RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/BFA/48
12 July 2000
(00-2855)
Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 3 JULY 2000
1. The WTO Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration met on 3 July 2000 under the
chairmanship of Mr. H. Akil.  The terms of reference and composition of the Committee are set out in
document WT/L/44/Rev.1.  The agenda contained in document WTO/AIR/1336 was adopted.
I ADMINISTRATIVE UP-DATES AND PROGRESS REPORTS AS AT 15 JUNE 2000
A. CASH SITUATION AND STATEMENT OF OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS (CRP(00)10 AND
WTO/BFA/SPEC/47)
B. INSTALMENT PAYMENTS FOR COUNTRIES IN ARREARS (CONTRIBUTIONS FROM 1987
(CRP(00)11)
C. CONTRIBUTIONS OF OBSERVER COUNTRIES TOWARDS THE COST OF SERVICES PROVIDED BY
THE SECRETARIAT (CRP(00)12)
2. The Secretariat presented reports on the cash situation and statement of outstanding
contributions as at 15 June 2000, the instalment payments for countries in arrears, and the
contributions of Observer countries towards the cost of services provided by the Secretariat.  The total
contributions received from Members amounted to CHF 73,194,916 while contributions received
from Observers amounted to CHF 427,709.  The Working Capital Fund stood at CHF 7,729,930.Since 15 June 2000 the following Members had made payments: (i) Argentina, (ii) Bangladesh, (iii)
Cameron, (iv) Grenada, and (v) Italy.  As of 15 June 2000, there were three Members in Category I
and four in Category II, while in Category III there were six and in Category IV, sixteen.  Uganda had
paid all arrears including arrears for 1987 and earlier years and was, therefore, no longer listed under
the administrative measures.  With regard to Observers, (i) Georgia, and (ii) Lebanon, had made
payments after 15 June 2000.
3. The Committee took note of the reports.
II. ASSESSMENT OF ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE 2000 BUDGET AND
ADVANCE TO THE WORKING CAPITAL FUND: ACCCESSION OF GEORGIA
4. Consequent to the accession to the WTO of Georgia on 14 June 2000 (document
WT/BFA/W/47), the Committee recommends to the General Council that a pro rata contribution
to the 2000 budget amounting to CHF 10,405 be assessed on this Government.  This assessment,
calculated as from 14 June 2000, is based on an annual contribution of 0.015 per cent, taking
into account the international trade figures (i mports plus exports in goods, services and
intellectual property rights) of Georgia for the years 1994-1996.  Furthermore, on the basis of
the level of the Working Capital Fund of CHF 7,729,930 the Committee recommends to the
General Council to assess an amount of CHF 38,650 on the Government of Georgia as an
advance to the Fund .WT/BFA/48
Page 2
III. NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE WTO
5. The Deputy Director-General responsible fo r Budget, Finance and Administration introduced
document WT/BFA/W/41/Add.1 and indicated that the document had incorporated the comments
made by the Members in the last meeting.  Accordingly, the Committee on Budget, Finance andAdministration would be expected to express an opinion on each and every proposed contribution
even where the contribution would involve no additional financial liability for the WTO.  Paragraph 4
proposed that non-governmental contributions would go exclusively to the purposes specified in
advance as those to be supported by private sector trust funds.  The uses of such funds were provided
in the Annex attached to the do cument; such possible uses avoided “core” budget-supported activities
and those which could give rise to conflicts of interest.  Paragraph 5 had been revised to prohibit both
the use of the WTO logo and secondment of staff from donors’ organizations.  Further paragraph 2(a)opened the possibility for acceptance of “in-kind” contributions in the form of goods or services.  It
was important to state this explicitly, in particular in connection with paragraph 5(b).  Given such
total prohibition on secondment, acceptance of a donation of services in kind still made it possible to
accept, for example, servicing personnel having maintenance or installation-type functions.
6. Members thanked the Secretariat for the preparation of the document.  One Member
suggested, and was supported by other Members, that in view of the fact that more deliberations
would be required to clarify some aspects of the matter, it would be appropriate to set up a working
group on the question to continue the deliberations.  Another Member indicated that if any decisions
had to be made on whether or not to accept a donation (i.e. not all donations were accepted
automatically) then Members had to make those decisions.  And that the projects to which donationsshould be put should be those decided by consensus by Members – and primarily related to technical
assistance and capacity building.
7. The Committee agreed to set up such a working group as soon as possible.  The Chairman of
the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration would conduct informal consultations with
members to identify a Chairman for the working group which would be open to all Members.
