Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)

The negotiations on the next WTO agreement have entered an intensive phase in recent weeks in the run-up to the WTO ministerial conference next month in Hong Kong. Agriculture is one item on a broad trade liberalisation agenda which also includes services, industrial goods and other matters. From our point of view, given the economic and social importance of agriculture, it is obviously a vitally important aspect of the negotiations. The outcome of the agreement will determine the levels of protection and support which will apply to the agriculture sector in the future and the new round could, therefore, have serious implications for the Common Agricultural Policy.

The negotiations were launched at the WTO Doha Ministerial Conference in November 2001. In so far as agriculture is concerned, the Doha mandate provides for substantial reductions in trade-distorting domestic support, reductions with a view to phasing out all forms of export subsidy and substantial improvements in market access. Substantial progress towards conducting a new agreement was made in August 2004 when agreement was reached on a framework document which sets out the broad outline and content of the new round. The negotiations on the details have been under way in the meantime.

The Commission negotiates on behalf of the member states on the basis of a mandate which was agreed in the Council of Ministers. The mandate is designed to defend the CAP as it has evolved under successive reforms, including Agenda 2000 and the mid-term review, both of which were agreed with a view to positioning the EU in the WTO negotiations. Essentially, the mandate aims to protect the European model of agriculture as an economic sector and a basis for sustainable development based on the multifunctional nature of agriculture and the part it plays in the economy, the environment and society generally.

I have been concerned that in recent months the Commission has adopted an unnecessarily concessionary approach to the negotiations. These concerns are shared by a number of ministerial colleagues in the Council, and on 14 October I supported a memorandum which was prepared by the French Minister for Agriculture and submitted to the Commissioner, outlining the growing unease at the Commission's approach. The memorandum urged the Commissioner to defend vigorously the EU position on agriculture in accordance with the mandate as agreed by the Council. The French initiative was endorsed by 14 EU Ministers for Agriculture.

I also strongly supported France's call for an extraordinary meeting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council which was held on 18 October. With several ministerial colleagues I again expressed concern at the negotiating strategy and tactics being adopted by the Commission. I am pleased to say that the conclusions of the Council again endorsed the negotiating mandate and confirmed the CAP reforms are the EU's important contribution to the current negotiations and constitute the limit of the Commission's negotiating mandate. The situation was also discussed again at the Council of Ministers on 24 and 25 October at which I, with many colleagues, sought to have the WTO round discussed in Council of Agriculture and Fisheries meetings in the run-up to the Hong Kong negotiations.

Let me be clear about the current position. The EU offer has been made by the Commission on the basis that it is within the terms of the negotiating mandate. I have some reservations in this regard and I will continue to press the Commission on this point. Technical meetings for experts will be held later this week at which the Commission will explain its handling of the negotiations. I will, of course, study the outcome of the technical briefing very carefully.

My position on the negotiations has not changed from the outset and remains firm. My overall objective remains to ensure that the terms of any new agreement be accommodated within the terms of recent CAP reforms and that further reform will not be required. There should be balance in the negotiations as between the various elements and the pillars of the agriculture negotiations. I will be insisting that agriculture must not, under any circumstances, be sacrificed for the sake of an overall agreement. I do not accept that concessions in agriculture should be a precondition for movement for progress in other aspects of the negotiations.

I also have a number of priorities. On domestic support, I want to ensure that the system of decoupled direct payments continues to qualify as non-trade-distorting payments under the so-called "green box" and remain exempt from reductions under the new round. The EU system of direct payments makes a major contribution to farm incomes in Ireland.

On export subsidies, I want to achieve full parallel treatment of all forms of export subsidy and to ensure that the phasing out, which has been agreed, is carried out over the longest possible period and in a manner least damaging to our interests. Ireland has substantial exports of milk products and beef to third countries which would not be competitive without export refunds.

On market access, I want to retain the maximum possible level of protection through a combination of tariff cuts and other mechanisms, including the designation of products of particular interest as sensitive products in order to protect our major EU markets from increased competition from imports from third countries.

I assure the House that I am keeping in very close contact with these negotiations. I am liaising with my Cabinet colleagues and EU ministerial colleagues. I will continue to avail of every opportunity to defend the benefits of the CAP to Irish and EU farmers and to achieve the best possible outcome to the negotiations next month in Hong Kong.

See this speech in context