WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/AG/NG/W/43
5 October 2000
(00-4063)
Committee on Agriculture
Special SessionOriginal:  Spanish
THIRD SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
28–29 SEPTEMBER 2000
Statement by Colombia
European Communities – blue box (G/AG/NG/W/17)
The blue box was the result of a political compromise reached in order to prevent negotiations
in the agricultural sector from stagnating during the Uruguay Round.  We therefore see the blue box
as a transitional support instrument which should be eliminated as a result of the current negotiations.
It is surprising to hear claims, based on vague arguments from a report with restricted
circulation, that blue box measures do not have a distorting effect on production and trade, when the
support given by the only two WTO Members to use such measures accounts for between 22 and
35 per cent of total domestic support for their agriculture.
It is of fundamental importance for the developing countries that the blue box should be
abolished.  As long as it remains, it will perpetuate the existing injustices in the Agreement on
Agriculture while at the same time allowing this type of support to continue distorting the agricultural
sector by not subjecting it to the disciplines and reduction commitments that would lead to itselimination.
We therefore reiterate the arguments of the Cairns Group in its domestic support proposal by
calling for the abolition of the blue box as part of the process of eliminating all forms of support
which have a distorting effect on production and trade.
European Communities – animal welfare (G/AG/NG/W/19)
It would be difficult to believe that the ultimate aim of this proposal was anything other than
to seek greater protection for European livestock production which meets certain already agreedstandards on farming, transport and slaughter.  I ndeed, we think that it constitutes a new form of
protectionism which prevents livestock products, particularly those from developing countries, from
having access to European markets.
Colombia has channelled large amounts of resources into research and vaccination in order to
make its meat and milk products exportable, since the presence of foot and mouth disease in certain
areas prevented their export.
Now that we have this possibility and can offer good quality meat and milk at competitive
prices, we may find ourselves facing a trade barrier because the livestock is farmed, milked or
slaughtered in a way that a third party considers to be detrimental to its welfare.G/AG/NG/W/43
Page 2
Not only do the development of multilateral agreements dealing with animal welfare and the
adoption of strict standards and appropriate labelling fall outside the scope of the agricultural
negotiations, but they would also generate an increase in production costs with a consequent impact
on competitiveness, especially in developing countries.  Indeed, they would represent an unjustifiable
trade barrier to exports of livestock products from the developing countries, with an impact on humanwelfare in those countries which the European Communities should also take into consideration.
European communities export competition (G/AG/NG/W/34)
Colombia shares the European Communities' concern over the absence of disciplines to
eliminate subsidies in the form of export credits, state trading enterprises and the use of food aid.
We also agree that it is discriminatory to apply disciplines to export subsidies while refraining
from doing so for the other measures.
However, Colombia reiterates the arguments made by the Cairns Group in its proposal on
export subsidies that such subsidies are the most trade-distorting form of support with regard toagricultural products and as such should be eliminated.  It is no accident that they are the only export
support measures that are subject to disciplines.
Treating the effects on agricultural trade of export subsidies and export credits on a common
footing should neither detract from the discussion on the elimination of subsidies, nor prevent thedevelopment of disciplines for credits.
Indeed, while we agree on the need to develop disciplines for export credits, we believe that
such disciplines should be negotiated in the WTO and not in any other forum, since it would be unfair
and inequitable to adopt disciplines resulting from negotiations in which the majority of the Membersof this Organization have not taken part.
Cairns Group – domestic support (G/AG/NG/W/35)
As a member of the Cairns Group, Colombia supports in its entirety the domestic support
proposal submitted today.  The elimination of all forms of trade- and production-distorting domestic
support, including the blue box, is a key element of the reform process we would like to see in the
agricultural sector.
There are three elements of the proposal that need to be given particular emphasis.  The first
concerns the issue of fairness.  Since it is clear that most distorting domestic support is provided by
the developed countries, the proposal aims to eliminate disparities by making sure those countrieswhich give most support make a greater effort in reducing such support.
Secondly, through enhanced green box disciplines and the elimination of the blue box, the
proposal seeks to remove all distorting elements from agricultural support, thus putting an end to the
avoidance of the Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS) reduction commitments through
increased support in other boxes, while at the same time enabling the green box to achieve its true
objective of strengthening rural and agricultural development through mechanisms that do not distort
production or trade.
Thirdly, there is the recognition that special and differential treatment provisions are needed
to enable developing countries to address their rural development needs and to raise the standard of
living of their inhabitants.G/AG/NG/W/43
Page 3
Colombia attaches particular importance to special and differential treatment, since it is the
instrument that enables us to soften the impact of the reform process, not only building on the existing
provisions but also through differentiated AMS reduction formulae and commitments to support our
agriculture and respond to our legitimate development needs through an enhanced green box, and to
support programmes for the replacement of illicit crops.
Cuba, Dominican Republic and others – market access (G/AG/NG/W/37)
This proposal clearly reflects the market access issues that remained unresolved for the
developing countries following the conclusion of th e Uruguay Round.  The complexity of  some tariff
regimes, the existence of tariff peaks and escalation and the lack of transparency in the administration
of tariff quotas were the undesirable result of tariffication.
Thus, the recommendations made in this proposal move in the right direction in liberalizing
market access for agricultural products.  By recognizing the need to establish certain elements of
special and differential treatment, the proposal makes it possible to resolve current imbalances in
world trade in agricultural products.
The elimination of tariff peaks and escalation is essential, as the proposal mentions, for the
diversification of exports from the developing countries.  If these distortions are not eliminated, we
will be condemned to exporting basic agricultural goods, more vulnerable to international price
fluctuations, rather than products with greater value added which can be found in more lucrativesectors of the markets.
Colombia has a more ambitious target with rega rd to tariff quotas:  we want to see them
eliminated.  Their elimination could take place in three stages:  first, a review of the allocation of
current in-quota volumes to ensure that they re spond to current commercial realities and not to
unrepresentative and sometimes arbitrary historical periods;  secondly, a substantial increase in in-
quota volumes;  and finally the reduction of out-of-quota tariffs to the same level as in-quota rates.
It is clear that specific tariffs essentially constitute a minimum import price, which generates
increased protection when they are combined with ad valorem  tariffs.  These complex tariff systems
should be abolished, and in the process of the conversion from a specific tariff regime to an
ad valorem  tariff regime, care must be taken to ensure that the resulting level of protection is lower
than previous levels.
Colombia supports the continued use of variable tariffs as an element of special and
differential treatment for all of the developing countries, since this scheme has enabled such countries
to respond promptly to excessive fluctuations in international prices of agricultural products withoutcreating distortions on the domestic market.
We also favour the complete liberalization of trade in all tropical products, such liberalization
having been acknowledged in the Agreement on Agriculture as a tool for enhancing the participation
of developing countries in world trade in agricultural products.
Another element that could be considered unde r special and differential treatment in the
market access area is the special agricultural safeguard.  This safeguard could be used only during the
new reform period, i.e. until the tariff reduction targets agreed in the negotiations are attained.
Likewise, considering the close link between distorting domestic support, export subsidies
and market access, in the sense that domestic support and subsidies enable surplus production to be
sold on international markets at reduced prices , impairing the competitiveness of products from
developing countries and threatening their domestic markets, developing countries need to be allowedG/AG/NG/W/43
Page 4
some flexibility in the new market access commitmen ts.  In this context, the negotiations should
proceed from the premise that the developing countries will not make new market-access
commitments until the countries which give most support to agricultural production and exports have
substantially reduced export subsidies and distorting domestic support.
__________