JOB/AG/71  
 
11 May 2016  
(16-2607) Page: 1/4 
Committee on Agriculture  
Special Session    
 
 REPORT BY THE COASS CHAIR, AMB. VANGELIS  VITALIS,  
TO THE INFORMAL MEET ING OF HEADS OF DELE GATIONS  
 
9 MAY 2016  
 As is customary, I will provide my report on the agriculture negotiations with reference to four 
inter-related elements: 1) our shared objectives;  2) the context for our negotiations, 3) their 
evolving substance and finally 4) process.  
 
 To frame my report, let me start with a quick factual account of what I have been doing in my 
role as Chair.  
 
 This morning I held the second open -ended meeting of th e Committee on Agricultural in 
Special Session since the Nairobi Ministerial Conference. The first was held on 8 March.  
 
 My report to the CoASS this morning, and indeed to the previous meeting held on 8 March 
this year, was cumulatively based on more than 110 bilateral consultations with Members and 
14 separate consultations with various Groups of Members since the middle of January this 
year. That report will, as usual, be circulated to you all.  
 
 In addition, and as mandated by our Ministers at Nairobi in their two Decisions on these 
matters, I will hold separate dedicated sessions of the CoASS on public stockholding for food 
security purposes and a special safeguard mechanism for developing country Members. These 
meetings will take place tomorrow and on We dnesday.  
 
1  OBJECTIVES  
 Based on all my consultations and meetings so far, my understanding of our shared objectives  
for the negotiations on agriculture, is:  
 
o  First, that agriculture should fo rm part of any outcome at MC11;  
 
o  Second, that Ministerial expecta tions should be delivered to, including as set out in the 
various relevant Nairobi Ministerial Decisions, the Ministerial Declaration, as well as 
Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture;  
 
o  Third, an outcome at MC11 on agriculture cannot be realisticall y envisaged by many 
Members without progress in other areas of the negotiations. In other words, advancing 
in agriculture cannot be understood in isolation from the wider negotiations at the WTO, 
even if variable speeds may be required across these , and 
 
o  Fourth, avoiding polarising discussions that risk paralysis, not only in agriculture but also 
more broadly.  
 
2  CONTEXT  
 With these objectives in mind, Members have identified a number of contextual elements that 
are informing their approaches to the negotiati ons. I have distilled these into the following 
seven themes:  
 JOB/AG/71  
 
- 2 - 
 
  o  Rising trade protection : Many of you have expressed increasing concern about the rise 
in trade protectionism internationally and indeed the apparent decline in global trade 
flows. Members are reaching different conclusions about what this means. On the one 
hand, some of you believe this may chill our process; while others believe this underlines 
the urgency of our negotiations;  
 
o  Preferential Trade Agreements : These have emerged very strongly a s a contextual 
element, and this raises many questions in terms of possible impact on our multilateral 
agriculture negotiations. These include a possibly diminution of appetite by some to look 
for improved market access in a multilateral setting;  
 
o  The Sustainable Development Goals : some Members drew my attention to the UN 
Sustainable Development Goals which our Leaders agreed to last year, in particular the 
Goal 2 target – part of which – the elimination of export subsidies – has already been 
achieved in N airobi last year;  
 
o  The pattern of two -yearly Ministerial Meetings : For many of you, outcomes have 
been delivered in Bali and Nairobi and our next Ministerial Council meeting at the end of 
2017 (MC11) should therefore be no different. Many Members have al so reminded me 
that MC11 should be seen as a stepping stone and not an end -point to the ongoing work 
at the WTO of the reform of the distortions in global agricultural markets ; 
 
o  A set of known -knowns  relating to domestic political circumstances;  
 
o  As part  of the wider Article 20 agricultural reform process, several Members reminded me 
of the importance of the negotiating process we are engaged in here, not least because 
of the way it can inform domestic policy reform ;  
 
o  Last but not least, the systemic va lue of the multilateral trading system  with many 
Members expressing very clearly to me their commitment to supporting and sustaining 
the multilateral trading system.  
 
3  SUBSTANCE  
 With regard to substance,  my report this morning to the CoASS was very similar  to the one I 
had presented at our first post Nairobi special session meeting in March.  
 
 One general observation I would make, however, is the interesting evolution of views about 
what we should be working on. During my initial rounds of consultations in September last 
year, there was a strong view that the focus of negotiations in agriculture should be on "real 
cuts" – in market access and in domestic support.  
 
