3

The Union Minister of Commerce and Industry

Shri Anand Sharma and Chief Minister of Uttar

Pradesh, Shri Akhilesh Yadav launched Delhi

Mumbai Corridor in Uttar Pradesh, in Lucknow

on March 2, 2014. “Uttar Pradesh will be the

main beneficiary of the Industrial Corridor

strategy being pursued by Government of India

as it is the meeting point of the Eastern and the

Western Corridors. The entire agriculture produce

of UP can be linked to cold chains and put on

Western Corridor at Dadri. This will enable all

agricultural products to reach the ports in record

time. The overall impact of the Western and

Eastern Corridors and the new Industrial Cities

being developed in the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial

Corridor project have the potential to create

over 30 lakh jobs in UP and enhance the State’s

Industrial Output by Rs. 24 lakh crores” Said Shri

Sharma on the occasion.

The growth of manufacturing sector is an essential

condition for sustaining GDP growth rate to

8-9% on a long term basis. Government of India

proposes to enhance the share of manufacturing

sector in GDP growth from 16% to 25% within

a decade and creating 100 million jobs. In this

regard, Government of India has announced the

pioneering National Manufacturing Policy 2013.

The conceptualization of the DMIC project as an

iconic symbol of Indo-Japan strategic partnership

was made. It has rapidly moved forward and

seven new industrial cities have advanced towards

implementation.

The Government has also announced three more

Industrial Corridor Projects namely:

(a) Amritsar-Kolkatta Industrial Corridor Project

with Eastern Dedicated Freight Corridor as

the back bone;

(b) Chennai-Bangalore Industrial Corridor

Project;

(c) Bangalore-Mumbai Economic Corridor

Project

The Industrial Corridors will lead to the

development of futuristic industrial cities with

transport connectivity effective and efficient

technologies, reliable energy supply and efficient

logistics. This will enable India to compete with

the best in the manufacturing and investment

estimation of the world and have the potential

of radically transforming India into global

manufacturing hub within a decade.

DMICDC in Uttar Pradesh:

Dadri-Noida-Ghaziabad Industrial City:

The vision of this 217 km. Investment Region is to

develop an Infrastructure led integrated industrial

city which is smart, sustainable, well connected

and having state of art support industrial and

social infrastructure. The master plan has adopted

the following principles:

• Developing Industrial City of Future endowed

with all the requisite physical & social

infrastructure like Water, Power, housing,

health, education etc.

• Transit Oriented Development: The region

to be supported by efficient mass transport

system. High intensity mixed land use is

proposed to be developed along major transit

nodes.

• Improved connectivity with Development

of intra and inter regional connectivity has

ANAND SHARMA AND UTTAR PRADESH CM LAUNCH DMIC PROJECT

4

been provided as part of the overall planning

process. Considering that development of

investment region will augment creation

of employment opportunity in the region,

there would be significant requirements for

improving the connectivity.• Focus on

Recycling of water and waste and integration

of smart technologies.

Industries in sectors viz. Food, Auto, Electrical &

Electronics, IT/ITeS, Research & Development,

Aerospace, Biotech and Hi tech are proposed in

the investment region.

Integrated Industrial Township at Greater

Noida:

The Integrated Industrial Township is planned on

the area of 302 ha with the key objective to create

a “knowledge based ecosystem” integrated with

industries leading to innovation and economic

development. The project will generate direct

industrial employment for about 58,000 workers.

It will be planned as the first comprehensive

built environment helping the launch of DMIC

Investment Region. The project will strengthen

the status of Greater Noida and Noida as a

manufacturing destination. It will also encourage

creation and growth of new businesses by fostering

collaboration and innovation, also enhancing the

development, transfer, and commercialization of

technology.

Integrated Transport Hub at Boraki:

The transport hub along the Delhi-Howrah trunk

rail corridor, with state-of-the art Multi-modal

Transit facility at Boraki Village is envisioned to

be the nucleus of development for Dadri-Noida-

Ghaziabad Investment Region, Greater Noida and

its upcoming extensions. The project will integrate

four transit nodes and user-friendly regional

railway terminal, a metro passenger terminal, an

ISBT, and the terminal station of the proposed

rapid rail connectivity between DNGIR and Delhi

International Airport. It shall be supplemented

by a Business Centre (equipped with office and

business hotel accommodation).

Seamless connectivity between Indira

Gandhi International Airport and Dadri-

Noida Ghaziabad Investment Region:

With the object of providing fast and adequate

rail based commuter connectivity to New Delhi,

various alignment options are currently being

explored to provide fast connectivity from the

proposed Boraki Station (catering the population

of Noida, Greater Noida and proposed Dadri-

Noida-Ghaziabad Investment Region) with the

Indira Gandhi International airport. The need

of the project has emanated from the long travel

time consumed by existing Road based transport

systems.

Multi Modal Logistics Hub Project at Dadri:

By virtue of industrial development there would

be an immediate need of developing the multi

modal logistics hub within the Investment Region.

The proposed MMLH is expected to handle 1.05

million TEUs.

5

India will conduct a dry run study in March 2014

on International North-South Transport Corridor

(INSTC), through Nhava Sheva (Mumbai)-

Bandar Abbas (Iran)- Tehran-Bandar Anzali

(Iran)-Astrakhan(Russia). The announcement

figured in the protocol signed after the 3rd

meeting of the Inter Governmental Commission

on Trade and Economic, Science and Technology

Cooperation between India and Azerbaijan by Dr.

E.M.S. Natchiappan, Minister of State (Commerce

& Industry) and Mr. Huseyngulu Baghirov,

Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources from

Azerbaijan, in New Delhi on February 25, 2014.

“The two countries have the requisite momentum

to take the relationship to next level. Completion

of the corridor will lead to mutually beneficial

connectivity between the two regions,” said Dr

Natchiappan.

During the meeting, both side reviewed the

statusof the construction of Gazvin-Rasht-

Astara (Iran)-Astara (Azerbaijan) railway route

for connecting the railway lines of International

North-South Transport Corridor. The Azerbaijani

side informed about the meeting between Iran

and Azerbaijan in November 2013 at which it

DRY RUN ON INTERNATIONAL NORTH-SOUTH TRANSPORT CORRIDOR NEXT MONTH

The Minister of State for Commerce and Industry, Dr. E.M.S. Natchiappan and the Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources, Azerbaijan, Mr. Huseyngulu Bagirov signing a protocol after the 3rd India-Azerbaijan Inter Governmental Commission Meeting on

Trade and Economic, Science and Technology Cooperation between India and Azerbaijan, in New Delhi on February 25, 2014.

National Hydroelectric Power

Corporation Limited also expressed

interest in the development of hydro

power plant in Azerbaijan

6

was decided to conduct technical and financial

feasibility study and discuss it in the next meeting

of the INSTC Coordination Council.

On Hydrocarbon front the Indian side noted the

Azerbaijani Government’s support for ONGC

Videsh Limited’s acquisition of Participating

Interest (PI) owned by Hess Corporation’s

wholly owned subsidiaries in the upstream and

midstream oil and gas assets in the Azerbaijani

Chirag Guneshli (ACG) Contract area and in

Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline. Both the

sides expressed satisfaction at the present level of

bilateral engagement in the hydrocarbon sector.

India and Azerbaijan also proposed to constitute a

Joint Working Group in the field of hydrocarbon.

The Indian Side reiterated the need to expedite

the formation of the Joint Working Group in the

field of hydrocarbon sector.

National Hydroelectric Power Corporation

Limited also expressed interest in the development

of hydro power plant in Azerbaijan. Both the sides

agreed to explore opportunities for participation

in renewable energy sector, energy efficiency and

various upcoming projects in oil and gas, petro-

chemicals, pipelines, etc. in Azerbaijan or India or

third countries in collaboration or joint venture.

The Indian Side showed keen interest in farming-

in into producing assets in Azerbaijan.

India also called for investment in the field

of hotel industry tourism and infrastructural

development as India allows 100 per cent foreign

direct investment (FDI) in hospitality sector on

automated basis.

