Return to the UKabc Home Page Updated 10th September, 1998


REPORTS FROM GENEVA WTO CONFERENCES

Trade and the WTO (15-17 May 1998) and the

Second WTO Ministerial Conference (18-20 May 1998)


by Penny Fowler, CIIR 27 May 1998


CONTENTS


Trade and the WTO (15-17 May 1998)

Workshop for NGOs and Farmers' Organisations on Agriculture, Trade and the WTO

[Return to Contents]

Approximately 80 NGOs and farmers' organisations participated in the 3 day workshop. Although participation was skewed in favour of representatives from the north, there were participants from Africa, Asia and Latin America.

Case studies on the impact of agricultural trade liberalisation on food security were presented for the following countries: Bangladesh, Peru, The Philippines, Brazil, Senegal and Bolivia. A number of new case studies had also been prepared for the ActionAid India/IATP workshop held in New Delhi two weeks before the Geneva workshop e.g. USA, India, Kenya. (These can be obtained from ActionAid India or IATP). Most case studies illustrated the problem of distinguishing between the impact of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture and other factors e.g. Structural Adjustment Programmes and national agricultural trade policies. Not all case studies presented have been formally written up. It was agreed that the Global Forum, IATP and ActionAid India will act as focal points for the collection of case studies.

There was substantive discussion of a number of key policy areas that had been identified by the workshop steering committee - policy options papers were presented to stimulate discussion. Small working groups discussed the following issues and made proposals for future work and strategies: world market price volatility and food security/food aid; the Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary Agreement and Codex Alimentarius; the idea of establishing a "Bread Box" (essentially a food security box) within the Agreement on Agriculture; production and processing methods (PPMs) and labelling; the human right to food; TRIPs; and sustainable agriculture. (See attached sheets for outcomes of working group discussions - this will be written up in a more accessibile format for the final workshop report).

Groups signed up to undertake future work on a range of different policy areas identified through the small working group discussions. The lists of organisations working on different issues will be included in the workshop report together with contact details for all workshop participants to facilitate networking and cooperation between groups.

Some concrete areas of future work identified during the workshop include: (1) undertaking and/or commissioning assessments of the impact of the UR Agreement on Agriculture on food security in developing countries; (2) developing an international media/propoganda campaign to generate controversy around the 1999 review of the Agreement on Agriculture; (3) coordination between national campaigns; and (4) the preparation of a "Fool's Guide to the Agreement on Agriculture".

Taking account of Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture on the future reform process, IATP have suggested the following series of questions that NGOs and farmers' organisations should seek to address when they compile their experience of agricultural trade liberalisation into written case studies:

  1. What have food import bills cost (in local currency and US dollars)?
  2. What change has there been in dependence on food aid?
  3. What change to production systems - what is being grown and how? How has land use changed?
  4. What impact on the environment from any shift in agricultural production patterns (e.g. to increased production of export crops)?
  5. What change in employment in the agricultural sector?
  6. What change in nutritional levels in the country? In urban as well as rural areas.
  7. What change in the price of food in the local market? What change in quantities available and in what food is available?
  8. What change has there been in the export share for the most important commodities in export production? Has market access improved for key export commodities?
  9. What has been the impact at the household level, including different impacts on men, women and children?

It was noted that it is important to give attention to the context in which liberalisation is occurring. For example, how can the impact of SAPs or national policy be factored in?

CPE, the European branch of Via Campesina were one of the organisers of the workshop. Via Campesina were mainly involved in their own meetings during the workshop to establish their position for the WTO Ministerial, although a few Via Campesina representatives were present throughout. Via Campesina reported the outcome of their deliberations to the workshop on Sunday morning. They have adopted a position that agriculture must be taken out of the WTO. However, they supported the continutation of NGO work on how the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture must be changed to take account of food security considerations.

Officials from the FAO (Panos Konandreas), UNCTAD (Miho Shirotori), the World Council of Churches (Israel Batista) and the South Centre (Rashid Kaukab) addressed the workshop on their expectations of the forthcoming review of the Agriculture Agreement and the next round of trade talks and opportunities for NGOs. Panos Konandreas' paper includes a number of concrete suggestions for reform of the Agreement on Agriculture (copy available from CIIR). Rashid Kaukab stressed the need for NGOs to target developing country missions in Geneva with inputs for the agricultural AIE process which is currently underway and with input for the country case studies that developing countries have been invited to submit to the Committee on Agriculture. The South Centre are doing interesting work to support developing countries in the WTO, including in the area of agriculture. Rashid Kaukab's contact details are: South Centre, Ch. du Champ d'Anier 17, POD 228, 1211 Geneva 19. Tel: 791-8050; Fax: 798-8531; E-mail: <south@southcentre.org>

Steering Committee members - Rudi Buntzel (The Protestant Farmers' Association of Wurttenburg, Germany), Christopher Jones and Penny Fowler (UK Food Group ), Sophia Murphy (IATP) and also Flavio Valente of the Global Forum - agreed to act as contact points for continuing work on trade and food security in the run up to the 1999 review of the Agreement on Agriculture. It was agreed that there probably needs to be another meeting of groups working on these issues in early 1999.

