RESTRICTEDCodedocsonline.wto.org/Dol2FE/Pages/FormerScriptedSearch/… · Web viewWorld Trade....

WORLD TRADE

ORGANIZATION

RESTRICTED

WT/GC/M/5315 March 2000

(00-1046)

General Council7 and 8 February 2000

MINUTES OF MEETING

Held in the Centre William Rappardon 7 and 8 February 2000

Chairman: Mr. Ali Mchumo (Tanzania)

Subjects discussed: Page

1. Five-year review of the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994...............................................................................................................................1

2. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration................................................3(a) Report of the Committee ...............................................................................................33. Negotiations on agriculture and services under Article 20 of the Agreement on

Agriculture and Article XIX of the General Agreement on Trade in Services......44. Follow-up to the Seattle Ministerial Conference......................................................95. Other aspects of the WTO Work Programme..........................................................96. Appointment of officers to WTO bodies..................................................................277. Election of Chairperson.............................................................................................28

Prior to adoption of the agenda, representatives rose and observed a minute of silence in memory of Mr. Georgiy V. Gabounia, First Deputy-Minister of Trade of the Russian Federation and Head of the Russian Delegation for negotiations in the WTO, who had passed away on 22 January.

Also prior to adoption of the agenda, the Chairman said that the 17 December 1999 meeting of the General Council that had been adjourned in order to allow for further consultations on the "Follow-up to the Seattle Ministerial Conference" should be considered closed, as that item would be taken up at the present meeting.

1. Five-year review of the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994

1. The Chairman recalled that the exemption under paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994 provided in sub-paragraph 3(b) for a five-year review after the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement in order to examine whether the conditions which had created the need for the exemption still prevailed. The exemption would thereafter be reviewed every two years for as long as it was in force. The General Council had considered this matter at its meetings on 6 October and 3-4 November 1999, and at the latter meeting had agreed to revert to it at the present meeting.

2. The representative of Japan recalled that at the meeting of the General Council on 6 October 1999, his delegation had submitted a communication in document WT/GC/W/344 which contained questions on this matter. Japan hoped that the United States would reply to these questions in writing. Prior to the present meeting, the United States had indicated its willingness to provide written replies to these questions, and his delegation welcomed this initiative. However, if these replies were not satisfactory or if further clarification was required, Japan reserved its right to

WT/GC/M/53

revert to this matter at a later date. His delegation hoped that the United States would provide further information on this matter at the present meeting.

3. The representative of the European Communities said it was his understanding that prior to the present meeting, the United States had provided some written replies to several Members' questions on this exemption. Since these replies still had to be examined, the item should remain on the General Council's agenda. He noted that on the basis of the US responses made available in January 20001 one could conclude that the US shipbuilding industry was in vigorous health. Deliveries of vessels had increased between the period 1990-1994 and the period 1994-1998, both in numbers and tonnage. Furthermore, the order books had strengthened. The industry had expanded its market share world-wide from less than 1 per cent in 1994 to around 2 per cent at the present time. It was therefore necessary to examine the most recent replies from the United States in order to consider what should be done in this case, since the industry seemed to be in good health. He reiterated that the item should remain on the General Council's agenda.

4. The representative of Australia said that like the Community, his delegation also considered that this item should remain on the General Council's agenda. He was aware that some responses had recently been provided by the United States to the questions asked. He underlined that paragraph 3(b) of the GATT 1994 required a proper review of the exemption after five years, as well as subsequently every two years. Australia was concerned that in the absence of such a review, it could be questioned whether the exemption under consideration should continue to apply. Therefore, a proper review was essential to the continuation of the exemption.

5. The representative of the United States said that her country had submitted its responses to the questions raised by Panama, Japan and the Community and would make them available to other delegations if they so wished. Paragraph 3(b) of the GATT 1994 required the Ministerial Conference to review the exemption not later than five years after the entry into force of the WTO. She recalled that the review had started at the General Council meeting in July 1999 and had continued in October 1999. In September 1999 the United States had organized consultations on the operation of this exemption, in which a number of Members had participated. In July 1999 her delegation had become aware that some delegations were not completely familiar with the background to the exemption and that many were also not acquainted with the annual statistical reports submitted by the United States in connection with it. As she had previously explained, the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994 was not a waiver but an important part of the GATT 1994 which had its origin in paragraph 1(b) of the Protocol of Provisional Application of the GATT 1947. That paragraph provided that Part II of the GATT 1947 applied to contracting parties "to the fullest extent not inconsistent with existing legislation". Since the WTO Agreement was not applied by its Members provisionally and the GATT 1994 had no counterpart to the GATT 1947 Protocol of Provisional Application, the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994 was necessary to deal with non-conforming provisions of domestic legislation of a non-discretionary character in the specific area addressed by the exemption. On 20 December 1994 the United States had invoked the provisions of paragraph 3(a) with respect to specific legislation that met the requirements of that paragraph. The US invocation of this exemption had been acknowledged by the Director-General on the same day. The invocation of the exemption carried with it an obligation to provide Members with annual statistical reports pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 3(c) of the GATT 1994. The United States had fully abided by this reporting requirement by submitting reports for 1995 in WT/L/112, for 1996 in WT/L/201, for 1997 in WT/L/257 and for 1998 in WT/L/293. The only purpose of the review provided for in paragraph 3(b) was to "examine whether the conditions which created the need for the exemption still prevail" – in other words, whether the legislation continued to be in force and had not been amended in a way which would disqualify it from coverage under the exemption. The conditions that had created the

1 Subsequently circulated to Members in WT/GC/W/397.

WT/GC/M/53

need for this exemption still existed. Since the invocation of this exemption in 1994, there had been no amendments, legislative changes, or measures adopted by the United States that would alter its position in conforming to coverage by the exemption. In fulfilling the terms of the exemption, the United States had provided detailed annual reporting of vessel orders and deliveries from US shipyards as required by paragraph 3(c) of the GATT 1994. During the consultations held in 1999, the United States had provided some analysis to participants on the scope of the exemption, and would make it available to Members who had not participated in those consultations who wished to receive this information. At the meeting of the General Council on 6 October 1999 she had cited some figures from the most recent statistical report (WT/L/293) and would therefore not reiterate them at the present meeting. The United States believed that the General Council, acting for the Ministerial Conference, should conclude its examination by noting that the conditions that had created the need for this exemption still existed.

6. The representative of Panama said that the questions Panama had submitted to the United States2 were available outside the room in English and Spanish, and thanked the United States for its replies to the questions. Since his delegation had just received these replies, it was not in a position to comment on them. The United States had stated that the exemption was an integral part of the GATT 1994. Even though an exemption might be integrated into the GATT 1994, it could still expire if the conditions for the exemption no longer prevailed, or it might not be extended because the legislation did not comply with the requirements. Since there was no WTO decision on the legislation notified by the United States, it was not clear whether such an exemption existed under paragraph 3(a). It was not enough simply to invoke the exemption. It was necessary to review whether the notified legislation complied with the requirements for the application of the exemption. Once a determination was made, one could consider if any modifications to the legislation were in line with the WTO Agreement. Panama also considered that the item should remain on the General Council's agenda. His country would carefully examine the US replies and hoped that in the very near future a further dialogue on this matter would be possible with a view to finding a solution.

7. The representative of Hong Kong, China said that his delegation welcomed the statement by the United States and noted its position on the type of review that was necessary on this matter. However, his delegation took a difference position. He understood that the United States had stated that it had replied to questions raised by the Community and Japan, but that it had done so on an individual Member-to-Member basis, and that these replies could be made available to other delegations. Hong Kong, China would be interested in receiving these replies, and urged the United States to make them available to the wider membership. His delegation noted with interest Panama's questions and would examine them carefully, and would be interested to have the replies to those questions had they been furnished. Hong Kong, China fully agreed with the Community, Australia and Panama that this item should remain on the General Council's agenda while the matter was being further considered.

8. The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter at its next meeting.

2. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration

(a) Report of the Committee (WT/BFA/45)

9. The Chairman recalled that at its meeting on 17 December 1999, the General Council had adopted a series of recommendations of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration concerning the budget of the WTO for 2000 (WT/BFA/44), and that the full report of the Committee

2 Subsequently circulated to Members in WT/GC/32.

WT/GC/M/53

would be presented as early as possible this year. That report was now before the General Council in WT/BFA/45.

10. Mrs. Dubois-Destrizais (France), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration, recalled that on 17 December 1999 she had submitted a series of recommendations of the Committee (WT/BFA/44) but no report. This had been due to the fact that a consensus on the budget of the WTO for 2000 had been reached at a very late stage and the full report had not been ready. At the present meeting she was submitting the report of the Committee's meetings on 27 September, 4, 12 and 29 October, and 14 December 1999 (WT/BFA/45). She drew attention to the Committee's decision in favour of the least-developed Members in the form of a reduction by half of the minimum contribution to the budget. The Committee had arrived at a consensus on this matter after having examined it for several years. She recalled that in 1999 the Budget Committee and the Committee on Trade and Development had held a joint meeting which had enabled them to examine the global situation of the WTO's technical assistance, and expressed the hope that this practice of joint meetings would be continued in 2000.

11. The General Council took note of the statement and adopted the report of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration (WT/BFA/45).

3. Negotiations on agriculture and services under Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture and Article XIX of the General Agreement on Trade in Services

12. The Chairman recalled that under Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture, Members had agreed that negotiations for continuing the reform process would be initiated one year before the end of the implementation period, i.e. 1 January 2000. Since that date had passed, those mandated negotiations were now on. However, a number of procedural matters remained to be settled before the work could start in practice. In this regard, and in the light of wide and intensive consultations with and among Members on the structure of the negotiations, he proposed that the negotiations be conducted in the Committee on Agriculture meeting in Special Sessions. Progress in the negotiations would be reported directly to the General Council on a regular basis. The first Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture would be scheduled back-to-back with the next regular meeting of the Committee, to be held on 23-24 March 2000. He also proposed that the Chair of the Agriculture Committee chair the Special Sessions, and that exceptionally a Vice-Chair of the Committee be appointed to conduct the regular work of the Committee.

13. As far as the negotiations on services were concerned, the General Council was aware that they too had officially started on 1 January, as required by Article XIX. Following the consultations that had been held, he proposed that the services negotiations be conducted in Special Sessions of the Council for Trade in Services. The Services Council would report on a regular basis to the General Council. The first Special Session of the Services Council would be held in the week beginning 21 February, back-to-back with the regular meeting of the Services Council. He further proposed that the Chair of the Services Council chair the Special Sessions, and that the Services Council consider whether any further procedural questions needed to be addressed including the possible appointment of a Vice-Chairman.

