29/12/2009

WTO: reporting on informal negotiating meeting on fisheries subsidies (4)

As mentioned in my post of yesterday, 28/12/09, the FFA has published a new issue (Vol. 2, Nr 12 of 12 December 2009) of its "FFA Fisheries Trade News" containing an article titled "Update on fisheries subsidies ‘Roadmap’ discussions at the WTO".

The article includes reports on the informal meetings held by the WTO Negotiating Group on Rules on October 28-29 and December 10-11, 2009. Concerning the October meeting, the ICTSD included a short report in its "Bridges Weekly Trade News Digest", Vol. 13, Nr 38 of 4h November 2009 under an article titled "WTO Rules Group Builds Understanding, but Gaps Remain".

According to both sources (FFA and ICTSD), at the October meetings Delegates took up again their discussions on the Chair's "Roadmap", in particular fisheries management conditionalities (Article V of 2007 Chair's Draft Text) applicable to those subsidies that might eventually be permitted under General Exemptions (Article II) and Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Members (Article III).

With regard to the December meeting, the reading of the FFA's reporting suggests that the meeting covered the two last sections of the Chair's Roadmap, namely "Implementation" and "Transition Rules".

Worth mentioning is that, according to the FFA reporting, the Small, Vulnerable Economies group (SVEs) renewed their call for the set-up of a sub-committee dealing exclusively with issues related to technical assistance and support programs. The creation of this sub-committee was proposed by the SVEs with their submission TN/RL/GEN/158 of 22 May 2008. I copy hereunder the relevant paragraph of the SVEs proposal:

III.4.3 The Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures shall establish a Sub-Committee dealing exclusively with issues related to technical assistance and support programs under this Annex, specifically as regards fisheries management systems and measures related thereto. The Sub-Committee shall coordinate the requests from developing country Members for technical assistance and support programs and shall review the effectiveness of the technical assistance provided to developing country Members. The Sub-Committee shall periodically report its findings to the Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and the Committee on Trade and Development (3).

(3) Future discussion would be required on the procedures to be followed if a developing country member does not receive the requested technical assistance.

Apparently the SVEs' call was well received by a majority of developing countries. Some developed countries (the FFA report cites New Zealand) reacted more cautiously and stated "that technical assistance should not necessarily imply greater financial transfers and it would be useful to develop an inventory of systems that already exist."

As a final point I note that there is no reference in the reports to a proposal tabled by Korea on 24 November 2009, i.e. before the December meeting, titled "Framework of the Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies" (TN/RL/W/245).

Here are the links to the reports by FFA:


And ICTSD:


28/12/2009

WTO: reporting on informal negotiating meeting on fisheries subsidies (3)

A few weeks ago I published a couple of posts on the issue of reporting on the WTO "Rules" Negotiating Group's informal meetings. In one of the posts, dated 17/10/2009, I was wondering which the sources were that enabled two organisations, i.e. the ICTSD and the FFA, to report on these meetings. In fact, neither official agendas nor reports are published by the WTO.

Well, I solved the "mystery" for the FFA. When going through the latest issue of "FFA Fisheries Trade News" I became aware that the input for FFA's reporting on these meetings was provided by a member of the Delegation of the Pacific Islands to the WTO. This is clearly indicated by way of an endnote to the text on the WTO meeting.

I take advantage of this post to apologise for my inadvertence when reading the FFA reports.

Here is the link to the webpage where readers can find the "FFA Trade News":

http://www.ffa.int/trade_industry

26/12/2009

CHILE: questions and replies on subsidies to fisheries and aquaculture at the latest WTO Trade Policy Review

I copy hereunder the questions by WTO Members on subsidies to fisheries and aquaculture, and the answers provided by Chile, at the latests WTO Trade Policy Review of this country, which took place on 7 and 9 October 2009.

Readers will notice that parts of the text are in Spanish. Apologies for this but the WTO document from which I copied the information (WT/TPR/M/220/Add.1 of 17 December 2009) does not include a full English version. I advise those readers who do not understand Spanish to make use of the transalation tools offered by web-browsers and/or websites.

Going through the text I noticed that Chile, one of the main proponents of a broad prohibition of subsidies to the fisheries sector, provides subsidies to its "small-scale" fishermen.