India was assured on easing the access for Indian

Pharma products. Azerbaijani Side assured to look

into the matter regarding the issues relating to

registration and re-registration of Indian Pharma

products by the Ministry of Health, Azerbaijan.

Both sides reiterated there is potential to

cooperate with each other in various sectors

of trade like investment, transport, energy,

fertilizers, financial services, aviation, tourism,

culture, pharmaceuticals, health, agriculture &

animal products, information and communication

technology, chemicals, science, education, visa &

consular matters etc. “Apart from the traditional

areas of cooperation between the two countries,

there is a need to diversify the trade basket to

include more commodities and services”, said Dr

Natchiappan.

The total trade between India and Azerbaijan

rose from USD 565.98 million in 2011-12 to USD

608.55 million in 2012-13.

India and Azerbaijan reviewed

the status of the construction of

Gazvin-Rasht-Astara (Iran)-Astara

(Azerbaijan) railway route

7

India and Zimbabwe have decided to further

enhance their cooperation in the priority sectors

of cooperation namely, pharmaceuticals,

infrastructure, health sector, small and medium

industries. This was agreed during a bilateral

meeting of the Union Minister of Commerce &

Industry Shri Anand Sharma with Ms. Joice T

R Mujuru, Vice President of Zimbabwe and Mr.

Michael Bimha, Industry and Commerce Minister

of Zimbabwe, in Harare on February 3, 2014.

Shri Sharma also met Mr. Patrick Chinamasa,

Zimbabwe’s Minister of Finance. Shri Sharma

informed the Zimbabwean side that in addition

to the assistance being offered under the Lines

ANAND SHARMA MEETS ZIMBABWE’S VICE PRESIDENT, FINANCE AND COMMERCE MINISTERS

The Minister of State for Commerce and Industry, Dr. E.M.S. Natchiappan and the Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources, Azerbaijan, Mr. Huseyngulu Bagirov signing a protocol after the 3rd India-Azerbaijan Inter Governmental Commission Meeting on

Trade and Economic, Science and Technology Cooperation between India and Azerbaijan, in New Delhi on February 25, 2014.

The Union Minister for Commerce & Industry, Shri Anand Sharma meeting the Industry and

Commerce Minister of Zimbabwe, Mr. Michael Bimha, in Harare on February 03, 2014.

Anand Sharma offered India’s full

assistance in implementing the

Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable

Socio-Economic Transformation

programme in the areas of

infrastructure, agriculture, food

production, mining, capacity

development

8

of Credit, India is willing to provide assistance

under the Buyers’ Credit Programme. India, in

September 2012, approved a LoC worth USD 28.6

million for up-gradation of Deka Pumping Station

and the River Water Intake System in Zimbabwe.

During the discussions, it was also decided to

speed up the implementation of various projects

being executed under the India-Africa Forum

Summit Programme, which include a Food

Testing Laboratory, a Rural Training Park and a

Vocational Training Centre. India is mulling to set

up an FTL in Zimbabwe at an approximate cost

of US$ 2 million under the India-Africa Forum

Summit-II. Under the IAFS-II, India is in the

process of setting up Rural Technology Park in and a

Vocational Training Centre (VTC)/Incubation Centre.

Shri Sharma offered to the Zimbabwean side

to organize a special dedicated programme

to train the Government officials and private

sector executives in international trade. This

training will be organized at the Centre for WTO

Studies, Indian Institute for Foreign Trade, New

Delhi. IIFT’s offer is to conduct an Executive

Development Programme on International

Business in Zimbabwe, which will be conducted

for a period of one week for about 60 participants

from the Zimbabwean side.

Shri Sharma also expressed India’s commitment to

deepen and diversify the trade and investment ties

between India and Zimbabwe. The Indian Minister

offered India’s full assistance in implementing the

Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable Socio-Economic

Transformation (ZIMASSET) programme in

the areas of infrastructure, agriculture, food

production, mining, capacity development. In

order to identify areas of cooperation in the field

of production of generics, a delegation from

PHARMEXCIL will visit Zimbabwe to have

deliberations with Zimbabwean industry and

Government.

While India’s export to Zimbabwe stood at US$

133.08 million in 2012, it rose to US$ 176.26

million in 2013. On the other hand, India’s imports

to Zimbabwe decreased from US$ 33.02 million in

2012 to US$ 10.29 million in 2013. India exports

drugs, pharmaceuticals & chemicals, machinery

and instruments, electronic goods and plastic

& linoleum products as major commodities to

Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe, on the other hand exports

cotton, tea, non-ferrous metals and spices to India

as principal commodities.

India is mulling to set up a Food

Testing Laboratory in Zimbabwe

at an approximate cost of US$ 2

million under the India-Africa

Forum Summit-II

India, in September 2012,

approved a Line of Credit worth

USD 28.6 million for up-gradation

of Deka Pumping Station and the

River Water Intake System in

Zimbabwe

9

conveyed the resolution of issues pertaining to

market access of egg powder. They informed

that Indian entities have started getting the nod

for export of egg powder for the Custom Union

Markets. During the India-Russia Working Group

on Trade & Economic Cooperation (IRWGTEC)

(10th – 11th September, 2013), the Russian side

had stated that market access can be given if the

Indian products meet the requirements and norms

of the Custom Union. The Indian side responded

that the products match the international

standards and the Department is ready to receive

a delegation of food and veterinary authorities

to inspect the facilities. Today Russian side also

assured to expeditiously resolve the issue of

recognition of Government approved Indian labs

for enabling export of bovine meat from India.

Both sides also reviewed the progress of

identified ‘priority projects’. These projects

include establishment of joint stock Indo-

Russian enterprises for manufacturing light

helicopters Ka-226T; establishment of joint stock

Indo- Russian enterprises for manufacturing

light helicopters Ka-226T; JSC United Aircraft

Corporation preparation of participation in tender

for Indian program to develop civil aircraft; plant

construction for manufacturing butyl rubber with

capacity of 100000 tons per year at the production

site in Jamnagar. “Seeking to further strengthen

the special and privileged strategic partnership

and specifically to enhance the economic and

investment cooperation between India and Russia

on a bilateral basis, have identified investment

projects and proposals for special attention”, said

Shri Sharma.

IndIan products clear market access Issues In the custom unIon

The Deputy Prime Minister of Russia, Mr. Dmitry Rogozin meeting the Union Minister for Commerce & Industry,

Shri Anand Sharma, in New Delhi on February 26, 2014.

India and Russia have agreed to a proposal

for setting up a Joint Study Group for studying

the scope of CECA (Comprehensive Economic

Cooperation Agreement) with member-countries

of the Customs Union viz Russian Federation,

Kazakhstan and Belarus. This was conveyed

in a meeting between The Union Minister of

Commerce and Industry Shri Anand Sharma and

Mr. Dmitry Rogozin, Deputy Prime Minister,

Russia, in New Delhi on February 26, 2014.

Keeping in view of the support of the Russian side

on the idea of setting up a JSG for CECA between

India and the CU, Russian side was requested to

steer the process for CECA within the Eurasian

Economic Commission. Russian Side also

10

The Union Minister for Commerce & Industry Shri

Anand Sharma has asserted that India remains

one of the top destinations for Foreign Direct

Investment, despite the economic slowdown.

Speaking at a Students’ Interactive Session at

Sophia College in Mumbai on February 11, 2014,

Shri Sharma said India’s Foreign Direct Investment

policy has been progressively liberalized to make

the regime more investor friendly. He said in a

recent review of the policy the government has

amended the sectoral caps in some key areas to

stimulate FDI inflow. Between 2009-13, India

attracted FDI worth US $ 172.82 billion, despite

growing competition from emerging economies

like Brazil, Indonesia, Vietnam etc.

Responding to a student’s question about India’s

poor ranking on the ‘ease of doing business’

parameter, Shri Sharma admitted that red tape

continued to be a cause of concern, but added

that sincere efforts were being made to create a

conducive business environment. He said, his

Ministry has recently launched the e-Biz portal,

which allows potential entrepreneurs to complete

most of the formalities online, like submitting

forms, making payments, among others. They

can also track the status of their requests through

the portal. Shri Sharma said that two of the key

organizations crucial for clearance of projects –

Ministry of Environment & Forests and Central

Board of Customs & Excise are yet to come on

INDIA REMAINS ONE OF THE TOP DESTINATIONS FOR FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT: ANAND SHARMA

The Union Minister for Commerce & Industry, Shri Anand Sharma speaking at a Students’ Interactive Session on “Emerging India in a Globalized World: The Imperative of Change” in Sofia College, Mumbai on February 11, 2014.