 Since Nairobi, I have detected a gradual shift in thinking. Many Members consider that looking  
at ways to "cut water" in market access and domestic support might be a pragmatic and 
realistic way forward, at least initially,  including in the wider negotiations beyond agriculture. 
On the other hand, at least two groups indicated that their objective had always been and 
remains "real cuts" – in agriculture market access and domestic support. Some Members have 
also expressed caution about this approach, wondering how one might measure the value of 
"water ". 
 
 Turning more specifically to the various issue s to be addressed by the negotiations, my 
consultations revealed some convergence of approaches.  
 
 It is clear that the Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) and Public Stockholding (PSH) remain 
high priorities for some Members.  But it is also equally clear th at other Members' positions on 
these two issues have not changed since our Ministers met in Nairobi.  
 
 These issues will be addressed specifically in dedicated sessions of the CoA Special Session 
tomorrow and on Wednesday and I will therefore not presume to  comment on the likely 
outcome of those sessions.  
 JOB/AG/71  
 
- 3 - 
 
   Turning to the classical three pillars of the Agreement on Agriculture overall, the situation 
remains as follows:  
 
Domestic Support  
  Negotiations on domestic support  remain the clear priority for the overw helming bulk of 
Members and has been identified by many of you quite explicitly as a key potential 
outcome for MC11. This also includes in particular cotton as an area of priority for a large 
number of Members, though a couple of Members have expressed som e caution in that 
regard.  
 
  Unfortunately, this general intention still lacks specific ideas for how to proceed on 
domestic support at this stage.  
 
  Some submissions and initial questions raised this morning were, however, very helpful 
in beginning to sco pe out the possible elements for a negotiation and starting to identify 
the kinds of issues Members believe we should be focusing on.  
 
  I also insisted during our meeting this morning on the critical importance of timely 
notifications by Members. I was ple ased that this call was supported by a range of 
delegations. We can 't negotiate in the dark. It cannot be the case that only 24 Members 
in an institution comprising 162 of us are up to date in their notifications. This is an 
urgent matter and I am grateful  for the opportunity to alert my fellow Ambassadors to 
this, if I may say so, embarrassing state of affairs. Please rectify this as a priority.    
 
Market Access  
  Negotiations on market access  remain a priority for a large group of Members and some 
have ra ised some specific issues of interest to them, including work on Tropical Products, 
tariff escalation, tariff peaks and Special Products.  
 
  At the same time, however, and going back to a point that I alluded to in my contextual 
remarks about the impact of  PTAs, there seems to be less interest from other Members 
under this pillar where there are both defensive (preference erosion) and offensive 
(retaining negotiating coin) interests at stake.  
 
Export Competition  
  Further negotiations on export competition  remain a low priority for most Members and 
at least two Members have made it clear to me in my consultations that they do not 
consider that a focus on export competition is helpful.   
 
  A small group of Members still consider this a high priority, however, with a particular 
focus on export credits. Indeed, I note that this morning a new submission was made on 
this subject and a number of delegations expressed willingness to undertake further work 
on it. 
 
  Given the reference to export competition in paragrap h 31 of the Nairobi Ministerial 
Declaration, I expect negotiations on this issue to continue and as with other issues, 
these will obviously need to be Member -driven.  
 
Other Issues  
 A minority of Members also raised with me what might be termed "other issue s". These 
include export restrictions; SPS; private standards for agricultural products;  disciplines on 
subsidies for biofuels and bio -energy and, more recently, Geographical Indications.  
 JOB/AG/71  
 
- 4 - 
 
  4  PROCESS  
 Let me now conclude my brief report with some words on pro cess. 
 
 As I noted this morning, our negotiation process will be informed in the coming months by 
four broad principles, namely:  
 
o  Parallelism;  
o  Without prejudice engagement;  
o  No presumption , and  
o  Transparency.  
 
 I described them in detail this morning and  will not come back to it now, but just to be clear 
that I expect to use these same set of principles in all CoASS -related negotiations.  
 
 It is also my intention, given the sensitivities we are all aware of, to proceed with all due 
caution and care, and mo re specifically to engage in a process of what I have been calling 
"defining by doing ".  
 
5  CONCLUSION  
 Let me close by observing that, from my perspective, the meeting this morning showed a 
generally constructive atmosphere and the beginning, perhaps, of a m ore focussed 
engagement. It was promising that some Members presented in a written form, or in some 
instances orally, questions identifying what the current issues are for them. Others said they 
planned to do so. The discussion is in its initial phase, but  it is this kind of focus which can 
help us frame an agenda for the way forward.  
 
__________