14. He also noted that Members had indicated the importance they attached to other elements of the Built-in Agenda, including the mandated reviews and the negotiations foreseen under the TRIPS Council in respect of geographical indications. Some Members had also indicated that the mandated reviews should address the impact of the agreements concerned on the trade and development prospects of developing countries. While these reviews and negotiations might not pose the same immediate practical questions as the services and agriculture negotiations, insofar as they were subject to existing procedures, this did not in any way detract from the need to make serious progress on them.

WT/GC/M/53

15. The representative of Pakistan said that while the Chairman's statement largely reflected the product of the informal discussions as regards the mandated negotiations, it had not done so as regards the mandated reviews of WTO agreements. In his delegation's understanding, there was no opposition to the notion that the mandated reviews should take into account developmental aspects of the agreements concerned. It was therefore not a question of some Members indicating this view, as in the Chairman's statement, but rather of the General Council taking a decision that these reviews should address such developmental aspects. Such agreement of the membership should be reflected at the present meeting, since this matter was vital for Pakistan and many other developing countries.

16. The representatives of Argentina for Mercosur Members, Australia, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Egypt, India, Malaysia, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco for the African Group, Panama, Poland for CEFTA Members and Turkey, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda and the United States agreed with Pakistan that the importance Members placed on developmental aspects in the mandated reviews should not be qualified, and that the collective recognition and commitment that the mandated reviews should address the impact of the agreements concerned on the trade and development prospects of developing countries should be reflected at the present meeting.

17. The representative of the Philippines, also on behalf of Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar and Thailand, expressed full support for the Chairman's statement. Moving forward with the mandated negotiations that had legally started on 1 January 2000 was the best signal that the WTO was back in business. The Chairman's proposals affirmed their preference for undertaking the negotiations in the existing bodies, and for these bodies to report to the General Council with the aim of achieving an overall balance in the outcome. It was necessary to benchmark the first meetings of these bodies, and at some point it would also be necessary to set a deadline for the conclusion of the negotiations. The chairmanship of the negotiations on agriculture needed an urgent decision, and it would be essential for the incoming General Council Chairman to hold further consultations on this. While all the issues and modalities might not be decided immediately, Members had to deal with them in the near future so as to seize this opportunity to demonstrate concretely that the WTO was indeed back in business.

18. The representative of Australia said that the Chairman's statement had captured the consensus reached in the consultations in all but one important respect, as referred to by Pakistan.

19. The representative of Bolivia said that since Seattle it had become clear that Members had to get down to work on a new basis, despite their disappointment at not having achieved the results they had hoped for. It was encouraging that Members had already been able to agree on the structures and modalities for the agriculture and services negotiations. Given the sensitive nature of these negotiations and the detail they would require, the chairpersons of the negotiating sessions should be Geneva-based and have a high level of expertise. The negotiations should also not be delayed in any way. Furthermore, it was important that no service sector be excluded, and particular attention should be given to sectors of interest to developing countries. Her delegation welcomed the Chairman's reference to the importance of developmental aspects in the mandated reviews.

20. The representative of India said that the agriculture and services negotiations should begin as quickly as possible, and agreed to the Chairman's proposals regarding the organizational arrangements. It was equally important that progress be made also in the TRIPS negotiations on geographical indications, which had already begun. Any mandated reviews of WTO agreements should take into account the experience gained in their implementation, and the impact on the trade and development prospects of developing countries was an important element of this experience. As this should happen in any review, there should be no objection to Pakistan's suggestion. As regards vice-chairs, his delegation had indicated in informal discussions that it would be appropriate to have vice-chairs for all bodies that would have the responsibility of undertaking mandated reviews. As

WT/GC/M/53

suggested by the Chairman in respect of the Services Council, the possibility of appointing vice-chairs should be available also to other bodies dealing with mandated reviews in case the workload justified it. The division of responsibility between the chair and the vice-chair should be decided in the respective bodies.

21. The representative of Cuba said that the agriculture and services negotiations were being held in an environment characterized by the increasing polarization of countries between the very rich and the very poor, and the increased vulnerability of developing countries in financial and economic crises. It was therefore imperative to address development priorities as an integral part of the negotiating process on the issues agreed for negotiations. Market access for developing-country products in developed-country markets would continue to be an important issue for all, and the negotiations should be established on this basis. His delegation believed that until there was multilateral agreement on negotiating guidelines, the actual negotiating phase itself could not be considered as having started. The guidelines should be commensurate with solutions found for the problems of implementation of existing agreements, which were of vital importance to Cuba. In agriculture, developing-country exports were still being hampered by tariff peaks and tariff escalation, and by difficulties in the application of quota systems. Concessions agreed to by developed countries in the Uruguay Round had in fact left certain maximum duties intact that were still being applied and which constituted excessive barriers to developing-country exports. Furthermore, developed countries had not to date fully implemented agreed reductions. The continuation of the agricultural reform programme should take account of food security concerns and the specific problems of net food-importing countries, as well as the social repercussions of agricultural trade liberalization. While negotiations should focus on the integration of agricultural trade into the WTO system, they should at the same time guarantee adequate flexibility to developing countries to enable them to tackle the issues he had raised.

22. Given the increasing importance of trade in services and the export possibilities for certain developing countries, Members should ensure that the overall architecture of the GATS remained intact. The GATS not only offered developing countries flexibility as to the calendar and the selection of sectors to be opened up, but also enabled them to establish certain conditions relating to access to their markets in achieving the goals set out in its Article IV. It also recognized that the increasing participation of developing countries in services trade should be further facilitated through specific commitments and through better access to new technologies and information networks. It was essential at the same time to continue working to improve services trade data, as well as the analytical and rule-making framework in the process of the liberalization of this sector. In light of the imbalances in the process of integration of the world economy, effective application of Article IV of the GATS should be a priority in the negotiations. The services trade of developing countries was being held back because of restrictions on the movement of natural persons, as well as other barriers. Commitments relating to the mode of supply and the movement of natural persons should be specified for sectors and categories. Mutual recognition agreements between developed countries as to professional qualifications, and any other arrangements that facilitated the movement of natural persons between these countries, should be extended to developing countries as well. His delegation would work hard to ensure that developing countries' needs, interests and requirements were fully taken into account and that real special and differential treatment was developed and applied to them.

23. The representative of Morocco, on behalf of the African Group, underlined the importance these countries attached to the other elements of the built-in agenda in addition to the agriculture and services negotiations, including the mandated reviews and the negotiations foreseen in the TRIPS Council on geographical indications. The fact that these other issues were not being discussed at the present meeting did not mean that one did not need to make quick progress on them as well.

24. The representative of Japan said that although the Chairman's proposed institutional arrangements for the agriculture and services negotiations were not exactly what Japan favoured most, the important task was to show to the outside world that the WTO had overcome the shock of Seattle

WT/GC/M/53

and was back in business. In the light of that objective, and given that many delegations seemed to favour the Chairman's proposals, Japan was prepared to go along with them, keeping open the possibility of a review of these arrangements at a later date if necessary. It would be much easier to produce substantive results in the agriculture and services negotiations if they were conducted in the framework of a sufficiently comprehensive round of negotiations. Members should therefore not lose sight of the need to continue to make necessary preparations for an early launch of such a round. It was also necessary for the WTO to continue to pay attention to the questions of internal and external transparency in order to promote the agriculture and services negotiations.

25. The representative of Malaysia said that Malaysia was committed to the agriculture and services negotiations as well as to the built-in reviews of agreements, and agreed to the Chairman's proposed modalities for the negotiations which, as the latter had stated, had legally begun on 1 January 2000. Parity among the mandated negotiations was important.

26. The representative of Panama endorsed the suggestion by India concerning the possibility of appointing vice-chairs to other WTO bodies.

27. The representative of Mexico stated his delegation's interest in having the chairs of various bodies and in particular of the Agriculture Committee and the Services Council and its subsidiary bodies be Geneva-based so that delegations could interact with them at any time. He also endorsed the view that the mandated reviews and other mandated negotiations that were also part of the built-in agenda were as important as the agriculture and services negotiations.

28. The representative of Mauritius said that while his delegation had a strong preference for the agriculture and services negotiations being conducted in existing bodies that could meet in special session, it was flexible on this issue and would go along with any consensus that emerged. He stressed that the negotiating process should be transparent and inclusive so as to enable the participation of all Members, big and small, at every stage. In addition, the other mandated negotiations and the reviews that were also part of the built-in agenda would also have to be taken on board.

29. The representative of Uganda said that his delegation agreed with the Chairman's proposals regarding the agriculture and services negotiations. In the agriculture area in particular, and also in regard to the other mandated negotiations and reviews, his delegation would be looking closely at the provisions relating to least-developed countries.

30. The representative of Egypt said that her delegation welcomed the outcome of the consultations on the organizational arrangements for the agriculture and services negotiations, and could go along with the Chairman's proposals.

31. The representative of the Dominican Republic expressed support for the statements by Bolivia, Cuba, Egypt, India, Malaysia, Mexico and Pakistan. His delegation joined in the consensus regarding the content of the built-in agenda for negotiations under the Uruguay Round Agreements and the mandated reviews. The same criteria for the initiation of the agriculture and services negotiations should also be observed for the mandated reviews, and for decisions taken on objectives, guidelines and time-frames. His delegation also agreed that the agriculture and services negotiations should be conducted in the existing bodies, although in the case of services the distinction between regular work and negotiations was less clear and the question of how the negotiations would be conducted should be left open. He expressed his willingness to contribute to the success of the process that was being launched at the present meeting, and hoped that all would participate with the necessary enthusiasm in these important negotiations, which should be conducted on the basis of parity.

32. The representative of Singapore emphasized the importance of the agriculture and services negotiations, which had commenced on 1 January. It was important to move constructively in these

WT/GC/M/53

important areas, and her delegation agreed to the Chairman's proposals. She noted that further consultations would be held on some of the modalities for these negotiations. Whatever modalities were adopted, it was important that they help Members move substantively to achieve the objectives of the negotiations and to avoid linkages between the different elements. Benchmarks for the different phases of the negotiations were important, and at some point it would also be necessary to set a deadline for their conclusion. She recalled that negotiations on maritime transport were also scheduled to recommence in 2000.

33. The representative of Bangladesh expressed support for the Chairman's statement, and said that India's suggestion of vice-chairs where justified for the bodies conducting the mandated reviews also merited positive consideration.

34. The representative of Poland, on behalf of the CEFTA Members, expressed full agreement with the Chairman's statement on the organization of the agriculture and services negotiations, and noted the flexibility regarding the vice-chairmanship for the Services Council, which their delegations believed should be addressed by that Council itself. A number of CEFTA Members attached particular importance to the organizational simultaneity of the negotiations on agriculture, services and geographical indications.

