17-Jun-2022: India leads and delivers at the WTO 12th Ministerial Conference: Shri Piyush Goyal

India has been able to secure a favourable outcome at the WTO after many years, despite a strong global campaign against our farmers & fishermen, said Union Minister of Commerce & Industry, Consumer Affairs and Food & Public Distribution and Textiles, Shri Piyush Goyal, after conclusion of the WTO 12th Ministerial Conference in Geneva today. Terming the just concluded MC12 as an “outcome oriented” success, Shri Goyal said the Indian delegation, guided constantly by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, has been 100 percent successful in portraying before the world the priority issues for India and the developing world.

Shri Goyal said the Indian delegation leveraged India’s strong relationship with the world, which the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has nurtured over the last few years.

“Few countries attempted to create false campaign, initially on Sunday and Monday, that India is obstinate due to which no progress is being made. The real situation has emerged before us all, the issues raised by India, on which Prime Minister had asked us to focus upon, now the whole world acknowledges that was the correct agenda and ultimately India played a vital role in arriving at all solutions,” Shri Goyal told a press conference in Geneva.

Stating that it is a proud day for 135 crore Indians at the WTO today, Shri Goyal said India took the lead and was at the center of the conference. “It turned the tide of negotiations from full failure, gloom & doom to optimism, enthusiasm and consensus based decision. India’s efforts to bring members on a table to discuss issues irrespective of the existing geopolitical order has ensured that the world order is not broken,” he said.

Admitting that India and the Developing countries accepted certain compromising decisions when the WTO was established 30 years ago and during the Uruguay Round of negotiations, Shri Goyal said India today bats on the front foot rather than being fearful on various issues be it Environment, Startups, MSMEs or gender equality. This is a result of the confidence of New India. India is able to build consensus & get a Win-Win outcome for the world, he said.

 “Today as we return India there is no issue on which we have to be the least concerned, whether it is related to Agriculture such as MSP, reinforcing the relevance of the Public Stockholding Programme towards fulfilling the National Food Safety Programme or PM Garib Kalyan Scheme, TRIPS Waiver, e-Commerce moratorium, response to covid and fisheries,” said Shri Goyal, adding, “Similarly there have been no restrictions on fishing that our fishermen were deeply concerned about, that would bind artisanal and traditional fishermen of India in the future. India has been cent percent successful; no restrictions or terms have been placed on India or the Government, rather we have been successful in introducing checks on illegal fishing, under-reporting or outside regulation, viz IUU fishing.”

Shri Goyal said India remains committed to supporting the World Food Programme (WFP). Citing India’s recent wheat supplies to Afghanistan, he said the Government has imposed no export restrictions on WFP purchases for food security in other countries; however, domestic food security takes priority.

On the global fight against the Covid19, Shri Goyal said the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) decision will boost vaccine equity, accessibility & affordability. It will enable ease of authorisation for production of patented vaccines and India can produce for domestic requirements and exports.

On the WTO Reforms agenda, Shri Goyal said the basic structure and core principles of WTO including Consensus, S&DT provisions, SDG goals, will be retained while making it more contemporary. “I believe it will be good for the WTO, and will be good for the Developing and Under-Developed countries in the future and foster global trade through transparent means,” he said.

Shri Goyal said India’s motto of ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ echoes in the WTO, India not only raised its issues but raised the issues of other developing countries, Least Developed Countries (LDCs), poor & vulnerable with sensitivity and fought bravely for their cause.

Outcomes at the WTO MC 12 Meeting

• On fisheries, there would be a check on illegal unreported and unregulated fishing in our waters and elsewhere. There would be very strict controls on overfished areas so that fish stocks are restored. Additionally, no subsidies to be provided for fishing in areas outside EEZ or RFMOs
• The TRIPS decision will boost export, vaccine equity, accessibility & affordability. A country can authorize production of vaccines patented elsewhere and there would be no consent required as well as there would be no limit on exports. A decision on Diagnostics/Therapeutics would be taken in 6 months. There would be faster pandemic response in future and there would be fewer trade barriers in pandemics
• The agenda decided on WTO reforms will make the WTO a more efficient, agile body. The dispute settlement body will be revived and play its expected role in settling trade disputes. The reform would deliver better trade outcomes for developing countries. A reference to Gender, Environment & MSME has been made in the WTO reform agenda.
• On e-Commerce, while agreeing to the temporary moratorium, India asked for intensifying discussions on the moratorium including on its scope, definition and impact for taking an informed decision on the same.
• The Food Security Declaration, focusses on making food available in developing countries while working towards increasing productivity and production
• As regards, the World Food Programme (WFP), there would be no export restrictions on WFP purchases for food security in other countries; However, domestic food security will take priority.

15-Jun-2022: Statement by Shri Piyush Goyal at the WTO 12th Ministerial Conference in the Thematic Session on WTO Reform

Following is the text of the Statement made by the Union Minister of Commerce & Industry, Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution and Textiles, Shri Piyush Goyal at the 12th Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Geneva during the Thematic Session on WTO Reform:

"We are all agreed that the primary objective of the WTO is to serve as the mechanism through which international trade can become the means for supporting economic development of Members, particularly the developing countries and the LDCs.

We need to accord priority to the reform needs especially to the crisis at the Appellate body, whose functioning should become more transparent and effective, the number of suggestions for reforming the WTO could result in fundamental changes in the institutional architecture thereby, running the risk of skewing the system against the interest of developing countries.

Therefore, the principles of non-discrimination, predictability, transparency very importantly, the tradition of decision making by consensus and the commitment to development underlying the multilateral trading system are sacrosanct.

In all such reforms, we must ensure that multilateral rule making processes are neither bypassed nor diluted.

Special & Differential Treatment (S&D) is a treaty-embedded and non-negotiable right for all developing members. The gaps between the developing and developed members have not narrowed down in decades but in fact, have widened in many areas. S&D provisions, therefore, continue to be relevant.

India strongly supports a robust WTO reforms and modernization agenda that is balanced, inclusive and preserves the core principles of the current multilateral system. We should also agree to address the existing asymmetries implicit in the Uruguay Round agreements.

