PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2005 ID-44386
.
27.11.05 .
for the developed countries is through Non-Tariff Barriers (NTBs), particularly through the use oftechnical barriers.The prop~als cfuniversa~l binding:of ~arjffs_will tie th~ h~nds.offuture governments a~~ compromise India's right to protect specific industrial sectors·and small industries. Steep reductions in tariffs on industrial products will accentuate the process ofde-industrialisation, which has already commenced with tough import competition being faced by many sectors in small and medium industries. FREE HAND TO CORPORAlES THROUGH GATS.
_. The focus ofthe GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) is on the liberalisation and deregulation of the services sector. Over 160 services sectors have been enumerated to illustrate its jurisdiction: basic .
services such as Water, Education and Health; infrastructure services such as Energy, Transport and .
Telecommunications; critical sectors such as Financial Services, Banking and Insurance; and the world's largest industry; travel and tourism. .
Nevertheless, the developing countries had succeeded to some extent in building in some safeguards into GATS to protect their interests, in so much as they could decide which sector was to be opened up for opening up ofservice sectors to certain conditions and limitations. These safeguards constituted the saving.
negotiations. In keeping with national policy objectives in service sectors, member countries could subject the graces ofthe otherwise draconian agreement. It is precisely these safeguards which are sought to be removed/ diluted by the developed countries in the current phase ofnegotiations in the name ofintroducing new concepts such as "benchmarking","quantitative targets and indicators" for liberalisation, llcritical mass" ofsectors to be .
liberalised etc. While developing countries have opposed these moves vociferously, the Indian Government has not been very clear or vocal in its opposition. .
Shamefully, rather than protecting the interests ofIndia's poor, India is adopting a pro-active stance in the .
.. ..
GATS negotiations. India's key area of interest is made out to be in the movement of highly·skilled labour .
through the Mode 4 route,that is to say, movement ofpersons across the national frontier to provide a service. This only mirrors the demands ofbig services corporations in the US. The lure ofthe opportunities for jobs and profits to the elite sections as, for example, in the Information Technology sector, particulariy, in Business .
Process Outsourcing, seems to have taken the driver's seat in the negotiating process. The result is that .
indiscriminate offers have been made for opening ofa large number ofservice sectors across the board, as demanded by the foreign corporate capital. The interests ofthe common people are at a discount. As the picture has emerged, for securing the gains foreseen by the rich and elite sections, the costs will have to be borne by the poorer masses in terms ofloss ofemployment and income, high costs ofservices to be provided by the corporate sector and loss ofaccess to essential services. We musttell our Government: No opening up ofany sector without national debate and consensus! One .
Enron is enough. No more Enron like disasters! No to 'benchmarking' and similar other moves! No compulsory opening up ofserVices sectors! Keep water, health, education and retail trade out ofGATS! Stop handing over banking sector strictly under national control! MNCs cannot be given national status and 'national treatment'..
Indian services sectors to transnational corporations for a few thousand American visas! Keep financial and .
TRIPS: DEMAND COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW In 1995, the Indian Government defied the popular consensus and agreed to the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Rights (TRIPS). Today, it is obvious that the TRIPS agreement jeopardizes " .
access to medicines and has a detrimental effect on the dissemination ofscientific knowledge and technology .
in diverse sectors such as software and biotechnology.The Patent Amendment Act is the latest manifestation I, d ofthis devastating agreement. The need ofthe hour is that India should press for a review ofTRIPS, not in the .
narrow sense that developed countries would want (in terms ofthe actual translation ofits provisions in the ;1- country laws ofdifferent countries) but in terms ofa comprehensive review ofTRIPS in WTO itself,and an end .
ell to patenting oflife forms, medicines and seeds. are .
(excerptedfrom a Campaign Folder ofthe WTO Virodhi Bharatiya Jan Abhiyan). .
lU Join a National Conventionon WTO organised by WTO Virodhi Bharatiya Jan Abhiyan On 3Dec.05 .
Observe December 13 as National Day of Protest .
To Voice the Concerns ofIndian People Against the Sellout ofIndian Interests .
at the WTO Ministerial Meet at Hong Kong ! .
sdt-Sandeep Singh,JtSecy., AISA, J hesh,Gen.Secy., AISA, JNU .
.
PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2005 ID-44386
.
27.11.05 .
for the developed countries is through Non-Tariff Barriers (NTBs), particularly through the use oftechnical barriers.The prop~als cfuniversa~l binding:of ~arjffs_will tie th~ h~nds.offuture governments a~~ compromise India's right to protect specific industrial sectors·and small industries. Steep reductions in tariffs on industrial products will accentuate the process ofde-industrialisation, which has already commenced with tough import competition being faced by many sectors in small and medium industries. FREE HAND TO CORPORAlES THROUGH GATS.
_. The focus ofthe GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) is on the liberalisation and deregulation of the services sector. Over 160 services sectors have been enumerated to illustrate its jurisdiction: basic .
services such as Water, Education and Health; infrastructure services such as Energy, Transport and .
Telecommunications; critical sectors such as Financial Services, Banking and Insurance; and the world's largest industry; travel and tourism. .
Nevertheless, the developing countries had succeeded to some extent in building in some safeguards into GATS to protect their interests, in so much as they could decide which sector was to be opened up for opening up ofservice sectors to certain conditions and limitations. These safeguards constituted the saving.
negotiations. In keeping with national policy objectives in service sectors, member countries could subject the graces ofthe otherwise draconian agreement. It is precisely these safeguards which are sought to be removed/ diluted by the developed countries in the current phase ofnegotiations in the name ofintroducing new concepts such as "benchmarking","quantitative targets and indicators" for liberalisation, llcritical mass" ofsectors to be .
liberalised etc. While developing countries have opposed these moves vociferously, the Indian Government has not been very clear or vocal in its opposition. .
Shamefully, rather than protecting the interests ofIndia's poor, India is adopting a pro-active stance in the .
.. ..
GATS negotiations. India's key area of interest is made out to be in the movement of highly·skilled labour .
through the Mode 4 route,that is to say, movement ofpersons across the national frontier to provide a service. This only mirrors the demands ofbig services corporations in the US. The lure ofthe opportunities for jobs and profits to the elite sections as, for example, in the Information Technology sector, particulariy, in Business .
Process Outsourcing, seems to have taken the driver's seat in the negotiating process. The result is that .
indiscriminate offers have been made for opening ofa large number ofservice sectors across the board, as demanded by the foreign corporate capital. The interests ofthe common people are at a discount. As the picture has emerged, for securing the gains foreseen by the rich and elite sections, the costs will have to be borne by the poorer masses in terms ofloss ofemployment and income, high costs ofservices to be provided by the corporate sector and loss ofaccess to essential services. We musttell our Government: No opening up ofany sector without national debate and consensus! One .
Enron is enough. No more Enron like disasters! No to 'benchmarking' and similar other moves! No compulsory opening up ofserVices sectors! Keep water, health, education and retail trade out ofGATS! Stop handing over banking sector strictly under national control! MNCs cannot be given national status and 'national treatment'..
Indian services sectors to transnational corporations for a few thousand American visas! Keep financial and .
TRIPS: DEMAND COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW In 1995, the Indian Government defied the popular consensus and agreed to the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Rights (TRIPS). Today, it is obvious that the TRIPS agreement jeopardizes " .
access to medicines and has a detrimental effect on the dissemination ofscientific knowledge and technology .
in diverse sectors such as software and biotechnology.The Patent Amendment Act is the latest manifestation I, d ofthis devastating agreement. The need ofthe hour is that India should press for a review ofTRIPS, not in the .
narrow sense that developed countries would want (in terms ofthe actual translation ofits provisions in the ;1- country laws ofdifferent countries) but in terms ofa comprehensive review ofTRIPS in WTO itself,and an end .
ell to patenting oflife forms, medicines and seeds. are .
(excerptedfrom a Campaign Folder ofthe WTO Virodhi Bharatiya Jan Abhiyan). .
lU Join a National Conventionon WTO organised by WTO Virodhi Bharatiya Jan Abhiyan On 3Dec.05 .
Observe December 13 as National Day of Protest .
To Voice the Concerns ofIndian People Against the Sellout ofIndian Interests .
at the WTO Ministerial Meet at Hong Kong ! .
sdt-Sandeep Singh,JtSecy., AISA, J hesh,Gen.Secy., AISA, JNU .
.