By 2035, when the developed

world will be saddled with ageing

population, India, and not China,

would be the country that would

provide skilled manpower to

the world

11

board, but expressed confidence that he would

convince them to join in soon.

The Minister also said the National Manufacturing

Policy seeks to address the menace of red tape

by introducing accountability to ensure timely

clearance of proposals. Shri Sharma said India’s

current economic growth is not commensurate

with its potential and the country has capacity

to grow faster. He said that India is looking to

create as many as 100 million skilled jobs in the

manufacturing sector by raising its share of GDP

to 25 per cent from 16 per cent. “We have to

create jobs through industrialization and boosting

manufacturing. The dedicated Delhi-Mumbai

Industrial Corridor and the Chennai-Bangalore –

Mumbai industrial corridor will create specialized

manufacturing centres, with single window service

to expand our industrial base,” he added.

The Commerce & Industry Minister also defended

the FDI in retail policy of the government, stating

that its benefits can be reaped by farmers as well

as small and medium enterprises. “If a retail chain

sources its farm products from hinterland or

creates cold storage facility, it will be the farmer

in the villages who will benefit directly” he added.

He reiterated that entry of organized retailer will

not put the corner grocery stores out of business.

Shri Sharma also said that India’s young

population is an important asset. “By 2035, when

the developed world will be saddled with ageing

population, India, and not China, would be the

country that would provide skilled manpower to the

world” he added. Shri Sharma called upon the young

students to cultivate a positive mindset and notice

the developments that have taken place in India.

The Minister in his address also touched upon

various global and domestic issues including the

emergence of a multi-polar world, importance

of preserving democratic tradition, protecting

cultural unity of India and above all the importance

of education in building a strong nation.

Noted industrialist Adi Godrej in his remarks

called for early introduction of GST to rationalize

tax regime and boost productivity.

More than 150 students of Sofia College for

Women participated in the Minister’s Interactive

Session, “Emerging India in a Globalized World:

The Imperatives of Change”, organized by CII.

Anand Sharma said that two of the key organizations crucial for clearance of projects – Ministry of Environment & Forests and

Central Board of Customs & Excise are yet to come on board, but expressed confidence that he

would convince them to join in soon

Between 2009-13, India attracted

FDI worth US $ 172.82 billion,

despite growing competition from

emerging economies like Brazil,

Indonesia, Vietnam etc

12

The second meeting of India-UAE High Level Joint Task Force on Investments (HLTFI) was held in Mumbai on March 3, 2014. The HLTFI, co-chaired by Shri Anand Sharma, Union Minister of Commerce & Industry and Sheikh Hamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Chairman of the Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Court, was established in April 2012 as a platform to address mutual issues associated with existing investments between the two countries and to promote and facilitate cross-border investments. More than 30 government and private sector representatives from India and the UAE were present.

The second meeting of the HLTFI made progress on a number of fronts:

1. Discussions were held on supporting the establishment of a strategic petroleum reserve in India in a manner serving the common strategic interests of both countries and based on the principles of long term strategic partnership and cooperation. The decision was taken to establish another joint working group to make progress on this effort;

2. Wide-ranging discussions took place on priority sectors of engagement for channelling investments in the two countries;

3. Discussions took place on expediting the resolution of current pending issues associated with existing UAE investments in India (Etisalat, Emaar & DP World), and a plan

UAE INVITES INDIAN COMPANIES TO INVEST IN RENEWABLE ENERGY SECTOR

The Union Minister for Commerce & Industry, Shri Anand Sharma with the Ambassador of UAE in India, Mr. Muhamad Sultan Al Uwais, during the 2nd Meeting of the India-UAE High Level Joint Task Force on Investment, in Mumbai on March 03, 2014.

13

of action was agreed for the Legacy Issues sub-working group to address and resolve these issues;

4. Acknowledged TAQA, the Abu Dhabi-based international energy and water company, as the largest private operator of hydroelectric plants in India, following its acquisition, signed on Saturday 1st March, 2014 in New Delhi, of two hydroelectric plants in India. The equity invested by the TAQA-led consortium in the acquisition of the two hydroelectric plants will amount to approximately INR 3,820 crores (USD 616 million), of which 51% is from TAQA. The consortium will also acquire the assets` non-recourse project debt. The agreement follows the signing of the UAE-India Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement in December 2013 and the UAE`s commitment at the last HLTFI meeting to invest USD 2 billion in India`s infrastructure sector.

5. The UAE has invited the Indian companies in the renewable energy area to the UAE to meet with Masdar to discuss potential investments.

The UAE and India are significant trading partners and bilateral trade between the two countries is expected to continue its important growth in years to come. Alongside trade, the HLTFI would seek to achieve a similar growth path for investment with a clear roadmap between the two countries.

Commenting on the 2nd meeting of the HLTFI, Shri Sharma underlined India’s status as a major destination for foreign investments and the opportunities that exist for the UAE, especially in infrastructure areas such as roads and highways, power and utilities, civil aviation, ports, renewable energy, urban infrastructure, etc. and participation through the Infrastructure Debt Funds. He also highlighted India’s desire to participate in the hydrocarbon sector in the UAE, especially in the upstream petroleum sector. He

also mentioned that he sees greater opportunities for UAE investors as strategic partners in India’s growth story.

Sheikh Hamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan said that “today we have advanced the work of the Joint Task Force, and laid the foundation for further mutually beneficial investments and areas of common interest. We look forward to the ratification of the Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement, and the resolution of the outstanding issues identified at our first meeting. Together, our combined efforts will help to further strengthen bilateral trade relations and pave the way for continued strategic dialogue.”

The first meeting of the HLTFI, held in Abu Dhabi in February 2013, resulted in a wide-ranging discussion on matters of mutual interest including the identification of priority sectors of engagement for possible investments in the two countries. Since then, work conducted by the HLTFI to strengthen and develop bilateral relations in the field of investments culminated in the signing, in December, 2013, of a Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPPA), serving as a platform for promotion and reciprocal legal protection of investments in both countries.

As a result of decisions taken during the inaugural meeting of the HLTFI, several joint working groups have been created to address issues of mutual interest in the following sectors: Infrastructure, Investment & Trade, Energy, Manufacturing & Technology, Aviation, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and Legacy Issues. At today`s meeting, an action plan was agreed to expedite progress across all these joint working groups.

The next meeting of the UAE – India High Level Joint Task Force on Investments will be held on a mutually agreed date and location.

14

The Union Minister for Commerce & Industry Shri Anand Sharma dedicated the Nucleus Breeding Centre of the Domestication of Tiger Shrimp Project of Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Aquaculture in Port Blair on February 28, 2014. Speaking on the occasion, Shri Sharma said that establishment of the project will have far reaching benefits for the shrimp famers and the sea food exporters of India. “It is expected that within five years of the establishment of the project, tiger shrimp aquaculture in India would scale new heights to achieve additional production to the tune of 100000 MT and have export value of USD 1 billion,” said Shri Sharma. “Last year, we exported shrimps worth over US$ 1.8 billion. This is an area which has the potential of becoming a huge foreign exchange earner for our country,’ added Shri Sharma. The Minister further added that India ranks second only to China in global aquaculture production producing 4.64 million tonnes annually out of the world’s total production of 60 million tones.

“There is no doubt that production of disease free varieties of Tiger prawns will assure market access to advanced markets which have much higher health standards. It will also catalyse the growth of ancillary industry in the entire value chain of sea food processing,” added the Minister. Shri Sharma said that “with the upgradation of the airport in Port Blair, there will be a surge in marine exports in the country.” He also said that the non-trade barrier issues in shrimp with Japan have been resolved.

