RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/GC/M/80
18 July 2003
(03-3901)
General Council
15 May 2003
MINUTES OF MEETING
Held in the Centre William Rappard
on 15 May 2003
Chairman:  Mr. Carlos Pérez del Castillo (Uruguay)
Subjects discussed: Page
1. Iran – Request for Accession ................................................................................................. ..2
2. Work Programme on Special and Differential Treatment in Pursuance of
Paragraph 44 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration and Paragraph 12.1 of the
Decision on Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns – Progress report by
the General Council Chairman on his consultations .............................................................2
3. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration .............................................................6
(a) Report of the Committee on its meetings of October, November and December 2002 .............6
(b) Report by the Chairman of the Committee on the Committee's review of
methodologies for future pay ad justments for WTO Staff .........................................................6
4. Report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations Committee ..........................................8
5. Work Programme on Small Economies – Report by the Chairman of the
Dedicated Sessions of the Committee on Trade and Development.....................................10
6. Kimberley Process Certification Scheme for Rough Diamonds – Request for a
waiver from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, Japan, Korea, Philippines, SierraLeone, Thailand, United Arab Emirates and the United States .........................................11
7. Marrakesh Ministerial Decision concerning the possible negative effects of the
reform programme on least-developed and NFIDCS – Follow up to the Report
of the Inter-Agency Panel on short-term difficulties in financing normal levels of
commercial imports of basic foodstuffs – Report by the Chairman of theCommittee on Ag riculture .....................................................................................................12
8. Review of progress on the implementation issues referred to WTO bodies under
the Decision of 14 November 2001 on Implementation-Related issues and
Concerns – Communication from India ...............................................................................14
9. Review of progress on development-related issues of the Doha Work Programme
– Communication from Tanzania on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing
Countries...................................................................................................................... ............14
10. WTO Pension Plan – Election of a Chairperson, Member and Alternate to the
Management Board – Proposal by the Chairman ...............................................................25WT/GC/M/80
Page 2
11. Attendance by international intergovernme ntal organizations as observers at the
Fifth Session of the Ministerial Conference – Request by the League of Arab
States ......................................................................................................................... ...............26
12. Ongoing improvements to the services provided by the Secretariat to Members ............30
13. Chairmanship of the Committee on Trade and Development............................................3114. Chairmanships of the Working Parties on the Accessions of Bhutan, Ethiopia
and Yemen...................................................................................................................... .........31
15. Closure of the WTO premises during the meeting of the G-8 in Evian.............................31
1. Iran – Request for Accession (WT/ACC/IRN/1)
1. The Chairman drew attention to the communi cation from Iran in WT/ACC/IRN/1 requesting
accession to the WTO Agreement pursuant to Article XII.  He recalled that the General Council had
last considered this matter at its meeting in February, and had agreed to revert to it at the present
meeting.
2. The representative of the United States said that the issue of Iran's accession to the WTO
continued to be under review by her Government, and her delegation had nothing to add to its
statement at the February meeting of the General Council.
3. The representative of Tanzania, speaking on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing
Countries, said that these countries took note of the statement by the United States.  They hoped that
the United States would complete its review soon and would be able to provide a positive response on
this issue at the next meeting of the General Council.
4. The General Council took note of the statements and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next
meeting.
2. Work Programme on Special and Differential Treatment in Pursuance of Paragraph 44
of the Doha Ministerial Declaration and Paragraph 12.1 of the Decision on
Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns – Progress report by the General Council
Chairman on his consultations
5. The Chairman recalled at its meeting in February, the General Council had considered a
report from the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD) in Special Session regarding special
and differential treatment in pursuance of paragraph 12.1 of the Doha Ministerial Decision on
Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns.  Following the discussion at that meeting, the General
Council had agreed to revert to this matter, after having taken note of the report and of the statements,
and to invite its incoming Chairman, in coordination with the Chairman of the CTD in Special
Session, to undertake consultations immediately on how to take this very important matter forward.In pursuance of this mandate, and with the firm belief that, as part of the Doha Development Agenda,
it was important to make progress on the work on special and differential treatment, he had held
consultations with several groups of Members in order to explore various ideas on a possible new
approach to the work ahead.  This would enable Members to move beyond the frustration they felt in
this area and to undertake a procedure that would enable them to have positive results.  On the basisof these consultations, he had put forward a paper on 7 April (JOB(03)/68, outlining what he believed
was the best way to enable Members to move forward.  As he had indicated in that paper, there were
two fundamental premises to his approach.  First, all Agreement-specific proposals on S&D treatment
were on the table and would be considered by Members without prejudging the results.  Second, for
efficiency in this work, it was necessary to informally categorize the 88 Agreement-specificproposals, without in any way implying a prioriti zation of these proposals.  Based on this suggested
approach, and following a careful examination of all the Agreement-specific proposals, he hadWT/GC/M/80
Page 3
divided these proposals into three broad categories, and on 5 May Members had received a document
reflecting these categories in a consolidated list (Job 3403).  This list would be the basis for Members'
future work with regard to special and differential treatment.
6. "Category I" was comprised of proposals on which, based on the discussions so far and the
responses given by Members, there appeared to be a greater likelihood of reaching agreement.  It alsoincluded those proposals that had a developmental value which, in his judgement, made it necessary
that Members try to address them and make progress, whether in their current form or otherwise.
There were 38 proposals in this category, including the 12 Agreement-specific proposals that had
already been agreed in principle by Members in February and set out in Annex III of the report of the
CTD in Special Session in document TN/CTD/7.  "Category II" was comprised of another 38
proposals that had been made in areas that were currently under negotiation as part of the Doha
Development Agenda, or whose operative part was already being considered in some WTO bodiesand which, in his judgement, were likely to get a better response within the framework of the
negotiations or at the technical level.  It had to be  recognized that despite all attempts thus far, the
Category II issues continued to remain unresolved, and for this reason he believed firmly that the only
way to make real progress was to refer them to the relevant negotiating or technical bodies.  Finally,
"Category III" contained 12 proposals on which, in hi s view, there currently appeared to be a wide
divergence of views, and on which progress might not be possible without a certain degree of
redrafting of the original text.
7. On the basis of this approach, he intended to hold further consultations at the level of
Permanent Representatives.  He wished Members to approach the proposals in Category I, with which
he would begin his consultations, with the utmost flexibility and support so that progress could be
made.  As he had indicated in the approach paper, there was an understanding from the consultations
he had held that Members were willing to consider  changes in the existing balance of rights and
obligations and, without prejudging the results of the work, were also prepared to look at possible
amendments to existing texts of WTO agreements and decisions on a case-by-case basis.  He had also
proposed that, in asking the relevant bodies to address the proposals in Category II, the GeneralCouncil instruct those bodies to consider these proposals as soon as possible and to report on their
status and the progress made in this regard to the last meeting of the General Council before the
Cancún Ministerial Conference.  These bodies would also be instructed that, where Members were in
a position to make recommendations, this be done without prejudice to the date of completion of the
negotiations as a whole.  In this connection, he was optimistic that positive results could be reached
before Cancún with respect to some proposals in Category II which had been included in the original
list of the 22 proposals identified by the Chairman of the CTD in Special Session.  He also intended towrite to the Chairpersons of the respective bodies to which these proposals were being referred,
specifically in this regard during the course of the current week.  Furthermore, he intended to follow
progress on these issues very closely.  With respect to Category III, he intended to look at these issues
in the General Council before the Cancún Ministerial Conference.
8. It was important to emphasize that the process as a whole would remain under the overall
authority of the General Council, and that he w ould continue to brief the Council on the progress
being made in this regard.  He would be starting an intensive series of negotiations with Members as
from the coming week, and assured Members that he would spare no effort to achieve a positive result
before Cancún.  He knew that there had been no major results on S&D treatment, but it was now
important to achieve specific results that met the needs of developing countries.  He would make afurther progress report to the General Council at its next meeting.  He said that it was not his intention
to open a debate on this matter at the present meeting, and that he would prefer to leave substantive
debate for the informal consultations.  While he sought Members' cooperation and understanding in
this regard, delegations could nevertheless take the floor to make specific points.
9. All representatives who spoke expressed appreciation to the Chairman for the report on his
consultations and for his efforts aimed at breaking the existing deadlock on S&D issues.WT/GC/M/80
Page 4
10. The representative of Kenya recalled that under paragraph 12 of the Decision on
Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns and paragraph 44 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration,
Ministers in Doha had instructed the CTD to identify, strengthen, make more effective and
operationalize S&D provisions by changing them into firm obligations.  However, after a year of
discussions and three missed deadlines, the CTD in Special Session had not been able to agree toresolve the 88 issues identified, and had recommended that the General Council provide clarification
of its mandate on S&D.  In her delegation's view, the General Council should provide the clarification
sought, and give further guidance on how the CTD could carry out its mandate.  Referring some of the
S&D Agreement-specific proposals to other WTO bodies would not only constrain her delegation's
limited resources, but would also send a dismal reminder of the lack of progress made on
implementation issues.  Currently, small delegations were not able to follow negotiations in all the
negotiating bodies, and her delegation was sceptical about their participation in the discussions onS&D treatment in those bodies.  Kenya still believed that the CTD's mandate differed markedly from
that of the negotiating bodies, since the CTD was expected to review existing S&D provisions as
opposed to considering new areas for S&D treatment.  Her delegation would nevertheless study the
implications of the Chairman's proposal.  However, she believed that Members should be fully
involved in determining any categorization of the pro posals.  In this regard, if there was a consensus
to follow the Chairman's approach, all proposals submitted by the African Group should be
considered in Category I.  Kenya was willing to participate in the completion of work on existing
S&D provisions in order to strengthen and make them more favourable for developing-country
Members.
11. The Chairman said he regretted that Kenya had not been able to attend a meeting he had held
with the African Group the previous day in which some of Kenya's concerns had been fully discussed.
It was clear that the final categorization of the proposals would be determined by Members.  He was
merely proposing, for Members' consideration, an efficient way of dealing with these issues under
three categories, and he took full responsibility for this.  In light of the few results and little progress
achieved thus far, this approach would allow Members to move forward.  With regard to Kenya'sconcerns about smaller delegations' difficulties in attending all meetings, he intended to write to ask
the Chairpersons of all the bodies to which the issues in Category II would be referred, to highlight in
advance when these issues would be considered in their respective bodies.  Members would therefore
know when the S&D issues would be considered, in order to prepare themselves for those meetings.
Regarding clarification of the Committee's mandate on S&D treatment, he recalled that at the
February meeting of the General Council, there had been no agreement among Members on this issue.
Had Members decided that clarification of the mandate was required to make progress – which in hisview would not have been the most appropriat e precedent to set – they would have decided
accordingly.  However, in the approach he had suggested, the issues would be clarified to a large
extent, as they would be considered on a case-by-case basis.
12. The representative of India said that in view of the problems of smaller delegations and his
delegation's experience with implementation issues referred to various bodies, it would be necessary
to keep a close watch on the work done in the bodies to which the Category II issues were referred.
He noted the Chairman's intention to follow progress on these issues very closely.  In his delegation's
view, it would be useful to have a timetable as to  when these issues would be discussed between the
present time and Cancún, so that Members could make the necessary arrangements to attend those
meetings.
13. The Chairman assured India that he would do his best to work along those lines.
14. The representative of Botswana said he wished to  make two points.  First, with respect to the
Category II issues, Members should avoid losing sight of these issues by referring them to the
respective negotiating bodies.  In this connection, his delegation noted the Chairman's intention to
closely monitor these issues.  He supported India's suggestion for a timeframe within which theseissues would have to be resolved, thus avoiding the danger of leaving them to the negotiating bodiesWT/GC/M/80
Page 5
without any indication of the pace at which they were supposed to be negotiated.  Second, he wished
to have a clarification with respect to the Chairm an's role in trying to move this matter forward.
Would the General Council take over the role of the CTD in Special Session?  He recalled that the
CTD in Special Session had a specific mandate in the Doha Declaration, and the General Council
should not completely usurp the role of the CTD in this regard.  It was his understanding that theGeneral Council had a role of general superintendence over the negotiating process, and it had never
been suggested that it should assume a substantive role as far as the negotiations were concerned.  His
delegation wished to know whether at some point this work would revert to the CTD in Special
Session.
15. The Chairman said that the CTD in Special Session would be revived in due course.  The
process he was suggesting dealt only with specific proposals.  Moreover, the mandate of the CTD in
Special Session also covered other issues that would be considered after the General Council hadcompleted its work.
16. The representative of Zambia said that the LDCs constituted one of the main proponents of
the S&D proposals.  The Chairman had held consultations prior to the circulation of his paper in
JOB(03)/68.  He had also held a consultation with the African Group on that text after its circulation.
