RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/C/M/33
12 May 1998
(98-1873)
Council for Trade in Goods
21 April 1998
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
Held in the Centre William Rappard
on 21 April 1998
Chairperson:  Mr. R. Saborío Soto
The meeting was convened by WTO/AIR/821.  The proposed agenda contained in document
G/C/W/112 was adopted as follows, with the inclusion of items 7 and 8 under "other business":
Page
1. Market Access Matters
(a) Committee on Mark et Access ...................................................................................  2
- Periodic Report of the Committee (G/MA/59)
(b) Harmonized System - Requests fo r Extensions of  Waivers .....................................  2
(i) Bangladesh (G/L/227, G/ C/W/107/Rev.1) .....................................................  2
(ii) Nicaragua (G/L/230, G/C/ W/110 and Corr.1) ................................................  3
(iii) Sri Lanka (G/L/229 and Rev.1, G/C/W/109) .................................................  3
(c) Zambia - Renegotiation of  Schedule XXVIII ...........................................................  3
- Request for an Extension of the Waiver (G/L/228, G/C/W/108)
(d) Decision on the Introduction of Harmonized System ...............................................  3
Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff Concessions on 1 January 1996
- Extension of the Time-Limit (G/C/W/111)
2. Trade Facilitation (paragraph 21 of the Singapore Ministerial Declaration
(WT/MIN(96)DEC)) .............................................................................................................. ..  4
3. Understanding on the Interpretation of Article  XVII of the GATT 1994 ...............................  6
- Adoption of a Revised Questionnaire on State Trading (G/STR/3)
4. Free Trade Agreement betwee n Hungary and Israel ................................................................  7
- Communication from the Parties (WT/REG54/N/1, WT/REG54/1)
5. Free Trade Agreement between Israel and the Czech Republic ..............................................  8
- Communication by the Parties (W T/REG56/N/1, WT/REG56/1 and 2)
6. Free Trade Agreement between Isr ael and the Slovak Republic .............................................  8
- Communication by the Parties (W T/REG57/N/1, WT/REG57/1 and 2)G/C/M/33
Page 2
7. Chairperson of the Mark et Access Committee ........................................................................  8
8. Date of the next meeting .................................................................................................... ......  9
_________________
1. Market Access Matters
(a) Committee on Market Access
- Periodic Report of the Committee (G/MA/59)
1.1 Mr. Tagma, Chairman of the Committee on Market Access, introducing the periodic report
contained in document G/MA/59, stated that in accordance with the procedures adopted by the Market
Access Committee regarding the submission of factual information on requests for waiver extensions,
the draft report to this Council had been circul ated in document G/MA/SPEC/7 and was examined by
the Market Access Committee at its meeting of 26 March 1998.  Following this meeting, the report
was revised taking into account the discussions that had taken place at that meeting.
1.2 The report summarized the activities of the Committee since its last report to the Council
made at the end of 1997, and indicated in Annexes I and II the reasons why certain Members whose
waivers expired on 30 April 1998 had to request an extension for a new period of six months, i.e. until
31 October 1998.  In spite of efforts made by the delegations concerned to lift their reservations or to
specify their general reservations, forty Members requested waivers or waiver extensions in
connection with the introduction of HS96 changes to schedules of concessions and four Members hadmade requests in connection with the transposition of pre-Uruguay Round schedules of concessions
into the Harmonized System.  He encouraged the delegations concerned to make the necessary efforts
to conclude as soon as possible any pending negotiations and to limit as much as possible any waiver
requests in the future.
1.3 The Council took note of the report.
(b) Harmonized System - Requests for Extensions of Waivers
1.4 The Chairman drew attention to the communi cations from Bangladesh, Nicaragua and Sri
Lanka, containing requests for extension of waivers which were going to expire on 30 April 1998.
These requests for waiver extensions had been made in the context of the transposition of these
Members' schedules into the Harmonized System, and in accordance with paragraph 1 of theUnderstanding in respect of Waivers of Obligations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade 1994.
1.5 These requests for waivers were before the Council for Trade in Goods for its consideration
pursuant to Article IX of the WTO Agreement.  Draft decisions had been circulated to assist the
Council in its consideration of these requests.
(i) Bangladesh (G/L/227, G/C/W/107/Rev.1)
1.6 The Chairman stated that the request for a waiver extension from Bangladesh had been
circulated in document G/L/227 and a draf t decision in document G/C/W/107/Rev.1.
