|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Apr25/01) Geneva, 28 Mar (D. Ravi Kanth) — The United States has expressed serious concerns about the World Trade Organization’s Secretariat activities, in particular the “systemic implications” that those activities are having on the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) and its sub-bodies. The US proposal (G/C/W/860) regarding its systemic concerns about the WTO Secretariat, submitted to the CTG on 25 March, is a seemingly indirect criticism of the WTO’s Director-General, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, for outsourcing several important activities to external agencies, said people familiar with the development. The US proposal came two days before the Reuters news agency published a story on 27 March stating that Washington has paused its contribution of 22.7 million Swiss Francs to the WTO for 2024 and 2025 (see below). US PROPOSAL In its proposal issued on 25 March, the US said the July and December 2024 meetings of the CTG witnessed several members expressing concerns “about the Secretariat’s activities and indicated an interest in potential further action.” “In addition, the United States is deeply concerned about the systemic implications that those activities are having on the CTG and its sub-bodies,” the US maintained. While appreciating “the work of the Secretariat as it seeks to serve Members,” the US said that based on the concerns raised by members, it has become apparent that “the Secretariat is moving away from its Member- driven purposes, and is attempting to re-invent itself into a resource to be provided to the public, regardless of Members’ views or the impact that such activities may be having on Members’ interests or budget contributions.” The US said that it has “identified five specific categories of concerns that stem from the concerns raised by Members since this issue was first raised: (1) not coordinating outward facing activities, such as seminars, with all relevant Committees with functional knowledge of a topic; (2) not informing Members or seeking their approval, where appropriate, via relevant Committees before drafting and issuing reports covering a specific functional area; (3) creating substantive databases, in particular for outside use, that were not requested by or previously discussed with or approved by Members; (4) Secretariat staff participating as panelists at outward facing events without clearly stating that any comments made do not represent the views of the WTO or WTO Members; and (5) a lack of transparency concerning how Secretariat activities and research not approved by Members utilize WTO budget resources that are provided by Members.” In its proposal, the US suggested that “Members create formal guidance and procedures that are specific to each category above that provide sufficient space for the Secretariat to operate, where applicable, but also the necessary guidance that the Secretariat currently lacks to ensure that the Secretariat’s initiatives and activities are Member-driven.” It proposed that such guidance would include: * Retrospective and prospective reporting on Secretariat activities to the relevant substantive bodies, especially those involving use of staff time, budget expenditure, and allocation of resources; * An annual reporting requirement to the CTG, whereby the Secretariat would cover all activities and initiatives relevant to the CTG and sub-bodies. Such a report shall include: 1. Activities that were covered during the reporting period; 2. Activities that are being undertaken in the subsequent reporting period; 3. Activities that are being considered for future work; 4. Budget implications of such work, including costs, travel expenses, and staff time consumed; and 5. Disclosure of Committees and other bodies that were consulted before such work was undertaken and whether that work was approved, as appropriate, by the relevant Committees; * Rules for when the Secretariat must seek Member input and approval prior to undertaking major initiatives, including drafting reports, and meetings; and * For all panels and seminars in which Secretariat staff participate, a requirement that both the event and the Secretariat staff involved make clear that any comments made are not being made on behalf of the WTO, unless the Membership has approved of the content. Interestingly, at a time when the US is imposing allegedly unilateral tariffs on all WTO members, it has called for a “collaborative” approach with the members, “as it is in all Members’ interest to ensure that the Secretariat continues to serve Members in the most effective, transparent, and cost-efficient way possible.” It appears that the US has also submitted such a document for consideration to the Committee on Trade and Environment, which is meeting next week. Meanwhile, in a seemingly related development, the Reuters news agency on 27 March reported that the US has paused its contributions to the WTO for 2024 and 2025, attributing Washington’s action to US President Donald Trump’s budgetary cuts in government spending. The Geneva correspondent of the Reuters news agency said that the pause is stemming from the Trump administration’s retreat from global institutions it sees as at odds with his “America First” economic policies. The Reuters news report, however, did not mention the budgetary and “systemic” concerns raised by the US about the WTO Secretariat and the DG’s allegedly extra-budgetary spending, said a person familiar with the proceedings of the WTO’s budget committee. +
|
||
