WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  RESTRICTED 
G/AG/R/68 
1 November 2012 
 (12-6021) 
Committee on Agriculture  
  
 
SUMMARY REPORT OF THE MEETIN G HELD ON 20 SEPTEMBER 2012 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
  
1. The Committee on Agriculture he ld its sixty-seventh (67
th) regular meeting on 
20 September 2012 under the Chairmanship of  Ms Emalene Marcus-Burnett of Barbados. 
2. The agenda of the meeting as set out in WTO/AIR/3993 was adopted with the following 
modifications: 
(a) under Part 1 (Review Process): 
(i) addition of questions by New Zealand u nder Article 18.6 to (i) Canada on the 
Ice Cream Promotion Initiative2; (ii) Indonesia on quantitative and other 
import restrictions on certain food products3; (iii) Switzerland on the 
compliance of a measure with Article 9.1(c); 4 
(ii) addition of a question from the United States under Article 18.6 concerning 
Ukraine's recourse to Article XXVIII of GATT 1994; 
(iii) withdrawal of questions from Australia with respect to the European Union's 
Table DS:1 notification (G/AG/N/EU/7). 
(b) under Part 2 (Other Matters within the Pu rview of the Committee):  addition of an 
item relating to the review of domestic support notifications as requested by the United States. 
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights or obligations under the WTO. 
2 Paragraphs 2-6 of G/AG/W/98 refer. 
3 Paragraphs 11-13 of G/AG/W/98 refer. 
4 Paragraphs 16-18 of G/AG/W/98 refer. G/AG/R/68 
Page 2  
 
  I. PART 1:  THE REVIEW PROCESS 
A. M
ATTERS RELEVANT TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMITMENTS UNDER THE REFORM 
PROGRAMME :  ARTICLE 18.6 
3. The eight implementation-related issues rai sed as well as the responses provided thereto and 
follow-up exchanges are compiled in pa ragraphs 1-20 of document G/AG/W/103. 
B. REVIEW OF NOTIFICATIONS  
4. Since the June 2012 meeting, the Committee had received 27 notifications. 
(a) Notifications in respect of which questions have been raised in advance of the issuance of the 
convening airgram 
5. The questions raised, responses provided as well as Members' follow-up comments in 
connection with the 24 notifications in respect of  which questions were raised in advance of the 
issuance of the convening airgram5 are fully reflected in paragraphs 21-64 of document G/AG/W/103 . 
(b) Notifications subject to review in respect of wh ich no questions have been raised in advance 
of the issuance of the convening airgram 
6. The Committee took note of the 15 notifications circulated before 10 September 2012, 
including notifications carried over from the previous  meeting, but in respect of which no questions 
had been raised by that date unde r the Committee's Working Procedures.6 
(c) Notifications circulated or made available after the issuance of the convening airgram 
7. The Committee took note of three notifications ci rculated after the issuance of the convening 
airgram on 10  September 2012, i.e.: 
(a) Table DS:2 (G/AG/N/USA/86) and Table MA:5 (G/AG/N/USA/87) for 2011 by the 
United States;  and  
(b) Table DS:1 by Panama (G/AG/N/PAN/27) for 2008 and 2009. 
8. The above notifications will be reverted to fo r review during the November 2012 meeting, in 
accordance with paragraph 9 of the Working Procedures. 
(d) Points concerning notifications raised at previous meetings 
(e) Counter-notifications (Article 18. 7 of the Agreement on Agriculture) 
9. There were no requests for the floor und er the above-mentione d two agenda items. 
(f) Deferred replies to questions raised under the Review Process 
10. The Secretariat regularly maintains contacts with the delegations that are yet to provide their 
written responses to questions raised in the past in order to complete the relevant compilation 
documents.  The Chairperson urged a ll delegations that have outstandi ng replies to submit those to the 
Secretariat in order to enhance the efficiency of the review process. 
                                                      
