2 April 2003
TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE
Dr. Supachai underlines importance of Doha progress to global confidence

SEE ALSO:
> press
releases
> news archives
> Supachai
Panitchpakdi's speeches
>
Negotiations, implementation and development: the Doha agenda
>
The Doha Declaration explained
>
The Implementation Decision explained
>
How the negotiations are organized
- I -
At the outset, I would like to emphasize once more the reasons why I am
convinced it is essential to finish these negotiations successfully and
on time, by 1 January 2005. What we are doing here is immensely
important to economic growth and development prospects for all
participants. It will also make an irreplaceable contribution to
achieving a more stable, more equitable ?and ultimately more peaceful ?
world.
At a time of growing global economic uncertainty, progress in the Doha
Round towards its timely conclusion can make a much-needed contribution
to confidence. The converse is also true.
We cannot ignore the fact of missed deadlines and the disappointment
they create. I take this very seriously, and I share the disappointment.
The importance of agriculture is self-evident, not only in terms of
progress in the Round, but also in terms of its economic and human
significance to so many participants. This is why we must continue to
work hard in this key area. More broadly, we cannot allow disappointment
to distract us from the tasks before us across the whole range of the
Doha agenda, nor let it weaken our determination to arrive at a balanced
and positive outcome.
Every piece of unfinished business is a potential addition to the burden
on Ministers at Canc鷑, a burden which is already considerable. Of
course we must continue to work to resolve as many as possible of these
issues beforehand. But where we cannot, this only strengthens the need
to prepare the choices we will be putting before the Ministers with
clarity and care.
Let us not be dazzled by speculation about prospects for success or
failure at Canc鷑. It is the success or failure of the Round itself that
should be our primary concern. Canc鷑 will be part ?a very important
part ?of the successful continuation of our work programme. It is up to
us, in Geneva and in capitals, to make it feasible for Ministers to
tackle the issues productively and give us the guidance we need to carry
on to a timely conclusion. This should be the key aim of our work from
here to September. I hope we will all continue it with realism and with
resolve.
It is in this spirit that I would like to give you a brief overview of
the state of progress as I see it in the bodies set up by the TNC.
- II -
Agriculture Special Session
On agriculture, I regret to have to report that it has not been possible
to establish modalities for the further commitments, including
provisions for special and differential treatment, by the date mandated
by Ministers. This is a setback. The fact that at this juncture the wide
divergence of views in key areas could not be bridged must be of serious
concern to all of us. Nevertheless, we should guard against the
temptation to pass around the blame for the situation ?this is not the
time for pointing fingers. We should also guard against making negative
linkages ?it would be counterproductive. Instead, we should reconfirm
our collective determination to find solutions to the outstanding issues
within the shortest delay possible.
On the positive side, it must be noted that much productive work has
already been achieved in the negotiations on agriculture. Even more
importantly in the circumstances, at the formal Special Session of the
Committee on Agriculture on Monday this week there was overwhelming
support for a course of action which involves technical and other
consultations on a wide range of matters with a view to further
advancing the negotiations. This is a constructive response to the
situation we are facing in agriculture. However, it is also clear that
sooner rather than later, major political decisions are required on all
sides so as to create the room for appropriate compromises on key issues
with a view to establishing modalities as soon as possible. The serious
consequences for the Doha Development Agenda as a whole of any failure
to achieve this are too obvious to require further elaboration.
Services Special Session
The services negotiations are continuing to progress in a satisfactory
manner. Several Members have submitted initial requests since 30 June
2002 on the basis of which delegations have been actively engaged in
bilateral negotiations. Also, the adoption of the Modalities for the
Treatment of Autonomous Liberalization by the Special Session of the
Services Council at its last meeting represents an important achievement
for many delegations, and no doubt will facilitate the next phase of the
services negotiations. So far, 12 Members have submitted their initial
offers in accordance with the date of 31 March 2003, as specified by
Ministers in Doha. Many other Members have indicated that their offers
are under preparation. As you know, this date marks only the start of a
new phase in the services negotiations and not a deadline. Of course, we
all realize that the services negotiations are part of the broader DDA
and that linkages are a reality. However, many delegations realize, as
we have seen from the offers submitted so far, that what is needed at
this stage is a positive rather than a negative linkage. The submission
of meaningful initial offers in services would be the best way to induce
progress in other areas of negotiations, including agriculture. It
should also be kept in mind that there is a 搑ule-making?side to the
services negotiations. We must make every effort to ensure that
negotiations on domestic regulation, emergency safeguard measures,
subsidies and government procurement progress in a satisfactory manner
towards their conclusion.
Negotiating Group on Non-agricultural Market
Access
With respect to the Negotiating Group on Market Access, Members will
need to work expeditiously in the coming 2-month period in order to
reach agreement on modalities for the negotiations. As you are aware,
this negotiating group has set a target date of 31 May 2003 to reach
agreement on modalities. At this point in time it is clear to me that it
is only through the concerted effort of the whole Membership that this
will come to fruition.
