JOB/AG/221  
 
18 October 2021  
(21-7880) Page: 1/7 
Committee on Agriculture  
Special Session    
 
REPORT BY AMBASSADOR GLORIA ABRAHAM PERALTA TO THE  
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE IN SPECIAL SESSION  
AND DEDICATED SESSIONS ON PSH AND SSM  
14-15 OCTOBER 2021  
Introduction  
1.   I have organi zed meetings with Members in different configurations and formats always bearing 
in mind the representativeness of the groups. In particular, I also organi zed a first round of 
"Room  D"-type meetings, in order to have a focused, text -based discussion on what  might be a 
possible outcome at MC12 on different topics. I invited Members to come prepared to make specific 
and constructive suggestions to amend the draft text I circulated (JOB/AG/215 and Corr.1), in order 
to identify possible landing zones.  
 
2.   I would l ike to stress again that these meetings are not intended to make decisions, but rather 
to provide a space and time for in -depth discussions on a without prejudice basis.  
 
3.   The discussions were insightful and at times very lively. While the discussions broa dly reflected 
the well -known positions, many useful suggestions were made.   
 
Domestic Support  
4.   The discussions on Domestic Support focused on the potential changes to the draft text 
contained in J OB/AG/215, on a without prejudice basis. The discussions were very animated, and 
many useful suggestions were made. However, we did not have enough time to hear all the 
suggestions and comments and these discussions will therefore have to continue, notably on the 
substantive parts of the draft Decisi on. 
 
5.   Regarding substance, the fundamental positions remained the same. I will therefore not repeat 
them here in detail but rather summarize the discussions with a focus on specific suggestions.  
 
6.   The key differences focus on the level of ambition and on the  sequencing of different steps.  
 
7.   Several Members considered that agreeing on a numerical target was not realistic and other 
alternatives should be considered. Suggestions included to agree on "substantial reductions" of 
trade-distorting domestic support i nstead.   
 
8.   The sequencing of the reform steps was also discussed. Members views remained apart, some 
calling for addressing all categories of Article 6 support, while maintaining that not all categories 
would be treated the same. Other Members continued to  call for addressing AMS above de minimis  
as a first step. Discussions also focused on whether AMS above de minimis  should be eliminated or 
prioritized in the negotiations . 
 
9.   In this respect, a proposal was made to include a stand -still provision for AMS ab ove de minimis  
in the draft Decision on Domestic Support while negotiations continue post -MC12. It was suggested 
to place the standstill provision at the beginning of the text distinguishing it from the modalities to 
be agreed. Several clarifications were sought, notably regarding the support to be excluded from 
the standstill provision, such as COVID -19 related payments and the support under PSH 
programmes.  JOB/AG/221  
 
- 2 - 
 
  10.   References in the Preamble to non -trade concerns and sustainability were also discussed, with 
the su ggestion made, among others, to use the language in the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) 
which refers to "sustainable development".  
 
11.   Special and differential treatment was also discussed, including how to address it in an 
overarching manner to avoid repetiti on in the various parts of the draft text.  
 
12.   Regarding transparency, it was suggested to include some specific suggestions from 
JOB/AG/213.  
 
13.   It was also suggested to structure the draft Decision in three parts, with the first part focusing 
on Key Principle s, the second part on Specific Elements and third part on Transparency. This 
suggestion would not involve any substantive change, but only a reorgani zation of the order of the 
paragraphs.  
 
14.   As already mentioned, not all comments and suggestions could be mad e as a lot of time was 
dedicated to discussing textual suggestions to the Preamble. Therefore, more discussions will be 
needed to hear all views.   
 
Market Access  
15.   The draft text contains two elements in the Market Access section. There is a proposed Decision 
on transparency of changes in applied tariffs and secondly the text contains elements of a work 
programme for the continuation of the Market Access negotiations post -MC12. Both these elements 
were subject to extensive discussions during the Room D process.  
 
16.   On the issue of applied tariff transparency, the proponents emphasized that the draft Decision 
seeks to enhance transparency and predictability in the application of changes to applied tariffs and 
the proposed approach to achieve this objective was flexible enough to accommodate the varying 
national practices that Members currently have in effecting changes to applied tariffs.  
 