In this context, he suggested that the Chairman al so hold a consultation with the LDCs to hear their
views on the text before proceeding any further.  His delegation encouraged the Chairman to continue
his consultations after the present meeting, and would cooperate with the Chairman in this regard so
that Members could take a decision on a way of proceeding with the S&D issues as soon as possible.
17. The Chairman said he would hold consultations with all Members.  He added that the
discussion he had had with the African Group on his text the previous day had been in response to that
Group's invitation.
18. The representative of Morocco thanked the Chairman for his initiative in dealing with
S&D provisions, which had been on hold for some time.  This innovative and laudable initiative was
welcomed.  He also thanked the Chairman for his past and forthcoming consultations.  At the
consultation with the African Group the previous day, there had been general support for the proposedapproach.  Concerns had also been expressed with respect to Category II.  The main concern was
linked to the fact that African delegations were often small and would not be able to attend all the
meetings scheduled.  He hoped that the concerns expressed at that consultation and at the present
meeting would be dealt with in the very near future.
19. The representative of Bangladesh, speaking on behalf of the LDCs
, said these countries would
be fully supportive of this process and would engage with the Chairman to the best of their abilities.
They had listened to the Chairman's statement about paying attention to the needs of smallerdelegations, and felt this was an important statement demonstrating that he was seriously interested in
engaging the LDCs in this process.  Like previous speakers, the LDCs were keen to have a clear
timeframe within which these issues would be addressed.  With regard to Category II issues, it was
very important that these were not lost within the WTO framework, as it was sometimes very difficult
for the LDCs to bring these issues back into th e mainstream of the negotiations.  Finally, the LDCs
had found that on many occasions, the texts in the Chairman's draft were not texts the LDCs had
either suggested or agreed to, in particular with rega rd to areas of interest to them.  It was therefore
very important that LDCs' concerns be taken on board.  In the Chairman’s forthcoming consultations,
some of these texts would have to be re-visited and negotiated very closely with the LDCs.
20. The General Council took note of the report by the Chairman and of the statements, and also
that the Chairman would submit a further progress report to the General Council at its next meeting.WT/GC/M/80
Page 6
3. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration
(a) Report of the Committee on its meetings of October, November and December 2002
(WT/BFA/63)
21. The Chairman drew attention to the Report of the Committee on Budget, Finance and
Administration on its meetings of October, November and December 2002 in document WT/BFA/63.
22. Mr. Law (Hong Kong, China), Chairman of the Committee on Budget, Finance and
Administration, said that the report in document  WT/BFA/63 covered the meetings held on 2, 18 and
30 October, 11, 20, 22 and 28 November, and 3 and 6 December 2002.  That report should be read in
conjunction with document WT/BFA/62, which contained the recommendations of these meetings.
Those recommendations had been presented to and approved by the General Council on
12 December 2002.  At one of these meetings, the Committee had discussed briefly the subject of
Result-Based Management procedures in the organization, based on the documents prepared by theSecretariat.  This subject would be discussed again in the course of 2003.  With respect to the
participation of least-developed country Members and observers at Ministerial Conferences, as in past
years, a fund was being established to facilitate the participation of these Members and observers at
the forthcoming Ministerial Conference in Cancún.  He wished to draw Members' attention to that
fund and said that urgent consideration by Members should be given to making donations to it, forwhich an amount of 1.3 million Swiss francs was required.
23. The General Council took note of the statement and adopted
 the report in WT/BFA/63.
(b) Report by the Chairman of the Committee on the Committee's review of methodologies for
future pay adjustments for WTO Staff (WT/BFA/64)
24. The Chairman recalled that at its meeting in December 2002, the General Council had
adopted the recommendations of the Budget Committee contained in document WT/BFA/62.  With
regard to the salary adjustment for the Secretariat, the Committee had recommended a 3 per cent
salary increase as from 1 January 2003, a 1 per cent increase as from 1 July 2003, and such further
adjustment as would be necessary to restore parity with equivalent grades in the UN Common
System.  It had further recommended that the Committee carry out a review of the methodologies forfuture pay adjustments, to be completed by 31 March 2003.  The General Council had also taken note
of its Chairman's statement suggesting certain elements to help guide the Committee's work on this
matter, including that the Committee be requested to make a progress report on this review to the
General Council at its February meeting.  At that meeting, the General Council had heard a progress
report on this matter from the Chairman of the Committee.  As Members were aware, the Budget
Committee had met the previous afternoon, and consequently the Committee's report in document
WT/BFA/64 had been circulated only  the morning of the present day.
25. Mr. Law (Hong Kong, China), Chairman of the Committee on Budget, Finance and
Administration, said that the Committee's report on the WTO salary methodology was contained in
document WT/BFA/64.  Pursuant to the recommendation of the General Council of
13 December 2002, the Budget Committee had met on numerous occasions, both formally and
informally, to examine this subject.  The Committee had taken account of all elements listed in thestatement by the General Council Chairman on 13 December 2002.  During the course of
deliberations, the Committee had been assisted by a consultant who had advised, and had provided the
Committee with technical information as and when required on the subject.  The Committee had also
been serviced by a very efficient Secretariat rendering invaluable support with a high standard of
professionalism and dedication.  He wished to pay tribute to his predecessor, Mr. McMillan (UnitedKingdom), under whose leadership this process had been put on the right track, and who had
continued to play a key role to assist him as a Friend of the Chair in bringing the deliberations to a
conclusion.WT/GC/M/80
Page 7
26. Throughout this process, the Committee had considered all relevant factors and had examined
a wide range of data in a serious, objective and balanced manner.  Delegations had approached the
exercise in a fair, reasonable and principled way.  He had had the opportunity to keep the General
Council Chairman and the Director-General informed of the deliberations at critical junctures of the
process.  The Staff Council had been given regular opportunities to present its views and theCommittee had taken note of all its comments.  In addition, the Staff Council had been kept abreast of
the Committee's deliberations.  Both the former Committee Chairman and himself, as well as
individual delegations, had also maintained regular contacts with the staff on this matter.  A vast
amount of information and papers had been shared with the staff at an early stage, to the extent that on
several occasions they had been able to address the Committee on materials which even Members of
the Committee had not yet had the opportunity to see or discuss.  During the deliberations, Members
had embraced many of the ideas and proposals put forward in the original report prepared jointly bySecretariat representatives and the staff, despite the initial misgivings which Members had had in
2002 when they had first examined that report.  The Committee had done its utmost in taking into
account the views of the Staff Council.  It was regrettable that the Staff Council had decided to take
industrial action, and particularly so when such action had been taken even before the Budget
Committee had been able to finalize its recommendations.
27. The report, which was self-explanatory, showed the seriousness with which the Committee
had approached the subject, examining in depth:   (i) the various options;  (ii) the choice of
comparators;  (iii) the measurement of comparator salary scales;  and (iv) the review provisions.  It
had been in good faith and in the spirit of consensus that the Committee had arrived at the consensus
on the recommendations contained in document WT/BFA/64.  The proposed methodology provided
for a formula of annual salary adjustment based on  the comparator salary scales of the UN and the
Coordinated Organizations as they were applied, we ighted 70 per cent for UN and 30 per cent for the
Coordinated Organizations.  The Committee firmly believed that the proposed methodology was a fair
and equitable salary methodology for both Members and WTO staff.  The Committee believed that
the methodology, when implemented, could ensure that WTO salaries were sufficiently competitiveinternationally to attract and retain a highly skilled and motivated staff.  He would therefore ask the
General Council to take a decision on the salary methodology as set out in paragraph 27 of document
WT/BFA/64.  Once a decision was taken, it was crucially important to make sure that the staff fully
understood and appreciated the merits of the package and what it meant for them.  In this connection,
he had already written to the Chairman of the Staff Council setting out at great length the different
elements of the package and addressing some of the staff's misunderstanding and criticisms.  Many
delegations on the Committee had also expressed the wish for the Director-General and the seniormanagement to redouble their efforts to explain the package to the staff with a view to bringing them
on board and resuming normal work as soon as possible.  Finally, he thanked all Members for their
full cooperation and support throughout this process.  Delegations had pressed their authorities very
hard to their bottom line, and in some cases ev en beyond, in order to join the consensus on this
package.  He also thanked the Chairman and the Director-General for their support, particularlyduring the critical phases of this exercise.
28. The General Council took note of the statement by the Committee Chairman, approved
 the
Budget Committee's specific recommendations in para graph 27 (a) to (g) of its report in document
WT/BFA/64, and adopted the report.
29. The Director-General expressed his appreciation to the Chairmen of the General Council and
the Budget Committee for their efforts in crafting the compromise which had just been approved by
the membership.  He also wished to pay tribute to  their respective predecessors, Mr. Marchi (Canada)
and Mr. McMillan (United Kingdom) who had initiated and had actively participated in the process
which had been concluded at the present meeting.  He also acknowledged that, in these times of
financial constraints, Members had been faced with difficult decisions.  Based on his own contactswith numerous Ministers, he knew that the Secretariat's work was highly appreciated, and that
budgetary constraints were a reality.  The compromise did not meet all the staff's expectations, norWT/GC/M/80
Page 8
would he regard it as the ideal solution.  Howeve r, the result would lead to an improvement in
conditions of service compared to the position in December 2002.  Many Members had made
concessions and commitments they had not anticipated at the beginning of this process.  Their
flexibility and understanding should be recognized.  It was time for all, WTO Members and staff
members alike, to focus in this crucial year on the future of the organization and the multilateral
trading system.  The success of the Doha Development Agenda and of the Cancún Ministerial
Conference would undoubtedly depend on the full commitment of all, and he was confident that
Members could count on the cooperation of all to work towards achieving the results which were so
necessary to promote economic growth and development for all people.
30. The representative of Chile expressed his delegation's gratitude to the Budget Committee
Chairman and to those who had been involved in the work carried out with regard to this issue.  This
work had been difficult and intense, and the results achieved probably did not satisfy one hundred percent the staff's aspirations.  However, this was the maximum governments were prepared to give.
Many delegates also had to make sacrifices as their remuneration, which was determined in dollars,
had been reduced due to movements in exchange rates.  He wished to state in a serious and
responsible way that the staff's attitude and behaviour had been counter-productive for its own cause.
The staff had shown a lack of respect and had stopped fulfilling its obligations, leaving meetingswithout microphones and therefore without access to interpreters.  This situation had to be redressed
with corresponding disciplinary measures.  Finally, he suggested that in future, for transparency and
flow of information purposes, staff representatives be allowed to participate in the Budget Committee
on a regular basis.
31. The representative of Cuba asked for clarification with regard to the recommendation under
paragraph 27(a) of the report on WTO salary methodology, which she had only recently received and
in English only.  In that report, the weight of comparator salary scales used in the WTO salary
methodology was 70 per cent for the UN and 30 per cent for the Coordinated Organizations.  From
the Spanish interpretation of the Budget Committee Chairman's statement earlier, however, she had
understood these weights to be were 80 and 20 per cent respectively.
32. The Chairman confirmed that the weight of comparator salary scales used in the WTO salary
methodology was 70 per cent for UN and 30 per cent for the Coordinated Organizations.
33. The General Council took note of the statements.
4. Report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations Committee
34. The Chairman recalled that at its first meeting on 28 January and 1 February 2002, the Trade
Negotiations Committee had agreed that it would report to each regular meeting of the General
Council.
35. The Director-General, Chairman of the Trade Negotiations Committee said that the TNC had
held its ninth meeting on 9 May, at which it had taken up two agenda items.  The first item concerned
reports by the Chairpersons of bodies established by the TNC.  Three of these bodies had circulated
reports on progress in their respective areas.  Other Chairs had also taken the floor to update
participants on recent developments in their groups.  He believed that the reports by the Chairs hadclearly demonstrated the enormous effort and dedication they were placing in the work on meeting
their respective mandates.  However, the reports as well as the oral updates by the Chairs had also
sent a strong signal that focused political energy was now needed to take the process forward.  He
hoped this would be forthcoming.  Recently, he had been encouraged to hear Ministers reaffirm their
commitment to concluding the Round successfully and on time.  However, this determination shouldtranslate into concrete progress in Geneva in the short time available to Members before the meeting
in Cancún.  Although one could not pretend that the setbacks encountered in this process so far had
been cost-free, he believed that they had been handled in a responsible manner.  However, avoidingWT/GC/M/80
Page 9
the worst was no substitute for real progress, and the problem of negative linkages remained very
much with Members.  Continuing the gridlock on the road to Cancún would serve nobody and would
be very serious for the Round as a whole.  Two important deadlines were coming up at the end of
May in the Dispute Settlement and Non-Agricultural Market Access negotiations.  At the TNC's May
meeting he had urged participants to approach these deadlines with a strong sense of commitment soas to provide the Chairs with enough room for ma noeuvre to comply with their respective mandates.