I would furthermore note that there are two formal meetings scheduled
during this time-frame in which Members will have to continue to analyze
the specific modalities proposed on both tariffs and non-tariff barriers
(NTBs). Because the range of elements for tariff modalities is vast and
there are approximately 25 submissions to consider, Members will likely
need to focus more attention in this area during April and May. As part
of the core modality on tariffs, there are many formula-based approaches
submitted by Members that will need to be analyzed in detail.
The issue of NTBs will also need adequate attention by Members, as many
have noted that this is an equally important area to improve market
access. From the information received from Members on this subject,
there appear to be important matters that may need further direction by
Members at the level of the NGMA, TNC, or elsewhere. This pertains to
the appropriate forum or WTO body to address some of these NTBs. As you
are probably aware, many of the NTB issues brought before the NGMA
concern barriers with respect to existing WTO Agreements that are not
specifically addressed in the Doha Declaration. However, at this
juncture, the NGMA needs this time in April and May to clarify many of
these issues on NTBs. Thus, I hope that these issues of modalities on
tariffs and non-tariff barriers will be given the dedicated input by
Members in April and May so that they can advance according to the
parameters set by the membership.
TRIPS Council Special Session
In the negotiations in the TRIPS Council Special Session on a
multilateral system of notification and registration of geographical
indications for wines and spirits, a great deal of work has been done
over the last year or so to clarify the issues and the proposals on the
table. This has been brought together in a way which delegations have
found helpful in a Secretariat compilation. The basis for the final
negotiating phase has thus been laid.
However, positions remain far apart. While there is perhaps some measure
of common ground on the notification phase of the procedure, differences
are as wide as ever on issues of the legal effect of a registration
system, of whether there is need for a multilateral opposition or
challenge procedure and of whether the notification and registration
system should have effects on non-participating Members.
Given that the negotiations in this area are to be completed by the
Canc鷑 Ministerial Conference, as an 揺arly harvest?element of the
single undertaking, there is an urgent need to make more progress. The
Chairman of the Special Session intends to table a draft negotiating
text in good time prior to the next meeting of the Special Session at
the end of this month, unless such a text can emerge from delegations
themselves. I would like to invite participants at this meeting to seek
to come up with ways of narrowing the differences so as to give him as
much guidance as possible in the formulation of this text.
Negotiating Group on Rules
Paragraph 28 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration envisions that the
Rules Negotiations begin with an initial phase where participants
indicate the provisions of the Anti-Dumping and Subsidies Agreements
that they seek to clarify and improve. The Rules Negotiating Group has
been meeting regularly for more than a year and considering issues
identified in written submissions by participants. While additional
issues will doubtless be identified over the next few months, the Group
is rapidly approaching a critical mass in terms of issues identified by
numerous participants and reflecting a broad range of perspectives with
respect to both agreements. Work is most advanced on anti-dumping, and
least advanced with respect to the question of fisheries subsidies.
Further, some participants have already begun to shift from issue
identification to the development of more detailed proposals. In short,
the Negotiating Group is on track and should be prepared to shift to a
more detailed phase of the negotiations after Canc鷑.
The fact that there are no particular problems at this stage in the
Rules Negotiations does not mean that participants should not start
already thinking about problems that may emerge as the negotiations
intensify. A key issue for progress in the Rules Negotiations is the
extent to which trade-offs will be available, both among issues covered
by the Rules mandate and with issues elsewhere in the DDA. In this
context, there is the possibility that some participants may seek to
feed into the WTO process work that has been done in other fora. It is
also important to ensure an even progress in all subject areas covered
by the Negotiating Group. While I believe that it is premature at this
point to engage in a concrete discussion of these issues, I would
encourage all participants to begin reflecting on them so as to be
prepared when the time comes.
In its work on Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs), the Group has
concentrated on discussing ways of addressing identified issues of a
primarily procedural nature, under the generic label of 揜TAs
transparency? Given the growth of RTA numbers and scope, more
transparency should be an aim to be pursued in parallel with the
clarification of criteria attached to the consistency of RTAs. It is
possible that the Group could arrive at a consensus on 揜TAs
transparency?before the Canc鷑 Ministerial, but only if Members are
convinced that any change in this area will be without prejudice to
their interpretation of WTO provisions on RTAs, and will not be an
obstacle to further 搒ubstantive?negotiations.
DSB Special Session
The negotiations on dispute settlement have reached a critical phase
considering that the deadline for concluding the negotiations is only
eight weeks away. A great deal of work has been done since the beginning
of this year. It started with a consideration of the proposals submitted
by participants and most recently ended with a consideration of the
draft legal texts put forward by participants on the basis of the
proposals submitted by them. The discussions have revealed significant
differences in the positions of participants on some of the negotiating
issues reflecting their priorities and levels of ambition.
