WEBVTT - SA to submits trade proposal US 

0:00:00.040 --> 0:00:02.840
<v Speaker 1>We're supposed to be hammering out trade deals with the

0:00:02.960 --> 0:00:06.760
<v Speaker 1>United States. All of that something somewhere out of the spotlight,

0:00:06.800 --> 0:00:09.760
<v Speaker 1>I would say, after drama in the Oval Office a

0:00:09.800 --> 0:00:13.560
<v Speaker 1>couple of weeks back. But according to the Minister of Trade,

0:00:13.600 --> 0:00:17.800
<v Speaker 1>Industry and Competition, the United States has put out a

0:00:17.880 --> 0:00:22.079
<v Speaker 1>new trade framework and we have to in putting together

0:00:22.320 --> 0:00:24.680
<v Speaker 1>our proposals for what kind of trade deals we want

0:00:24.880 --> 0:00:28.440
<v Speaker 1>aligned with that framework. Is this simply an admin issue

0:00:28.760 --> 0:00:30.960
<v Speaker 1>or is there more to it than that? And might

0:00:31.040 --> 0:00:34.280
<v Speaker 1>we find ourselves either in perhaps it's calmer waters or

0:00:34.360 --> 0:00:38.080
<v Speaker 1>choppier ones. Let's welcome to talk about that. Chris Hutton,

0:00:38.320 --> 0:00:42.040
<v Speaker 1>who is executive director at the Center for Risk Analysis.

0:00:42.080 --> 0:00:44.600
<v Speaker 1>Mister Hutton, welcome and thanks very much for your time.

0:00:44.960 --> 0:00:50.000
<v Speaker 1>What's the significance of this new framework? Neutral or does

0:00:50.040 --> 0:00:51.360
<v Speaker 1>it bend one way or the other?

0:00:53.800 --> 0:00:56.200
<v Speaker 2>Good oftenoon John, Thanks for the opportunity.

0:00:56.480 --> 0:01:00.959
<v Speaker 3>I think, as chanced to be the case with the President.

0:01:00.640 --> 0:01:04.080
<v Speaker 2>Trump and his administration, things are much more complicated than

0:01:04.120 --> 0:01:08.240
<v Speaker 2>they appear on the surface. So I think it does

0:01:08.280 --> 0:01:11.280
<v Speaker 2>give South Africa maybe a different route to talk about

0:01:11.319 --> 0:01:14.679
<v Speaker 2>this kind of thing. But despite wanting to now use

0:01:14.720 --> 0:01:17.120
<v Speaker 2>the new tempt that I still think South Africa should

0:01:17.120 --> 0:01:20.119
<v Speaker 2>focus on what are the priorities from our side and

0:01:20.200 --> 0:01:22.560
<v Speaker 2>how do we get to the table with what the

0:01:22.680 --> 0:01:25.479
<v Speaker 2>US might want from their side. So not to say

0:01:25.600 --> 0:01:28.480
<v Speaker 2>this now gives us an opportunity to kick for touch.

0:01:28.840 --> 0:01:31.000
<v Speaker 2>There's more time to do the admin, there's more time

0:01:31.040 --> 0:01:33.559
<v Speaker 2>to work on the new template. But rather to say

0:01:34.000 --> 0:01:36.240
<v Speaker 2>thank you America, this is what we have, this is

0:01:36.240 --> 0:01:38.679
<v Speaker 2>what we already have sort of in the pipeline to

0:01:38.959 --> 0:01:42.000
<v Speaker 2>bring to the table. How can we build this with

0:01:42.160 --> 0:01:44.600
<v Speaker 2>your current framework kind of thing? We have an even

0:01:44.640 --> 0:01:46.720
<v Speaker 2>better framework that we are bringing to the table.

0:01:47.080 --> 0:01:49.800
<v Speaker 1>So do you have any sense at all of how

0:01:50.640 --> 0:01:55.040
<v Speaker 1>a South Africa's putting together of our package and our

0:01:55.080 --> 0:01:58.800
<v Speaker 1>proposals is going. And secondly, any sense of the kind

0:01:58.800 --> 0:02:04.880
<v Speaker 1>of stuff that's the conversations that might actually be building relationships,

0:02:04.920 --> 0:02:09.400
<v Speaker 1>whether they're personal or between sections of departments. Are we

0:02:09.520 --> 0:02:11.400
<v Speaker 1>moving in the right direction? In general?

0:02:14.360 --> 0:02:16.839
<v Speaker 3>I think in this in this climate, I don't think

0:02:16.840 --> 0:02:19.840
<v Speaker 3>any country would would say they're moving in the right

0:02:20.000 --> 0:02:21.160
<v Speaker 3>or they're direction.

