• 5 months before the ministerial conference there's little sign that members are moving closer to any shared positions. Substantial gaps remain on almost everything
• The Cairns Group and African Group issued a joint statement calling for fairer agricultural trade by cutting domestic support that distorts markets. Getting the two groups together was an achievement, but the statement is broad. It doesn't say how
• The talks look busy with a lot of new submissions, particularly on domestic support. But they all come from individual members of the Cairns Group (lobbying for far-reaching liberalisation) plus Ukraine.
The Cairns Group: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, Uruguay, Vietnam
• The new submissions on domestic support propose new approaches for curbing the subsidies. Even if new ideas eventually catch on, that takes time for clarification and debate. Eg, the proposal for "proportionality" in cutting support ⬇️.
• So the best we expect on domestic support, called a priority in the #wtoAgricultureNegotiations, is an agreement on a work programme after the year-end ministerial conference.
• Even that is complicated because of "public stockholding"
• This is not directly about stockholding, but how the stocks are acquired. Purchases at government-set prices (not market) are deemed subsidised. The "technical issues" in the WTO news ⬇️ are actually central to avoiding effects on other countries.
• Also deadlocked: the "special safeguard mechanism" for developing countries to temporarily impose high tariffs, explained here ⬇️. It's difficult to see how this can be agreed outside a broad package of tariff cuts.
• And then there are COVID-19-related issues including export restrictions in general and the proposed exemption for the World Food Programme. Can they surprise us on this as well?
So, the 11 members of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement Trans-Pacific Partnership (#CPTPP) have agreed to start negotiations for the UK to accede.
Many others have commented. I won't repeat them. Just a few points to consider
Starting negotiations with the UK is only one part. The statement ends with: ministers and senior officials “hope that those Signatories for which the CPTPP has yet to enter into force will ratify the Agreement as soon as possible”
The accession candidate (here the UK) must be “prepared to comply with the obligations in this Agreement”, although negotiation is envisaged. Final approval is needed by each of the countries concerned.
WTO members remained divided on the proposal to waive intellectual property rules for COVID-19 in today's informal meeting, although most said they were willing to discuss the new text.
The US, China, New Zealand and Ukraine shifted their positions to back the waiver
Some countries asked for more time to study the new #WtoCOVID19waiver text or remained sceptical about the waiver's ability to help access to vaccines and other products.
As expected, some countries disliked the new proposed time period for the waiver—three years, to be extended unless WTO members decide by consensus to end it.
One called it a blank cheque for the waiver to last indefinitely, undermining incentives for research & innovation.
3/5
• Investment facilitation for development—a “plurilateral” negotiation (ie among only some members), initiated by China etc, aiming for some decision at the year-end ministerial conference
The recently-announced US proposal for the WTO fisheries subsidies talks—on the use of forced labour—is now available on the WTO website: docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/S…
It was not discussed in today's negotiations session, but the talks will continue on Saturday and and Monday.
1/2
The US proposal refers to the chair's latest draft ⬇️
Meeting on Saturday is unusual. It seems to be part of the effort to accelerate the talks so that all or most of the issues are settled by July 15 when ministers are due to meet online.
PS The US floated the idea in April. Today's focus was on special treatment for developing countries in provisions on illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.
The US proposal may be discussed whenever the talks move to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing in general
@BobWolfeSPS and I have written at length (with a short summary too) about the need to include transparency in the discussion of WTO reform. Releasing agendas publicly would be a good starting point
P.S. On the other hand, for a bit of balance, we do know what the @wto Dispute Settlement Body will discuss tomorrow. But it's an exception to the general rule