RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/GC/M/31
9 November 1998
(98-4407)
General Council
14, 16 and 23 October 1998∗
MINUTES OF MEETING
Held in the Centre William Rappard
on 14, 16 and 23 October 1998*
Chairman:  Mr. John M. Weekes (Canada)
Subjects discussed:            Page
1. International Trade Centre UNCT AD/WTO.........................................................................2
(a) Report of the Jo int Advisory Group.......................................................................................... ..2
2. Accession of the Kyrgyz Republic ...........................................................................................4
(a) Report of the Working Party................................................................................................. ......4
3. Accession of Latvia .......................................................................................................... .........6
(a) Report of the Working Party................................................................................................. ......6
4. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement................................................................8
(a) Harmonized System – Requests for extensions of waivers ........................................................8
(b) Zambia – Renegotiation of Schedule LXXVIII..........................................................................9
(c) Decision on the introduction of Harmonized System changes into WTO schedules of
tariff concessions on 1 January 1996..........................................................................................9
5. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration ...........................................................10
(a) Report of the Comm ittee..................................................................................................... ......10
6. Work programme on el ectronic commerce..........................................................................10
7. Review of procedures for the circulation and derestriction of WTO documents .............10
8. Agreements between the WTO and the IMF and the World Bank....................................17
(a) Report by the Director-General .............................................................................................. ..17
9. Appointment of the next Director-General ..........................................................................19
10. Conditions of Service of WTO Staff......................................................................................26
(a) Draft decision.............................................................................................................. ..............26
11. High-level meeting on trade and environment.....................................................................34
(a) Proposal by the Eu ropean Comm unities...................................................................................34
                                                     
∗ This meeting of the General Council was adjourned on 23 October and will be reconvened at a later
date;  the discussion will be reflected in an addendum to this document.WT/GC/M/31
Page 2
12. High-level meeting on tr ade and development.....................................................................38
13. Chairmanship of the Working Parties on Accession of Georgia and Kazakstan .............39
14. State of play in accessi on working parties ............................................................................39
15. End-of-year review of developments in international trade and the trading
system......................................................................................................................... ..............39
Prior to adoption of the Agenda, representatives rose and observed a minute of silence in
memory of Mr. Charles Carlisle, former Deputy Di rector-General of the GATT, who had passed away
on 26 July.
Also prior to the adoption of the Agenda, the Chairman of the General Council proposed that
the meeting of 15, 16 and 22 July 1998, adjourned to allow for further consultations on the WTO
Secretariat and Senior Management Structure, be considered closed and that the question of WTOSecretariat and Senior Management Structure be taken up at a future meeting of the General Council,
as and when it becomes ready for consideration.
The representative of Pakistan, supported by India
 and Egypt , recalled that the question of the
WTO Secretariat and Senior Management Structure, aside from the number of Deputy Director-
General posts, encompassed a number of other aspects on which the discussion at the meeting in July
appeared to be close to a consensus;  these other aspects of the above-mentioned question might be
settled quickly.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed  to the Chairman's proposal.
1. International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO
(a) Report of the Joint Adviso ry Group (ITC/AG(XXXI)/171)
Mr. Benjelloun-Touimi (Morocco), Chairman of the Joint Advisory Group (JAG), introducing
the report of the JAG on its thirty-first session (ITC/AG(XXXI)/171), said that the JAG had examined
the following matters:  (i) ITC's technical cooperation activities in 1997 based on its annual report;
(ii) the evaluation of the ITC subprogramme "Product and market research, development and
promotion" and the ITC strategy for product and market development, and (iii) the work of the
Consultative Committee on the ITC Global Trust Fund. During the opening session the Deputy
Secretary General of UNCTAD and the Deputy Director-General of WTO had commended ITC's
Executive Director for the manner in which he had led the reform process which had given ITC a newculture of dynamism, professionalism, innovation and acceptance of responsible challenges.  They
had also referred to the enhanced cooperation among the three organizations, particularly in joint
activities such as the WTO/UNCTAD/ITC Joint Integrated Technical Assistance Programme in
Selected Least-Developed and Other African Countries.  In his statement to the Group, the Executive
Director had announced that ITC had virtually completed the refocusing exercise it had begun in1994.  He had highlighted ITC initiatives to strengthen its capacity to address the trade-related needs
of least-developed countries (LDCs) and had inform ed the Group that in the context of the follow-up
to the High-Level Meeting on LDCs, ITC had been asked to take on the responsibility for an
administrative unit to facilitate the day-to-day coordination among the agencies making up an Inter-
Agency Working Group:  IMF, ITC, UNCTAD, UNDP, World Bank and WTO.  Furthermore, an
office for LDCs had been created within the organi zation.  ITC was developing, refining and applying
at the country level generic technical assistance tools as the best possible way of achieving national
capacity building and optimizing the return on its limited resources.  ITC collaboration with other
organizations had increased.  In his opening remarks to the Group he had referred to the informal
consultations which he had convened in April 1998 on an appropriate supervisory mechanism for ITCand the implementation of the recommendations of the Office of Internal Oversight Services.  TheWT/GC/M/31
Page 3
Group had commended the Secretariat for its well-advanced response to the recommendations of the
Office for Internal Oversight Services which were consistent with the refocusing agenda previously
endorsed by JAG.  It had acknowledged the fact th at the follow-up to some of the recommendations,
including the closer integration of the technical cooperation programmes of ITC, UNCTAD and
WTO, was a continuing process, and had expressed the wish to be kept informed of further
developments.
On the supervisory mechanism a consensus had been reached for the review to take place
after the thirty-first session of JAG giving due regard to the outcome of the ongoing review of the
technical cooperation programmes of ITC's parent organizations and the functioning of the existing
supervisory bodies.  The conclusions of the informal consultations, including an open-ended session
which he would be holding later in the autumn, would be reported to the next JAG session in 1999.
These consultations would also cover the recent request by the Fifth Committee of the GeneralAssembly that JAG and the Trade Development Board consider the proposal of the Advisory
Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Qu estions (ACABQ) on new budgetary arrangements
for ITC, as called for by the General Council, before it decided on this issue.  This would imply a
major delay before arriving at a solution to the concerns expressed by the General Council.  The
Group had unanimously expressed its appreciation to the Executive Director and the Secretariat for
ITC's progress in defining and implementing a new strategic orientation, in pursuing its management
reform, intensifying cooperation with other organizations and in reporting clearly and
comprehensively on its activities.  It had discussed the technical cooperation activities in 1997 and
had made a number of observations for future consideration.  The Group had welcomed the new
product and market development strategy.  It had also expressed its appreciation for the contributionthat the Global Trust Fund and its Consultative Committee had made to ITC's work programme.  The
Group had also made special mention of its apprecia tion for the excellent presentations given in the
informal JAG session on the Competitiveness Challenge for SMEs and congratulated the Secretariat
on the initiative taken to organize an "open house" for JAG participants. Finally, on behalf of the
Group, he expressed gratitude to the Governments of Belgium, Canada, China, Denmark, Finland,
France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Sw eden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, which
had announced confirmed or possible voluntary cont ributions to ITC for its technical cooperation
programme.
The representative of Chile, speaking on behalf of GRULAC
 expressed satisfaction for ITC's
progress in defining and applying a new strategic orientation through its administrative reforms and
intensification of cooperation with other organizations, as well as in preparing a clear and completereport on its activities.  He recognized that the issue of adequate supervisory mechanism of the ITC
would be taken up after the thirty-first session of the JAG, bearing in mind the results of the ongoing
review of the technical cooperation programmes of the parent organizations of the ITC and the
functioning of the present supervisory bodies.  He considered very positive the evaluations that were
being conducted on the various technical cooperation programmes under the ITC.  These evaluationswere useful management tools, making it possible for Members to know the status of each
programme. It was important that ITC maintained an on-going and increasing cooperation both with
UNCTAD as well as with WTO and other international organizations.  He expressed gratitude for the
contribution that the Global Trust Fund and its Consultative Committee had made to the ITC work
programme.  The ITC had now become a more stre amlined, efficient forward-looking institution and
it had made considerable progress in facing future challenges.  In GRULAC's view, it was necessary
that the beneficiary countries be able to give their views on the various programmes financed by the
Global Trust Fund.  In this respect the meeting of the Consultative Committee which would be held
towards the end of October would be an excellent opportunity for such an exchange of views, during
which GRULAC hoped to make contributions.
