ATTAC on no new round at WTO

["Ian Murray" <seamus2001@xxxxxxxx>]

SAND IN THE WHEELS (n°103)
ATTAC Weekly newsletter - Wednesday 07/11/01
______________________________

Please circulate and distribute.
The Newsletter is received by 8 913 direct subscribers today.

To subscribe or unsubscribe: <http://attac.org/listen.htm>

Confort Reading and Printing
Format RTF http://attac.org/attacinfoen/attacnews103.zip
Format PDF http://attac.org/attacinfoen/attacnews103.pdf

QUARTERLY REPORTS
http://attac.org/listentri.htm
+ International Trade & WTO - 2
NEW + Finance & Economy - 3
+ Debt & Development - 2
____________________________________________________________

Content

1- No New round
Saturday November 10 by hundreds of thousand people will say "No! WTO
Round". No new round, no old round, no more of this hocus pocus that
is supposed to change trade liberalization in development,
multinational corporate benefits into distribution of wealth.

2- WTO Tidbits
US exports to Pakistan may receive financial support; the ILO reveals
a picture of spiralling poverty in Latin America; the TRIPs agreements
and environment issues sow discord in Brussels, at the WTO and in
Geneva; ACP countries are less than enthusiastic about proposed
economic partnerships with the EU.

3- Economists Appeal for a new Globalization.
At the instigation of the United States of America, Canada and the
European Union, the WTO has surreptitiously reintroduced the four
points held on to since the previous WTO conference in Singapore. The
majority of the Third World countries do not wish these points to
appear on the agenda: they relate to investments, trade competition,
market transparency, and the liberalisation of trade, and have become
the main subjects to be contained within the new round. Southern
hemisphere countries are equally against the discussion of these
topics.

4- Will we have to sell our personal data?
After September 11, some Western nations rushed to adopt new laws
aimed at strengthening surveillance of Internet exchanges. On October
30 the French Parliament is likely to pass an amendment requiring
Internet access providers to store communications data for one year.
Civil liberties organizations in France and other countries protest
these measures, which they describe as "dealing a deathblow" to
freedom of expression. And the European Parliament has just announced
that, "in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights and
in keeping with decrees issued by the European Court of Human Rights,
all forms of electronic surveillance, general or exploratory,
conducted on a large scale are prohibited. " This is high-flown
hypocrisy.

5- Minnesota Public Employees Win the Largest Strike in State History
The strike of nearly 30,000 Minnesota state workers came to an end
after two weeks of picketing, demonstrations, and rallies all over the
state. For years the two unions involved had been accepting raises
below the level of inflation.

6- Against IMF and WB
We call on all activists from around the world to come to Ottawa
during these meetings to protest and expose these nefarious
institutions and to actively work to create a better world.

7- Meeting ATTAC worldwide



______________________________

1- No New Round
____________________________________________________________

Saturday November 10 by hundreds of thousand people will say "No! WTO
Round". No new round, no old round, no more of this hocus pocus that
is supposed to change trade liberalization in development,
multinational corporate benefits into distribution of wealth. More
than 28 actions will reunite thousands of people in Germany, in
Berlin, Frankfurt and other cities in all the country, small and big.
In Geneva and in Roma few tens of thousands are awaited for national
demonstrations, the Swiss will end probably in front the empty WTO
building, the Italian in the Truth Mouth, a symbolic place where
ancient Romans were dealing with lies and liars. In France around 70
actions will reunite from North to South, East to West tens of
thousand in a big minute of noise at 03:00pm before marching, dancing
and singing. In fact ATTAC will participate is something like 120
actions in 12 countries.

Another world is possible!

But the ancient one is still at work and is obviously threatening the
well being of most people. A weekend phone call between U.S. Trade
Representative Robert Zoellick and European Union Commissioner Pascal
Lamy failed to develop a common approach for dealing with developing
countries' demands that international intellectual property rules not
interfere with their ability to enact public health policy, according
to informed sources. The issue will come to a head in this week's
ministerial of the World Trade Organization.

Zoellick expressed irritation with the way the EU has handled this
issue involving the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property Rights, according to these sources. The EU has tried to find
a bridge between the U.S. position expressed in the ministerial
preparations and that of developing countries.

The EU has not tabled a new proposal on the TRIPS and public health
issue after withdrawing two controversial proposals last month. One of
these closely tracked the position of developing countries designed to
exempt public health measures from dispute settlement cases under the
TRIPS. The other dealt with the issue of compulsory licensing for
countries that do not have their own drug manufacturing capacity and
must import generics from abroad (Inside U.S. Trade, Oct. 26, p. 1).

