|

|

The Sixth WTO Ministerial Conference
Hong Kong, China, 13 to 18 December 2005.
SUMMARY OF
15 DECEMBER 2005
Day 3:
Tonga all set to join, as movement seen in talks on
least-developed countries
Tonga’s
membership agreement signed
Ministerial Conference plenary, 6 pm, and signing, 8.15 pm
The Hong
Kong Ministerial Conference approved Tonga’s accession
agreement on 15 December, paving the way for the South Pacific
island nation to join the WTO. Tonga will now ratify the
agreement and will become a full member 30 days after it has
informed the WTO that it has ratified. It has agreed to do
this by 31 July 2006.
At a signing ceremony afterwards, WTO Director-General Pascal
Lamy observed that Tonga will become the WTO’s 150th member.
“Unfortunately we don’t have special prizes for that,” he
joked.
“Four weeks ago, we welcomed another kingdom into the WTO
family. Not too many families welcome two members in one
month!” he said.
Tonga’s Labour, Commerce and Industries Minister Feleti Sevele
described his country’s “long course” of membership
negotiations that began in June 1995. “We believe, despite
what some NGOs have said, we will be grateful for many years
to come with this decision,” he said.
Not being a WTO member is “simply not an option,” he went on.
“Reform is an ongoing process, and it’s something that has not
been extracted from us, but part of a long-term process.”
Paying tribute to countries and organizations that helped with
the negotiations, Minister Sevele said: “At the end of the
day, we have to weigh the pros and cons of WTO membership. We
believe this is the right decision to take as a member of the
world community. We will continue our efforts to be a good
citizen of the world. We will, of course, ratify in due
course.”
Tonga is the fourth Pacific Island state to join, after Fiji,
Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands.
Heads of
delegations
Informal meeting 5 pm
As usual
the purpose of this heads of delegations meeting was to share
information. Chairperson Tsang told the ministers that there
were signs of progress here and there, particularly on issues
concerning Least Developed Countries. But he said members
remain far from agreeing on outcomes in a number of difficult
issues.
Chairperson Tsang told the meeting that another minister,
Foreign Minister Walker of Chile has started working as his
“facilitator”, coordinating discussions on specific subjects.
The full list is now:
-
Non-agricultural market access — Commerce Minister Humayun
Khan of Pakistan
-
Agriculture — Trade and Industry Minister Mukhisa Kituyi of
Kenya
-
Development issues — Foreign Trade and International
Cooperation Minister Clement Rohee of Guyana
Three
more are facilitators-at-large, who could assist as necessary
on services, rules and other issues:
- Trade
Minister Hyun Chong Kim of Korea (now working on services);
-
Foreign Minister Jonas Støre of Norway; and
-
Foreign Minister Ignacio Walker of Chile (now working on
implementation and other issues, and bananas).
Chairperson Tsang said members needed to begin developing
texts that would lead to solutions that members could adopt
and which would permit the Chairman and the Director-General
to circulate an improved Draft Ministerial Text.
Reminding ministers to keep the task in perspective, he
stressed that the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference is neither
launching nor concluding a round. Instead it is an opportunity
to take the Doha round a step further towards conclusion, he
said.
Members will, he said, need to work with a much greater sense
of urgency over the next two days and he asked his
facilitators to intensify their work over the course of the
day and to focus on developing compromise texts.
Five “facilitators” reported on their consultations:
Agriculture. Minister Kituyi said he had met a number of
delegations over the course of the last day, the latest being
the recently acceded members and China. He urged delegations
interested in submitting inputs to his text to get in touch
with him.
Specific development issues. Minister Rohee began by
reassuring members that he fully recognized that the
development package was not limited solely to the question of
duty-free quota-free market access for least-developed
countries (LDC) or to the other LDC issues alone. He pointed
out that he had prioritised his discussions on this issue and
that very soon he would take up other development issues.
On the issue of duty-free quota-free market access for
least-developed countries, he underscored the following
points:
-
least-developed countries want a predictable and secure
commitment to provide them with duty-free, quota-free market
access, and that they wanted members to go beyond the
commitments taken at Doha, Minister Rohee reported.
- He
said most members were positive about providing this
preferential access and that they were considering how to
provide the access securely and predictably, including by
legally binding.