35. The representative of Argentina, on behalf of the Mercosur Members, expressed satisfaction that a large part of the suggestions made by them in informal meetings had been taken into account in the Chairman's statement. It was important for the WTO to get back to business, and particularly important for their countries that the agriculture and services negotiations be effectively launched and conducted with adequate balance and parallelism.

36. The representative of Switzerland expressed agreement with the Chairman's proposals on the agriculture and services negotiations. He also stressed that there should be parity among the negotiations on agriculture and services and other mandated negotiations, i.e. on geographical indications and rules of origin, which were important for Switzerland as well as other countries.

37. The representative of Sri Lanka expressed his delegation's agreement with the Chairman's proposals on the agriculture and services negotiations.

38. The Chairman thanked delegations for their constructive participation. He expressed satisfaction at the consensus on his proposal on the organizational aspects of the agriculture and services negotiations. On the mandated reviews, it was clear from the discussion that Pakistan's suggestion was fully supported, and the action at the present meeting should reflect the collective recognition and commitment that these reviews should address the impact of the agreements concerned on the trade and development prospects of developing countries. He understood that Members also wished to keep in mind the possibility of appointing vice-chairs where appropriate for these mandated reviews.

39. The General Council took note of the Chairman's statements and of other statements, and agreed to the proposals by the Chairman. The General Council also agreed that the mandated reviews should address the impact of the agreements concerned on the trade and development prospects of developing countries.

WT/GC/M/53

4. Follow-up to the Seattle Ministerial Conferenceand5. Other aspects of the WTO Work Programme

40. The Chairman proposed that items 4 and 5 be taken up together, and invited the Director-General to report on the consultations he had been holding in regard to the other aspects of the WTO work programme.

41. The Director-General said that since the beginning of the year, he had had a wide range of contacts with WTO Members both in Geneva and in capitals, beginning with New Delhi and including Brussels and Washington. He had also met with the heads of other institutions, such as the Secretary-General of the UN, the President of the World Bank, and the Secretary-General of the ACP Group, who had all been very supportive. In his contacts with Members, which he had undertaken in close co-operation with the Chairman and with the assistance of his deputies, he had sought to get a sense of the immediate priorities for attention beyond the mandated negotiations. These consultations had shown considerable convergence on several points which were widely seen as immediate priorities. These of course did not exclude any further action that Members might decide to take in due course on other areas of interest and concern. In his contacts with a large number of Members, nearly all had stressed the importance of ensuring that the proposals discussed as part of the preparation for Seattle with respect to measures in favour of least-developed countries, which encompassed both market access and capacity-building, should be taken up as a matter of priority. These proposals were never to be seen as a trade-off or leverage to gain agreement on a new round of negotiations. Supporters of these measures had assured him of their continued support, and he would be working closely with the Chairman to bring about agreement on a set of measures. He would aim to report back progress before the Easter break. He saw this as an important confidence-building exercise and a clear signal of the WTO's resolve to help improve the conditions of its poorest Members.

42. A second element that, disappointingly, Members had not achieved in Seattle – although they had come very close in pre-Seattle discussions – was agreement on an increase in the regular budget for technical cooperation. He would not repeat the gross imbalance between the core funds currently available for technical cooperation and the needs of Members. There was an ever-growing demand for technical cooperation which was difficult to meet when there was great uncertainty about its funding. The WTO had a rolling three-year plan of technical cooperation activities which was updated and reviewed every year by the Committee on Trade and Development. This showed Members where the technical cooperation efforts were going and the types of projects undertaken subject to the availability of funds. Members had the opportunity to comment on this in the CTD, and their remarks were taken into account in planning activities for the future. The text produced in the course of discussions for Seattle encompassed principles for reinforced technical cooperation, improvement of the Integrated Framework, evaluation and regular review of technical cooperation, and a provision for additional funding through the regular budget of the amount of Sw F 10 million over a three-year period. He hoped that early agreement in principle could be reached on this second confidence-building measure and, in close co-operation with the Chairman, he would be consulting extensively on this in the weeks to follow.

43. At the meeting of the General Council on 17 December 1999, the Chairman had stated that delegations should exercise restraint in respect of the expiry of transition periods. Both prior to and since that meeting, a number of Members had tendered written requests concerned with transition period extensions. He had been consulting with Members as to their attitude to these requests and to the transition period issue in general, and was pleased to report that Members had told him they were all prepared to adopt a reasonable and constructive attitude to crafting practical solutions to individual Members' transition problems within the multilateral framework. He was encouraged by this and had every reason to expect that all would be able to work together to achieve the required

WT/GC/M/53

consensus decisions in respect of these requests. It was also encouraging that Members had shown sensitivity in their approach to these problems, and he hoped this would continue while all worked towards a definitive solution. He saw this issue as a priority for further consultations which he planned to continue in close co-operation with the Chairman. The aim would be to report back to the next meeting of the General Council. Members needed also to bear in mind that while the transition period issue was the most immediately pressing problem before them, they would need to revert to other implementation-related issues in due course. This was a major continuing concern for a good number of Members, as they had made clear in his consultations. They had recalled, for example, that the proposals for Seattle envisaged the establishment of a special implementation review mechanism under the General Council composed of representatives of all Members. This was an area some had suggested might also be revisited in further consultations.

44. At Seattle, and since that meeting, many Members and other commentators had expressed the view that the WTO's consultative procedures among Members needed to be reviewed. The general thrust of the comments made seemed to be that the WTO needed to find ways to improve internal transparency and guarantee effective participation to all its Members, while at the same time operating in an efficient manner. Members had also rightly stressed that the principle of consensus was not negotiable. While he believed most would agree that major issues of substance had played a greater role than process in preventing agreement in Seattle, getting the process right was important. He was personally committed to working on this problem, and since he knew a number of Members had already been working in capitals on proposals in this area, he believed one should start by inviting contributions from delegations which could then be used as the basis for further consultations that could begin later that month after those who were going to UNCTAD X returned from Bangkok. Clearly, these consultations should themselves be conducted in a transparent and open way, and he would be discussing with the Chairman the best ways to ensure this. One possibility that had been suggested was to devote an Informal Heads-of-Delegation meeting, and possibly a Special Session of the General Council, to the issue. He had already received a number of thoughtful and detailed suggestions from delegations about the questions he had covered and how they should be addressed. He was sure delegations would understand that it had not been possible to reflect all these suggestions in his report, which was not intended as a text for negotiation in its own right. However, he could assure delegations that as far as he was concerned the suggestions that had already been made on the basis of this report would be valued inputs into the consultations that he would continue with them.

45. The Chairman said that the Director-General's report had been made under his own responsibility. Delegations were free to express their views on the issues covered by it, which would of course be part of the written record of the meeting and taken into account in the further consultations to be held.

46. The representative of Bangladesh said that in the latest version of the text that was under discussion at Seattle on action in favour of LDCs, the entire paragraph on market access had been missing. This was despite the fact that the LDCs had presented to the Secretariat language approved by their Ministers and transmitted in a formal letter from the Commerce Minister of Bangladesh. The LDCs, representing 12 per cent of the global population, had presented the sum total of their aspirations in a set of proposals known as the Comprehensive New Plan of Action (CNPA). The CNPA was the only way they could be integrated into the global trading system in a manner beneficial to them, and was designed to supplant the plethora of existing plans and programmes and bring them within a single framework. The first proposal concerned bound, duty-free and quota-free market access for all LDC products. The others related to the extension of transitional periods in various agreements, implementation of the Integrated Framework, acceleration of the LDC accession process, and establishment of a high-level mechanism within the WTO Secretariat to regularly monitor the implementation of the CNPA in cooperation with other agencies. The CNPA proposal actually predated Seattle, having been presented by his delegation on behalf of the LDCs in July

WT/GC/M/53

1999 (WT/GC/W/251). It had been the result of the evolution of the thoughts and work of LDCs since the Singapore Ministerial Conference and through the High-Level Meeting of October 1998, and therefore did not require the stamp of approval from Seattle for the WTO to be engaged. The Integrated Framework deserved particular immediate attention. Following the decisions taken at the High-Level Meeting, round tables had been held in five countries: Haiti, the Gambia, Uganda, Tanzania and Bangladesh. The results confirmed that it was time to conduct a serious assessment, and the LDCs needed to be part of this exercise. Among the six core agencies, UNCTAD should be invited to play a significant role, given its experience in the field. There was also an ethical and moral mandate for the WTO to undertake action immediately in favour of LDCs. The LDCs had excellent relations with key trading partners, and were receiving positive signals from them. Thus, apart from the danger of the LDCs being marginalized vis-à-vis the WTO, there was an equal danger that the WTO might become marginalized vis-à-vis the LDCs. There was a risk of wasting a unique opportunity, and the Chairman and the membership should focus on this question urgently. The Director-General should be actively involved to jump-start the process, and should report to the General Council on progress at the next meeting. Pledges by both Members and the Secretariat should be turned into policies and thereafter into practice, by beginning substantive efforts.

47. The representative of the Dominican Republic regretted that decisions necessary for the confidence-building measures outlined in the Director-General's report would not be taken at the present meeting. While the report was balanced, it had been presented strictly under the Director-General's own responsibility, and should not prejudge Members' positions in any way. Continuity was necessary with regard to Ministers' instructions in paragraphs 8 and 9(a)(i) of the Geneva Ministerial Declaration concerning the resolution of the implementation problems identified by Members during the preparatory process for the third Ministerial Conference. This continuity should take the form of an extension of the transition periods for developing countries in the Agreements on TRIPS, TRIMs, Customs Valuation and Subsidies, on a multilateral basis and for a reasonable period of time. For other implementation issues, the continuity the Dominican Republic sought should be achieved through a special mechanism under the General Council, as it had proposed with Honduras and Pakistan in mid-1999. It was only by following these instructions, the most recent that Ministers had given, that investors in developing countries could hope for minimum conditions of legal security for their investments and market access for their products. Furthermore, it would be necessary to solve the problem of internal transparency in the WTO. This problem had been amply emphasized in the closing statements of the Chairperson and the Director-General at the Ministerial Conference. The delegations that had been permanent members of the Green Room had stated that what was not broken should not be fixed and that one had to be cautious in reforming the WTO. Nevertheless, during the preparations for the present meeting, delegations had been asked to contribute to the creation of a climate of harmony. This harmony could in no way consist of passive acceptance of solutions that left to one side the fundamental problems which had paralysed decision-making in this organization in other words, the practices of exclusion and lack of impartiality. For this reason, resolution of the internal transparency problem could not be postponed further, and it was already necessary to take account of this in the selection of the Chairpersons of the WTO bodies. In the light of the reception extended to the WTO by civil society at recent events, it would also be necessary to rethink external transparency, since this would seem to favour certain Members who thought the WTO agenda was already wide enough and should not be expanded. Any decision concerning implementation or internal transparency would only be acceptable to his delegation if these points were taken into account. The present meeting could at least result in an understanding that a Special Session of the General Council would be convened to address these issues, which would be the only course of action acceptable to all Members, and would represent multilateralism.