The Chairman, on behalf of the General Council, expressed appreciation for the useful and
valuable work of the ITC.WT/GC/M/31
Page 4
The General Council adopted the report in ITC/AG(XXXI)/171 and took note  of the
statements.
2. Accession of the Kyrgyz Republic
(a) Report of the Working Party (WT/ACC/KGZ/ 26 and Corr.1, Add.1, Add.1/Corr.1 and Add.2)
The Chairman recalled that in April 1996, the General Council had established a Working
Party to examined the request of the Kyrgyz Re public for accession to the WTO Agreement.  The
report of the Working Party was now before th e General Council in document WT/ACC/KGZ/26 and
Corr.1, Add.1, Add.1/Corr.1 and Add.2.
Mrs. Dubois-Destrizais (France), introducing the report of the Working Party on behalf of its
Chairman, Mr. Metzger (France), said that the Working Party had held several meetings during the
period 1997-1998 to examine the foreign trade regime of the Kyrgyz Republic and its evolution in the
direction of conformity with WTO rules and disciplines.  Simultaneous to this multilateral exercise,
interested WTO Members and the Kyrgyz Republic had also pursued bilateral market access
negotiations for goods, including agriculture and services.  Documents WT/ACC/KGZ/26/Add.1 and
Corr.1 of the Working Party's Report reproduced Schedule XCLII on goods;  Add.2 reproducedSchedule XCLII on services.
This documentation had been adopted by the Working Party at its meeting on 17 July 1998
and on an ad referendum  basis.  Members of the Working Party had noted with particular appreciation
the impressive efforts made by the Kyrgyz Repub lic in putting into place the very comprehensive
legislative programme necessary to implement the WTO Agreements by the date of accession to the
WTO.  The success achieved by the Kyrgyz Republic in this critical area had ensured that it would be
an effective participant in this Organization im mediately on entry.  The Appendix to the Report
reproduced a draft decision on accession of the Kyrgyz Republic and a draft Protocol of Accession.
In accordance with usual WTO practice, the Prot ocol of Accession incorporated the specific
commitments undertaken by the Kyrgyz Republic in relation to matters negotiated in the Working
Party.  These commitments included, inter alia , the submission of information concerning the on-
going privatization programme, seasonal duties, other duties and charges, internal taxes on imports,
import licensing procedures, the customs valuation regime, export regulations, the trading activities of
State-owned enterprises, and membership in the Agreements on Government Procurement and Trade
in Civil Aircraft.  The Kyrgyz Republic would be the first country of the Commonwealth of
Independent States with an economy in transition to a market economy system to become a Memberpursuant to Article XII of the WTO Agreement.  On behalf of the Chairman of the Working Party, he
wished to pay tribute to the openness, spirit of cooperation and flexibility demonstrated by Members
by the Kyrgyz Republic in the course of arduous negotiations which had often broken new and
difficult ground.  Without these it would not have been possible to achieve the negotiations in such a
short period of time, outstanding in the, still short but already significant, history of WTO accessions.
The representative of the Kyrgyz Republic, speaking as an observer, stated that his country's
accession to the World Trade Organization was one of the most important events on the way to
strengthening of its independence.  The process of negotiation had been a good test of maturity and
firmness as well as a good school for learning the WTO system.  He expressed gratitude to Membersof the Working Party and to its Chairman for their support had finally had led the Kyrgyz Republic to
the successful completion of the negotiation process.  The Kyrgyz Republic had stood through the
difficult time of the transitional period and had started laying a reliable foundation for the creation of
a future prospering state.  The main results of his country's efforts were political stability, civil peace,
further democratisation and deepening of economic reforms.  There was still a long a complicatedway to implement proclaimed high ideals, principles, and norms of its Constitution.  The Kyrgyz
Republic had been negotiating it accession to the WTO consciously and according to its convictions.
This step had not been simple, but necessary for the future of his country's people and for the future ofWT/GC/M/31
Page 5
its economy.  He assured Members of their commitment to implement all the obligations undertaken
within the framework of its accession to the WTO.
The representatives of India, Turkey , Indonesia on behalf of the ASEAN countries , the Czech
Republic also on behalf of Bulgaria, Hungary, Po land, Romania, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia,
Pakistan, Cuba , Chile on behalf of GRULAC , Egypt  and the United States , supported the accession of
the Kyrgyz Republic to the WTO Agreement.
The representatives of India, Turkey , Pakistan  and Cuba  underlined the importance of their
respective political, historical and commercial ties with the Kyrgyz Republic.
The representatives of Turkey and the Czech Republic also on behalf of Bulgaria, Hungary,
Poland, Romania, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia wished the Kyrgyz Republic every success in its
function as a WTO Member, and hoped that other acceding countries of the region would also join the
WTO soon.
The representative of India said that since February 1996, the Kyrgyz Republic had worked
towards its early accession in a fully constructive spirit.  For a country that was at the same time
undertaking a process of transition to a market-based economy, it was no mean achievement to
overcome bottlenecks to institute a domestic legal framework, and associated administrative
procedures and enforcement mechanisms, that had to meet the requirements of the accession process
as well as the aspirations of the WTO membership for market access in goods and services.  The
general policy of the Kyrgyz Republic was to create a broad-based market economy, and to notmaintain any policies that would distort trade.   The Protocol of Accession documented the
commitment of the Kyrgyz Republic, in particular, to  ensure from the date of its accession to the
WTO that all of its laws and regulations relating to the right to trade in goods, and all fees, charges or
taxes levied on such rights, as well as all internal taxation, would be in full conformity with its WTO
obligations.  The Kyrgyz Republic had also committed that it would adopt the Harmonized Rules ofOrigin once finalized by the WTO in cooperation with the World Customs Organization.  Their
standards and certification requirements were not intended to distort or establish technical barriers or
to disrupt trade, and would be applied in conformity with the requirements of the relevant WTO
provisions.
The representative of Turkey welcomed the first of the Commonwealth Independent States as
a Member of the WTO and attached great importance to the integration of the whole region to the
multilateral trading system.  His delegation expressed appreciation to the determined work undertaken
by the Kyrgyz Republic to that end.
The representatives of Indonesia on behalf of the ASEAN countries and Pakistan  hoped that
countries that were in the process of joining the WTO would be able to complete their accession
process as soon as possible and would join the WTO in the near future.
The representative of the Czech Republic also on behalf of Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary,
Romania, the Slovak Republic, and Slovenia said that during the accession process the Kyrgyz
Republic had done very well in ensuring full complianc e of its foreign trade regime with all pertinent
WTO requirements.  In pursuing this objective, the Kyrgyz Republic had shown considerable
flexibility, enabling a consensus to be reached on terms of its accession to the WTO.  He commended
the Kyrgyz authorities for their efforts to meet successfully the economic challenges resulting from
transformation to a market economy.  Substantially improved market access conditions and
commercially valuable commitments undertaken by the Kyrgyz Republic showed a high degree ofopenness of its economy. WTO membership would help the Kyrgyz Republic in its further integration
into the world economy and would also serve the in terest of making the multilateral trading system
truly global.  He looked forward to future cooperation with the Kyrgyz Republic in the WTO context.WT/GC/M/31
Page 6
The representative of Cuba looked forward to increasing trade relations over the next years
within the framework of the WTO. He recogniz ed the tremendous efforts made by the Kyrgyz
Republic in order to join this organization.  The accession of the Kyrgyz Republic was a further
contribution toward the universality of the WTO.
The Chairman, on behalf of the General Council, welcomed the accession of the Kyrgyz
Republic.
The General Council approved the text of the Protocol of Accessi on (WT/ACC/KGZ/29) and
the text of the draft Decision on the Accession of  the Kyrgyz Republic 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 Decision on the Accessi on of the Kyrgyz Republic (WT/ACC/KGZ/28).
The General Council then adopted the report of the Working Party (WT/ACC/KGZ/26 and Corr.1,
Add.1, Add.1/Corr.1 and Add.2), and took note of the statements1 and of the expressions of support.
3. Accession of Latvia
(a) Report of the Working Party (WT/ACC/LVA/ 32, and Add. 1, Add. 1/Corr. 1 and Add. 2)
The Chairman recalled that in December 1993, the GATT 1947 Council had established a
Working Party to examine Latvia's request for accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade.  Subsequently, in pursuance of the decision regarding requests for WTO accession adopted by
the WTO General Council on 31 January 1995,2 the GATT 1947 Accession Working Party had been
transformed into a WTO Accession Working Party.  The report of the Working Party was now beforethe General Council in document WT/A CC/LVA/32 and Add.1, Add.1/Corr.1 and Add.2.