17.   The proponents expressed openness to adopt the Decision on a best -endeavour basis in order 
to allay concerns of the non -proponents regarding possible legislative changes that may have to be 
made as a result of the obligations in the draft Decision. The proponents also recently decided to 
explicitly clarify the scope of the draft Decision that it o nly covers changes in ordinary applied tariffs 
and not to measures like trade remedies or changes arising from tariff classification. The revised 
proposal in JOB/AG/212/Rev.1 was already presented to you earlier this morning.  
 
18.   Those Members, who continue to have concerns on the proposed Decision, raised the following 
main issues in the Room D process:  
(a) CoA SS may not be the appropriate forum to deal with the topic , considering that the 
proposed product scope extends beyond the product definition in the AoA;  
(b) The proposed Decision entails logistical challenges: especially that it may necessitate 
legislative changes and proposes burdensome transparency or notification obligations ; 
(c) Advance notification of tariff changes might trigger excessive speculation or uni ntended 
consequences like import surges.  
 
19.   The proponents expressed their willingness to engage with Members having concerns on the 
draft to further explain and clarify the content and to possibly accommodate their concerns.   
 
20.   On the proposed Market Access  work programme, I noted a general willingness among 
Members to work out an agreeable language based on suitable modifications to the draft text in 
JOB/AG/215.  
 
21.   Broadly, I heard a preference for comprehensive negotiations in the Market Access pillar leavi ng 
the treatment of individual elements, including of tariff reduction, subject to the modalities to be 
agreed.  
 JOB/AG/221  
 
- 3 - 
 
  22.   In this spirit, several concrete drafting suggestions were discussed during the Room D 
consultations focussing , inter alia , on tariff reductio n, flexibilities for developing countries, treatment 
of NTBs and transparency including in respect of non -ad valorem  tariffs.   
 
23.   The issue of balance and linkage with progress in other pillars of agriculture, and for some even 
outside agriculture, also cam e up in the Market Access discussions.  
 
Export Restrictions  
24.   The discussions on Export Restrictions addressed both the exemption of WFP food purchases 
for humanitarian reasons and the elements on transparency and clarification on export restrictions.  
 
25.   Most of the Members who spoke at the meeting expressed support for a Decision to exempt 
WFP food purchases for humanitarian reasons from export restrictions. Following the presentation 
of the African Group's inputs, participants proffered the view that paragraph 1 of the current text in 
JOB/AG/215, together with the relevant preambular language,  should be considered as a stand -
alone Decision.  
 
26.   Several Members urged the removal of brackets around the second sentence of that paragraph 
and suggested turning that sentence into a new paragraph. In addition, a Member considered it 
appropriate to refer  to challenges facing NFIDCs as per the preamble of the AoA.  
 
27.   One Member suggested to make explicit that any decision on WFP exemption or on the other 
elements would be limited to "quantitative " export restrictions.  
 
28.   Notwithstanding these developments, on e Member reiterated its concerns, citing its questions 
to the WFP regarding examples of actual export restrictions hindering its work, and its questions to 
other Members on whether the proposed Decision would cover food assistance procured from PSH 
stocks by the WFP or through bilateral non -commercial humanitarian channels.  
 
29.   With regard to the remainder of the draft Decision on Export Restrictions in JOB/AG/215, 
several Members, notably the proponents of enhanced transparency, reiterated their support for the 
current text while submitting specific textual suggestions to further clarify and improve the existing 
rules on notifications of e xport restrictions under the AoA. Suggestions in this regard were drawn 
from proposals on the table and included, for example, advance notice periods with a possible 
10 days ex -post notice in situations of " force majeure ", and a requirement to explain reas ons for 
continuing export restrictions for longer than six months.  
 
30.   Several suggestions were also made on the way the Secretariat could be invited to provide 
technical assistance to Members, including the addition of possible additional supporting trade 
related data.  
 
31.   Other Members, particularly developing countries, considered that many elements of the draft 
Decision would require deeper discussions and are therefore not ripe for a decision at MC12. These 
Members however stressed their support for improvi ng transparency in principle and would be 
amenable to a work programme covering various aspects of transparency improvements in the 
current text.  
 