In conclusion, as I hear many members' interventions the sense I get is that most of us are suggesting that the reform process should take place in the General Council and its regular bodies, as the General Council has the authority to act on the behalf of the ministers and reforms discussions must not be held with the aim of undermining the authority of the existing bodies of the WTO."

14-Jun-2022: Statement by Shri Piyush Goyal during the WTO 12th Ministerial Conference at the meeting with co-sponsors of TRIPS Waiver

Following is the text of the Statement made by Union Minister of Commerce & Industry, Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution and Textiles, Shri Piyush Goyal during the 12th Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Geneva at the meeting with co-sponsors of TRIPS Waiver today:

“We have been engaging with the developed world to try and find solutions. I must commend H.E. Ms. Xolelwa, Ambassador of South Africa for her wonderful leadership. I have been trying to get a sense of where this is heading, both in the various quadrilateral meetings, in my bilateral with various ministers and governments, and also in the green room. I have a few disturbing things to share with you, which I think is important for us to be on the same page before we take a final decision.

First of all, I do not think it matters very much whether item 1 and 2 get finalized or not. My own sense is whatever language we want, gradually, we will get in item 1 and 2 here, because they are very keen to show to the world and civil society, that we have pain in our heart for the developing countries, we care for Africa, Less Developed Countries and the developing world, and they want to clear their chest of this allegation that the developed world is insensitive and inhuman to the concerns of the poor and the vulnerable.

My own sense right now with the number of meetings that are being held and with the number of green room engagements, is that the effort they are putting in, is more to showcase to the world that ‘Oh! we found a wonderful solution, we agreed with 80 countries or more to give a TRIPS waiver’. Now the common man does not understand that this is nothing near a TRIPS waiver, they do not understand that this is a little elevation from compulsory licensing.

But, the way the discussion was going on, the nitpicking is something that my colleague, the Ambassador from Egypt will also share because he was also in the room and at the receiving end of several attacks on him for having raised his voice. This very clearly shows that the effort there is to somehow take the burden or the obligation off their chest and get anything passed, but the nitpicking they are doing reflects their insincerity. The fact that my own feeling is, not a single factory, not one, will ever come up with the agreement that we are finally trying to negotiate and which may get approved.

The kind of fights over small commas, full stops, one word here or there seems to suggest that this will continue through the 5 years. If anybody was to try and take the benefit of this agreement, he/she will get frustrated and not a single plant to manufacture vaccines will come up with this.

Second, with great difficulty we got the period of 5 years. But, we all know that by the time we get an investor, get funds raised, draw plans, get equipment and set up a plant, it will probably take 2.5-3 years to do that. After that, you will start producing and within 2 years, you will have to bring down your exports to the normal compulsory license level and your capacity will remain idle. Today, in India, we have vaccines which are expiring, we have the capacity of vaccines which is idling and therefore, investors will not be easy to come by for this.

Our hope and desire was that this will be the beginning and in 6 months they will decide over the therapeutics and the diagnostics. I am sorry to share with you that in some bilateral that I have had with the developed world and some of the countries who are opposing this, in a way, they have almost clearly hinted and indicated that IP rights are extremely important. We are flowing with the wind only because of the international pressure but on diagnostics and therapeutics there is no way we are going to yield.

Their expectation is very similar to what is written here that COVID-19 is increasingly being well managed and their hope is that issue will lose relevance. Their hope is to unburden their chest of any guilt today, show the world that we have been so magnanimous today, kick the can down the road for therapeutics and diagnostics which are really now essential.

Vaccine story is almost over and even there, they have charged an arm and a leg to many of our countries. Where a vaccine in India gets produced for a $1.5, many parts of the world are paying $38 - $40 plus. Some of you have received donations, for valuing the vaccine at $38 or $40 and making it out to be such a big favor to you. So, my own sense is that what we are getting is completely half baked and it will not allow us to make any vaccines. They have no intentions of allowing therapeutic and diagnostics and if at all they try to say that we are the cause for its collapse, I think we should unanimously speak to the world and tell them that no, ideally we want a holistic solution including therapeutic and diagnostics.

Vaccines have already lost relevance, 2 years they spent without giving a solution and it is too late, not even a situation where you can say better late than never. It is just too late.  There is no demand for vaccines anymore. So rather, let us pitch for the final decision, collective and holistic decision and not get conned into accepting a sub-optimal stage 1, knowing full well that the stage 2 will never happen.”

14-Jun-2022: Statement by Shri Piyush Goyal at the WTO 12th Ministerial Conference during the Thematic Session on Agriculture

Following is the text of the Statement made by Union Minister of Commerce & Industry, Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution and Textiles, Shri Piyush Goyal at the 12th Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Geneva during the Thematic Session on Agriculture today:

“We are discussing one of the most critical issues under negotiations which has a direct impact on the lives of millions of people across the globe.

Agriculture is not just a source of livelihood for most of the farmers and farm workers in developing countries, it is also important for their food security, their nutrition and in a sense for developing nations and the people at large.

Many countries have been severely impacted due to the recent food crisis, both during COVID 19 and the current geopolitical situation. My friends from Egypt and Sri Lanka spoke about this yesterday, and we need to see if the draft declarations and decisions under consideration would help in improving food availability in their countries.

In fact, these two Members have not agreed on the draft Food Security Declaration, but they have called for an immediate Permanent solution to the Public Stockholding issue.

We are in a situation, where the temporary declarations are not going to help the countries rather the Permanent Solution to Public Stock Holding, pending for more than 9 years, is not yet being taken up for closure.

India has had an experience of transiting from a food deficient nation to a largely self-sufficient food nation. Our state support in the form of subsidies and other government interventions played a very important role to achieve this sufficiency, therefore we are fighting on behalf of all the developing countries including the LDCs collectively based on our own journey, our own experience. And look at the story so far, right from the Uruguay round where after 8 years of negotiations between 1985-86 and 1994 when the Marrakesh agreement was decided led to the establishment of WTO, agriculture always got a raw deal, imbalanced outcomes and those who were distorting markets by granting huge subsidies managed to secure their subsidies, which were prevalent at that point of time and deprived the other nations, the developing nations from their ability to grow and take prosperity to their people.

