|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Oct23/16) Yerevan, 13 Oct (D. Ravi Kanth) — Despite sharp concerns over the issues to be discussed and the seemingly inadequate time being catered to the mandated issues, the World Trade Organization’s Director-General, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, and the chair of the General Council, Ambassador Athaliah Lesiba Molokomme of Botswana, issued a revised note on the modalities for the Senior Officials Meeting (SOM) with marginal changes, said people familiar with the meeting. The note on modalities circulated in a restricted document (Job/GC/358) on late 11 October evening and seen by the SUNS, starts with an introduction on the poly-crisis confronting the world. It says, “The need for a responsive WTO that is fit for purpose is even more vital.” The note on the modalities suggests that “MC13, which is around the corner, provides another opportunity to deliver outcomes that can positively impact lives and livelihoods and contribute to solutions to current challenges. This will yet again require the same solidarity, flexibility, and political commitment from all 164 Members that made success at MC12 possible.” The note on modalities says, “In Geneva, work to prepare for a productive and fruitful MC13 is intensifying as is reflected in the General Council Chairperson’s flexible roadmap for MC13 in JOB/GC/349.” “To complement these efforts, the political guidance, input, and involvement of Senior Officials before MC13 will help in solving certain problems, bridging gaps, and laying a stronger foundation for a successful Ministerial Conference,” the note says, emphasizing, “This is why the Senior Officials Meeting (SOM) is a critical milestone as the fourth station of our roadmap to MC13.” According to the note, “During the two-day meeting, Senior Officials will have the opportunity to engage with each other on Members’ priority areas in various configurations. Spaces have been provided for plenaries, breakout sessions, bilaterals, group coordination, and consultations with Chairpersons or Facilitators.” “The aim is for Senior Officials to (I) take stock of progress on all issues, (ii) bless, endorse, and take decisions as appropriate, (iii) solve specific problems, (iv) point the way to deliverables for MC13 and provide political guidance and support, and (v) deliberate on pressing global issues,” it maintained. It expressed the hope that “your involvement at this stage will provide the needed impetus to propel our work in Geneva and ensure that MC13 meaningfully delivers for people across the globe.” The SOM, according to the note, “will be structured with a view to ensuring full participation, inclusiveness, and transparency. The SOM Programme is annexed to this document.” According to the note, “The first day of the SOM will start at 08h00 with an Opening Session and Scene Setting. Chairpersons will update Senior Officials on the ongoing work in their respective areas. The floor will not be opened.” “It will be immediately followed by breakout sessions. a. Given the nature of the expected discussion – that is, political guidance and resolving specific issues as appropriate, Agriculture including Food Security and Trade and Development which covers a broad spectrum of issues such as LDC Graduation and Policy Space for Industrialization issues, amongst others, will be allotted two and a half hours each. b. As technical discussions are ongoing, the nature of the expected discussion on DS Reform and Fish 2 will be to reiterate political support and strong re-commitment to continue the technical discussions and negotiations with the objective of concluding them as soon as possible. As such, only one hour has been dedicated to each of these breakout sessions. c. To provide the opportunity for all Senior Officials to have candid and frank exchanges, every Senior Official will be assigned to one of the three breakout groups. The groupings will be designed to reflect balance and representation based on region, views, and interests. The group composition will be circulated on 20 October. d. There will be listening-in rooms within the WTO building for Members to follow discussions of the breakout group of their choice. Given room capacity constraints and to ensure that every delegation has an equal opportunity, access will be limited to one delegate per delegation for each of the listening-in rooms subject to room capacity on a first-come, first-serve basis. We count on Members’ understanding. e. There will at least be a 15-minute coffee break allotted in between breakout sessions. The program on Day 1 is as follows: Senior Officials will have a two-hour break for lunch and for self-organized bilateral or group meetings among Members and/or self-organized meetings. In order to keep to the regular Geneva lunchtime hours (13:00 to 15:00), for breakout groups one and two, these two sessions will break for lunch and continue in the afternoon. Breakout group 3 is not affected. After the last breakout session, there will be a one-hour transparency plenary. During this plenary, Facilitators of all breakout sessions will report on the discussions from all groups in their respective areas. Senior Officials will also have the chance to briefly take the floor if they so wish. At the end of Day 1, the Director-General and the General Council Chairperson will host a Reception and a Fish Ratification Ceremony in the Atrium. Day 2 On the second day of the SOM, which will officially start at 08h30, there will be a “two-hour plenary session on “Other Areas” in view of MC13,” including deliberations on two subjects – Trade and Industrial Policy and Trade and Environmental Sustainability. One hour and a half is devoted to each subject in two large breakout groups.” In between the breakout sessions, is a break for two hours and fifteen minutes for lunch and self-organized bilateral or group meetings among Members and/or self-organized meetings. After the last breakout session, there would be a 30-minute coffee break followed by a two-hour Closing Plenary which will start at 16h30. During this session, Facilitators of the deliberative sessions will report on the discussions from the breakout groups. Senior Officials will also have the opportunity to bless the Reform-by-Doing work and express views on the way forward. At the end of the Closing Plenary, a Chair’s Summary will be provided. This will contain all work undertaken by Senior Officials over the two days – outlining any action taken and political guidance or instruction