Export Competition  
32.   On Export Competition, most of the discussions focused on paragraphs 4 and 5 of the draft  
Decision on Export Competition contained in JOB/AG/215 read in conjunction with Annex 1.  
 
33.   While reaffirming its support for improving transparency as a general principle, the African 
Group considered that any attempt to modify the information requirements  contained in the Export 
Competition questionnaire would be premature, in light of the absence of replies so far by many 
Members.  
 
34.   On the other hand, the proponents noted that Members that have responded to the 
questionnaire covered a significant proportio n of total world exports and considered that the 
suggested approach was the least burdensome. The proponents also suggested to amend the text 
contained in JOB/AG/215 in a sense closer to their initial proposal.  JOB/AG/221  
 
- 4 - 
 
  35.   I was encouraged by the suggestions made duri ng the discussions by some participants to 
explore ways to narrow the gaps on this issue and I invite them to pursue their efforts in this 
direction.  
 
36.   One Member also suggested the inclusion of elements contained in the proposal JOB/AG/213 
with a view to s treamlining the notification requirements in light of the Bali and Nairobi Decisions.  
 
37.   Finally, it was also proposed to include the reference to the post MC12 work programme at the 
beginning of the draft Decision.  
 
Transparency  
38.   Let me now move on to transparency.  
 
39.   All Members acknowledged the critical importance of enhancing transparency, wh ile not 
considering this objective as an end in itself and recognizing that transparency alone could not 
constitute a sufficient outcome for MC12.  
 
40.   On the structure of a possible outcome on transparency, Members generally signalled their 
flexibility and pr agmatism regarding the possible way forward, between an approach composed of a 
horizontal Decision complemented by transparency -related elements incorporated in topic -by-topic 
decisions as suggested in JOB/AG/215, or an overall decision encompassing all tr ansparency -related 
elements as initially suggested by the proponents.  
 
41.   It was also generally agreed that some specific transparency -related elements ought to be 
addressed within the Committee on Agriculture. Some Members suggested exploring ways to merge 
paragraph 4 of the text in JOB/AG/215 with the horizontal section proposed by the proponents in 
JOB/AG/213. Some questions were raised regarding the timeframe suggested by the proponents to 
conclude such a transparency enhancement -related work programme.  
 
42.   The discussions also focused on how to address capacity constraints faced by developing 
country Members. A suggestion by one Member to include a preambular paragraph to this end was 
supported by several other participants, while the African Group called for  an operational paragraph 
recognizing the need for simplified notification formats and prolonged timeframes with developing 
countries, with special attention granted to LDCs and SVEs. Several participants suggested 
identifying first the challenges faced by  developing country Members when fulfilling their notification 
requirements in order to assess whether it would be necessary to consider different formats of 
notifications.  
 
43.   One proponent concurred with the view that enhancing transparency could also aim a t 
streamlining and simplifying notification requirements , as well as agreeing on realistic notification 
timelines.  
 
44.   It was also suggested to include a provision on the update of information and technology tools 
available through the AG -IMS system.  
 
Cotton  
45.   The consultations on Cotton took place in the Cotton Quad Plus format yesterday afternoon. 
This meeting addressed both trade -related aspects under my chairmanship and development -related 
ones under DDG Paugam's chairmanship.  
 
46.   The C -4 introduced its submiss ion TN/AG/GEN/51  - TN/AG/SCC/GEN23 and called for a more 
ambitious outcome than the one currently contemplated in the Chair's text.  
 
47.   Other Members attending the meeting, while acknowledging the importance of cotton and 
supporting the need emphasized by th e C-4 to address cotton trade -distorting domestic subsidies 
considered the draft text contained in JOB/AG/215 as a good basis for future work, in light of the 
current state of play in the negotiations.  
 JOB/AG/221  
 
- 5 - 
 
  48.    Other participants stressed the importance of transparency enhancement as a step forward at 
MC12, with different views being expressed on the opportunity to incorporate the Cotton 
questionnaire in the G/AG/2 notification requirements as suggested in the p roposal JOB/AG/213.  
 
49.   The C -4 reaffirmed its invitation to other Members to engage constructively to reach a 
consensus on a mutually acceptable agreement.  
 
50.   The development -related aspects were discussed as per the well-established practice in the 
second par t of the meeting chaired by DDG Paugam as Chair of the Director General Consultative 
Framework Mechanism on Cotton.  
 