36. In all, there were around a dozen issues requiring action before or at Cancún, following the
mandates agreed at Doha, some of which were outside the negotiations themselves.  However, all of
these issues had something in common, and Members' aim overall should be to focus work on what
had to be done in Cancún to maximize the chances of success thereafter.  A clear priority for work on
all of these issues in the immediate future should be to reduce this burden to manageable proportions
by reaching understandings on as many of these issues as possible before the Ministerial Conference.Those issues which remained outstanding would need to be presented in a clear and operational
manner.  He had stressed his commitment to facili tating progress across all areas of the TNC's work.
The importance of the benefits this Round could offer to all participants was such that one could not
allow any issue to become a roadblock to progress elsewhere.  He had urged all participants to bear
this in mind in the coming weeks.
37. Under the second agenda item, the TNC had heard statements from some 30 delegations.
These interventions had generally provided useful comments on the written and oral reports by the
Chairs of the bodies established by the TNC and had emphasized the urgent need to intensify the
substantive discussions in preparation for Cancún.  The exchange of views at the TNC's May meeting
had perhaps been the most constructive and interactive to date.  He wished to express his appreciationto delegations for their contributions and positive approach in the discussions.  Although it was still
too early to identify significant substantive convergence on most issues, he now saw encouraging
signs that delegations were committed to creating the optimal negotiating environment for real
progress to be made.  He hoped that Members would be able to build on this in forthcoming TNC
meetings and associated consultations.  Finally, in line with his commitment to continue consultationson implementation issues under paragraph 12 (b) of the Doha Declaration, he had held an open-ended
meeting the previous day to seek to advance this important issue.  He would be following up on this
as necessary.  At the end of the TNC's May meeting he had also announced that the next meeting of
the TNC would take place on 10 June.
38. The representative of Cuba thanked the Director-General for his report on the results of the
work carried out since the February TNC meeting.  She drew attention to the fact that the process of
multiple meetings, be they informal or formal, had now begun.  She wished to reiterate a proposal shehad made during an informal meeting of Heads of Delegations on the process leading up to Cancún.
Cuba believed that a calendar should be established indicating when and in which bodies the different
issues would be dealt with, so that small delegations could participate in meetings of special interest
to them.  This should be the case not only for the process in the negotiating bodies but also for
consultations with regard to S&D as well as implementation.  Cuba sought Members' cooperation sothat all Members could participate in meetings of specific interest to them.
39. The Chairman said that the special needs of small delegations would be taken into account so
that they would be able to attend the meetings of specific interest to them.
40. The General Council took note of the report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations
Committee and of the statements.WT/GC/M/80
Page 10
5. Work Programme on Small Economies – Report by the Chairman of the Dedicated
Sessions of the Committee on Trade and Development
41. The Chairman recalled that at its meeting in February and March 2002, the General Council
had taken note of a framework and procedures fo r the conduct of the Work Programme on Small
Economies, under which this Work Programme would be a standing item on the General Council'sagenda.  The framework and procedures also provided that the Committee on Trade and Development
would report regularly to the General Council on the progress of work in its Dedicated Sessions on
this subject.
42. Mr. Ali (Bangladesh), Chairman of the Dedicated Sessions of the Committee on Trade and
Development, said that the Dedicated Session of the CTD had met once since the General Council's
February meeting.  This meeting, held on 10 March, had been constructive.  Delegations had begun to
focus on the Cancún Ministerial Conference.  Some small economies had introduced a newsubmission (WT/COMTD/SE/W/8), proposing that the General Council be requested to use the
proposals contained in WT/COMTD/SE/W/3 as the basis for making recommendations to the
Ministerial Conference.  Members had seemed convinced of the need to focus on the nature and
content of the report to the General Council, although some had cautioned that it could be difficult to
reach agreement on all proposals.  Members had felt that the stage of identifying the trade-relatedissues relating to small economies had been concluded.  However, it was not clear that the stage of
framing of responses had been concluded.  It had been agreed that, in order to prepare for a report to
the General Council, the issues relating to small economies, as outlined in paragraph 35 of the Doha
Ministerial Declaration, had to be further examined.  Where needed, assistance could be sought from
expert bodies.  The proposals made by the group of small economies, as well as the Secretariat papers,could be useful for continued discussions.  The small-economies group had sent him a letter the
previous day containing its views on the report to the General Council as well as the status of
discussions.  At the March Dedicated Session, he had recommended that, in the intervening period
until the next Dedicated Session, interested delegations consult among themselves to clarify the
issues.  In this process, they would be free to draw on the services of the Chair or the Secretariat, ifthat was considered helpful.  He understood that there had been consultations among interested
delegations.  He had found this approach of informal contacts helpful, and hoped that the Dedicated
Sessions of the CTD would be able to build on them when drafting the report for Cancún.  Also at the
March Dedicated Session, Members had taken note of document WT/COMTD/SE/W/7, which
contained responses from some small economies to questions by the United States in regard to the
proposals contained in document WT/COMTD/SE/W/3.  The tentative date of the next formal
Dedicated Session had been chosen to coincide with the "Geneva Week" for non-resident Membersand Observers and was scheduled for 17 July.  As stated at the March Dedicated Session, he would
brief the incoming Chairperson of the CTD on the work undertaken so far in the Dedicated Sessions.
43. The representative of the United States thanked the Chairman of the Dedicated Sessions of
the CTD for his comprehensive report.  The United States was pleased that work and consultations
had continued on this issue since the February meeting of the General Council, and appreciated thepositive spirit with which the discussions had been conducted.  It recognized that this was an
important area of concern for trading partners, and that it was related to other development-related
work that was underway in the negotiations, as well as the S&D review.  His delegation looked
forward to continuing work, particularly in determ ining how to carry forward work on some practical
issues that would address the problems being experienced by small economies, consistent with therequirements of the Doha mandate.
44. The representative of Mauritius said that his delegation supported the report by the Chairman
of the Dedicated Sessions of the CTD, and expressed appreciation to the United States for its
statement.  Mauritius looked forward to continuing  the consultations in the same spirit of cooperation
and understanding.WT/GC/M/80
Page 11
45. The General Council took note of the report by the Chairman of the Dedicated Sessions of the
Committee on Trade and Development and of the statements.
6. Kimberley Process Certification Scheme for Rough Diamonds – Request for a waiver
from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, Japan, Korea, Philippines, Sierra Leone,
Thailand, United Arab Emirates and the United States (G/C/W/431 and Corr.1 and 2,G/C/W/432/Rev.1)
46. The Chairman drew attention to the request for a waiver from Australia, Brazil, Canada,
Israel, Japan, Korea, Philippines, Sierra Leone, Thailand, United Arab Emirates and the United States
contained in G/C/W/431 and Corr.1 and 2, and to  the related draft Decision in G/C/W/432/Rev.1.
47. Mr. Hovorka (Czech Republic), Chairman of th e Council for Trade in Goods, reported that at
a reconvened meeting of the CTG on 26 February 2003, the CTG had approved the request for a
waiver contained in G/C/W/431 and Corr. 1 and 2 and had recommended that the draft Decision
contained in G/C/W/432/Rev.1 be forwarded to the General Council for adoption.
48. The representative of Poland said he wished to state for the record that Poland was now
engaged in procedures aimed at participation in the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme and that
it therefore expected, pursuant to paragraph 3 of the draft decision, to notify its intention to be covered
by the waiver decision, if adopted.
49. The Chairman drew attention to paragraph 3 of the draft Decision in G/C/W/432/Rev.1 which
provided as follows:  " This waiver also applie s in respect of measures implementing the Kimberley
Process Certification Scheme taken by any Member not listed in the Annex to this Decision that
desires to be covered by the present waiver and that notifies the Council for Trade in Goods
accordingly."  In this connection, he wished to note that, in accordance with the provisions of thatparagraph, the European Communities, Switzerland and the Czech Republic had recently notified the
CTG that they wished to be covered by the waiver Decision.  These communications had been
circulated in documents G/C/25, 26 and 27, respectively.  Accordingly, the European Communities,
Switzerland and the Czech Republic would be covered by the provisions of the waiver when adopted.
It went without saying that it was open to any other WTO Member which was not currently listed in
the Annex to the draft Decision and which wished to be covered by the waiver, to notify the CTG in a
similar way in due course in accordance with paragraph 3 of the draft Decision.
50. The General Council took note of the report by the Chairman of the Council for Trade in
Goods and of the statements, and, in accordance with the Decision-Making Procedures under
Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed  in November 1995 (WT/L/93), adopted the draft
Decision in G/C/W/432/Rev.1.1
51. The representative of Canada said his delegation was pleased that Members had adopted this
Decision at the present meeting.  On behalf of  the co-sponsors of the Decision, he thanked the
membership for supporting their efforts to seek  legal certainty for measures implementing the
Kimberley Process Certification Scheme.  For Canada, this waiver touched on two pillars of its
foreign policy:  first, its ongoing concern with international issues of human security, and second, the
importance it attached to the multilateral trading system and the WTO in particular.  Trade in conflictdiamonds was a matter of serious international concern, for it could be directly linked to the fuelling
of armed conflicts, the activities of rebel movements aimed at undermining or overthrowing
legitimate governments and the illicit traffic in, and proliferation of, armaments.  The Scheme aimed
to prevent conflict diamonds from entering into the legitimate trade in diamonds, which played an
important role in the economies of a large number of countries, including many developing countries.Canada took very seriously its obligations regarding the international trade in conflict diamonds, as
                                                     
1 The Decision was subsequently circulated as WT/L/518.WT/GC/M/80
Page 12
well as its international trade obligations, and this waiver reflected Canada's commitment to both.  A
great number of Members were implementing the Scheme domestically.  The waiver Decision
provided, in an open and transparent manner, legal certainty that domestic measures necessary to
implement the Scheme were in line with international trade obligations.  Finally, Canada invited other
Members implementing the Scheme to notify the CTG of their measures in order to be covered by thiswaiver.  Canada was pleased that the European Communities, Switzerland and the Czech Republic
had also chosen to follow that course.
52. The representative of Chinese Taipei thanked the 11 Members involved for their efforts in
making this waiver request.  Chinese Taipei was pleased that the decision to grant this waiver had
been adopted at the present meeting.  His delegation attached great importance to Canada's statement,
and wished to inform Members that his government had taken measures to implement the Kimberly
Process Certification Scheme as of 10 May.  Therefore, pursuant to paragraph 3 of the Decision,Chinese Taipei would notify the CTG during the course of the week of its wish to be covered by the
waiver.
53. The representative of the United States said that as one of the many Members who had
requested this waiver, the United States was pleased that Members had adopted it.  The Kimberley
Process Certification Scheme was a crucial part of the international effort to combat trade in diamondsthat had fuelled conflicts in Africa, while at the same time protecting the legitimate diamond trade.
The completion of the Scheme was a major achievement.  Participants had recognized in the
Ministerial Declaration that had launched the Scheme the need to ensure that the Scheme was
implemented in a WTO-consistent manner.  To that end, the United States had joined in the waiver
request.  With the adoption of the waiver, the United States would be able and intended to fullyimplement the Scheme.
54. The General Council took note of the statements.
7. Marrakesh Ministerial Decision concerning the possible negative effects of the reform
programme on least-developed and NFIDCS – Follow up to the Report of the Inter-
Agency Panel on short-term difficulties in financing normal levels of commercialimports of basic foodstuffs – Report by the Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture
55. The Chairman recalled that at its meeting in October 2002, the General Council had taken
note of the report of the Inter-Agency Panel on short-term difficulties in financing normal levels of
commercial imports of basic foodstuffs, and had approved the recommendations contained in
paragraph 168 of the report.  With regard to the recommendation in paragraph 168(b), the General
Council had also taken note that the question of fe asibility of an ex-ante financing mechanism would
be pursued by the Committee on Agriculture, on the understanding that a proposal regarding theestablishment of an ex-ante financing mechanism would be submitted by the WTO net food-importing
developing countries, and that a follow-up report concerning the discussion of the proposal would be
submitted to the General Council following the regular meeting of the Committee in November.  At
its meeting in December 2002, the General Council had considered a report by the Chairman of the
Agriculture Committee and had authorized him to continue his consultations with a view to preparinga decision by the Committee on the proposed ex-ante fund at its regular meeting in March 2003, and
to report back to the General Council on the outcome as soon as possible thereafter.
56. Mr. Maghawry Diab (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the Chairman of the Committee on
Agriculture, said that on 28 October 2002, a proposal for the establishment of an ex-ante financing
mechanism had been submitted by Bangladesh, Cuba, Egypt, Jordan, Kenya, and Sri Lanka on behalf
of the WTO Net Food-Importing Developing Countr ies (NFIDCs) and the LDCs (G/AG/W/58 and
Corr.1).  The Committee Chair had since convened a series of informal consultations to discuss the
proposal, in the course of which the NFIDC spons ors had provided written answers to 21 questionsWT/GC/M/80
Page 13
from donor countries.  The proposal had also been discussed at the meeting of the Committee on
Agriculture in November 2002.