Applauding the Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Aquaculture as being front ranking scientific organization in this sector in India, Shri Sharma also added that “they will shortly be granted four patents in adaptable aquaculture technology”

for which they have applied. The Minister said that the seafood industry of India is poised at a crucial juncture and it needs a dramatic technology infusion capacity building and market expansion. “It needs much greater value addition for providing remunerative prices to our resource poor farmers. I would urge MPEDA to create innovative implementation models which would create necessary forward and backward linkages and create economies of scale.”

Later in the day, Shri Sharma also laid the foundation stone for the Multi-species Grouper Hatchery at Rangachang, Andaman and the Broodstock Multiplication Centre for Tiger Shrimp at Kanyakumari. Once the aquaculture of groupers is established, Shri Sharma said that “production can be increased manifold and will facilitate export of this item in live condition which has the potential of enhancing the income by up to five-fold for our fishermen.”

Shri Sharma also praised Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA) for introducing several scientific technologies for the aquaculture sector. “MPEDA has been consistently providing technology support for commercial hatcheries and extension in financial services in the entire coastal area to ensure propagation of scientific shrimp farming practices in the country,” said Shri Sharma. At the same time, Shri Sharma stressed the “need to make continuous investments in technology upgradation, research and development for addressing the diseases which have struck the shrimp aquaculture industry.”

Speaking on the trade scenario, Shri Sharma expressed hope that the annual trade figures will be higher this year in comparison to the last year. He also hoped that the Foreign Direct Investment figure for the last five year will cross USD 215 billion.

ANAND SHARMA INAUGURATES NUCLEUS BREEDING CENTRE FOR TIGER SHRIMP IN PORT BLAIR

15

On February 18, 2014, the Minister of State for

Commerce and Industry Dr. E M Sudarsana

Natchiappan launched a Cement Information

System (CIS) Portal for on-line collection of data

regarding production, dispatch, export, import

etc. of cement across the country. The portal

is first of its kind in India which would enable

cement manufactures in India to upload data on

the central server of the Department. The cement

producers have been provided USER ID and

PASSWORD for this purpose. This will facilitate

the Government in analyzing the sector for

appropriate policy measures.

Speaking on the occasion, Dr. Natchiappan stated

that the cement sector plays an important role in

the Indian economy and suitable interventions

through policy are required for higher growth. The

portal will help in gathering data in real time. The

real time data collection will be better utilized for

answering the questions in Parliament apart from

its value in policy making process.

The Minister congratulated the entire NIC team

for their commitment for its development and

launching within short period of time.

E M S NATCHIAPPAN LAUNCHES CEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM PORTAL

The Minister of State for Commerce and Industry, Dr. E.M.S. Natchiappan launching the Cement Information System (CIS) Portal, in New Delhi on February 18, 2014.

16

Roberto Azevêdo urges members to make 2014 the year to implement Bali

and put Doha back on trackAt the first meeting of WTO ambassadors after

the 9th Ministerial Conference, Director-General

Roberto Azevêdo told the Trade Negotiations

Committee on February 6, 2014 that: “Bali

represents not just a huge achievement for all

of us—but also a huge opportunity. There is real

political momentum and we must build on it.” He

said he had asked the chairs of the negotiating

groups to “start a dialogue with members on

(Doha Round) issues that we may be able to take

forward”.

Good morning everybody.

As this is our first meeting of 2014, I would like to

wish you all a happy and successful New Year — I

very much hope it is a productive one.

I want to thank you all for the role you played,

individually and jointly, in delivering that historic

success in Bali.

After an 18 year drought, Bali proved that the

WTO can deliver negotiated outcomes.

It delivered significant gains for the global

economy and particularly for our developing

and least-developed members. And it moved the

spotlight back onto us here in Geneva.

But Bali has not finished the job.

We have two very significant tasks before us.

First and foremost, we need to implement the

decisions and agreements reached in Bali.

Second, the Bali Declaration instructs us to

prepare a clearly defined work program on the

remaining Doha Development Agenda issues by

the end of 2014.

And we should remember that the Bali Declaration

instructs that those areas where decisions were

non-binding in nature must be a priority in our

post-Bali work. We must keep a relentless focus

on these issues.

So the real work starts now.

These two tasks will form the bulk of our work

over the course of this year — and so this is what I

want to talk about today.

Implementing the Bali Package

First, let’s focus on implementation.

The true significance of the Bali results, and the

tangible realization of their benefits, will only be

achieved as a result of the actions that you, the

members, take over the coming months.

This is an important test for the system — and one

which we must pass if we want to move forward

and see the benefits of Bali made real.

We must work together to keep up the momentum

and the pressure that allowed us to reach a

successful outcome in the first place.

The Bali Package consists of ten ministerial

decisions, each of which requires different steps to

take forward.

A lot of the implementation efforts will fall outside

the TNC — but for clarity I think it would be

helpful to take a few moments to set out some of

the actions needed to implement each of those

decisions.

Let’s start with Trade Facilitation, where the work

has already started, and where there are important

milestones for implementation over the coming

WTO DEVELOPMENTS

17

months.

The first meeting of the Preparatory Committee

was convened by the General Council Chairman

on 31 January.

And we already have a chair, as you elected

Ambassador Esteban Conejos by acclamation. Let

me congratulate Ambassador Conejos, and wish

him all the best in his new role.

The Preparatory Committee will swiftly commence

the execution of the tasks Ministers gave it in Bali

— specifically, to ensure the entry into force of the

Trade Facilitation Agreement and prepare for its

efficient operation.

The Bali decision on Trade Facilitation also calls

on the Committee to carry out three immediate

tasks:

• undertaking a legal review of the Agreement;

• drafting a protocol of amendment to include

the Trade Facilitation Agreement in Annex IA

of the WTO Agreement;

• and receiving notifications of Category A

commitments.

Our ability to move the whole of the WTO agenda

forward hinges on our ability to fulfil the promises

to provide timely and effective technical assistance

and capacity building wherever it is demanded by

developing and least-developed countries.

To help those countries make full use of the

flexibilities set out in Section II, and to facilitate

preparations for the Agreement’s entry into force,

the Secretariat will continue its needs assessment

program. But in addition there is an imperative on

developing members to identify what support they

need as early as possible.

Donor members and various donor organizations

are also getting ready to provide comprehensive

support on Trade Facilitation.

I met with them yesterday for an initial

conversation about the importance of coordination

and transparency in the provision of support to

developing countries.

Many donors were present at the meeting — over

25 countries and organisations were there.

In due course, the conversation needs to be

broadened out to include beneficiary countries

once there is greater clarity on their needs.

The WTO will of course help to facilitate

the interaction between the donors and the

beneficiaries.

So there is important — and urgent — work ahead.

I must also take this opportunity to thank

Ambassador Sperisen-Yurt for his leadership and

chairmanship of the Negotiating Group on Trade

Facilitation.

Let’s turn now to Agriculture, where there were

three decisions in Bali.

For each of these three decisions, Ministerial

guidance specifically indicates that the Committee

on Agriculture will undertake follow-up activities

in terms of monitoring and review.

The Committee on Agriculture met on 29 January

and discussed follow-up on these issues.

So let me briefly take each one in turn…

First, export competition. This decision calls for

dedicated discussions based on notifications and

a questionnaire to be circulated by the Secretariat.

The annex of the Declaration includes elements

for enhanced transparency on export competition

which will form the basis of the Secretariat’s

questionnaire.

The Committee on Agriculture agreed to hold the

annual discussion on export competition during

its meeting in June this year. This timing could

18

also be appropriate in 2015 as it would provide

adequate time between that discussion and the

review foreseen at MC10. That’s for you, the

members, to follow through in the Committee on

Agriculture.

The Secretariat will circulate the questionnaire

soon with a view to circulating a summary of

the questionnaire results in advance of the June

meeting.

Second, with respect to the decision on TRQ

administration, the Committee on Agriculture is

expected to review and monitor the implementation

of the Understanding.

The monitoring to be conducted in the context of

the TRQ underfill mechanism will depend on the

members’ submissions.

Some members have indicated that they planned

to take advantage of this mechanism. Others noted

that the Committee on Agriculture could begin

applying the monitoring procedures laid out in

the Annex of this Decision as soon as submissions

were received by the Committee.

