to be accelerated, and for cooperation among regional neighbours.
Against this backdrop, the ITA Bill is a progressive and forward-looking piece of legislation, in making provision for consultative and democratic decision-making between South Africa and our SACU partners, in the administration of the Customs Union.
Clearly, in preparing to pass this Bill so close after the signing of the new SACU agreement, we are making impressive progress in establishing the required governance infrastructure for economic growth, integration and cooperation in our region. But there is still a lot of work to do, and we shall have occasion to debate all of this when the SACU agreement comes before you for ratification in the new year.
In conclusion, Chairperson, I wish to extend our sincere gratitude to both Committees for the detailed, vigilant and constructive manner with which they dealt with this Bill, and to the stakeholders who debated the Bill and submitted comments during the public hearings.
We are confident that in passing this Bill, this Parliament will be effecting a major strengthening of the necessary institutional framework for the continued growth of this economy, and for mutually beneficial economic relations with our partners in SACU.
I thank you
Issued by the Office of the Deputy Minister of Trade and Industry
13 November 2002
Source: Deputy Ministry of Trade and Industry
Title: Hendricks: International Trade Administration Bill, NCOP
SPEECH BY MRS LINDIWE HENDRICKS, DEPUTY MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION BILL, 2ND READING DEBATE, National Council of Provinces, 13 November 2002
Honourable Chairperson and Members
The International Trade Administration Bill has undergone extensive consultation and debate, both inside and outside Parliament, and we are pleased that the crucial moment of voting the Bill into law has now arrived.
As we get ready to pass this Bill, it bears reminding ourselves of the significant changes that this law proposes to introduce, and of the motivation for them.
In an important sense, Chairperson, this Bill is an affirmation of the current and expected contribution of international trade to South Africa's economy, and to the economies of our regional neighbours, particularly in the Southern African Customs Union (SACU). Consequently, therefore, the establishment of an effective system of international trade administration is imperative, to enable trade to contribute to economic growth and development, and to rising incomes, investment and employment.
Chairperson, Government's policy of openness to trade with the world, requires that economic operators, be they importers or exporters, be afforded certainty, efficiency and redress, to enable them to conduct their businesses, and to sustain and grow them.
In establishing such a system through this Bill, we placing trade policy in the driving seat of trade administration; that is, allowing the lowering and raising of tariffs, for example, the adjudication of unfair trade, etc, to be informed by national interests and policy objectives; and not by special interests and ad hoc lobbying of the past.
Moreover, Chairperson, our country's membership to agreements under the World Trade Organization, SADC, SACU, and with European Union, means that practically all of South Africa's trade with world is governed by binding international trade laws and disciplines. In this sense, therefore, the clarity and certainty that this Bill seeks to introduce to our trade administration, is also an obligation to our trade partners.
In essence, Chairperson, the International Trade Administration Bill is about adherence to 'good governance' that we so much seek to promote -- 'good governance' in the domestic economy and as a member of global and regional trade systems.
The requirement that the Minister consults stakeholders in issuing trade policy statements and directives, as foreseen in our Constitution and in laws like the Nedlac Act, is indeed 'good governance'. And we welcome this emphasis in the Bill from the deliberations of the two committees and from the submissions of stakeholders.
The requirement that the Minister publishes in the Gazette such statements and directives, as well as the policy mandates, procedures and decisions taken at the SACU-level, is also good governance. So is the spelling out of procedures for the investigation, evaluation and adjudication of customs duty and trade remedy applications. And so is the spelling out of the functions of the International Trade Administration Commission, and the criteria for its composition.
In the regional context, the Bill both affirms and anticipates the very significant historic changes foreseen in the new, re-negotiated SACU agreement with Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland, which was signed by our President and his SACU counterparts only three weeks ago on the 21st of October 2002.
The elevation of the signing of this agreement to Heads-of-State level symbolizes the high level of importance all of them attach to equal participation and democratic decision-making which new SACU agreement introduces. It is also an expression of the free commitment of SACU leaders to deeper regional economic integration and cooperation in our region.
Chairperson, the importance of these changes in South Africa's relations with our SACU partners is clearer when one considers the past history of virtually complete domination of the Customs Union by South Africa - because what was clearly the case is that the members of the custom union were not all equal in the arrangements of that customs union and that increasingly created difficult problems for us. A range of difficulties occurred, there being an assumption, for example, that anti-dumping actions that were taken by South Africa were also applicable in the member states. It took the policy review of the WTO to point out to us that this was not the case - that it was necessary for each member state of the Customs Union to have a national center of its own that would deal with these actions. But, it was also the case that South Africa was making decisions on tariffs without any obligations to consult with other member states of the Customs Union. Accordingly straight after 1994 we embarked on some very difficult negations around the Southern African Customs Union. There were two areas that were of concern in these negotiations and created the most difficulty. This first one was what I have just covered, that is essence the Customs Union was not democratic and did not allow for real economic integration and co-operation and secondly, that the revenue formula in that agreement from South Africa's point of view led to the possibility that we would be required to pay out funds that in fact had not been collected.
Furthermore, one would need to consider NEPAD and its challenge for regional economic integration in Africa to be accelerated, and for cooperation among regional neighbours.
Against this backdrop, the ITA Bill is a progressive and forward-looking piece of legislation, in making provision for consultative and democratic decision-making between South Africa and our SACU partners, in the administration of the Customs Union.
Clearly, in preparing to pass this Bill so close after the signing of the new SACU agreement, we are making impressive progress in establishing the required governance infrastructure for economic growth, integration and cooperation in our region. But there is still a lot of work to do, and we shall have occasion to debate all of this when the SACU agreement comes before you for ratification in the new year.
In conclusion, Chairperson, I wish to extend our sincere gratitude to both Committees for the detailed, vigilant and constructive manner with which they dealt with this Bill, and to the stakeholders who debated the Bill and submitted comments during the public hearings.
We are confident that in passing this Bill, this Parliament will be effecting a major strengthening of the necessary institutional framework for the continued growth of this economy, and for mutually beneficial economic relations with our partners in SACU.
I thank you
Issued by the Office of the Deputy Minister of Trade and Industry
13 November 2002
Advertisement
EMAIL THIS ARTICLE SAVE THIS ARTICLE FEEDBACK
To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here