57. While the consultations had been useful in exploring and clarifying technical details of the
proposed ex-ante financing facility, they had also made it clear that wide differences of opinion
remained between the donor Members and the sponsors of the proposal.  In particular, donor countrieswere not convinced that the ex-ante revolving fund financing idea was a viable option for addressing
the potential future short-term financing needs of the LDCs and NFIDCs.  These countries suggested
that they were prepared to consider alternatives other than the ex-ante revolving fund.  For their part,
the NFIDCs were frustrated over the pace and direction of the consultations.  On the basis of his
informal consultations, it had become clear that there was no donor support for the establishment of
an ex-ante financing facility.  Given such state of affairs, at the March meeting of the Committee on
Agriculture, the Chair had proposed that the Committee consider the idea of continuing andbroadening the search for options and solutions within the framework of the Marrakesh Decision,
building on the work previously undertaken in this respect, as it was his feeling that this process might
allow Members to identify new avenues that might be worth exploring.
58. Specifically, the Chair had proposed and the Committee had agreed to convene a roundtable
with the following task:  (i) to explore, in the c ontext of the Marrakesh Decision, the need for a safety
net to be established to assist the LDCs and NF IDCs during the reform process leading to greater
liberalization of trade in agriculture, including an examination of objective criteria and trigger
mechanisms to determine a need, and (ii) to identify , in the light of (i) above, appropriate mechanisms
within the framework of the Marrakesh Decision, ta king into account their technical feasibility, as
well as their financial and institutional implications on potential donors and beneficiaries.  Thefollowing organizations had been invited to nominat e experts to participate in the Roundtable:  FAO,
International Fund for Agricultural Developmen t (IFAD), International Grains Council, IMF,
UNCTAD, WFP and the World Bank.  Members were also invited to participate in the roundtable,
which was scheduled to take place on 19 May 2003.  Following the roundtable, it was the Chair's
intention to convene further informal consultations with interested Members to discuss the next steps
that might be appropriate.
59. The representatives of Cuba, Kenya
, Djibouti , Morocco  and Tunisia  expressed appreciation to
the Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture for his report on the progress of implementation of the
Marrakesh Decision concerning the possible negative effects of the reform programme on LDCs and
NFIDCs.
60. The representative of Cuba said her delegation wi shed to highlight its interest in this matter
which, as could be seen from the report by the Chairman of the Committee, had been on the table for
a long time and a solution still not found.  The solution for LDCs that were net food-importing
countries of creating an ex-ante financing mechanism was of vital importance.  Her delegation
attached great importance to the roundtable to be held the following week with the participation of
different international bodies.  It urged possible donors to make their contributions so as to arrive at a
satisfactory solution on this Ministerial Decision.
61. The representative of Kenya said that Kenya was disappointed to note that despite the
negative implications of liberalization on NFIDCs, assistance to finance normal levels of food
imports, as recognized by Minister in Marrakesh, had not been forthcoming.  This had been a long
outstanding issue and Kenya commended the efforts by the Committee Chairman in initiating further
discussions on this issue through the roundtable discussions.  It was hoped that donors would showflexibility and commitment to support the r ecommendations emanating from the roundtable
discussions.
62. The representative of Djibouti said this was a burning issue on which the lives of millions
depended.  This issue had been on the table for a long time and was important for many Members.WT/GC/M/80
Page 14
Like Cuba and Kenya, his delegation believed that the General Council should seek a way to deal
with the requests of the LDCs and developing countries.
63. The representative of Morocco said that like other delegations, Morocco was disappointed
that no solution had been found to this important issue which was among the implementation-related
issues.  A solution to this issue would substantially reduce the impact of the possible negative effectsof the reform programme on the NFIDCs' and LDCs' economies and, as Cuba had said, these
countries wished to have donors participate in the roundtable on 19 May with as much goodwill as
possible in order to find a solution as soon as possible to this issue.
64. The representative of Tunisia said his delegation wished to stress the importance of a solution
to this issue for Tunisia and for other NFIDCs a nd LDCs.  Tunisia hoped that donor countries would
demonstrate flexibility in order to come up with a solution to this issue.
65. The General Council took note of the report by Mr. Maghawry Diab on behalf of the
Chairman of the Agriculture Committee and of the statements, and invited the Chairman of the
Committee to keep the General Council informed of progress in this regard following the Committee's
meeting in June.
8. Review of progress on the implementation issues referred to WTO bodies under the
Decision of 14 November 2001 on Implemen tation-Related issues and Concerns –
Communication from India (WT/GC/W/494)
and
9. Review of progress on development-related issues of the Doha Work Programme –
Communication from Tanzania on behalf of the Informal Group of DevelopingCountries (WT/GC/W/495)
66. The Chairman proposed that in order to rationalize discussion on items 8 and 9, delegations
address both items together in their statements.  He then drew attention to the communications from
India in document WT/GC/W/494, and from Tanzania on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing
Countries in document WT/GC/W/495.
67. The representative of India recalled that since May 2000, the various bodies of the WTO had
been addressing the problems and concerns on the Uruguay Round Agreements highlighted by
developing countries in their proposals, commonly referred to as implementation issues and concerns.
Following intensive discussions held before the D oha Ministerial Conference, Ministers at Doha had
taken a Decision on Implementation-Related Issues  and Concerns (WT/MIN(01)/17).  When taking
this Decision, Ministers had reaffirmed that they attached utmost importance to the
implementation-related issues and concerns raised by Members, and had expressed theirdetermination to take concrete action to find appropriate solutions to them.  They had agreed that
negotiations on implementation issues should be an integral part of the Doha Work Programme.
Pursuant to this Decision, issues covered by paragraph 12(a) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration were
being dealt with in different negotiating groups.  Issues covered by paragraph 12(b) of the Declaration
had been dealt with in the WTO bodies up until December 2002 and were now with the TradeNegotiations Committee (TNC).  The TNC Chairman was holding consultations on these issues.
India had participated in such a meeting the previous day and looked forward to constructive progress
on all these issues in future, in accordance with the programme suggested by the TNC Chairman and
the Director-General the previous day.
68. As part of the Decision on Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns (the Doha Decision),
WTO bodies had been asked to carry out further work on some of the issues and to make
recommendations to the General Council by specified deadlines.  On some issues, the respectiveWT/GC/M/80
Page 15
WTO body was to take the decision itself.  At the December 2002 meeting of the General Council, the
Chairpersons of the different WTO bodies dealing with these issues had presented their reports.  His
delegation wished to thank the Chairpersons of the different bodies for the extremely useful work
carried out by these bodies under their guidance.  It was clear from the report that a decision on some
of these issues had already been taken in the respective WTO bodies.  The issues that would fall inthis category were:  (i) recommendations regarding annual reviews under Article 18.6 of the Anti-
Dumping Agreement relating to paragraph 7.4 of the Doha Decision;  (ii) recommendation concerning
the time period to be considered in making a dete rmination of negligible import volumes for purposes
of Article 5.8 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement referred to in paragraph 7.3 of the Doha Decision;
(iii) appropriate methodology for calculating the per capita GDP in constant dollar terms for purposes
of Annex VII of the Agreement on Subsidies and C ountervailing Measures referred to in paragraph
10.1 of the Doha Decision;  and (iv) implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement referredto in paragraph 11.2 of the Doha Decision.
69. Regarding the issue of the programme for further implementation of Article 4 of the
Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) referred to
in paragraph 3.3 of the Doha Decision, the SPS Committee was doing useful work and would take up
this issue again in July 2003.  India looked forward to constructive engagement by all Members with aview to finding an appropriate solution to this issu e.  Despite the best efforts in the respective WTO
bodies, the following issues had not been resolved :  (i) the meaning to be given to the phrase
"substantial interest" in Article XIII.2(d) of GATT 1994 referred to in paragraph 1.2 of the Doha
Decision;  (ii) exchange of information on export values for purposes of determining the accuracy of
declared value under the Agreement on the Implementation of Article VII of GATT 1994 referred toin paragraph 8.3 of the Doha Decision;  (iii) review of provisions regarding countervailing duty
investigations under the SCM Agreement referred to in paragraph 10.3 of the Doha Decision;
(iv) operationalizing Article 15 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the
Doha Decision;  and (v) method of calculating th e quota growth rate for smaller suppliers and
advancement of growth-on-growth provisions fo r stage 3 integration to 1 January 2000 under the
Agreement on Textiles and Clothing referred to in paragraphs 4.4 and 4.5 of the Doha Decision.  In
addition, S&D issues referred to in paragraphs 12.1(i) and (ii) of the Doha Decision were being dealt
with in the CTD in Special Session.  The report of the CTD in Special Session had been presented at
the February General Council meeting, in which the Committee had sought clarification on the Doha
mandate.  The General Council Chairman was holding consultations on the S&D proposals and India
was hoping for constructive and positive engagement of all Members with a view to finding ways of
strengthening S&D provisions and making them mandatory, as decided by Ministers at Doha.Similarly, work on rules of origin, covered by paragraph 9.1 of the Doha Decision, was being carried
out in the Committee on Rules of Origin.  India was disappointed at the slow progress of work on this
important issue which was an essential part of the rules on trade facilitation.  It hoped that Members
would show the necessary flexibility to facilitate  early decision on the remaining outstanding issues.
70. Regarding issues on which no decision had been possible in the WTO bodies, these needed to
be addressed.  This would be in line with Ministers’ commitment at Doha to find appropriate solutions
to them.  Since the WTO bodies had reported that no progress could be made beyond a certain point,
it was now for Members to decide on the best way forward.  India was open to suggestions from
Members on this.  His delegation had two suggestions.  First, Members could pool these issues with
outstanding issues under paragraph 12(b) of the Doha Declaration so that the consultations by theTNC Chairman could deal with these issues as well.  Second, Members should draw up a specific
timetable for work on implementation issues up to Cancún, in order to ensure the maximum possible
results before that Ministerial Conference.  Indi a looked forward to hearing the views of other
Members on this.  His delegation, along with many other developing-country delegations, attached the
greatest importance to the early resolution of these issues.
71. The representative of Tanzania, speaking on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing
Countries, said the Doha Work Programme provided for early action on such development-relatedWT/GC/M/80
Page 16
issues as implementation issues, strengthening of S&D provisions, agriculture and addressing the
difficulties faced by Members with insufficient or no manufacturing capacity in the pharmaceutical
sector in making effective use of compulsory licensing under the TRIPS Agreement.  As Members
were aware, none of these issues had yet been fully resolved.  The commitment given to developing
countries at Doha on these issues had remained largely unfulfilled.  This was a cause for seriousconcern among members of the Informal Group of Developing Countries, who had participated and
contributed in the best way they could to the ongoing negotiations.
72. The Doha Ministerial Declaration specified time-frames for completion of work on the
various issues.  The failure to complete all mandated work within the given timeframes had, therefore,
led to a situation where the agenda was getting overcrowded and backloaded.  This affected the
capacity of many resource-constrained developing countries to participate effectively in the
negotiations.  It was imperative that these issues be accorded priority between the present and theCancún Ministerial and be resolved expeditiously.  The Informal Group emphasized that work in the
period up to the Cancún Ministerial, and the organization of the Ministerial itself, had to be conducted
observing the principles of transparency and inclusiveness, in order to avoid past experiences.  They
were aware of and supported the commitment of th e General Council Chair and the Director-General
to observe these principles.  The Informal Group was also eager to get a sense of the nature andformat of the output to be expected from Cancún, and looked forward to participating in an early
discussion on the outline of the documents to be submitted to the Cancún Ministerial.  Members of the
Informal Group hoped that in spite of the difficulties encountered in the process so far, the output of
Cancún would preserve and not detract from the basic developmental spirit of the decisions at Doha,
as well as adhere to the planned time horizon of the Round as a whole.  They were aware of theinitiatives of the General Council and TNC Chairmen to advance the process in key areas of the
negotiations that had experienced difficulties, and hoped that all Members would support those
initiatives.
73. The representative of Cuba expressed her delegation's appreciation to India and Tanzania for
their statements with respect to these two agenda items.  Cuba fully subscribed to what India had said
in its document.  The issue of implementation had been given priority by Ministers in Doha, and as
clearly indicated in India's document, various implementation issues in the Decision of
14 November 2001 had not yet been satisfactorily resolved.  These issues were of vital importance for
developing countries.  Her delegation therefore felt that efforts should be made to achieve specific and
practical results as quickly as possible, and certainly before Cancún.  This would generate the trust
developing countries needed in order to remain involved in the process.  Cuba fully endorsed
Tanzania's statement on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing Countries.