That leaves the decision on public stockholding

for food security purposes. Here the monitoring

activity of the Committee will again depend on

how members decide to push this monitoring

agenda.

As you will recall, Ministers agreed to establish

a work program to be undertaken in the

Committee on Agriculture with the aim of making

recommendations for a permanent solution on

this issue — that’s what the decision says. This

work program will take into account members’

existing and future submissions.

Indeed, the conversation on the work program

has already started with a discussion at last week’s

meeting of the Committee on Agriculture.

I’d like now to turn to the decisions on Development

and LDC issues.

The adoption of an LDC package was a key

achievement of the Bali Ministerial — representing

a very significant step forward towards the better

integration of LDCs into the multilateral trading

system.

But, here too, Bali represents a beginning, not an

end.

A significant amount of effort is needed to convert

these decisions into concrete gains for the LDCs.

On the operationalization of the services waiver

the LDCs will need to table their collective request

as soon as possible. This will kick-start the process,

leading towards the high level meeting at which

members will indicate if, and in what areas, they

are prepared to give preferential access to LDCs.

In parallel, the Council for Trade in Services is

convening an informal meeting to discuss the

operationalization of the waiver. I encourage all

members to actively participate in this process,

so that we can bring fruition to this important

instrument.

Next, the decision on Duty-Free Quota-Free

market access.

Similarly here, members will need to notify their

DFQF schemes and any other relevant changes

that they may have adopted. In my view the LDCs

should be pursuing this issue in the Committee on

Trade and Development. Of course all members

have a responsibility here, and the Secretariat

will be on hand to support the process, but the

demandeurs must keep up the pressure.

The same goes for the last decision in the LDC

package — which is on preferential rules of origin.

Members have concrete guidelines before them

to make further improvements to their LDC

19

preference schemes. I encourage members,

whenever possible, to draw on these multilateral

guidelines and make a further contribution to help

ease market access for LDC products. There will be

an opportunity to annually review developments

through the Committee on Rules of Origin.

The other important development decision taken

at Bali — though not specific to LDCs — was to

establish a Monitoring Mechanism on Special

and Differential Treatment. Members will take

this forward through a Dedicated Session of the

Committee on Trade and Development.

I should also mention here those items which were

held over from Bali — for example the Cancun 28

proposals and the 6 Agreement-specific proposals.

These items are under active consideration in the

Special Session of the Committee on Trade and

Development and this work will need to be picked

up as soon as possible.

The tenth decision of the Bali package relates

to Cotton, which of course is sensitive for many

members, particularly the Cotton-4.

I understand that informal consultations are

underway to call a meeting of the Director-

General’s Consultative Mechanism. That meeting

would likely be held back-to-back with a dedicated

discussion on cotton in a meeting of the Committee

on Agriculture in order that we can move this issue

forward.

You all worked incredibly hard last year to conclude

the negotiations and deliver the Bali package.

So now let’s make it count, by delivering the

benefits of the package.

DDA Work Programme

But, as I say, implementation is only the first task.

The second is to get talks going again and prepare

a clearly defined work program on the remaining

Doha Development Agenda issues by the end of

2014.

I have begun some very early and very preliminary

consultations on these issues — for example:

• At the World Economic Forum in Davos I

attended the informal ministerial gathering

convened by the Swiss Confederation — about

which Ambassador Winzap will say a few

words when I have concluded my remarks.

• Last week I visited India and Oman where I

talked to the business sector and government

officials.

• In recent days I have addressed members of

the LDC and ACP Groups.

• I have also seized every opportunity to

exchange views with individual delegations.

I’ve been listening to members very carefully.

I think that in order to look forward, we must also

look back. We must learn from the mistakes of the

past — and also, now, from the success in Bali.

Bali offered us a number of good lessons in how to

be successful multilaterally.

But I believe it will be very difficult to replicate

the approach where we avoided the core issues

— agriculture, industrial goods, services — and

found harvests elsewhere.

Most likely, any future multilateral engagement

will require outcomes in agriculture. This was a

central pillar of the DDA and many delegations

have been stressing that, if agriculture comes into

play, then so do the other two legs of the tripod:

industrial goods and services.

We may even conclude that we’re not yet ready

to properly tackle these three areas, but we can’t

avoid the conversation.

Even though we can’t replicate Bali precisely, there

20

are lessons learned that we must keep in mind.

Our dialogue about the future is just beginning,

but I believe that some parameters seem to be

already framing this conversation.

I will talk through these parameters now, as I

perceive them personally — though I stress that this

is not an exhaustive list, nor is it arranged in order

of priority or importance. It is intended merely to

provide some inspiration in our discussions.

• First, development has to be preserved as the

central pillar of our efforts. Above all, we must

have tangible results for the poorest members.

This remains a development round.

• Second is that we must be realistic and focus

on those things which are doable. Instead of

abstract goals, let’s look at what we can do

and set goals that are reachable. Members

have to be honest with each other and with

their domestic constituencies about what can

realistically be expected from the negotiations.

We must find a balance between ambition and

realism.

• The third parameter is that the big issues in

the DDA are interconnected, and therefore

they must be tackled together. So, again, as it

was in Bali, balance is key. We must find an

approach in which all members contribute and

all members benefit. And, again, where no one

is faced with impossible demands. Bali worked

because all members wanted it. Everyone has

to see themselves in the issues on the table.

• Fourth, in order to make headway in these

areas, we must be ready to be creative and

keep an open mind to new ideas that may

allow members to overcome the most critical

and fundamental stumbling blocks. This

creativity, however, has to be coherent with

the DDA mandate, which is flexible enough to

accommodate new paths. Let me be very clear

about this: I am not proposing changing the

DDA mandate — quite the opposite really.

• Fifth, the process must continue to be inclusive

and transparent, engaging all members at all

stages of the negotiations. This was a very

important factor in Bali.

• Sixth, our efforts must have a sense of urgency.

This was also an essential element of the

success in Bali. We must be careful, however,

not to rush recklessly into another cycle of

failures due to bad planning. We cannot afford

to wait another 18 years for a result.

Finally, I think that, as well as being open-minded

to new ideas, we should also be open-minded

about how far-reaching our next steps will be.

Of course what we want to do is to find a path

towards the conclusion of the Round. It may be

that it can be done in one step — or we may need

more than one step. Again, that is something that

we have to discuss.

But whatever we do we will always be moving in

one direction — and that is towards the conclusion

of the Doha Round.

I think that we should keep these parameters

in mind over the coming weeks and months. In

summary:

development as a central pillar

• doability — balancing realism and ambition,

with no-one being asked to do the impossible

• recognising that the issues are interconnected

so must be tackled together

• staying creative and open minded

• always being inclusive and transparent

• maintaining a sense of urgency

21

As time is of the essence, I have asked the Chairs

of the Negotiating Groups to start a dialogue

with members on issues that we may be able to

take forward — using the parameters that I just

mentioned as a guide for discussions.

The exact format of these meetings will be up

to the Chairs — they will have full discretion on

how they conduct these discussions — but I have

asked them to ensure that the format is as open as

possible.

I think we need to start by asking simple questions:

What went wrong? What should we do now? What

level of ambition should — or could — we have?

While we may start with a range of different

opinions I trust that in time commonalities will

emerge and, in due course, that we will be able to

find convergence.

And I can assure you that there is no hidden or pre-

cooked agenda here. I am approaching this process

— along with the Chairs — with a completely open

mind. We want to hear your views.

I don’t intend to impose any strict time-frame

on this initial process — but I have asked the

negotiating chairs to feed back with some initial

thoughts and findings from their consultations, if

possible at the General Council on 14 March.

Conclusion

Bali represents not just a huge achievement for all

of us — but also a huge opportunity.

There is real political momentum and we must

build on it.

The work has only just begun.

2014 should be the year that we implement our

first negotiated outcomes — and the year that the

Doha Round is put back on track.

It will not be easy, but it is achievable.

We all have a role to play. Every voice will be

heard. And I hope that together we can capitalise

on the success in Bali, and seize the opportunity

that it has provided.

Thank you for listening.