48. The representative of Brazil said that while the issue of transition periods was urgent, Members should also proceed with a discussion on broader implementation-related issues. With regard to transition periods, the Director-General's report mentioned the idea of adopting practical solutions to individual Members' problems within the multilateral framework, and this raised a very

WT/GC/M/53

important point, particularly with regard to TRIMs, to the extent that solutions to some Members' problems might cause problems for other Members. From the start, Brazil had emphasized the importance of a level playing field among developing countries in this area. His delegation hoped that the consultations would offer the opportunity for Members to express their views and submit proposals for solutions that were equitable and truly multilateral. In the meantime, if plurilateral consultations took place in relation to individual requests, Brazil would wish to be included. Contrary to what was frequently assumed, TRIMs did not exclusively concern investors and recipients, but might also have a profound impact on third parties.

49. The representative of Bolivia said that while there had been problems in the area of transparency in the preparatory process for the Ministerial Conference and at the conference itself, this did not merit structural reform of the organization, but rather adjustments. It was important to work towards improvement of internal transparency through better participation of all Members. With regard to implementation and transition periods, it was necessary to work seriously with the aim of reaching results beneficial to all Members, independent of any interpretation given to the solutions found. On technical cooperation, her delegation appreciated the distinction made between technical cooperation for developing countries and the integrated programme for least-developed countries. Bolivia would participate fully in the consultations on these issues.

50. The representative of India said that finding suitable solutions to the problems of implementation was critical. In the preparatory process for the Ministerial Conference, no delegation had expressed reservations on the proposal to mandate the General Council to review implementation problems and suggest remedial measures within a finite time period. In fact, at Seattle Members had been very close to a package on implementation, which even though not entirely satisfactory, would have provided at least a partial solution to some of the existing imbalances and inequities in implementation, and would also have set in place a special mechanism to address remaining concerns. Expeditious redressal of these problems would go a long way in confidence building and enhancing the WTO's credibility by demonstrating to the outside world that it had the capacity and willingness to make appropriate adjustments to existing agreements, based on the experience gained during their implementation. Within the overall context of redressal of implementation problems, the question of extension of transition periods was extremely important, since it would provide developing countries much-needed time to adjust to some of their commitments. However, transition periods in themselves constituted only a small part of the problems which developing countries had been highlighting for the previous year and a half. Members would therefore need to address both issues urgently in order to generate the requisite confidence. His delegation appreciated the fact that the Director-General had recognised in his report the need to revert to other implementation-related issues, and had noted that the proposals under consideration at Seattle had included the establishment of a special implementation review mechanism under the General Council. India would have preferred the General Council to have taken a decision to constitute this special mechanism at the present meeting. However, since this did not appear to be possible because of time constraints, his delegation suggested that the subject of implementation be included for appropriate decision on the agenda of the next General Council meeting, on the basis of the consultations that would be undertaken. Moreover, in order to ensure constructive engagement in this area, Members should review the progress on implementation issues at the last General Council meeting of the year.

51. With regard to transition periods, his delegation favoured a multilateral solution and was concerned by the approach of some Members that requests for extension could only be considered on a case-by-case basis. Such an approach, where Members were expected to hold bilateral consultations, lacked transparency and predictability and was likely to make the requesting Member susceptible to unnecessary and unfair demands. His delegation therefore noted with satisfaction that the Director-General had stressed the need for finding practical solutions to individual Members' transition problems within the multilateral framework. It was also important to finalise quickly a

WT/GC/M/53

package for LDCs that would include technical assistance and capacity-building measures, and India agreed that proposals relating to LDCs were never to be seen as a trade-off or leverage to gain agreement on a new round of negotiations. He hoped the same principle would be applied to the redressal of implementation problems. On transparency, ensuring increased involvement and participation of the entire membership in the decision-making process was important. However, the Seattle Ministerial Conference did not fail because of shortcomings in the process, but rather because of differences on major substantive issues. Moreover, the whole issue related to internal transparency within the organisation. Hence, it was the membership which was well placed to deal with this subject. In this context, his delegation welcomed the suggestion of inviting contributions from Members and subsequently discussing the various contributions in the General Council. His delegation did not believe that outside persons, however eminent, could be of assistance to Members in dealing with internal transparency issues. In concluding, he said that the Director-General's report had been prepared on the basis of bilateral and plurilateral consultations, but prior to the informal meetings of the General Council held the previous week. While he did not wish to negotiate the text of the Director-General's report, there should be a common understanding that the forthcoming consultations would allow all delegations the opportunity to express their views on all the issues, and that the report, as the Chairman had acknowledged, was not to be viewed as limiting the scope of the consultations or the opportunity for delegations to highlight their concerns or make proposals. He noted that all Members had been constructive and had not linked procedural decisions on implementation issues to the procedural decisions on the mandated negotiations and reviews. However, this should not be misinterpreted as a dilution of his delegation's interest in finding solutions to the implementation issues and concerns it had raised along with others. The WTO was an integral whole, and what it did or did not do in one area of work would be viewed against the backdrop of what it did or did not do in other areas. It was therefore essential for all to ensure that meaningful progress was made in all areas, so that the final outcome was satisfactory to the entire membership. The political linkages that were inevitably made in such situations were a reality, and it was important to be sensitive to this. One had to be conscious not only of the need for parity between the agriculture and services negotiations, but also between implementation, the mandated negotiations and the mandated reviews, not in the narrow procedural sense but in the larger political sense.

52. The representative of Morocco, on behalf of the African Group, expressed these Members' appreciation for the references in the Director-General's report to measures for LDCs and technical cooperation and capacity building. Undertaking initiatives in these areas was the only way in which the WTO would become an organization for all Members, whether big or small, powerful or not. Bangladesh had made a comprehensive statement with regard to the LDCs, and he wished to recall that 33 out of the 48 LDCs were in Africa. It was necessary to ensure the real participation of these countries and avoid their marginalization. The African Group sought a rapid materialisation of the measures included in the package, and Members should be ambitious in this area. Work in the areas of technical cooperation and capacity building was also necessary if the developing countries were to derive benefits from and participate in the multilateral trading system. One of the top priorities for the African Group was implementation, and he urged the Chairman and the Director-General to pursue their consultations actively with the aim of reaching adequate solutions. Technical cooperation and capacity building should also be developed to adapt to these solutions. On transition periods, he agreed with others that solutions should be found in the multilateral forum, but that these should not exclude being pragmatic and practical. The approach should allow the Secretariat to help developing countries, because some Members in Africa, for example, could not identify why they were unable to implement some of their obligations. A systemic approach was needed to allow these countries to address these problems, which should be top-down, with General Council Special Sessions finding solutions and giving direction to subsidiary bodies, such as the Committee on Trade and Development. The approach would also contain a bottom-up element, since the subsidiary bodies would carry out the work of categorising the issues and solutions. With regard to implementation, a special review mechanism should be established, and a multilateral approach was

WT/GC/M/53

needed to the problem to avoid conditionalities being imposed. Extensions of transition periods should be accorded on the understanding that they would be used to ensure that at the end of the new period, Members would be in a position to comply with their commitments, and this implied the provision of technical cooperation. The African Group appreciated the restraint in this area that had been shown by Members thus far, and counted on it continuing, to allow the consultations to take place in a spirit of compromise. Finally, while much need to be done on external transparency, the first duty was to address internal transparency. Wide reforms were not necessary, but rather some adjustments taking into account recent experience. This could easily be done within the WTO, as it was the Members themselves who knew best how to improve the situation. The African Group would make practical suggestions on this matter, but a meeting of the General Council should be held to allow all Members to express their views, and to allow transparency in this work.

53. The representative of Egypt said that the elements contained in the Director-General's report constituted a realistic basis for agreement. The problems and difficulties related to the extension of transition periods under some agreements, especially TRIPS and TRIMs, were only one part of the issues under implementation. Egypt and others had repeatedly stressed that they had serious concerns with regard to these issues, and these concerns had been included in paragraphs 20 and 21 of the 19 October draft Ministerial text for the Seattle Ministerial Conference. These issues needed to be addressed to allow progress to be made. A positive attitude to this was being shown by a number of Members, and Egypt was looking for concrete actions and practical solutions. While the Director-General's report had been made on his own responsibility, action on transition periods should have been referred to in the broader context of implementation issues, of which transition periods were only one part. This would have been a fairer reflection of the discussions in the informal meetings on this issue. Egypt expected that implementation would be placed on the agenda of the next General Council meeting. Egypt supported increased market access for least-developed countries, and appreciated the Director-General's emphasis that this issue was not part of a trade-off. Technical assistance should be oriented towards building capacity and should be in accordance with the needs and priorities of developing countries. Like others, Egypt believed that transparency in the WTO's decision-making process needed to be improved, including the selection of chairpersons of WTO bodies. Efforts to improve internal transparency should be kept fully internal, since Members understood the problems best and should be capable of addressing them without outside help.

54. The representative of Singapore said that the areas identified by the Director-General were the more immediate issues for the work programme, and a successful outcome of the present meeting would provide a firm basis to build on. This was an evolving process, and starting in a modest way would contribute to the confidence-building process. Members should work constructively in the near term and avoid linkages between the different elements. Also, the process should not preclude the inclusion of other issues in the medium and longer term; in particular, the core business of the WTO, market access and progressive liberalisation, should not be forgotten. Industrial tariffs and e-commerce, for example, should be included in the future work programme. On implementation, a solution to the transition problems was the more immediate issue. Since different Members faced different problems regarding transition periods, a blanket approach might not be feasible. Members should adopt a reasonable and constructive approach and work towards practical solutions within the multilateral framework. Her delegation also shared Brazil's concern that bilateral solutions that might resolve the transition problem of one Member could impact on third countries, and this should be borne in mind in the consultations. The broader implementation problems raised by Members should also constitute an important aspect of the work programme. Since these were varied and highly technical, the review of these problems should be undertaken by the existing subsidiary bodies. The General Council could maintain an oversight of the review process, and there was no need to establish a new mechanism. On internal transparency, the WTO structure was not in need of major repair because the organization was generally working well, but her delegation would be prepared to discuss fine-tuning or adjustments. However, her delegation cautioned against

WT/GC/M/53

over-playing or over-exaggerating the problem, or even engaging in long debates that would divert the WTO's attention from its core business of trade liberalisation.