In a Nov. 5 press conference, Lamy said the EU would seek to strike a
middle road between sharply contrasting proposals from the U.S. and
developing countries on TRIPS and public health.

According to Lamy, the EU is sympathetic to the U.S. view that the
TRIPS agreement already contains the necessary flexibility for
countries to take steps to combat public health emergencies, without
any additional agreement to waive TRIPS obligations. This appeared to
be a reference to a proposal from Brazil and India that would have
ministers agree that "nothing in the TRIPS Agreement shall prevent
Members from taking measures to protect public health."

"There must be comprehension for the fear that exists in the U.S. that
agreeing to too-broad language would de facto imply putting the TRIPS
agreement aside for health, which we shouldn't do," Lamy said.

At the same time, Lamy said it was important to "recover a margin of
maneuver" for developing countries in dealing with public health
crises which had not been available in some of the dealings these
countries had with the drug industry, he said. He did not get specific
about whether the U.S. proposal fell short on that score.

He did say that he believed that certain technical issues regarding
the flexibility in the TRIPS agreement should be clarified, including
the question of whether countries that do not have the capacity to
manufacture medicines domestically could issue compulsory licenses for
manufacture in a third country. Some of these issues may have to be
addressed after Doha, Lamy said although "our view is that the maximum
of possible clarifications should be on the table in Doha."

To know more about the issues and Doha, http://attac.org/nonewround/


______________________________

2- WTO Tidbits
____________________________________________________________

By the Attac work group on International Treaties, Marseille

1) Support for US exports to Pakistan

The Ex-Im Bank is to explore ways of supporting US exporters concerned
in the health, education and gaz & petroleum sectors of Pakistan's
privatisation scheme, and of financing transactions for the support of
commercial airplane exports to Pakistan.

2) At the All-American Conference of the ILO

In Latin America and the Caribbean, 45 % of the population lives in a
state of poverty.  Well before the terrorist attacks in the US, a drop
in growth from 3.9 to 1.3 % was predicted. Unemployment, which was at
10 % at the beginning of the last decade of the 20th century and had
gone down to 7.8 % in 1995, has risen to 9.5 % to-day.  35 % of the
people have no social security cover (source: ILO).

This does not prevent the Canadian Trade Minister from affirming at
the same moment : "According to a recent Australian government survey,
globalisation has helped reduce poverty in the world during the past
30 years. Up to now, the focus of policies has been the financial
side, but the region has reached the limits of structural adjustment."

Solutions could be sought by helping small businesses, the domestic
market, and by developing education.

3) Divisions in the EU over the TRIPS

At the October 12th meeting of Committee 13 in Brussels, the
Committee's proposal for a more pliant Trips position on compulsory
licences was rejected.

The pharmaceutical industry revealed that opposition to the proposal
came mainly from Germany and the Britain, whose labs had most to lose
from this proposal if adopted.

The developing countries, headed by Brazil and India, want the Trips
clauses allowing the use of compulsory licences to be interpreted as
meaning that, in the event of a national emergeny or "extreme
urgency", these licences could be imposed and could by-pass
negotiations with the patent holder, the government concerned being
allowed to consider valid a compulsory licence coming from another
member state.

The USA and Switzerland, which are home to some of the biggest
laboratories, are against a declaration on this subject, and stick to
their stand that the Trips already contains clauses allowing
governments sufficient room for pliability in ensuring access to
medicines for Aids or other pandemics.

4)  The pharmaceutical industry cnsiders that Brussels leans too far
in the direction of the developing countries' position

It is thought that this proposal to soften the Trips rulings was made
with the idea that it would bring more Southern countries to support a
new Round.

The EU proposal nevertheless included a ban on the re-export of
medicines and on demand being met by local producers.

Another clause provided that no country could issue compulsory
licences if it already benefited from special tariff conditions,
reduced below the price normally due to the patent holder.

5)  The Europeans confront the other WTO members on the environment

The EU, with the support of Norway, Switzerland and some East Europen
countries, declared that within the EU a wide section of public
opinion was interested in environmental questions.  The EU is expected
to bring back answers, and is prepared to introduce whatever
safeguards against protectionism other members may require.
Australia, which has the backing of many other countries, accuses the
EU of trying to weaken the WTO rulings by seeking to "clarify" the
agreements.