The workshop report will be available around the end of June 1998 (hopefully in English, Spanish and French).


Second WTO Ministerial Conference

[Return to Contents]

Monday 18 and Wednesday 20 May were devoted to pre-prepared speeches by WTO Member countries on implementation of existing WTO agreements and the future workof the WTO. Tuesday 19 May was the day of celebration for 50 years of the GATT/WTO - speeches were given by a number of heads of state including Mandela, Castro and Blair. Clinton made his speech on Monday evening.

No agreement was reached on whether the next round of multilateral trade talks will cover only the Uruguay Round "built-in agenda" or a wider range of issues. The EU called for a comprehensive Millennium Round i.e. incorporating new issues beyond the built-in agenda; several developing countries stressed that they will not accept negotiations on new issues unless their concerns about implementation of the existing agreements is taken into account; the US was non-committal on this issue; a number of other countries talked about the need for a "broad-based round" which would include a limited range of new issues agreed by all WTO Members.

There was disquiet from some developing countries about the lack of consideration given to food security in the WTO and, more so, to the problems faced by developing countries in implementing the existing Uruguay Round Agreements, the inadequate implementation by developed countries of some of their commitments (e.g. the Marrakesh Decision on LLDCs and NFIDCs), and the unequal distribution of the benefits of the Uruguay Round. It was difficult to tell how far-reaching these concerns were among developing countries, especially since NGOs had very little access to the official delegations but some of these concerns are reflected in the official statements circulated during the Ministerial.

The United States came to Geneva with one objective: to obtain an agreement on electronic commerce. They got this on the agenda at a late stage and achieved an agreement by the end of the Ministerial Conference despite concerns raised by some countries (e.g. Norway) about procedure. The electronic commerce agreement is political rather than legally binding - this was the concession that the US had to make to obtain the agreement - but the US have succeeded in putting it firmly on the WTO agenda

There was much talk of the need for greater transparency and accountability at the WTO (e.g. Clinton, Santer) - partly in reaction to the street demonstrations and protests in Geneva against the WTO. But it is apparent that most government definitions of transparency differ considerably from NGO definitions.

The International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (NGO information centre on WTO issues based in Geneva) was encouraged by the WTO Secretariat to propose the establishment of an NGO-WTO Contact Group as the basis for closer consultation between the WTO and NGOs. This idea was strongly criticised by NGOs in Geneva as it would be difficult to ensure that the group is truly representative of a diverse range of NGOs. Instead it was proposed that ICTSD should coordinate a general NGO statement of principles on the need for greater transparency for submission to the WTO Secretariat as well as coordinating NGO input into the on-going process to review the restriction of WTO documents (next review is set for 18 July 1998).

Alternative proposals to the idea of an NGO-WTO Contact Group included the establishment of an NGO accreditation process similar to that adopted by the UN agencies. It was agreed that more time was required for consultation among NGOs as to what form of consultation they desire with the WTO. The importance of improving national level consultation with governments on WTO issues was also raised.

The caucus on gender and trade established at the Singapore Ministerial was re-convened in Geneva. They have produced an alternative Trade Policy Review for Ghana incorporating a gender perspective (available from WIDE).

The American Farm Bureau Federation hosted a press conference with many representatives of the US commercial farm sector, including several US agricultural trade negotiators from the Uruguay Round, some of whom were introduced as ex-Cargill employees. Key preoccupations of this group were further agricultural trade liberalisation in order to expand US export markets and the promotion of biotechnology!

The next WTO Ministerial Conference will be held in late 1999 in the United States - a final decision on the timing and nature of the next round will be declared then.


Useful new resources

[Return to Contents]

 

 


Summary of who said what at the Geneva WTO Ministerial Conference on Agriculture, WTO Transparency and Developing Countries

[Return to Contents]

SPEAKER SUMMARIES

 

South Africa (Nelson Mandela)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

We must be frank in our assessment of the outcome of the Uruguay Round. The developing countries were not able to ensure that the rules accommodated their realities. It was mainly the preoccupations of the advanced industrialised economies that shaped the agreement. The sections dealing with the developing countries and the least-developed countries were not adequately thought through. Nor have they been fully implemented.

The developing countries should now give leadership to the development of a positive agenda that fully addresses their needs. Free market access for the Least-Developed Countries should no longer be the issue debated. It is rather the practical effects of implementing this that need to be incorporated into the multilateral system.