74. The representative of Botswana, speaking on behalf of the ACP Group , said these countries
fully associated with the statements by India and by Tanzania on behalf of the Informal Group of
Developing Countries.  They appreciated the Chairman's efforts in moving this matter to where it was
and sincerely commended him for his report to the General Council.  The ACP Group was one of the
largest constituencies in the WTO and remained committed to working with the Chairman and with
other Members in fully discharging the Doha mandate.  However, the ACP Members wished to
express their profound disappointment that some of the key aspects of the negotiating process had
continued to lag behind, and that most of these were  areas of particular interest to the ACP Group.
They were particularly concerned about the issue of missed deadlines, and were aware that Members
would very soon miss the end-May deadlines relating to the DSU Review as well as non-agriculturalmarket access.  Some of the missed deadlines included critical deadlines with respect to S&D,
implementation issues, agriculture, and TRIPS and public health.  These were some of the issues of
major interest to the ACP Group, which was concerned that there continued to be difficulties in
moving these particular matters forward.
75. However, they continued to be hopeful, particularly taking into account the report the
Chairman had made regarding his own efforts to move the S&D issues forward.  Their concern wasWT/GC/M/80
Page 17
with respect to the potential risk of overloadin g the Cancún agenda.  Such a situation had serious
implications for the capacity constraints of small delegations.  It was important that Members aim to
resolve as many issues as possible in Geneva in order to avoid overloading the agenda for Cancún.
The ACP Group attached great importance to implementation issues and urged all Members to work
seriously towards their satisfactory resolution and thereby contribute to redressing the presentimbalances in the multilateral trading system.  The ACP Group maintained that all implementation
issues and concerns should be adequately and satisfactorily addressed and resolved, preferably before
Cancún.
76. With respect to S&D, it was important to recall that the Doha Ministerial Declaration took
cognizance of the significance of S&D provisions, particularly in facilitating the reduction of the trade
and economic inequality between developing and developed countries and the need for WTO to work
to avoiding further marginalization of developi ng countries.  The ACP Members appreciated the
efforts the Chairman was undertaking in terms of moving the S&D issues forward and remained
committed to working with him and others in satis factorily resolving these issues.  On TRIPS and
public health, they were deeply concerned that to date Members had still not found a solution to
paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, and again stressed
that this was an issue with serious moral ramifications.  They urged that a workable, legallysustainable multilateral solution be found to this problem before Cancún, and appealed to all
delegations to demonstrate greater political will and flexibility in order for this to be accomplished.
77. In the area of agriculture, which was an area of general concern to the ACP Members, their
interest was to ensure safeguarding as much as possible the preferential trade schemes they enjoyed
with their various trading partners, including the European Union.  However, they were fully aware
that in the long term, preferences would diminish and that the future of the economies of their
respective countries would depend on their ability to develop a productive capacity and to address
capacity constraints.  In the area of non-agricultural market access, where the deadline was coming up
at the end of May, he recalled that the Doha mandate was to negotiate market access from the point of
view of Article XXVIII of GATT 1994, which stated that less than full reciprocity was required bydeveloping countries and that S&D treatment was to be applied.  It was crucial that negotiations in the
area of non-agricultural market access did not undermine revenue generation and industrialization
programmes of developing countries.
78. Another area of special interest to the ACP Members was trade in services, where it was
important for them to have the necessary flexibility in the development of policy options and, in
particular, to preserve the elements and principles of S&D contained in Article IV of GATS.  They
also felt there should be synergy between the negotiations on rules and market access, and the requestand offer processes.  As it was now, the negotiations on trade in services were rather skewed against
developing countries, who had to promote requ ests and offers which were being extended by
delegations, while insufficient attention was being paid to the rules aspects, such as safeguard
measures.  Two other areas of concern to the ACP Members in the current negotiations were
transparency and inclusiveness in the negotiating process, and also the need to promote an overallbalance in the negotiations, particularly now that Members were preparing for Cancún.  Transparency
and inclusiveness were essential if the Cancún Ministerial Conference was to be a success.  The ACP
Members therefore attached great importance to progress in the WTO in the critical areas referred to,
and were also keen to have progress in the Work Programme on Small Economies, which was item 5
of the present Council agenda.  A number of the ACP Members had a direct interest in the issue ofsmall economies, and the ACP Group wished to make meaningful progress in this area.  The ACP
Members reiterated their readiness and willingness to work with the Chairman and with delegations in
effectively implementing the Doha Work Programm e within the mandate and timelines indicated.
They appealed to delegations to show greater flexibility in order to overcome difficulties currently
being experienced, as all were keen to achieve a successful outcome of the Cancún MinisterialConference.WT/GC/M/80
Page 18
79. The representative of China supported the statements by India and by Tanzania on behalf of
the Informal Group of Developing Countries.  The concerns raised by India and the Informal Group
were real and legitimate.  Whether they could be addressed or not would have a great bearing on
confidence building for the developing countries for this Round.  As this was the Development
Round, the needs and interests of the developing countries had to be placed at the heart of the WorkProgramme.  China was pleased that the Chairman was going to tackle the issue of S&D treatment
and that the TNC Chairman was going to work on implementation issues.  China strongly urged all
Members to fully support these efforts so that satisfactory results could be achieved before Cancún.
His delegation fully concurred with India that a timetable for the consultations on these issues should
be worked out.  Removal of trade distortion in export subsidies and domestic support, concerns for
rural development and poverty alleviation, less than full reciprocity, removal of non-trade barriers,
movement of natural persons, S&D treatment and Trade-Related Technical Assistance for thedeveloping countries and other development elements should be taken fully into consideration during
the negotiations.  China hoped that the concerns of the developing countries could be addressed and
that the outcome of this Round could bring tangible benefits for the developing countries and
contribute positively to the cause of development.
80. The representative of the United States said that her delegation agreed with many of the
descriptions of Members' work provided by India, and thanked that delegation for its thoughtful
comments.  However, she had two other observations on items India had mentioned.  On customs
valuation, the Committee had agreed on a work programme involving input from the World Customs
Organization.  On the anti-dumping and subsidies issues referred to by India, the General Council had
discussed these at length.  Also, the advocates of these issues had introduced them for work in theNegotiating Group on Rules.  Her delegation did not believe that the proposal for new additional
consultations would provide value-added given the overload of work currently before Members on the
road to Cancún.  These items had already been widely discussed.  Her delegation thanked Tanzania
for its comments and agreed with it on the importance of dealing with the development issues as
Members worked towards Cancún.
81. The representative of Kenya thanked India and Tanzania for their statements.  Regarding
India's statement, her delegation attached great importance to implementation-related issues, and as
the Cancún Ministerial approached, hoped that Members would show flexibility and commitment to
resolving these issues.  It also agreed that it was imperative to draw up a timetable on the
implementation issues.  Regarding Tanzania's statement, she recalled that Ministers at Doha had
reaffirmed their commitment to ma intain the process of reform and liberalization of trade policies
with a view to ensuring that the multilateral trad ing system played its part in promoting recovery,
growth and development.  It was in this regard that the Doha Work Programme placed the needs and
interests of developing and least-developed countries at its heart.  Members had to show their
commitment to the Doha Development Agenda by being supportive of development concerns and
interests of developing countries.  This was the key to a successful and balanced outcome of the entire
Round.  As Cancún approached, it was imperative that Members agree on key issues that had apositive linkage to development.  Progress in addressing development issues would boost the
confidence of developing countries in the multilateral trading system.  Rebuilding the confidence of
the developing countries in that system was crucial at the present juncture for a successful Cancún
Ministerial Conference as well as the conclusion of the Doha Round by 1 January 2005.
82. The representative of Senegal endorsed the statement by Tanzania on behalf of the Informal
Group of Developing Countries.  It also support ed India’s statement on implementation issues.
Senegal fully shared all of the concerns expressed, particularly with respect to the need for an urgent
solution to the development issues of the Doha Wo rk Programme.  Members were now less than four
months from the Cancún Ministerial Conference, and it was therefore vital that the organization move
rapidly on these issues, in order to ensure a balanced outcome.  Members should not consider theCancún Conference as a simple stage on the road to January 2005.  It should be a time for Members to
show political will and to make an assessment of the conformity between the spirit of the DohaWT/GC/M/80
Page 19
Development Agenda and the action taken thus far to implement it.  The WTO was based first and
foremost on the trust Members had in it, in terms of its rules and operation.  It was clear that progress
in terms of Members' confidence had enabled the results achieved at Doha, which on the whole, had
been considered balanced and, above all, focussed as a priority on development.  However, this
confidence was starting to dwindle, and despite the efforts made, Members were close to an impasseand had to ensure they were on the right path.  Everyone recognized that the WTO's workload was
overburdened.  The priority lay with development matters, on which progress should be made without
linking these issues or blocking them.  Senegal realised that other matters had to be looked at in a
constructive manner.  Members had to work towards the 2005 deadline going through the Cancún
Ministerial Conference.  Before Cancún there would ha ve to be substantial results, particularly with
respect to S&D, TRIPS and public health, and implementation.
83. The representative of Zambia supported the statements by India and Tanzania and urged that
quick and effective solutions be found to implementation issues highlighted in the documents.  This
would provide a concrete and positive signal and a high motivation for Cancún.  Regarding
paragraph 11.2 of the Decision on Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns dealing with
Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement, he reported, as the focal point on TRIPS for the LDCs and on
their behalf, that these countries were glad that a decision had been reached in the TRIPS Council onthe reporting and implementation mechanism regard ing Article 66.2.  The key task now was to make
that mechanism operational so that it would produce tangible results, namely, to make sure that
technology was transferred to LDCs.  His delegation hoped that the spirit applied in taking the
decision on this matter would apply to the other issues listed in India's document as well as the
development concerns presented by Tanzania, and asked Members to replicate the method used toreach the decision on Article 66.2.  Zambia wished to thank all Members, in particular the US,
European Communities, Canada and Japan, with whom it had cooperated in the process of arriving at
this decision.
84. The representative of Japan thanked the previous speakers who had stressed the importance of
the development aspect on the road to Cancún and beyond, in the context of the Doha Round.  Japan
appreciated the importance of the development aspect of the task before Members.  In this context, he
wished to express his appreciation to the Chairman for the initiative he had undertaken in proposing a
way forward in the area of S&D treatment.  He also wished to thank the TNC Chairman for his
initiatives to further promote the consultations on implementation issues.  Japan would continue to
engage constructively on these issues.  He had one specific comment regarding India's proposal.
While the Decision on Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns dictated that those issues be
addressed in the relevant bodies, Japan felt that Members had to remember that the Decision did notcall for any wholesale review of such issues by the General Council itself.  In this respect, Japan was
of the view that some of the issues India was pr oposing for further review in the General Council did
not warrant such review.  In addition, regarding the issues in India's document under paragraph (c) in
the first cluster, and paragraphs (a) and (e) in the second cluster, Japan considered that these issues
had already been resolved.  Regarding the issues in paragraphs (d), (e) and (f) in the first cluster and
(b) and (c) in the second cluster, Japan consider ed that the work would be more efficiently and
constructively dealt with if these issues continued to be addressed in the respective bodies or
Committees that were most relevant to them.
85. The representative of the European Commun ities thanked India and Tanzania for their
statements.  These underlined once more the urgency and imperative need to respond to overriding
development concerns, which constituted a central element of the Doha Declaration, as China had
said.  The Community's objective was to build on the progress already achieved with a view to
reaching by Cancún a substantial development package and to ensure that developing-country needs
were properly addressed throughout the Round in at  least the following areas:  implementation, S&D,
market access and rules, where there was a need for stronger rules that were pro-development, andalso a need for more aid to help developing countries trade and integrate, including amongst
themselves.  Regarding implementation, as India had said, Members had already gone a considerableWT/GC/M/80
Page 20
distance since Seattle.  A first set of decisions had been taken before Doha, and a second package
adopted at Doha, where it had been decided that implementation would be an integral part of the Doha
Development Agenda work programme.  At the end of 2002 Members had taken decisions on a
number of issues, notably in the areas of anti-dumping, and subsidies and countervailing measures.  A
number of issues had been referred to subsidiary bodies, and India's document referred to a number ofthose issues.  His delegation had some difficulty making a precise judgement on each and every issue
which had been dealt with by subsidiary bodies and suggested that it would be useful for the
Secretariat to produce an overview document of those issues that would indicate their status in the
different subsidiary bodies.  On the issues referred to in paragraph 12(b), all Members had attended
the recent meeting called by the Director-General, and all had full confidence in the latter's
consultations and in the General Council Chairman's actions and guidance to make sure that Members
reached a fruitful result on outstanding implementation issues.
