PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Europaudvalget 2003-04
EUU Alm.del Bilag 874
Offentligt

PDF udgave (98 KB)

Modtaget via elektronisk post. Der tages forbehold for evt. fejl.

Europaudvalget

(Alm. del - bilag 874)

udenrigsministerråd

(Offentligt)

_____________________________________________

URU, Alm. del - bilag 284

FLF, Alm. del - bilag 920

Medlemmerne af Folketingets Europaudvalg

og deres stedfortrædere

Bilag

Journalnummer

400.C.2-0

Kontor

EUK

18. maj 2004

Til underretning for Folketingets Europaudvalg vedlægges EU-kommissærerne

Lamy og Fischlers brev af 9. maj 2004 til samtlige WTO-lande.

Brevet skal ses i lyset af EU's løbende drøftelser af WTO-forhandlingerne i

Doha-Runden, herunder på rådsmødet (almindelige anliggender og eksterne

forbindelser) den 26.-27. april 2004, og de fortsatte bestræbelser på at bringe

Runden tilbage på sporet og afsøgning af yderligere fleksibilitet fra EU's side. I

brevet kommer EU med flere væsentlige indrømmelser, herunder vedrørende

landbrug, hvor EU bl.a. indtager en fleksibel holdning med hensyn til

endelig udfasning af al eksportstøtte. Tilbudet betinges af, at ordninger

med tilsvarende effekt (såsom eksportkreditter) ligeledes udfases.

Samtidig erklærer EU sig rede til væsentlige reduktioner af forvridende,

intern støtte (støtte, der kategoriseres i den såkaldte ”gule boks”) samt

reduktion af anden intern støtte (”blå boks”).

Singapore-emnerne (investering, konkurrence, offentlige indkøb og

handelslettelse), hvor EU erkender, at der i WTO-kredsen ikke er

opbakning til at gå videre i Runden med investering og konkurrence. Det

fremgår således af brevet, at det alene vil være muligt at forfølge

handelslettelse og muligvis offentlige indkøb inden for Runden.

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

særlig fordelagtig behandling af udviklingslandene, hvor EU er villig til at

acceptere, at de fattigere udviklingslande indenfor G90-gruppen ikke

behøver at foretage yderligere åbning af deres markeder som følge af

Runden.

EU-kommissærerne kommer i brevet også ind på andre væsentlige emner i

Doha-Runden, herunder varehandel og tjenesteydelser. Vedrørende sidstnævnte

presses der i brevet på for, at andre lande lægger tilbud på bordet, der svarer til

EU's substantielle tilbud i forhandlingerne om tjenesteydelser.

I de videre handelsforhandlinger er det sigtet med brevet at muliggøre, at der

kan skabes tilstrækkelig med fremdrift i Runden til, at der ved det planlagte

møde i WTOs Generelle Råd den 27. og 29. juli 2004 kan nås en aftale om et

rammepapir for videre forhandlinger. Hvis det lykkes, vil det svare til, at man til

sommer når, hvad man håbede at nå i Cancun i september sidste år.

I forberedelserne frem mod juli-mødet forudses desuden drøftelser af Runden

og EU's udspil dels blandt OECDs handelsministre den 13. maj, dels ved et

møde i WTOs Generelle Råd den 17.-18. maj.

(Løbenr. 19036)

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Pascal LAMY

Franz FISCHLER

Brussels, 9 May 2004

Dear Colleague,

From many discussions with colleagues over these past few months, it is clear that

there is a stronger sense of resolve to make progress on the Doha Development

Agenda between now and July. A much more positive atmosphere has now emerged

in Geneva.

This letter sets out what we see as the key areas where more movement is needed, in

order for us to agree on framework modalities by July. We will be deliberately

selective, focusing only on the prominent issues and the corresponding European

positions. This will necessarily imply certain omissions, including issues of importance

to the European Union, and we trust that this will not be misunderstood or

misinterpreted. We will focus on agriculture, non-agricultural market access, services,

the Singapore issues, and development questions.

On agriculture, we believe that we have a historical opportunity for a breakthrough.

The responsibility for showing the lead clearly lies with the major subsidising countries

in the developed world. We are prepared to play our role in that respect, as two major

reforms of the Common Agriculture Policy in the span of less than a year demonstrate.

But there must be movement on all three pillars – market access, domestic support,

and export support - in a balanced fashion.

Firstly, on market access, approaches differ widely, often reflecting the fact that tariff

structures are so different among members. We continue to believe that a blended

formula could, with the necessary modifications, meet the concerns of all participants

as well as our own sensitivities. However, all of us, instead of looking for our own

magic solutions, should consider how best to address these concerns by focusing on

the necessary flexibility particularly in response to developing country sensitivities.

Market access continues to be a central issue in the negotiations, and one which will

have to be carefully integrated in our overall approach on the three pillars.

Secondly, on domestic support, we continue to aim for a very substantial reduction of

all forms of trade-distorting subsidisation. Since Cancun, a number of developing

countries, including the G-20, have made their objectives very clear and we are ready to

go a long way to meet them. Thus, we are prepared to commit ourselves to a large

reduction in trade distorting (amber) support as well as reduction in existing blue box

payments and their capping. We believe

de minimis

support should be eliminated for

developed countries. There should be new rules which would prevent subsidising

countries from transferring subsidies between and within boxes. Greater transparency,

(Løbenr. 19036)

advance notification and consultation are also vital principles for many countries which

we support. In addition, we are open to commitments guaranteeing the overall

reduction of trade-distorting domestic support. But non-trade distorting support

(green box) should remain free of restrictions.