If the WTO is used to defend the current patterns of production it will fail. Many developing countries have a clear comparative advantage in agriculture and textiles. New competitive advantages in manufactured products are being developed. These advantages will be the basis for development. The WTO must be able to facilitate these changes in world production and not be used as a means to revert to protection.

The pace of events is rapid and reality requires us to address the so-called new issues. But only if there is confidence in the system will all parties feel comfortable doing so. It would be unwise to ignore the increased frustration of ordinary people, or to confuse patience which is exercised in order to ensure an advance, with reluctance to comply.

Cuba (Fidel Castro)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Criticism of the USA, particularly relating to the Multilateral Agreement on Investment and Helms- Burton. "The United States obtained practically everything it wanted with the agreements leading to the establishment of the WTO, and particularly the General Agreement on Services, an old dream. The same applies to the Agreement on TRIPS, a field where it holds a privileged control thanks to its technological development and systematic plundering of the best minds in the world. Some of its patents have received up to 50 years of exclusive rights and it has additionally obtained other highly beneficial agreements."

Those of us who were colonies yesterday and are still today enduring the consequences of backwardness, poverty and underdevelopment, we are the majority in this organisation. Every one of us has the right to a vote and no one has the right to veto. We should turn this organisation into an instrument of the struggle for a more just and better world. We should also count on those responsible statesmen, sensitive to our realities, who can undoubtedly be found in many developed countries.

 

ORIGINAL:SPANISH

ENGLISH VERSION

 

SPEECH BY HIS EXCELLENCY DR.FIDEL CASTRO RUZ, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CUBA AT THE SPECIAL SESSION COMMEMORATING THE 50th ANNIVERSARY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MULTILATERAL TRADE SYSTEM. PALAIS DES NATIONS, GENEVE, SWITZERLAND. MAY 19, 1998.

 

"Excellencies,

Officials of the World Trade Organization,

Distinguished delegates,

Last March, the US government made public the "1988 Trade Policy Agenda of the United States" where it was literally indicated that it is set to be "aggressive, directed globally and at all key regions of the world"; that "as the most important and successful economy in the global trading system, the United States is in a strong position to use its powers of persuasion and influence to pursue this Agenda"; and that "despite the substantial market openings that have been achieved in recent years, there remain too many barriers to US goods and services exports throughout the world". Such language is disquieting.

Together with this, on September 1995 following a United States initiative, even though the World Trade Organization already existed with 132 member countries in different stages of development, discussions began in the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), an exclusive First World club, to work out a Multilateral Agreement on Investments.

Due to problems obviously related to the sovereignty of states, the subsequent idea to negotiate that agreement in the World Trade Organization was strongly opposed by numerous members at the Ministerial Conference held in Singapore on December 1996. However, the agreements reached there did not prevent the OECD --made up as I said by developed countries-- from proceeding with the elaboration of the Multilateral Agreement on Investments.

Attempts by the United States to introduce key aspects of the Helms-Burton Act in said Agreement led the negotiations to a standstill, leaving only the United States and Europe involved while the other 13 OECD member nations were left out.

The above mentioned Act illustrates the United States behaviour in its economic war against Cuba. The extraterritorial nature of these and other measures led the European Union to request from the WTO the establishment of a Special Panel, which was then approved on November 20, 1996.

Later on, by April 11, 1997 an understanding was reached on the basis of certain American pledges associated with the implementation of, and amendments to, the Helms-Burton Act. The European Union, to avoid weakening the WTO, agreed to temporarily suspend the commencement of the Special Panel activities.

An amazing and shrewd maneuver had allowed the United States to leave the dock at the WTO and undertake to laying down new rules in international law within the framework of the OECD in an attempt to retroactively insert in the Multilateral Agreement on

 

2

 

Investments the supposed illegality of the nationalizations conducted in the late 1950s, --a date exactly coinciding with the triumph of the Revolution in Cuba-- a principle that can also be applied to nationalizations carried out in other countries after 1959, the intention being to internationalize the principles of the infamous Helms-Burton Act under the umbrella of a multilateral agreement. That Act, which has not been amended at all, has arbitrarily turned people who were Cuban citizens at the time of the expropriations into expropriated Americans.

Actually, the extraterritorial principle of the blockade had been in force long before that shameful Act came into existence. The US Administration prevents every American company, whatever the country where it is based, from trading with Cuba. That constitutes a violation of sovereignty and is extraterritorial by nature. There are plenty of reasons for the world to feel humiliated and be concerned, and the WTO should be capable of preventing an economic genocide. Disputes between the United States and the European Union about this law should not be settled at the expense of Cuba. That would be an inconceivable dishonor for Europe. The agreements announced in London yesterday are unclear, contradictory and threatening for many countries, as well as unethical. The economic blockade has already cost Cuba 60 billion U.S.dollars.