86. On S&D treatment, the General Council Chairman's initiative was very valuable.  His
delegation would work constructively on it.  It would try to help the Chairman find significant,
substantive packages on the Category I issues, and would help him discuss each and every issue in the
different categories, so that this exercise could have a result within the next few months.  He wished
to add that Members were not starting from scratch.  Very important work had already been done bythe Chairman of the CTD in Special Session, and collectively Members could also build on that
preparatory work.  In fact, the General Council Chairman himself had done so.  Thus, the Community
was confident that regarding process, Members were on the right track as far as S&D was concerned.
He recalled that in the negotiating groups on market access and on rules, considerable time was being
spent on looking at developmental concerns.  That was also the case for the various proposals whichhad been made, be they in agriculture or industrial products.  Thus, delegations, including the
Community, took the letter and spirit of the Doha De claration very much to heart in these negotiating
groups.  Finally, regarding trade-related technical assistance, the Community considered this a crucial
component of an overall package and balance if Members were to respond to development concerns.
He knew that the Secretariat had been active, not only as far as the 2003 Trade-Related TechnicalAssistance (TRTA) was concerned, as regards the 2004 TRTA Programme, on which Deputy
Director-General Mr. Rana had started his consultations.  Regarding TRTA, the Community
participated not only in the WTO framework – and as all knew, the Community and its member States
were funding more than 50 per cent of the total funds – but included trade among its development
priorities in its own bilateral development coopera tion, as he had said in the recent General Council
meeting on coherence
2.  The Community would be providing roughly two billion euros for its TRTA
activities over the next five years.
87. The representative of Brazil said that Brazil had consistently attached the highest priority to a
positive response to the implementation-related issues and concerns which had been raised by
developing countries long before the Seattle Ministerial Conference.  However, the record thus far on
this matter had not been noteworthy, thus frustrating one of the pillars on which the launch of the
Doha Development Agenda itself had been based, i.e. the correction of imbalances verified in theimplementation of the Uruguay Round Agreements.  The lack of constructive engagement on these
issues had been consistent in all fora in which they had been discussed, and the results thus far had not
contributed by any measure to fostering confidence in the system, which was a vital component if the
Doha Round was to move forward with substantive re sults.  Therefore, Brazil renewed its calls for
constructive engagement on all implementation-related issues as a necessary step towards building asuccessful outcome to the negotiations.  His delegation associated itself with the statements by India
and Tanzania and by those who had supported them.
88. The representative of Indonesia associated his delegation with the statements by India,
Tanzania, China, Brazil and others.  Indonesia attached high importance to the resolution of
implementation issues, which were very close to the hearts of developing countries.  These issues had
                                                     
2 See WT/GC/M/79.WT/GC/M/80
Page 21
been discussed for several years, and were still waiting for a concrete resolution.  Although Members
had entered a new round of trade negotiations, they should not forget to resolve these pending issues.
He recalled that some implementation issues were  part of the Doha Development Agenda and needed
resolution earlier than the conclusion of the negotiations.  Given the state of play for these issues in
the WTO, where some important deadlines had passed, early resolution of implementation issueswould be a significant impetus to unlock the impasse.  Resolution of these issues would also show a
spirit of good faith by all Members to work together to resolve the issues of crucial importance for
many developing countries.  Indonesia supported India’s proposal in document WT/GC/W/494 and
the statement by Tanzania on behalf of Informal Group of Developing Countries on drawing up a
specific timetable for work between the present and the Cancún Ministerial Conference.  It also saw
the need to have a review of the progress made on the implementation issues referred to WTO bodies.
89. The representative of Uganda associated his delegation with the statements by India and by
Tanzania on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing Countries.  Uganda had been one of the
active proponents of implementation issues well before Doha and its expectation was that most of
these should have been resolved by the present ti me.  However, it was willing to continue to engage
constructively, welcomed the Director-General's programme and hoped that it would be possible
before Cancún to show tangible results.  The same applied to the question of S&D.  A number ofproposals had been on the table for some time, and Uganda also commended the Chairman on his
willingness to take over the burden of trying to resolve these issues.  However, he again wished to
emphasize that Members should not wait for Cancún.  Uganda's expectation was that there would be
meaningful economic and beneficial results before Cancún.  As many delegations had said, this would
increase Members' confidence and would improve the atmosphere.  The Director-General in his reportand in his discussion with Ministers had reported a positive willingness among Members to engage,
and Uganda hoped that this would produce meaningful results.
90. With respect to paragraph 6 of the Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health,
Uganda believed that the TRIPS Council Chairman's text remained the most viable solution, and
expected that it would be possible before Cancún to find a solution.  Furthermore, one could not talkabout development as far as Africa was concerne d without addressing the question of agriculture.
Thus, resolving the question of agriculture would go a long way in trying to address development
issues.  It was Uganda's hope that there would be agreement on modalities for the agriculture
negotiations.  For the LDCs, SPS and TBT measures were also very big impediments to trade, and
these countries looked forward to the Director -General continuing his cooperative efforts with
international standard-setting organizations for the la tter to accord priority to the participation of the
LDCs.
91. The representative of Djibouti supported the statements by India, Tanzania, China and Brazil.
Development issues were vital for developing countries, which were not only trying to create
economic growth but also to survive.  Thus, it would be well to address development issues between
the present and the Cancún Ministerial Conference.  Development issues had to be taken into account
in the framework of WTO negotiations.  As many delegations had already said, these issues wereclose to developing countries' hearts and should, as Ministers had already said, be at the heart of the
negotiations.  He wished to thank the donor countries which understood this issue and the importance
of technical assistance for developing countries.  He also wished to thank all who had spoken about
technical assistance and had attached importance to it.  Technical assistance was essential in the
negotiations, as it was important for developing countries to better understand the way the systemworked and to defend their interests throughout the negotiations.
92. The representative of Argentina expressed his delegation's support for all the statements made
regarding how central to the negotiations developm ent issues were, and how they could help Members
to move work forward in the negotiating process.  Argentina was prepared to contribute to a
consensus, not only in the WTO bodies which had been mandated to deal with these issues, but alsoon other levels.  His delegation specifically wished to underline the importance of getting informationWT/GC/M/80
Page 22
on the state of play in these areas, given the great number of issues to be dealt with.  For example, it
seemed from Japan's statement that its understanding of sub-paragraph (a) of the second cluster of
issues in India's paper, regarding the SPS Agreement, was that the "equivalence" issue had been
resolved.  However, Argentina's interpretation and understanding was that this issue – although it was
being taken up in the SPS Committee – had not given rise to any consensus regarding paragraphs 5and 7 of the Decision on Equivalence.  Therefore, Argentina felt that Members would perhaps do well
to consider the suggestion made by the Community re garding the need to know the state of play with
respect to these issues.
93. The representative of Malaysia said that his delegation was one of those which had repeatedly
stressed the importance of finding a resolution to the various development-related issues, which
included implementation issues as well as S&D.  His delegation was encouraged by the initiatives the
General Council Chairman was taking to deal with S&D issues, and also by the Director-General'sinitiative in dealing with implementation issues, especially those relating to paragraph 12(b) of the
Doha Declaration.  Malaysia supported these initiatives and the efforts being made.  His delegation
fully associated with the statement by Tanzania on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing
Countries.  His delegation also fully associated with the statement by India, and believed that
Members needed to look at this issue in a very objective and constructive manner.  As many had saidat the present meeting, it was important to ensure  that amicable solutions were reached to these
implementation issues.  This was essential and impe rative in order for Members to instil confidence
and trust in the system, and there was some way to go in this regard.  Malaysia was particularly
encouraged by the Community’s statement as to ho w Members should be dealing with these issues,
particularly the issues which had been highlighted by India, and agreed that for a start it would beuseful for the Secretariat to provide Members with the status of work or progress that had been
achieved in relation to the various issues outlined by India.  This would provide a good basis on which
to carry the exercise forward.  It was important at the present stage not to put aside or on the back
burner any of these issues, because this was not the way to move forward in this very important
exercise.
94. The representative of the Philippines said that S&D and implementation issues were essential
ingredients to foster confidence among developing countries in the negotiations, to redress the
imbalances that had piled up in previous negotiations and agreements, and to ease the integration and
prevent the marginalization of developing countries, especially the least-developed ones, in the
multilateral process promising growth, employment, poverty alleviation and overall development for
all.  It was therefore important that the constructive engagement and positive commitment to resolving
most of the remaining issues be seen before Cancún.  His delegation supported the elaboratearticulation of this in the statements by India, Tanzania on behalf of the Informal Group of
Developing Countries, China, Brazil and others.  The Philippines had also taken due note of the
statement by the Community that in the negotiations on market access and rules, a great deal of time
and substance had been spent in discussions devoted to similar development issues that would
promise developing countries a better deal in the future.  He urged developing countries to put moreemphasis on these discussions so that what they had experienced in the past would not be repeated.
He hoped that given the congenial atmosphere that was being developed in the discussions on S&D
and implementation issues, Members would be able to move forward in a more committed way so that
the outcomes of the negotiations would be mutually beneficial for all.
95. The representative of Barbados said that his delegation supported the statement by India and
looked forward to a satisfactory resolution of thes e matters in due course.  It also supported the
statements by Tanzania on behalf of the Inform al Group of Developing Countries, and by Botswana
on behalf of the ACP Group.  All of the issues raised in those three statements were of interest to
Barbados.  For the time being, he would comment briefly on two issues raised by Botswana, which
had to do with the loss of preferences and the loss of revenue, and the implications of those twooccurrences.  He was making this statement in the context of the discussion that had taken place at the
General Council meeting on Coherence two days earl ier, at which Members had heard about the workWT/GC/M/80
Page 23
being done by the IMF and the World Bank.  His interpretation of what had been said was that when
the Fund said that its research on the loss of prefer ences indicated little evidence to suggest that the
impact would be very significant, it was speaking essentially about balance-of-payments problems.
For Barbados, the impact of a loss of preferences  went beyond balance-of-payments problems to the
possible social dislocation that would take place regardless of whether or not there was a balance-of-payments problem.  Whenever people lost their employment, this had social implications for them and
for their families.
96. In addition, in a small country it was not possible for people who lost their jobs to move to
another geographical area to find employment.  Added to this was the problem that a small economy
with a very narrow resource base did not have the possibility to allow one industry to close and to
start another which would take up the idle resources.  This meant that in order for unemployed people
to be saved from going under, the government had to provide a social structure.  In this context theissue of revenue loss took on great importance, because people who lost their jobs could not pay taxes
or make purchases.  Thus, when the government lost revenue it was faced with having to cut back the
very social services that were needed, in order to fit within its new budget, and the poor who
depended on these services would also suffer.  Therefore, when one spoke of the potential damage to
a country's economic system that would result from a loss of preferences, it was not a balance-of-payments problem.  The programmes the Fund was talking about reorganizing were those aimed at
balance-of-payments support.  These had nothing to do with the social problems with which Barbados
had to contend.  While the Bank had a number of social safety net programmes, a country like
Barbados had no access to Bank funds.  Thus, his delegation was not willing to accept that Barbados
could afford to agree to allow these preferences to disappear on the understanding that the Bank andthe Fund were putting in place programmes to deal with the resulting situation.
97. The representative of Thailand thanked Tanzania for presenting its concerns on behalf of the
Informal Group of Developing Countries, and said her delegation wished to share its concerns over
the lack of progress on development-related issues.  This had been due to the lack of real and
constructive engagement of the parties concerned in the discussions.  On implementation issues,Thailand had requested that the imbalances resulting from the Uruguay Round Agreements,
particularly the lack of implementation of certain commitments and obligations on the part of
developed countries, needed to be addressed before any new obligations could be accepted in the new
round of negotiations.  Its constituencies and stakeholders had complained that they had lost trust and
confidence in the multilateral trading system as they  could not see any gain in the areas in which they
had comparative advantage, but had already had to make concessions and open markets in areas in
which they could not compete.  If trust and confidence in the credibility of the multilateral tradingsystem was to be regained, these imbalances had to be addressed before Ministers met in Cancún.
With regard to the statement by India, her dele gation also felt the proposal by the Community for a
status overview document on these issues would be  a useful basis for Members’ consideration.  On
S&D, Thailand looked forward to working with the General Council Chairman in the weeks to come.
98. The representative of Paraguay supported the proposals and statements by India and Tanzania
and that Members should examine the progress made on the implementation issues that had been
forwarded to specific WTO bodies.  It would be ve ry timely to have a schedule of meetings between
the present and Cancún, so that Members could make progress on the various items which had to be
discussed.  Paraguay also wished to support the Chairman’s approach to moving forward on
examining S&D issues in order to analyse them and make them more precise, operational andeffective, and welcomed the General Council Chairman's communication in document Job(03)/68.
He noted at in a meeting of the CTD in Special Session, his delegation had proposed a draft text
which it hoped would be discussed in future meetings convened by the Chairman.
