EU POSTPONES VOTE ON NEW BANANA TARIFF AMIDST INTERNAL DIVISIONS

The EU has postponed a vote on a reform to its banana import rules that would set the most-favoured nation tariff at 179 euros per tonne, after a group of EU member states attacked it as excessively high. No date has been fixed for the vote, originally scheduled for 23 November, but European Commission agriculture spokesman Michael Mann expressed hope that EU members would resolve the issue before WTO's Hong Kong Ministerial Conference in December. Honduras has already put the issue on the agenda for the summit (see BRIDGES Weekly, 16 November 2005).

After its banana import regime was found to be WTO-inconsistent in 2001, Members granted the EU a waiver (the so-called 'Cotonou waiver') allowing it to maintain preferential access for African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) banana exports -- so long as the move to a tariff-only regime by 1 January 2006 maintained total market access for Latin American most-favoured nation (MFN) producers. The waiver allowed MFN banana exporters to seek arbitration if unhappy with the EU's proposed tariff levels. WTO arbitrators have already rejected two EU proposals for tariffs of 230 and later 187 euros per tonne (see BRIDGES Weekly 2 November 2005).

Dow Jones reports that Sweden objected to the 179 euros per tonne level, arguing that it would grant too much protection to Europe's banana farmers and former colonies at the expense of EU consumers. Germany, the Netherlands, and the Czech Republic supported its position. Arrayed against them are France, Spain, and Portugal, which have domestic banana industries, and ACP producers, who already feared that a 187 euros per tonne tariff would leave them unable to compete.

The Cotonou waiver is set to lapse on 1 January 2006. A failure to agree on a tariff before the Ministerial Conference could complicate the EU's negotiating position there.

ICTSD reporting; "EU Delays Banana Duty Vote, Lowering Hope for Dec Deal," DOW JONES, 23 November 2005.

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT APPROVES CHEMICALS LEGISLATION

The European Parliament on 17 November voted by a large majority to approve Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) legislation, which sets out a process in the EU for the pre-sale evaluation and potential ban of chemical products based on health and environmental safety grounds.

As per a compromise struck to ensure its approval, the law includes basic registration requirements for quantities of chemicals between one and ten tonnes and provides for the possibility of waiving safety testing requirements for the sale of quantities ranging from ten to 100 tonnes "based on satisfactory justification of risk." Although environmental groups criticised these compromises on the required safety information, the final deal adds two relatively pro-environment provisions: the 'substitution principle' requires companies to cease the production and use of dangerous chemicals when safer alternatives are available, while another limits the duration of authorisations to five years.

Of the numerous amendments incorporated into the approved text, several respond to concerns raised by WTO Members including the US, Japan and several African countries that the new measures may pose illegal barriers to trade (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 11 November 2005, http://www.ictsd.org/biores/05-11-11/story3.htm). South African government officials had earlier warned that REACH rules, particularly those pertaining to the mining sector, could impose heavy costs on businesses in African, Caribbean, and Pacific countries.

European Parliament Environment Committee member John Bowis said that although he thought the EU should promote REACH-type standards in world trade negotiations to ensure a "level playing field that includes environmental and health requirements," it would also be necessary to "take account of the very real worries among developing countries, especially on the issue of minerals and mining products, and ensure that we do not damage their fragile economies."

EU member states will vote on the legislation on 19 December.

ICTSD Reporting; "Parliament backs safety assessment of chemicals," EURACTIV, 17 November 2005; "Britain sets December date for EU chemicals deal," REUTERS, 18 November 2005; "EU Parliament Passes Chemical Legislation In First Reading; Ministers to Review in Dec," WTO REPORTER, 21 November 2005, "Parliament backs new EU law on toxic chemicals," REUTERS, 17 November 2005; " America's Chemical Makers Dismayed by E.U. 'REACH' Vote," PRNEWSWIRE, 18 November 2005.

WSIS MEETING CHANGES LITTLE ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE OR DIGITAL DIVIDE FUNDING

The second phase of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) took place in Tunis, Tunisia from 16-18 November. The two key goals of the conference were to look at how to increase funding for efforts to close the 'digital divide' and, more controversially, to address the governance of the internet.

The technical management of the internet is currently carried out by the US-based non-profit Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which is under contract to the US government. Several governments had wanted internet control to be transferred to a potential international body.

The event ended in a compromise, with ICANN remaining in control of the system for governing domain names -- a key US negotiating aim. However, the summit created a new Internet Governance Forum (IGF) to bring together representatives from government, civil society, business, and the UN to examine internet-related governance and cyber-security issues.

Not long before the meeting, the EU moved away from its original pro-ICANN stance by supporting calls for an international body. However, at WSIS itself, the EU effectively accepted the US' position.

Michael Geist, an internet governance expert at the University of Ottawa, writes that the forum "has the potential to emerge as the platform to allow for a continued emphasis on internet regulation concerns." The future of internet governance will also be reviewed in the future.

Little was accomplished in terms of securing additional funding to improve people's access to information and communications technology; contributions to the Digital Solidarity Fund (DSF) remain voluntary. Reportedly, discussions at the summit were distracted by concerns over internet control, censorship, freedom of speech and other issues yet to be tackled by WSIS.

The summit's final documents, the Tunis Commitment (WSIS-05/TUNIS/DOC/7) and the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society (WSIS-05/TUNIS/DOC/6 (Rev. 1)) as well as further details on the event are available at: http://www.itu.int/wsis/tunis/index.html.

"Controversy blights UN net summit," BBC NEWS, 18 November 2005; "Internet Summit Ends with Promises, Little Funding," ASSOCIATED PRESS, 18 November 2005; "Analysis: Net control debate rumbles on," BBC NEWS, 17 November 2005.