Mr.Theilgaard (Denmark), Chairman of the Working Party, introducing its report, said that
the Working Party had held several meetings during the period 1995-1998 to continue its intensive
examination of the rapidly evolving foreign trade regime of Latvia and Latvia's impressive anddynamic domestic reform process in the direction of conformity with WTO rules and disciplines.
Simultaneous to this multilateral exercise, interested WTO Members and Latvia had continued to
pursue bilateral market access negotiations for goods, including agriculture, and services.  Addendum
1 of the Working Party's report reproduced Schedule CXL111 on goods, and Addendum 2 reproduced
Schedule CXLIII on services.  This documentation had been adopted by the Working Party at its
meeting on 29 September 1998 on an ad referendum basis.  The Schedule on Goods would undergo
technical work by Latvia before 31 December 1998 in order to conform all tariff lines to the six-digitHarmonized System level.  The revised Schedule would be circulated to WTO Members and follow
the Procedures for Modification and Rectification of Schedules of Tariff Concessions.  Members of
the Working Party had noted with appreciation the efforts made by Latvia in putting into place the
comprehensive legislative programme necessary to implement the WTO Agreements by the date of
accession to the WTO.  This would ensure that Latvia would become an effective participant in thisorganization immediately upon entry.   The Appendix to the Working Party's report reproduced a draft
decision on Latvia's accession and a draft Protocol of Accession.  In accordance with usual WTO
practice, the Protocol of Accession incorporated the specific commitments undertaken by Latvia in
relation to certain matters negotiated in the Working Party.  These  commitments included, inter alia ,
(i)  the submission of information concerning developments in the privatization programme, and onother issues related to Latvia's economic reforms until 1 January 2002, (ii)  the binding of duties and
charges, (iii)  the application of internal taxes on imports, (iv) the elimination of quantitative
restrictions, (v) import licensing procedures, (vi) the customs valuation regime, (vii) export
regulations, (viii) the subsidies regime, (ix) the trading activities of state-owned enterprises, (x)
membership in the Agreements on Government Procurement and Trade in Civil Aircraft and, (xi)
                                                     
1 See also the statements by Chile (on behalf of GRULAC), Egypt and the US under item 3.
2 See WT/GC/M/1, item 4(g).WT/GC/M/31
Page 7
transit operations.  Latvia would be the first Baltic State to become a Member pursuant to Article XII
of the WTO Agreement.  He paid tribute to the continuous efforts, good will and spirit of compromise
shown all round which had enabled Members to overcome the many difficulties encountered in this
accession process.  The difficulties reflected the fact that many important national and multilateral
issues had been at stake in this accession. He noted that the traditional spirit of pragmatism of the
GATT – and now the WTO – had prevailed and allowed the conclusion of the work.  He hoped andtrusted that Latvia's successful accession process would help in clearing the way for other states in the
region whose accessions were at an advanced stage of work.
The representative of Latvia, speaking as an observer, said that Latvia had been devoted to the
process of accession to the GATT and since 1995 had striven to join the WTO.  Latvia attached the
greatest importance to the completion of its accession process, and considered its accession as a
logical milestone in its progressive and effective integration into the global trading system.  Theuniversal nature of the WTO ensured Latvia's participation in an open, fair, rule-based and dynamic
trade system, leading to the growth of world trade and investment.  Since its independence in 1991
Latvia had launched a comprehensive reform package in order to establish an economic system fully
based on the principles of a market economy.  Latvia's trade policy objectives were based on a liberal
trade regime for trade in goods and services, and with the completion of its accession process the highquality of Latvia's market-access commitments has been recognized by all Members.  The accession
process to the WTO had accelerated its reform process and Latvia had thus benefited from the WTO
even before gaining full membership.  Latvia looked forward to active participation in the work of the
WTO.
The representatives of the Czech Republic also on behalf of Bulgaria, Poland, Romania, the
Slovak Republic, and Slovenia, Indonesia on behalf of the ASEAN countries , Norway , New Zealand ,
Chile on behalf of the GRULAC, Iceland , Egypt  and the United States , supported the accession of
Latvia to the WTO Agreement.
The representatives of the Czech Republic also on behalf of Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland,
Romania, the Slovak Republic, and Slovenia, Norway  and Iceland  underlined the importance of their
respective close relations with Latvia.
The representatives of the Czech Republic also on behalf of Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland,
Romania, the Slovak Republic, and Slovenia looked forward to strengthening their respective trade
relations in the multilateral framework.
The representatives of the Czech Republic also on behalf of Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland,
Romania, the Slovak Republic, and Slovenia and Norway  hoped that the other Baltic States would
join the WTO very soon.
The representatives of Norway, New Zealand  and Egypt  expressed appreciation for the
positive spirit and the constructive approach which had characterized Latvia's negotiations
The representatives of New Zealand and Iceland  looked forward to working closely with
Latvia within the WTO framework.
The representative of the Czech Republic also on behalf of Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland,
Romania, the Slovak Republic, and Slovenia said that when applying for observer status in the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1992, Latvia had expressed its hope that this would be
only the first step in the development of closer li nks with the then GATT, with a view to eventual
accession.  He commended all those who had contributed to the success of the accession process
which had proceeded in a speedy manner, although the final package had been on the table for some
time, and commended Latvia for its efforts in paving the way for WTO membership.  Its significant
market-access commitments and the substantial changes in its foreign trade regime were bringing fullWT/GC/M/31
Page 8
compliance with the WTO rules and disciplines.  This would be beneficial not only to Latvia but also
to the multilateral trading system and its Members.
The representative of Indonesia on behalf of the ASEAN countries said that Latvia's accession
would strengthen the multilateral trading system, and he wished Latvia all the best in carrying out its
function and responsibility as a WTO Member.
The representative of Norway underlined the remarkably short period during which Latvia
had managed the transition from a centrally-planned economy to a market-based economy.
The representative of Chile on behalf of GRULAC, referring to accessions of the Kyrgyz
Republic3 and Latvia, said that the respective accession negotiations had been completed within a
short period of time.  Accession had required long and exhaustive work by the authorities requesting
accession as well as by WTO Members.  Both countries had demonstrated a clear willingness to
comply with the rules governin g international trade.  GRULAC welcomed the accessions both
countries and reiterated its interest to see the WTO membership increase so that the organization
might become truly universal.
The representative of Egypt hoped that countries in the process of joining the WTO would be
able to complete their accession processes soon and thus help to make the WTO universal.  In this
context, he said that no additional burden should be put on the countries which were seeking
accession, in particular the developing countries.
The representative of the United States said that the accession packages of both the Kyrgyz
Republic4 and Latvia were good ones, providing full implementation of all agreements.  Notably, only
limited derogations from immediate implementation were part of the packages.  Market access
packages were comprehensive and contained commercially viable commitments.  Her delegationconsidered the approval of the two accession packages as the first of many that would happen in the
coming years.
The Chairman, on behalf of the General Council, welcomed the accession of Latvia.
The General Council approved the text of the Protocol of Accessi on (WT/ACC/LVA/35) and
the text of the draft Decision on the Accession of Latvia 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 Decision on the Accession of Latvia (WT/ACC/LVA/34).  The General Council then
adopted the report of the Working Party (W T/ACC/LVA/32 and Add.1, Add. 1/Corr. 1 and Add.2),
and took note of the statements.
4. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement
(a) Harmonized System – Requests for extensions of waivers
(i) Bangladesh (G/L/255, G/C/W/118)
(ii) Nicaragua (G/L/256, G/C/W/119)
(iii) Sri Lanka (G/L/257, G/C/W/120)
                                                     
3 See item 2.
4 Idem.WT/GC/M/31
Page 9
The Chairman drew attention to the requests by Bangladesh (G/L/255), Nicaragua (G/L/256)
and Sri Lanka (G/L/257) for extensions until 30 April 1999 of waivers previously granted in
connection with their implementation of the Harmonized System, and to the related draft decisions
(Bangladesh - G/C/W/118, Nicaragua - G/C/W/119 and Sri La nka - G/C/W/120).
Mr. Saborío Soto (Costa Rica), Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods, reporting on the
Council's consideration of these requests, said th at the Council had agreed to forward the draft
decisions to the General Council for adoption.
The General Council took note of the report 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 decisions (Bangladesh – WT/L/277; Nicaragua – WT/L/278 and Sri Lanka –
WT/L/279).
