WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/RL/W/243 
7 October 2009 
 (09-4810) 
Negotiating Group on Rules Original:   English 
  
 
FISHERIES SUBSIDIES 
 
Communication from Argentina, Australia , Chile, Colombia, the United States, 
 
New Zealand, Norway, Iceland, Peru and Pakistan  
 
 
 The following communication, dated 6 October 2009, is being circulated at the request of the Delegations of Argentina, Australia, Chile, Colo mbia, the United States, New Zealand, Norway, 
Iceland, Peru and Pakistan.    
_______________ 
 
 1. We make this statement on behalf of the fo llowing countries:  Argentina, Australia, Chile, 
Colombia, United States, New Zealand, Norway, Iceland, Peru and Pakistan.    
2. It will be evident from this list that the Friends  of Fish is a diverse grouping of developed and 
developing countries.   3. Despite our differences, we share common objec tives: promoting sustainable fishing practices 
and eliminating harmful subsidies and providing e ffective and appropriate S&DT for developing 
countries.   
 4. In that context, we recall our previous stat ement on the prohibition and its data on the state of 
the world's fish stocks, only 20 per cent of which are moderately exploited or  under-exploited, with 
perhaps a possibility of producing more.    
 Context 
 
5. Mr. Chairman, we support your efforts to meet the mandate that has been given to us – to develop appropriate and effective S&DT for developing and least-developed members as an integral 
part of the negotiations, taking into account the impor tance of the sector to development priorities, 
poverty reduction, and livelihood and food security concerns.   
 6. To fulfill that mandate, we believe the ques tion of appropriate and effective S&DT in the 
fisheries subsidies context should be treated ho listically, recognizing the link between livelihoods, 
development and the health of global fish stocks.   
 
7. We know that fisheries make a critical c ontribution to food security and an essential 
contribution to livelihoods and development.    8. We must also recognize the role that deve loping countries play in global fisheries – as 
outlined in the FAO 2008 State of the World Fisheries report – to ensure we do not undermine our 
mandate of addressing subsidies that contri bute to overfishing and overcapacity.   
 TN/RL/W/243 
Page 2  
 
  9. The S&DT provisions negotiated for fisheries subsidies have the potential to have a 
significant impact on the world's re maining fish stocks, and on the ability of developing countries to 
promote sustainable development and reduce poverty.  They should be crafted in light of the common 
responsibility we all share in respect of this global resource.    
10. Mr. Chairman, we support the overall approach and structure of your text, while 
acknowledging that some elements require further work.    11. Given the context of your Roadmap process, this  statement will articulate the factors that the 
Friends believe need to be weighed to  achieve a balanced S&DT outcome.   
 
Special and Differential Treatment:  Objectives 
 
12. Firstly, Mr Chairman, the S&DT pr ovided in these negotiations should be effective ;  it should 
provide flexibility for developing countries to deve lop their fisheries where they can do so without 
threatening the health of fish stocks.   
 13. The flexibility provided should be responsible ;  it should be conditioned upon effective  
fisheries management systems that are appropriate to the category of fishery in question and, where 
appropriate, follow international standards a nd practices with proven effectiveness.   
 
14. The balance struck must be realistic ;  the conditionality should not be so stringent as to 
prevent developing countries from being able to  access the flexibility provided.  For example, 
fisheries management could involve simplified sy stems in certain circumstances such as those 
identified in Article III.2(a) of your draft.    
15. Above all, the S&DT provided should be appropriate ;  it should not undermine our overall 
objective of addressing overcapacity and overfishing and improving the sustainability of the world's 
fisheries.    
Special and Differential Treatment:  Content 
 16. Mr Chairman, Friends agree that developing countries should have the necessary flexibility  to 
support fishing activities through certain kinds of subsidies, within ade quate parameters and subject to 
meaningful and effective conditionalities.    17. Your text on Article III is a very useful star ting point.  There are useful elements of potential 
categories of fisheries, and potential flexibilities, pr ovided in your text. Other elements, including the 
use of certain static parameters, require more discussion.    18. We broadly support the flexibility provided in your text to least developed members  
although we acknowledge this requires further discussion.  We note that the prohibition on subsidies 
to fishing vessels or fishing activity affecting unequivocally overfished stocks, and the prohibition 
on subsidies to vessels or enterprises engaged in illegal, unreported or unregulated fishing  should 
also apply to all subsidies from all Members wh ich would otherwise be available under S&DT.   
 19. Appropriate treatment of artisanal fisheries is  a crucial issue for the livelihood of some of the 
poorest people in the world.  For this reason, we are committed to finding a balance that addresses the 
legitimate development needs of artisanal fisheries in developing countries.   
 20. Flexibilities provided to LDCs and to artisanal fisheries in other developing countries should not open a door to circumvention of the general pr ohibition of subsidies we all are striving for.   
  TN/RL/W/243 
 Page 3 
 
 
  21. The flexibility provided for a ll other developing Members should balance :   
 
• the scope of each category of fishery (whether defined by type, scale, or geographic area of 
operation); 
• the subsidies that may be provided to that category of fishery;  and  
• the fisheries management conditions  that need to be satisfied.  
 
22. In other words, the narrower each category of  fishery, and the smaller the impact of the 
subsidies allowed for that fishery, the more relaxed the conditions should be.   
 23. This flexibility should in all case s be limited by the health of the fish stocks.  In the case of 
some types of subsidies, it could be time-bound through the phasing-in of certain conditionalities or 
the phasing-out of flexibilities.  The Friends also support S&DT taking the form of additional 
transitional periods  in the implementation of obligations and appropriate technical assistance  
guidelines and criteria where a specific need is articulated.    24. Those subsidies that are exempted fro m the prohibition under S&DT should remain 
actionable under the existing SCM Agreement complemented by the disciplines set out in 
Article IV  of the Chair's text.   
 
Trade impacts 
 
25. Lastly, Mr Chairman, we should also not lose sight  of the trade impact of fisheries subsidies.  
Nothing in this annex should result in an SCM-minus outcome.   
 26. The Friends believe all subsidies provide d under this annex should be subject to a 
notification  obligation.   
 27. Mr Chairman, this statement is not an e xhaustive statement of each Member's position in 
respect to S&DT.  These will be articulat ed in our individual interventions.   
   
__________