These and other topics were the subject of around 30 questions or sets of questions on how WTO members are implementing the Agriculture Agreement — a core function of the committee. The questions were based partly on information in 48 notifications received from members since the committee last met in March this year.

WTO members also heard China’s detailed explanation of its domestic support for pork, value added tax on agricultural products and tariff quotas in reply to US questions in the seventh near-annual review of China’s first decade as a WTO member.
  

Notifications and review, and related questions

The questions members ask each other under the review of notifications is part of the committee’s responsibility to oversee how countries are complying with their commitments. They can also ask about agricultural measures that have not yet been notified or have not been notified at all.

The committee continued its year-old tradition of going through the reviews efficiently because written questions and answers are posted on a website that members can access. This meeting lasted about two and a quarter hours. The relevant notifications can be found from links to searches for documents.

The EU, enlargement and other issues

Questions from Argentina and Australia directly or indirectly brought to light the fact that the EU’s revised commitments on market access and subsidies have not been certified by the WTO’s members. The revisions are designed to account for the EU’s expansion from 12 members at the end of the Uruguay Round, to 15, 25 and now 27. The EU said it is working to ensure the commitments are certified and explained that the changes are based on a method agreed for the expansion from 12 to 15.

The specific topics raised included questions from Australia and Brazil about whether the EU will stay within its subsidy commitments on sugar, including the ruling in a recent dispute (DS266). The questions were partly based on European documents suggesting the EU might exceed its commitment. The EU said it would comply with its commitments, including the dispute ruling, and advised members to focus on its formal notifications to the WTO because the data used in those other documents have different criteria and cover different time periods.

Triangular food aid

Thailand asked Switzerland to explain “triangular transactions from developing country to developing country”, a description included with information in Swiss food aid. Switzerland said this is when the aid provided by (1) a donor country is bought from (2) a country or area neighbouring (3) the area where the food is needed and described this as the best method. Thailand agreed.

Other questions

These mainly sought more information about members’ policies and how they implement them, including: Brazil’s new support measures, India’s sugar export subsidies (follow up questions), US domestic food aid, US sugar programmes, China’s tariffs and other duties and charges, the meaning of “considered planted” in a US programme, Japan’s bidding system for rice import tariff-quotas, Canada’s corrections to its method for calculating the value of production for some crops and in some notifications, how Chile calculates the value of production, details of Japan’s domestic support programmes, Australia’s disaster relief, and the EU’s and Switzerland’s export subsidies and food aid.

Switzerland and the EU were asked about their calculations of the value of domestic production. This is a calculation that underpins some present domestic support commitments (it determines the permitted “de minimis” — or conceptually small — distorting support). But it is also the basis for some new ideas being negotiated in the current Doha Round, particularly limits on the “Blue Box”, which is part of “overall trade-distorting domestic support”, as is “de minimis”. Switzerland and the EU said the question should be asked in the negotiations and not in these “regular” committee meetings. Argentina, which was particularly interested in the question, said this is also about implementing the present agreement and therefore part of the regular committee’s work.
  

China’s transitional review

The questions in this seventh review came from the US in a four-page document (G/AG/W/69) and (G/AG/W/69/Corr.1).

China replied in detail. It described its domestic support for pork and said many of the figures cited by the US were wrong. It argued that value-added tax exemptions do not discriminate against imports, and it supplied information that the US requested on value-added tax rebates on exports. But it declined to provide information on entities receiving tariff-quota allocations on the grounds that this is confidential commercial information.

The US said the corrections show the value of the review, thanked China for the detailed replies and said it would study them.

The transitional reviews are required annually for the first eight years under China’s membership agreement, and once more after about 10 years.
  

Other agenda items

These passed with little or no comment. Cuba asked for an updated report to the Goods Council on how some provisions are being implemented — provisions in the Agriculture Agreement on export credit, and the Marrakesh decision on net food-importing developing and least-developed countries. The chairperson said she would consult with Cuba on how to do this.
  

Chairperson: Ms Valéria Csukasi (Uruguay)

  

Next

• The meeting scheduled for Thursday 27 November could be postponed to early December (to be confirmed)

In 2009, tentatively:

• 12 and 13 March
  

• (perhaps) 18 and 19 June
  

• 21 and 22 September
  

• 19 and 20 November