With regard to this category of fisheries I was struck by the fact that "small-scale" vessels can have "...a maximum length of 18 metres, not more than 80 cubic metres of hold space and a displacement of up to 50 gross register tonnes (GRT)" and that "The first five nautical miles off the Chilean coast, the fjords and the sea islands, together with the inland waters, are reserved for small scale fishing." (as confirmed by Chile when replying to question 36 from the EU). Note that in the answer given by Chile to this question it is mentioned that the "small-scale" fleet can operate outside the 5 mile zone.

Interesting are also the replies provided by Chile on the mechanisms put in place to help the ailing salmon farming industry.


(iii) Fishing and Aquaculture

PREGUNTA DE ARGENTINA

Párrafo 61 - ¿Podría Chile aportar más información respecto a las ayudas implementadas en los últimos meses a favor de la industria del salmón?, en especial respecto a las referentes a medidas de financiamiento y reprogramación de deudas de empresas salmoneras.

R. En el tratamiento de la crisis existen 2 frentes en los cuales se está trabajando, uno de ellos es resorte de la autoridad, en el marco del rol que le cabe al Estado en sus tareas de regulador y generador de las condiciones que aseguren superar la crisis y disponer de una actividad sustentable, frente que se espera cubrir por la vía de la modificación de Ley actualmente en discusión en el parlamento.
Y el segundo frente es el que se refiere a la relación de las empresas productivas con los bancos privados, acreedores estos últimos de una deuda cuyo pago se vio comprometido como resultado de la crisis.
La relación de los bancos con la empresa, se da en el marco de acuerdos y negociaciones privadas, cuyas condiciones están dadas por la realidad de cada empresa, no siendo ámbito de la autoridad involucrase en estos procesos. Existe información que señala que las principales empresas productoras han logrado acuerdos de reprogramación de la deuda con sus respectivos acreedores.
PREGUNTAS DEL ECUADOR

18. ¿Qué programas de apoyo y subsidios mantiene el Gobierno de Chile a favor de la pesca artesanal, la pesca industrial y la acuicultura?

R. Chile no dispone de programas de Subsidios específicos para las actividades de la Pesca y Acuicultura. No obstante, hay instrumentos de apoyo para la pesca artesanal financiados a través del Fondo de Fomento de la Pesca Artesanal (FFPA), a objeto de promover el desarrollo sustentable del sector pesquero artesanal chileno, por la vía de apoyar los esfuerzos de las organizaciones de pescadores artesanales para mejorar sus condiciones laborales y de vida en general.
En cuanto a instrumentos de apoyo, el Gobierno de Chile dispone de Institucionalidad que ofrece financiamiento para la ejecución de investigación para el desarrollo de sectores productivos con proyecciones, dentro de los cuales la Acuicultura ha sido foco de preocupación, destinando recursos financieros en iniciativas que se refieren a elevar la competitividad de la economía chilena, por la vía de promover y facilitar la innovación en las empresas, materias en que la Corporación de Fomento de la Producción (CORFO) a través de InnovaChile cumple un rol fundamental.
 QUESTIONS FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION

WTO Secretariat's Report, page 93, para.52
The report indicates that "Law No. 19.849 of 2002 extended Law No. 19.713 up to 2012 and created the Small Scale Harvesting Regime, which distributes among the small scale fishing associations the small scale share of the annual quota for certain fisheries."
34. Are these "small scale shares" user-specific allocations to individuals and groups under limited access privileges or exclusive quota regulations?

R. El Régimen Artesanal de Extracción (RAE) distribuye la fracción artesanal de la cuota global anual de captura de los recursos sujetos al Régimen entre aquellas embarcaciones que tienen permisos vigentes para operar sobre el recurso en cuestión. Lo anterior se traduce en que, previo a establecer el régimen de asignación, la normativa exige: (i) el establecimiento de una cuota global anual; (ii) definir una asignación para el subsector artesanal; (iii) su distribución regional y, (iv) contar con el registro de naves artesanales con permisos vigentes en la pesquería de interés. Considerando los elementos señalados, se distribuye la cuota artesanal en base a criterios regulados por la Ley y el Reglamento, dentro de los cuales el de mayor relevancia es la historia de capturas contenida en los registros de desembarque informados por los pescadores al Servicio Nacional de Pesca (Sernapesca).
35. Are these "small scale share" allocated for free while other fishermen not falling under the "Small Scale Harvesting Regime" do have to pay (e.g. buy in an auction, public tender, etc.) their share of the catch? Could Chile provide details about the mechanisms for allocation catches and the differences between small-scale and non small-scale fishermen?