In a revised text of the Declaration, published on Setember 26th,
there could be an approach to a compromise text, inspired by the US
and Hong Kong, suggesting a two-tier process for this question.  The
first phase would be one of study and analysis, lasting until the next
Conference in 2003.  Members would then decide whether or not to
engage in negotiations on the subject.  The question of eco-labelling
could be a part of this.

A meeting of European Environment Ministers should shortly be held to
decide whether this clause of the Declaration could be accepted by
member states.

6) Anthrax and TRIPS

The link between the Trips and access to essential medicines is still
very much in the public eye, with Canada having recently set aside the
Bayer patent on an antibiotic, Cipro, intended for the treatment of
anthrax, so as to be able to buy a generic version of the drug
produced locally, despite the fact that Bayer said it was able to
respond to demand.  Canada is accused of using doublespeak, since it
actively took part in defending the laboratory patents in the
treatment of Aids in developing countries.  The US was not duped, and
criticized Canada's position, fearing that it would weaken the
American position with regard to the use of compulsory licences in a
national emergency. (Canada finally decided to buy the Bayer
medicine). However, an American coalition demanded that the US follow
the Canadian example, considering that a decision not to provide
generic medicines would prevent poor Americans from obtaining Cipro.
The Director of the Brazilian Aids Programme declared : "I hope this
case (of anthrax) will bring them to reflect on our position, which is
that compulsory licences are a perfectly legitimate instrument."

7)  In Geneva, states take diametrically opposed stands on the TRIPS

The US has submitted a new proposal, suggesting that the transitional
period for implementing the agreements could be extended to 2016 for
the Least Developed Countries. It proposed a 5-year moratorium before
a suit could be presented to the DSB on the application by developing
countries in Sub-Saharan Africa  for improved access  to medicines for
treatment of Aids and other pandemics.

This proposal is however considered narrower and more restrictive
than the options already available to the Least Advanced Countries,
such as the right according to Art.66 to demand an extension at the
end of the transitional period ending in 2005.

The EU, for its part, proposes that the developing countries take
measures to prevent cheaper medicines finding their way to the markets
of developed countries.  The developing countries fear that this
clause would restrict the Trips options, which make no mention of such
an obligation.

8)  The 13th Meeting of the parties to the Montreal Protocol on
ozone-depleting substances

The Protocol is often quoted as the most advanced multilateral
agreement on the environment reached to date.  It contains several
trade-restrictive measures, and is thus in the front lines of
discussions on the incompatibility of WTO agreements and
trade-restrictive multilateral agreements on the environment.
Ozone-depleting substances have almost all been eliminated in the
developed world.  The Protocol will depend for future headway on the
capacity of developing countries to conform to their obligations in
this field.  Most of them already do so; but 25 of the 136 developing
countries have increased both consumption and production of these
substances.

Several developing countries, and the Vice-Director of the UN
Environment Programme have underscored the obstacles put in the way of
conformity to the agreements in developing countries, such as the low
cost of CFCs, the high cost of alternative projects, and the continued
exports of CFC-based products to developing countries.

One of the major challenges concerns illegal trade; and illegal
production has been declared partially reponsible for maintaining the
low prices of CFCs.

9)  Europe could drive a wedge between ACP countries

Efforts presently being made by the EU Commission to take part in
Regional Economic Partnership Agreements with ACP (African, Caribbean,
Pacific) countries, based on the Cotonou Agreement and covering
amongst other products rice, bananas and sugar, is considered by some,
especially the Caribbean countries, as a possible threat to solidarity
between these countries.

omc.marseille@xxxxxxxxx


______________________________

3- Economists Appeal for a new Globalization.
____________________________________________________________

The next ministerial conference of the WTO (World Trade Organisation)
is planned to take place in Doha, Qatar between the 9th and the 13
November 2001. The conference agenda is alarming, because it expresses
the will of the WTO to push through a new round that systematically
ignores the questions posed concerning global economic development. At
the instigation of the United States of America, Canada and the
European Union, the WTO has surreptitiously reintroduced the four
points held on to since the previous WTO conference in Singapore. The
majority of the Third World countries do not wish these points to
appear on the agenda : they relate to investments, trade competition,
market transparency, and the liberalisation of trade, and have become
the main subjects to be contained within the new round. Southern
hemisphere countries are equally against the discussion of these
topics.