In the last few years, the United States has approved over 40 laws and executive decisions to apply unilateral economic sanctions against 75 nations representing 42 percent of the world population.

The United States obtained practically everything it wanted with the agreements leading to the establishment of the WTO, and particularly the General Agreement on Services, an old dream. The same applies to the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, a field where it holds a privileged control thanks to its technological development and systematic plundering of the best minds in the world. Some of its patents have received up to 50 years of exclusive rights and it has additionally obtained other highly beneficial agreements.

The United States also has the peculiar privilege of issuing the currency in which the central banks and the trade bank deposits worldwide keep most o@ their hard currency reserves. The transnational companies of the nation whose citizens have the lowest saving rates are purchasing the world riches with the money saved by people in other countries and the money printed without the gold backing agreed upon in Bretton Woods, and unilaterally ended in 1971.

Therefore, if the Eurocurrency emerges as a strong and prestigious currency, welcome the Euro! It would be of benefit to the world economy!

New themes introduced in the WTO's agenda by the wealthy countries are threatening with a reduction of the developing countries' competitive possibilities, that in the midst of already difficult conditions fraught with inequalities, which will certainly be used as pretexts for non-tariff barriers or to prevent their commodities from acceding to the markets.

 

3

The Third World countries have been losing everything: custom tariffs that protected their emerging industries and produced revenues; agreements on basic commodities; Producers associations; price indexation; preferential treatment; any instrument protecting their exports value and contributing to their development. What are we offered?

Why isn't the unfair and unbalanced trade mentioned? Why is the unbearable weight of the external debt no longer discussed? Why is the official Development Aid being reduced? If every developed country did like Norway, the Third World would annually have 200 billion U.S. dollars for its development. Norway should be imitated!

How are we supposed to make a living? What goods and services shall we export? Which industrial productions will be left to us? Only those with a technology gap and a high input of human labor, and the highly pollutants? Might this be an attempt to turn a large part of the Third World into an immense free zone full of assembly plants that do not even pay taxes?

Why is the strongest economic power in the world obstructing China's access to the WTO when that country shelters one fifth of the world population? Why does it jeopardize the admission of Russia and other countries? No nation, big or small, can be left out of this important institution, nor should it; and its admission cannot be subjected to humiliating conditions.

The developing countries must fend off divisions. Unity is our only asset, the only guaranty in the defense of our legitimate aspirations.

Those of us who were colonies yesterday and are still today enduring the consequences of backwardness, poverty and underdevelopment, we are the majority in this organization. Every one of us has the right to a vote and no one has the right to veto. We should turn this Organization into an instrument of the struggle for a more just and better world. We should also count on those responsible statesmen, sensitive to our realities, who can undoubtedly be found in many developed countries.

Despite so much euphoria no one can be sure of how long the United States economic system, ruled by the blind laws of the market economy, will be able to prevent a financial meltdown. There are no economic miracles. That is clear now. The absurdly inflated stock prices in the Stock Exchange markets of that economy --unquestionably the strongest in the world-- cannot be sustained. In similar situations history is not known to have made exceptions. The problem is that now a big crisis would go global and have unforeseeable consequences. Not even the adversaries of the prevailing system could wish that to happen.

It would be worthwhile for the WTO to assess these risks and include among the so-called "new themes" another one: "Global Economic Crisis. What to do?"

Thank you, very much."

 

European Union (Leon Brittan)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Aware of concerns from some developing countries over their capacity to implement particular Uruguay Round agreements within the agreed deadlines. EU is prepared to provide further technical assistance and support to ensure full and timely implementation of commitments by the countries concerned.

Major challenge is to strengthen public understanding of, and confidence in the multilateral system. We must introduce measures to improve transparency of the workings of the WTO and greater engagement with representatives of the civil society.

Traditional concepts and patterns of trade are now inextricably linked with international patterns of investment, with communications technology, with the explosive growth of trade in services, and with major issues involving competition policy, the management of the environment, and sustainable development. The Community is convinced that these challenges can be met only if we embark on a new, comprehensive round of trade negotiations: a Millennium Round covering the built-in agenda, the new issues identified at Singapore, and other issues on which there is agreement to prepare for negotiations.

New Zealand

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Look forward to strong, clear outcome of the mandated negotiations which will place agriculture on the same basis as trade in other goods and achieve a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system: end to agricultural export subsidies, improved market access, elimination of trade- distorting domestic subsidies.

United Kingdom (Tony Blair, Prime Minister)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Commitment to free trade - question is how to manage the irreversable and irresistible trend so that all countries and all peoples can benefit. Five key tasks:

Spread the benefits of globalisation: benefits have not been felt evenly, trade an investment is lagging in some developing countries. Must commit to zero tariffs for LLDC exports.