R. Cuando se establece el Régimen para un recurso, en una región en particular, la cuota en su totalidad se asimila al Régimen, razón por la cual no hay tratamientos de acceso a cuotas distintos para una misma región y recurso.
En cuanto a las modalidades de asignación contenidas en la Ley de Pesca, éstas se establecen dependiendo del estado de situación de la Pesquería, de acuerdo a lo siguiente:
1. Para Pesquerías en Desarrollo incipiente y en Recuperación. Declarado el Régimen, se establece una cuota anual de captura, la cual se asigna por subasta pública, pudiendo participar en esta licitación cualquier persona que cumpla con los requisitos contenidos en la Ley y el Reglamento, no siendo relevante el subsector al que pertenece. Estos son derechos que se asignan por 10 años, teniendo la obligatoriedad de efectuar el pago de una cuota anual de beneficio fiscal.
2. Limite Máximos de Captura por Armador. Se aplica sobre los armadores industriales con autorizaciones de pesca vigentes de las pesquerías asimiladas a la norma, y consiste en el establecimiento de una cuota individual por armador (o empresa) expresada en porcentaje (%), resultado de la consideración de parámetros contenidos en la Ley 19.713, dentro de los cuales el más relevante es la historia de capturas informadas al Sernapesca. Definida la participación por armador, este porcentaje se aplica sobre la fracción industrial de la cuota global. Esta Ley está vigente hasta el año 2012.
3. Régimen Artesanal de Extracción. Distribución de la fracción artesanal de la cuota global de un recurso en particular, entre los permisos vigentes en el registro pesquero artesanal de una región cualquiera, considerando la historia de desembarque de cada embarcación como principal parámetro. Lo anterior se traduce en un porcentaje de cuota para cada Organización participante del Régimen, porción de cuota que es válida durante la vigencia del Régimen, el cual dependerá de la situación particular.
En la normativa Chilena, el Sector Industrial y Artesanal (pequeña escala) están sujetos a derechos y obligaciones distintas, con una normativa específica que otorga consideraciones de operación especiales para cada sector. Dentro de estas particularidades esta la modalidad de asignación de cuota, siendo para la Industria los Límites Máximos de Captura y para la pesca artesanal el Régimen Artesanal de Extracción, en ambos casos se otorga sin previo pago.
En cuanto a la pregunta sobre la diferencia entre la pesca a pequeña escala y la que no lo es, la ley no hace esta distinción y sólo define la pesca artesanal en los términos que recoge el párrafo 57 del Informe de la Secretaría.
WTO Secretariat's Report, page 94, para.57
The report states that Chilean law defines small-scale fishing as "[…] that engaged in by a vessel with a maximum length of 18 metres, not more than 80 cubic metres of hold space and a displacement of up to 50 gross register tonnes (GRT)" and that "The first five nautical miles off the Chilean coast, the fjords and the sea islands, together with the inland waters, are reserved for small scale fishing."
36. Can small-scale vessels fish outside the reserved areas and in particular outside the first five nautical miles?

R. El Artículo 47 de la Ley de Pesca, establece el Área de Reserva de la Pesca Artesanal, como un área de exclusivo uso de la pesca artesanal, donde está prohibida la operación de la flota industrial, pudiendo la pesca artesanal operar fuera de las 5 millas sin restricciones, sobre recursos de distribución más amplia.
In addition to benefiting from a dedicated subsidy programme (the "Fondo de Fomento de la Pesca Artesanal") and fishing areas for their sole use, do small-scale fishermen benefits from other types of support such as tax exemptions, fuel rebates, reduced fees for accessing the fishery, etc? If yes, could Chile provide the financial equivalent of such support?