(b) Zambia – Renegotiation of Schedule LXXVIII
(i) Request for extension of waiver (G/L/258, G/C/W/121)
The Chairman drew attention to the request fr om Zambia (G/L/258) for an extension until
30 April 1999 of the waiver previously granted in connection with its renegotiation of its schedule,
and to the related draft decision (G/C/W/121).
Mr. Saborío Soto (Costa Rica), Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods, reporting on the
Council's consideration of this request, said that the Council had agreed to forward the draft decision
in G/C/W/121 to the General Council for adoption.
The General Council took note of the report 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 (WT/L/280).
(c) Decision on the introduction of Harmonized System changes into WTO schedules of tariff
concessions on 1 January 1996
(i) Extension of time-limit (G/C/W/127)
The Chairman drew attention to the draft decision regarding the introduction of Harmonized
System changes into WTO schedules of tariff concessions on 1 January 1996 (G/C/W/127).
Mr. Saborío Soto (Costa Rica), Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods, reporting on the
Council's consideration of this matter, said that th e Council had agreed to forward the draft decision in
G/C/W/127 to the  General Council for adoption.  The draft decision listed in its annex 37 Members
which had requested the waiver extension until 30 April 1999.
The representative of Japan said that only three Members had finished the process of
rectifications and modifications to schedules for introduction of the 1996 Harmonized System
changes.  Since the collective waivers had been granted in January 1996, almost three years had
passed but no significant progress had been made.  In view of the next tariff negotiations, it was
problematic that only 1992 Harmonized System schedules would be the legal basis.  If 1996
Harmonized System schedules could not be used as a legal basis, one would have to compare thetariff rates of items that incorporated new technology by using the 1992 classification for these items.
Therefore, 1996 Harmonized System schedules had to be established as soon as possible.  He urged
Members to make the necessary efforts so that this extension would be the last.
The representative of Australia supported Japan's statement but said that there should be no
suggestion that a further round of industrial tariff negotiations would be contingent on completion ofWT/GC/M/31
Page 10
the 1996 Harmonized System negotiations.  However,  the completion these negotiations was an
important preparation for a new round of multilateral trade negotiations.  There had been little
progress, and an effort had to be made to finalize the Harmonized System negotiations.  He noted in
the context of preparation for a round of industrial tariff negotiations that it would be important that
consolidated information on tariff commitments be lodged with the Integrated Data Base.
The General Council took note of the report 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 (WT/L/281).
5. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration
(a) Report of the Committee (WT/BFA/37)
The Chairman said that the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration had not yet
completed its examination of the budget for submission of its report to the General Council.  He
therefore proposed that the General Council revert to this question as early as possible.
The General Council so agreed.
6. Work programme on electronic commerce (WT/L/274)
The Chairman recalled that this matter had been discussed at the Special Session of the
General Council on 24 and 25 September, at which a work programme had been established.Paragraph 1.2 of the work programme provided that the General Council "shall play a central role in
the whole process and keep the work programme under continuous review through a standing item on
its agenda".  For this reason, this item was on the agenda for consideration at the present meeting.
However, since Members had already had a full discussion on this subject at the September meeting,
and the relevant WTO bodies were only just beginning the work programme that has been assigned tothem, he did not anticipate holding another detailed discussion in the General Council at the present
meeting.
The representative of Jamaica recalled that a number of activities on electronic commerce
were taking place elsewhere.  It would be useful if information on these activities could be made
available to Members.
The Chairman said that he would request the Secretariat to examine how such information
could be provided.5
The General Council took note of the statements.
7. Review of procedures for the circulation and derestriction of WTO documents
(WT/L/160/Rev.1, WT/GC/W/88, WT/GC/W/92, WT/GC/W/98)
The Chairman recalled that paragraph 7 of the procedures for the circulation and derestriction
of WTO documents (WT/L/160/Rev.1), adopted in July 1996, provided that: "In the light of the
experience gained from the operation of these procedures and changes in any other relevant
procedures under the WTO, the General Council will review, and if necessary modify, the procedures
two years after their adoption".  He also recalled that Members had had an initial discussion on this
                                                     
5 Information on OECD activities on electronic commerce was subsequently provided in Job No. 5626
and 5708.WT/GC/M/31
Page 11
subject as part of the broader issue of transparency in WTO work at the General Council meeting in
July.  Since then, informal consultations had been held to discuss in particular, the question of review
of the procedures for the circulation and derestriction of documents.  As Members were aware,
proposals modifying the current procedures had thus far been circulated by the European
Communities, Canada and the United States.  Following further consultations with other delegations,
the United States and Canada were now submitting a joint proposal for the consideration of Members(WT/GC/W/106).
The representative of the United States recalled that since February her delegation had been
proposing to revise certain aspects of the 1996 decision on the circulation and derestriction
procedures.  Since July, when the United States' first proposal on changes to these procedures was
tabled, her delegation had held several rounds of consultations and discussed re-drafts with a large
number of delegations.  At the informal General Council meeting on 12 October, she had introduced arevised proposal.  As a result of comments made by delegations at that meeting, the proposal had been
fine tuned further, and her delegation was now submitting a joint US/Canada proposal in
WT/GC/W/106, which seemed to enjoy a wide degree of support among WTO Members and which
could be the basis for consensus in the General Council.
 In an effort to meet the concerns expressed by a number of delegations and to avoid any
confusion with the DSU procedures, the proposal now  referred to the circulation of information on
final panel reports.  The United States was now proposing that only the findings and conclusions be
circulated when available in all three languages.  There was no suggestion that any language was
favoured over others.  The descriptive portion would be "made available" pending its translation andthe official circulation of the panel report, but would not be circulated.  All Members would thus
receive the same information at exactly the same tim e in the official language of their choice.  This
included the parties to the dispute.  Because the issue of the relationship of this proposal to the DSU
kept coming up, and because some delegations had proposed addressing this proposal in the DSU
review, a few additional points needed to be made.  First, while the DSU clearly requiredconfidentiality of panel proceedings, there was ab solutely nothing in the DSU which suggested that
final panel reports were to be treated as anything but unrestricted documents.  The DSU talked only
about circulating the final panel report promptly.  Second, the DSB working procedures adopted in
June 1996 only addressed the "date of circulation"  issue and nowhere suggested that the information
in the final panel report should be treated as restricted.  Third, reference had been made to footnote 10
to paragraph (h) of the Appendix to the 1996 decision on the procedures on the circulation and
derestriction of WTO documents.  If paragraph (h) were "discontinued" because there was noconsensus on it in the DSU review, it would mean that the possibility of requesting restriction of a
panel report for a period of ten days would be eliminated and that there would be no circumstances
under which a final panel report could even be considered for restriction.  Moreover, paragraph (h)
had never been invoked.  For all of these reasons, it was clear that it was appropriate to consider this
proposal in the General Council and not in the DS U review.  With these changes included in the
present proposal, it should now be acceptable to WTO Members and the General Council should try
to adopt it at the present meeting.  This proposal was not only designed to address the issue of how to
deal with one-sided stories in the press stemming from leaks, but also with the problem of getting
information to all Members in a timely and accurate fashion.  With regard to the derestriction
procedures for various documents, the proposal combined the separately-tabled proposals from theUS, Canada and the EC.  This proposal had also taken account of comments by many delegations to
the effect that they could not accept immediate derestriction of meeting minutes but could live with a
shorter time-frame.  The other proposals reflected ideas that had been generally well-received in
earlier versions of the proposal.  She hoped that Members could support its adoption at this meeting
and noted that there were safeguard provisions in the case of both Secretariat background notes anddocuments submitted by Members.
The representative of Canada said that Canada had circulated a proposal on transparency and
derestriction (WT/GC/W/98).  As her Minister for International Trade had made clear in his statement
at the May Ministerial Conference, greater transparency of WTO activities was central to building andWT/GC/M/31
Page 12
reinforcing public support for the multilateral trading system.  Canada's proposal contained three
separate elements of transparency in the WTO context:  document derestriction policy, outreach to
civil society, and transparency issues related to the DSU.  The joint US/Canada proposal in
WT/GC/W/106 related to the first of the three elements, namely, document derestriction policy.  In
Canada's view, circulation of information on panel reports was not a transparency issue related to the
DSU but rather a matter of document circulation only.  The proposed derestriction procedures, whilenot responding to all the concerns that some elements of civil society had voiced about WTO work,
would help to foster an open and well-informed publ ic debate within Canada and elsewhere about the
WTO and the multilateral trading system.  She hoped that the General Council could agree at the
present meeting, or in the very near future, to adopt the proposal.  This would be a first step to
enhance transparency, while preserving the contractual intergovernmental nature of the WTO.