IV. REPORT OF WORKING GROUP ON CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE WTO BUDGET
8. The Chairman of the Working Group on contributions to the WTO Budget recalled that
Members had suggested that the question of large variations of Members’ share of contributions from
one year to another be examined in 2000.  The Working Group had met on 30 May and 9 and
23 June 2000 to exchange views on the matter.  The Secretariat had prepared various simulations as
proposed by the Members.  Without prejudice to the final outcome of the discussions in the WorkingGroup, the Chairman indicated that it was considered important and just to have homogeneity in the
statististical data i.e. the years that would be taken into consideration in the calculation of
contributions.  The Working Group would continue its deliberations on the matter.
9. A Member indicated that his Government considered that the WTO Members’ contributions
to the WTO Budget should be commensurate to their trades shares, and that the most recent datashould be taken into consideration.
10. The Committee took note of the oral report.
V. MERIT PAY
11. A Member of the Secretariat indicated that the document WT/BFA/W/48 set out the
amendments to the Staff Rules required to implement the performance award programme.  The
amendments would take effect on 1 September 2001 when the first performance awards were due to
be paid.  The performance award programme would comprise three main elements:WT/BFA/48
Page 3
(i) the pensionable increases for satisfactory performance by staff members whose
salaries lie within the corresponding salary range;
(ii) the non-pensionable awards, of two types: (a) those staff whose performance is
judged to be satisfactory in the light of the performance reports but whose position in
the salary range did not allow the full granting of a pensionable increase.  Thebalance of that increase would be granted as a non-pensionable award: and (b) those
staff whose performance was judged to be excellent in the light of the performance
reports.  Those staff would receive, in addition to the award for satisfactory
performance, a non-pensionable bonus; and
(iii) the non-granting of any increase or award for staff whose performance required
improvement.
12. Further, the Secretariat explained that “pensionable” meant essentially that the recipient
would move through the range as a result of the increase in terms of both net remuneration and
pensionable remuneration.  “Non-pensionable” meant that the recipient was given a lump sum which
did not alter the position of the recipient in the salary range.  The pensionable increase and non-
pensionable awards for satisfactory service would take the form of a uniform lump sum amount for
each grade.  The non-pensionable bonus for excellent performance would be calculated at a rate of 2.5per cent of the annual net salary of the recipient and paid as a lump sum.
13. It was noted that there would be a one-time additional cost associated with the introduction of
non-pensionable awards: the new feature in the proposed programme, as distinct from the pensionable
increases which correspond in their impact to the existing periodic increments.  The Secretariat
stressed that the cost of the performance award programme would be carefully monitored in order to
ensure that, in any one year, the cost of the programme would not exceed the limit of 2 per cent of the
total net salary set in the Staff Regulation 6.5.
14. Members thanked the Secretariat for the detailed explanations.  Some Members indicated
concerns that the cost would exceed the ceiling of 2 per cent of the total net salary budget set in Staff
Regulation 6.5.  Others requested information on clear criteria of the three categories and themechanism for ensuring fair distribution of all categories.  Some Members showed concern over the
non-pensionable awards for staff member at the end of the scale.  One Member requested, and was
supported by others, that the Secretariat provide simulations, based on the present staffing table,
which would show the impact of the proposal on salary costs.  Another Member requested
information on the number of staff members involved in the various categories.  Further, one Member
requested that the Secretariat provide the figures to back up their assertion that when 100% of staff
were performing satisfactorily and 20% excellently, they could still meet the 2% limit.
15. The Secretariat explained that the proposed performance award programme had been
designed to ensure that the costs remained stri ctly within the 2 per cent ceiling.  The one-time
additional cost generated by the non-pensionable awards required the phasing-in of the full
programme to ensure compliance with the 2 per cent ceiling.  The payment of non-pensionable
awards to staff members at the end of the scale was justified by the need to ensure equitable treatmentof all staff with satisfactory performance.  The proposals were based on the assumption that all staff
were performing satisfactorily and that 20 per cent of those staff were eligible to receive the non-
pensionable bonus for excellent performance.  At present, approximately 30 per cent of the staff were
at the end of the grade, so that pensionable awards  would be payable only to 70 per cent of the staff.
If the proportion of staff eligible for pensionable awards were to increase, the number of bonusespayable for excellent performance would be reduced in order to remain within the 2 per cent ceiling.
The Secretariat would be happy to provide the additional information requested.WT/BFA/48
Page 4
16. The Committee took note of the presentation of the Secretariat and the remarks of the
Members.  Deliberations on the matter would continue at the next meeting based on the simulations,
and additional information that the Members had requested the Secretariat to provide.  In the
meantime, informal consultations between the Members and Secretariat on the matter would continue.
POINT FOR DECISION: Paragraph 4
__________