. /.WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/MIN(99)/ST/69
1 December 1999
(99-5260)
MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE
Third Session
Seattle, 30 November - 3 December 1999Original:  English
ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA
Statement by the Honourable Hilroy Humphreys
Minister of Commerce Industry and Business Development
I would like to thank the United States for hosting this important conference.
Antigua and Barbuda is a small, open, vulnerable, democratic, twin island economy.  Every
adjective denotes a complex of challenges with one constant – Antigua and Barbuda has no choice but
to be a part of the global system.  It cannot afford to isolate or insulate itself.  Its imports of goods are
a multiple of its production and over 60 per cent of its foreign exchange comes from tourism.
Antigua and Barbuda believes that the global system must be both free and fair and that those
attributes can best be achieved through institutions which recognize the difference in capacities and
levels of development among their membership and are structured to ensure that all members benefit
from, and are enhanced by, the system.
It was those beliefs which led Antigua and Barbuda to be a founding member of:
• The Caribbean Free Trade Association (CARIFTA) later to become the Caribbean
Community (CARICOM);
• The East Caribbean Common Market later to become the Organization of Eastern
Caribbean States (OECS);
• The African, Caribbean and Pacific Group (ACP); the Association of Caribbean
States (ACS);
And also to join the World Trade Organization as it came into being on 1 January 1995.
We believe in institutions, democracy, equity, the rule of law and natural justice.We ask ourselves and we challenge this Third Ministerial Meeting to ask itself whether our
Organization, the World Trade Organization, has since the Marrakesh Agreement been leading to
greater equity in trade and investment across the me mbership and to a greater sense of natural justice
among the Members?  The statistics tell us that the gaps in both trade and investment have increased
between the developed and developing Members.
The publics of the small banana growing countries of the Caribbean tell us that they do not
sense natural justice when their governments could not defend their vital interest directly in the
Dispute Settlement Body.WT/MIN(99)/ST/69
Page 2
If the statistics and the concerns of the public of the small countries have any merit we need
to re-examine our fundamental assumptions of how free trade mechanisms work to create equity and
how the implementation of our arrangements build confidence.
Antigua and Barbuda is vulnerable both to natural disasters and changes in trade patterns.
Our country has been ravished by at least one major hurricane since 1995.  We have had to shift from
sugar production, to cotton production, to services – tourism and later, financial services.  At each
stage we have had to retreat as competitors from larger countries, with greater resources, in cases with
governmental support, establish comparative advant age.  We understand when the private sector and
the market are at work:  we have observed, however, ironically more so, since the WTO has come into
being, an increasing tendency of large countries ei ther individually or as groups to seek to impose
conditions on activities in developing countries.  We draw attention here to the effort of the OECDcountries over the past three years or so to attack the financial services sector in small jurisdictions.
The recent unsubstantiated, factually flawed "harmful tax competition report", the trial in an
institution in which no small developing country is a member, the threat of sanctions and the issuance
of advisories can only add to the cynicism and distrust of our global effort.
I would now like to underline the importance of special and differential (S&D) treatment.
1. Special and differential treatment is an integral part of the GATT and Uruguay Round
Agreements (URAs).  The notion that the URAs  negate the fundamental understanding that
differentiated treatment was and is necessary to mediate the encounter with the multilateraltrading system is a myth, and really nothing more than a goal for some.
2. The primary criticism of the S&D provisions in the URAs is the lack of any objective basis or
linkage to measurable development parameters including factors such as the constraints
imposed by small size.  The arbitrarily chosen transition periods, threshold and otherflexibility measures built into the Uruguay Round Agreements do not provide sufficiently
sensitive rules to address the development needs of all WTO Members.
3. S&D provisions in the URAs of a "best endeavour" nature have largely remained
unimplemented.  These provisions must be made effective, operational and binding.  We must
strengthen and give tangible operational meaning to S&D provisions in the URAs.
4. The lessons learned through the initial implementation period confirm that a deepening of
liberalization commitments will demand concurrent strengthening of S&D provisions.
Special and differential treatment must be a fundamental component of any future
negotiations.
Our larger Members do not add credibility to our institutions if they are selective in their use
of these institutions and do not play by the rules which they themselves design.
__________