 Tanzania, who represents the group of 'disadvantaged countries', has
specified that the conditions of negotiation on these four points are
not fulfilled as they deal with complex questions, the implications of
which they are not yet capable of apprehending. India has also
emphasised that the conditions are not yet acceptable for the
re-opening of the negotiations, and that so doing would lead to the
establishment of overly constraining laws in the areas concerned.

 These same countries state that they are already suffering from the
trade conventions so far agreed upon, and ask, for example, that the
question of access to northern hemisphere markets be covered, and that
the imbalance existing between north and south be more generally taken
into account. As economists, we can only share these concerns. The WTO
aims lead in practice to social dumping, and it is urgent to put in
place a new concept of international exchange, one based on principles
of solidarity, cooperation and fair trade. It is only in this way that
we can build a strong and lasting foundation for development that will
respect the rights of workers in the countries of both the north and
the south, and which will protect employment, democratic rights and
the ecosystem.

 More precisely, we pronounce ourselves in favor of the following
objectives - objectives that are at present completely absent from the
programs of the WTO, if not countered by them :

- To maintain and develop public services in the most important
sectors, including water, health, social security, education, culture,
television, communication services, transport, housing, and energy.

 - To respect the principle of precaution concerning ecology, public
health, food, and in particular, production and distribution of
genetically modified foods.

- To outlaw patents on plants, animals, micro-organisms and genes.

- To declare water, air and genes as the property of humanity.

- The modification of intellectual property rights on pharmaceutical
products for the benefit of poor countries.

 - The recognition and preservation of subsistence farming.

 - The acknowledgement of the huge differences in productivity between
large geographical areas, and the necessity of applying renewed
international laws protecting certain zones in order to counterbalance
these differences. These laws must be based upon policies for
development rather than on freedom of trade.

 A profound change in direction now appears urgent in the aftermath of
the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. On October 1st, 2001 the
World Bank produced an alarming document reporting that the economic
growth rate of third world countries is decreasing. The president of
the World Bank, James Wolfensohn, has delivered this warning :

 "We are aware of the cost in human life caused by the terrorist
attacks in New York,Washington and Pennsylvania USA that caused the
deaths of citizens from around eighty different nations. However,
there is another human tribute which is being widely ignored; it will
be paid by all third world countries, and mainly by Africa. Judging by
our estimations, tens of thousands more children will die around the
world, while perhaps ten million other human beings will pass under
the poverty line with less than onedollar a day to live on as a
consequence of the terrorist attacks. This is simply because they will
have lost their income, and far more people will be reduced to poverty
if development strategies are compromised."

 Saturday November 10th 2001 will be a day of demonstration on an
international scale. We join in this initiative, and we take the
opportunity to call upon public opinion and the European authorities
in order to formulate rhe following demands made to the WTO:

 - To refuse any new round of liberalisation or extension of power and
spheres of competence delegated to the WTO.

 - To take out an evaluation of the WTO's results that includes the
full participation of citizens' organisations, and take out an equal
evaluation of the rules and practices of the WTO since its creation.

 - The integration of the WTO as a specialised institution of a global
institutional structure with aims to put into action a worldwide plan
against poverty and towards economic development.

 - The subordination of the WTO to international charters such as The
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to international treaties
relating to economic, social and cultural rights, and to sanitary and
environmental norms.

This subordination must be concrete. There is a particular need for
all the activities of and decisions taken by the WTO to be controlled
by independent, democratic bodies.

This subordination must also include the possibility of contesting any
WTO decision in courts of law that are independent from the WTO. This
is not at present the case.

