|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on Sustainable Agriculture Geneva, 7 Jun (D. Ravi Kanth) – Members of the ACP (African, Caribbean, and Pacific) group, the African Group, and the G33 group of developing countries on 6 June upped the ante for securing the permanent solution for public stockholding (PSH) programs for food security at the WTO’s 12th ministerial conference (MC12), which begins in Geneva in four days, said people familiar with the development. The World Trade Organization’s Director-General, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, on 4 June attached a footnote to her draft ministerial decision on public stockholding programs for food security that enables more than 80 developing and least-developed countries to press ahead with their proposed draft ministerial decision on the permanent solution for PSH programs. The ACP group, the African Group, and the G33 group of developing countries led by Indonesia called for a decision on the permanent solution for PSH programs at MC12 based on their comprehensive proposal (Job/AG/229). Although the time is short for negotiating on the ACP-African Group-G33 proposal, with MC12 scheduled to start on 12 June, the footnote enables negotiators and ministers to pursue the issue and let ministers decide the outcome in one way or the other, said a person, who asked not to be quoted. Thailand, the United States, the European Union, and members of the Cairns Group of farm-exporting countries seemed rather perturbed and remained skeptical on the inclusion of the footnote to the DG’s draft ministerial decision on PSH, said people, who asked not to be quoted. The US has all along opposed the permanent solution for PSH programs and seemed to have worked hard to have no decision on this issue until the 13th ministerial conference, scheduled to take place in 2024, said people familiar with the negotiations. In a significant development at a meeting of select trade envoys and later at an informal Doha agriculture negotiating body meeting on Saturday, the DG defended the Secretariat’s contribution through the footnote. The footnote says that “in case (a) permanent solution to (the) issue of public stockholding for food security purposes is not adopted at MC12” as proposed by more than 80 countries, then ministers could adopt the DG’s formulation, said several people familiar with the development. As reported in SUNS last week, the DG’s earlier formulation on public stockholding programs stays as it is except for this crucial footnote that was apparently opposed by Thailand at the Doha agriculture negotiating body meeting on Saturday, said people who asked not to be quoted. The DG’s draft decision calls for continuing negotiations on the permanent solution for PSH programs by MC13, indicating that a mandated decision on PSH programs is being kicked down the road with an intense work program. At the meeting on Saturday, Thailand, one of the members of the Cairns Group of farm-exporting countries, apparently pointed a finger at the Secretariat, asking why it added the footnote that puts the negotiations on the permanent solution squarely on the table, said people, who asked not to be quoted. In a sharp response to the Thai ambassador’s comments, the DG defended the Secretariat for its day-and-night work during the past ten days, suggesting that it is wrong to attribute motives to the Secretariat, said a person who asked not to be quoted. The DG’s revised formulation, which is the same as the previous one, includes two other paragraphs that contain an intensive work program to be pursued, particularly an assessment of the external reference price of 1986-88 that has allegedly ignored the huge spike in prices over the last 30 years. The reference to the external reference price says, “this issue would be considered more broadly in the context of current AoA (Agreement on Agriculture) disciplines” in the second footnote. It appears that Australia has inserted this footnote, said farm negotiators, who preferred not to be identified. All other issues like domestic support, market access, special safeguard mechanism for developing countries, export restrictions, export competition, cotton, and enhanced transparency provisions remained the same in the revised draft decision issued on 4 June, SUNS was told. Nevertheless, the differences among members on several issues showed little change on Saturday, said people, who asked not to be quoted. After the DG left the meeting on Saturday, the Thai trade envoy took the floor again to ask why the DG was angry with her comments. DG’S TEXT ON WFP The United States and the European Union on Saturday made a plurilateral pledge if the draft decision suggested by the DG is adopted, as it says, “this Decision shall not be construed to prevent the adoption by any Member of measures to ensure its domestic food security in accordance with the relevant provisions of the WTO agreements.” The DG’s revised draft decision, based on Paragraph 1 of Article IX of the Marrakesh Agreement, Article 12 of the Agreement on Agriculture and Article XI of the GATT 1994, proposed two provisions. The two provisions seem to address the concerns of both the proponents and opponents on the WFP purchases that are made through major agri-corporations like Cargill. The proponents’ demands are met in the DG’s revised draft decision, in the first provision, which says that “Members shall not impose export prohibitions or restrictions on foodstuffs purchased for non-commercial humanitarian purposes by the World Food Programme.” The DG appears to have addressed the opponents’ concerns by suggesting in the second paragraph of the operative decision that “this Decision shall not be construed to prevent the adoption by any Member of measures to ensure its domestic food security in accordance with the relevant provisions of the WTO agreements.” Apparently, the current food crisis is also caused by the rapacious international traders in food grains who seem to have hoarded huge stocks of wheat and other items in major industrialized countries, causing an artificial shortage for WFP to procure food, said people, who asked not to be quoted. India has apparently suggested that in the current context of the massive hoarding of food grains by traders, government-to-government (G2G) purchases could be adopted to address the vulnerable populations in the poor countries, said a person, who asked not to be quoted. Australia, however, sought to know whether India had made a proposal on the G2G purchases. Apparently, India said that it had already submitted a proposal on the G2G purchases to the Secretariat, said people familiar with the discussions on 4 June. Allegedly irked by the DG’s second paragraph, the US and later the EU apparently said that if the DG’s draft decision is adopted, they would pursue a plurilateral track to address the WFP’s concerns, said people familiar with the development.
|
||