Keep markets open and fair

Extend trade liberalisation: must fully implement Uruguay Round agreements and press onwards, especially with agriculture and services negotiations. "Existing levels of agricultural support are expensive and inefficient."

World trade expansion must not be at any cost: importance of protecting the environment but trade rules should not be used to impose unfair standards on developing countries, nor to discriminate against their exports. Must work in ILO for the world-wide observance of core labour standards but, again, not as a barrier to trade.

Maximise the benefits of the electronic age and the borderless economy: regulating and developing electronic commerce.

Kenya (Minister for Trade, Hon. J.J. Kamotho)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Need to assess the implementation process of the WTO agreements taking into account the various problems and limitations of the developing economies like Kenya. Should view WTO agreements, not as ends in themselves, but as invaluable means of alleviating poverty, raising standards of living, ensuring full employment, and sustained economic growth and development. Appeal for WTO/UNCTAD/ITC assistance to cover country-specific studies on the impact of the implementation of the WTO Agreements.

Australia (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade, (Tim Fischer)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Next round of agricultural negotiations must result in fundamental reforms putting trade in agricultural goods on the same basis as trade in other goods. Export subsidies must be eliminated, with major cuts to domestic subsidies. Market access must be substantially improved with deep cuts to tariffs, tariff peaks and escalation and removal of all non-tariff measures, so that agricultural trade can proceed on the basis of market forces.

Jamaica (Deputy Prime Minister & Minister of Foreign Affairs & Foreign Trade,Seymour Mullings)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Major benefits of trade liberalisation have not been equally distributed. Trade between the equal and unequal has in many instances proven to be inequitable. Developing countries, and particularly the least-developed, have derived the least benefit from trade liberalisation in spite of measures taken in the GATT e.g. the "Enabling Clause" which established the GATT principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries.

Welcome Plan of Action for Least-Developed Countries but there are other categories of developing countries caught between the emerging economies and the least developed, the needs of which are being overlooked. These are small developing economies which are facing the challenge of building their export and institutional capacities to allow them to become effective participants in the new highly competitive global environment and thus avoid marginalisation.

The focus of the WTO, at this time, should be on implementation of the existing Agreements and the built-in agenda, and on closing the gap which exists between its Member States. Essential to evaluate the impact of the implementation of the Agreements to determine the benefits to or adverse effects on developing countries. Specifically, there should be a review of the Agreement on Agriculture to determine the extent to which countries are meeting their reduction commitments and the impact on net food-importing developing countries, especially with regard to the Ministerial Decision on Least-Developed Countries and Net Food-Importing Developing Countries.

Negotiations scheduled to begin in the next two years should cover only those areas identified in the built-in agenda or agreed by Members at a Ministerial Conference. With regard to new issues, must note the ability of small developing countries to cope with the WTO's present and future work programme, which will involve negotiations. The inability of national administrations to adequately prepare for negotiations could adversely affect the level of their participation.

Ask Members of the WTO to recognise that meeting the objectives set out in the preamble of the GATT 50 years ago is predicated on the achievement of a sustainable level of growth by all countries. Need to build a cooperative process which recognises our differing levels of development and growth.

World Bank Statement (Masood Ahmed, Vice-President and Head of the Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

The Bank helped many developing countries to make the transition from inward-oriented development policies to the open trade policies that are consistent with WTO rules. Some estimates suggest that some developing countries gained very little or even lost from the Uruguay Round. This is essentially because they lost as other members reduced their distortions, such as agricultural subsidies but failed to benefit by removing their own. To avoid such imbalance in future, these countries will need to participate actively in the exchange of market access concessions. The World Bank is ready to provide support for such participation both through its analysis and through financial support in the context of appropriate policy programmes.

United States (Bill Clinton)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Must build a modern WTO ready for the 21st Century by:

Pursuing an ever-more open global trading system: "I am determined to pursue an aggressive market opening strategy in every region of the world".

We must recognise that in the new economy, the way we conduct trade affects the lives and livelihoods, the health and the safety of families around the world: we should level up not down in terms of environmental protection, consumer protection and labour standards.

We must harmonise our goal of increasing trade with our goal of improving the environment and working conditions: "international trade rules must permit sovereign nations to exercise their right to set protective standards for health, safety and the environment and biodiversity."

We must modernise the WTO by opening its doors to the scrutiny and participation of the public: "The WTO should take every feasible step to bring openness and accountability to its operations". Proposes opening all WTO trade dispute hearings to the public, making all briefs by the parties publicly available, establishing a mechanism for private citizens to provide input in trade disputes and for the decisions of trade dispute panels to be made publicly available as soon as they are issued.

We must have a trading system that taps the full potential of the Information Age: calls on all nations to join the United States in a standstill on any tariffs to electronic transmissions sent across borders ie. not to erect barriers to electronic commerce.