Contact : Michel Husson, hussonet@xxxxxxx +33.1.48.15.19.06

First signatories

Tony Andréani (sciences politiques, Univ.Paris VIII). - Mikaël
Balabane, (Univ.Paris XIII) - Mireille Bardos (économiste) - Jacques
Bournay - Nicolas Béniès (économiste) - Christian Berdot-Mair (Les
Amis de la Terre) - Marc Bonhomme (économiste, Québec) - Lino de
Carvalho (économiste et député, Portugal) - Odile Castel (Univ.Rennes
I) - Pierre Concialdi (économiste, Réseau d'Alerte sur les
Inégalités) - Nathalie Corade (ENITA, Bordeaux). - Albano Cordeiro
(CNRS) - Laurent Cordonnier (Univ.Lille I) - Pierre Cours-Salies
(Institut d'études européennes, Univ.Paris VIII) - Christine Delphy
(directrice de Nouvelles Questions féministes) - Hélène Delorme
(politologue, CERI, Fondation nationale des sciences politiques) -
Anne Dufresne (Observatoire social européen) - Pierre Duharcourt
(Univ.de Marne la Vallée). - Alain Gély - Dominique Guibert - Janette
Habel (Univ.Marne-la-Vallée) - Jean-Marie Harribey (Univ.Bordeaux
IV) - Françoise Hatchuel (Univ. Paris X, revue EcoRev ) - Jörg
Huffschmid (Univ.de Brême) - Michel Husson (Conseil scientifique
d'Attac) - Esther Jeffers (Univ.Paris VIII) - Bruno Jetin (Univ.Paris
XIII) - Isaac Johsua (Univ.Paris XI) - Catherine Lévy (sociologue) -
Dominique Lévy (directeur de recherches CNRS) - Francisco Louçã
(économiste et député, Portugal) - Michael Löwy (directeur de
recherches CNRS) - Yannick Lung (économiste, Univ.Bordeaux IV) -
Gustave Massiah (AITEC) - Antoine Math - Jacques Mazier - Denise
Mendez - Pedro Montes (Présidence fédérale de Izquierda Unida, Etat
espagnol)  - El Mouhoub Mouhoud (Univ.Paris Nord) - Martino Nieddu
(Univ.Reims) - Jacques Nikonoff (Univ.Paris VIII) - Daniel Perraud
(INRA) - Evelyne Perrin (AC!) - Claude Piganiol-Jacquet (Univ.François
Rabelais de Tours) - Dominique Plihon (Univ.Paris XIII, Conseil
scientifique d'Attac) - Christophe Ramaux (Univ.Paris I) - Pierre
Salama (Univ.Paris XIII) - Catherine Samary (Univ.Paris IX
auphine)  - Catherine Sauviat (économiste) - Dominique Sicot
(journaliste économique) - Jacques Texier (philosophe) - Bruno
héret  - Eric Toussaint (CADTM, membre Conseil Scientifique d'ATTAC) -
Stéphanie Treillet (IUFM Créteil) - Pierre Volovitch (économiste de la
santé) - Arnaud Zacharie (CADTM)


______________________________

4- Will we have to sell our personal data?
____________________________________________________________

By Marc Laimé

Protecting our privacy seems increasingly difficult at a time when
computer networks are extending their tentacular reach. Until now we
held a property right to our personal information -- identity, family
and professional status, buying habits. Laws controlled government and
business use of this data. Will we soon be selling it in the
marketplace? In the universe of the network economy, the gathering of
personal data for customization or sale is expanding widely. In this
context, individuals themselves could soon be encouraged to sell their
personal data.

After September 11, some Western nations rushed to adopt new laws
aimed at strengthening surveillance of Internet exchanges. On October
30 the French Parliament is likely to pass an amendment requiring
Internet access providers to store communications data for one year.
Civil liberties organizations in France and other countries protest
these measures, which they describe as "dealing a deathblow" to
freedom of expression. And the European Parliament has just announced
that, "in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights and
in keeping with decrees issued by the European Court of Human Rights,
all forms of electronic surveillance, general or exploratory,
conducted on a large scale are prohibited. " This is high-flown
hypocrisy.

Millions of profiles developed

Technological advances have greatly reduced business' costs for
collecting and processing personal data. Several types of players have
developed very profitable markets in this niche. They include:
mail-order giants like Trois Suisses and La Redoute, which resell
their customer files numbering in the millions of "profiles," to many
firms; owners of marketing "megabases," developed from extremely
detailed questionnaires usually distributed in mail boxes, including
companies like Claritas and Consodata which own data from tens of
millions of French households; firms which specialize in marketing
directory data, like Mediatel (France Telecom), or GroupAdress. With a
limited presence if any in Europe, but already very active in the
U.S., other firms (Equifax, Trans Union, Experian) are marketing --
completely legally -- information regarding individuals'
creditworthiness. Finally, thanks to the pinpoint nature of the
Internet certain start-ups, particularly lottery sites (Bananalotto),
have collected millions of personal profiles in two or three years.

The large companies which market direct marketing files in France
resell addresses for between 0.30 and 2.00 Francs (between ¤ .045 and
.30). A few months ago, an e-commerce site customer was "valued" at
10,000.00 Francs (¤ 1,520). That absurd valuation followed from
astronomical stock market valuations typical until the new economy
bubble burst. The markets ended up punishing those excesses. But the
increasing power of consumers in the network economy leads economists
and marketing experts today to predict that individuals will soon
market their own personal data.