What we are discussing are the rules of an agreement largely suited to the developed countries, which work for their socio-economic situation already give higher entitlement for the developed world and the calculations under which the developed world is questioned are flawed based on certain situations prevailing 35 years ago and without any relevance to today's situation in either terms of growth in prices, inflation, changing dynamics with absolutely no system of calibrating it over the years, we landed up freezing that at the 86 levels and today we are suffering the consequences of that.

In my earlier intervention today, I alluded to this only to warn our other friends in the room that the same is sought to be done in Fisheries again. The ministerial conference of 11 December 2013 decided, and I repeat ‘decided’ that the members had agreed to put in place an interim mechanism to negotiate on an agreement for a permanent solution for adoption by the 11th ministerial conference. The process had been fixed. We all agreed on this, and in lieu of agreement on trade facilitation with the developed world was very keen adopt. We compromised, agreed on their trade facilitation agreement and settled for a permanent solution for public stockholding.

In fact, para 8 says and I quote, “Members agreed to establish a work program to be undertaken in the committee on agriculture to pursue this issue with the aim of making recommendations for a permanent solution”. Para 9 says, “Members commit to the work program with the aim of concluding it no later than the 11th Ministerial Conference”. And Para 10 says “The general council shall report to the 10th ministerial conference, the progress made on the work program”. I am reminding you of this because what we are suggested is that we once again start the discussions on this issue, which was reiterated in 28th November 2014 document of the General Council and which states that public stockholding for food security purposes for the developing countries will be final. In fact, even in 2015 the ministerial conference in the 10th session took note of the progress and decided that they reaffirm the General council decision of 2014 and agreed to engage constructively to make all concerted efforts to agree and adopt the decision.

I am saying this out of agony because we are already in the 12th MC. It’s a delayed MC, it is almost time for the 13th MC technically now and we are yet to finalise the permanent solution. I think it is possible to do it. We have very well established and proven mechanisms available and documents are on the table which can be adopted and finalised. So that we can bring closure on this very important subject.

WTO is an organisation for trade, but one should remember that before trade, there comes hunger and one cannot tread the path of trade on an empty stomach.

Leading up to the MC 12, more than 80 countries have come together for taking the issue of Public Stockholding to a logical conclusion and directly addressing the food insecurity concerns.

It is ironical that the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) provides considerable flexibility to the developed members to provide huge subsidies in the form of Aggregate Measure of Support (AMS) and further, to concentrate these subsidies on a few products, without limit, but the same flexibilities are not available to majority of the developing countries including LDCs.

The fear mongering in the name of trade distortion by the latter’s de minimis support entitlements is pointless.

There are vast differences in the actual per farmer domestic support being provided by different countries, as per the information notified to the WTO. This difference in case of some developed countries vis-a-vis the developing countries is more than 200 times. So the developed countries are giving more than 200 times the support that most developing countries are able to give.

Despite this, some Members have been pushing to deprive the low income and resource poor farmers of their already small share in state support.

The special and differential treatment accorded to developing countries remains crucial for us and hence bringing it into the ambit of negotiations is just not acceptable.

We feel that the draft Ministerial Decisions on Agriculture is expansive and goes beyond the Doha Round mandate and does not acknowledge the progress achieved so far.

Finally, India has always been proactive in extending food aid to vulnerable countries. On the proposal for providing exemption to the World Food Programme from export restrictions, while we support such exemptions, we believe, we must also provide for G2G transactions so that we can truly ensure food security - both global and domestic, from a broader perspective, especially considering the fact that World Food Programme has its own limitations of size, scale & funding.

I would urge the membership of the WTO to seriously reflect on this programme of permanent solution to public stockholding being finalised at the MC 12, sending a message to the world that we do care, we care for the poor, we care for the vulnerable, we care for food security, we care for a far more balanced & equitable future for the rest of the world.”

14-Jun-2022: Intervention by Shri Piyush Goyal on Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations during the 12th Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Geneva

Following is the text of the Intervention made by Union Minister of  Commerce & Industry, Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution and Textiles, Shri Piyush Goyal on Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations during the 12th Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Geneva:

“India is a strong advocate of sustainability, and its glorious history speaks volumes of its traditions, customs and good practices in managing its natural resources. At the same time, I urge you to take cognizance of the fact that many nations from both hemispheres allowed their gigantic industrial fleets to exploit and plunder the ocean's wealth over the past several decades, leading to highly unsustainable fishing. In contrast, India maintained fleets of modest size that largely fished in its Exclusive Economic Zone, operating with passive gear and leaving bare minimum footprints on the seascape.

Our subsidies are one of the lowest; we are a member only in one RFMO, and we are not a distant water-fishing nation. We don't operate huge fishing fleets to exploit the resources indiscriminately like any other advanced fishing nation. I have before me a chart which shows the vastly differing subsidies given by different nations. India, for every fisher family that we have, gives barely $15 in a year to its fishermen families and there are countries here, which give as high as $42,000, $65,000 & $75,000 to 1 fishermen family. That is the extent of disparity that is sought to be institutionalized, through the current fisheries text.  

India's fisheries sector is traditional and small-scale in nature and we are essentially one of the disciplined nations in sustainably harnessing the fisheries resources.

Excellencies, Fish is an inseparable part of Indian mythology, religion and culture. India’s engagement in the sustainable harnessing of its fish & aquatic resources has always been exemplary. The traditional fishers' life in India has been intertwined with the oceans and seas since times immemorial. Fish is the only source of their livelihood over generations; responsible and sustainable fishing is ingrained in the ethos of our fishers. Our traditional fishers toil under harsh and extreme conditions to bring the highly delicious and nutritious fish protein to our plates & to the plates of many other countries.

In spite of abject poverty and illiteracy, Indian Fishers practice voluntary restraint for 61 days in a year to allow Fish to grow and regenerate. They may go hungry but do not venture into the seas during these 61 days. In fact, as we speak today, there is no fishing happening in my country anywhere. On the West coast, where the Arabian sea is, and from where I come from, it is stopped from 1st June to 31st July. In the Bay of Bengal, in the East, it is stopped from 15th April to 14th June to allow the fish to breed & regenerate. Our traditional fishers are mired in deep poverty and their only asset is a boat and net.

