---

World Trade Organisation

My Lords, I thank all noble Lords who contributed to this debate and, in particular, I thank my noble friend Lord Radice for his timely report. The main theme of our debate has reflected sensible realism rather than undue pessimism. In conclusion, there are three things that are significant for us as a trading country. The first is the development objective of Doha. The Chinese are not given to overstatement or to ill-judged words, and the chairman of the WTO conference in China said:"““This is after all a development round, and if we aren’t able to do something significant in development it really becomes meaningless””." Doha was a promise from the developed to the developing countries. To deliver it inadequately would be bad. To deliver it not at all would be unacceptable. My second point is on the coincidence of international and British trading interests. Most developing countries want agricultural reform. So do we. Most developing countries will accept trade in services, provided it is reasonably sequenced and local interests are looked after. So do we. As the noble Lord, Lord Brittan, and my noble friend Lady Whitaker pointed out, nearly half of our exports are dedicated to services. We should play our full part; if agriculture opens the door in negotiations, we should follow up with services. They work abroad to give stability and help the fight against corruption. My last point is about the Government’s policy. I commend it. It echoes the phrase used in this Motion, ““fair and positive””. I hope that it continues, always with a delicate equipoise between patience and determination, and always punctilious to fulfil British and international fair trading objectives. I beg leave to withdraw the Motion for Papers. Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.