Unthinkable just yesterday, this idea is taking shape as significant
amounts of personal data, until now in government hands, will also be
marketed in different ways. A few months ago Paul Sholtz, chief
technology officer of the California company PrivacyRight, championed
a new notion of privacy based primarily on the "transaction costs"
concept developed by 1991 economics Nobel prizewinner Ronald Coase.

An inefficient market

The significant reduction in business costs for collecting and
processing personnel data resulting from the development of new
technology seems to have produced an inefficient market because it
creates a glaring information asymmetry between players. Consequently,
to "reestablish market efficiency" and facilitate the development of
e-commerce, the consumer's property (and marketing) rights to his/her
personal data would have to be recognized.

Certain privacy advocates support this view. Opposing the most
intrusive on-line marketing tactics, they take the position that
"royalties" paid to consumers who market their data will lead to
significant additional production costs for direct marketing
campaigns. For profit reasons, firms would then choose communication
methods that reflect greater concern for personal privacy. Arnaud
Belleil, marketing director for the French firm Cecurity.com and
lecturer at the l'Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Rennes (Rennes
Institute of Political Studies) makes the point: "By registering on
Internet sites, individuals provide substantial value to firms but
today receive only marginal compensation. They are like tribal people
offered a handful of glass beads by early Western explorers in
exchange for their precious metals."

Kathy Daly Jennings, marketing vice president of Persona, a U.S. firm
which sells privacy protection services, believes in the market's
solvency -- if the consumer is appropriately compensated. "In our
market studies, when we ask consumers if they would release their
telephone number for $20, they say, "No!' But once we get to $100,
they don't care."

The collapse of the "new economy" mocks the prophecies that promised a
shining future for businesses whose model was based on services that
appeared to be free but, in fact, depended on gathering massive
amounts of personal data for marketing. Yet despite massive start-up
failures, data is still being collected. We've only in the earliest
phase of a massive marketing of our personal data.

Tomorrow, e-commerce

Today net economy actors are adopting the " pay-to-play " model on a
massive scale. They hope to market what they (apparently) used to give
away for free to consumers seeking services or content. From now on
media outlets will try to sell their information on-line. Large
portals and access providers now charge for a multitude of services
that were free until recently. In the last few months, Yahoo ! has
launched multiple paid services called "Premium" -- email or personal
web pages with expanded memory and business services -- while waiting
for Pressplay, Universal and Sony's music services, to be launched and
distributed on its network. Directories and search engines are also
marketing Website registration and even positioning. Marketers and
promoters clearly intend to profit from this windfall, not to mention
the businesses and even institutions preparing to be paid for services
that just yesterday they offered for free -- including in the "real"
world.

The full meaning of the idea that the consumer could soon be led to
market his/her personal data then becomes clear. The development of
electronic commerce, the "cornerstone" of the information society
(according to the decisionmakers), assumes significant improvement in
the security of transactions conducted over the networks. Thus the
developed countries have already implemented many legal and regulatory
provisions, all aimed at assuring maximum security for electronic
transactions.

Big Brother is watching you..

The technical processes involved in certifying transactions require
intervention by a large number of operators who are creating highly
sophisticated transactional platforms, which need to offer 100%
guaranteed security in order to reassure consumers. And the question
is now being asked, as to whether "essential public data", such as the
verification of an individual's identity, should be available for use
to commercials ends, a privilege, until now, only permissible by the
state. However, the certification authorities are now claiming rights
to the facility, within the framework of a new model of public service
delegation, which will enable them to authenticate a person's
identity.

The French telecommunications regulatory body, known as ART, recently
opened discussions around a project called ENUM, designed to make the
telecommunications and the Internet networks inter-operative by
setting up a service to combine identifiers. In practice, what this
means is that from one single telephone number, you'll be able to get
hold of a person by telephone, e-mail or mobile phone. According to
Arnaud Belleil, of Cecurity.com, " if the individual is prepared to
assume responsibility for the data featured and for defining the
access criteria, this kind of service should allow him to have
complete control of his "contactability".(.) Once the structure is in
place, it wouldn't seem inconceivable for a person to be able to add
other details to the corpus of information, such as credit card and
social security numbers. In that way, ENUM would become a viable
alternative to Microsoft's Passport. But in view of the time it takes
the telecommunications regulatory bodies to get round to issuing
licences, ENUM is likely to come in behind Microsoft and AOL."