A trading system for the 21st Century must be comprised of governments that are open, honest and fair in their practices: by next year, all members of the WTO should agree that government purchases should be made through open and fair bidding and every nation should adopt the anti-bribery convention developed by the OECD.

We must develop an open global trading system that moves as fast as the marketplace: need to negotiate trade agreements more quickly especially on agriculture. "Agriculture, for example, is at the heart of America's economy and many of yours - and tearing down barriers to global trade is critical to meet the food needs of a growing world population Starting next year, we should aggressively begin negotiations to reduce tariffs and subsidies, and other distortions that restrict productivity in agriculture. We must develop rules, rooted in science that will encourage the full fruits of biotechnology. And I propose that even before negotiations near conclusion, WTO members should pledge to continue making annual tariff and subsidy reductions - ensuring that there is no pause in reform."

United States (Trade Representative, Charlene Barshefsky)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Priority areas for next round of comprehensive negotiations on agriculture:

Market access: need further reductions in tariffs, improved rules for tariff rate quotas, assurances against use of restrictive administrative procedures as substitutes for such barriers.

Export subsidies: must continue working to reduce and eventually eliminate export subs

State Trading Enterprises: need greater transparency and improved disciplines

Biotechnology: The principal threats to this are policies note based on science regarding importation, planting and labelling of biotechnology products. The world's producers must be able to use safe, beneficial scientific techniques that make farms and ranches more productive and friendly to the environment.

Bangladesh (Minister for Commerce and Industry, Tofail Ahmed)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

All of us have not benefited equitably from the rule-based Multilateral Trading System. Conditions in the 48 Least-Developed Countries, where more than 1/5th of humanity lives, continues to deteriorate.

Raised LLDC concerns relating to:

the non-bound nature of the GATT Special and Differential Treatment Provisions decline in levels of ODA lack of technical assistance capacity of the WTO implications of the TRIPS agreement restrictive rules of origin market access - zero tariff access for all LLDC exports LLDC debt

Zimbabwe (Minister of Industry & Commerce, N.M. Shamuyarira)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Concerned about implementation problems and that Zimbabwe has still to see the benefits that were expected to materialise following its acceptance of the WTO package. Calls for the speedy implementation of the special provisions in the WTO Agreements that are intended to promote trade and economic interests of developing countries as a means of tackling the threat of the increasing marginalisation of our countries within the multilateral trading system.

Stresses importance of implementing commitments relating to LLDCs made at the Singapore Ministerial and at the High Level Meeting on LLDCs.

Africa considers that there is not much to celebrate at the 50th Anniversary of the GATT/WTO. The WTO should commit and dedicate itself to devising an integrated approach and multilateral process that will effectively address the marginalisation of developing countries and the dangers that this state of affairs poses for the well-being of the multilateral trading system.

Pakistan (Minister of Commerce, M. Ishaq Dar)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Increased trade and investment have by-passed the majority of developing countries. The gainsfrom trade liberalisation have been disappointingly asymmetrical.

Need to have an effective review of the Uruguay Round Agreements with the objective of promoting the balance and mutuality of benefits which were the basis for the consensus achieved on the "single undertaking" at Marrakesh. Unless this balance is restored, it would be unrealistic to expect developing countries to accept new areas of liberalisation.

On agriculture, the US, EU and Japan have maintained high levels of protection and given away little in terms of market access. And the measures designed to neutralise negative effects of agricultural reforms on the least developed and net food importing developing countries have remained largely unimplemented. We trust that further liberalisation in agriculture - preparations for which can be initiated in 1999 - will serve to redress asymmetries against developing countries inherent in the present structure of the agricultural regime.

India (Minister of Commerce, Ramakrishna Hegde)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

The Agreement on Agriculture is based on the rationale of open international trade in the agricultural sector. It presupposes the supremacy of an open price based system. Thereby implying that a country should import agricultural products if they are produced cheaper elsewhere. India and certain other developing countries have been stressing the need for the multilateral trading system to recognise the importance of food security. A country may not have the resources to buy agricultural products from international markets even if they are easily available. Moreover, a very large percentage of the rural population in such countries is dependent on agriculture and any measure that has an effect on employment in this sector needs to be carefully examined. It is necessary to have a close look at the shortcomings in minimum access provisions, exemptions from the reduction commitments given for direct payments, and the issue of the possible negative effects of the reform programme of least developed and net food-importing developing countries which has not yet been effectively addressed as yet.

Also concerned about imbalances in the TRIPS Agreement.

Statement by Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture on the process of Analysi and Information Exchange (AIE)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Informal papers on issues of interest to developing countries and on special and differential treatment have been submitted by Pakistan, Peru and the Dominican Republic (jointly) and by Cuba. WTO Secretariat produced notes on studies on the implementation and impact of the Agreement on Agriculture on Developing Countries.