55. The representative of the European Communities said he had set out in the informal meeting the reasons why all Members, especially developing-country Members, should support the objective of the present meeting, which was to move forward and to tell the world that the WTO was moving forward, however slight the movement might be. He agreed with the Director-General's proposed programme of further consultations. Since this was an exercise in confidence-building, the indications of timing given should be respected and as much as possible should be accomplished before the end of March. It was no use launching the exercise only to see it become a long process. He also agreed with Japan that one should not lose sight of the long-term objective of relaunching a new round of negotiations on a broad, balanced basis. This was perhaps the only element missing from the Director-General's report. In this respect, he quoted President Zedillo of Mexico, who had stated at the meeting of the World Economic Forum at Davos: "I am fully convinced that notwithstanding what happened in Seattle – inside and outside the conference room – serious efforts to further liberalize trade and investment should not faint. Truly progressive minds sincerely committed to the advancement of the poor people in developing countries should, by virtue of persuasion, be converted into firm allies in this endeavour". On the functioning of the organization, some aspects could be addressed in the long term, but others should be addressed in a relatively short period, such as the preparation and organization of Ministerial Conferences, ensuring developing-country participation in negotiations through technical assistance, and improving external transparency.

56. The representative of Indonesia said that, like many other developing countries, Indonesia attached importance to the question of implementation. Many Members had expressed the need to establish a special mechanism under the General Council to address these issues, and Indonesia supported any attempt to ensure that problems related to implementation issues were seriously addressed and resolved. Indonesia thus supported suggestions that the subject of implementation should be placed on the agenda of the next General Council meeting. On transition periods, this issue should be approached in a logical and practical manner. Requests for extensions should be considered on the basis of the specific needs and objectives of the requesting country. It would be illogical to address the issue across the board, since each requesting country had different problems and needs. Also, such requests should be considered by the committee concerned, based on the particular difficulties faced by individual requesting Members. In order to facilitate the deliberations, the requesting country might have bilateral consultations with other Members. However, final decision and approval should be taken by the entire membership in order to ensure transparency. However, this approach should not be used by other Members to acquire additional commitments from requesting Members. Like others, her delegation saw a need to continue discussion with respect to measures in favour of LDCs, including efforts to enhance capacity building to ensure their ability to implement their commitments and obligations as well as maximize market opportunities created by trade liberalisation. Enhancing capacity building should not be limited only to the LDCs, since many developing-country Members, including Indonesia, needed technical assistance for the same objectives. It was also important to ensure that technical cooperation and capacity-building measures were effectively and efficiently implemented. In this regard, her delegation supported the suggestion that the WTO should undertake an evaluation of technical cooperation as soon as possible. In the light of the growing need for funding for technical cooperation activities and for certainty, and to ensure the continuity of the technical assistance programme, her delegation hoped that developed-country Members would accord favorable and consistent contributions to ensure the availability of continuous funding. Other Members in a position to provide contributions should be expected to do so only on a voluntary basis, commensurate with their level of development. Indonesia agreed that the existing WTO decision-making process needed to be improved, and this was one of the most crucial issues needing immediate attention if Members wanted to move forward. The increase in the developing-country

WT/GC/M/53

membership of the WTO was a clear indication of these countries' keen interest to participate fully in a fairer, more open multilateral trading system. Full participation entailed giving these countries equal opportunity to participate in any decision-making process, especially on matters of vital interest to them. Therefore, it was time for the WTO to develop an improved process of negotiation which was more inclusive, according full transparency while not forsaking efficiency. Indonesia hoped that Members would embark on serious consultations on this important issue.

57. The representative of Pakistan said there was no doubt that rapid action was needed on the programme for LDCs, and his delegation would support this. Pakistan had been disappointed that the agenda for the present meeting had not included an item relating to implementation. Every Ministerial Declaration since Marrakesh had underlined the importance and priority of implementation. With regard to the issue of transition periods, a multilateral solution should be sought as far as possible. It was encouraging that all Members had displayed sensitivity in this area and had agreed to act in accordance with the understanding reached at the 17 December meeting of the General Council until a definitive solution was reached. This understanding should be reflected in the Chairman's concluding remarks at the present meeting. His delegation did not agree that requests for extension of transition periods should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, as such an approach would leave too much space for selectivity and even, possibly, discrimination. With regard to implementation issues, paragraph 9 of the Geneva Ministerial Declaration read "in the light of paragraphs 1-8 above, we decide that a process will be established under the direction of the General Council to ensure full and faithful implementation of existing agreements, and to prepare for the Third Session of the Ministerial Conference." Thus, the process of undertaking work on implementation issues had been assigned to the General Council by Ministers at Geneva, and that mandate had not been rescinded by any subsequent decision. The General Council was thus still bound to undertake further work in this area, and it should take a clear decision, perhaps at the present meeting, to do so. He noted that proposals had been made on this issue in the preparations for the Seattle Conference. His delegation trusted that the General Council would agree to establish a special mechanism that would address and resolve the implementation problems that had been identified. He hoped that this too would be reflected in the Chairman's concluding remarks. On the issue of transparency, the problem Members faced was to improve the participation of developing countries in particular in the WTO's work. This objective involved three dimensions: first, fuller participation for all Members in the decision-making process, which meant participation in consultations and adoption of decisions through a fair and open process; second, rationalization of the pace and rhythm of meetings to enable smaller delegations to participate and benefit from the work; and third, an increase in the capacity of the Secretariat to address new trade and development issues in the various areas of the agreements, another aspect of which was the need for a balanced representation of developing countries in the Secretariat. The General Council should devote time to consider all aspects of this issue.

58. The representative of Korea said that the first and foremost task was to build confidence among Members and the general public by agreeing on a realistic work programme for the immediate future. It should be possible to agree on a package for technical cooperation and capacity building for developing countries as soon as possible, since sufficient groundwork had already been done in this respect. Korea hoped that major Members would also reach agreement on market access for LDC products, following which Korea would be willing to make its own contribution. His delegation welcomed the fact that Members were ready to address the issue of deadlines and transition periods in a pragmatic manner, and hoped that consideration of other implementation issues would proceed in the same constructive atmosphere so as to contribute to building confidence. Similarly, his delegation agreed with others that reform of the WTO process should be approached with utmost care so that it did not become another difficult and divisive issue. Korea joined the consensus at the present meeting on the understanding that Members would remain open to the possibility of adding other elements to the work programme in due course. A broad and balanced work programme for further trade liberalization and development of WTO rules should continue to

WT/GC/M/53

be a priority, and Korea hoped that the negotiations and consultations in the following months would succeed in building confidence to that end.

59. The representative of Uganda said that the challenge before the WTO was how to address the problems facing the LDCs so that they could benefit from the multilateral trading system. The share in world trade of these countries had dropped from around 0.6 per cent in the 1970s to about 0.4 per cent at present. Since they represented 12 per cent of the global population, the task they were facing to reverse this marginalization was clear if they were to share fully in the benefits of the trading system. Uganda had therefore welcomed the initiative proposed by the Community during the preparations for the Seattle Conference for improved market access for substantially all products originating from LDCs, and hoped it would still be possible to undertake this commitment. Studies by both the WTO and UNCTAD of the impact this might have on sensitive products could help to improve public opinion in developed countries, and put to rest the fears advanced for not granting this access. In terms of market share, this improved access would not cause much of a problem. With regard to the transition periods, a systemic rather than a case-by-case solution was needed. The view that LDCs should be exempt from implementing agreements as long as they remained LDCs had been expressed in the proposals submitted by them prior to Seattle. The issue of implementation should have pride of place in the work programme, and his delegation agreed with the statement by India in this respect. On transparency and participation, his delegation had been among those which had pointed to the marginalization of LDCs, and particularly African countries, in the consultation process in the lead-up to and at the Seattle Conference. They had felt that much as they had talked, nobody had been listening, and Bangladesh had earlier noted how a paragraph they had proposed had vanished from the text on action in favour of LDCs. Furthermore, these countries had expressed their points of view in one of the working sessions at Seattle, but these had not been reflected in the Chairperson's summing-up and, despite written proposals by Uganda and Bangladesh, the final paper had not included them. Uganda agreed to the consideration of the issue of transparency, but this should begin with internal transparency. It should not be taken for granted that these countries would accept whatever was ordained, despite having put forward their points of view. The question was how to involve meaningfully all Members in the decision-making process.

60. The representative of Mexico said that Mexico continued to seek the launch of a new round of broad-based multilateral trade negotiations under a single undertaking. A new round was the best way to cover the interests of all Members, and it should be launched as soon as possible. Nevertheless, Mexico agreed with others that the WTO could not withstand another failure in this type of undertaking. Thus, before trying to launch a round at Ministerial level, it was important that all Members agree beforehand on what would be included. Mexico was in favour of negotiations on all issues leading to trade and investment liberalization, and against the introduction into the WTO of non-trade issues. The Director-General's report covered a series of elements on which he had undertaken consultations with a view to allowing the General Council to decide on how to continue the work programme in the immediate future. Although this report had been presented under the Director-General's own responsibility and did not commit any Member, he wished to clarify certain points. Mexico could accept that consultations be undertaken on measures in favour of LDCs, which as the Director-General had stated, was not an issue linked to a new round. Mexico agreed also on consultations on technical assistance and capacity building, with the aim of defining the amounts and modalities to be applied to contributions. This should bring fresh resources to this area and not simply be a means of sharing across all Members what had been previously given voluntarily by a few. On transition periods, consultations should be undertaken with a view to finding creative solutions within a multilateral framework. In the case of the TRIMs Agreement, there was no legal need for consensus on the decisions to be taken under Article 5.3 on the requests for extension submitted, including by Mexico. Mexico hoped that the restraint discussed at the 17 December General Council meeting would continue to be valid, since it was in the interest of all Members. On broader implementation issues, Mexico supported continuing consultations with the aim of fulfilling the commitments agreed at the Geneva Ministerial Conference, and also that this item be on the

WT/GC/M/53

agenda for the next meeting of the General Council. On transparency and effective participation of Members in decision-making, only Members' comments should be taken into account. Mexico was concerned that, although the Director-General's report clearly addressed internal transparency, this work might open the door to contributions dealing with more than internal transparency, and that these contributions might be used as a basis for consultations. The only consultations to which Mexico could agree were those carried out with the aim of improving internal transparency and effective participation of Members. In these consultations it should be clearly established that it was a strictly internal exercise. If this were not possible, Mexico would prefer not to agree to anything. There should be no ambiguity that would allow some Members to think that the discussion would also cover proposals made on other occasions and which went further than a strictly internal exercise. Mexico could not join any consensus on consultations going further than internal transparency, or any interpretation that would require consensus for the Council for Trade in Goods to authorize the extension of transition periods under the TRIMs Agreement when the measure concerned had been notified and the extension requested in conformity with the Agreement.