I strongly feel that this outcome of the exercise being carried out now, has not provided a level-playing field to the developing nations to address the aspirations of the traditional fishers and their livelihood. Several million fishers, nearly 9 million families in India depend on assistance and support from the Government, albeit very small which I just demonstrated, for their livelihood. Any decision not to provide space for small-scale and traditional fishers to expand their capabilities would only rip away their future opportunities.

It may not be out of place to say that several advanced fishing nations are indiscriminately exploiting the fisheries resources in others' EEZ and the high seas by being members of multiple RFMOs.  India has argued in the past that such nations shall own the responsibility for the damage they have caused to the global fisheries wealth and should bring them under a tougher discipline regime. Still, to our distress, the present text does not stop such over-exploitation; instead, it indiscreetly allows such practices indefinitely.

Incidentally, I see a lot of countries very concerned about their fishermen. But what are the number of fishermen? One may have 1,500 fishermen, another may have 11,000 fishermen, another has 23,000 fishermen, and yet another 12,000. The concern of the small number of fishermen prevails over the livelihood of 9 million fishermen in India. This is completely unacceptable! And that is the reason, India is opposed to the current text, also opposed to the way De minimis is sought to be institutionalized. I see in every which way, the Uruguay round assymetries and discrimination in agriculture being sought to be institutionalized in fishing today. And I would urge all the developing countries to beware of such efforts. To be cautious while we mortgage away our future and the future potential of our poor people to grow, to become more prosperous in the future and to get a chance, a better chance in life.

In fact, India has been able to sustain its fisheries wealth, providing livelihood to its millions and food and nutrition to its growing population, because we have kept sustainability at the core, yet given them an opportunity to fish in our economic zone (EEZ). It may not be out of place to state that the developing nations have been a mute witness to these unsustainable exploitation of fishery resources by industrial fishing fleets of the distant water fishing nations. As the FAO status of the World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020 Report suggests, there are an estimated 67,800 fishing vessels of at least 24 meter length. It further reported that the proportion of these large vessels was highest in Oceania, Europe, and North America. A recent study, (Rousseau et al., 2019) found that the large fishing vessels, making up only 5% of the fleet constituted more than 33% of the total engine power.

A recent article research published in Science Advances on the Economics of fishing the high seas (Enric Sala et al 2018) alludes that high sea fishing at the current scale is enabled by large government subsidies, without which as much as 54% of the present high seas fishing would be unprofitable at current fishing rates. India would once again like to reiterate its position that advanced fishing nations own the responsibility of the damage caused to the global fisheries wealth especially in the high seas which are also the common heritage of the humankind.

In this context, we would like to emphasize that ‘common but differentiated responsibility’ and ‘polluter pays principle’ should be the bedrock of any agreement related to sustainability.

India would strongly urge that Distant Water Fishing Nations should be subject to a moratorium on giving any kind of subsidies for 25 years for fishing or fishing-related activities beyond their EEZ. It is essential, that they transfer these capacities to the Developing countries and LDCs to give them a chance to grow.

It would be a matter of great concern for India such Distant Water Fishing Nations are provided carve out under the shelter of conservation and management measures in the draft Ministerial Text on fisheries subsidies  (article 5.1.1).

On the contrary, we see from the current text that the subsidies extended by the developing countries to their millions of small-scale and artisanal fishermen for meeting their genuine needs and enabling their access to fishing for livelihoods in their own EEZ is subjected to scrutiny with the onerous responsibility to demonstrate sustainability. We cannot not agree to such an imbalanced text.

Subsidies like income and livelihood support during the seasonal no fishing for regeneration of fish stock, and provision of social security nets to the socially disadvantaged fishing communities cannot contribute to overfishing. Such subsidies in fact contribute to the reduction of vulnerabilities of the poor fishing communities who work in extremely harsh environment.

We must also be mindful of the fact that the ecosystem attributes of tropical waters are different from the temperate waters and in tropical waters the regeneration of the fish stocks is much faster vis-à-vis the temperate waters and therefore the same yardstick cannot apply.

Similarly, a de-minimis on the global catch basis without reference to the fishing, the fishermen families involved, the size of the nation, the size of the population being supported is a completely arbitrary and unfair situation. Whether point 7 or point 8, it does not take into account that an African country maybe supporting 220 million people population or possibly supporting a very large number of fishermen against another country which maybe supporting a 2 million – 3 million population and ten thousand fisherman, how can the de-minimis be the same for all sets of people.  

We are also extremely concerned with the proposed prohibition limited to only specific fuel subsidies and leaving out the non-specific fuel subsidies. In the total fisheries subsidies, the share of fuel subsidies is estimated to be around 22 percent, which is mostly in the form of non-specific fuel subsidies. Through this agreement, we are trying to address the issue of sustainability. Leaving out disciplining non-specific fuel subsidies has no justification in the science of fisheries conservation. The Agreement would negate the objective of sustainability as envisaged under SDG 14.6 and our resolve to stop subsidies for IUU fishing.

The transition period of 25 years sought by India is not intended as a permanent carve-out, it is a must-have for us and for other similarly placed non-distant water fishing countries. We feel that without agreeing to the 25-year transition period, it will be impossible for us to finalize the negotiations, as policy space is essential for the long-term sustainable growth and prosperity of our low income fishermen.

The exemption from disciplines for the low income or resource-poor or livelihood fishing particularly again for those nations not involved in long distance fishing up to our EEZ i.e. 200 nautical miles, is highly essential to provide socio-economic security to these vulnerable communities. This will allow us to disperse the fishing operations of the low income, resource poor, small-scale and artisanal fishers deeper in the EEZ in order to reduce the fishing pressure in the nearer to coast regions. While urging for this exemption, it may not be out of place to state that Members have a sovereign right to explore, exploit and use the resources within their jurisdictional waters. We are also mindful of the responsibilities bestowed on us while exploiting the resources in our own sovereign waters.

We are strongly of the view that the outcome of this exercise should provide a level-playing field to the developing nations to ensure that their small-scale and artisanal fishing fleets are sustained, and the livelihoods of their resource-poor fisher people are not threatened, food security issues are adequately addressed, and there is policy space for all maritime zones including the high seas, which should be provided to meet the growth aspirations of the traditional fishermen communities. We would also like to emphasize on providing time and space to enhance the capacities of the developing nations in resource management, fleet optimization, wherever required and taking this onerous task of meeting the requirements of the final outcomes of the fisheries subsidies to the last mile. We have always played a very active role in this long and arduous journey, we are often told that this is some last minute thought we have brought out, I will strongly contest that we are on record since long on many of the issues that I have raised here today. I know I have been long but I thought it is necessary to open the eyes of this august assembly to the deep concerns of the low income countries and the developing world and the developed nations to the huge disparity sought to be foisted on us once again like it was done in Agriculture 35 years ago.