R. No hay apoyos o tratamientos especiales para la pesca artesanal más allá de los establecidos en el Fondo de Fomento de la Pesca Artesanal.
37. Do exports from Chile include fishery products harvested by small-scale fishermen? If yes, what is the estimated amount, in value terms, of products exported by small-scale fishermen?

R. La actividad de la pesca extractiva artesanal se desarrolla en una estrecha relación con los industriales que procesan y exportan los productos derivados de la operación de la flota, constituyendo pieza importante de la cadena de producción para satisfacer los mercados de destino de recursos de mayor valor agregado. Para el año 2008, las exportaciones de la Pesca y Acuicultura alcanzaron los US$ 4.110 millones, de los cuales el 34% es resultado de capturas silvestres. De las exportaciones de pesca extractiva, un 53% se origina de la pesca artesanal, explicando US$ 746 millones en exportaciones.
WTO Secretariat's Report, page 95, para.62
The report notes that the "Fisheries Administration Fund, established by Law No. 19.849 (2002), finances fishery research projects, small scale fishing promotion projects, programmes for the surveillance and administration of fishing activities, and training and retraining programmes. In 2008, the Fund had a budget of US$12 million, of which US$10 million was earmarked for small scale fishing and the rest for research and development."
According to publicly available information at the website www.fondofomento.cl, the Fisheries Administration Fund subsidises programmes in the following areas:
a) Development of fisheries infrastructure for small-scale fisheries;
b) Training and technical assistance for small-scale fishermen and for their organisations;
c) Re-stocking of hydro biological resources for primary use, or artificial farming, by small-scale fishermen;
d) Marketing of fishery products and administration of production centres.

38. Could Chile confirm that subsidies are provided for the above purposes?

R. Como primera cuestión, debe aclararse que el Fondo de Fomento de la Pesca Artesanal, y el Fondo de Administración Pesquero, son instrumentos distintos, siendo las áreas señaladas en la pregunta las correspondientes al Fondo de Fomento de la Pesca Artesanal, fondo que opera bajo el alero del Sernapesca y cuyo Director lo preside.
Los recursos financieros disponibles se otorgan por concurso todos los años, pudiendo presentar proyectos todas las organizaciones de pescadores artesanales legalmente constituidas y aquellas que realizan actividades ligadas directamente al sector, cuyos miembros sean pescadores artesanales inscritos en el Registro Pesquero Artesanal.
El Fondo es administrado por un Consejo, el cual selecciona las ideas de los proyectos presentadas por las organizaciones, cuya ejecución será licitada mediante Concurso Público. Esto significa que las ideas de proyectos no necesariamente se repiten año a año, y van a depender de las iniciativas presentadas por las organizaciones de pescadores.
Durante el año 2008 se seleccionaron 103 proyectos, cuyo detalle puede ser consultado en http://www.fondodefomento.cl/.
39. With regard to objective "a) Development of fisheries infrastructure for small-scale fisheries", what type of infrastructure can be subsidised? Does this include landing, handling or in- or near-port processing activities for products of marine wild capture fishing or port infrastructure or other physical port facilities exclusively or predominantly for activities related to marine wild capture fishing (for example, fish landing facilities, fish storage facilities, and in- or near-port fish processing facilities)?

R. El Fondo de Fomento de la Pesca Artesanal en la línea de apoyo ‘Desarrollo de Infraestructura para la Pesca Artesanal’ sólo se hace cargo de financiar proyectos de Infraestructura de apoyo menor, tales como sedes organizacionales, galpones de trabajo, salas de venta y exposición de productos. Las inversiones en infraestructura portuaria (inversiones mayores) se encuentran dentro del plan de mejoramiento de infraestructura portuaria del Ministerio de Obras Públicas, a través de la Dirección de Obras Portuarias.
40. Concerning objective "d) Marketing of fishery products and administration of production centres", are these subsidies granted to production centres close in ports or close to ports?