0:02:22.120 --> 0:02:24.000
<v Speaker 2>With President Trump, I mean the only the.

0:02:23.960 --> 0:02:26.240
<v Speaker 3>Only deal effectively that the US has reached is with

0:02:26.280 --> 0:02:28.640
<v Speaker 3>the United Kingdom. I mean, even the deal with China

0:02:28.760 --> 0:02:30.520
<v Speaker 3>was just to bring down the tariff. It was a

0:02:30.520 --> 0:02:33.359
<v Speaker 3>bit of a cease fire, not really a reciprocal trade

0:02:33.480 --> 0:02:36.280
<v Speaker 3>or tariff deal as it were with China. So the

0:02:36.360 --> 0:02:39.320
<v Speaker 3>ninth of July deadline, you know, we know it's been coming.

0:02:39.800 --> 0:02:43.880
<v Speaker 3>The Trump administration, various reps have said they don't think

0:02:43.880 --> 0:02:46.639
<v Speaker 3>they'll meet that deadline. In a way, this for them

0:02:46.800 --> 0:02:50.519
<v Speaker 3>is useful because they can keep the looming reciprocal tariff's

0:02:51.400 --> 0:02:54.000
<v Speaker 3>sword as it were, hanging over many countries and say,

0:02:54.400 --> 0:02:56.040
<v Speaker 3>you know, we're not going to reach the deadline. We

0:02:56.120 --> 0:02:58.120
<v Speaker 3>can continue to negotiate the heart what are you going

0:02:58.160 --> 0:03:01.040
<v Speaker 3>to bring to the table. So that's one point on

0:03:01.080 --> 0:03:04.360
<v Speaker 3>the South Africa, on the DCIC. On international relations, I

0:03:04.400 --> 0:03:07.320
<v Speaker 3>think there has been more of a focus than there

0:03:07.320 --> 0:03:10.880
<v Speaker 3>has been in previous years on just drilling down into

0:03:10.919 --> 0:03:14.240
<v Speaker 3>sort of nitty gritty basics, especially when you talk about

0:03:14.240 --> 0:03:16.600
<v Speaker 3>the outcomes of the White House meeting, where you talk

0:03:16.600 --> 0:03:21.600
<v Speaker 3>about things like buying US gas for example, or looking

0:03:21.639 --> 0:03:24.560
<v Speaker 3>at other areas where US companies can invest in South Africa,

0:03:24.600 --> 0:03:27.040
<v Speaker 3>looking at some policy reforms that make it easier for

0:03:27.200 --> 0:03:28.400
<v Speaker 3>US companies to invest.

0:03:28.720 --> 0:03:30.480
<v Speaker 2>I think there has been a focus there.

0:03:30.840 --> 0:03:34.880
<v Speaker 3>Whether those deals are just one sort of one more

0:03:34.960 --> 0:03:38.480
<v Speaker 3>dot away from being signed or not that I'm speaking

0:03:38.560 --> 0:03:40.120
<v Speaker 3>under correction that I'm not sure about.

0:03:40.840 --> 0:03:44.280
<v Speaker 1>Thank you very much. Chris Hutton, Center for Risk Analysis,

0:03:44.800 --> 0:03:49.200
<v Speaker 1>Executive Directors joining us on seven two Drive. I'd like

0:03:49.280 --> 0:03:52.480
<v Speaker 1>to know if you are involved in business with companies

0:03:52.640 --> 0:03:55.600
<v Speaker 1>or other kinds of entities in the United States, one

0:03:55.600 --> 0:03:59.120
<v Speaker 1>way or another, goods coming in, goods use sending across.

0:03:59.200 --> 0:04:02.440
<v Speaker 1>How are you handling this period of relative uncertainty? I mean,

0:04:03.160 --> 0:04:05.880
<v Speaker 1>is it affecting your business? Are you holding back on

0:04:06.000 --> 0:04:09.800
<v Speaker 1>investment plans? Are there freezers on hiring? Or do you

0:04:10.000 --> 0:04:12.960
<v Speaker 1>sense the water is now calmer, even if it's not

0:04:13.120 --> 0:04:16.600
<v Speaker 1>yet crystal clear, and that let's get on with it.

0:04:16.720 --> 0:04:19.080
<v Speaker 1>Let's do what we must and do it as best

0:04:19.120 --> 0:04:20.960
<v Speaker 1>we can. I'd love to hear from you if you

0:04:21.120 --> 0:04:24.839
<v Speaker 1>are actually a player in this space, however, big or small.

0:04:24.839 --> 0:04:28.120
<v Speaker 1>Oh seven two, seven oh two one seven oh two,

0:04:28.160 --> 0:04:29.840
<v Speaker 1>twenty seven minutes past four