|
The
WTO's Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) met on 23 and 24 May, where
it discussed, inter alia, the work programme on trade facilitation
(specifically Article X of GATT 1994), the implementation- related
items on the textiles agreement, and the relevant preparations,
in connection with paragraph 18 of China's Protocol of Accession,
for the review of China's trade policies.
Trade
facilitation
Paragraph
27 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration tasked the CTG to "review
and as appropriate, clarify and improve relevant aspects of Articles
V, VIII, and X of the GATT 1994 and identify the trade facilitation
needs and priorities of Members [...]". It further noted that
this review was to be undertaken in preparation for negotiations,
to take place after the Fifth Ministerial (September 2003), "on
the basis of a decision to be taken by explicit consensus"
on modalities. The transparency issue of 'publication and administration
of trade regulations', i.e. Article X of GATT 1994, was previously
agreed to be the focus of the 23/24 May meeting, the first to deal
with the substantive matters of the mandate.
Five
papers have been submitted to date on Article X -- including ones
from the EU (G/C/W/363), Japan (G/C/W/376), Canada, Korea, and the
US (searchable at http://docsonline.wto.org).
The first four papers generally called for a widening of the scope
of information to be published, a consultation mechanism for affected
parties prior to the finalisation of customs regulations, the legal
right of appeal against customs decisions, a single inquiry point
for trade-related information and expanded technical assistance
to developing countries on the issue of trade facilitation. Small
and medium enterprises (SMEs) were often pointed to as the main
beneficiaries from the actions being proposed -- citing a decreased
capacity to dedicate resources to finding such information (relative
to larger multinationals). The US paper was an overview of its transparency
mechanisms -- the Federal Register.
Brazil,
in its intervention, commented that refraining from the abusive
and protectionist use of trade instruments as well as completing
the WTO harmonisation work programme on rules of origin (i.e. harmonising
the diverging methodologies in use for calculating the origin of
a good) could also be included in trade facilitation. It added that
the best way to facilitate trade for developing countries was to
eliminate trade barriers to their products. Speaking specifically
to the EU paper, they noted that a sufficient case had not been
made of Article X's inadequacy to warrant amending the provision.
Uruguay,
Pakistan, Malaysia, India, Indonesia and Cuba stressed that this
exercise was merely a review and not in fact negotiations -- which
would only start after the 5th Ministerial "on the basis of
a decision to be taken by explicit consensus" on modalities
of negotiations (i.e. the framework for how negotiations will proceed).
Textile
discussions moving slowly
On
the item of implementation-related issues, Ambassador Supperamaniam,
the Chair from Malaysia, noted that the exchange of views at the
13 May informal meeting was constructive. Furthermore, he pointed
to his hope that greater detail could be had at the next informal,
scheduled for 28 May.
A
source close to the textile industry indicated his belief that the
discussions, "at this time", were not moving very well.
He noted that the US, the EU and Canada were showing little flexibility,
based on the claim that they were implementing the textile agreement
faithfully. While admitting that no light was currently shining
at the end of the proverbial tunnel, the source nevertheless stressed
that movement was still possible at upcoming informal meetings on
the issue.
These
informal meetings are being held to consider the proposals under
para. 4.4 and 4.5 of the Decision on Implementation (see BRIDGES
Weekly, 15 May 2002). The paragraphs deal with the use of the
most favourable methodology for calculating the expansion of textile
quotas for small suppliers and least-developed countries; and the
advance expansion of quotas for developing countries. The Goods
Council is to make recommendations to the General Council by 31
July for on how to proceed with the proposals.
China
adamant not to expand paragraph 18 obligations
In
the lead-up to the review of China's compliance with its WTO obligations
-- mandated annually for the next 8 years under paragraph 18 of
China's Protocol of Accession -- the US requested a timetable to
allow sufficient time, prior to the review, for China to submit
information and for written questions to be tabled. In response,
China reiterated statements made most recently at the 3 May Subsidies
Committee (see BRIDGES
Weekly, 7 May 2002), that it could not assume obligations in
addition to what is provided for under para. 18 and that they would
reject any attempts to increase the scope. They added, however,
that Members were welcome to raise questions well in advance of
the review meeting.
Under
paragraph 18 of China's Protocol of Accession, the CTG is to conduct
a review of items relating to non-discrimination, export restrictions,
state trading entities, and government procurement.
The
next regular meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods is scheduled
for 13 June, 2002.
ICTSD
Internal Files.
|