In conclusion, India would like to remind that the United Nations General Assembly has declared 2022 as the International Year of Artisanal Fisheries and Aquaculture, let us all join hands to ensure that the outcomes of the fisheries subsidies negotiations provide the right support, balance, equity and thrust to the artisanal and small-scale fishers, who are also the backbone of global fisheries. By doing so, we would not only be honouring the decision of the UNGA but also paying a glorious tribute to the millions of fisher folk all over the world.”

13-Jun-2022: India makes a strong pitch for protecting the interests of the developing and under-developed countries at the WTO

India has made a strong pitch for protecting the interests of the developing and under-developed countries at the WTO. Plain speaking, Union Minister of Commerce and Industry, Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution and Textiles, Shri Piyush Goyal, representing India at the 12thMinisterial Conference of the WTO in Geneva, raised concerns about the “skewed” WTO reforms proposal, imperative need to retain the Special and Differential Treatment (S&DT) provisions for the developing world, global inequities in Covid vaccination and Public Stockholding of foodgrains.

Speaking on the ‘Challenges confronting the Ministerial Session’ yesterday, Shri Goyal said the current proposals for WTO Reform could fundamentally change its institutional architecture, skewing the system against the interests of developing countries. “We need to move ahead preserving the core principles of consensus and ensuring S&DT, with people and development being at the core of WTO’s future agenda,” said Shri Goyal.

“Friends, those who question the need for S&DT provisions are aware that the per capita GDP of the developed countries is 20 to 50 times that of the developing countries. Even India is at the lower end of the per capita GDP supporting 1.4 billion people. I believe, the developing world aspires to work for a better future. Is it humane, fair or even equitable that the developing world takes the same obligations as the developed nations?,” he added.

Shri Goyal said the COVID Pandemic has exposed the inability of the world to promptly respond to any crisis, whether on food security or health, economic wellbeing or open supply chains.

“When the world was desperately looking for relief, the WTO was found wanting. As an example, vaccine inequity persists even two years after COVID. When people in LDCs and several developing countries are yet to be vaccinated, there are some countries who have already administered the 3rdor 4thdose,” he said, adding, “This is a collective failure of global governance& we need to introspect. Those responsible need to seriously reflect deep within their hearts, it will help us craft a more equitable, fair and prosperous future for every citizen of the world and finally achieve the Sustainable Development Goals we had all collectively agreed upon.”

To rebuild trust and credibility, Shri Goyal said, we must first address mandated issues, like the Permanent Solution to Public Stockholding agreed nearly a decade ago.

“The current global food crisis is a reminder to us that we act now! Can we risk the lives of millions of people dependent on food stocks maintained for the poor and vulnerable?,” Shri Goyal asked.

“During the pandemic, India alone distributed 100 million tonnes of foodgrains free of charge to 800 million Indians at a cost of nearly US$50billion. This was over and above the foodgrains distributed as a part of our National Food Security Programme thus ensuring that nobody ever slept hungry,” he said.

Shri Goyal argued that while negotiating the Fisheries Subsidies, the livelihood of traditional fishermen cannot be compromised.

“We cannot institutionalize the privileges of a few countries and take away the right to progress for those who are working for the vulnerable marginalized sections of society. Particularly for those countries, who are not engaged in harmful deep sea fishing, we need to have different views. Otherwise, we may have a similar situation like the Agreement on Agriculture, where inequities & asymmetries persist, causing several countries to still depend on food aid,” he said.

On climate issues, Shri Goyal proposed we need to adopt environmentally-conscious lifestyles, more sustainable lifestyles, based on 3Ps of “Pro Planet People”.

“The WTO needs to rebuild trust. It is time to demonstrate goodness, concern for people, more sensitivity to the poor & vulnerable sections of society in the spirit of “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam”, which we believe in India as “The World is one Family”,” he said.

12-Jun-2022: Intervention by Shri Piyush Goyal at the Plenary Session of 12th Ministerial Conference of the WTO

Following is the full text of the Intervention made by Union Minister of  Commerce & Industry, Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution and Textiles, Shri Piyush Goyal during the Plenary Session of 12th Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Geneva today:

“Mr. Chairperson, Mr. Co-chair, Madam Director General, Ministers, Ambassadors, Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen - warm greetings to all.

On behalf of the Indian delegation, I thank the co-hosts of the MC12 for their efforts in organizing this much delayed Conference.

I carry the aspirations of 1.4 billion Indians who, despite global challenges, are actively participating as trusted partners in making this planet a better place.

Mr. Chairman, the humanitarian crisis triggered by spiraling food inflation is a matter of deep concern, and reminds us of the importance of nurturing domestic capacities to produce food. Rising food prices threaten the survival of millions and subjugate the poor and vulnerable nations/people to imperfect markets.

Our collective moral obligation is to ensure that no person, anywhere in the world, goes to bed hungry and WTO rules should facilitate this. The Covid-19 pandemic has reinforced once again the need and efficacy of food stockholding for public good. After the Bali Ministerial Decision in 2013, the General Council in 2014 mandated permanent solution on the issue of public foodstocks, which has already been delayed, should be the topmost priority for MC12, before we move to new areas. Nothing is more important than this for the people of the world.

The pandemic reinforced the importance of “One Earth One Health”, calling for global solidarity and collective action. My country ramped up supplies of medical products to provide medical and health items globally. Unfortunately, the WTO could not respond with alacrity. We have let down the people of the LDCs and developing countries. The rich countries need to introspect! We need to bow our heads in shame for our inability to respond to the pandemic in time.

Mr. Chairman, living in harmony with Nature is enshrined in our Indian culture. Traditional fishing communities in India customarily worship nature and use sustainable methods of fishing. They do not fish during the breeding season to allow stocks to be replenished, thereby maintaining the aquatic ecological balance.

