THIS NEWS ITEM IS DESIGNED TO HELP THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND DEVELOPMENTS IN
THE WTO. WHILE EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO ENSURE THE CONTENTS ARE
ACCURATE, IT DOES NOT PREJUDICE MEMBER GOVERNMENTS’ POSITIONS. THE
OFFICIAL RECORD IS IN THE MEETING’S MINUTES]
> news archives
> Supachai Panitchpakdi’s speeches
> Cotton Sub-Committee
Mandate (July-August 2004 framework, paragraph 1.b and Annex A paragraph
Background explanations in the agriculture negotiations backgrounder
Reports from the Secretariat on development aspects of cotton, and
from the IMF, UNCTAD and EU on their development activities sparked a brief
debate on how development assistance could best be used to help recipient
countries adjust while also working on reducing trade distortions through
the agriculture negotiations.
The work programme
This was approved swiftly, ending debates over some of the details and
allowing the sub-committee to plunge into substance. The work programme
essentially reflects the 1 August 2004 framework as it relates to cotton and
Progress in the agriculture negotiations
One of the sub-committee’s tasks is to assess this. Chairperson Groser
reported on progress in the talks, particularly as relevant to cotton.
Amb.Groser also noted that the recent G-20 ministerial declaration also
referred to cotton.
Benin, the African Group (Rwanda speaking), Paraguay, the least-developed
countries (Zambia speaking), said that they looked forward to progress on
substance. Several said the WTO’s credibility depends on a good outcome. The
African Group said it would soon submit its own proposals.
For the WTO Secretariat, Mr Chiedu Osakwe, director of the DDA Special
Duties Division, updated members on latest developments. He outlined latest
activities of the OECD, EU, US and African Development Bank, reporting that
the development track is on-going work that is working well, with
significant further progress having been made since the WTO
December 2004 report.
The IMF, UNCTAD and EU also reported on their activities. The EU went into
some detail on programmes for the region, for cotton, and for individual
Benin, Burkina Faso, Kenya and Senegal noted that what the Africans were
seeking was a fair market for their products so that they can “live from the
products of our own hands”. They said agencies such as the World Bank had
advocated privatisation, but without funding for adjustment and training
“reform for reform’s sake” would yield nothing. “The manner of giving is
more important than what is given,” Senegal said.
Ambassador Groser noted that both the EU and Benin gave priority to
progressing on the trade front. He said it is “inconceivable” that there
will be a result in the agriculture negotiations without serious reform in
domestic support and cotton. Therefore ultimately the work in the
sub-committee and in the agriculture negotiations will be brought together,
he predicted, and development assistance will be needed to help countries
He also observed that the WTO’s role is to create “opportunities”, not
“trade outcomes”, but countries sometimes need help to make use of the
opportunities. The African proponents (Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali) are not asking for preferences but for
assistance to make use of the system, he said.
28 April 2005
Amb.Tim Groser of New Zealand, who also chairs the agriculture negotiations.