- But
he said that members generally felt that “binding” in the
classic legal sense was not practical. Instead, they were
considering other options, including using the phrase “on a
lasting basis”, which was attracting broad convergence.
-
Another question is whether duty-free, quota-free market
access would apply to all least-developed countries. While
some countries have a problem with this idea, he said that
in an endeavour to move the process forward, members have
proven willing to accept a reference in the text to “all
LDCs,” he said.
- The
third issue before members on this topic related to product
coverage, he went on. LDCs insist that all their export
products included but that some members said they could not
accept duty-free, quota-free market access for all products.
- As a
possible compromise he is exploring the possibility of using
the text that currently appears in the draft. This text
allows members with difficulty on this point to start by
providing duty-free, quota-free market access for a
specified percentage of products (tariff lines) by a given
year. They would then increase this percentage
progressively. Minister Rohee said he hoped to build
convergence around this approach.
-
Developing countries say they would like to participate but
would need flexibility in applying it, he reported.
Services. Minister Kim said the starting point for his
consultations was the part on services in the draft
ministerial text. Many delegations considered that this offers
a sound basis for the way forward; others wanted the text
strengthened, a third group felt that the text was too
prescriptive and not in line with the General Agreement on
Trade in Services and the Doha negotiating mandate.
Concerns focused on provisions in the text dealing with
qualitative objectives, sectoral objectives and references to
plurilateral “request-offer” negotiations, Minister Kim said.
He said he would be conducting further consultations in an
effort to narrow divergences. Later on, Malawi on behalf of
the G-90, said they would be meeting with Minister Kim later
this evening to present him with the G-90 version of the text.
Non-agricultural market access. Minister Khan expressed
concern that delegations have remained increasingly entrenched
in the positions they had adopted in Geneva. They are not
flexible enough to turn this Ministerial Conference into a
success story, he said, cautioning that there may be a risk of
some backsliding on this issue.
In his report to delegations, said Minister Khan had met
intensively with delegations either separately or in groups.
He said he did not see much progress towards consensus on
amendments to the ministerial draft. He said that while there
was broad support for using a Swiss formula (a mathematical
formula for cutting tariffs that results in steep cuts on high
tariffs) with two coefficients (the numbers in the Swiss
formula that determine how steep the cuts are and set ceilings
on the final tariffs). He said that several developed
countries who had been indicating in Geneva that they
preferred a formula with a single coefficient have now given
clear support to this dual-coefficient approach.
In
addition, he went on, a group of developing countries which
insists on linking tariff reductions in agriculture and
non-agricultural market access — so that cuts made by
developing countries on non-agricultural products are related
to the cuts made by developed countries in agriculture.
The group also wants flexibilities to be independent from the
formula, he reported. And differences also remain on the
question of unbound tariffs, the erosion of tariff preferences
and a sectoral component to the NAMA negotiations (such as
having totally free trade for some sectors).
Other issues, implementation, and bananas. Minister Walker
said he had consulted a number of countries who wanted to
discuss trade and environment, electronic commerce,
geographical indications, the WTO intellectual property
(“TRIPS”) agreement and the
Convention on Biological Diversity, “non-violation complaints”
in intellectual property.
Minister Walker has also been asked by the conference
chairperson to hold consultations related to a request by
Honduras on the EU’s banana regime.
Development issues
Group meeting, 3.30 pm
This
meeting took place before the heads of delegations meeting.
Facilitator Rohee explained to delegates that while the focus
of the development talks is currently on the duty-free,
quota-free market access proposal for least-developed
countries’ exports (Annex F of draft ministerial text), the
“development package” as a whole remains the objective of the
negotiations.
This least-developed country proposal is being discussed first
because ministers have shown they are willing to offer
preferential market access to these countries. A key remaining
question is how to find a legal way to provide this securely
and predictably. Also being discussed are which countries
would be involved and whether all products from them would be
covered (see above).
Some developing countries said that they would not let
specific development issues be diluted. They spoke favourably
about giving preferential access to exports from
least-developed countries, although they asked for
flexibilities on such issues as which products would be
covered, and how long the preferences would apply.
Countries describing themselves as small and vulnerable
welcomed the initiative in favour of least-developed nations.
They also wanted to make sure their interests would not be
diluted
when the
ministerial text is redrafted.
|
|