NOTE:
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
SEE ALSO:
FIND OUT MORE
about SPS’s “three sisters” — the international
standards-setting bodies:
> Codex Alimentarius
> World Organization for Animal Health
> International Plant Protection Convention
Some detail
Ad hoc mediation
One of the purposes of using the chairperson as a
mediator is to avoid differences turning into complicated and sometimes
expensive legal disputes.
Argentina is one of the countries seeking an “ad hoc” method to be set up within
the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Committee. More specifically,
Argentina and the US have proposed guidelines for applying
Art.12.2 of the SPS
Agreement
It warned that the deliberations could be “held hostage” by other countries’
preference to wait for members to agree on an alternative system, currently
being negotiated in the Doha Round talks on non-agricultural market access (NAMA).
The NAMA system was proposed by a group of countries and can be found in the
negotiating group’s chairperson’s
December 2008 draft “modalities” text, in
part 1 of Annex 5. If agreed, it would
be used for non-tariff measures (including SPS measures) across a range of WTO
topics. This “horizontal” mechanism would then be submitted to individual
committees (such as the SPS Committee) for them to adapt it to their particular
needs.
India, Switzerland and a number of other countries said they would prefer to
wait for the NAMA system to be agreed, although they were willing to continue
discussing the question in the SPS Committee. Some other delegates said both
systems could be available, allowing members to choose which one to use. Some
said the SPS version could be adopted temporarily and then adapted or replaced
by the broader NAMA version.
The SPS Committee’s new chairperson Flavio Damico of Brazil joked that he hoped
that if the discussions are held hostage, this would not lead to a Stockholm
Syndrome in which the hostages prefer to remain hostages.
The SPS Agreement already includes provisions for the chairperson to mediate in
consultations and this was used occasionally in the WTO’s early years.
The first substantial discussion to strengthen the system and encourage more
countries to use it took place in SPS Committee’s
June 2008 meeting, when proposals from Argentina and the US were on
the table.
Making better use of the chairperson’s services as a mediator is one in a series
of moves to strengthen the committee’s work. It follows decisions to improve the
information that members are asked to supply on the SPS measures they implement,
and on recognizing regions — as distinct from countries — as being free from
certain diseases or pests.
Consultations will continue and those countries that have used the chair as a
mediator before have been asked to report on their experiences.
Private sector standards
Consultations among about 30 members in an ad hoc working group continued on the
eve of the committee’s meeting. Outgoing SPS chairperson Miriam Chaves reported
that members remain divided over the actions that the SPS Committee might take
and how this might be presented in a draft report on possible actions to deal
with private standards in food safety and animal and plant health.
Members have identified a dozen possible actions, ranging from proposals to
clarify what is meant by “private standards” to proposals to develop codes of
conduct for private standards-setting bodies. While some of these proposed
actions appear to enjoy widespread support, others are more controversial for
certain members.
Since the agreement mainly deals with government measures, some members doubt
whether the committee can act on private sector standards. The agreement’s
Art.13 includes this sentence: “Members shall take such reasonable measures as
may be available to them to ensure that non-governmental entities within their
territories, as well as regional bodies in which relevant entities within their
territories are members, comply with the relevant provisions of this Agreement.”
Ms Chaves reported that the consultations also included presentations from other
organizations such as two of the SPS Committee’s three “sisters” — Codex
Alimentarius, which deals with food safety standards, and the World Organization
for Animal Health — and the International Organization for Standardization
(ISO). One of the messages from these presentations was to urge private sector
organizations to base the safety requirements in their standards with those of
the international bodies.
When first raised in 2005, this issue took the SPS Committee into comparatively
new territory — the committee generally deals with standards set by
international standards-setting bodies and those imposed by governments.
A number of developing countries in particular are concerned that private
standards — which apply for example in supermarket chains — could undermine the
disciplines negotiated in the SPS Agreement (see also SPS news archives).
Some delegations also argue that by meeting private standards, exporters can
improve their products’ marketability.
Specific concerns
One of the SPS Committee’s most important functions is to provide an opportunity
for members to raise concerns they have about each others’ SPS measures. This is
the SPS Committee’s bread-and-butter work in overseeing the agreement’s
implementation.
Code numbers, eg, “no. 278”, identify particular issues and can be used to
search the WTO’s SPS Information Management
System.
Several issues raised were old ones, raised in previous meetings, in some cases
with similar exchanges. Those summarized here tend to be issues that have
generated concerns among a number of members. The full list of issues on the
agenda is under “P.S.” below.