99. The representative of Canada expressed appreciation to India and Tanzania for having put
their thoughts on the table, as well as for the comments by other delegations.  It was clear that
development was indispensable to and intertwined with the very essence of the Doha DevelopmentWT/GC/M/80
Page 24
Agenda.  While there was no dispute on that point, it seemed – and he did not want anyone to
misinterpret this – somewhat awkward to hear some delegations equating lack of progress in a number
of areas with lack of commitment or engagement.  While Canada certainly felt that more progress
could be made on a number of fronts, his delegation was not prepared to accept that lack of progress
equalled lack of commitment.  Rather, he would argue that the time and effort spent by Members overthe past number of years had in fact overwhelmingly – and legitimately so –  been focussed on
advancing the development file.  This was the case before, at and after the Seattle Ministerial
Conference, as well as before, at and after the Do ha Ministerial Conference, and included the issues of
implementation, S&D, and TRIPS and public health.  While successful outcomes had not yet been
reached on all of these issues, Members had nonetheless successfully advanced and enhanced internal
transparency, particularly for the benefit of the smallest delegations.  In addition, efforts on trade-
related technical assistance had borne fruit, as had those on LDC accessions.  In this regard it wouldbe very positive both substantively and symbolically if Members were to welcome one, if not more, of
the LDCs as WTO Members at the Cancún Ministerial Conference.  The issue of small economies,
while it had proved frustrating for these countries, was another area in which Canada was not
prepared to equate lack of progress with lack of commitment and engagement on the part of all
delegations, whether developing, least-developed or developed.  It was necessary to recognize thisand to begin to acknowledge the efforts made.
100. This attitude almost assumed that great progress was being made in other areas and that the
development file was being allowed to lag behind, even though development was intertwined in each
of the negotiating sectors.  Some statements also seemed to suggest that Members needed to
concentrate more on development because it was somehow being left behind.  He believed, however,that this was not the case.  He asked Members to reflect, for example, on where they were on
agriculture, on non-agricultural market access, on coming to grips with a focussed agenda for reform
of the DSU, or in other areas.  There seemed to be a general sense that Members were creating
momentum, but that they were not there yet, in un fortunately too many areas.  The central thrust of
the message he was hearing from the Director-General and from a number of Ministers, was thatMembers really had to begin to converge their positions into an international position of progress and
success.  Therefore, it was not that development was lagging behind everything else, but rather that it
was regrettably in the same position as too many other issues.  This led to his third point, which was
that if Members were to advance all of these files,  including development, this was not the moment to
create a new track to review these issues or to create a special procedure in the General Council.  He
believed, and a number of developing countries had mentioned this, that what was needed was a
convergence of all the existing roads to form a super highway to Cancún.  If Members could focus onthis, rather than on creating more off-ramps and tangents, they could begin to make more progress,
first and foremost on development issues but also in other areas.  His delegation supported the spirit
of many interventions under the present item.  However, it did not accept that there had been a lack of
commitment or engagement.  This was a perfect case where Members needed to build trust with one
another.  Development was not the exception to success elsewhere.  While Members had been unableto find traction thus far, he was convinced that they would.  He did not think Members had done that
badly in the past year and half, as compared to the record of those who had been involved in the eight
previous rounds of multilateral trade negotiations.  In fact, they had moved as well and as fast as, if
not better or faster than, in any previous round.  However, one could not rest on one's laurels, because
all knew what the deadline was and what the agenda looked like.  Canada hoped that Members couldbuild some trust and positive spirit and begin to converge, not only for development but also for the
rest of the Doha Development Agenda.  It also hoped that Members could use the good offices of the
Chair and of the Director-General to help them with this convergence rather than trying to splinter and
increase the existing tracks that were already more than they could manage.
101. The Chairman said that the statements by both India and by Tanzania on behalf of the
Informal Group of Developing Countries had generated a very good debate on matters of
development.  He could sum up by saying that the evolution of the Doha Work Programme with
respect to development had clearly not been satisfactory thus far.  Members had not met deadlines,WT/GC/M/80
Page 25
and had come up against major delays in much of the work.  The results had been quite limited for the
moment and some Members were actually questioning the name of the Doha Development Round.
This situation had led to disappointment and conc erns for many countries.  However, he believed
there were some positive aspects that Members should consider.  The statements from both
developing and developed countries had included a confirmation of their commitment to the DohaWork Programme, and had indicated their political  will to continue strengthening their efforts to
achieve a package of substantive and specific results on development issues before Cancún.  The
majority of Members who had spoken had urged bot h the Director-General and himself, as General
Council Chairman to strengthen their efforts with respect to S&D and implementation issues,
respectively, and to seek the greatest possible flexibility to enable them to submit specific results
before Cancún.  A further highlight was that in the work the Director-General and he were
undertaking, and in the informal meetings of HODs which they had convened, they had stressed theneed to maintain the greatest possible transparen cy and inclusiveness.  With respect to TRIPS and
public health, Members had stated the need to make all efforts to resolve this issue before Cancún.
They had also stated the need to seek an overall balance in the context of the Doha Work Programme.
Many Members had stressed the need to find specific results in agriculture, S&D, and
implementation, in order truly to satisfy not only the economic goals but also the social goals of manyMembers.  With respect to implementation, which had been highlighted by India, of the 12 proposals
raised in India's document, Members had noted that on five of them, positive results had been
achieved, that on three others work was continuing in subsidiary bodies, and that in four areas there
continued to be wide divergences which would make it difficult to achieve results.  However, India
had launched an appeal to continue to seek new ways and means and procedures that would enable
Members to make progress on implementation.  One delegation had said that the lack of progress in
certain areas should not in any way be interpreted as a lack of commitment to the Doha Development
Agenda.  With respect to seeking new paths or procedures, one delegation had made a proposal,
supported by others, with respect to the usefulness of a factual document prepared by the Secretariat
on the state of play on implementation issues, that would provide focused and centralized informationon where Members stood with respect to each of these issues.  In the light of the discussion, he
proposed that the General Council take note of the statements, and in particular of the concerns
expressed with respect to the work programme relating to development, and of the need to continue to
work to achieve a specific and substantive package reflecting the interests and objectives of
developing countries before Cancún.  He urged Members to continue to reflect on the concerns
expressed and make the best possible efforts to find content for the Doha Work Programme, in order
to ensure that their work faithfully reflected the title of the Doha Development Agenda.
102. The General Council took note of the statements.
10. WTO Pension Plan – Election of a Chairperson, Member and Alternate to the
Management Board – Proposal by the Chairman (WT/GC/W/496)
103. The Chairman recalled that Article 4(a) of the Regulations of the WTO Pension Plan
provided, inter alia, for the election by the General Council of a Chairperson, four members and four
alternates to the Management Board of the Pensi on Plan.  At its meetings in July 2002 and February
2003, the General Council had elected representatives to serve on the Management Board.  However,
he had been informed that Amb. Whelan, Ms. Andréa Saldaña de Gama Watson and Mr. Xiaodong
Wang were no longer available to serve on the Management Board as Chairperson, member and
alternate, respectively, and it was therefore necessary for the General Council to take a decision on thereconstitution of its representation on the Management Board.  As indicated in his communication in
WT/GC/W/496, he wished to inform Members that th e following representatives had kindly agreed to
have their names put forward for election to the posts of Chair, member and alternate, respectively:
Chairman: Amb. Stefán Jóhannesson (Iceland), for a period of one year
Member: Mr. Thomas Chan (Hong Kong, China)WT/GC/M/80
Page 26
Alternate: Mr. Mathias Francke (Chile)
104. Accordingly, he proposed that the above candidates be elected as the General Council's
representatives to the Management Board of the WTO Pension Plan.
105. The General Council took note of the statement and so agreed .3
11. Attendance by international intergovernmental  organizations as observers at the Fifth
Session of the Ministerial Conference – Request by the League of Arab States
106. The Chairman recalled that at its meeting in February, the General Council had agreed that in
keeping with past practice and the agreed Guidelines for observer status for IGOs in Annex 3 of the
General Council's Rules of Procedure, the organizations invited to attend the Doha Ministerial
Conference would also be invited to attend th e Ministerial Conference in Cancún.  The General
Council had also agreed that consultations would be held on requests for observer status at the Cancún
Ministerial Conference from any other IGOs that were not already observers at the Doha Ministerial
Conference, and who were neither observers in the General Council nor in other WTO bodies.  In this
connection, he wished to inform Members that a request for observer status at the Cancún Ministerial
Conference had since been received from the League of Arab States.  Members wishing to consult thecommunication sent by this organization were invited to contact the External Relations Division of
the WTO Secretariat.  With regard to the request from the League of Arab States, he proposed that the
General Council proceed in exactly the same way it had in the past with regard to requests from IGOs
for observer status at Ministerial Conferences who were neither observers in the General Council nor
in other WTO bodies.  Accordingly, he proposed that, unless any objection was received by theSecretariat from any Member by 15 June 2003, the Le ague of Arab States be granted observer status
to the Cancún Ministerial Conference.  As in the pa st, he would inform the General Council at its next
meeting of the situation with regard to this request.
107. The representative of Egypt, speaking on behalf of the Arab Members
, thanked the Chairman
for bringing to the attention of the Council the request by the League of Arab States to attend the Fifth
Ministerial Conference as an observer, a request which the Arab and other Members of the WTO
supported.  This request had been made on 5 February and his delegation had referred to it at the
General Council meeting on 10 February.  However, their countries understood the Chairman's desire
to give Members an additional 30 days for further reflection.  Therefore, they believed the General
Council should take up this request again and decide on it at its next meeting in order to
operationalize the principle of transparency that was being sought by all Members, and to ensure the
participation of all Members in the decision-making process.  They also wished to highlight theimportance the Arab Group attached to the attendance of similar intergovernmental organizations,
especially when they were involved in regional integration activities and in promoting trade
liberalization as well as assisting acceding countries in many trade-related areas.  It was the wish of
the Arab countries that the request by the League of Arab States, which had been denied for both the
Seattle and Doha Ministerial Conferences, be treated positively this time by all Members in a mannerthat would avoid the politicization of the request and at the same time correspond to recent initiatives
in or to the region.
108. The representative of Kuwait, speaking also on behalf of Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, and the
United Arab Emirates, supported the statement by Egypt.  Their Governments accorded great
importance to the request by the League of Arab States for observer status at the Fifth Ministerial
Conference.  They agreed with statements by Egypt at earlier meetings of the General Council that
this request had been a long-standing issue and should not be politicized.  His delegation urged
                                                     
3 The Decision was subsequently issued as WT/L/517.WT/GC/M/80
Page 27
Members in the General Council to give positive cons ideration to the request from the League of Arab
States.
109. The representative of Jordan said his delegation had little to add to the statement by Egypt,
with which it fully associated itself and strongly s upported.  The League of Arab States administered a
free-trade area agreement and played an important role in the region, especially at the economic andtrade levels, which was very much related to the multilateral trading system.  Jordan hoped that at the
next meeting of the General Council this matter would be depoliticized and that the request of the
League for observer status at the Cancún Ministerial Conference would be accepted.
110. The representative of Djibouti said that the request from the League of Arab States should be
considered at the next meeting of the General Council.  This request should be treated in the same
manner as requests from other organizations had been treated, without politicizing it.
111. The representative of Tunisia supported the statements by the previous speakers.  His
Government also accorded importance to the granting of this request, in view of the role played by the
League of Arab States in the development of trade in its member countries.  The General Council
should give favourable consideration to this request at its next meeting.
112. The representative of Morocco said that his delegation, like others before him, also supported
Egypt's request.  In view of the role played by the League of Arab States in relation to trade policies
in its member states, his delegation wished that this request be taken up again and a favourable
response given by the General Council at its next meeting.
113. The representative of Mauritania said his delegation wished to join in the statements by the
previous speakers that the request by the League of  Arab States be examined in accordance with the
principles outlined by them, i.e. that the request be treated according the same rules applied in thiscontext, and take into account the important economic and trade dimension of the League of Arab
States.  His delegation wished that a solution be found quickly at the next General Council meeting.
114. The representative of Canada, speaking on a related observership question, recalled that at the
end of the 13 May General Council meeting on coherence -- which had been both valuable and
relevant -- the Director-General in his summary had suggested that it would make sense for the WorldBank and the International Monetary Fund, in the name of coherence, among other things, to be
invited as observers to meetings of the Trade Negotiations Committee and its subsidiary bodies.  His
delegation wondered whether, in the general spirit of observership, Members might want to take stock
of that suggestion and perhaps find a way to complement the informal consultations and see if there
was a sense that Members could move on these organizations on the strength of what he considered
was a very well received meeting on coherence.