US files dispute against India over measures relating to solar cells and solar

modulesIn a communication received on February 11, 2014,

the United States notified the WTO Secretariat of

a request for consultations with India concerning

certain measures relating to domestic content

requirements for solar cells and solar modules. The

measures correspond to Phase II of the Jawaharlal

Nehru National Solar Mission programme.

India adopted this programme to promote

development of solar power generation facilities.

According to the United States, India requires

solar power developers to purchase and use solar

cells and solar modules of domestic origin.

The United States adds that solar power developers

receive certain benefits and advantages, such as

long term tariffs for electricity, contingent on their

purchase and use of solar cells and solar modules

of domestic origin.

The claim states that India provides less

favourable treatment to imported solar cells and

solar modules that that accorded to like products

originated in India and they are trade-related

investment measures inconsistent with India’s

obligations under the GATT.

The request for consultations formally initiates a

dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties

an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find

a satisfactory solution without proceeding further

with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have

failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may

22

request adjudication by a panel.

India launches safeguard investigation on saturated fatty alcohols

On February 19, 2014, India notified the WTO’s

Committee on Safeguards that it initiated on

February 13, 2014 a safeguard investigation on

saturated fatty alcohols.

A safeguard investigation seeks to determine

whether increased imports of a product are

causing, or is threatening to cause, serious injury

to a domestic industry.

During a safeguard investigation, importers,

exporters and other interested parties may

present evidence and views and respond to the

presentations of other parties.

A WTO member may take a safeguard action (i.e.

restrict imports of a product temporarily) only if

the increased imports of the product are found to

be causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury.

India launches safeguard investigation on bare elastomeric filament yarn

On March 5, 2014, India notified the WTO’s

Committee on Safeguards that it initiated on

February 28, 2014 a safeguard investigation on

bare elastomeric filament yarn.

In the notification, India indicated as follows:

“All interested parties may make their views

known within a period of 30 days from the date

of the notice issued by the Director General

(Safeguards) i.e. 28 February 2014 to:

The Director General (Safeguards)

Bhai Vir Singh Sahitya Sadan: 2nd Floor,

Bhai Vir Singh Marg,

Gole Market, New Delhi-110 001, INDIA.

Telefax: 011-23741542

E-mail: dgsafeguards@nic.in

Any other party to the investigation who wishes to

be considered as an interested party may submit

its request so as to reach the Director General

(Safeguards) on the aforementioned address

within 15 days from the date of the aforesaid date

of notice of the Director General (Safeguards).”

A safeguard investigation seeks to determine

whether increased imports of a product are

causing, or is threatening to cause, serious injury

to a domestic industry.

During a safeguard investigation, importers,

exporters and other interested parties may

present evidence and views and respond to the

presentations of other parties.

A WTO member may take a safeguard action (i.e.

restrict imports of a product temporarily) only if

the increased imports of the product are found to

be causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury.

Revised WTO agreement on Government Procurement to come into force on

April 6, 2014The revised WTO Agreement on Government

Procurement (GPA) will come into force on April

6, 2014, effectively two years from the date on

which the Protocol amending the Agreement was

adopted in March 2012. The Chairman of the WTO

Committee on Government Procurement, Bruce

Christie of Canada, confirmed that the threshold

of acceptances by two-thirds of the Parties, which

is required for the revised Agreement to come

into force, had been met, with Israel accepting the

Protocol on March 7.

The revised Agreement streamlines and

modernizes the Agreement’s text, for example by

taking proper account of the widespread use of

electronic procurement tools. It provides gains in

market access for the Parties’ businesses that have

been estimated as in the range of $80-100 billion

23

annually. This results from the addition, to the

Agreement’s scope of application, of numerous

government entities (ministries and agencies)

and the coverage of new services and other areas

of the public procurement activities. The revision

also incorporates improved transitional measures

that are intended to facilitate accession to the

Agreement by developing and least-developed

economies.

The ten Parties that have, to date, accepted the

Protocol to amend the Agreement are, in the order

in which they have accepted it, Liechtenstein;

Norway; Canada; Chinese Taipei; the United

States; Hong Kong, China; the European Union;

Iceland; Singapore and Israel.

The Chairman, Mr Christie, said that the prompt

bringing into force of the revised agreement

“shows the Parties’ firm commitment to the

Agreement and augurs well for its future as an

increasingly important element of the framework

for global trade.”

The entry into force of the GPA is in keeping

with Ministers’ undertaking at Bali to work hard

to achieve this goal by the two year anniversary

of the adoption of the GPA revision. Once again,

Members can celebrate a successful outcome.

The Director General of the WTO, Roberto

Azevêdo, said:

“This is a very welcome achievement. The revised

WTO Agreement on Government Procurement

will open markets and promote good governance

in the participating Member economies. The

fact this has been achieved so quickly shows the

importance that the Parties attach to the GPA

and is further evidence, after the successful Bali

Package, that the WTO is back in business. The

modernized text of the revised GPA and the

expanded commitment to market access should

prompt other WTO Members to consider the

potential advantages of joining.”

The GPA is a plurilateral treaty that commits

members to certain core disciplines regarding

transparency, competition and good governance

in the public procurement sector. It covers the

procurement of goods, services and capital

infrastructure by public authorities. The aim of

the Agreement is to open up, as much as possible,

government procurement markets to international

competition and to help eradicate corruption in

this sector.

In addition to the 43 WTO Members that already

participate in the GPA, ten other WTO Members,

including China, Moldova, Montenegro, New

Zealand and Ukraine, are in the process of

negotiating accession to it.

Members query India’s export subsidies on sugar and other farm trade

programmesIndia’s new support programme for sugar sparked

comment among a number of delegations with

some urging India to remove immediately

what they described as export subsidies that

will potentially impact world trade, when WTO

members met as the Agriculture Committee on

March 21, 2014.

The discussion was about one of 31 sets of

questions and answers, a key part of the agenda

of the committee, whose major responsibility is

to oversee the present Agriculture Agreement and

members’ commitments in agriculture.

The largest number of comments from delegations

were on India’s sugar programme. The topics

that also aroused interest included Costa Rica’s

on-going breach of its domestic support limit

resulting from its guaranteed rice prices and its

24

intention to correct this breach in 2015 (the US

said it appreciated the fact that Costa Rica had

shared information consistently but that breaches

of commitments are always a serious concern),

Thailand’s rice support programme known as

“paddy pledging”, Canada’s reclassification of

pizza toppings to prevent traders avoiding import

duties, and India’s domestic support for rice and

wheat and its food security programme.

Meanwhile, members continued their work on

implementing the decisions and a declaration from

the December 2013 Bali Ministerial Conference,

and they discussed information that members

shared on their policies, including the latest US

Farm Bill, and trends in trade and agricultural

trade policies.

And a voluntary solution has been found to the

long-running question of how to update the 1995

list of significant exporters — used to define who

should provide information on their exports in

order to help members monitor whether exports

might have hidden subsidies. The solution is

voluntary because members have failed to agree

on a formal decision.

Some details

One of the key responsibilities of the “regular”

Agriculture Committee, which consists of all

159 WTO members (and does not deal with the

current agriculture negotiations), is to see how

countries are complying with their commitments

on subsidies and market access and to discuss

issues that arise.

It monitors whether members are keeping the

promises they have made in the WTO. Out of the

31 sets of questions in this meeting, 15 were about

information available elsewhere that has not yet

been notified, and 16 sets of questions were about

some of the 48 notifications on their programmes

that members submitted since the last meeting

in January (seven questions on tariff rate quotas,

eight on special safeguards, 18 on domestic

support and 15 on export subsidies).

Questions and answers from all meetings

are compiled in the Agriculture Information

Management System database, and each question

is identified by a code, AG-IMS ID XXXXX, where

the Xs represent numbers. These are a selection:

India’s export subsidies for sugar

Australia, Colombia, Brazil and the EU asked

India about a new policy announced in February

involving incentive payments to Indian sugar

exporters. Along with the facts and figures they

sought, some of them asked what the legal basis

under the WTO was for the export subsidies.

Several pointed out that India has agreed not to

subsidize exports.

India said the policy is designed to encourage

diversification away from white sugar to raw sugar

and that no intervention payments have been paid

yet. India said export subsidies will be notified to

the WTO.

