Last year, leaders met as the world began to experience the breadth and depth of the economic recession. Knowing the challenges that awaited businesses at every level, they specifically instructed member economies to assist SMEs by resisting protectionist measures–which are harmful at every level but can put an SME out of business altogether. Ministers responsible for trade met in July this year, as spokespeople throughout the globe began to speak of ‘recovery’ and future growth. In discussing these concepts, there was overwhelming consensus among the Ministers that growth strategies need to be inclusive and sustainable and this is where we stand at present. APEC has always been founded on the premise that free and open markets are inextricable to a healthy economy and that, where the conditions are conducive, people and businesses will thrive. The SME Ministerial Meeting has discussed ways to make markets more accessible to businesses of every size and specific areas to be shaped by future policies–things like the ability of financing and the sustainability of business practices.
What do you think are the prospects for enlargement of APEC? Would admitting more countries make it difficult to keep the agenda focussed?
Ambassador Tay: A wider membership wouldn’t necessarily make it more difficult to remain focussed, but one should anticipate that gaining consensus might take more time. Having come to the close of a moratorium on new membership, the possibility of admitting new members will be examined in Japan next year. Quite a few economies have already expressed their interest in joining APEC and several of them have been granted guest status at some of APEC’s sectoral meetings–including India, for example.
Over the next months or so are a series of high-level meetings, culminating in the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in the middle of November. What would you say in response to criticism that summits such as these are essentially just talking shops?
Ambassador Tay: I’d respond by asking how is it conceivable that any significant movement should be made without talking first?To garner genuine commitment from 21 economies and to devise plans of action to which both developed and developing members can adhere, demands extensive discussion. There is no “easy way”. There’s no short cut. APEC gets 21 of the world’s most influential leaders sitting down in a room, side-by-side. That doesn’t happen every day. So doesn’t it make sense that they should be talking – very frankly – about the world’s most pressing issues?
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