1.7 The Council approved the extension of the waiver granted to Bangladesh until
31 October 1998, and recommended that the draft decision be forwarded to the General Council for
adoption.G/C/M/33
Page 3
(ii) Nicaragua (G/L/230, G/C/W/110 and Corr.1)
1.8 The Chairman stated that the request for a waiver extension from Nicaragua had been
circulated in document G/L/230 and a draft deci sion in document G/C/W/110 and Corr.1.  The
corrigendum affected only the English version of this document.
1.9 The Council approved the extension of the waiver granted to Nicaragua until
31 October 1998, and recommended that the draft decision be forwarded to the General Council for
adoption.
(iii) Sri Lanka (G/L/229 and Rev.1, G/C/W/109)
1.10 The Chairman stated that the request for a waiver extension from Sri Lanka had been
circulated in document G/L/229 in Spanish and Fr ench and in document G/L/229/Rev.1 in English.
The draft decision was contained in document G/C/W/109.
1.11 The representative of New Zealand stated that long standing Article XXVIII negotiations
were still in progress with Sri Lanka.  New Zealand could accept that this request for a waiver
extension went forward to the General Council for adoption, but hoped that the negotiations with
Sri Lanka could be finalized at an early opportunity.
1.12 The representative of Sri Lanka expressed appreciation to New Zealand for being flexible on
this issue and looked forward to concluding the negotiations as soon as possible.1.13 The Council took note of the statements, approved
 the extension of the waiver granted to
Sri Lanka until 31 October 1998, and recommended that the draft decision be forwarded to the
General Council for adoption.
(c) Zambia - Renegotiation of Schedule XXVIII
- Request for an extension of the waiver (G/L/228, G/C/W/108)
1.14 The Chairman drew attention to the request by Zambia circulated in document G/L/228 for an
extension of a waiver granted to it in connection with the renegotiation of its schedule, and to a draft
decision in document G/C/W/108.
1.15 The representative of Zambia stated that his delegation had met twice with the delegation of
the European Communities to address some of the issues raised by the EC.  In his view these issues of
a conceptual nature could be resolved before the end of the next waiver extension.
1.16 The representative of the European Communities hoped that an agreement could be reached
before 30 April 1998.1.17 The Council took note of the statements, approved
 the extension of the waiver granted to
Zambia until 31 October 1998, and recommended that the draft decision be forwarded to the General
Council for adoption.
(d) Decision on the Introduction of Harmonized System Changes into WTO Schedules of
Tariff Concessions on 1 January 1996
- Extension of the Time-Limit (G/C/W/111)
1.18 The Chairman recalled that the General Council had adopted four decisions, thereby
suspending the application of the provisions of Article II of GATT 1994 until 30 April 1998, for the
purpose of enabling Members to implement the 1996 recommended amendments to the HarmonizedG/C/M/33
Page 4
System nomenclature.  He drew the Council's attention to the draft decision, contained in document
G/C/W/111 which now proposed to extend this time-limit until 31 October 1998.  The annex to this
draft decision listed Members who had requested an extension of their waivers, as well as additional
Members who had requested to be covered by this waiver decision.  The purpose was to give
Members more time to proceed with consultations or possible Article XXVIII negotiations.
1.19 The representative of the European Communities stated that his delegation had taken note of
the requests to extend the time-limit of waivers by the WTO Members listed in the annex to document
G/C/W/111.  In his view, certain of these WTO Memb ers might not need a further waiver extension if
reservations against their changes could be withdrawn by 30 April 1998.  The Communities wouldmake an effort to withdraw their reservations on certain schedules by that date.  Additionally,
pursuant to the commitment which the EC had take n at the Goods Council meeting in October 1997,
the Communities considered that all the general reservations they had made on WTO Member
schedules and which had not been specified by 30 April 1998 could be deemed to be withdrawn as of
that date.
1.20 The Council took note  of the statement, approved
 the extension of the waiver until
31 October 1998, and recommended that the draft decision be transmitted to the General Council for
adoption.
2. Trade Facilitation (paragraph 21 of the Singapore Ministerial Declaration
(WT/MIN(96)DEC))
2.1 The Chairman recalled that at the last meeting of the Council, it had been agreed that the
Secretariat prepare a factual paper on the Symposium on Trade Facilitation which was held on
9-10 March 1998.  He understood from the Secretariat that this paper was quite near to completion
and would be circulated soon.  At that meeting, there was also the suggestion that in the interim it
would be useful to have a checklist of issues raised during the Symposium.  The latter had beenprepared and circulated in document G/C/W/113.  As this document was issued only very recently,
and as delegations might not have had the opportunity to review it, he proposed that Members
consider the document in detail at the Council's next meeting on 5 June 1998, by which time the
factual paper would also be available.