R. Esta línea de acción surge con el fin de contribuir a mejorar las capacidades para la comercialización de los productos extraídos por los pescadores artesanales, apoyando las acciones orientadas a la asistencia técnica y capacitación en gestión y administración empresarial, y la capacitación en administración de caleta o centros de desembarque. Esta es una línea de acción centrada en el fortalecimiento de las capacidades de las personas para una mejor gestión de la pesca.
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page 95, para.61
The report makes references to the difficulties that the Chilean aquaculture industry experienced in previous months. It ends with a sentence on the expected adoption, in 2009, of amendments to the Law on Fishing, "designed to improve the organization of this activity".
41. Could Chile provide information on whether these amendments include measures that would allow aquaculture companies to get access to bank finance, which otherwise would have been not available?

R. La relación con la banca privada, en cuanto a garantizar financiamiento, hasta antes del problema del Virus ISA, operaba teniendo como garantía la Biomasa de los centros de cultivo, lo cual como resultado de la crisis dejo en evidencia no constituía un buen instrumento que asegurara los intereses de las entidades financieras. Por lo anterior es que el proyecto de ley actualmente en trámite considera mejores mecanismos para facilitar y otorgar certeza a la constitución y ejecución de garantías sobre las concesiones y autorizaciones de acuicultura. Lo anterior a objeto de dar mayores certezas a las partes en su relación financiera.
 42. Do the measures include the possibility to use aquaculture licences as collateral for bank credits?

R. Efectivamente se considera la posibilidad de hipotecar concesiones para obtener recursos del sistema financiero.
 43. What other measures, if any, have been, or are to be adopted to improve the financial situation of aquaculture companies in Chile?

R. Los procesos privados de reprogramación de la deuda y las mejoras que el Estado está introduciendo en la normativa para el establecimiento de garantías, son los instrumentos con los cuales se esperan superar los problemas financieros.




20/12/2009

WTO - PHILIPPINES: protesters against fisheries trade liberalisation (including negotiations on fisheries subsidies?)




During the latest WTO Ministerial conference held in Geneva a number of demonstrations were held in down town but also around the WTO building.

One of these demonstrations included a group of fishermen from the Philippines. They were voicing their disapproval concerning the WTO’s negotiations which, among many other sectors, also affect trade fish products and the fisheries sector.

One of the banners that the “Progressive Fisherfolk Alliance in the Philippines” displayed during one of the demonstration read as follows:
“NO TO FISHERIES LIBERALIZATION - Seafish For Justice Network”.
The banner appears in a picture posted with an article in the “Trade Blog” of the World Development Movement (WDM) on 30 November 2009.

In the text of the article the author alludes to the fact that, according to the protestors the WTO and its policies are a threat to their livelihoods because of trade liberalisation in the fisheries sectors. The author also mentions that Filipino fishermen are against the WTO because “WTO rules allow multinationals the freedom to fish in Filipino waters”.

I must confess that was slightly puzzled by this last sentence. As far as I know no WTO rule imposes free access to the waters of one of its Members. In actual fact many WTO countries do not allow foreign fishing in their waters.

After reading the above mentioned article it is not clear to me whether the Filipino fishermen only oppose the WTO liberalising trade in fish products through the so called “NAMA” (Non-Agricultural Market Access) negotiations or whether they are also against the WTO disciplining subsidies to the fisheries sector. As a side comment it is interesting to see that the Philippines is a regular member of the “Friends of Fish” group of countries, pushing for a wide ranging ban of subsidies to fisheries.

For those interested here is the link to the article in the “Trade Blog” of WDM:


And here is the link to the Youtube video with an interview of Pabs Rosales, leader of the Progressive Fisherfolk Alliance in the Philippines

19/12/2009

CANADA: Newfoundland and Labrador granted CAD 3.4 million (USD 3.20) subsidies to the processing industry


On 19 July 2009 I wrote a post on Newfound and Labrador’s crisis and about the difficulties the fisheries industry (harvesters and processors) was going through. In my post I was also referring to the fact that Mr Hedderson, the Provincial Fisheries Minister at that time, was not persuade that the public aid had to be provided to the industry.

Well, after some follow-up research on this issue I found that, in the mean time, the Provincial Government had decided to provide subsidies to this industry.

According to a news release dated 14 July 2009

“…the Provincial Government agreed to provide CAD 3.4 million in rebates and suspension of processing licensing fees for the 2008 and 2009 fishing seasons. This refund is being provided to address the fact that there are no subsidies available to the fishing industry and that the industry is facing a difficult year.”