61. The representative of Jamaica said that his delegation saw three lessons from Seattle. First, failure at Seattle had been predictable. This was important to acknowledge, since events that could be foreseen were usually open to intervention and prevention. Second, scope, substance and process were at the core of the deadlock – not one or the other, but all three. The third lesson was related to the first, inasmuch as Seattle had not been an aberration, nor a single, unique event, but rather part of a process in train for several years. This process had been characterized by an institutional unwillingness or inability to adjust to an increasing and diverse membership, the growing involvement of all Members and the fact that an increasingly complex calculus of costs and benefits was now associated with each decision and agreement. It was in this sense that Seattle had been predictable. It had merely been the place where the world had been able to see what most people on the inside might have recognized since at least the time of the Uruguay Round, and certainly since then – that there was a fundamental incompatibility between substance and process in the organization. This was an inconsistency between the issues Members wished to decide, the decisions they had to take and how in practice they had to set about making those decisions in a multilateral organization that had a profound impact on policy prescriptions and therefore on the economic possibilities of its Members. Jamaica was prepared to play its part in seeking to ensure that Seattle's lessons would prove to be valuable, from the standpoint of a small developing economy with a high share of trade to GDP. It had sometimes been told that size did not matter in the new global economy, but there was a growing number of mega-mergers in many sectors, and those producing and selling goods and services seemed to have no doubt that size did matter. The increasingly complex calculus of costs and benefits mentioned earlier demanded that the organization be more responsive to the particular concerns and needs of different groups of countries, including the small economies, and provide scope for their effective participation. Ultimately, such an unambiguous tilt towards inclusiveness and accommodation would strengthen the WTO, even if this might entail a slower pace in some areas of work and would require increased acceptance of the need for policy flexibility. This might also require a less expansive vision of the organization's core business.

62. An improvement in transparency seemed to be supported by all Members. The question was how to achieve this objective. Significant changes were necessary, not in respect of legally binding elements such as consensus, nor necessarily in institutional structure, but in culture, procedures and willingness to implement creative ways of ensuring that all Members had access to and could participate effectively in negotiations of interest to them. Jamaica hoped to be in a position to make a contribution on this. The starting-point should be the recognition by all that trade negotiations could not take place successfully if a significant number of Members believed themselves to be alienated from the negotiating process itself. It was important to deal with internal transparency, but relations with NGOs and other elements of civil society should also be examined. There should be improved channels of communication, increased contact and interaction. However, it should be

WT/GC/M/53

recognized that those who alleged the supra-nationalism of the WTO and wished to directly determine the agenda and decisions of this intergovernmental body perhaps themselves harboured supra-national ambitions. The soundest course was for the WTO to be responsive to its membership as a whole, which had not been the case in the past. On the Director-General's report, Jamaica understood that the elements he had outlined were intended to build confidence and credibility through initial steps, but the restoration of confidence would require that a range of issues be addressed expeditiously. Implementation issues, particularly those related to perceived imbalances in the Uruguay Round Agreements, should be addressed and be on the agenda of the next General Council meeting. Jamaica welcomed the willingness indicated by some important Members to engage constructively on these issues and believed that this augured well for confidence building. On technical cooperation and capacity building, a Minister of an EU member State had referred in a recent speech to World Bank estimates that implementing agreements relating to sanitary measures, patents and customs reform would cost developing countries an average of US$130 million per country. This was a sharp reminder of the scope and cost of the work remaining to be done. For this reason there was a great need for assistance, both financial and technical, across a wide range of developing countries. On transition periods, there was recognition from many Members that this issue should be addressed expeditiously. The solution should impart clarity and predictability to the situation to the greatest extent possible, because the agreements, deadlines and time-frames involved had direct implications for, and direct impact on, the productive sectors and livelihood of peoples in the developing countries. Furthermore, certain other non-controversial issues, such as the work programme for small economies, should also be part of an early phase of confidence building, since this would serve to assure a significant number of Members of the WTO's preparedness to respond to their needs. Finally, Jamaica supported improved market access for LDCs.

63. The representative of Ecuador said that Seattle had provided some valuable lessons which should not be underestimated or ignored, and which the General Council had to examine critically with the aim of identifying a common direction for the development of constructive and efficient initiatives for the benefit of all. Such direction should be clearly reflected in the work programme, and if improvements were not made to fundamental aspects such as transparency and decision-making, a major lesson from Seattle would be lost. Outside interest in the WTO was not just focussed on what it did or did not do, but also on the manner in which it did it. Future work should thus be based on credibility and should take on a new energy and a true spirit of openness and transparency. This implied seeking more points of convergence and being more equitable and balanced. Taking account of developing-country views was imperative, along with paying attention to their needs in the areas of implementation, technical assistance and real and effective participation. These Members were looking to participate actively in all decisions affecting their development policies and demanded better representation in the Secretariat. Ecuador agreed to the consultations outlined, and to the possibility of widening their scope to include issues of vital interest to developing countries, such as a study on the relationship between external debt and trade. Ecuador supported the initiative in favour of market access for LDCs and the effort to provide technical cooperation and capacity building, which should be widened in scope. The General Council should adopt a decision on transition periods within an equitable framework as soon as possible. Ecuador had not requested any extensions in this respect, but believed that the situation should be clarified and the problems facing developing countries resolved.

64. The representative of Poland, on behalf of the CEFTA Members and Turkey, said that the WTO now needed a pragmatic and realistic work programme, matching consistency and resolve in the execution of the already-established objectives with awareness and willingness to resolve urgent current issues. The final aim should be the launching of an ambitious, broad-based new round. While attention should clearly focus first on the different elements of the built-in agenda, there were a number of other important and urgent issues. A reasonable and realistic solution should be found to the problem of transition periods on a case-by-case basis. Consultations on the other issues related to implementation should continue. The pressing issues for LDCs of market access, technical

WT/GC/M/53

assistance and capacity building should also be urgently addressed, with the aim of finding a solution reflecting the solidarity of all Members. The time that had elapsed since Seattle had enabled a calmer assessment of the factors that had led to the unsuccessful result, and the failure could not be attributed to the process itself. A number of factors had played a part, the first being the deep discrepancy in Members' positions on substance. However, the present debate should focus on the internal transparency of the WTO. These countries agreed with the Director-General's statement that the basic principle of consensus was not negotiable, and believed that consultations on this topic should be a first step towards a wider, confidence-building, incremental dialogue among all Members. It was essential to start with modesty and self-restraint, and to avoid any temptation to exaggerate the effects of the demonstrations in Seattle. A gradual accumulation of positive actions was needed before a more measured step towards wider objectives was taken. Finally, a strong and unequivocal message to the outside world that the WTO was solidly on the track of normal work would be important.

65. The representative of Madagascar said that it was important now to send a clear message to re-establish confidence among Members and the outside world. This confidence could only be restored through better transparency and participation of all Members in the decision-making process. The time had come for the General Council to take up its work in a constructive and positive spirit, and implementation should be the first priority. Many developing-country Members, including Madagascar, had clearly stated the problems they faced in implementing WTO agreements. On the issue of extension of transition periods, Madagascar agreed with others that the solution should be multilateral and not case-by-case. The General Council should also take immediate measures in favour of the LDCs, including duty-free, quota-free, bound market access and full implementation of the Integrated Framework. Furthermore, a commitment should be made for financing technical assistance through sufficient, predictable and permanent budgetary resources, without excluding voluntary contributions. Finally, the future work programme should be more limited in scope than it was prior to Seattle. It would be difficult for many Members, including Madagascar, to undertake new commitments while facing difficulties in implementation of existing agreements.

66. The representative of Malaysia said that his delegation placed great importance on finding solutions to all the implementation issues that had been raised prior to Seattle. These issues were not confined merely to the extension of transition periods. All the issues should be addressed, through either a special review mechanism established under the General Council or dedicated special sessions. They could not be relegated to the respective subsidiary bodies, since discussions at the technical level would not result in meaningful conclusions. Although some highly technical questions might best be dealt with in these bodies, the focus of the discussions should be in the General Council. Malaysia supported the suggestion that implementation should be a permanent agenda item for meetings of the General Council. The issue of extension of transition periods should be dealt with in the General Council, or in the respective Councils in the case where a consensus was reached in this respect. While these extensions could be addressed case-by-case, it should be on the basis of a multilateral determination and not subject to bilateral conditionalities. Malaysia also supported the initiatives for the LDCs, especially on capacity building and technical cooperation. The areas of work outlined in the Director-General's report constituted a moderate but realistic package to allow Members to continue the reform and liberalization process. These initiatives represented a fairly broad and comprehensive agenda for all Members. While internal transparency and the decision-making process was an important area that necessitated urgent action, its importance should not be overplayed. Malaysia did not agree that the failure at Seattle was due to process. While the process, including the logistical arrangements, had been flawed, the failure could not be entirely attributed to process or the lack of transparency in decision-making. Overloading of the agenda with unrealistic ambitions had been the primary cause, and even the most perfect process would not have led to a successful outcome. The decision-making process remained essentially intact, and decision-making through consensus should be retained and was non-negotiable. What

WT/GC/M/53

was needed was greater transparency in the Green Room process and in the subsequent process leading to decisions in a multilateral forum.

67. The representative of the United States said that her delegation sought a practical approach to the issue of expiry of transition periods, drawing on the flexibility that was inherent in the WTO system. The goal of her delegation was to ensure that the WTO Agreements were fully functioning, and she believed that this was also a common goal. Each Member's rights would be fully protected in this regard. Her delegation was ready to explore expeditiously some of the suggestions made, with the aim of finding practical solutions to the unique and differing difficulties faced by some Members, to help them meet their commitments within an agreed period of time. A practical framework would be useful and would be without prejudice to any Member's rights. On technical cooperation, her delegation agreed with the suggestion by Bangladesh for a review of the Integrated Framework. Some of the other suggestions made in this area had been along the same lines as a proposal the United States and others had submitted in the preparatory process for Seattle, and these suggestions would need to be examined in the consultations.