EU’s forthcoming regulation on humane slaughter. In this new issue, India and
China were concerned that this would require exporters to adopt the EU’s
methods. The EU said the regulation would not do that, but would accept
equivalent methods.
China’s notifications: The EU said that while it welcomed the transparency,
China had recently submitted almost 100 notifications on food additives, with
too little time for other countries to study them all and to comment. China said
the measures are necessary to protect consumers. It urged members to comment,
even after the official comment period had expired, and promised to take the
comments into account.
Residue standards for ractopamine, a beta-agonist drug mixed with feed to make
pigs produce leaner meat. The US, Canada and others said they hoped Codex could
shortly adopt a new, long-delayed maximum residue level following new scientific
recommendations. The EU and China were more cautious about the scientific
findings and said they did not want to “prejudge” the discussion in Codex. This
is was raised as a “specific trade concern” in earlier meetings but this time
raised as an agenda item dealing with standard-setting in other organizations.
Other issues
The francophone West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) and
Agency for International Trade Information
and Cooperation (AITIC) have been accepted as observers, to be invited
meeting by meeting, if there are no objections by 30 July 2010. Three other
organizations were accepted as observers at the last meeting.
Meanwhile, the third review of the operation and implementation of the SPS
Agreement has now been formally adopted. The report is document G/SPS/53.
Chairperson: Mr Flavio Soares Damico of Brazil (taking over from Ms Miriam
Chaves of Argentina at the start of the meeting)
Next meetings
These dates (with informal meetings on other days in the week) could still be changed:
2010
-
20—21 October 2010, with a workshop on improving the system of submitting notifications and sharing information (transparency) on 18—22 October 2010
2011
-
23—24 March 2011
-
29—30 June 2011
-
12—13 October 2011
____________________________
P.S.
These are some of the trade issues or concerns discussed in the meeting or information supplied to the meeting.
Activities of members
-
Argentina — analysis of risk factors associated with BSE in Argentina
-
United States — USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service Public Health Information System
-
Communication from Kenya (G/SPS/GEN/1019)
Specific trade concerns
New
-
China’s SPS notification practices — concerns of the European Union
-
Canada’s registration requirement for pet food export enterprises in China — concerns of China
-
Colombia’s import restrictions on Brazilian beef — concerns of Brazil
-
United States’ 2009 Food Safety Enhancement Act — concerns of China
-
EU Regulation No. 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 — concerns of India
-
US risk analysis for the entry of queen bees from Argentina — concerns of Argentina
-
Turkey’s restrictions on products derived from biotechnology — concerns of the US
-
Senegal’s import restriction on Brazilian poultry meat — concerns of Brazil
Previously raised
Code numbers, eg, “no. 267”, identify particular issues and can be used to search the WTO’s SPS Information Management System
-
Japan’s pesticide maximum residue levels (MRL) and order inspection — concerns of China (no. 267)
-
India’s restrictions due to avian influenza — concerns of the EU (no. 185)
-
US import restrictions on cooked poultry products from China — concerns of China (no. 257)
-
Import restrictions due to BSE — concerns of the EU (no. 193)
-
EU artificial colour warning labels — concerns of the United States
-
Venezuelan suspension of inspection and of emission of phyto- and zoo-sanitary certificates (G/SPS/GEN/983) — concerns of Colombia (no. 290)
-
US proposed rule on importation of wooden handicrafts from China — concerns of China (no. 284)
Consideration of specific notifications received
-
Canada’s notification on Asian gypsy moth, plant protection policy for marine vessels (G/SPS/N/CAN/281/REV.1) — concerns of China
Information on resolution of issues
-
(None)
This meeting’s magic number
95
… the number of Chinese SPS notifications distributed in one day in May 2010. China has now notified 300 measures since it joined the WTO
• equivalence: in SPS, governments recognizing other countries’ measures as acceptable even if they are different from their own, so long as an equivalent level of protection is provided
• notification: a transparency obligation requiring member governments to report proposed measures to the relevant WTO body if the measures might have an effect on other members' trade.
• regionalization: recognition that an exporting region (part of a country or a border-straddling zone) is disease-free or pest-free (or has a lower incidence).
• sanitary and phytosanitary measures: measures dealing with food safety and animal and plant health. Sanitary: for human and animal health. Phytosanitary: for plants and plant products.
• S&D, STD, special and differential treatment: special treatment given to developing countries in WTO agreements. Can include longer periods to phase in obligations, more lenient obligations, etc.
> More jargon: glossary
> Problems viewing this page?
Please contact [email protected] giving details of the operating system and web browser you are using.