WTO Secretariat will prepare supplementary background material on trade data and tariff bindings for selected major products of interest to developing countries in line with the suggestions made in this regard. Developing country members were invited to submit country papers on specific issues related to their experience in the implementation and impact of the Agreement, including on import and exporting trends. It was also indicated that analysis related to food security and net food-importers will be of relevance.

Chair to develop a checklist of issues for future work on special and differential treatment in the context of market access, food security, domestic support, export subsidies, notification requirements and technical assistance. Chair will consult with members regarding the basis on which observer international organisations would be invited to make specific contributions to the AIE process.

Informal papers have been submitted on the following issues (countries submitting papers are shown in brackets): special agricultural safeguard mechanism (US, New Zealand); blue box payments (US, EU, Australia); State Trading Enterprises (US, Australia, New Zealand); export subsidies (New Zealand); domestic support policy reform (US); sectoral trade liberalisation(Canada).

Next AIE meeting will take place on 24 June 1998.

Communication from Cuba for Committee on Agriculture AIE Process

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

Future negotiations should try to achieve fair trade both for exporters and for importers of agricultural products. Agreement on Agriculture would be worthless if at the end of its implementation prices have increased and therefore "market access for importers" has been restricted.

Taking account of Article 20 of the Agriculture Agreement, it is necessary to determine as rapidly and accurately as possible the effects of the commitments so far on the prices of the main import products for the developing countries, the effects at the end of the implementation period and the likely scenarios if the liberalisation process continues. It is very difficult to think about any new commitments without these answers.

The Committee on Agriculture's follow up of the "special and differential treatment" consists of the monitoring procedure of the Ministerial Decision on Least-Developed and Net Food-Importing Developing Countries. Should also include studying the annual impact on imports of these countries due to the negative prices effect resulting from the reform programme. A new mechanism could be devised covering import shortfalls with respect to customary annual levels of imports by food importing countries as a result of price changes stemming from the reform programme. This could be a new commitment.

COMMONWEALTH OF DOMINICA )Statement by the Honourable Edison C. James, Prime Minister)

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]

"One very troubling area is the recent experience we have had in the resolution of the dispute on the EU banana import regime. It has had an adverse impact on trade with our trading partners and undermined confidence in the WTO process. We believe that there are some important principles and procedures requiring improvement as we begin the review of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU). The so-called "systemic" complaints raised by a major trading partner, not only run the risk of upsetting the balance of rights and obligations, but also undermining the balance of benefits to developing countries, laboriously negotiated during the Uruguay Round."

The 50th Anniversary of the establishment of the multilateral trading system provides the opportunity for an evaluation of the achievements and shortcomings, as well as the challenges and opportunities facing the global economy. We recognize the crucial role that was played by the GATT and its successor, the WTO, in encouraging open trade regimes and dismantling tariffs and non-tariff barriers in the trade in goods and services. The primacy of a transparent, fair and equitable rule-based multilateral trade system under the WTO, including the development of regional trading agreements can safely be reaffirmed by all countries.

This is not to say that all countries have seen the benefit of the system. In fact throughout these 50 years there have been clear evidence that a large number of countries, all of them developing countries, and particularly least-developed countries, have been falling behind. In the four years since the establishment of the WTO even clearer disturbing signs have emerged of trends that point in the direction of exclusion rather than inclusion and of marginalization rather than integration. Moreover, these trends are beginning to have quite serious negative effects on confidence in countries which only a short time ago were viewing their future prospects with some considerable optimism.

Developing countries, and particularly the least-developed, have derived the least benefit from trade liberalization in spite of measures taken in the GATT, beginning in the 50s, to assist these countries, including the adoption in 1979 of the "Enabling Clause" which made the principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries a part of the GATT legal framework.

We welcome the initiatives that have been taken within the WTO framework in the implementation of the Plan of Action for Least-Developed Countries agreed at in Singapore. The High Level Conference held last October demonstrates that the WTO is conscious of the needs of the least-developed countries. We congratulate Member Countries, both developed and developing, as well as the cooperating International Agencies for their important contributions to the Plan and hope that it will be implemented expeditiously.

But I speak for a Country and a Region which do not fit easily into any of the WTO classification of countries. They are those other categories of developing countries caught between the emerging economies and the least-developed, the needs of which are being overlooked. I make specific reference to small developing economies such as Dominica, which are facing the challenge of building their export and institutional capacities to allow them to become effective participants in the new highly competitive global environment and thus avoid marginalization.

If small developing economies are to be able to attract investment, expand production, improve product quality, meet standards, in short compete effectively and grasp the opportunities presented in the WTO Agreements, then it is imperative that their need for adequate transitional periods and for support be also recognized.