68. The representative of Chile said that it was important to send a clear message that multilateralism was alive and well and that free trade was necessary. Work should progress both on the built-in agenda and on other issues, as outlined in the Director-General's report. The principle of multilateralism should also be strengthened. At present there was an outbreak of free-trade agreements across the world, not all of which were based on the integrity and detail required by the WTO. The Committee on Regional Trade Agreements should carry out its work and all Members should participate with the aim of reducing the dispersion in standards, rules of origin and disciplines. A joint effort should be made to send a clear signal that the liberalization process was under the effective control and supervision of the WTO. On measures in favour of LDCs, Chile agreed that there was a need for clear decisions, including on improved market access and capacity building. The developed countries were the best placed to join the market access initiative rapidly, but some developing countries could also join on a voluntary basis in the short to medium term. Chile would be prepared to join this initiative, and hoped others would do so. Chile was also willing to join a consensus on inclusion of the financing of technical cooperation in the regular WTO budget. On implementation issues, many delegations had stated that resolving the problems in this area was their top priority. The issue of transition periods was only one issue among many in this area, and it should be resolved through negotiation, although this should not entail writing a blank cheque for exemption from fulfilling existing commitments. Finally, consultations should be started on internal transparency. Various ideas had been put forward and should be examined, particularly that of interest groups independent of region or level of development. Many such groups already existed, and others could be created for different subject areas.

69. The representative of Japan said that his delegation intended to contribute to the consultations on the decision-making process. These consultations could address issues such as the role of the Director-General at Ministerial Conferences, further derestriction of documents and the suggestion for an advisory group composed of eminent persons from business, consumer, environmental or academic circles. The aim should be to improve internal and external transparency. On implementation, Japan was fully aware of the difficulties developing countries faced in this area, and was willing to provide as much assistance as possible. It was on this basis that it had announced at Seattle that it would receive 2,500 people from developing countries over 5 years for training on implementation and utilization of the WTO Agreements. It was particularly important to provide assistance to LDCs, and cooperation in this area was crucial. Japan had thus announced together with the Community at Seattle its willingness to make an effort to improve the market access of LDC products and to provide more trade-related technical assistance. Japan hoped that such initiatives would be integrated into the work of the WTO and encouraged the participation of other developed countries. On transition periods, it was important to solve the problems rapidly, with the cooperation and support of the countries concerned and the Secretariat. For this, agreement

WT/GC/M/53

was needed on a set of procedures and criteria under which individual requests for extension could be examined. In this way every Member could be confident that the examination of their request would be conducted under fixed criteria and not be subject to discretion.

70. The representative of Canada said that before it would be possible to embark on any process to launch a new round, a healing process was needed both on some very divisive and complex matters and also on relations between some Members, and the Director-General had clearly attempted to begin that process. Bangladesh had clearly identified some of the genuine issues and aspirations of LDCs. Equally genuine were the difficulties and practical complexities of arriving at solutions to some of the issues raised. Those issues had not been easy in the preparations for and at Seattle. Goodwill on all sides would be needed to overcome the challenges inherent in these issues. On the issue of transparency, many Members had used the word caution, meaning that an incremental approach should be used in this area as on the substantive issues. Work on transparency should be undertaken in a measured way rather than trying to revolutionise the process, which would risk putting back the substantive agenda. Some Members were not prepared to work on internal transparency if work was also undertaken on the external side. Canada did not agree with this approach, because in the long run Members might not have the luxury to do one without the other. The WTO could do a better job in helping Member governments on external transparency. The demonstrations at Seattle had not been aimed at the WTO as an institution, but rather at globalization itself. For this reason, Canada had supported work on coherence, because the WTO could be part of the solution and increase its outreach together with other organizations. The objective would be to reassure supporters of globalization.

71. The representative of Switzerland said that his delegation agreed with the four priority issues outlined in the Director-General's report since they would be part of a broad-based round of negotiations, which must remain the objective in the medium term. Measures in favour of LDCs and improvements in technical cooperation for capacity building should be undertaken as soon as possible. This package of measures was important, as was the time-frame, which should be credible and respected. The first priority was to bring the funding of technical cooperation into the regular WTO budget. On transition periods, the problems differed across Members and agreements. A uniform approach was thus not possible, and an approach involving individual waivers would avoid undermining the agreements themselves. The broader issue of implementation was very complex and was perceived differently among different Members. Consultations should be carried out taking into account that the meaning of implementation had evolved since the conclusion of the Uruguay Round. Finally, many Members had called for caution in the work on the decision-making process. The need for caution should not be underestimated, especially so soon after Seattle. It was necessary to proceed step by step, and carefully analyze the situation collectively, first by defining the need for reform, then identifying deficiencies in the existing mechanisms, and finally looking for the solutions.

72. The representative of Cuba said that for the WTO to be truly global and reach its goals, the fundamental interests of all Members should be at the center of its activities. There was a need for concrete, effective action on implementation problems, of which the issue of transition periods was only one. Implementation should be the focus of the next General Council meeting. Suggestions had been made on different occasions regarding issues such as the impact of external debt and the effect of globalization on trade and development, and it would not be possible to discuss coherence in international macroeconomic policy and the role of the WTO without addressing these and other issues. The issue of the trade and development prospects of developing countries was of particular importance. Developing-country issues concerned the majority of Members and should be addressed. There was also a clear link between the organization's activities and problems of transparency. The WTO was what its Members wanted it to be, and its methods were supposedly as democratic as any organization could have. Each Member was supposed to have one vote, and decisions were to be taken by consensus. However, in practice this was not the case, although this

WT/GC/M/53

was a tradition which stemmed from the time of the GATT. Members themselves, without outside interference, needed to find mechanisms to make a reality of the foundations of the decision-making process contained in the Marrakesh Agreement, or the WTO would not be viable. Without transparency within the organization, including in the appointment of officers, it would be impossible for the organization to take advantage of external transparency and confidence. Agreement on the other measures outlined by the Director-General should not de delayed, in particular the measures in favour of LDCs. This issue should not be linked to any negotiations, since it was a question of justice aimed at giving these countries a minimum level of equality to allow them to trade.

73. The representative of Panama agreed with the Director-General's assessment of the situation in his report, and noted that he had not excluded proposals being made by Members. Panama believed that the scope of the work programme should be moderated at present, but that did not exclude adding other issues in the future if they fell under the core responsibilities of the organization. One such issue would be a review of the Dispute Settlement Understanding. High priority should be given to making the work of the organization and any negotiations inclusive, so that all Members were involved and covered by the results. All Members should be able to represent their own interests when necessary. While it was important to achieve results, efficiency should not determine the methodology used. If an inclusive system did not result in agreement on a particular issue, it should be considered that the issue was not yet ripe for negotiation. The aim of the WTO was to establish a sustainable trading system to the benefit of all, and not to attempt to achieve short-term benefits alone. While much was indeed not broken and therefore did not need fixing, this aspect of existing procedures was unsatisfactory, and required immediate attention.

74. The representative of Thailand agreed with others that although internal transparency had been cited as one of the shortcomings in Seattle, the outcome had been due to substantive differences, and that time and resource constraints had prevented the much-needed interactive dialogue among Members. From this perspective, Members needed to be cautious on the issue of WTO reform and not over-react. The question was whether there was a need to change the existing system or simply to fine-tune it to improve communication between the various levels of the decision-making process, so that there was maximum transparency and inclusiveness for all delegations in the process. These questions should be addressed within the organization with the aim of finding a practical solution.

75. The representative of Trinidad and Tobago associated her delegation with Jamaica's statement. Several issues being addressed at the present meeting were of critical importance for Trinidad and Tobago and other countries of the Caribbean sub-region. Many of them were not represented at the present meeting, but most had been present in Seattle and had had a first-hand view of the deficiencies of the decision-making process and the lack of internal transparency in the functioning of the WTO, and how little weight their concerns, problems and proposals carried in the organization’s deliberations. For these countries the issue of internal transparency was critically important because its absence affected their ability to be full and active participants in the WTO. Her delegation was unable to join with others who suddenly found that the organization was just fine and needed only a little fine-tuning. While a revolutionary overhaul of the internal transparency of the organization might not be required, after Seattle it seemed glaringly obvious that ways had to be found to improve internal transparency and guarantee effective participation of all Members. This was a matter of priority, as mentioned by the Director-General in his report. The system might not be totally damaged but it certainly was broken and did require some fixing. These countries had not forgotten their experience in Seattle and their Ministers who had been present in Seattle had not forgotten it either. In their view, the process as well as substantive issues were equally responsible for the failure of Seattle. Improvement in internal transparency should begin with the selection of chairpersons of the various WTO bodies. On external transparency, Members need not be too concerned about this, since the media had already reported on the outcome and decisions adopted at

WT/GC/M/53

the present meeting while it was still in session. It therefore seemed that external transparency was functioning even better than internal transparency, which should make all Members take stock. Implementation was also an important issue for her country and other countries in the Caribbean region, for it concerned not only their ability to live up to the obligations they had undertaken voluntarily in the Uruguay Round, but also affected their ability to develop the capacity to participate fully and take advantage of the benefits of the international trading system. It was for this reason that they supported the proposal for the establishment of a special review mechanism in the General Council on implementation and the convening of a Special Session to allow them to air their concerns, problems and aspirations and to agree on possible solutions.

76. Like India, her delegation believed that expeditious resolution of implementation issues would go a long way towards establishing the credibility of the system and building confidence. Her delegation also shared the view that the issue of transition periods, which was the most pressing issue facing the organization, should be dealt with quickly but within the multilateral framework, and that the result should be one of equity. The best way forward for the organization and its membership was not to pursue bold and ambitious objectives but rather an incremental approach, beginning with the mandated negotiations and reviews. Her delegation was pleased to join the consensus that seemed to be emerging for action to be taken as early as possible to assist LDCs, which were the most marginalized Members. A decision of this nature had nothing to do with negotiations or trade-offs, but had everything to do with ethics. It was not acceptable that 12 per cent of the world’s population should account for only 0.4 per cent of world trade. On the subject of marginalization, her delegation would continue to raise the issue of the treatment in WTO of small-economy Members and the need to take into account the specific constraints and vulnerabilities of these countries and the problems they faced in integrating into the world economy. Integration into the system had been their goal for decades, even before the WTO had come into being, and was precisely why they had repeatedly stated that their special circumstances should be taken into account. While these countries already had very open economies, openness was not a guarantee of positive results when there were constraints linked to trade processes, technology transfer, domestic market size, diseconomies of scale, investment and international finance. If their concerns were not taken into account they ran the real risk of losing everything they had struggled and sacrificed so much to gain. If no attention was paid to their concerns and difficulties, they might well become the LDCs of the future.

77. The representative of Costa Rica expressed support for the initiatives in favour of LDCs, in particular on market access, which the developing countries should join on a voluntary basis. Capacity building for developing countries was also important. His delegation hoped that solutions could be found to the most urgent problems in the area of transition periods, and would participate in consultations on this and other implementation issues with the understanding that the process would evolve towards addressing other issues in the near future. On transparency, only the internal aspects should be addressed, and Costa Rica agreed with others that this should be reflected in the Chairman's concluding remarks. In the work in this area, no attempt should be made to restructure the organization. The WTO was functioning well and further work should focus only on fine-tuning the existing consultation mechanisms to ensure that information was made available to all Members. This fine-tuning, together with efforts towards capacity building for developing countries, would contribute to better participation by all Members.