2.2. The representative of the European Communities stated that the checklist of issues
(G/C/W/113) was useful as it was an important reminder of the range of problems faced by
international trade in this area, and of how mu ch importance the business and trade community, as
well as other international organisations, attached to simplification of trade procedures.  It also
demonstrated the high expectations they had of the WTO.  In fact, since the Symposium theInternational Chamber of Commerce had sent out a further request that WTO Members begin to
address these questions as a priority.  He was pleased to report that at the recent Asia-Europe Summit
meeting leaders adopted a trade facilitation action plan, which among other things pledged support to
the work programme in WTO.  So from both business and government, the interest in trade
facilitation continued to grow, the messages were clear, and it was up to Members now to decide how
to respond to these clear calls in favour of WTO action.  The checklist also contained a vast number
of ideas and recommendations.  It constituted a detailed agenda that Members could work through inthe next stage of the work programme.
2.3 The checklist, however, needed to be supplemented, as it did not deal with technical
assistance and cooperation, nor did it say much about the need for coordination of work carried out by
different international bodies.  It was also very brief on the transport sector, and  it did not address all
the possible improvements that could be made to existing WTO agreements.  Nonetheless, it was agood basis for the next phase of the work, and the other elements could be added.
2.4 The Council needed to determine the process to take the work forward.  The Singapore
ministerial mandate was clear on this:  the next stage was to carry out analytical work onG/C/M/33
Page 5
simplification of trade procedures and to assess th e scope for WTO rules.  The checklist together with
the other documents to be provided by the Secretariat would give Members the raw material for this
analytical phase.  Therefore, Members needed to reflect and come up with a solution on the process
necessary for this stage of the Singapore mandate.  The Communities had in the past proposed a sub-
group of this Council to carry out the analytical work, and while his delegation was flexible on
arrangements, it continued to think that this would be the most efficient way to organise the work.The Communities had held consultations with a number of delegations in the last few weeks which
had indicated broadening support for a process of this type starting.  There was also wide recognition
that Members now had to effectively carry out the Singapore mandate.
2.5 There were two ways of proceeding.  First, it would be necessary to study carefully the
substantive issues outlined in the checklist.  This should be done now in preparation for a full
discussion at the next Goods Council meeting on the issues raised by the Symposium and other
aspects delegations considered important.  Secondly, the Chairman could be invited to beginconsulting delegations as to how, in organizational terms, to take the work forward.  One possibility
might be to organize informal meetings of inte rested Members of the Goods Council - a mechanism
used successfully in the context of the major review of phase one of the Agreement on Textiles and
Clothing.  That would make it possible for any pro cedural decisions to be taken by the time of the
next Goods Council meeting.  Finally, Members needed to consider how this subject should be
addressed at the May Ministerial meeting.  It would be appropriate for the Ministerial to refer to the
Singapore work programme and express its expectation that, in order to implement the Singapore
decision, the analytical phase should now go ahead rapidly.
2.6 The representative of Switzerland welcomed the checklist of issues which was useful, as well
as the expected factual paper.  It would be possible for Members to start the analytical work on this
basis and by concentrating on aspects which were directly relevant in the WTO context.  This process
could also take place in informal meetings of the Goods Council.
2.7 The representative of Malaysia, speaking on behalf of ASEAN Members , stated that the
checklist would serve as a useful basis for further discussion.  The issues raised were multifaceted and
complex, and, from ASEAN's perspective, had to be  examined carefully.  ASEAN agreed with the
European Communities that Members needed an appropriate process to further consider this issue,
and took note of their specific proposal.  However, at this juncture, ASEAN would need to further
reflect on the matter.
2.8 The representative of Canada stated that the issue of trade facilitation was important in
international trade, and this importance was, in  his view, reinforced by the discussion and the
concerns raised by the private sector at the 9-10 March 1998 Trade Facilitation Symposium.  His
delegation was struck by the fact that the private sector had spoken in one voice on the existence of
real problems, and also when it had forwarded suggestions and ideas on what could be addressed.
The private sector had also made it clear that it had expectations that the WTO should become
involved actively in this area.  The checklist was an appropriate and accurate reflection of the issues,
concerns, suggestions and ideas raised by the private sector, and it along with the papers that were
distributed at the symposium and the forthcoming factual paper would be a useful guide for thediscussions.  It was time to begin the analytical stage, and while his delegation was flexible on the
approach, it believed that the Communities had proposed a sensible and pragmatic course of action.
