Bridges Weekly Trade News Digest • Volume 8 • Number 37 • 3rd November 2004
SPS Committee Finalises Transparency Procedure
Following a compromise reached by Canada and Malaysia, the WTO Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measure (SPS), meeting from 27-28 November, adopted a procedure for transparency in special and differential treatment (S&D) for developing countries. The procedure was based on a Canadian proposal adopted in principle in April 2003 (see BRIDGES Weekly, 10 April 2003). The Committee also addressed over 30 specific trade issues, among them concerns raised over stringent wood packaging regulations proposed by some Members.
S&D transparency procedure finally agreed
The amended notification procedure requires Members to engage in bilateral consultations if an exporting country identified significant difficulties in complying with proposed regulations, including the option of S&D (contained in the Canadian submission G/SPS/W/155). Following the consultations, the notifying Member should submit an Addendum to the WTO, specifying the S&D requested and provided (or reasons why S&D was not granted).
The procedure also provides for an extension of the comment period "wherever practicable" (usually by 30 days) in cases where there have been delays in receiving and translating relevant documents or where there is a need for further clarification of the measure notified. The adopted compromise furthermore elaborates on the ways in which concerns expressed by exporting Members could be resolved. These could include one or more of the following: a change in the measure to be applied on a most favoured nation basis; the provision of technical assistance to the affected Member; or the provision of S&D. Should S&D be provided, it would apply equally to all developing country Members.
Malaysia’s concerns, which had held up the adoption the of procedure, had centred on whether the onus to provide S&D should rest with developed countries introducing new measures that affect imports without waiting for the affected developing countries to comment. Some developed countries responded that it would be difficult for them to assess what S&D would be needed without comments from the affected country.
Wood packaging rules raise concerns
A number of Members, in particular from the US and some Latin American countries, raised concerns over proposals certain countries, including Australia and the EC, to deviate from the International Plant Protection Convention’s standard for wood packaging (ISPM 15), inter alia, by requiring that the wood should be free of bark. The complaining Members commented on the lack of risk assessment by the EC and Australia, which is required under the SPS Agreement whenever a measure exceeds an international standard. New Zealand, which is also evaluating the new measure, said it was preparing a risk assessment.
Members have repeatedly raised concerns over wood packaging regulations in the past, including India’s measures which the US, supported by the EC, Canada, Chile and New Zealand, at the last SPS Committee meeting in March said deviated substantially from the IPPC standard, requesting India to provide scientific justification for its measure. Argentina and Chile had also voiced concerns at the October 2003 SPS Committee meeting over the US’ wood packaging notification which they felt did not provide sufficient time for implementing the needed measures.
ICTSD reporting.