51.   I will not report here about all the issues discussed in this part of the meeting, but just note 
that the text contained in section B of th e recent proposal by the C -4 appears to be a good basis for 
a possible outcome at MC12 on the Cotton development -related track. One Member nevertheless 
raised questions on the approach to be followed to address such development -related issues in the 
contex t of MC12.  
 
Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes  (PSH)  
52.   At the dedicated sessions in September, Members discussed how to amend the draft text 
contained in JOB/AG/215 so that it could be brought to consensus. Different views were expressed, 
with pr oponents calling for the adoption of the permanent solution on the basis of the African Group 
and G33 proposals, while some others were willing to consider an outcome based on Option 1, and 
some others Option 2. There was a renewed call for food security issues to be considered in a more 
comprehensive manner.  
 
53.   Since the September Dedicated Sessions, I held different consultations and notably two 
Room  D-type meetings on the issue of PSH, on 6 October and 11 October. While the positions 
remained bro adly the same, the discussions were lively and many suggestions were made how to 
amend the text, or how to take the discussions forward.  
 
54.   During these lively and interactive discussions, many proponents reiterated their support for 
the proposals put forwar d by the African Group and G33. Nevertheless, Members engaged on the 
Chair's text on a without prejudice basis. Some Members suggested to delete Option 2 and proposed 
changes to Option 1. These Members considered that the legal form of the Decision should entail 
the amendment of the AoA. In their view, a permanent solution should cover all agricultural products 
and all public stockholding programmes for food security purposes, a footnote clarifying the external 
reference price, and include no notification r equirement other than the existing ones.  
 
55.   Some other Members considered that a permanent solution is out of reach for MC12 due notably 
to the persisting differences in the levels of ambition on this topic, but also a lack of technical 
discussions. A "Thir d Way" approach was suggested that would consist in a work programme, which 
would list specific elements to be addressed and some principles, such as product and programme 
coverage, notifications and transparency, anti -circumvention and safeguards, and leg al form.  
 
56.   Some Members also reiterated that the level of ambition on public stockholding should be 
consistent with other negotiating pillars, particularly with the parallel progress on Trade -Distorting 
Domestic Support. Proponents again strongly opposed t his view and the linking of the negotiation 
of a permanent solution on PSH to other issues.  
 
57.   Suggestions were also made how to organize  the continuation of consultations so that it would 
allow for a parallel analysis of the alternatives.  
 
58.   On the basis of these discussions, I believe that a forthright conversation is needed between 
proponents and non -proponents to find a middle ground acceptable to all. I must stress again that 
time is extremely limited and we must make the best use of it.  
 
  JOB/AG/221  
 
- 6 - 
 
  Special Safeguard Mechanism  (SSM)  
59.   During the two Dedicated Sessions on SSM in September, the discussions focused on my draft 
text contained in JOB/AG/215 of 29 July 2021. On the one hand, some proponents expressed the 
view that the draft text was not sufficiently ambitious whereas the other side maintained that no 
substantive outcome on SSM was feasible at MC12 in the absence of parallel progress on Market 
Access.  
 
60.   At the September 21 SSM dedicated session, the proponents again underscored the importance 
of an SSM  for the livelihood of domestic producers and food security, and some of them put forth 
the idea of adopting an interim SSM (for a period of 6/9 years) at MC12 as a stopgap measure. 
These Members believe that the implementation of an interim SSM would enab le all parties to gain 
practical experience with the operation of a safeguard mechanism and facilitate an informed 
appreciation of the impact an SSM may have on markets and trade. There was, however, no 
substantive discussion on this idea at the 21 Septemb er SSM Dedicated Session.  
 
61.   I also took up the theme of SSM in my Room D consultation process. At the recent small -group 
meeting early this week, the proponents of an interim SSM, pending the finalization of their proposal, 
provided some details of how suc h a mechanism would apply in practice. It was explained that the 
proposed interim SSM would have temporal applicability (at most nine years), would be flexible in 
respect of its legal form (for example it would not necessitate an amendment of the AoA) and would 
entail a notification -based system to annually determine eligible products.  
 
