By Michael O. Leavitt (China Daily)
Updated: 2008-01-16 07:41

Under assignment from President George W. Bush, I have devoted considerable time and a lot of Health and Human Services resources over the past six months to an Import Safety Working Group. I was chairman of the 12-member group which represented all the relevant parts of the US government.

The working groups concluded that our country has a good system of import safety, but it is inadequate for the future. In September, we laid out a strategic framework for the future. In November, we issued an implementation plan with 50 specific recommendations in 14 different categories.

Throughout the period of our work, there were negative reports about pet food, aquaculture products, toothpaste, and toys with lead paint. It was evident that these events were warning signs that required a policy response.

In the summer of last year, I began working with Chinese officials to develop binding memorandums of agreement on how we can work together to assure their export products meet US standards.

I asked Andy von Eschenbach, Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, to assemble a technical team. I assigned my chief of staff, Rich McKeown, to represent me in the negotiations. Vice-Premier Wu Yi of the Chinese government received a similar assignment from Chinese President Hu Jintao to organize a team.

The work between the Chinese and American negotiating teams spanned six months and involved four different rounds of meetings. They were rigorous and spirited. However, in the end, two agreements were produced.

One agreement is on food and animal feed. The second is focused on drugs and medical devices.

I believe these two agreements contain a framework which will have a profound impact not just on the importing relationships between the US and China, but also on the relationships we have with other nations.

I want to enumerate five of the many important conclusions I have reached during this period.

Lesson 1: The import safety problem is the natural consequence of a maturing of the global marketplace.

These issues have been slowly ripening for several years now. It is a direct reflection of the profound growth in the amount of trade between nations. We are inventing tools to deal with new problems. Scaling the old way up is an inadequate response.

Lesson 2: Collaboration is necessary within governments as well as between governments.

Different countries have different systems of government and different views of import challenges and priorities. Likewise, different parts of governments see import safety with different perspectives.

For example, a border protection agent views this as a law enforcement challenge. A public health official sees it as a health problem and, naturally, a trade negotiator wants to know how it will affect commerce.

Lesson 3: Different perspectives, economic systems and regulatory regimes can be bridged by common goals, international standards and interoperable systems.

The standardization of cargo containers across the world is a proper metaphor. By adopting standard-sized containers, the shipping community has made it possible for cargo to be handled efficiently in any nation. There is no substitute for the hard, messy work of collaboration in developing them.

Lesson 4: In a global market, speed is life. Anything that slows the flow of goods down, including unnecessary inspections, damages competitiveness. Lesson 5: Continuous improvement is necessary.

The agreements we signed with the Chinese are frameworks and will require continued work at many layers of government and industry. There is a Chinese saying: "A man who would move a mountain starts by moving small stones."

The author is US Secretary of Health and Human Services By courtesy of the author's blog at www.hhs.gov

(China Daily 01/16/2008 page9)