The subsidy was granted to facilitate the conclusion of an agreement between harvested and processors on the price of shrimps.

Here is the link to the official new release:

http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2009/fishaq/0714n06.htm

And here is the link to the press conference where Minister Hedderson announces the subsidy:

http://www.releases.gov.nl.ca/releases/2009/fishaq/0714n06_video.wmv

13/12/2009

UNEP: Regional Symposium on “Sustainability Criteria for Fisheries Subsidies: The Latin American Context” Guayaquil, Ecuador, 29-30 July 2009

UNEP is one of the most, if not the most, active organisations when it comes to provide information to negotiators, and to the general public, on the ongoing WTO negotiations on fisheries subsidies.

I notice that in most of the events organised by UNEP environmental NGOs were being associated. This was the case of the above mentioned regional symposium were WWF co hosted the meeting.

The webpage of UNEP on this particular event includes links to the presentations given by the different speakers and to the symposium's report.

I found the presentation by Clarisse Morgan, from the WTO Secretariat, Rules Division, very interesting as it provides useful insights on the positions of the key players in the negotiation, not only in terms of groupings (e.g. the so called "Friends of Fish"), but also in terms of individual WTO Members (US, EU, Japan, Canada, Norway, etc).

I was also struck by one the paragraphs of the Symposium's report, i.e. paragraph 43, which I copy hereunder, on the issue of fishing in the high seas:

42. In discussing both the high seas issue and the need for effective sustainability criteria generally, several participants referred to the reality of “south-south” competition for fisheries resources and markets. Some of the most aggressively expanding distant water fleets today come from developing countries. Latin American fleets are generally not among the most expansionists. Several participants explicitly noted that meaningful sustainability criteria could be important in helping limit the distortions subsidies could introduce into major South South competitive relationships.
Clearly developing countries are playing an ever more important role in fisheries, including by the expansion of their distant water fleets.

Here is the link to UNEP's web page on the symposium:


AUSTRALIA: subsidies for Blue fin tuna fishermen in South Australia

In a recent joint statement Tony Burke, Federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and Mark Arbib, Federal Minister for Employment Participation announced a number of government support measures to help tuna fishermen in Port Lincoln (Souther overcome the crisis triggered by severe cuts in the catch quotas for Southern Bluefin tuna.

I quote here some of the paragraphs that I found most interesting when reading the media release.

"Senator Arbib said support for the Port Lincoln workforce includes immediate access to Stream 2 Government employment services and funding for 150 nationally recognised training places for affected workers."

“These measures will ensure that workers receive fast, personalised assistance to help them get back into the workforce,” Senator Arbib said.

“Support for tuna fishers in Port Lincoln is essential to ensure the sustainability of the community and the industry,” Mr Burke said

We want to see Australia’s Southern Bluefin Tuna industry continue as a sustainable industry for the long term. That's the best option for jobs and regional economies.

Thus, the subsidies appear to aim, prima facie, at keeping the fishermen in the fishery. Such subsidies could be identified as "prohibited" in the sense of Article I.1(c) of the draft text agreement submitted by the Chair of the negotiating group, Ambassador Valles from Uruguay, to WTO negotiators. This is what one could deduct when reading Article II "General Exceptions" of the same draft text, in particular Article II (c), on exceptions to prohibited subsidies covering personnel costs.

I copy here Article II (c) of the draft text:

For the purposes of Article I.1(c), subsidies to cover personnel costs shall not be interpreted as including:

(1) subsidies exclusively for re-education, retraining or redeployment of fishworkers into occupations unrelated to marine wild capture fishing or directly associated activities; and

(2) subsidies exclusively for early retirement or permanent cessation of employment of fishworkers as a result of government policies to reduce marine wild capture fishing capacity or effort.
Though there is an important caveat on finding that the Australian subsidies would be prohibited. Indeed, if the subsidies are not specific to the fisheries sector, i.e. if they are available to all workers, irrespective whether they are fishermen or not, then they should not fall under the prohibition.