62.   Other Members appreciated the willingness of the proponents to share those technical details 
of the interim mechanism as well as their openness to engage; however, they exp ressed concerns 
that the proposed mechanism, even if time -limited, did not appear to be substantively different on 
core parameters like triggers, remedies or the treatment of trade under FTAs. As the invocation of 
the proposed mechanism could potentially a llow tariffs to exceed the existing tariff bindings, the 
linkage between SSM and Market Access was also invoked by several Members asking whether any 
time-limited market access improvement could also form part of the arrangement.  
 
63.   Based on my consultation s, I believe that a candid conversation is required between the 
proponents and the non -proponents in their search for an agreeable landing zone on SSM at MC12. 
This would need to happen sooner rather than later.  
 
Conclusion1 
64.   I have been encouraged by the level of engagement by Members, today and in recent weeks. 
However, with seven  weeks to go until the start of the 12th Ministerial Conference, we need to 
sharpen our focus, enhance our engagement  and start to reduce and close the gaps in the positions 
if we are to present something meaningful for our Ministers to consider at the 12th Ministerial 
Conference.  
  
65.   There is a need for further textual negotiations in order to collectively develop the mo st realistic 
text and the best possible outcome, taking into account the divergent views and time constraints. 
Members will also have to consider where the differences are greatest and what could be a 
reasonable middle ground.  
 
66.   Despite differences in views  on many issues, all my consultations confirmed that Members 
consider an outcome on agriculture at MC12 to be a necessary step in the right direction to rebuild 
the WTO's credibility , and this strengthened my resolve to assist Members to take this step.  
 
67.   The lively discussions at several of my consultations and the many textual suggestions have 
led to useful – and sometimes heated – discussions that will, I believe, make it possible to see more 
clearly the contours of possible landing zones.  
 
68.   We are reaching the point where we have two choices: either we find a way to reduce the 
remaining gaps, or we have to adjust the level of ambition. That is the reality we are in.  
 
 
1 As delivered at the end of the CoA Special Session meeting . JOB/AG/221  
 
- 7 - 
 
  69.   Many Members continue to stress that an outcome in agriculture is long overd ue. The COVID -19 
context has added further urgency to ensuring an agricultural outcome at MC12 that would help 
address critical food security issues, as underscored in the ACP submission today.   
 
70.   I agree with Members that an outcome at MC12 would send a s trong signal about WTO Members 
willingness to put their differences behind them and work towards a common goal of enhancing food 
security for all.  
 
71.   I will take my responsibilities and do everything in my power to facilitate negotiations between 
Members. On ce again, I would like to emphasize that negotiations must take place between 
Members, not between Members and myself.  
 
72.   Looking forward, I intend to hold another round of topic -by-topic Room D -type meetings, 
initiated during the week starting on 4 October.  The first round has stimulated useful exchanges 
between Members , and I would like to allow Members to further deepen their reflections and 
discussions. It is important to stress again that these meetings are brainstorming meetings and that 
the results of these meetings will be reported to the CoA SS. No decisions will be taken at these 
meetings and the groups will be representative of the Membership.  
 
73.   I will again invite Members to come prepared to make specific and constructive textual 
suggestions to the draft text I have circulated, so that it can attract consensus among Members. 
Textual suggestions are more likely to be agreed upon if they are the result of engagement within 
and between the groups of proponent and non -proponent groups. The aim is to have  a text 
constructed by all Members, for all Members.  
 
74.   In order to ensure transparency and inclusiveness during this process, I also intend to meet 
with Group Coordinators and with any Member or group of Members willing to meet with me either 
in-person or virtually to share their ideas with the aim of helping to make progress.  
 
75.   In parallel, I will continue consultations in various formats with a view to determining with 
Members what could constitute an appropriate overall balance for a successful agricultur al outcome.  
 
76.   We will need to have a much clearer idea of the potential landing zones if we are to be able to 
prepare a revised text for consideration by our Ministers at the 12th Ministerial Conference.  
 
77.   The next open ended CoA Special Session meeting is s cheduled to take place on 28 October.  
 
78.   We will then have only four weeks left until MC12.  
 
79.   The coming weeks and hours are therefore of fundamental importance for our process.  
 
80.   I invite you once more to engage constructively with each other.  
 
__________