Statement by Norway: TNC 13 October 2005

(as held)

Mr. Chairman,

Allow me first of all to join other speakers in thanking you and the chairmen of the negotiating groups for their reports to the TNC. You all make it clear that there is still a lot of work needed between now and the Hong Kong Ministerial meeting.

Mr. Chairman,

Regarding Agriculture, Switzerland presented a statement on behalf of the G-10. We fully endorse that statement. Let me emphasise a few points from the Norwegian perspective:

In order for us to reach consensus on the full modalities for Hong Kong, Members can only act within their different political realities and constraints. We will have a new government in Norway on Monday. All countries must be able to sustain the production of key agricultural products for domestic consumption. It would be political suicide for any government to accept a solution that rules out such production.

• First, we remain firmly opposed to a tariff cap;
• Second that we cannot disregard the different situations and sensitivities across the Membership. Due to our topography and climatic conditions, Norwegian agriculture is not, and will never be, internationally competitive. This fact is reflected in our current tariff structure. Obviously, we stand by our commitments in the Doha mandate.
  
  Since Doha, we have at numerous occasions repeated our willingness to make concessions in agriculture. However, our concessions can not be expected to be disproportionately larger than the concessions made by other major actors in these negotiations. Members should keep in mind that Norway is a net importer of agricultural products. We only produce a limited range of products, mainly for the domestic market. Our limited agricultural production does not distort the world markets.
• Third, whereas most key players will gain from agriculture as a whole, or will be able to offset concessions in one pillar with gains in another, Norway has nothing to gain from the agriculture negotiations.

Mr Chairman,

In order for this round to be successful for all the members, there is a need for an appropriate balance to be struck. This applies both within the separate negotiating areas as well as between the areas. For this round to deliver on its promises we must not just get agriculture right, but also have parallel developments in all areas when we reach Hong Kong. Our ambitions for this round remain high but frankly the picture is somewhat worrying at present.

Rules is a key issue for Norway. This is something we cannot leave until after Hong Kong. Real text-based negotiations have to be a priority. Ministers must at the 6 ^th> Ministerial meeting in Hong Kong give firm and clear guidance and direction – with a sufficiently high degree specificity – to guarantee a result that is meaningful in 2006.

As others, I have been seriously worried about the state of the services negotiations. We all agree that this is yet another area where progress cannot wait until after Hong Kong. I have been somewhat encouraged by the report by the Chair today. We need viable, real and specific guidance regarding the work to be done after the Ministerial so that we have a level of comfort as to the end result. As Alejandro pinpointed, the clear objective of GATS art. 19 is a higher level of liberalisation. That is what these negotiations must deliver.

Turning to NAMA, we welcome the report by the Chairman of the NAMA negotiating group and his efforts to move things forward. I have to agree with Chairman Johannesson that the informal discussions have been good. Numbers are beginning to emerge. There is an emerging convergence on a Swiss formula with 2 coefficients. Many Members are engaging which is useful and necessary. At the same time, however, it is essential that everybody understands that it is not possible to lean back and wait for everything to be concluded in Agriculture before engaging in proper negotiations in NAMA. We both want and need an ambitious result in NAMA. Without it, the results of a round would be in jeopardy.

A word, Mr. Chairman, on the “development aspects” of these negotiations. We all recognize the need to ensure that this round must deliver on “development”. We participate actively in this work.

It is imperative that the further process is transparent and inclusive. This is especially important as we reach the end-game. All Members have to be on board as we go forward towards the final solutions.

There is still a lot of work that needs to be done in the weeks to come, and there are many issues that are interlinked. Let me assure you that we are prepared to do our part of the work in progressing towards what ultimately has to be an overall balanced package that will benefit all Members of this house.