5 Section B of WTO/AIR/3993 refers. 
6 Section C of WTO/AIR/3993 refers.  G/AG/R/68 
 Page 3 
 
 
  11. The United States noted several non-response situ ations by Members in this meeting to 
written questions.  In light of the forthcoming web-based Q&A system, the US delegate expressed 
interest in understanding how the proposed new Q& A design may impact the process for questions 
and answers.  The Secretariat informed Memb ers that a session on the Q&A database of the 
Agriculture Information Management System (Ag-IM S) would be organized in the near future to 
address the electronic submission of questions and responses, which would hopefully contribute to 
addressing the timeliness aspect of the process. 
(g) Overdue notifications 
12. The Committee took note of document G/AG/ GEN/86/Rev.11 dated 10 September 2012 
reflecting the current status of Members' complia nce with notification obligations.  The questions 
raised, the responses provided and the follow-up ex changes regarding outstanding notifications are 
compiled in paragraphs 65-69 of document G/AG/W/103. 
13. Switzerland informed the Committee of their upcoming Table ES:1 notifications for 2009 
and 2010.  In this context, Switzerland had disc overed that export subsidi es had been erroneously 
used with respect to HS 0401.10 in processed agricultural produc ts.  Switzerland has adapted its 
national legislation which no longer includes HS 0401.10. 
II. PART 2:  OTHER MATTERS WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE COMMITTEE 
A. IMPLEMENTATION -RELATED ISSUES AND CONCERNS  
14. The Chairperson noted that the situation had not changed since the circulation of the 2003 
and 2006 reports to the General Council.7 
15. Argentina stated that without prejudice to the provisions of Article 10.1 of the Agreement on 
Agriculture, the establishment of additional and sp ecific disciplines on export credits, export credit 
guarantees and insurance programmes remained an  outstanding implementation issue resulting from 
the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture.  S upported by Australia and Brazil, Argentina 
requested that this item be retained on the age nda of the Committee on Agriculture in its regular 
session. 
B. REVIEW OF THE LIST OF "SIGNIFICANT EXPORTERS " FOR THE PURPOSE OF TABLE  ES:2  
NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT  
16. As requested by Members during the Committee me eting in June, the Secretariat circulated a 
compilation8 of formal and informal written and or al communications since November 2009. 
17. The Committee took note of the joint paper9 submitted by Australia and the United States.  
Australia stressed that the paper offered a clear side-by-side comparison of the two previously 
submitted format proposals.  This effort seeks only to address the practical aspect of how changes in 
the format may address listing of (comparable) tota l exports.  The paper did not address the question 
of product disaggregation.  In Australia's view , this point remained open for discussion by the 
Membership as a whole.  A number of Members expressed appreciation for the joint paper. 
18. Both India and Pakistan noted that since June 2012, a lot of work had been devoted to move 
the discussions forward.  The June meeting had b een useful as five Members had jointly provided 
                                                      