Fishing by my country’s traditional fishermen and women is to address hunger, poverty, food and nutrition insecurity, which is largely sustenance fishing. Their right to life and livelihood cannot be curtailed in any manner. On the contrary, those nations responsible for depleted fish-stock should assume responsibility, having exploited the oceans for far too long by giving subsidies. Fisheries are global public commons and should be shared equitably considering the past and being mindful of future to strike the right balance on the principles of common but differentiated responsibility. For food security and eradication of hunger, sustainable fishing is as important as agriculture, which is an important SDG goal. Let us not repeat the mistakes of the Uruguay round in Agriculture in a Fisheries agreement.

WTO reform is necessary keeping development at its core, to be decided through a precise, transparent and inclusive process, upholding the basic principles and objectives of the WTO, particularly consensus-based decision making and S&DT.

India strongly believes that the WTO should not negotiate rules on non-trade-related subjects like climate change, gender, etc. which legitimately fall within the domain of other inter-governmental organisations.

India reiterates our Prime Minister’s clarion call for sustainable living through “Lifestyle For Environment (LiFE)”, a movement aimed at promoting environment-conscious lifestyle, focusing on “mindful and deliberate utilization” instead of “mindless and destructive consumption”. Mahatma Gandhi had said that “the world has enough for everyone’s needs, but not for everyone’s greed”.

In conclusion, let me say that when the world is facing severe challenges and expects the WTO to deliver solutions, the MC12 must send a strong message that the rich care for the poor, vulnerable and marginalized people and that we have come together to give them a better future.

The WTO should embrace a people first approach to trade.”

11-Jun-2022: Twelfth WTO Ministerial Conference all set to begin from 12th June 2022 in Geneva

The twelfth WTO Ministerial Conference is all set to begin from 12th June 2022 in Geneva, Switzerland after a gap of almost five years. The key areas of discussions and negotiations this year’s conference include WTO’s response to the pandemic, Fisheries subsidies negotiations, Agriculture issues including Public Stockholding for Food security, WTO Reforms and Moratorium on Custom Duties on Electronic Transmission.

A strong Indian delegation at the Conference is being headed by Shri Piyush Goyal, Union Minister for Commerce and Industry, Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution and Textiles. India has a vital stake in protecting the interests of all stakeholders in the country as well as the interests of the developing and poor nations that look up to the leadership of India at multilateral forums including WTO.

Agriculture

In the agriculture sector, in May 2022, the DG-WTO, brought three draft texts on agriculture, trade and food security and exemption of the World Food Programme from export restrictions for negotiations. India has reservations about some of the provisions in the draft decisions and has been engaging in the process of discussions and negotiations in order to be able to preserve the rights under the Agreement on Agriculture without undermining the existing Ministerial mandates.

An important issue under negotiation at the WTO relates to protection of India’s food grain procurement programme at Minimum Support Prices (MSP). Such programmes involve purchase from farmers at administered prices and are key to support to farmers and consumers in the country. WTO rules limit the subsidy that can be provided to such products being procured. This issue is being negotiated at the WTO by the G-33, coalition of developing countries of which India is a key member, and the African Group which have come together along with the ACP group in submitting a proposal on permanent solution to the issue of public stockholding for food security purposes on 31 May 2022. India co-sponsored a G-33 proposal for a permanent solution on PSH for food security purposes at the WTO, on 15 September 2021, which had co-sponsorship of 38 Members.

In the negotiations, improvements are being sought by developing countries over the Ministerial Decision adopted at the Ninth Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Bali in December 2013 where Members agreed to negotiate a permanent solution on the issue of public stockholding for food security purposes by the 11th Ministerial Conference of the WTO. It was agreed that in the interim, until a permanent solution is reached, Members would exercise due restraint (commonly termed as ‘peace clause’) in raising disputes in respect of public stockholding programmes for food security purposes instituted before 7th December 2013, even if countries exceeded their permissible limits. Consequent to the firm stand taken by India at the WTO, this peace clause was extended by a decision of the WTO General Council (GC) in November 2014 until a permanent solution was agreed and adopted. Thus, it was ensured that the ‘peace clause’ would be available in perpetuity. At the Nairobi Ministerial Conference held in December 2015, WTO members agreed to engage constructively to negotiate a permanent solution. India neither wants to link PSH issue with other Agriculture issues nor a Work Programme as negotiating a permanent solution has a standalone mandate at the WTO.

Another issue under discussion relates to additional disciplines on export restrictions on agricultural products. The proponents on export restrictions are seeking outcome on two issues: (i) exemption of foodstuffs purchased for non-commercial humanitarian purposes by the World Food Programme (WFP) from the application of export restrictions, and (ii) advance notification of export restrictive measures, including improving compliance with existing notification requirements. Under the provisions of the relevant WTO rules, WTO Members can temporarily impose export prohibitions or restrictions to prevent or relieve critical shortages of foodstuffs or other products essential to the country. India has concerns with making notification requirements burdensome for developing country Members in view of the sensitivities regarding shortages, price escalations and the implications of providing advance notice of such measures on the effectiveness of policies.

With reference to contributions to WFP, India has been a significant contributor to the WFP over the years and has not imposed export restrictions for WFP procurement, at the same time extending support to neighbours with food supplies. Blanket exemptions for the WFP is a concern for India in view of domestic food security.

Other areas of discussion in agriculture are issues relating to market access, special safeguard mechanism for developing countries to protect domestic agricultural producers against import surges and sudden price falls, through additional import duties, on the lines of a similar safeguard presently available to many developed and few developing countries.

WTO Fisheries Negotiations

India is keen to finalize the fisheries agreement in the upcoming MC-12 because irrational subsidies and overfishing by many countries are hurting Indian fishermen and their livelihood. India strongly believes that it should not repeat the mistakes made during the Uruguay Round that allowed a few members unequal and trade-distorting entitlements in agriculture. It unfairly constrained less developed members who did not have the capacity and resources to support their industry and farmers.

