|
||||||||||||||||
Statements by the U.S. Representative Geneva, Item 1. SURVEILLANCE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY THE DSB A. UNITED STATES – SECTION 211 OMNIBUS APPROPRIATIONS ACT OF 1998: STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES (WT/DS176/11/ADD.34) · The United States provided a status report in this dispute on August 18, 2005, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the DSU. · As noted in the report, several legislative proposals relating to section 211 that would implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings in this dispute have been introduced in the current Congress, both in the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives. · The Administration is working with Congress to implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings.
· The United States provided a status report in this dispute on August 18, 2005, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the DSU. · As of November 23, 2002, the U.S. authorities had addressed the DSB’s recommendations and rulings with respect to the calculation of antidumping margins in the hot-rolled steel antidumping duty investigation at issue in this dispute. Details are provided in the document numbered WT/DS184/15/ADD.3. · The U.S. Administration continues to support specific
legislative amendments that would implement the DSB’s recommendations
and rulings with respect to the U.S. antidumping duty statute,
and is working with the U.S. Congress to pass these amendments.
In this connection, on May 19, 2005, legislation was introduced
in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 2473) that would implement
the DSB’s recommendations and rulings with respect to the
U.S. antidumping duty statute. The U.S. Administration will continue
to work with Congress to enact this legislation. · The United States provided a status report on August 18, 2005, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the DSU. · As noted there, the U.S. Administration proposed repeal of the CDSOA in its budget proposal for fiscal year 2006. In addition, legislation that would repeal the CDSOA has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. · The U.S. Administration will continue to work with the
Congress to enact legislation, and to confer with the complaining
parties in these disputes, in order to reach mutually satisfactory
resolutions of these matters. · The United States provided a status report in this dispute on August 18, 2005, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the DSU. · As noted in the report, the U.S. Administration continues to work with the U.S. Congress, and will confer with the European Communities, in order to reach a mutually satisfactory resolution of this matter. E. MEXICO – MEASURES AFFECTING TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES: STATUS REPORT BY MEXICO (WT/DS204/9/ADD.8) · The United States would like to thank Mexico for its status report. The United States would like to comment briefly on the implementation of the DSB’s recommendations and rulings. · The agreement entered into by the United States and Mexico following adoption of the DSB’s recommendations and rulings required Mexico to undertake two distinct regulatory reforms. First, Mexico was to modify its international long distance rules to eliminate the uniform settlement rate system, the allocation of incoming calls, and the right of the carrier with the highest volume of outgoing calls to be the sole negotiator of settlement rates. Second, Mexico was to promulgate regulations to allow for the resale of international switched services by commercial agencies in Mexico. · On August 11, 2004, Mexico published its revised international long distance rules. The revised rules allowed, for the first time, the competitive commercial negotiation of international termination rates. Then on August 12, 2005, Mexico published its new resale regulations allowing for the commercial resale of long distance and international long distance services originating in Mexico. · With these reforms, the United States is satisfied that Mexico has fulfilled the regulatory changes required by the agreement. For that reason, Mr. Chairman, we can accept Mexico’s suggestion that it discontinue filing status reports in this dispute. We note, however, that this is without prejudice to the question of whether Mexico has fulfilled all of its WTO commitments with respect to telecommunications services. · The United States recognizes the progress that Mexico has made through these regulatory reforms, and hopes to see continuing liberalization in Mexico’s telecommunications services market. F. CANADA - MEASURES RELATING TO EXPORTS OF WHEAT AND TREATMENT OF IMPORTED GRAIN: STATUS REPORT BY CANADA (WT/DS276/20/ADD.3) · The United States thanks Canada for its status report. We appreciate Canada’s statement that the previously announced regulatory changes have come into force on August 1, 2005. · At the July 20, 2005 DSB meeting, we noted that we had certain questions concerning how Canada’s new regulations will work in practice, and that we would be pursuing these questions with Canada. · Canada has provided written responses to those questions,
and we are reviewing them. Item 3. EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND CERTAIN MEMBER STATES - MEASURES AFFECTING TRADE IN LARGE CIVIL AIRCRAFT A. INITIATION OF THE PROCEDURES FOR DEVELOPING INFORMATION CONCERNING SERIOUS PREJUDICE UNDER ANNEX V OF THE SCM AGREEMENT AND DESIGNATION OF THE REPRESENTATIVE REFERRED TO IN PARAGRAPH 4 OF THAT ANNEX (WT/DS316/2) · Mr. Chairman, on July 20, the DSB established a panel to examine the U.S. claims regarding the massive subsidies that France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Spain, and the European Communities have provided to Airbus, the European manufacturer of large civil aircraft. · At that meeting, the United States also sought to have the DSB initiate the procedures provided for in Annex V of the SCM Agreement, pursuant to paragraph 2 of that Annex. Regrettably, the EC blocked initiation of the Annex V process. At that meeting, we also responded to the reasons that the EC gave for blocking the process. We invited the EC to reconsider its stance and to allow the DSB to go forward with the decision that paragraph 2 requires it to take. · On August 3, the United States renewed its request to have the DSB initiate the Annex V procedures in this dispute. Regrettably, the EC again blocked initiation of the process. We again invited the EC to reconsider its stance, but the EC refused. · The procedures for developing information provided for in Annex V are an important part of a dispute concerning actionable subsidies under the SCM Agreement. It provides a way for both parties as well as the panel to have access to relevant information. The EC has in the past agreed with the importance of the process and the need to engage promptly and constructively. · Today, we renew our request that the DSB initiate the
Annex V procedures in this dispute, and we hope that the EC will
not stand in the DSB’s way for a third time. |