The representative of Indonesia, speaking on behalf of ASEAN Members
, said that ASEAN
supported the overall objective of enhancing the transparency of WTO operations.  Transparency
meant access to information without undermining confid entiality principles.  In attempting to enhance
transparency, Members should ensure that the intergovernmental and contractual nature of the WTO
was not compromised.  ASEAN welcomed the US/Canada proposal on the circulation of information
on final panel reports.  Immediate access to the findings and conclusions of a final panel report wouldhelp reduce the likelihood of leakage and public mis-representation.  ASEAN also supported the
suggestion relating to the descriptive portion of the final panel report, provided that the suggested
changes did not alter the working practices agreed to by the DSB in respect of dispute settlement
procedures and, more importantly, that they had no impact on Members' rights and obligations under
the DSU.  The agendas of meetings should be derestricted only after adoption by Members.  Thecirculation of agendas prior to their adoption by Members as unrestricted documents would create
unnecessary confusion since the proposed agendas of meetings might subsequently be altered.  The
minutes of meetings in their final version could be derestricted after three months.  Members should
be clear about the notion of "Member-approved".  ASEAN's understanding was that minutes of
meeting were considered approved if all Members who had made statements or expressed views hadstated their agreement with the draft prepared by th e Secretariat.  However, this rule would not apply
to certain WTO bodies which, by their nature, required a certain degree of confidentiality in their
proceedings.  Therefore, it would be useful to define the exact procedures for achieving final
Member-approved minutes of meetings.  Secretariat background notes, when they provided factual
information and did not represent collective or individual views of Members, could be circulated as
unrestricted documents.  However, a Secretariat background note could be circulated as restricted if
there was a consensus thereto.  With regard to documents submitted by WTO Members, proceduresunder paragraph (a) of the Appendix of WT/L/160/Rev.1 could be modified to allow for the same
rules as in paragraph (g), according to which documents submitted by WTO Members, other than in
the "W" series, were circulated as unrestricted unless otherwise stated by the Member concerned, and
would be considered for derestriction at the end of each six-month period.
The representative of Jamaica said that his delegation supported the joint US/Canada proposal
but wished to comment on two points.  First, to his understanding, the proposal relating to the
circulation of information on final panel reports excluded the Appellate Body reports.  Moreover, the
proposal stated that the findings and conclusions would be issued to the parties to the dispute.  Article
17.4 of the DSU made a distinction between parties and third parties.  He hoped that such a distinctionwould not be included in this proposal.  Second, the proposal should be clear about what was implied
by "Secretariat background notes", in terms of the distinction between notes produced on the
Secretariat's own responsibility and those which were Member-approved.
The representative of Norway said that his delegation attached the greatest importance to the
transparency issue because increased transparency would contribute to demystification of WTO work.
His delegation expressed appreciation to those delegations having submitted proposals and was ready
to go along with the joint US/Canada proposal.WT/GC/M/31
Page 13
The representative of Egypt said that his delegation was in favour of more transparency, more
clarity, and less ambiguity in WTO work.  Therefore, as many documents as possible should be issued
unrestricted, with the exception of provisional agendas, which should be derestricted upon adoption.
With respect to final panel reports, these should be derestricted once available in all official
languages.  This rule would also apply to the Appellate Body Reports.  At the Ministerial Conference
in May, his Minister had referred to the need to increase public awareness of WTO work.  Egyptconsidered that NGOs should take their place in WTO plenary and official meetings.  His delegation
would further elaborate on this matter when the time came.
The representative of Australia said that his delegation welcomed the joint US/Canada
proposal, which was a useful solution to what was essentially a procedural issue, separate from
broader and politically sensitive questions of transparency.  He noted, however, that other useful
WTO documents, such as for example those with "job numbers" and papers from the Committee onAgriculture's Analysis and Information Exchange Process were currently outside the scope of the
procedures.  He hoped that arrangements could be made to enable appropriate circulation of these
documents as well.
The representative of Hong Kong, China said th at the principles of circulating documents as
soon as possible and enhancing access to documents through derestriction in a timely fashion were
good ones.  Too many documents were still being circulated as restricted, or were remaining restricted
for too long.  He hoped that the improvements id entified in the joint US/Canada proposal could be
agreed upon and that further improvements would be made in the future.  On the circulation of
information on final panel reports, this proposal added to the transparency and efficiency of thedispute settlement procedures without affecting the balance of rights and obligations.  His delegation
supported the joint US/Canada proposal.
The representative of Cuba expressed concern with respect to procedural matters in dealing
with this item.  The practice that was followed at present, whereby in some cases proposals were not
submitted to Members within the normal deadlines, was not a welcome practice, nor a transparent
practice.  The procedures provided that documents should be circulated in the three official languages
at least 10 days before their consideration.  Members were apparently confronted with proposals that
did not meet these prerequisites.  Therefore, Cuba called upon the General Council for greater
transparency and increased cooperation in the presentation of documents within the agreed time-
frame.  With regard to the proposals on changes in the circulation and derestriction procedures, his
delegation was awaiting instructions.  However, with respect to the circulation of information on finalpanel reports, the DSU process was not completed until the very end of the procedure in the Appellate
Body.  Therefore, documents should not be published before the very final stages of that procedure.
Partial results should not be circulated to other bod ies or to the press.  This would be detrimental to
the organization, and to delegations from developing countries in particular.  Moreover, he agreed
with the European Communities that this issue should be discussed as part of the dispute settlementprocedure and not within the general framework of th e WTO.  He also agreed with the view expressed
by Mexico at an informal consultation that documents should be made available in all three WTO
languages.
The representative of India recalled that the 1996 procedures had been the results of detailed
deliberations between Members, ensuring both transparency in the functioning of the WTO and
protection of Members' rights, an aspect which was becoming increasingly important with the
growing interest of pressure groups in WTO work.  Nevertheless, his delegation had examined the
proposals very carefully and had expressed its views both in informal meetings organized within the
WTO and in plurilateral meetings organized by the United States.  India was extremely appreciativethat in the joint US/Canada proposal some of India' s points had been taken on board with regard to the
circulation of information on final panel reports.  In this context however, while its basic objective
was understandable, the suggestion needed to be exam ined carefully for its implications on the future
working of the dispute settlement mechanism, and should therefore be considered as part of the
mandated review of the DSU.  With regard to th e derestriction procedures for certain documents, heWT/GC/M/31
Page 14
said that while adopting the 1996 derestriction procedures, the General Council had specifically noted
that particular importance should be attached to the restrictive nature of the documents, so that
individual governments would be able to proceed accordingly in their handling of such documents.
This basic right which allowed governments to proc eed in a manner they deemed appropriate to their
domestic conditions should remain unfettered.  Therefore, paragraph (a) of the Appendix should
remain unchanged.  As to the proposal concerning minutes of meetings, India was still examining theneed for such a proposal.  His delegation would find it useful if the Secretariat could provide to
Members details on the procedures relating to the derestriction of minutes of meetings of other
international organizations, including the IMF and World Bank.  With respect to the proposal on
Secretariat background notes, India could not accept it in the present formulation, because the
Secretariat often prepared these notes at the request of individual Members or on its own initiative.
The unrestricted circulation of these notes before they were considered by the relevant WTO body
could lead to the wrong impression that the views expressed therein were those of the WTO as awhole.  This would severely prejudice Members' positions on the issues dealt with in the document.
As to the marking of the document initially circulated as a restricted document and a further review of
any decision, India had no comments to offer.  WTO working procedures were already very
transparent.  Therefore, India would not like to se e them changed without being convinced of the need
to do so. Moreover, the accountability of the WTO would not be enhanced by simply proposing toincrease transparency.
The representative of Switzerland welcomed the joint US/Canada proposal and hoped that
this would help Members to move the discussion forward.  His delegation was in favour of
unrestricted circulation of WTO documents to the greatest extent possible, provided that delegationshad the opportunity to protect politically sensitive documents, which was presently the case.  With
regard to the circulation of information on final pa nel reports, Switzerland would be ready to go along
with the proposal if there was a consensus thereon.  Switzerland also supported the proposal
concerning documents in the "W" series.  As to minutes of meetings, Switzerland supported the
proposal with the understanding that the possibility of restricting such documents, as provided in
WT/L/160/Rev.1, remained.  With regard to Secretariat background notes, Switzerland supported the
proposal with two reservations relating to work ing documents of the WT/BFA/SPEC/- series and
Balance-of-Payments documents for which present procedures should continue to apply.