In relation to this issue of "specificity" I remember that the ICTSD had published in February 2008 an article by Marc Bénitah (remember my post of 22/5/09 on experts testifying at the Canadian House of Commons) titled "Five Suggestions for Clarifying the Draft Text on Fisheries Subsidies". One of this suggestions was "Determine specificity". Watch this spot.

Here is the link to the official press release:

http://www.maff.gov.au/media/media_releases/2009/december/employment_and_training_support_for_tuna_workers

And here the link to the article by Marc Bénitah in ICTSD's "Bridges" Volume 12 • Number 1 • February 2008:

http://ictsd.org/i/news/bridges/3146/

07/12/2009

CANADA: provincial aid for another seafood processor

In previous post I was referring to aid provided by the Canadian Province of Nova Scotia to seafood processors.


A few days ago the Provincial government granted a loan guarantee of CAD 2.5 million (USD 2.35 million) to another seafood processor, namely D. B. Kenney Fisheries Ltd. in Digby County. The guarantee will be provided through the Industrial Expansion Fund, which is administered by the Provincial governement.

According to Nova Scotia's Economic Development Minister Percy Paris, the seafood processor is part of a group of 14 companies and has sales of about $15 million.

Here is a link to the press release:


and to an article on the Net:

05/12/2009

WTO: Is the US the stumbling block in the road to a WTO Agreement on fisheries subsidies?

This is the conclusion one could draw from reading some of the press articles reporting on the recently concluded WTO Ministerial Conference in Geneva.

These articles suggest that the best way to salvage the Doha round is to "smash the deal into digestible pieces" (as put in an article by LauraMacInnis of Reuters published on Thu Dec 3, 2009).

Another article by Jason Rhodes, also in Reuters, titled "WTO urged to spin off fishing pact to protect seas" is more specific and refers to Oceana and its campaign to  promote a quick agreement on fisheries subsidies.

"Oceana, a lobby group based in the United States, said on Tuesday a potential fisheries agreement could be spun out from the Doha agenda, which requires full consensus across all politically sensitive negotiating areas to be clinched. "I think the fisheries negotiations are one of few issues that have made steady progress in the Doha Round," Oceana's Courtney Sakai said, suggesting success in fishing could provide a model for trade talks in other areas such as clean fuels. "The world's fish need a WTO deal, not necessarily a Doha deal, and soon," she said. The soonest a Doha deal could be clinched is next year, but doubts are growing about whether that 2010 goal is achievable.

So, Oceana would like to see an stand alone agreement for this negotiating subject, completely detached from the 'Rules negotiating chapter' and, obviously from the other two big chuncks of the round, namely agriculture and NAMA. Or, put otherwise, take out fisheries subsidies from the so called 'single undertaking' (nothing is agreed until everything has been agreed).

Well, it seems that the first person who will have to be persuaded that the single undertaking has to be abandoned is Mr Kirk, the US chief negotiator.

In the first article I was referring to, on smashing the WTO deal in digestible pieces, Mr Kirk is quoted as saying:

"We want you to go ahead and do duty-free, quota-free, we want you to go ahead and do cotton, but you'll kind of figure out what the U.S. will get down the line, and I felt: What about nothing's decided until everything's decided?" Kirk said.

The problem seems to be that fisheries subsidies is not the only "digestible piece" into which the Doha round could be smashed.

Other "pieces" into which the Doha round could be smashed, such as an agreement to cut subsidies to the cotton industry in rich countries, or a commitment by these same countries to provide duty free quota free access to least developed countries, an agreement on Geographical Indications (pushed by the EU) or a revised anti-dumping agreement that would not include "zeroing", are not very digestible by the US, at least not now.

I suggest thus to Oceana that they use all their power of persuasion to bring the US administration to digest what is on table now, if they want to see new WTO rules on fisheries subsidies. There are other "dishes" on the table with more digestible food (think for instance of agriculture, environmetal goods). It is by eating the whole 'menu" that WTO Members will ensure that everybody gets comparable levels of satisfaction (or disatisfaction) at the end of the meal.

Here are the links to the articles:

WTO urged to spin off fishing pact to protect seas

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-44384120091201

Calls grow to smash WTO deal into digestible pieces

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B229G20091203