Canada was, therefore, prepared to begin substantive discussions in informal discussions and
consultations and also at the next Council meeting. His delegation supported the Communities'
proposal that the Chairman engage in informal consultations on procedural matters.
2.9 The representative of Argentina stated that the Communities' proposal seemed reasonable.
However, he had two observations to make: firstly, with respect to the type of message that should beG/C/M/33
Page 6
incorporated into the Ministerial Declaration, he wished to make it clear that this should be a balanced
process and no subject matter should be privileged. Secondly, and this point was for reflection only,
Members might start thinking of imposing on themselves a sort of "standstill" in the area of trade
facilitation without creating new obligations.
2.10 The representative of Australia stated that a range of issues, concerns and suggestions was
raised during the Trade Facilitation Symposium, which had been reflected in the checklist and which
would also be reflected in the forthcoming factual paper.  She indicated the readiness of her
delegation to engage in substantial discussions at the Council's next meeting, and further stressed the
importance of the work on trade facilitation.
2.11 The representative of Hungary stated that his delegation supported the Communities' proposal
that analytical work should commence as soon as possible, and encouraged the Chairman to start
informal consultations on procedural issues soon.
2.12 The representative of Mexico stated that the checklist would be considered in detail at the
Council's next meeting which was scheduled for 5 June 1998.  He stated that thought would have to
be given to the Communities' proposal.  Likewise if informal consultations on the matter were to take
place, his delegation would wish to participate.  These consultations would permit Members to hear
different opinions.  However, the consultations should not prejudge the results.  As to the report to the
Ministerial Conference, he had understood that a format had been decided upon for standing WTObodies when reporting to Ministers, and it was his impression that the general criterion would have to
be applied in this case as well.
2.13 The Chairman proposed that the Council take note
 of the statements and revert  to this item at
its next meeting.  He also proposed that he undertake informal consultations to determine the process
to take the work on trade facilitation forward.
2.14 The Council so agreed.
3. Understanding on the interpretation of Article  XVII of the GATT 1994
- Adoption of a Revised Questionnaire on State Trading (G/STR/3)
3.1 The Chairman drew attention to the fact that paragraph 5 of the Understanding on the
Interpretation of Article XVII of the GATT 1994 mandated the Working Party on State Trading
Enterprises to review, in the light of the notificat ions received, the adequacy of the 1960 questionnaire
on state trading and the coverage of state trading enterprises notified.  He invited the Chairman of the
Working Party to introduce this item.
3.2 Mr Jacques Teyssier d'Orfeuil, Chairman of the Working Party on State Trading Enterprises,
stated that as a result of the Working Party's review of state trading notifications and of the adequacy
of the 1960 questionnaire, it had concluded that the 1960 questionnaire should be improved to provide
a more transparent basis for notifications, and had agreed on the revised questionnaire contained in
document G/STR/3 which was before the Council at this meeting.  The Working Party had
recommended that this revised questionnaire be put into operation for the full notifications period
beginning in 1998.  In addition, the Working Party had agreed to continue its work, in a way
consistent with its mandate, on possible further information needed to enhance transparency, and to
reconvene as early as possible to this end.
3.3 In order to take account of the postponement in circulating the request for notifications
necessitated by the date of adoption of the revised questionnaire, the Working Party had also agreedG/C/M/33
Page 7
that the deadline for submission of the 1998 new and full notifications be moved from 30 June 1998
to 30 September 1998.
3.4 The Chairman proposed that the Council take note  of the statement by the Chairman of the
Working Party on State Trading Enterprises, approve the revised questionnaire contained in
document G/STR/3 and agree to implement it beginning with the 1998 new and full notifications, and
take note of the postponement in the deadline established for the submission of new and full
notifications in 1998 from 30 June to 30 September 1998.3.5 The Council so agreed.
3.6 The representative of the United States stated that his delegation viewed the updated
notification questionnaire as a positive contribution to improving the transparency of state trading
enterprises.  It was important that this questionnaire be used for the new and full notifications required
this year.  However, the US and others would have preferred to have additional information available
on the practices of state trading enterprises, particularly import and export monopolies.  The reviewand scrutiny of state trading enterprises had to continue in the Working Party and other fora.  His
delegation was pleased that the Working Party would continue to pursue its agenda in an expeditious
manner, and intended to continue work to ensure that: 1) all state trading enterprises were reported as
required under WTO notification requirements; 2) privileges and activities of state trading enterprises
were fully transparent; and 3) state trading enterprises did not operate in a way that undermined themultilateral trading system.
