Alþjóðaviðskiptastofnunin - WTO: Samningaviðræður um landbúnað.

Committee on Agriculture Special Session 24-28 February 2003

General statement by Iceland

Thank you Mr. Chairman
I would like to begin by joining others in thanking you for the draft before us. We appreciate your difficult and unenviable position in trying to bring the very divergent views that have been expressed in this process together in a single, consolidated document containing draft modalities.
Unfortunately, in light of the various positions that have been elaborated in this forum, we see these first draft modalities as being seriously out of balance. In our view, they simply do not stand up to the criteria of compromise in either quantitative or qualitative terms.
With respect to the general approach, we see a fundamental need to address all elements of our negotiations as a package, to be agreed to in its entirety. To disregard non-trade concerns at this stage and deal with them in some obscure shape or form later on in the process simply isn't an acceptable approach. We have consistently raised a number of issues of critical importance to us in relation to factors such as geographical location, population sparsity, harsh production conditions and various other non-trade concerns with which you are familiar. The point we have been trying to make is that different conditions may require different approaches, whether for developed or developing countries, and that the system needs to respect the coexistence of various types of agriculture if fundamental provisions of the Agreement on Agriculture are to be respected and upheld. The principles of equity and fairness, for example, do not necessarily run in parallel with harmonization and the definition of progressive liberalization surely doesn't encompass that we in one swift move deprive each other of the means to engage in agriculture and safeguard its very existence.
With respect to what some have called the level of ambition found in this draft, we see it as going well beyond the process we have been engaged hitherto, as well as the Doha mandate. We have no quarrel with the reform process as such, but as radical a departure as this from the structure we set off with as of the Uruguay Round doesn't provide our agricultural sector with either the time or the flexibility to adapt to the realities imposed by substantial reform and the advancement of the long-term goals of the Agreement on Agriculture, with which we as Members of course agree. We went dutifully through the first round, certainly not without aches and pains. Our ambition now is not to be KO'd in the second, but rather go the full distance and leave the ring standing. That's what should be important here, that we all make it to the finish line intact. We simply fail to see how the approach and the size and pace of reduction commitments elaborated in this first draft can accommodate that basic requirement.
It is all too clear from our discussions to date that the existence of Icelandic agriculture is of no concern to some Delegations in this room. But it does matter to us, Mr. Chairman, and we will continue to participate actively and constructively in these negotiations with the future viability of our agriculture in mind.