The representative of Korea said that his delegation could support the joint US/Canada
proposal.  He recalled that at the informal consultation on 12 October, his delegation had expressed
the hope that in relation to the circulation of information on formal panel reports, due considerationwould be given to the interests of the parties to the disputes, with regard to the procedures for
distribution of panel reports.  His delegation believed that the joint proposal as a whole
accommodated the various views and comments made by other delegations, achieved a broad balance,
and could serve as a basis for an early consensus.
The representative of the European Communities said that his delegation was anxious to see
progress made in this area and for that purpose, the Community had presented a proposal
(WT/GC/W/92) to revise the 1996 procedures for the circulation and derestriction of WTO
Documents.  This proposal provided for the immediate derestriction of four categories of WTO
documents:  documents submitted by Members, minutes of meetings, agendas of meetings andSecretariat background notes.  In his delegation's view, a decision by the General Council to take
action on a broader policy of document derestriction along these lines would strengthen the WTO as
an institution by providing fuller and more rapid information on WTO activities.  The joint
US/Canada proposal coincided, to a large extent, with elements of the Community's proposal and
incorporated some of its suggestions.  However, unlike the EC proposal and the initial US proposal,the revised text did not cover meeting agendas, and provided that in the case of minutes of meetings,
derestriction would be delayed for three mont hs.  The Community did not see any reason why
meeting agendas should be kept confidential and favoured a more rapid derestriction of minutes of
meetings.  First, the Community attached the utmo st importance to improved transparency in WTO
dispute settlement and would soon present ideas within the framework of the DSU review.  Second,WT/GC/M/31
Page 15
the principle of equality among the three official languages in the WTO had to be strictly respected.
Therefore, the Community had some concerns with the joint US/Canada proposal on the circulation of
information on final panel reports.  First and foremost, the principle of linguistic equality was not
respected.  Second, the Community was not convinced that the issue could be delinked from the DSU
review.  At least one aspect of this proposal appeared to imply a change in the provisions of the DSU.
The provision in Appendix 3 on "Working Procedures " which envisaged a three-week period in which
the final report was issued only to the parties to  the dispute, would be eliminated under the joint
proposal to circulate findings and conclusions at the same time that the final report was issued to the
parties.  While the Community remained open to  consider whether such a three-week delay was
necessary, this appeared to be an issue that needed to be tackled within the framework of the DSU
review.  The Community was ready to work with Members in order to find satisfactory solutions to
these points.
The representative of Argentina said that his delegation would always support efforts toward
ensuring public understanding of the work, objectives and decisions of the WTO.  To this end, his
delegation welcomed the proposals made, and in particular the joint US/Canada one.  He was not sure,
however, that this was the only form of achieving greater transparency.  With regard to the circulation
of final reports, his delegation supported the joint US/Canada proposal.  However, for practicalreasons, Members should find a formula to ensure that the parties had such information at least a few
days or a few hours before the press, so that they could inform their governments appropriately and
explain to the public and to their national institutions the meaning of the different decisions.  With
regard to Secretariat background notes, he shared the views expressed by several delegations that they
should be circulated as restricted, and proposed that these could be derestricted 15 days aftercirculation if no request to the contrary had been received by the Secretariat.  As to the proposal to
review the procedures after two years, he did not believe it to be necessary since the General Council
had the capacity to revert to the issue as required.
The representative of Japan expressed appreciation for the joint US/Canada proposal and said
that like Canada and other delegations, Japan believed that a balance had to be struck between the
effort to improve the transparency of the organization and the need to preserve its intergovernmental
character as a forum for negotiation.  The joint US/Canada proposal had been improved in that
respect.  However, on the circulation of information on final panel reports, Japan understood that the
"descriptive" portion was made available for information purposes.  On the derestriction of documents
submitted by Members and of Secretariat background notes, provisions to maintain the necessary
confidentiality of these documents would have to be made clear.  With these technical clarifications orimprovements incorporated, Japan could fully support the US/Canada proposal.
The representative of New Zealand welcomed the joint US/Canada proposal, which he said
provided Members with an immediate way forward.  With respect to the proposal on derestriction of
certain documents, he believed that once categories of documents like minutes had been circulated toMembers in the three WTO languages, there were no compelling reasons for maintaining any
additional period for derestriction.   New Zealand would have supported a more ambitious change to
the current rules than what was reflected in the join t proposal, but recognized that the latter sought to
find a middle ground.  With respect to the circulation of information on final panel reports, New
Zealand fully supported the proposal. It was clear that there were particular reasons to makeinformation which was of importance to the membership available in a timely way.  This proposal did
not affect the DSU and there was thus no basis for arguing that this move needed to await the DSU
review.  New Zealand supported early action on ea ch of the points, as outlined in the proposal.
The representative of Mexico said that while delegations had referred to this matter as one of
transparency, the WTO was in fact transparent.  The real issue related to timely information.
Documents concerning an issue which had still not been duly discussed among Members should not
be made available to the public, because Members would then be under pressure of lobbies or other
pressure groups.  Three changes should be made to improve the 1996 procedures.  First, modification
of paragraph (b) of the Appendix should be made, in order to include, for instance, documents relatingWT/GC/M/31
Page 16
to renegotiation of commitments in services under Article XXVIII of the GATT. Second, these
procedures should include the principle of equality and balance among the three WTO languages, and
should state that documents should be derestricted only when available in the three languages.
Finally, footnote 2 of the 1996 procedures should be strengthened.  He thanked those delegations
which had tabled proposals, but was not convinced that there should be changes made to the
procedures other than those he had proposed.  With regard to documents submitted by Members,current procedures allowed each Member to decide  on their circulation status.  As to minutes of
meetings, Mexico shared Brazil's view that these minutes should not be made  immediately available
to the public.  Moreover, if the period before derestriction were shortened, this could change the way
the organization worked.  The minutes, which reflected a constructive dialogue and negotiation
among different Members, would then also serve as a microphone to the outside world.  Secretariat
background notes, if immediately made available to  the public, would not be treated with the same
flexibility, because some Members might wish to influence their content.  Moreover, circulating thesenotes as unrestricted could lead to the belief that they reflected not only the Secretariat's opinion but
also the opinion of the WTO.  As to the proposal  on dispute settlement documents, there was an
imbalance.  In some cases Members would have the full report, while other Members would not have
it in their working language.  Moreover, as stated by the European Communities, this proposal should
be examined within the DSU review and its legal im plications should also be examined.  Referring to
the Chairman's statement that the review of the procedures was one part of transparency, he said that
transparency was more related to enhancing public understanding of the importance of WTO work.
In that context he had listened with great interest  to the Director-General's statement on information
policy.
The representative of Chile welcomed and supported the joint US/Canada proposal.
However, Members should ensure that the early dist ribution of the findings and conclusions of final
panel reports in the three languages would not change the later distribution of the full documents in
the three languages.  The points contained in this proposal improved the information while preserving
the nature of WTO work.
The representative of Pakistan expressed appreciation for the joint US/Canada proposal which
he said had taken on board many of the comments made by delegations in informal consultations.
However, he still believed that the question of derestriction of panel reports should be addressed in the
context of the DSU review, and shared the concerns of India and Mexico regarding the derestriction
of minutes and of Secretariat background notes.  Nevertheless, his delegation would work with the
proponents of this proposal to overcome Pakistan's concerns.
The representative of Colombia said that his delegation had participated in consultations on
this issue and agreed with those who had propos ed examining the need to respond to the outside
world's wishes to have fuller information about WTO activities.  However, a clear distinction should
be made between the DSU, which should not be affected by the changes, and the circulation andderestriction procedures.  Colombia broadly agreed with the suggested changes and expressed
appreciation to the United States, Canada and the Community for their contributions.  Colombia
agreed that equality of languages should be a requisite in the document circulation process.  This was
fundamental in the area of dispute settlement.  With respect to the distribution sequence of final panel
reports, thought should be given to the role of th ird parties, as mentioned by Jamaica.  This issue
would also have to be dealt with in the DSU revi ew, as there were undoubtedly anomalies and gaps to
be remedied in this field.  With regard to the Secretariat background notes, Colombia shared
Argentina's concerns and believed that Members should be given the possibility of controlling the
circulation status of such documents.  The propos al concerning unrestricted proposed agendas was not
appropriate, since such agendas would not yet have been adopted by Members.  Colombia's attitude tothe proposed changes was constructive, and he hoped that it would be possible to reach agreement so
as to contribute to a better understanding and outreach of WTO activities.
