|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (May23/07) Geneva, 17 May (D. Ravi Kanth) — The World Trade Organization’s Director-General Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala on 16 May proposed that the Senior Officials’ meeting be held in October, in the face of severe opposition from many members to holding such a meeting at the end of July as suggested by her earlier, said people familiar with the discussions. At an informal Heads of Delegation (HODs) meeting on 16 May, the DG was compelled to change her earlier statement about convening a senior officials’ meeting in end-July, as many members simply did not agree to such a meeting without any preparations, said a trade envoy, who asked not to be quoted. “Based on Members’ feedback during the sessions with more than 100 delegations, I am suggesting that we hold the Senior Officials Meeting in October,” the DG said at the informal HODs meeting on 16 May. She went on to say that “if this holds in October, we will be putting back the TNC/HODs meeting on 20 July.” More importantly, the meeting will be used “for a proper stocktaking and identify issues to be taken up at the Senior Officials Meeting prior to the summer break,” she said. “This will focus the Geneva process from September until senior officials meet in October,” she emphasized. OPPOSITION TO SENIOR OFFICIALS’ MEETING IN JULY Though the DG suggested a Senior Officials’ meeting in July based on what she heard during the recent retreats, the conditions apparently do not augur well for the July meeting. She said by senior officials, she means “Vice Minister or Minister of State level”. She wants senior officials with “decision-making authority” to participate in the October meeting. In a report on her consultations issued as a restricted document (Job/TNC/109) late in the evening of 16 May, seen by the SUNS, the DG posed three questions to members during her consultations. The questions are: a. First, whether the idea of having a senior officials’ meeting was a good one? b. If so, what the timing for this would be? c. Finally, what topics should be addressed? On the first question of the utility of such a meeting, she said that “everyone agreed that, in principle, having a Senior Officials Meeting is a good idea.” However, she heard “differing views on the timing.” She said that her earlier suggestion “was to have a two-day Senior Officials Meeting late in July in lieu of the tentatively scheduled July TNC.” Ms Okonjo-Iweala said that she “proposed late July because in the two years that I have been here, I have observed the tendency to keep pushing work till the latest possible moment and then it is too late to do much.” Acknowledging that “building momentum is as difficult as sustaining it”, she said, “I thought it would be good to hold the Senior Officials Meeting early.” During her consultations, the DG said that she heard two broad views on the timing. “Some Members supported the idea of convening the Senior Officials Meeting in July and said that this would provide political momentum and clarity for work after the summer break,” she said. Ms Okonjo-Iweala said, “it was pointed out that waiting to have such a meeting after July would risk Members drifting back to the usual pressure – yet Members were trying to de-dramatize MCs [Ministerial Conferences].” According to the DG, “some noted that senior officials would be busy with a lot of events later in the year such as the UNGA, G20, and COP, to name a few – hence the preference for a July Senior Officials Meeting.” MAJORITY OF MEMBERS AVERSE TO JULY MEETING According to the DG, “the majority preferred the idea of an autumn Senior Officials Meeting.” “Some (members) asked what a Senior Officials Meeting in July could accomplish that Ambassadors could not.” Further, “LDC graduation and procedural reforms were mentioned as issues that Ambassadors could resolve without senior officials’ engagement,” she said. According to the DG, other members “pointed out that at present, it was difficult to identify what the agenda for a July meeting could look like and that senior officials would not come to Geneva simply for stocktaking.” Several other delegations also asked about the level of ambition and the objective for a July meeting, the DG said. Many members voiced their concerns about a Senior Officials’ meeting in July, emphasizing that “they wanted senior officials to come to Geneva when work in various areas was ripe.” In their view, she said, “work should be allowed to further progress between now and July so that by autumn, senior officials would have concrete areas to engage on, allowing them to avoid reading statements and instead provide solutions.” The DG said other members pointed out that “the risk with bringing senior officials to Geneva too early was that positions could harden, and delegations would have to toe the line provided by their officials, limiting flexibility in the Geneva process.” If the function of a Senior Officials’ Meeting was to generate momentum to move forward, and if there was a long break after their meeting, then the momentum would be lost, she said, adding, “making it more useful for senior officials to meet after the summer break, and closer to the Ministerial.” Apparently, some members “suggested having two Senior Officials Meetings – one in October, November or December and another – two or three days before MC13 to further close gaps – following the example of other multilateral organizations and other meetings.” But, the DG said several members pointed out that “two Senior Officials Meetings would be difficult given resource constraints of smaller delegations.” TOPICS FOR