Kamal Nath questions both draft texts

In a statement from Auckland, New Zealand, Nath said many decisions agreed in the Hong Kong ministerial of 2005 had not been reflected in the latest draft texts.

On the issue of overall trade-distorting farm subsidies, known as OTDS (given by countries like United States), Nath said: " All of us at the Hong Kong ministerial settled for steep and effective cuts in OTDS. Even this goal is vanishing. For the US, the proposed lower range of $13 billion (OTDS) was nearly double the current applied levels of domestic support. Where is the need for 100 per cent headroom as a cushion," Nath said.

Nath also said the agriculture draft paper included views of the US on issues like special products (SPs), which are farm products of developing countries on which duty cuts will lower. The latest paper has proposed to reduce the number of SPs. The US had demanded this in previous negotiations.

Nath said the proposals on special safeguard mechanisms (measures for protection against sudden increase in farm imports) were "completely out of step with the ground realities" and would not be accepted.

He expressed his displeasure at the Nama proposals, which have not included norms related to less-than-full-reciprocity (developed nations take greater duty cuts on industrial goods than developing nations).

Nath also critised the move to make sectoral initiatives mandatory. Through sectoral initiatives, countries negotiate to completely slash duties on select industrial goods.

"This is nothing but a blatant violation of the mandate," Nath said. He added India was ready for a ministerial but the differences on agriculture and Nama woud have to be sorted out.