But, while we press for more attention to be paid to our particular concerns, we recognize that it is up to us to identify our problems, and articulate these in the WTO and other international organizations, working with them to ensure that we rise above our constraints.

One very troubling area is the recent experience we have had in the resolution of the dispute on the EU banana import regime. It has had an adverse impact on trade with our trading partners and undermined confidence in the WTO process. We believe that there are some important principles and procedures requiring improvement as we begin the review of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU). The so-called "systemic" complaints raised by a major trading partner, not only run the risk of upsetting the balance of rights and obligations, but also undermining the balance of benefits to developing countries, laboriously negotiated during the Uruguay Round.

We are particularly concerned about the blind and insensitive application of WTO Rules which could have the effect of nullifying all the efforts being made to prepare the economies for integration into the World Economic System.

I say these things not to sound alarmist bells but because I speak for a country whose economy has traditionally depended on a single crop, bananas. This crop is well suited to conditions in my country as well as in all of the Eastern Caribbean and other countries in the Caribbean Community. In the case of the Winward Islands, it accounts for well over one half of all export earnings and about a fifth of GDP. The industry is the major source of employment, and the majority of households receive an income, directly or indirectly from the production and marketing of bananas. It is a rural industry in which almost the entire rural community is engaged, producing bananas on predominantly small family plots, often situated on hill sides. A substantial number of the banana farmers are women. At the moment, there is no system more guaranteed to ensure that a cash income reaches the neediest in the society or to address the special problems of the rural poor. In addition to its contribution to economic development the banana industry is, therefore, a significant guarantor of social and political stability not only in my own banana producing country but in the entire Caribbean Region. I cannot therefore assess 50 years of the multilateral trading system, especially its evolution since the establishment of the WTO, outside of the context of its treatment of the trade in bananas and its impact on our countries.

In a small island economy the development options are not many. The reform process is painful and the diversification process difficult. More over, all of these initiatives depend for their success on increased financial resources to fund infrastructure, training, and to gain access to technology. Increased financial flows, in turn, depends on a stable economic and political environment. It is therefore not sufficient to talk about the non-discriminatory character of WTO. The institution must also promote and defend an orderly trading system that seeks to spread the benefit of global economic growth and trade to all countries, irrespective of their size or level of development. It may well be that the task is beyond the WTO acting alone. In this case, in addition to the Geneva based institutions, it might be necessary to engage other institutions whose development missions may be more all embracing.

Thus as we structure the agenda and define the work programme for the period ahead we will need to bear in mind certain important considerations that have not so far been allowed to inform earlier deliberations and decisions.

It will bear repetition that because of their inherent deficiencies some countries are not now able to take advantage of the many opportunities being presented as a result of the liberalization process in spite of the tremendous efforts that they are making to position themselves to obtain at least some of the benefits of the system and in spite, also of their enormous commitment to reform. It is simply a fact that the WTO membership consists of countries at varying levels of development and different trading interests. The system must be able to respond to the different needs, in order that all countries among them, prominently, small island developing States could derive some benefit. Above all it is important to recognize that the necessary adjustments to a global economy will not proceed at the same pace in all countries nor have the same effect in all places.

In this regard, as we look to the period ahead the focus of the WTO, should be on implementation of the existing agreements and the built-in agenda, and on closing the gap which exists between its Member States.

An essential requirement of this work programme should be an evaluation of the impact of the implementation of the agreements to determine the benefits to or adverse effects on developing countries. Specifically, there should be an evaluation of the Agreement on Agriculture to determine the extent to which countries are meeting their reduction commitments and the impact on Net-Food Importing Developing Countries especially with regard to the Ministerial Decision on the possible negative effects of the reform programme on least-developed and net-food importing developing countries.

In relation to new negotiations a point which cannot be stressed too often with regard to new issues, is the ability of small developing countries to cope with the WTO's present and future work programme, which will involve negotiations. The inability of national administrations to adequately prepare for negotiations could adversely affect the level of their participation.

We propose that machinery be established within the WTO to examine the special circumstances of small States, particularly islands, given their recognized fragility and vulnerability, with a view to determining how the rules could be structured to take into account these disadvantages.

As our countries increase efforts to implement the WTO Agreements, due recognition should be given to the need for adequate transitional periods and for support of our efforts at the national level. In this regard, we would emphasize the need for continuing and increasing the technical assistance provided by the WTO, UNCTAD, ITU and relevant agencies to enable our countries to participate more effectively in the WTO arrangements.

I think the period ahead is an exciting one for multilateral cooperation in trade, investment and other areas, and the Caribbean Community is doing all it can to position itself to participate fully in the global process.

[Return to Speaker Summaries List]


[Return to Contents]


[Return to Top of Document]


[Return to the UKabc Home Page]