OCTOBER MEETING The DG said: “What I want to push back against is waiting – until the end of July – to set the date.” “Given that the majority seem to prefer autumn – I hope that by today’s meeting, we can converge on a month so that we can give advance notice to senior officials and start laying the foundation for a meaningful Senior Officials Meeting.” The DG indicated that in terms of topics, “a wide variety of ideas were expressed”, while some members categorized areas as: “(i) low-hanging fruits that senior officials can harvest when they meet; (ii) issues that require political guidance and clarity for further focused work until MC13 including issues from MC12; (iii) issues that were not addressed at MC12. The importance of building on our collective successes at MC12 was reiterated.” Ms Okonjo-Iweala said that she heard “one central theme” centering on “the importance of finalizing the LDC Graduation issue.” According to the DG, “Many said that this is an issue that Permanent Representatives should be able to gavel at the General Council.” On development, she said that apart from the G90 Agreement Specific Proposals, “is an area that we need to deliver by MC13.” As regards the second wave of the Doha fisheries subsidies negotiations, the DG said some members “noted that the type of political guidance would depend on the progress Members would have achieved prior to the Senior Officials Meeting.” If there is a draft negotiations text on fisheries subsidies, the DG said that “some said that the guidance we will need is how to build convergence.” “If there is no text, the focus could be on the principles Members should converge on to arrive at a text and begin text-based negotiations,” the DG said. She suggested that “many members also stressed the importance of ratifying the Fisheries Subsidies Agreement to ensure its entry into force by MC13 and assured me that they were working on their domestic processes.” She congratulated Iceland and the United Arab Emirates for being the latest Members to deposit their respective instruments of acceptance (of the Protocol of the Fisheries Subsidies Agreement). As regards her country of origin, the DG said “I likewise recognize Nigeria’s cabinet has approved the Fisheries Subsidies Agreement and I look forward to receiving their instrument of acceptance soon.” WTO REFORM Commenting on WTO reform, the DG said that “it was suggested that senior officials should be updated on the work on procedural reforms and agree on them as appropriate.” “In fact, delegations said that a set of procedural reforms could be agreed by Ambassadors for implementation,” the DG maintained. As regards substantive reforms, she said: “Some underscored the need to distill ideas brought to the table and put them to the Senior Officials Meeting. Those that have garnered widespread support should be identified and senior officials’ action sought.” She emphasized that “dispute settlement reform remained a key priority.” The DG said without dispute settlement reform, the WTO and its members would not look “credible if by MC13 we had nothing here”. The DG admitted that even if members cannot deliver everything by MC13, they “should at the very least know where we are going on this, and we should have progressed some way on dispute settlement reform, including by converging on broad principles that can guide this work.” She said, “we could ask senior officials to agree on these principles.” On other issues, the DG said that she heard the importance of outcomes in the following areas: 1. Agriculture, in particular, food security in times of crises; 2. The e-commerce work program and moratorium; 3. Pandemic preparedness; 4. TRIPS waiver extension; 5. SPS [Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures]; 6. Small economies; 7. Environment, climate change, and sustainability issues; 8. State intervention and policy space; 9. Level playing field issues, inclusiveness, and accessions. DG’S “SILENCE” ON PSH & SSM Surprisingly, the DG apparently remained silent on the mandated issues in agriculture such as the permanent solution for public stockholding (PSH) programs for food security and the special safeguard mechanism (SSM) for developing countries, both of which have been hanging in limbo since 2015. On the structuring of the Senior Officials’ meeting, the DG said that she “is open to ideas – but it is clear that the modalities of the meeting will depend on the topics to be taken up.” At the same time, during her consultations, the DG said that it seems that three options are possible. “So, assuming we agree to take up four topics – the options could be: a. First, taking up two topics each day in two breakout groups and then have a concluding plenary on the second day. b. Second, taking up one topic in all breakout groups in the morning followed by a short plenary, and the same in the afternoon – which would be replicated again on the second day. c. Third, having four breakout groups on four different topics happening simultaneously for two hours per topic and a plenary session on Day 2. So, every Senior Official would have a go at every topic in this option. d. For Options 1 and 2, we would have different Facilitators on the same topic – while with Option 3, the Facilitator would be the same for each topic and would listen to all Members’ views on the topic.” The DG said, “A number of delegations requested financial assistance and the possibility of virtual participation to ensure that all Members have the opportunity to fully participate in the Senior Officials Meeting.” She assured members that on the funding, “I take note of the request and will try to see what can be done.” +
|
||