3.7 The representative of Argentina said that his delegation fully agreed with the US statement.
3.8 The representative of New Zealand stated that his delegation welcomed the approval of this
new questionnaire which he said was a big improvem ent over the 1960 questionnaire on state trading.
If it were responded to fully, it would contribute to fulfilling the objectives that had been outlined bythe United States.
3.9 The Council took note of the statements.
4. Free Trade Agreement between Hungary and Israel
- Communication from the Parties (WT/REG54/N/1, WT/REG54/1)
4.1 The Chairman drew  attention to the notification from the parties to the Agreement circulated
in document WT/REG54/N/1.  The text of the Agreement had been circulated in document
WT/REG54/1.
4.2 The Chairman proposed that the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements carry out the
examination of the Agreement in accordance with the following terms of reference:
"to examine, in light of the relevant provisions of the GATT 1994, the Free Trade Agreement
between Hungary and Israel and to submit a report to the Council for Trade in Goods".
4.3 It was understood that the understanding read out by the Chairman of the Council for Trade in
Goods under item 7 of the Agenda of the meeting of the Council on 20 February 1995, as contained in
document WT/REG3/1, would apply mutatis mutandis  to the examination.  It was also understood
that, during the examination, due account would be taken of the intrinsic differences between customs
unions and free-trade areas.
4.4 The Council so agreed.G/C/M/33
Page 8
5. Free Trade Agreement between Israel and the Czech Republic
- Communication by the Parties (W T/REG56/N/1, WT/REG56/1 and 2)
5.1 The Chairman drew  attention to the notification from the parties to the Agreement circulated
in document WT/REG56/N/1.  The text of the Agreement had been circulated in
document WT/REG56/1 and 2.
5.2 The Chairman proposed that the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements carry out the
examination of the Agreement in accordance with the following terms of reference:
"to examine, in light of the relevant provisions of the GATT 1994, the Free Trade Agreement
between Israel and the Czech Republic and to submit a report to the Council for Trade in
Goods".
5.3 It was understood that the understanding read out by the Chairman of the Council for Trade in
Goods under item 7 of the Agenda of the meeting of the Council on 20 February 1995, as contained in
document WT/REG3/1, would apply mutatis mutandis  to the examination.  It was also understood
that, during the examination, due account would be taken of the intrinsic differences between customs
unions and free-trade areas.
5.4 The Council so agreed.
6. Free Trade Agreement between Israel and the Slovak Republic
- Communication by the Parties (W T/REG57/N/1, WT/REG57/1 and 2)
6.1 The Chairman drew  attention to the notification from the parties to the Agreement circulated
in document WT/REG57/N/1.  The text of the Agreement had been circulated in document
WT/REG57/1 and 2.
6.2 The Chairman proposed that the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements carry out the
examination of the Agreement in accordance with the following terms of reference:
"to examine, in light of the relevant provisions of the GATT 1994, the Free Trade Agreement
between Israel and the Slovak Republic and to submit a report to the Council for Trade in
Goods".
6.3 It was understood that the understanding read out by the Chairman of the Council for Trade in
Goods under item 7 of the Agenda of the meeting of the Council on 20 February 1995, as contained indocument WT/REG3/1, would apply mutatis mutandis  to the examination.  It was also understood
that, during the examination, due account would be taken of the intrinsic differences between customs
unions and free-trade areas.
6.4 The Council so agreed.
7. Chairperson of the Market Access Committee
7.1 The Chairman, speaking under "other business",  recalled that at the last meeting, it had been
agreed that the Council take note of the consen sus on the nomination of Mr. Ole Lundby (Norway) as
Chairman of the Market Access Committee, pending confirmation from Oslo of his availability.  He
had now been informed that the Norwegian Government had confirmed Mr Lundby's availability to
chair the Market Access Committee.  In case Mr. Lundby were to be recalled from Geneva before the
end of his term as Chairman, the Norwegian Go vernment had confirmed that Mr. Lundby would beG/C/M/33
Page 9
available to chair the remaining meetings of th e Market Access Committee and that the Government
would cover travel and other related costs.
7.2 The Council took note of the statement.
8. Date of the next meeting
8.1 The Council took note that its next meeting was scheduled for 5 June 1998, and that the
agenda for this meeting would close, at noontime, on 25 May 1998.
__________