Fisheries are a common endowment to humanity, a global public common. Therefore, the sharing of such resources should be equitable and just. Any imbalance in the agreement would bind us to current fishing arrangements, which may not meet everyone’s future requirements. For sustainability, big subsidizers must take greater responsibility to reduce their subsidies and fishing capacities. Any agreement must recognize that different countries are at various stages of development and that current fishing arrangements reflect their current economic capacities. Needs will change with time as countries develop. Any agreement will have to provide for balancing current and future requirements to exploit fisheries in marine waters and the high seas.

Countries like India cannot be expected to sacrifice their future policy space because some members provided considerable subsidies to overexploit fisheries resources and are able to continue to engage in unsustainable fishing. India needs Special and Differential Treatment to protect the livelihoods of poor fishers and address food security concerns of a nation, have the necessary policy space for developing the fisheries sector, and sufficient time for to put in place systems to implement the disciplines under Over Capacity and Over Fishing, Illegal, Unreported Unregulated and Over Fished. India believes that the fisheries agreement has to be seen in the context of existing international instruments and the laws of the sea. The sovereign rights of coastal States to explore and manage the living resources within their maritime jurisdiction, enshrined in international instruments, must be protected.

Protection of the environment has been ingrained in the Indian ethos for ages and has been repeatedly emphasized in various international forums. India is committed to concluding the negotiations so long as it provides space for equitable growth and freedom in developing fishing capacities for the future without locking members into disadvantageous arrangements in perpetuity.

E-Commerce

In 1998, the General Council (GC) of the WTO established the Work Programme on E-Commerce (WPEC), with an exploratory and non-negotiating mandate, to comprehensively examine all trade-related issues relating to global e-commerce, taking into account the economic, financial and development needs of developing countries. Under the Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) on E-commerce, launched in 2017, 86 WTO Members are negotiating trade rules on issues such as electronic authentication, non-discriminatory treatment of digital products, free flow of cross-border data, data localization, permanent e-commerce moratorium, online consumer protection, personal data protection, access to source codes.

India believes negotiation on rules and disciplines in e-commerce would be premature given the highly asymmetrical nature of the existing global e-commerce space and lack of understanding on the implications of the multi-faceted dimensions of issues related to e-commerce. Developing countries need to preserve flexibility to implement policies to ‘catch-up’ with the developed countries in the digital arena. We first need to focus on improving domestic physical and digital infrastructure, creating supportive policy and regulatory framework and developing our digital capabilities. Accordingly, India has not joined the JSI on e-commerce as we believe that multilateral avenues are best-suited to achieve inclusive and development-oriented outcomes.

WTO members have agreed not to impose customs duties on electronic transmissions since 1998 and the moratorium has been periodically extended at successive Ministerial Conferences. At MC11, the moratorium was extended for two years. In the GC meeting held in December, 2019, Members agreed to maintain the current practice upto MC 12. At MC12, many WTO members are seeking temporary extension of the moratorium until MC13. India and South Africa have been making several joint submissions highlighting the adverse impact of the moratorium on developing countries and suggesting that a reconsideration of the moratorium is important for developing countries to preserve policy space for their digital advancement, to regulate imports and to generate revenue through customs duties.

WTO Reforms

India believes that WTO reforms discussions must focus on strengthening its fundamental principles, preserving Special and Differential Treatment (S&DT) including consensus-based decision making, non-discrimination, special and differential treatment, at this juncture and should neither result in preserving inherited inequities nor should they worsen the imbalances.

Among the reform proposals, the most consequential is the US-EU-Japan trilateral initiative, announced at the MC 11. The US-EU-Japan trilateral initiative, immediately after the postponement of MC 12, on 30 Nov. 2021, came out with a joint statement intending to address concerns relating to non-market practices, existing enforcement tools and developing new rules, as required. Prior to this, in Oct. 2021, the European Union came up with a structure of a Working Group it is proposing on WTO reforms.

India led the initiative to present a developing country reform proposal (Developing countries reform paper “Strengthening the WTO to promote development and inclusivity” in Aug. 2019 which was co-sponsored by Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Malawi, South Africa, Tunisia, Uganda, Zimbabwe and Oman. The paper has been revised a number of times with the latest one submitted in Feb. 2022 to keep the reform discussion alive in the run-up to MC12.

India introduced a proposal in November 2021 wherein India took the lead to question the proposal from the European Union and Brazil, both on the process and its objectives. It did not favor an open-ended exercise on WTO reforms, without first agreeing on the elements of the reform package. It proposed that the Members first need to agree on the elements of the reform package, precise nature of the process to be adopted to carry out the discussions, before the Ministers can agree to green-light the WTO reform work. India believes that the reform process and its outcomes should not alter, or in any manner affect, Members’ rights and obligations under the WTO Agreements and agreed mandates and that the agreed rules of procedure of the General Council shall apply to the review process.

WTO response to pandemic

Outcome on WTO’s response to the pandemic is one of the priority items for MC12 which includes TRIPS Waiver proposal. In June 2021, the GC Chair initiated a facilitator led process with Ambassador David Walker of New Zealand as the facilitator. He identified six verticals for work in this area – export restrictions; trade facilitation, regulatory coherence, co-operation and tariffs; role of services; transparency and monitoring; collaboration with other organizations; and framework to respond more effectively to future pandemics.

India is currently engaged in deliberations with various members and groups to build a consensus for a balanced outcome on all the aforesaid elements to address the concerns of all members.  India has concerns on additional ‘permanent’ disciplines in the WTO agreements to respond to the pandemic. India does not want to conflate the challenges of pandemic to areas like market access, reforms, export restrictions, and transparency. India wants that the WTO response needs to address supply side constraints for the WTO’s response to pandemic and outcomes be credible.

Regarding intellectual property, India seeks: (i) a recognition of the difficulties faced by developing countries and LDCs in utilising TRIPS flexibilities to address the COVID-19 pandemic, and (ii) a reaffirmation of the TRIPS waiver decision under the responses’ declaration.

India is a founding member of the WTO since 1 January 1995 and a member of GATT since 8 July 1948. India believes in a transparent and inclusive multilateral trading system and we are committed to work to strengthen the WTO. There is a need to preserve the basic principles of the WTO, including, non-discrimination, consensus-based decision making and special and differential treatment to the developing countries.