The possibility of seeing individuals selling their personal data,
themselves, doesn't yet have the support of the parties concerned.
Direct marketing companies are obviously reticent about the idea. The
various authorities involved in protecting privacy, like the CNIL in
France, are just as reluctant to go down that road. As Margaret-Jane
Radin, Professor of Law at Stanford puts it, "It's one thing to talk
about selling ownership rights, but you can't erect a for sale sign on
human rights." Lawyers will doubtless oppose any form of economic
regulation over privacy that would deprive them of the monopoly they
presently enjoy in this domain.

New inequalities.

However, the spectre of a society in which the weakest will be forced
to sell their private lives, whilst the rich have the means to pay to
protect their privacy, is no longer a fiction. In fact, it's becoming
clearer by the day that it's going to become almost impossible for us
to materially insure ourselves against any unwanted commercial use
being made of our personal data.

In the near future, we will most probably be asked to define for
ourselves, the parameters within which we will grant to any third
party "right of access" to this data. In the 22 May edition of the
magazine Business Wire, Austin Hill, co-founder and vice-president of
the American firm Zero Knowledge, presented his new product, a PRM
(Privacy Right Management) soft-ware package. Just like the DRM
(Digital Right Management) soft-ware that the major audio-visual
multinationals have developed in order to prevent digital pirating of
music and films, PRM packages aim to put a stop to the unauthorised
use of personal data.

The debate which has only just opened, looks like being a heated one.
Mrs Jason Cattlet, an American lawyer specialising in privacy
protection spoke out last August against the inequalities between, on
the one side, the multinationals who claim for themselves 100% of the
profits from sales of their products and services and, on the other,
the citizen faced with the marketing strategies practised by these
same companies. She points out that, "When an individual distributes
soft-ware without a companies authorisation, that's called pirating.
But when a company distributes an individual's personal data without
his authorisation, it's called sharing out."

How to protect personal data?

During the next Trusted Computing Conference, being held in Mountain
View, California in November, all the actors on the computing and
Internet scene will be exploring the idea of creating an independent
international body to manage the movement and protection of personal
data on the Internet.

Since 1997, the major American computer companies have developed,
under the aegis of the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium), a standard
known as P3P (Platform for Privacy Preference) to manage the relaying
by web-sites of their clients electronic profiles. Technologies such
as Passport (Microsoft), Magic Carpet (AOL),and Liberty Alliance (Sun
Microsystems) are the first industry applications of P3P, managing the
automatic exchange of personal data on the web, according to the level
of consent granted by the internaut.

These technologies make it possible to dispense with the hassle of
repeatedly having to register on-line and allow the user to define for
himself the level of protection governing his personal data. Microsoft
confirms that "Our application, Passport, no longer centralises the
storage of electronic profiles." The internaut's credit card numbers
remain in the possession of his bank's server, which Passport is
counting on being able to open up. The same goes for administrative
data. On the assumption of an agreement with the state, information
will remain in the hands of the public authorities. They go on to say
at Microsoft that, "The next step will be to entrust the management of
the relay which executes the interchange of data to an independent
third party." It's these new personal identity gateways that, from now
on, the industry is preparing to mandate to a supervisory body.

The French government plans, at the next meeting of the
inter-ministerial committee for the information society (CISI), to set
a consultation process in motion on the use of new technologies for
the protection of privacy.

"Civil status falls within the competence of the Justice Ministry. It
could very well be considered that the movement of personal data on
the internet is governed by royal prerogative in the same way as the
right to security and the right to a personal identity," explains a
spokesperson for the Prime Ministers office, which is unwilling to
leave the management of private information up to industry. The debate
rests on a project introducing the notion of an "electronic safe"
which would give every citizen the control over the administration's
use of their personal details. This project, which was announced in
August by Michel Sapin, the Minister for the civil service, would not
be limited to furthering the set up of on-line government but would
also allow for the securing of on-line commerce. And this, like it or
not, is supposed to effectively guarantee privacy protection to
European citizens..

In the UK, an identical project called "Government Gateway" was
launched by Tony Blair in January. The British are somewhat less
scrupulous than the French though, since they are entrusting technical
support to Microsoft's Passport. The way we see things in France is
that the technologies aimed at privacy protection can't be implemented
without a prior debate on their legitimacy. To be continued...

