A NUMBER of international events take place before the end of the year which will have long term effects on the trading environment for this country. They include:

. the first World Trade Organisation conference to be held in Singapore in December, for which this week's meeting in Dublin is a key preparatory step;

. the second meeting of the Transatlantic Business Dialogue will be held in the US - the objective of which will be to increase and deepen US/EU trade.

At home, the recent appointment of a new chief executive at An Bord Trachtala may herald a new approach to trade promotion. Underpinning all of this will be our preparation for EMU and the probability of the non participation of Britain.

Against this background, there are a number of issues to be addressed by Government. One of, the most important is our dependence on Britain. Trade with Britain is extremely high at 31 per cent of total trade; six years ago it was 38 per cent. While there has been diversification away from Britain since joining the EU, Britain is and will remain the single most important market for Irish goods and services. Clearly any trade policy to diversify Irish exports should be achieved through increasing total exports while maintaining and increasing market share in Britain.

Research by An Bord Trachtala confirms the generally held view that exports from traditional, low tech, indigenously owned firms are most heavily concentrated on the British market. In contrast, high tech, modern, foreign owned sectors are much less dependent on Britain. But these low tech traditional sectors are more labour intensive than the modern sector so that behind the trade ratio of 31 per cent there lies a much greater level of employment dependence than the figures suggest. A significant proportion of our employment is still geared to firms that are dependent on Britain: primarily in the clothing, textile and food areas.

An Bord Trachtala recognises that export diversification is essential, and a number of useful initiatives have been introduced to assist exporters to that end.

In terms of our competitiveness vis a vis Britain, there are significant differentials in wages, salaries, insurance, transport and energy. Some of these are within the individual company's control, but many are determined by Government. Government does not seem prepared to tackle the areas where we are uncompetitive against Britain. The Irish Business and Employers Confederation (IBEC) strongly believes a golden opportunity was lost in the last Budget when:

. no provision was made for a significant reduction in employers PRSI;

. no effort was made to address our uncompetitiveness in relation to transport, energy and insurance costs.

Given our country's heavy dependence on trade, it is nothing short of astonishing that there is no nationally stated trade policy. While Irish export growth has increased significantly over the last couple of years, the contribution of the state agencies responsible for trade and marketing to this growth is unclear.

Many Government appointed committees, including Culliton and Moriarty, have proposed that the state agencies be rationalised along functional lines. However, instead of opting for an integrated and coherent policy for trade promotion, a decentralised approach is now being pursued by Government.

The State agencies involved in trade promotion need to be continuously reviewed in order to prevent any overlap in their functions. The management of these agencies must also become performance related, with individuals being held accountable for specific targets.

There are some positive indications. In the Foreign Policy Document, published recently, Government recognised the need to optimise the value of the State's limited resources and to maximise the potential impact of Ireland's various overseas representatives. A more flexible, integrated approach will now be adopted.

However, a fundamental review of the effectiveness of trade promotion needs to be undertaken, particularly in relation to servicing the indigenous sector. We need to ensure that the money spent on trade promotion gives an optimum return.

Perhaps it is time to take a lesson from how our main EU trading partners operate their trade promotional bodies. For example, 10 of our main trading partners in Europe have promotional bodies with significant private sector participation. These operate directly through business representative organisations (interestingly, Culliton recommended that business representative organisations should perform some of the functions of the promotional agencies).

Private sector participation would have two distinct advantages for Irish trade promotion:

. the private sector resource input would free up State funds for other activities;

. private sector participation "would bring a stronger commercial dimension to the operation of trade promotion.

Also, most of our trading partners have a considerably higher percent age of staff based overseas than is the practice for Irish trade promotional agencies. The market place is where we can optimise sales, not back in Dublin.

The newly created National Trade Policy Forum is a positive move because it provides a platform for the private sector to influence the development of a national, trade policy.

A coherent trade programme must also address transport issues.

It must have the following elements:

. halving the cost of transporting goods from Ireland to mainland Europe;

. reducing transit time from Irish factories to EU customers by at least 20 per cent;

. promoting the greater use of information technology in transport logistics and customs documentation.

Ireland cannot be immune from the increasing globalisation of trade which is having a profound effect on all aspects of business activity. Any national trade policy must address the need for fundamental changes in a range of elements such as cost competitiveness, export diversification and more effective trade promotion.