Australia said the 3,300 rupees per tonne incentive

payment is the equivalent of 14–16% of the world

price. Since India is the third largest exporter of

sugar this threatens to seriously distort trade,

Australia said and it asked India to remove export

subsidies immediately. It said that the amount

envisaged could potentially finance all its own

exports half way across the Pacific Ocean.

The Agriculture Agreement allowed developing

countries to subsidize marketing costs and internal

transportation costs during the agreement’s

“implementation period”.

Brazil asked how India could justify the subsidies

25

since there has been no consensus to extend

these special provisions for developing countries.

Previously, in response to similar questions raised

in the past, India argued that developing countries

are still allowed to use the special provision because

the 2005 Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration says,

“developing country Members will continue to

benefit from the provisions of Article 9.4 of the

Agreement on Agriculture for five years after the

end-date for elimination of all forms of export

subsidies” — and export subsidies still have not

yet been eliminated.

Sharing the concerns were Paraguay, Thailand,

El Salvador, Canada, the US, Pakistan and New

Zealand.

Other questions and answers

Thailand’s paddy-pledging programme: Thailand

said it is finally about to submit information on its

domestic support for 2008, and that the present

paddy pledging programme has ended — it

cannot be renewed while the government remains

a “caretaker” because of political problems,

Thailand said.

Those problems have also prevented officials from

preparing answers to the questions about the

programme in more recent years, Thailand said.

Under the programme, farmers can borrow from

the government using unmilled rice (paddy) as

collateral valued at target prices, which farmers

can forfeit if market prices do not meet the targets.

India’s domestic programmes: Members

continued to question India about details of its

support programmes for rice and wheat and its

stockholding programme for food security. Some

asked when India is going to circulate more up-

to-date information on its domestic support — the

most recent notification is for the 2003/04 year.

India said the notifications are being prepared.

Overdue notifications: Overall, 1,799 notifications

were overdue by the end of 2012, the chairperson

observed, the largest numbers being in domestic

support and export subsidies. He was introducing

the latest updated of the Secretariat paper on

notifications, G/AG/GEN/86/REV.17, 22 pages)

which also says that a total of 3,400 notifications

had been received by 6 March 2014, since the

WTO came into being in 1995.

Implementing the Bali farm package

Work has already begun on the Bali Ministerial

Conference declaration on export subsidies

and measures having similar effects (known

collectively as “export competition”). The

Secretariat has circulated a questionnaire for

members to supply information on this, and the

chairperson said three delegations have already

replied. The information is being prepared for the

next Agriculture Committee meeting in June.

The declaration is the strongest political statement

since the 2005 Hong Kong Ministerial Conference

on export subsidies and related policies. It deals

with what some members have described as

the agricultural trade policies having the worst

distorting effect on world markets.

Members have agreed to “exercise utmost

restraint” in using any form of export subsidy,

to “ensure to the maximum extent possible” that

progress will be made in eliminating all forms of

export subsidies, that actual subsidies will stay

well below the permitted levels, and that similar

disciplines will apply to export policies that may

have the same effect as subsidies. The subsidies

are currently at lower levels than previously,

notably because of high commodity prices.

The chairperson also reported on discussions in

26

the informal meetings on this and on “tariff quota

administration”, a Bali decision designed to reduce

the chances that the methods governments use to

share out these quotas are also trade barriers.

He said some members urged delegations to

start to use the decision quickly, pointing out

that the tariff quota administration decision is to

be reviewed in four years’ time, and that seeking

a change in the administration method can take

three years. Tariff quotas are where quantities

inside a quota are charged lower import duties

than quantities outside the quota.

Members also discussed unofficial papers from

the Cairns Group on these two “Bali package”

subjects.

The problematic significant exporters’ list

Meanwhile, members have agreed on a voluntary

solution to the long-running question of how to

update the 1995 list of significant exporters —

used to define who should provide information on

their exports in order to help members monitor

whether exports might have hidden subsidies.

They have failed to agree formally proposed

solutions currently on the table, including the

updated list itself, how to add new products and

how to separate information notified in broad

categories of products such as “coarse grains”,

into component parts such as rye, barley, oats,

maize (corn), sorghum and some other products.

But no delegation objected to the chairperson’s

suggestion that countries could voluntarily

announce that they consider themselves no

longer to be on the list for the product or products

concerned — meaning that they will not notify

their exports of those products — since they no

longer meet the 5% threshold trade share to qualify

as significant exporters. Similarly, countries that

do meet the threshold can voluntarily notify their

exports as significant exporters.

Chairperson Bayer first put the idea of a voluntary

solution to an informal meeting earlier in the week

and repeated it in a report to the formal meeting.

A number of delegations expressed regret at

the membership’s inability to agree on a formal

solution, he reported.

Intellectual property body grapples with plain packaging, innovation,

technology and moreWTO members discussed a number of new and

long-running issues such as plain packaging for

tobacco products, measures related to biodiversity,

innovation in green technologies, and the role

of universities, when they met as the intellectual

property council on February 25–26, 2014. But

they failed to narrow their differences on many

issues and there were no breakthrough decisions.

The discussions (details below) took place in the

Council for Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual

Property Rights (TRIPS), which, like almost all

WTO committees, consists of all WTO members.

One issue was a follow-up from the Bali Ministerial

Conference in December 2013 — the apparently

abstract legal question of “non-violation”

disputes, which some believe may have real-world

implications for trade and related issues.

Plain packaging

A number of countries urged members to refrain

from introducing plain packaging for cigarettes

and other tobacco products — using standard

colours and typefaces instead of brand logos,

usually with large health warnings — until a ruling

emerges from the WTO dispute settlement cases

involving Australia’s law. However, New Zealand

reported on the progress of its draft law, which is

now in Parliament.

27

This was the seventh time the TRIPS Council

had discussed the issue since June 2011, the

most recent exchanges focusing on similar plans

in Ireland. Plain packaging for tobacco products

has also been discussed in the Technical Barriers

to Trade Committee (which deals with labelling

and packaging) and is the subject of five legal

challenges against Australia, dispute cases

DS434 (brought by Ukraine), DS435 (brought

by Honduras), DS441 (brought by Dominican

Republic), DS458 (brought by Cuba) and DS467

(brought by Indonesia).

Cuba, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Zimbabwe,

Ukraine, Nicaragua, Indonesia repeated their

support for health objectives, but remained

concerned about possible violations of TRIPS by

preventing producers from using trademarks and

geographical indications.

They argued that plain packaging is too drastic

to meet the objective of protecting health, and

that it could be counter-productive by making

counterfeiting easier and cheaper, and increasing

smoking. They repeated their complaint about the

impact on their poor producers. The Dominican

Republic said it also fears that similar measures

might be taken on other products such as those

with high sugar, fat and alcohol contents

Australia declined to comment while the legal case

was being heard.

New Zealand described the latest progress of its

bill, which was introduced into Parliament on 17

December 2013, and passed its first reading on 11

February. The draft law still has to go through a

parliamentary committee and two more stages in

Parliament before it becomes law, New Zealand

said. After that regulations would be drafted,

which would include details of what the plain

packaging should look like.

New Zealand said comments can still be received

on the bill, up to 18 April 2014, and with further

comments possible when the regulations are

drafted.

Uruguay supported Australia’s view that the

current legal challenges in the WTO should not

prevent countries from adopting these types of

measures. It added that any country can introduce

laws to protect the public interest such as in

health, and plain packaging cannot be considered

a violation of the TRIPS Agreement

Nigeria said that measures to protect public health

should not be used to impede legitimate trade,

and also urged members to wait until the Australia

dispute is concluded.

Switzerland said it supports health policies

and anti-smoking campaigns, but also urged

members to be consistent with the TRIPS

Agreement, Paris Convention for the protection

of industrial property, and adopt policies that

are “proportionate” — appropriate for the

circumstances and taking into account a balance

of all interests at stake.

Some of the legal disputes against Australia’s

legislation have reached the stage where WTO

members (meeting as the Dispute Settlement

Body) have agreed to set up panels (a group of

adjudicators) to rule on the case, but so far no

panellists have been appointed.