Marc Laimé. Wednesday 24 October 2001.
Translated by Leah Brumer and Karen Newby, volunteer translators
coorditrad@xxxxxxxxx
Published in collaboration with Uzine.net
http://www.uzine.net/article1198.html


______________________________

5- Minnesota Public Employees Win the Largest Strike in State History
____________________________________________________________

by Anja Weinhold

The strike of nearly 30,000 Minnesota state workers came to an end
after two weeks of picketing, demonstrations, and rallies all over the
state. For years the two unions involved had been accepting raises
below the level of inflation.

AFSCME had been negotiating since February, rejecting the state's
offer of a 2.5 percent raise in each of two years. The Minnesota
Association of Professional Employees (MAPE) was offered 2 percent
each year.

The state wanted to increase workers' health care costs to $1,900 a
year for individuals and $3,800 for families. The out-of-pocket
expenses for a single mother with the misfortune to have cancer could
have reached 25 percent of her take-home pay. The union's proposal
called for a maximum of $1,000 and $2,000.

The unions had chosen this time to demand fair wages because the state
had a budget surplus this year and actually refunded money to
announced that Canada would host the next meetings of the G20, from
November 16-18, 2001. He also invited the International Monetary and
Finance Committee (IMFC) of the IMF and the Development Committee (DC)
of the World Bank, whose September, 2001 meetings were canceled in
Washington earlier this.

The IMF and the World Bank, controlled by the G20 governments, are the
primary architects of neo-liberal globalization. The IMFC and the DC
are key Committees, vital to the business and functioning of the World
Bank and IMF. Already hampered by the cancellation of their September
meetings, the World Bank and IMF are feeling pressure to have a
successful round of talks here in Ottawa.

We therefore encourage any and all activists, who envision a world
free of exploitation and oppression, to come together in Ottawa from
November 16 - 19 to actively resist the G20, the World Bank and the
IMF. It is imperative that all those who support global economic
justice send a clear message to these Institutions and the planet:

'The movement for global justice continues to grow, and will not stand
for continuing efforts by these institutions to structure the world
for the benefit of corporations and the wealthy and to deny basic
justice to the majority of the world's people.'

Global Democracy Ottawa, and many other groups from Ottawa, Toronto,
Montreal and Quebec City, have begun to mobilize for diverse and
varied actions, teach-ins and marches to be held throughout the
duration of the conference.

We invite any groups planning on coming to Ottawa to join us in
spokes-council -- our process for organizing, which is based on an
understanding of the realities of protest and mutual respect. We
envision a process of democratic decision making where all groups can
come together to share information, resources and ideas.

For more information, please contact:
MAILTO: info_N17@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.flora.org/gdo

Global Democracy Ottawa


______________________________

7- Meeting ATTAC worldwide.
____________________________________________________________

If you are interested in one of these rendezvous please click on
http://attac.org/rdv/ Then select the country in which it will take
place to find further information.

Wednesday 07 : AUSTRIA : WIEN / ESPANA : MADRID - VIGO / FRANCE: LA
ROCHETTE - PARIS 11 - VOIRON - PARIS 13 - CACHAN - LILLE - TOULOUSE -
NANTERRE - ROYAN - PARIS 9 10 - REIMS - BRIANCON / SVERIGE : VARBERG -
SJUHARAD - UPPSALA

Thursday 08 : AUSTRIA : WIEN / BELGIQUE: BRUXELLES / DEUTSCHLAND :
BERLIN / ESPANA : VIGO / FRANCE: DREUX - NIMES - GRENOBLE - PARIS
CENTRE - ST PIERRE D'OLERON - REIMS - VIENNE - LARAGNE / ITALIA :
SIENA - BOLOGNA / NORGE : BAERUM / QUEBEC : MONTREAL / SVERIGE :
VARBERG

Friday 09 : DEUTSCHLAND : AACHEN / ESPANA : VIGO / FRANCE: COUERON -
MONTREUIL - NIMES - CHAMPAGNOLE - ANNECY - PERTUIS - EPERNON - REIMS -
GAP / NORGE : TRONDHEIM - OSLO / SUISSE-SCHWEIZ : LAUSANNE / SVERIGE :
VARBERG

Saturday 10 : 120 rendez-vous in 12 countries
http://attac.org/nonewround/mob



____________________________________________________________

This weekly newsletter was put together by the « Sand in the Wheels »
team of volunteers. <newsletter@xxxxxxxxx> <http://attac.org>