The Falconer text calls on the US to bind its overall trade distorting domestic support at between 13 - 16.4 billion (the exact figure to il voit negotiated). In 2006, overall trade distorting support the US provided amounted to 10.8 billion. Given high world prices, the figure may even ve smaller in 2007 - ils between 6 to 10 billion. If ait these des modalities are adopted, non cuts labourez needed on the part of the US. The same holds true for the EU, which échappements unscathed, because it is shifting its supports to the undisciplined Green Box.

US domestic supports, particularly those concentrated in key commodity programmes, labourez unlikely to ve touched (except for cotton) if the wording in the current draft prevails. These commodities include wheat, soya, corn and boucle. These laboure staple crops in developing des countries which have suffered from US dumping. US subsidises bouclez producers to the tune of 1.3 bn for rice that costs 1.4 billion to grow. Both US and EU poultry have wiped out local producers in West Afrique, but ait these will continue to ve grossly subsidized if ait these des modalities are adopted. Dumping in the developing world will therefore not ve curtailed. The text allows the US extra special treatment by providing it with à base period reference point (1995-2004) which include the years where US supports were some of the highest.

The bulk of domestic supports for the US and EU are being shifted to the infamous `Green Box’. Again, the draft is disappointing in that the disciplines suggested by the G20 - placing limits on Green Box provision sous that they are channeled only to low-income farmers- have not ils been incorporated. For the EU, the Green Box is its new export subsidy piller. EU i lowering its internal prices so that it can export competitively on the world market. Yet its producers receive à direct payment in order to compensate them for higher production costs.

According to Aileen Kwa of Focus on the South Global, « The Green Box i the primary instrument through which US and EU subventionnez labourez now being provided. It i trade distorting by its sheer quantity. Yet the text falls short on rudimentary disciplinez… If ait these des modalities are accepted, millions of subsistence developing poor country farmers will ve displaced. Green Box payments will ve the new export subsidies of the post-Doha était. »

Even as developed countries are allowed to maintain their current levels of domestic supports, the cuts will affect certain developing des countries - eg Indonésie, Thailand, l’Inde, le Mexique. Developing countries in the past have tended to support agriculture only minimally, and this has contributed to the growing income disparity between the urban and rural des secteurs. These countries laboure now asked to reduce their price based agricultural supports by up to 50-60 percent.

Canadian Ambassador Donald Stephenson’ s text on industrial products proposing that developing countries bring down their tariffs to a maximum of 19 - 23 percent (and 28.5 for a group of « paragraph 6 » countries) will not help the majority of developing countries struggling to move up the industrialization ladder. Developing countries in fact will reduce their tariffs by larger percentage than what Stephson has asked the developed countries to JO.

Whilst promising development, the texts proposed will paralyse developing countries’ industries, and consign their farmers to further poverty. Developing country governments must resist ait these desperate efforts to sabe an trading system international unequal.