Rice NGO rejects US, Canada, other countries’ proposals on
Special Products and Special Safeguard Mechanism in WTO

March 12, 2008

Rice Watch and Action Network (R1) urges the government negotiators in the World Trade Organization (WTO) to reject the proposals in the negotiations for higher protection of developing countries like the Philippines against free market access and trade of agricultural products.

R1, a coalition of non-government organizations monitoring the ongoing negotiations in the WTO said the proposed modalities on Special Products (SP) and Special Safeguard Measures (SSM) as proposed by the Committee on Agriculture Chair Crawford Falconer in February 2008 are unacceptable and the proposals put forward by the US, Australia Canada, Costa Rica, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paraguay, Thailand, United States and Uruguay are even worse.

“The proposals grossly undermine the Doha Development Round and will definitely stall the negotiations in the WTO as these are the complete opposite of the minimum demands of the G33,” said Jessica Reyes-Cantos, R1 lead convenor.

The Philippines and Indonesia are the prime movers behind the G33, the group of developing countries pushing for certain agricultural products under SPs that should not be subjected to massive tariff reduction. The SSM allows developing countries to shield local agricultural products from unfair competition against increased volume of importation and lower prices of imports.

“We urge our government and the other members of the G33 to hold their fort and stay united as the US, Canada and Australia are trying to divide the ranks of developing countries as they have successfully convinced Malaysia, Thailand and other nations to support their anti-development objectives,” said Cantos.

R1 and the other civil society organizations (CSOs) in G33 countries submitted this position paper to the G33 Ministers and to the country trade missions in Geneva, home of the WTO to register their opposition against these proposals. R1 is the lead convenor of the G33 CSOs composed of farmers and NGOs from Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Malaysia, Korea, Brazil and other countries in Latin America and African nations.

SP Coverage

Falconer proposed that the minimum SP coverage will be 8 percent of the total agriculture tariff lines and placed the maximum number of SPs in brackets, at 12 percent or 20 percent. Putting the number in brackets implies the number is still subject to negotiations. On the other hand, the US, Canada, Australia and company want only 8 percent of agriculture tariff lines as the maximum SP coverage.

“Placing the maximum percentage of SP coverage at 12% is not enough to protect the food and livelihood security and rural development objectives of many developing countries. The other proposal of 8% as maximum number of product coverage is unreasonable and designed to render SP as an irrelevant mechanism in the current negotiations,” said Cantos.

SP treatment

According to Cantos, Falconer put in brackets the exemption of SPs from tariff reduction which made it still subject to negotiations which should not be the case. The G33 proposed earlier that a certain number of SPs should have not be subject to tariff reduction to give ample protection to these critical agricultural products.

The proposal of US, Canada, Australia and the others limited zero tariff reduction to only 1 percent of agriculture tariff lines.

G33 agreed to a tiered level of tariff reductions for SPs and proposed the cuts to be within the range of 5% and 10%.

Falconer proposed an 8 percent to 12 percent tariff cut for 6 percent of agriculture tariff lines that will be accorded SP status and a higher 15 percent to 25 percent tariff cut for the other 6 percent of agriculture tariff lines covered by SP. The US, Canada, Australia, et al also proposed 15 to 25 percent tariff reduction of SPs.

“These proposals are outrageous because 15 to 25 percent are just a few points lower than the 36 percent maximum overall tariff reduction formula for developing countries. Countries like the Philippines has unilaterally reduced its tariff to a level that further reducing it will perhaps cover only the administrative costs of the Bureau of Customs,” said Cantos.

Out of the total 802 tariff lines in agriculture, 259 tariff lines are within the 0-30% range while 543 tariff lines fall under the 30%-60% range. The existing proposals will result to sweeping tariff cuts to already very low and relatively flat tariff rates with no provisions for high levels of protection for highly vulnerable or strategic agricultural sub-sectors.

SSM overhaul

Falconer’s proposal on SSM remedies was limited to only 3-8 products in a given 12-month period. Second, the additional duty to be imposed in case the volume trigger is breached should not exceed the current bound rates setting the pre-Doha bound rate as the ceiling. The same holds true for the provision on the price trigger.

“The proposals of Falconer on SSM need major overhaul. SSM duties should go beyond the current bound rates and developing countries reserve the right to impose quantitative restrictions in case of import surge or price fluctuation,” said Cantos.

Next PR | Previous PR | Back to Press Releases Page