78. The representative of Burundi said that the Director-General's report was a commitment to make the WTO an organization for all Members, rich or poor. His delegation supported statements by others on the urgent need to analyse implementation problems, and agreed that there was a need to link future negotiations to the development dimension. On transparency, he recalled that in addition to the countries awaiting accession, there were also organizations such as regional economic organizations which had submitted requests for observer status, and these needed to be considered. Any reform of the WTO should allow analysis of ways to integrate developing-country nationals into

WT/GC/M/53

the Secretariat, as suggested by Pakistan. His delegation also appealed for a positive reaction to calls for a rapid decision on the financing of technical cooperation, because the linkage between development and future negotiations could only be made effective through technical cooperation.

79. The representative of Barbados expressed support for the statements by Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago. Implementation issues, and particularly the expiry of transition periods, were major concerns for Barbados, and discussions on these issues should take place rapidly with a view to reaching positive and meaningful solutions. To this end, the establishment of a special review mechanism was necessary. Early action was also needed on the proposals made before Seattle for immediate decisions aimed at the further integration of developing countries into the multilateral trading system. Specifically, early progress should be made on: (i) measures for LDCs; (ii) a package on technical cooperation for all developing countries; and (iii) a work programme on small economies. On internal transparency, serious improvement was needed in this area to ensure that all Members, regardless of size or trade share, could effectively participate in the WTO decision-making process. The views of even the smallest delegations should be taken into account and given equal consideration.

80. The representative of Israel said that his delegation recognized the importance of a constructive, reasonable and practical approach in dealing with the issues outlined by the Director-General, in order to rebuild confidence among Members and send a positive signal to the public. His delegation welcomed the initiatives in favor of LDCs on market access and capacity building, which should not serve as trade-offs for a new round. A similarly constructive approach should be adopted with respect to other issues, such as market access and electronic commerce, which should be included in the future work programme. There was also a need to address implementation issues in a manner satisfactory to all Members. On extension of transition periods, a constructive and practical approach should be adopted bearing in mind the multilateral nature of the WTO system. His delegation recognized the importance of both external and internal transparency, but believed that the need to improve internal transparency was of greater urgency. A review of the whole structure was not necessary, but it was important to ensure the effective participation of all Members while, at the same time, ensuring efficient operation. In this regard, his delegation supported the view that the principle of consensus was not negotiable.

81. The representative of Mauritius supported the statements by Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago and Barbados, and agreed that other non-controversial issues should be part of an early phase of confidence building, such as the work programme on small economies. On implementation, his delegation attached great importance to the issues outlined in the Director-General's report, and believed that the issue of extension of transition periods was only one element of this work. Like others, his delegation had noted the willingness of the Community and the United States to approach this issue with an open mind so as to achieve a concrete solution. Mauritius had long supported improved measures in favour of LDCs and had provided market access to some products originating from LDCs where possible. His delegation hoped that a solution to the satisfaction of all could be found, and believed that capacity-building measures should be extended to all developing countries. On transparency, his delegation agreed that it was not a question of large-scale reforms but rather internal adjustment to enable the full and effective participation of all countries, large and small, in all stages of the decision-making process. His delegation had noted the Director-General's statement that the principle of consensus was non-negotiable and believed that no attempt should be made to dilute this principle.

82. The representative of Venezuela recalled that a working group on the institutional image of the WTO had been set up at the suggestion of Venezuela, and in the light of what had taken place in Seattle there was now an opportunity to make progress in this area. The image of the work of the WTO had been distorted, and despite whatever internal differences might exist, this image had to be strengthened to allow work to progress on the main task of trade liberalization. Progress should also

WT/GC/M/53

be made on measures in favour of LDCs, as well as on strengthening technical cooperation. The latter was a necessity for least-developed as well as developing countries so as to ensure their participation in the organization and their ability to meet their obligations. Like others, his delegation believed that flexibility regarding the extension of transition periods would be an important message for the General Council to send out. A solution on a multilateral and not case-by-case basis would show that Members were making an effort to understand the difficulties faced by many countries in implementing existing agreements. On other implementation issues, it was important to re-launch efforts to find solutions.

83. The representative of Argentina said that the procedure proposed for the continuation of the work was acceptable, and his delegation hoped that the consultations would be held in a spirit of cooperation to ensure substantive progress on all the issues that were important to Members. His delegation agreed on the importance of addressing both implementation and internal transparency, and had confidence in the Director-General and the General Council Chairman to undertake consultations on these issues in an effective way.

84. The representative of Saint Lucia said that Seattle was memorable for some Members for all the wrong reasons, since their disappointment stemmed not only from the absence of sufficient political will to seriously address the concerns of developing countries, but also from the process itself. Many Members had agreed with the statement by Uganda on the marginalization in this process, and this was particularly the case of the small economies. Members were now in a confidence-building mode, and this was important as the WTO had acquired a bad reputation in many of these countries. It was important to address the marginalization of small economies and the unfulfilled promises of the Uruguay Round, which had raised serious implementation problems. Undertaking a serious review of transition periods in order to be sensitive to the needs of developing countries was important. Capacity-building measures and technical assistance, particularly for LDCs and small economies, were also important. Her delegation agreed with Jamaica's statement that certain non-controversial issues such as the work programme for small economies should also be part of an early phase of confidence building. She wondered how it would be possible to fulfill the collective mandate of the WTO in launching new negotiations without addressing the failure of the Uruguay Round Agreements to deliver promised benefits, raise standards of living and promote trade in a manner consistent with the needs and concerns of Members at different levels of economic development. On transparency, she recalled that when asked once whether St. Lucia would be as concerned about the decision-making process if it could be assured of a satisfactory and fair outcome without being at the table, her response had been that she did not know how a country could protect its interests without having its chosen representative at the table. The new world order appeared far less benevolent to some Members than to others. Her delegation agreed with Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago that there was a clear need for improvements in internal transparency so as to ensure that all Members had an opportunity to contribute to the process and even the smallest delegation's input was recognized. In this regard, her delegation was appreciative of the Director-General's efforts to facilitate the greater participation of Members without permanent representation in Geneva.

85. The representative of Honduras said that although the issue of transition periods was the focus of discussion at the present meeting, it was only a starting point for continuing work on other implementation issues which had been raised during the preparations for Seattle. On transparency, work on this issue would receive the support of his delegation if it concerned only internal transparency. His delegation supported the statements by the Dominican Republic, Egypt, India and Pakistan.

86. The representative of the Côte d'Ivoire agreed with others that despite the difficulties that had afflicted the WTO, there was still hope. Her delegation was pleased by the wide interest shown by other Members in ensuring the full integration of the weakest countries into the trading system. With regard to transparency, the improvements sought by Members were a wise approach and her

WT/GC/M/53

delegation welcomed this initiative. It also agreed with Morocco and others that renewed confidence in the WTO was necessary.

87. The representative of Hungary said that the events at Seattle had resulted in distrust among Members and further work should therefore start with appropriate confidence-building measures. It was important to achieve an ambitious package providing improved market access for LDCs as soon as possible, and failing to do so would risk losing credibility. It was also necessary to find a realistic workable solution to the problem of transition periods. The issue of internal transparency should also be addressed. The failure in Seattle had been caused by substantive differences in negotiating positions and not by systemic deficiencies of the WTO. Therefore, it was important to be cautious in this area, so as to avoid a situation in which the process of further trade liberalization might be delayed or blocked by sterile procedural debate.

88. The Chairman said that the discussion had been very positive and constructive, and it was clear that all Members agreed on the need to build confidence among themselves. The discussion had been a significant step in that process. Working together on a series of realistic and achievable measures was the way in which substance would be given to this renewed confidence. In this respect, he noted that the issues identified by the Director-General in his report – measures in favour of LDCs; technical co-operation; transition periods and other implementation issues; internal transparency and effective participation of all Members – had been widely considered to be priorities for further consultation. He also noted the high importance Members had placed on addressing the range of implementation issues in an effective way, and suggested that implementation should be an item on the agenda of the next General Council. In this light, and bearing in mind all the additional points that had been made by delegations, he proposed that further consultations be held by the Chairman of the General Council and the Director-General.

89. The General Council took note of the Director-General's statement and of other statements, and agreed to the Chairman's proposals.

6. Appointment of officers to WTO bodies

90. The Chairman said that in accordance with the guidelines for appointment of officers to WTO bodies approved by the General Council in January 1995 (WT/L/31), he had held informal consultations on this matter. On the basis of these consultations, he considered that there was a consensus on the following slate of names:

General Council Mr. Kåre Bryn (Norway)

Dispute Settlement Body Mr. Stuart Harbinson (Hong Kong, China)

Trade Policy Review Body Mr. Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury (Bangladesh)

Council for Trade in Goods Mr. Carlos Pérez del Castillo (Uruguay)

Council for Trade in Services Mr. Sergio Marchi (Canada)

Committee on Trade and Environment Mrs. Yolande Biké (Gabon)

Committee on Trade and Development Mr. Ransford Smith (Jamaica)

Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions Mr. Milan Hovorka (Czech Republic)

Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Mr. Edsel T. Custodio (Philippines)

Committee on Budget, Finance andAdministration

Mr. Hakki Akil (Turkey)

WT/GC/M/53

Working Group on the Relationship between Trade and Investment

Mr. Man Soon Chang (Korea)

Working Group on the Interaction between Trade and Competition Policy

Mr. Frederic Jenny (France)

Working Group on Transparency in Government Procurement

Mr. Ronald Saborío Soto (Costa Rica)

91. He further said that the Chairmanship for the Council on TRIPS would be decided pending further consultations and taking into account the overall balance of the remaining Chairmanships to be decided by the Council for Trade in Goods for its Subsidiary Bodies.

92. The General Council took note of the statement and of the consensus on the above slate of names.

7. Election of Chairperson

93. As the outgoing presiding officer of the General Council, the Chairman made a statement (WT/GC(00)/ST/1).

94. The General Council then unanimously elected Mr. Kåre Bryn (Norway) to the Chair.

__________

RESTRICTEDCodedocsonline.wto.org/Dol2FE/Pages/FormerScriptedSearch/… · Web viewWorld Trade....

Documents

Transcript of RESTRICTEDCodedocsonline.wto.org/Dol2FE/Pages/FormerScriptedSearch/… · Web viewWorld Trade....