The representative of the United States said that the US/Canada proposal on the circulation of
information on final panel reports did not affect the timetable for panel work as set out in the DSUWT/GC/M/31
Page 17
working procedures, since the parties to the dispute would still have all elements of the final report
ahead of the full panel report circulation to the Members.  The reason for this proposal was that the
three-week period in the working procedures for the circulation of the final panel report had
effectively grown to three months or more, due to translation difficulties.  This was clearly a case of
unforeseen developments justifying a change in the calendar.
The Director-General said that information policy, which was a major aspect of the
transparency of the WTO, had to be improved and reinforced.  He agreed with Members that the
WTO was an open and transparent institution but, as confirmed by his daily experience, the public
believed that the WTO was a secret and non-transparent organization.  Therefore, this problem had to
be taken very seriously.  Members had to move on with an information policy but also to improve
WTO derestriction policy, taking into account the proposals and the comments made.  In relation to
the proposal on the circulation of information on final panel reports, he had been informed by anexpert of the Secretariat that independent of the aspect of increased transparency, the proposal would
be an equaliser for all Members.  In the present si tuation, parties to the dispute received the outcome
of a panel sometimes well before third parties and other Members which themselves might have a
particular interest in knowing the outcome because they had begun another panel procedure in the
meantime.  Equal access to the information at the same time would thus be in the interest of all, andwould be an important element of transparency.  While this proposal would not solve the problem of
leakage, it would avoid leakage of wrong information.  In this context, he called Members to do
everything possible to protect the interim report of the panel from wide diffusion, and urged
Governments not to make public comments about the outcome of the provisional report. as they
would then increase the leakage just on one side, leaving the other side without the possibility ofresponding to and rebalancing the arguments.
The Chairman said that he had requested Mr. Hoda, Deputy Director-General, to carry out
further informal consultations with Members concerning the procedures for derestriction of WTO
documents.  The aim would be to attempt to come to an agreement by the time the General Councilreconvened to examine the proposals from the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration.
The General Council took note of the statements.
8. Agreements between the WTO and the IMF and the World Bank
(a) Report by the Director-General
The Chairman recalled that the General Counc il's Decision on the Agreements between the
WTO and the IMF and the World Bank (WT/L/194) provided that the Director-General, should, inter
alia, hold consultations with Members under the auspices of the Chairman of the General Council on
matters relating to the implementation of the Agreements.  He invited the Director-General to make
his report to the General Council.
The Director-General said that since he had last reported to the General Council, the
importance of the WTO's relationship with the IMF and the World Bank under the cooperation
agreements concluded in December 1996 and April 1997 respectively, had been emphasized by the
present financial crisis.  This crisis had been a principal topic at a meeting he had recently had inWashington with the Managing Director of the IMF and with the President of the World Bank.  He
had made clear to them WTO Members' views on the crisis and its implications for the WTO.  It had
been agreed at that meeting that the crisis placed a premium on further improving cooperation among
the three organisations.  As a concrete step, they had agreed on the urgent need to revitalize the High
Level Working Group which was provided for in the cooperation agreements.  He had nominatedDeputy Director-General Warren Lavorel to repr esent the WTO in this Group, which would discuss
ways to further strengthen collaboration in areas of common and complementary objectives.  He said
that Mr. Camdessus and Mr. Wolfensohn had agreed that it was fundamental to a solution to theWT/GC/M/31
Page 18
present crisis that markets remained open, and that to slip back into protectionism would be
disastrous.  It had also been agreed that it was essential to press on energetically with the trade agenda
and to continue to give high priority to the accession of candidates to the WTO.  A joint statement had
been issued at the end of the meeting and was available in the room today.  He had also raised the
matter of trade finance, reflecting the view that a number of WTO Members had told him that a
shortage of such financing was slowing the ability of the crisis-hit countries to take full advantage of
their improved competitiveness and thus help their recovery.  Both Mr. Camdessus and
Mr. Wolfensohn had indicated that they were looking into the situation.  This matter would be on the
agenda for the next meeting of the High Level Working Group, which would examine the extent of
the problem and any possible action.  He had also made it clear to his two colleagues that there was
concern among WTO Members about the length of time it was taking to advance work under the
Ministerial mandate for greater coherence in international economic policymaking.  Here again, the
current crisis highlighted the importance and urgency of this work.  He said that the three secretariatshad agreed on a working document which was in translation and would be issued soon.  This paper, in
accordance with the Ministerial Declaration, and as required under the terms of the agreed
commentary to the Agreements between the WTO, IMF and World Bank, set out an informal
framework for joint work.  It included an agenda of topics that reflected concerns raised by
participants in the Uruguay Round Negotiating Group on the Functioning of the GATT System, aswell as other issues such as the efficiency and revenue aspects of tariffs.  The implementation of this
agenda would be a priority matter for the High Level Working Group, and he would keep Members
fully informed about this and all other action to follow  up this first step in this important and difficult
area.
During the IMF/World Bank meeting in Washington he had related Members' views to the
Interim Committee, a ministerial-level body of the IMF which met twice a year and to which the
WTO, under the terms of its Agreement with the IMF, was invited.  He had also conveyed to the
Committee his remarks at the time of the September informal discussion on the rôle of the WTO in
the present financial crisis, as well as Members' support for those remarks.  The Committee hadunderstood how important it was to prevent a retreat into protectionism and had thus underlined the
important rôle of the WTO in this difficult situation.  However, it also understood that the crisis was
financial in origin and that while open markets we re fundamental, the majority of the measures to
address it would have to be financial.  This had also been recognized in the joint statement which
emphasized that a return to more orderly financial markets and exchange rate stability were
immediate requirements for recovery.  The WTO, IMF and World Bank's collective response to the
crisis was the most immediate aspect of their coll aboration, but they had also examined all the other
elements of their relationship.  Broadly the WTO's interaction with the IMF and the World Bank fell
under three headings:  exchange of views and inform ation, participation in each others' meetings, and
technical cooperation, especially on the Integrated Framework and on communications technologies.
He recalled in this context the statement he had made to the General Council in 1996
(WT/L/194/Add.1) on Consultations and Coherence, and reaffirmed that, as he had said in thatstatement, in any discussion or exchange of inform ation with the IMF or World Bank staff, the WTO's
first and only point of reference was the WTO Agreements and Decisions.  Technical cooperation was
a particular priority, especially in relations with the World Bank, which had endorsed the Integrated
Framework at the Executive Board level and was proving to be helpful in moving the programme
forward;  the IMF was also playing an active rôle, especially in the area of customs matters.  TheWorld Bank was also an important partner in the diffusion of technology to boost development;  a
joint web-site now had a forum capability, with thre e fora already held, on intellectual property, the
50
th Anniversary and financial services.  The site also had training modules, on the WTO and on the
WTO and developing countries, and more were bein g developed.  Equipment had now been installed
and the necessary training provided in 29 countries to allow on-line access through the web site to theWTO;  nine more would be completed by the end of 1998.  The Bank was also very active with the
WTO in seminars, including work in the Training Division. Together with the IMF and the World
Bank, the WTO was a member of the Joint Vienna Institute, to provide training for officials from
transition countries;  the WTO had recently given its first course in the Institute. In conclusion, he said
that overall, the implementation of the WTO's Agreements with the IMF and the World Bank was onWT/GC/M/31
Page 19
the right track. These organizations would continue to look for additional means to enhance their
cooperation and collaboration, because a mutually supportive approach, based on the principles
embodied in these institutions, was a key elemen t for the economic recovery and continued growth
that they sought.  He would continue to keep Members fully informed.
The representative of Jamaica said that there would not be sufficient time at the present
meeting to have a full discussion of this item, and suggested that it be included on the agenda of the
next General Council.  In 1994 a decision had been taken that the WTO was a sui generis  organization
established outside the United Nations system.  However, both the Bretton Woods institutions of the
IMF and the World Bank were part of the United Nations system.  He believed that when the Bretton
Woods institutions met, they also involved both the United Nations and the UNCTAD Secretariats,
for example, in the Interim Committee and in the Development Committee.  The Director-General
had not mentioned his participation in the Development Committee.  A reference had been made inthe Development Committee to the Integrated Framework, and it would be useful to consider in the
WTO how that Integrated Framework was being impl emented, in order to see how, cooperatively, the
WTO Secretariat could enhance its technical cooperation.  He suggested that in future, the WTO
might use its good offices so that joint statements with the IMF and the World Bank could also
include UNCTAD, which was the premier institution within the UN system concerned with trade anddevelopment.  This would enrich both the policy analysis of UNCTAD and the practical cooperation
which had been developed between the Director-General of the WTO and the Secretary-General of
UNCTAD.  That cooperation should be institutionalised because UNCTAD could and should make a
contribution in addressing the development aspects of trade and finance.  Cooperation between the
WTO and UNCTAD could also be part of the exercise of a high-level meeting on trade anddevelopment which India was going to propose.