115. The Chairman said that, with regard to the request from the League of Arab States, he would
propose, as he had earlier, that the General Council follow the same practice it had in the past in
dealing with requests from IGOs for observer status at Ministerial Conferences, and that he, as Chair,
inform the General Council at its next meeting of the situation with regard to this request.  He also
proposed that all of the statements at the present meeting highlighting the importance of this request
be included in the minutes.
116. The representative of Egypt said that in his earlier statement he had made a specific proposal
which did not correspond exactly to the proposal the Chairman had put before the General Council.
His delegation had proposed that the General Council reconsider the request from the League of Arab
States and decide on it at its next meeting.  The General Council would therefore postpone its
discussion on this request at the present meeting, since the Chairman wished to leave an additional 30days for Members to reflect further on the request.WT/GC/M/80
Page 28
117. The Chairman said that when he had proposed that he as Chair inform the General Council at
its next meeting of the situation with respect to this  request, he was, in reality, leaving the door open
for consideration of this matter at that meeting.  He was not closing the door to further consideration
of it.  That being said, there was an established practice in the General C ouncil to follow a specific
procedure with respect to such requests from IGOs, and it seemed correct to follow that practice in thepresent case.  He would be informing Members of the situation at the next meeting of the General
Council and, in the light of his report, the Council co uld revert to a further discussion of this matter.
118. The representative of the United States said her delegation supported the approach proposed
by the Chairman as that had been the standard approa ch that applied to all such requests.  Should there
be an objection to the request by the League of Arab States, her delegation respected the right of
Members to request a discussion at the next meeting of the General Council.
119. The representative of Egypt said that while it was true that the General Council had in the past
followed the practice mentioned by the Chairman, unf ortunately that practice did not seem to be a
fruitful one, and that was why the General Council should try to follow another practice, since such
practices were not enshrined in the General Council's Rules of Procedure.  His delegation still wished
to leave time for Members to reflect on this request, but wanted the decision to be taken in a
transparent manner by the General Council at its next meeting, rather than allowing for writtenresponses to be sent to the Secretariat in a manner that was not transparent.
120. The Chairman said that he was in Members' hands on this matter.  However, he wished to
highlight once again that if the General Council were to follow the customary practice he had
outlined, it would not prejudice the result, because if no Member objected to the request, he would be
informing the General Council at its next meeting th at the request had been approved.  In the event
that an objection was received from any delegation between then and the next General Council
meeting, that would be the report he would be maki ng to the next meeting, and the decision would not
be taken until then.  In other words, the matter would remain pending until then, and any Member
would have the right to revert to it on that occasion.  However, Egypt was requesting – if he
understood correctly – that the General Council not follow the customary practice in this case and thatit leave the matter pending until its next meeting, which was scheduled for 24-25 July.  In this case,
the Council would be leaving the matter pending without knowing the outcome until very late in the
day.  However, as he had said, he was in Members'  hands.  He believed that his proposal would not
prevent the General Council from reverting to a disc ussion of this matter at its next meeting, but that
would at least be in the full knowledge of whether or not any objections had been raised.  His
suggestion would be for the General Council to foll ow the proposal he had made, since that would not
hinder the right of any Member to come back to the question of taking a decision at the next meeting.
121. The representative of Egypt said that his delegation was as concerned with the process as with
the result.  It believed that the process to be followed should be transparent, and that a decision should
be taken at a meeting of the General Council, whether the present meeting or -- since he understood
that the Chairman wished to give additional time for Members to reflect on the request -- the next one.
Egypt respected the Chairman's wish and would be  agreeable to coming back to this matter and
deciding on it at the next meeting of the General Council.  Otherwise, Members could decide on it at
the present meeting, if there were no objections.
122. The Chairman said he wanted to be clear that, under his proposal, the decision would in any
event be taken at the next meeting.  It would not be taken at the present meeting nor in the interim
between the present and the next meeting.  Thus, the customary practice that he was suggesting wouldenable Members to know between then and the next meeting whether there were objections to this
request from any delegation.  The decision, however, would not be taken on that basis, but rather
would be taken at the next meeting.  On the understanding that the decision would be taken at the next
meeting, he wondered whether the delegation of Egypt could accept the procedure he had proposed,
or whether it would insist that this procedure not be used in the present case and that the GeneralWT/GC/M/80
Page 29
Council leave this matter completely open and reve rt to it at the July meeting without knowing
whether or not there were objections to the request.
123. The representative of Egypt said that the problem with the Chairman's proposal was that it
would allow Members to express their points of view through a process, be it written letters or
otherwise, which Egypt did not believe was the righ t one to be followed concerning this request or
any other request for observer status.  Requests for observer status in other WTO bodies were dealt
with in a transparent manner in the bodies themselv es, rather than having the approach of delegations
sending letters to the Secretariat or to the Chairman expressing their point of view.  Egypt therefore
wished to see this issue be taken up by the Genera l Council at a meeting, in a transparent manner and
with the participation of all Members.
124. The Chairman said that he had no difficulty in leaving this matter pending until the next
meeting.  In his view, the suggestion he had made would have brought greater clarity and
transparency with respect to the situation regard ing the request from the League of Arab States.
However, if Egypt considered that the General Council should not follow the customary practice in
this case, and that the matter should be left pending, he had no difficulty in withdrawing his
suggestion, and leaving this matter pending and open for discussion at the next meeting.  In the light
of this, he suggested that the General Council agree to Egypt's proposal and revert to this item at itsmeeting on 24-25 July.
125. The representative of the United States said it seemed that what Egypt was suggesting was a
change to the standard practice the General Council had been following in the past for all such
requests, and asked if this was indeed what the Chairman was suggesting the General Council do now.
126. The Chairman said that the proposal by Egypt was that in the specific case of the request by
the League of Arab States, rather than follow the customary practice, the General Council defer
consideration of this item until its next meeting.   This would by no means prejudice the final decision
to be taken with regard to this request.  Therefore, if, as the United States had said, the General
Council was not following the usual practice in the present case, it would nonetheless be able to do so
at a later point.  The situation was that, at the re quest of Egypt and a group of Members that had taken
the floor on this matter, Members were considering deferring a decision on this matter until the next
meeting of the General Council.
127. The representative of Canada asked, further to the comments by the United States, whether
some semblance of procedure would be followed if Members were to leave this request pending
without following customary practice, and were, in the interim, to receive a request from another IGO
for observer status, or whether additional requests would also be treated in an ad hoc way.  He asked
what exactly the special procedure would be betw een then and the next General Council meeting.
128. The Chairman said that Canada's question was a pertinent one.  As Chairman, he had to listen
to all the proposals that were made.  In the present case, the General Council was being asked to
depart from a practice it had followed in the past.  What the General Council was doing was deferring
a decision to a later date.  In the light of the pr oposal by Egypt, the General Council would return to
this matter on 24-25 July without prejudice to the final decision that might be taken.  With regard towhat would happen if requests from other IGOs were received in the meantime, it was his view that
the General Council should continue to follow the normal practice it had always followed, in the
absence of a specific proposal to divert from that practice, such as had been made in this case.  Having
said that, he proposed that the General Council agree to defer consideration of this matter until its July
meeting, in view of the fact that there were ob jections to following the customary practice in this
particular case.
129. The representative of Egypt said that, since the Chairman had referred several times to
Egypt's proposal that Members defer consideration of this request to the next meeting, he wished toWT/GC/M/80
Page 30
clarify that his delegation's proposal was to decide on the request at that meeting when other Members
would be in a position, after further reflection, to join  in the decision at that meeting.  Therefore, by
the time of the July meeting, Members would not need to have any additional period for reflection on
the request before deciding on it.
130. The Chairman said he wished to clarify the situa tion.  Egypt had asked that, with regard to the
request by the League of Arab States, the Gene ral Council not follow the customary practice in
addressing requests for observer status at Mini sterial Conferences from IGOs which did not have
observer status either in the General Council or in other WTO bodies.  The General Council would
agree that it not follow that practice for the request at hand.  That being said, his understanding of not
following that practice was that this request would remain pending, and that it would be on the agenda
of the next meeting of the General Council and discussed at that time.  That was the Chairman's
understanding in relation to this matter.  He wished to say, at the same time, that the statements made
under this item by all delegations would be included in the minutes of the present meeting and would
help prepare the ground for the consideration of this item at the next meeting.
131. The General Council took note of the statements and agreed  to revert to this item at its next
meeting.
12. Ongoing improvements to the services provided by the Secretariat to Members
132. Mr. Abbott, Deputy Director-General, speakin g under "Other Business", said that his
statement followed remarks made by the previous  Chairman of the General Council that at the
February meeting of the Council, when the latter had informed the Council of a number of plans in the
area of Secretariat services to Members.  He wished to share with Members information regarding
some new facilities that the Secretariat had been able  to put in place, mainly in the area of on-line
internet access and access to documents.  This was an important area of work, especially as a form of
assistance to developing-country Members.
133. First, a new version of the Documents Online facility had been unveiled on 9 April 2003.
This version would enable Members, observers and the public to consult and download documents
more easily, according to various criteria.  The new features of the application would be of particularhelp to users unfamiliar with the structure of WTO documents and symbols.  Full details had been
provided in document WT/L/514.  A briefing sessi on on this facility would be organized within the
next few weeks.  During that session, additional de tails would be provided on the provision of "hands
on" training courses and on forthcoming facilities such as obtaining online all the documents for a
particular meeting.
134. Second, an Online Registration facility for the Fifth Ministerial Conference in Cancún had
been inaugurated on 6 May 2003.  This facility had been developed under the auspices of the MexicanOrganizing Committee and was now being used by Members and Observers to register participants
via the Internet.  Full details had been communicated to the individual Coordinators nominated by
Delegations and a link to the registration facility placed on the WTO Members' web site.
135. Third, a Delegates' Room had been opened on 30 April 2003.  In this area, Members would
find several PCs connected to the Internet intended fo r their use in order, for example, to register for
the Fifth Session of the Ministerial Conference as well as to perform other tasks.  In addition,
electronic photographic equipment and scanning facilities had been installed to assist participants with
the creation of electronic photographs for the purposes of the online registration.  He invited
delegations to visit Room 1045 at their earliest convenience.
136. Fourth, a Wireless "WiFi" facility had been installed throughout the WTO premises.
Through this facility, delegations in this building, or in the new conference building would be able to
access the Internet wirelessly.  To do so they would need an "enabled" laptop or a personal digitalWT/GC/M/80
Page 31
assistant.  An information note providing all the technical details would be distributed shortly, when
the required access lines had been made available by the Internet Service Provider (BlueWin).  He
hoped these new services would be helpful for Members, and especially the developing-country
Members.
137. The General Council took note of this information.
13. Chairmanship of the Committee on Trade and Development
138. The Chairman, speaking under "Other Business", recalled that at its meeting in February, the
General Council had taken note of the consensus on a slate of names of Chairpersons of WTO bodies,
including on the chairmanship of the CTD.  Since that meeting, he understood that
Mr. Ould Mohamed Lemine (Mauritania), who had been nominated to this post, was unfortunately
unable to serve as Chairman of this Committee at the present time.  In the light of this situation, and
following consultations with delegations, he inform ed the General Council that there was a consensus
on the appointment of Mr. Habib Mansour (Tunisia) to this post.  On behalf of the General Council,
he expressed appreciation to Mr. Mansour for having agreed to serve in this capacity, and also to
Mr. Ali (Bangladesh) for his goodwill in continuing to shoulder the burden of the Committee's work
up to the present time.  He understood that the formal election of Mr. Mansour would be the first item
on the agenda of the CTD's next meeting, which was scheduled for 22 May.
139. The General Council took note of the statement and of the consensus on this appointment.
14. Chairmanships of the Working Parties on the Accessions of Bhutan, Ethiopia and
Yemen
140. The Chairman, speaking under "Other Busine ss", informed the General Council that
following consultations between the respective Working Party Members and the authorities of
Bhutan, Ethiopia and Yemen, and in accordance with usual WTO practice, the following nominations
had been agreed:
- Mr. Petritsch (Austria) as Chairman of the Working Party on the Accession of Bhutan
to replace the outgoing Chair, Mr. Kreid (Austria);
- Mr. McMillan (United Kingdom) as Chairman of the Working Party on the Accession
of Ethiopia;  and
- Mr. Röben (Germany) as Chairman of the Working Party on the Accession of
Yemen.
141. The General Council took note of this information.
15. Closure of the WTO premises during the meeting of the G-8 in Evian
142. The Chairman, speaking under "Other Business", informed the General Council that since
access to the WTO premises was likely to be difficult during the meeting of the G-8 in Evian, he had
agreed with the Director-General, following consul tations with the Swiss authorities and the Geneva
police, that the building should be closed on 2 and 3 June 2003.  Consequently, delegates and staffshould not come to the WTO during these two days and planned meetings would be rescheduled.
143. The General Council took note of this information.
__________