provided. This will be the outcome document that Senior Officials will take back to their respective capitals. Guiding questions for breakout sessions are as follows: * Agriculture and Food Security: What would be the most optimal outcome on agriculture at MC13 and what contribution can it make towards enhancing global food security? What concrete steps should be taken in that regard? * How can MC13 best prepare the agriculture negotiations to achieve substantive outcomes?” The omission of two mandated issues such as the permanent solution for public stockholding programs for food security, and the special safeguard mechanism for developing countries stands out starkly, and it could become a major issue at the meeting, said trade envoys from developing countries. TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT With development being at the core of the demands from a large majority of developing countries, at the SOM, several questions are being raised for the Trade and Development session. The questions include: * Negotiations on Special and Differential Treatment (S&DT) and the Committee on Trade and Development in Special Session (CTD SS): What can be done to expedite concrete progress by MC13 on the ten G90 Agreement-specific proposals under discussion in the CTD SS, with a view to concluding the negotiations on S&DT as soon as possible? * Effective S&DT for the 21st century: What steps need to be taken to ensure that S&DT supports the development goals of developing and LDC Members, particularly when addressing trade challenges in the 21st century? * What outcomes can be envisioned at MC13 from the WTO reform discussions in the area of development, and what guidance can be given to the CTD in its continuing work on this matter? * Given that delegations are close to finalizing the negotiations on Annex 1 of the LDC Graduation proposal (WT/GC/W/807/Rev.2), are you ready to approve those outcomes at the SOM? How can Members make substantive progress on the provisions identified in Annex 2 of the LDC Graduation proposal and what concrete steps should be taken in the run-up to MC13? Unsurprisingly, the questions on trade and development appear to reflect the views of the major industrialized countries, particularly the question on “effective S&DT for the 21st century,” said a trade envoy who asked not to be quoted. “FISH 2” It is an open secret that the fisheries subsidies negotiations are part of the US trade agenda and supported by the so-called “Friends of the Fish” led by New Zealand. While mandated issues in agriculture are apparently given a short shrift at every ministerial meeting since 2015, the speed with which the fisheries subsidies negotiations are advancing is a little surprising. The questions posed for the Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations are as follows: Can the Senior Officials: * Reaffirm the commitment in paragraph 4 of the MC12 Ministerial Decision on fisheries subsidies (WT/MIN(22)/33), by instructing the Negotiating Group on Rules to make recommendations to MC13 on the basis of the current text-based negotiations relating to outstanding issues, for additional provisions that would achieve a comprehensive agreement on fisheries subsidies, including in particular, disciplines on subsidies contributing to overcapacity and overfishing, and related provisions for appropriate and effective special and differential treatment for developing country and least developed country Members; and * Instruct their negotiators to negotiate with a view to reaching agreement by December for Ministers to approve at MC13. DISPUTE SETTLEMENT REFORM Ever since the United States made the Appellate Body dysfunctional, the WTO’s enforcement function has been weakened. It is highly unlikely that there will be much progress on the reform of the two-tier dispute settlement system, as the US may not move on several contentious issues like Appellate Review and cross-retaliation among others. More importantly, the US and the DG are allegedly plugging for continuation of the informal process instead of open meetings where all members could participate, said several trade envoys, who asked not to be quoted. Despite India’s request for open-ended sessions, the DG seems to have posed the question in a way that prefers the informal meetings, said trade envoys, who asked not to be quoted. The questions posed on dispute settlement reform include: * In Paragraph 4 of the MC12 Outcome Document, Ministers recognized the importance and urgency of addressing the challenges and concerns with respect to the dispute settlement system, including those related to the Appellate Body, and committed to conduct discussions with the view to having a fully and well-functioning dispute settlement system accessible to all Members by 2024. Since then, Members have identified dispute settlement as the highest priority for a well-functioning multilateral trading system. An overwhelming majority of Members have expressed their desire to deliver an outcome by MC13. Bearing in mind this mandate from Ministers in Paragraph 4 of the MC12 Outcome Document: Do you see value in and do you politically support the work being carried out by experts in Geneva on dispute settlement that could get us to a successful outcome by MC13? TRADE AND INDUSTRIAL POLICY While trade and industrial policy is a non-mandated issue, the SOM is slated to address the question: Building on the discussions that Members had at the Informal Meeting on WTO Reform focused on Trade and Industrial Policy as reflected in JOB/GC/356, what concrete steps and actions are needed to ensure meaningful engagement on this topic at MC13 and beyond? TRADE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY This is an EU issue, said a trade envoy, suggesting that instead of discussing it in the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE), as mandated in the MC12 Outcome Document, the DG and the GC chair seem to persist with their stand to give a lift to the EU issue. The question posed here is: * Given paragraph 14 of the MC12 Outcome Document, which acknowledges global environmental challenges and the vital role of the multilateral trading system in advancing the UN 2030 Agenda and its SDGs, what concrete steps and actions should be taken to ensure substantive engagement on this issue at the WTO ahead of MC13? In conclusion, “The DG seems oblivious to the concerns raised by members and made little or no changes in the revised agenda issued on 11 October,” said a South American trade official, who asked not to be quoted.+
|
||