7 G/AG/16/Add.1 and G/AG/22 refer. 
8 RD/AG/9 refers. 
9 G/AG/W/99 refers. G/AG/R/68 
Page 4  
 
  views on the issue.
10  However, in India's view, since ther e had been no informal meeting between 
June and September 2012, the discussions could not move ahead.  Moreover, not all the concerns 
pointed out in RD/AG/4 had been addressed in th e joint Australia/United States paper, and these 
concerns should not be ignored in the discussion.  In Pakistan's view, Members had shown consensus 
to engage in a comprehensive review.  Pakistan ou tlined four areas where te chnical work was required 
in order to register progress in such a comprehensive review:  (i) developing criteria for product 
disaggregation;  (ii) establishing criteria for adding new products so that the list reflects current trade 
reality;  (iii) understanding the relationship between Table ES:1 and Table ES:2 and addressing 
comparability;  (iv) discussing two approaches to no tify Table ES:1 and Table ES:2.  China, India, the 
Philippines and Turkey registered their full suppor t for Pakistan's views and expressed readiness to 
fully participate in the proposed ex ercise as proposed by some Members. 
19. New Zealand recalled that the ultimate objectiv e of the Committee's exercise was not to 
establish criteria but to update the list.  Norway , supported by the European Union, believed that 
before engaging in further deta iled consultations, there was a n eed to investigate whether the 
proposals tabled thus far truly addressed the issu es at hand.  The European Union and Norway 
expressed willingness to engage on the basis of Memb ers' contributions, including a revised paper 
from China, India, Pakistan, Philippines and Turkey that would reflect the feedback they had received 
so far.11  Canada announced the circulation of a new contribution. 
20. Cuba reiterated its request, submitted in writte n form to the Committee on Agriculture in 
November 2010, to be exempted from the Table ES:2 notification requirement. 
21. The Chairperson proposed informal discussions  of the regular Committee to take place on 
10 October 2012.  Members were urged to circulate their proposals in writing well in advance of that 
date, and to review the Secretaria t's compilation of contributions on significant exporters, with a view 
to promoting a fruitful and productive discussion.  Several Members expressed appreciation for a 
renewed opportunity to continue the discussions informally. 
C. REVIEW OF DOMESTIC SUPPORT NOTIFICATIONS (G/AG/W/97) 
22. Subsequent to past discussions12, the United States introduced its paper.  This submission 
took into account delegations' request for a document cl arifying the US' ideas.  For example, the scope 
of the review was broadened to cover all aspect s relating to domestic s upport notifications and 
transparency in general.  The paper did not specifi cally address substance at this juncture, but sought 
further feedback from the membership. 
D. DRAFT ANNUAL REPORT TO THE CTG 
23. In line with past practice, a short and factua l report for the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) 
on the work undertaken by the Committee in th e course of 2012 was to be prepared by the 
Chairperson under her own responsibility.  In view of  the deadlines involved, a draft version had been 
circulated before the meeting in order to facilitate  Members' prompt consideration of this matter.  
Supported by Australia and Norway, the United States suggested that an effort be made to include 
more substantive and specific elements.  The Committ ee agreed that the Secretariat would circulate a 
revised report for Members' comments to be approved ad referendum  in time for its inclusion in the 
agenda of the CTG. 
                                                      
10 RD/AG/4 refers (joint submission by China, Indi a, Pakistan, Philippines and Turkey, 13 June 2012). 
11 Annex 1 of G/AG/R/67/Rev.1 refers. 
12 Paragraphs 19-23 of G/AG/R/67 refer.  G/AG/R/68 
 Page 5 
 
 
  E. OTHER BUSINESS  
(a) Export restrictions 
24. Japan reported that since June 2012, it had c ontinued to follow up on transparency matters 
relating to the Table ER:1 notification.  Japan also indicated its intention to have further consultations 
prior to the November meeting of the Committee. 
(b) Provisional schedule of meetings for 2013 
25. According to the Committee's rules of procedure,  regular meetings of the Committee are to be 
held in March, September and November.  The date s for each regular meeting would continue to be 
confirmed at the preceding meeting of the Committee.  The Committee took note of the provisional schedule of meetings for 2013 as follows: 
(a) 26 March 2013; 
(b) 26 September 2013;  and 
(c) 12 November 2013. 
(c) Date of the next regular meeti ng and reminder of upcoming agenda 
26. The next (68th) regular meeting of the Committee on Agri culture is scheduled to be held on 
14 November 2012.  On this basis, the Secretariat would issue the reminder airgram on 
23 October 2012 and the convening airgram on 2 November 2012. 
27. The Chairperson recalled that annual consulta tions under Article 18.5 of the Agreement on 
Agriculture and the Annual Monitoring of the Fo llow-up to the Marrakech Ministerial Decision on 
Net-Food Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) would be included in the agenda of the next 
regular session.  Members were urged to promptly submit any outstanding Table NF:1 notifications to 
the Secretariat. 
 
 
__________