Taking into account the views expressed by participants, the Chairperson
of the Special Session of the Dispute Settlement Body intends to
circulate a 揻ramework document?very soon, which hopefully would evolve
into a 揅hairman's text? Given that a strengthened dispute settlement
system is in the interest of all Members, I would urge participants to
show the necessary flexibility and to accommodate as much as possible
the interests of other participants to enable a meaningful result to be
achieved by 31 May 2003. The negotiations in the remaining eight weeks
will be difficult. The challenge, however, is to come up with a text
that would be broadly acceptable to all participants, taking into
account the level of convergence of views on each proposal.
Committee on Trade and Environment Special
Session
The Committee on Trade and Environment in Special Session (CTESS) has
made some progress in its work, but overall, the negotiations on
environment are still at an early stage. Some key procedural issues have
been resolved, notably with regard to the phasing of work. The
participation of UNEP and a number of Multilateral Environmental
Agreements (MEAs) at the next meeting of the CTESS should help Members
progress further on relevant aspects of the negotiating mandate.
The main focus in the negotiations so far has been the relationship
between existing WTO rules and specific trade obligations set out in
MEAs (Paragraph 31(i)). The CTESS has now engaged in an analysis of
specific trade obligations contained in relevant MEAs, based on concrete
examples. This exercise is important in order to assess whether such
specific trade obligations have in fact raised ?or may raise ?
difficulties in terms of their compatibility with WTO rules. In other
words, it is still unclear at this stage which are the problems, if any,
that the negotiations should be addressing. The more analytical phase in
which the CTESS has entered will hopefully shed light on this question.
On information exchange between WTO committees and MEA secretariats
(Paragraph 31(ii)), useful suggestions were made in the context of the
MEA Information Session held in November 2002. However, Members still
need to address whether the negotiations should be limited to
formalizing existing forms of cooperation, or whether new forms of
collaboration should be envisaged. On criteria for the granting of
observer status to MEAs, few proposals have been put forward so far and
Members need to continue to discuss how to fulfil this part of the
mandate.
With respect to the negotiations on environmental goods and services
(Paragraph 31(iii)), which are conducted mainly in the Negotiating Group
on Market Access and in the Special Session of the Council for Trade in
Services, some discussions have taken place in the CTESS on the
identification of environmental goods, but more work remains to be done.
CTD Special Session
As you are aware, the CTD Special Session submitted its report,
containing a number of recommendations, to the General Council on 10
February. The General Council took note of the report and of the
statements that had been made, and agreed that the Chairman of the
General Council, in coordination with the Chairman of the CTD in Special
Session, would undertake consultations on how to take this important
matter forward. The General Council Chairman has now initiated his
process of informal consultations.
- III -
This concludes my overview of the situation in the bodies reporting to
the TNC. Overall, the picture remains a mixed one. There is significant
progress in a number of areas, but there are also clearly significant
problems. The current situation underscores the need for participants to
engage seriously in real negotiations. This has not happened yet. We
should convert the disappointment we feel now into determination to
negotiate in earnest. We have a sufficient basis for this in the work
done so far, which is considerable. This week, I am looking for clear
signals of movement in this direction. I have seen a few such signals,
including greater bilateral activity, and I encourage this.
I am also looking for signs that participants will do more than just
talk about positive linkages and actually start constructing them. Here
also we have seen some encouraging developments, such as some active
demandeurs on agriculture making comprehensive offers on services.
Our challenge at this point in the negotiations is to build on the
elements of progress to help us tackle the problems, always keeping in
mind that this is a Single Undertaking. This is what I had in mind in
formulating the questions I have put before you in my fax last week.
Can I remind you that these questions are designed to provide the main
focus for our meeting today. I have just outlined my overview of the
situation in some detail, and delegations may wish to comment on
individual areas of our work, but I would ask that they do so in the
framework of the broader questions I have set out. These questions are
intended to promote a sense of the positive linkages we need and of the
totality of our endeavour in light of the TNC's overview function.
I can assure you that this is the spirit in which I will go on working
together with the Chairs of the bodies reporting to the TNC and in close
cooperation with the Chairman of the General Council. Over the weeks
ahead our work will intensify, both at the negotiating group and TNC
level. We will also need more informal consultations and more contact
among delegations. I will continue to work in full respect of the
principles of transparency and inclusiveness to which I am committed and
which our guidelines require.
To be successful, the work in Geneva will require the continuing close
support of capitals. This is why I am pleased to see so many senior
capital-based officials here this week. Meetings like this are not a
substitute for the excellent and essential work of your Geneva
representatives ?on the contrary, they should reinforce and encourage
it. The conversations you have among yourselves while you are here can
also make a valuable contribution to bridging gaps. I hope you will take
back to your capitals a renewed sense of the necessity of political
commitment and the urgency of sustaining the momentum of the
negotiations. I will certainly continue to stress this need in my
contacts with Ministers.