15-Jul-2021: Commerce Minister bats strongly for India and the Developing World at the WTO

Minister of Commerce & Industry, Consumer Affairs and Food & Public Distribution and Textiles, Shri Piyush Goyal today spoke strongly for the rights of developing countries at the Ministerial meeting of the WTO on the crucial fisheries subsidy negotiations. The meeting was attended by Ministers and Ambassadors from other WTO members and the DG WTO Dr. Ngozi.

Delivering a strong statement on behalf of India, Shri Goyal stated that India is very keen to finalize the agreement because irrational subsidies and overfishing by many countries is hurting Indian fishermen and their livelihood. He expressed his disappointment that the Membership is still short of finding the right balance and fairness in the agreement. The minister also emphasized Prime Minister Modi’s thrust to promote fishing sector and protect small fishermen.

Shri Goyal cautioned that we should not repeat the mistakes made during the Uruguay Round three decades ago that allowed unequal and trade-distorting entitlements for select developed country Members, particularly in agriculture. These unfairly constrained less developed members who did not have the capacity and resources to support their industry or farmers then. Shri Goyal expressed concern that any unbalanced or unequal agreement now would bind us into current fishing arrangements, which may not meet future requirements. He pointed out that it is essential that big subsidizers take greater responsibility to reduce their subsidies and fishing capacities, in accordance with the principles of ‘Polluter Pays’ and ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities’.

Shri Goyal observed that any agreement must recognize that different countries are at different stages of development and that current fishing arrangements reflect their current economic capacities. The agreement has to provide for current and future needs. While putting forth India’s demands, he said that the per capita fisheries subsidy given by most developing countries is minuscule compared to advanced fishing nations. Shri Goyal clearly demanded that countries like India who are yet to develop fishing capacities, cannot sacrifice their future ambitions. Allowing advanced nations to continue grant of subsidies is unequal, unfair and unjust.

While responding to the specific question posed by the DG to the ministers, he said that limiting Special & Differential Treatment (S&DT) to poor and artisanal fishermen only is neither appropriate nor affordable, and is not acceptable. S&DT is required to not only protect livelihoods of poor fishermen but also to address food security concerns, have necessary policy space for developing the fisheries sector and the need for larger time period for any transition..

Highlighting that protection of environment is ingrained in the Indian ethos for ages and has been repeatedly stated by our Prime Minister, Shri Goyal urged that India is committed to conclude the negotiations, as long as it provides for balancing current and future fishing needs, preserving space for equitable growth in fishing capacities in future, and an effective S&DT without any imbalances.

13-Dec-2017: Eleventh WTO Ministerial Conference

The Eleventh Ministerial Conference (MC11) of the WTO was held in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The meeting ended in stalemate after U.S. criticism and member country vetoes, raising questions about the body’s ability to govern increasingly disputed global trade. However, the outcome of the conference was a positive one for India as the country was able to secure the interests of its farmers as well food security for the poor.

India was successful stopping any of the new issues like investment facilitation and micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) from entering the ambit of the WTO. India became the second largest proponent of issues after the EU as it submitted proposals on six issues — public stock-holding, special safeguards mechanism, domestic regulation, domestic support, trade facilitation in services, and eCommerce.

India wanted; a permanent solution for food security by improving existing peace clause, Stopping entry of new issues like investment facilitation, e- commerce, MSMEs and Safeguarding WTO and multilateralism.

India got; No dilution in peace clause that protects MSP programmes for food grain, No fast- tracking of e- commerce talks, No commitments to curb fisheries subsidies and New issues and non-trade issues like gender and trade were not taken forward.

India should; Get legal backing for permanent solution, Broaden interests on agriculture and services and Form coalition to push interests.

Peace clause: It's an interim mechanism, as per which WTO members had agreed not to challenge developing nations at the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism if they breached the cap of the product-specific domestic support (which is 10% of the value of production). The ‘Peace Clause’ is available to developing nations, including India, till a permanent solution is found to public stock holding for food security purposes. The limited window offered by the Western powers for the peace clause was seen by India as insufficient assurance. The clause also requires full disclosure of MSPs and annual procurement for food security programmes, which the Government fears would leave India open to questioning by other countries on domestic matters.

The right to food is a basic human right. Therefore, Western misgivings about a country like India − where a third of the 1.3 billion-population lives beneath the poverty line − providing food subsidies seems hypocritical. The developed nations see India as a huge market for food grains and other products, but their produce is rendered uncompetitive when the government is willing to subsidise farmers, purchase their produce for a minimum support price and then sell it at a loss through the public distribution system and other channels. Accepting a temporary peace clause would be tantamount to admitting that the subsidy programmes in India and other developing nations violate global trade norms, leaving the nation a sitting duck if a complaint was to be raised in the WTO or other international forums later. This would also result in India losing its biggest bargaining chip in future WTO meetings.

9-Jun-2022: MoS (Agriculture), Ms. Shobha Karandlaje represents India at the 12th Meeting of BRICS Agriculture Ministers

The 12th BRICS Agriculture Ministers Meeting was held virtually last evening.  The meeting was attended by the Ministers for Agriculture of China, South Africa, Brazil, Russia and India.

The Union Minister of State for Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Ms. Shobha Karandlaje, participated in the meeting.  The Minister highlighted various steps and initiatives undertaken by the Government of India in the field of agriculture and for welfare of the farmers viz. PM KISAN, PM FASAL BIMA YOJANA, Soil Health Cards, Natural Farming, formation and promotion of FPOs etc.

The Minister mentioned the recent initiatives taken by the Ministry of Agriculture for increasing the use of digital technologies in agriculture like Agri-stack and India Digital Ecosystem for Agriculture (IDEA).

Ms. Shobha Karandlaje emphasized on India’s resolve to fulfill the Sustainable Development Goals of ending hunger and step up production and productivity of agriculture through sustainable use of natural resources.

The Minister highlighted the National Mission on Food & Nutrition with focus on development of nutri-cereals and bio-fortified varieties of crops and also highlighted importance of millets in food and nutrition security and climate resilience. She called for support and celebration of International Year of Millets, 2023 by the BRICS nations.

The BRICS Agriculture Ministers adopted a Joint Declaration of the Twelfth Meeting with the theme “Strengthening BRICS Cooperation for Coordinated Agricultural and Rural Development” and also the BRICS Strategy on Food Security Cooperation amongst BRICS member countries.