[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 13]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 17346]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR TONY HALL

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. FRANK R. WOLF

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, July 25, 2005

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I would like to share with my colleagues the 
attached statement by our former colleague Tony Hall, who now serves as 
U.S. ambassador to the World Food Programme. Ambassador Hall is 
concerned about the future of world food aid in light of current 
negotiations at the World Trade Organization.

       In the past year, the world has been broadsided by tragedy. 
     Mother Nature wreaked havoc in Indonesia, destroying lives 
     and impairing the ability of tens of thousands of survivors 
     to feed themselves. In Darfur, the constant need for food aid 
     will not subside until people can safely return to their 
     homes and begin to plant seeds. Ethiopia has once again found 
     itself on the brink of famine. There, the causes are complex, 
     but the need is simple. Food aid is helping Ethiopians stay 
     alive.
       I want to discuss another looming tragedy. But we can 
     prevent this one. I'm talking about negotiations happening 
     right now in Geneva at the World Trade Organization.
       Some European members of the WTO are working to eliminate 
     most in-kind food donations to humanitarian situations. There 
     is a belief among some countries that the best way to insure 
     minimal impact is to move to a cash only system for 
     donations.
       The U.S. is adamantly opposed to any proposal that would 
     RESTRICT and therefore REDUCE the amount of donations to the 
     world's hungry. There are 850 million people who don't have 
     enough food to eat. And yet we are reaching only about 100 
     million of them with assistance. We need to be increasing our 
     volumes of food aid worldwide but some of the wealthy WTO 
     member states are pushing positions that will inevitably cut 
     food aid back.
       Eliminating in-kind assistance results in smaller amounts 
     of food aid to the hungry of the world. For example, WFP'S 
     own research found ``a clear decline in European Union food 
     aid after the EC and other European member nations moved from 
     in-kind to cash.''
       It is inconceivable to me that a group of our colleagues 
     meeting in Geneva would put already fragile lives at risk. 
     Why is this conversation even happening, considering the 
     humanitarian emergencies in the world today?
       The U.S. has given $1.6 billion in 2005--that's half of 
     total food aid--and emergency needs are still not being met.
       The WTO should not be even be discussing food aid reform. 
     FAO and WFP are the experts. The discussions of improving 
     food aid deliveries should be taking place in Rome, not 
     Geneva. The United States urges WTO to rely on UN food 
     agencies for their expertise.
       We have a moral obligation to the people of Darfur, Panda 
     Aceh and Ethiopia and many more to protect the flexibility of 
     our assistance programs. It would be costly mistake to limit 
     our food aid. We are talking about people's lives--those with 
     children, parents, sisters and brothers. People who are 
     needed on farms, in schools, factories and churches. We have 
     a moral obligation to do the right thing. Food aid saves 
     lives.

                          ____________________