The chair of agricultural negotiations at World Trade Organization talks in Geneva says the issue of whether a future WTO deal would force an end to the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly is still on the table in the talks.
In December, CWB officials and their supporters left a WTO meeting in Hong Kong convinced new wording meant the mere existence of a monopoly would not be considered trade distorting. The board would be judged by how it used the monopoly.
New Zealander Crawford Falconer, chair of the WTO agriculture talks, does not hold the same interpretation.
Read Also
Interest in biological crop inputs continues to grow
It was only a few years ago that interest in alternative methods such as biologicals to boost a crop’s nutrient…
In a report circulated to WTO negotiators in April, he wrote that the agreement in Hong Kong “makes it now explicit that the future use of monopoly powers is a trade distorting practice and that disciplines will indeed extend to them.”
Therefore, he concluded, negotiators must decide whether a future WTO deal should eliminate the right to hold export monopoly powers or make sure use of monopoly powers do not cause or “threaten to cause” trade distortion.
He wrote that negotiators are split on the question, although Canadian negotiator Steve Verheul has said Canada has few allies on the state trading enterprises monopoly question.
Falconer wrote that negotiators opposed to state trading monopolies believe that outlawing monopoly powers would be “the most reliable way” to ensure they do not operate in trade distorting ways.
Meanwhile, agriculture negotiators are back at the table in Geneva as the WTO scrambles to salvage a deal.
WTO director general Pascal Lamy had planned to convene a meeting of ministers last week or this week to try to reach an agreement on the principles and outline of a deal. The deadline for “modalities” was set in Hong Kong for April 30.
He called off the ministerial meeting and instead asked negotiators to work intensively to close enough gaps so that ministers could be called to Geneva “within weeks” to try to seal a deal.
Many trade analysts have suggested if a modalities agreement setting out rules to increase market access and reduce domestic subsidies cannot be reached by mid-June, there will not be enough time to work out detailed rules and tariff lines that can be submitted to the U.S. Congress by early 2007.
It is considered crucial that Congress approve any deal before mid-2007, when so-called fast track trade legislation runs out. The Trade Promotion Authority bill forces Congress to approve or disapprove a treaty in total rather than judging it, and changing it, clause by clause.
Last week, there were indications from both London and Washington that schemes are afoot to try to keep the talks going.
British prime minister Tony Blair is promoting a meeting of WTO heads of government in June to inject political life into the process.
And in Washington, several members of Congress have suggested a deal may be worked out to extend both the current farm bill and the fast track trade legislation for two years to give the WTO enough time to complete its work.
Neither proposal has yet been
accepted.