The Dominican Republic said its first request

in December 2012 for a panel to be set up was

blocked by Australia but that the agreement

setting out the rules for disputes — the Dispute

Settlement Understanding — would not allow a

second request to be blocked. In practice a second

request can be lodged after about a month because

the Dispute Settlement Body meets almost every

month.

28

New Zealand reminded members that the rules for

disputes require the cases to be settled promptly.

Intellectual property, Innovation and green

technology

In the latest discussion on this subject, Ecuador

suggested it could update its year-old proposal

on easing patent terms and strengthening

TRIPS flexibilities for environmentally sound

technologies.

This was partly because the proposal related to the

December 2013 Bali Ministerial Conference, with

a call for a declaration highlighting the flexibilities

available in the TRIPS Agreement — along the

lines of the 2001 Doha Ministerial Declaration on

TRIPS and Public Health. Ecuador also proposed

reducing the length of time patents are protected

for green technologies.

Replying to questions asked in previous meetings,

Ecuador defended its view that intellectual

property protection can hamper the transfer of

environmentally sound technologies, making

it inaccessible and expensive for developing

countries, at a time when all countries agree on the

need to combat climate change. Cuba, El Salvador,

India, China, South Africa, Brazil, and Benin

supported discussing the Ecuadorian proposal.

Chile, the EU, Japan, Switzerland, the US, and

Australia countered that intellectual property

rights protection does not obstruct technology

transfer. In addition, other factors are also

necessary to support the transfer, they said,

such as adequate regulatory regimes, proper

infrastructure, and low patent fees.

Non-violation Complaints

Members continued to disagree as to whether

“non-violation” complaints could be allowed

in intellectual property. They were prepared to

tackle seriously a complex legal issue that has been

unresolved for over 20 years, but one that some

believe can have a bearing on real-world trade.

Nevertheless, they still differed on how to do this.

One of the real-world implications, some

developing countries say, could be to undermine

flexibilities allowed under the WTO agreement, for

example to bypass some patent rights so that the

sick in poorer countries obtain cheaper medicines.

However, some countries countered that WTO

rules prevent that.

A non-violation case arises in the WTO when one

country challenges the legality of another’s actions,

if it feels it is deprived of an expected benefit, even

if no actual agreement or commitment has been

violated. Non-violation disputes are allowed for

goods and services, but not in intellectual property

under a temporary agreement (a “moratorium”)

that has been extended several times. The most

recent two-year extension was agreed at the Bali

Ministerial Conference in December 2013.

Some of those opposing non-violation cases

in intellectual property argue that the TRIPS

agreement is different from those dealing with

goods (the General Agreement on Tariffs and

Trade, GATT, and related agreements) and

services (the General Agreement on Trade in

Services, GATS, and its subsidiary agreements).

They say the TRIPS agreement is not about market

access but establishing minimum standards for

protecting Intellectual property.

Some opponents also argue that non-violation

complaints would upset the balance of rights

and obligations in the TRIPS agreement and will

elevate private rights holders over the interests

of the users of intellectual property, by tilting the

balance in favour of those owning the patents,

copyrights, and other intellectual property. They

29

also fear that non-violation cases would put at risk

the use of flexibilities such as compulsory licences,

which governments can use to provide their

people with cheaper generic versions of patented

medicines.

The proponents of non-violation complaints

in TRIPS believe that it does have a place. The

US said and that WTO agreements ensure that

“recommendations and rulings of the Dispute

Settlement Body cannot add to or diminish the

rights and obligations” provided in the TRIPS

Agreement.

Switzerland said that a non-violation complaint

could not be brought against a measure benefiting

from TRIPS flexibilities, including those confirmed

in the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public

Health, because these measures had already been

foreseen at the time of negotiations.

The US said it is preparing a restructured

moratorium for members to consider in the next

meetings.

Countries speaking against non-violation cases in

this meeting — some calling for non-violation to be

dropped completely from TRIPS — were: Brazil,

Venezuela, China, South Africa, Cuba, Canada,

India, Ecuador, Pakistan, the EU, Bangladesh,

Argentina, Mexico, Peru, and Rep. Korea.

Some, such as Brazil and South Africa, interpreted

the TRIPS Agreement to require agreement on

how non-violation cases will be treated (the

“scope and modalities”), before the cases can be

allowed. The US and Switzerland continued to

support non-violation cases. Japan continued to

call for the TRIPS Council to clarify the “scope and

modalities”.

Biodiversity

Members’ positions remained broadly unchanged,

particularly on whether the TRIPS Agreement

needs to be amended to require patent owners

to disclose the source of the genetic resources

and related traditional knowledge used in their

inventions.

One of the main concerns is about unauthorized

use (“misappropriation”) of genetic resources and

any associated traditional knowledge in inventions

that are then patented, sometimes called biopiracy.

Also of concern is “bad patenting” when claimed

inventions are protected even though they are not

new.

All members agree that these need to be avoided.

They disagree on how to do it. Those seeking an

amendment to the TRIPS Agreement see it as a

way to ensure that the agreement is compatible

with the UN Convention on Biological Diversity

(CBD). Those opposing it continue to argue that

there a better ways of tackling the problem.

Repeating their call for a “disclosure” amendment

in this meeting were: the least developed countries

(Angola speaking), India, Indonesia, Brazil, China,

Ecuador, Bolivia, Bangladesh, Chile, Peru, South

Africa, Cuba, Venezuela, Egypt, Colombia, and

the African Group (Nigeria speaking). Opposing

disclosure in this meeting were the United States

and Japan.

This issue is linked to another, the review of

provisions on patenting inventions from plants or

animals — Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement.

Some countries also oppose patenting any life

forms and want this article amended too. Taking

this line in this meeting were: Bolivia, the least

developed countries (Angola speaking), Ecuador

and Bangladesh.

The US said there is a tension between the

opposition to patenting all life forms and the push

for a mandatory disclosure requirement through

patents.

30

Meanwhile members also remained divided over

whether the CBD Secretariat should brief the

TRIPS Council on the Nagoya Protocol on Access

and Benefit-sharing (a supplementary agreement

to the CBD adopted in October 2010, which

provides for the effective implementation of one

of the three objectives of the CBD: the fair and

equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the

use of genetic resources). The US noted that the

Protocol had not yet entered into force and that

only a few of those who had spoken had acceded

to it.

Some members called for consultations chaired

by the Director-General to resume soon: they

were Egypt, China, India and the African Group

(Nigeria speaking).

Innovation and university technology

partnerships

The discussion, proposed by the US, featured

many examples of universities contributing to

innovation and the development of technology,

and the arrangements that countries have set up to

make this work better. Sharing their experiences

were the US, Australia, Canada, Hong Kong China,

the EU, Japan, New Zealand, Chinese Taipei and

Switzerland.

Developing countries had mixed views. Some,

particularly India, were worried about the

commercialization of universities, basic research

and its free use by society at large being undermined

in favour of commercial research, and conflicts

of interest when academics have a commercial

interest. (The US said Indian universities have

contributed to Indian technological advance,

for example information technology; and said

universities have rules on avoiding conflict of

interest.)

Brazil, Guatemala, El Salvador said this is a good

topic to discuss. Brazil said public policy has to deal

with market imperfections and monopoly (which

comes with intellectual property protection)

and to strike a balance in order to optimize the

benefits. Brazil then described its own university

partnerships.

Others

Review of notified legislation: South Africa

reported on its new act recognizing indigenous

knowledge, which covers performance rights,

copyright, trademarks, terms and expressions,

geographical indications and designs. The law

also sets up a national council on indigenous

knowledge, South Africa said.

“Notification and review” is the core work of

many WTO committees because it helps monitor

how WTO agreements are being implemented.

Currently, this is less the case in the TRIPS Council

because it deals with whole laws rather than

separate measures. The early years after developed

and developing countries first applied the TRIPS

Agreement saw intensive and sometimes lengthy

reviews.

After a lull, notifications are increasing again

as members report changes to their laws, the

Secretariat reported. Around 600 notifications

have been received since 2009, it said. The

Secretariat is also working on methods to

improving tools for accessing the information

online.