Thirdly, it is clear that the objective of eliminating all forms of export support is one

which is shared by the great majority of participants. And although our own export

subsidies have decreased very substantially over the past several years, and have been

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

disciplined, other forms of export subsidisation by other members of the WTO have

been maintained or increased, and remain undisciplined. Going beyond this, before

Cancun, the EU offered to eliminate export subsidies on a list of products of interest

to developing countries, and we subsequently made clear that there would be no

priori

exclusions, so all our export subsidies are effectively on the table. However, the list

approach has not worked, and we need to take this into account. If an acceptable

outcome emerges on market access and domestic support, we would be ready to move

on export subsidies. At the same time, there must be full parallelism on all forms of

export competition including export credits, food aid and STEs. It is essential that the

necessary work advances rapidly to specify what “parallelism” means, so that it can be

spelt out in the framework agreement.

Clearly, the agriculture package must be taken as a whole, so as to ensure that our

non-trade concerns as agreed in Doha are adequately addressed.

Finally, early action on cotton is vital to many developing countries. It behoves us all,

and in particular developed countries, to eliminate all forms of export support, to

provide free and unfettered market access and to significantly reduce and if possible

eliminate the most trade distorting domestic subsidies. Our recent reform is a clear

indication of our commitment to such an approach.

Negotiations on non-agricultural market access have lost momentum and we must

regain it because we all know this is where the gains in the Round will be the greatest.

We suggest that negotiations focus on a simple, general and ambitious formula for

market opening accompanied by a short set of qualifications or exceptions in country

or product terms. For example, Members could accept clearly identified exceptions

for products of particular sensitivity to developing countries. More generally, we have

all accepted the principle of “less than full reciprocity”, but it needs to be made more

operational. This means that developing countries should undertake commitments in

line with their importance in world trade.

More generally, including for agriculture, there should be special, more favourable

treatment for newly acceded members, to take account of the efforts they are still

making. All developed, as well as advanced developing countries, should afford duty-

and quota-free treatment to all imports from the least developed countries. These aims

can all be achieved with only minimal changes to the Derbez text.

Negotiations in services are lagging very seriously behind, even though this is a huge

potential area of growth not only for developed but also for developing countries. All

developed countries have to show openness to developing country interests, which in

this sector often focus on “mode 4” (that is, temporary presence abroad and

professional activities of natural persons). Services negotiations need to move from

second into third gear. It will be inconceivable to conclude the DDA without a

significant level of new and substantial commitments on services.

(Løbenr. 19036)

On the Singapore issues, we offered after Cancun to treat each issue on its merits, and

proposed to allow those who wished to pursue those issues which fell outside the

Single Undertaking to do so. There has been plenty of discussion since. Where do

matters currently stand? There seems to be growing support for negotiating trade

facilitation inside the Single Undertaking. The EU would, of course, be ready to launch

negotiations on this. As regards investment and competition, there is clearly no

consensus to begin negotiations. This leaves the question of transparency in

government procurement, where the picture is less clear, but we are ready to join the

consensus view on this. So, to be very clear, that would leave only trade facilitation, and

perhaps transparency in government procurement, inside the DDA.

On development questions, and more specifically, special and differential treatment

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

(SDT) anddeveloping countries these issues Commission recognises the technicalities

number of implementation questions, the are key to progress. On that for a large

of SDT, there seems to be progress, and we for our part have made clear that we are

ready to accept much of what has been tabled. But following detailed discussions with

a number of colleagues from developing countries, it is clear that we need to be bolder

in setting forward a more concrete, operational objective for this Round. Therefore,

on agriculture and NAMA, we propose that the least developed countries and other

weak or vulnerable developing countries in a similar situation - essentially the G90 -

should not have to open their markets beyond their existing commitments, and should

be able to benefit from increased market access offered by both developed and

advanced developing countries. So in effect these countries should have the “Round

for Free”. But again, for purposes of encouraging domestic reform, these countries

should increase their tariff bindings to a reasonable level, which would increase

predictability.

As regards rules, apart from observing existing commitments in areas such as anti

dumping, subsidies, and regional trade agreements, G90 countries would be only asked

to participate actively in the discussions on trade facilitation and perhaps transparency

in government procurement (see above). While we do not of course want a two tier

WTO, negotiations should also take in account the fact that the LDCs and other

countries facing similar constraints may only be able to assume modest commitments.

Above and beyond this, we are open to the proposal of some developing countries to

have a negotiating group on some of the outstanding SDT and implementation

requests tabled by Members.

Finally, a few words on process. Members should be able to agree on a text of

framework modalities by July at the latest on at least the four key issues of agriculture,

NAMA, the Singapore issues and development. This means making progress in

Geneva, starting with the General Council on 17 May. We have to get concrete so that

we have an outline text on the table as soon as possible and in any event, no later than

the end of May.

We are sending this letter to Ministers responsible for trade in all WTO countries. We

should be very grateful to hear the reactions of colleagues to this letter.

Yours sincerely,

(signed)

Pascal Lamy

(signed)

Franz Fischler

(Løbenr. 19036)

Copy : Dr Supachai Panitchpakdi

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

(Løbenr. 19036)