SUTHERLAND ATTEMPTS TO PRESSURE US, EC

9:22 AM Nov 19, 1993

SUTHERLAND ATTEMPTS TO PRESSURE US, EC
Geneva 18 Nov (TWN) -- GATT Director-General Peter Sutherland tried to put pressure on the US and EC to be more forthcoming in the trade negotiations and urged them to bring to the table a "decisive contribution" to achieve a balanced package, particularly on market access issues.

A large and broad-based market liberalization package is within reach and with necessary leadership from major participants could be achieved, he asserted in a statement at the Trade Negotiations Committee Friday morning.

Sutherland however warned that considerable work remained to clinch it. But unless there was a determined and vigorous effort next week to move the market access package forward decisively, "there is a risk that some participants may be tempted to adjust the package by withdrawing conditional offers," he warned.

He repeated at the TNC what he had told a news conference previous day about the various market access offers and their effects and then urged those who still opposed the complete tariffication of non-tariff measures in agriculture -- "the central element of the DFA" -- to review their position.

In outlining some of the areas of difficulty requiring actions by the two majors, Sutherland said there were difficulties among participants on how the DFA provisions on minimum access opportunities had been applied by major participants. These related in particular to cereals, meat, sugar and dairy products.

In Tropical products too there was serious concern among developing country participants over bananas (where the EC has made offers reflecting its current banana regime for tariff quotas on imports from Latin American region).

Other areas identified by Sutherland included:

* tariff offers conditional on liberalization of government procurement practices;

* elimination of tariffs on steel products being subject to conclusion of the Multilateral Steel Agreement;

* deep tariff cuts or total elimination of tariffs by major importers in natural resource-based products (wood products, non-ferrous metals and fish products) being linked to access to supplies or resources;

* finding solutions to market access-related DFA issues in textiles and clothing which was still under discussion among concerned participants, but with concrete solutions yet to emerge;

* a number of major outstanding sectoral issues needing further movement from Quad participants.

On services, Sutherland expressed concern over the position recently taken over financial services (by the US) which he feared might be counter-productive and called upon the US to find workable solutions.

Unless this position was urgently reviewed, there was evidence that not only the efforts made so far to improve existing offers would falter, but the progress achieved might begin to unravel.

Though the text of the speech made available contained no references, Sutherland also reportedly made a reference in the TNC to the question of mandated assessment on all issues of interest to developing country participants. He would appear to have stuck to his line that this was an individual country assessment to be made, but that the secretariat would be ready to provide the necessary quantitative assessments of the offers on the table. He would also appear to have indicated that apart from this assessment to be conducted by the Group of Negotiations on Goods, he would also organise an assessment of the outcome in the rules area and in the area of services.

Several developing country delegates later reiterated that the assessment in respect of goods, called for in the Punta mandate, would cover all areas of goods negotiations and would have to focus on the extent to which the promises of special and differential treatment favouring developing countries had been implemented, and that this was not to be a country-approach, but an approach relating all issues of interest to the developing countries.

Individual country assessments, one Third World delegate said, would no doubt be made in the capitals after 15 December to decide whether they should sign on or not, but the assessment called for in the Punta mandate was aimed at taking stock and undertaking corrective measures.