The Director-General said that he would ask the Secretariat to prepare perhaps a paper on
progress made in the implementation of the Integrated Framework so that Members could be more
closely associated with this exercise.  The WTO and the World Bank were strongly committed todoing everything possible to improve their technical assistance, especially to the least developed
countries, and were working closely with orga nizations such as UNCTAD, the ITC and UNDP.
There was a good equilibrium in relations between the Bretton Woods institutions and the United
Nations institutions.  He said that from time to time there were quadripartite meetings with the
Secretary-General of the United Nations in which points relevant to the four institutions were
considered.
The Chairman suggested that the item be put on the agenda for the next meeting of the
General Council, which would give delegations time to reflect further on the matter.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the report by the Director-General
and agreed to revert to this matter at its next meeting.
9. Appointment of the next Director-General
At the General Council meeting on 14 October 1998 the Chairman recalled that Amb. Rossier
had been invited to carry out consultations on the best way of proceeding with regard to consultations
on the selection of the next Director-General, and invited Amb. Rossier to report on his consultations.
Amb. Rossier (Switzerland) recalled that on 15 July 1998, the Chairman of the General
Council had made a statement concerning the selection process for the next Director-General.  In
particular, the Chairman of the General Council had then stated:  "in order to ensure that thisimportant process is conducted in an atmosphere free of any question about its integrity, I intend to
ask Amb. Rossier to consult with Members to consider how we might best proceed in the
circumstances, and to make any recommendations which he might consider appropriate in the light of
those consultations.  One idea might be to consider identifying a small group of representativeWT/GC/M/31
Page 20
individuals who could work closely with me in ma naging the process.  The process of consultation
will obviously intensify after the nomination period.  I would, therefore, hope Ambassador Rossier
could report on his consultations before the end of September to allow us to take any necessary
decisions in good time".  Pursuant to this statement which had been endorsed by the General Council,
on  9 September he had invited interested Heads of Delegation to participate in consultations as from
the afternoon of 15 September. During three rounds of intensive consultations and a number of otherconsultations in the following period, 34 Heads of Delegation - including the representative of the EC
Commission and the representative of the EC Presidency - had expressed their views.  At the present
meeting, he wished to give the following reminder for the benefit of those delegations who had not
wished or had been unable to take part in those consultations.  He said that he had first recalled the
paragraphs of the statement by the Chairman of the General Council containing his intentions with
regard to the selection process for the next Director-General.  He had then recalled the terms of
reference given to him and had asked the following two questions which had been put together at the
beginning of the interview in order to avoid any misunderstanding: " (i) do you think the intentions
expressed by the Chairman of the General Council at the 15 July meeting are likely to raise
difficulties or create problems for your delegation?;  and (ii) where appropriate, what are your views
on how we might best proceed in the circumstances?".  In the event of a negative reply to the first
question, the interview had been concluded as the second question no longer had any purpose.
He stressed that all delegations had emphasized their appreciation for the initiative taken by
the Chairman of the General Council to ensure that "this important process is conducted in an
atmosphere free of any question about its integrity".  All delegations had underscored the fact that,
whatever position they might take, this would in any way undermine their confidence inAmbassador J. Weekes in his capacity as Chairman of the General Council.  No delegation, at any
time, had questioned this trust in his integrity and objectivity.  This was worth highlighting because of
the particular nature of the situation:  the first outcome of this consultation had been a general
expression of confidence in the Chairman of the General Council.
The question of the conduct of the consultations with a view to selecting the new
Director-General had been weighed up by delegations in a purely political context, as an operation to
be assessed independently of the normal work of the General Council, which its Chairman was
carrying out to perfection.  For that reason, the great majority of delegations had expressed a clear
wish that the two functions, namely chairing the General Council and conducting consultations with a
view to the appointment of the next Director-General, should be dissociated.  This position had been
expressed by 23 out of 34 delegations.  These 23 delegations had put forward a variety of solutions -in reply to the second question - which might be grouped in three major categories.  Instead of the
Chairman of the General Council, the consultations could be conducted by:  (i) a single individual;
(ii) a  group of persons to be elected by Members;  and (iii) a group of persons consisting of Heads of
Mission already elected as chairmen of major WTO bodies.  Out of these three possibilities the first
one had clearly received the widest support:  18 of the 23 Heads of Delegation had wished the processto be conducted by a Head of Mission, who should:  (i) not be directly or indirectly linked to a
candidate; (ii) be appointed by the General Council and thus enjoy the trust of all Members;  and (iii)
ensure both the strict confidentiality of the process and at the same time the utmost transparency.
Those delegations who wished to entrust this task to a group of Ambassadors had indicated  a variety
of reasons such as preference for an institutional rather than an ad hoc  solution, representativeness,
ensuring objectivity and transparency.  Of 18 delegations that wished a single person be in charge of
the process, ten delegations had categorically opposed to the appointment of a group, of any kind, for
the following reasons:  (i) fear that it would be cumbersome and inefficient;  (ii) fear of engaging in
an initial selection process - which could be troublesome - before even beginning the selection process
for the Director-General;  (iii) fear of ending up with a de facto  regionalization of the process, which
would be liable to make the process extremely diffic ult if not quite simply inoperative;  and (iv) fear
of a lack of confidentiality owing to the existence of a group of persons.
He considered that the recommendation concerning the procedure to be adopted for selecting
the next Director-General had to reflect the views expressed by the great majority of the delegationsWT/GC/M/31
Page 21
which had expressed their views.  Therefore, he proposed that the consultations be carried out by a
single person.  Nevertheless, certain views expressed during these consultations should also be taken
into account.  He therefore proposed that the Chairman of the General Council hold consultations with
a view to appointing from among the Permanent Repres entatives two persons to be jointly responsible
for conducting the consultations.  If this should prove impossible, one could then envisage that a
single person should carry out the whole process.  The names of the persons should be proposed to theGeneral Council, which would formally entrust them with the task of holding the consultations and
reporting regularly to the General Council.
The Chairman said that Amb. Rossier had made the same report in an informal meeting of
Heads of Delegation on 29 September.  He thanked him for conducting the consultations concerning
the appointment of individuals to carry out consultations on the selection of the next Director-General.
Amb. Rossier had made considerable efforts towards making the recommendations which wouldenable delegations to make progress on this matter.  He fully accepted the conclusions and the
recommendations made by Amb. Rossier.  As indicated on 29 September, the Chairman of the
General Council would not conduct the necessary consultations on the selection of the next
Director-General.  In line with the recommendations, it was the Chairman's intention to hold
consultations with Members to identify two individuals or, if necessary, one individual to carry outconsultations, with the necessary confidence of Members.  This process of consultations had already
begun and he had already met a number of delegations on 13 September,  and had invited delegations
to make suggestions as to possible candidates to be invited to conduct consultations.  At this stage, it
was premature to report on this issue and he only wished to note that he had met with 24 individuals
representing some 50 delegations.  He believed that he had received a broad spectrum of view on whomight be invited to undertake this task.  It was his intention to hold further consultations on
15 September in order to discuss different options on how to proceed.
He recalled the proposal made at the 5 June meeting that the General Council invite
candidates to meet with permanent representatives in Geneva in informal meetings.  This proposal hadbeen further discussed in the informal meetings held on 29 September and 12 October.  In line with
his proposal made on 12 October, he wished to recommend that the General Council take a decision
to invite the candidates to come to Geneva to part icipate in informal meetings.  He also proposed that
the General Council authorise him to enter into consultations with delegations that had nominated
candidates, in order to be able to make the best arrangements for this purpose.  It was necessary to
endeavour to organize such a meeting as early as possible.  He recalled that emphasis had been placed
on the fact that Members were responsible for this process.  As he had stated in July, the selection ofthe next Director-General was the responsibility of Members.  This task could not be delegated to a
Chair or a group of persons, and Members should not confuse the management of the process with
their responsibility to select and appoint the next Director-General.  He was in the process of
conducting the consultations concerning the appointment of individuals to carry out consultations on
the selection of the next Director-General.  It was urgent to determine how to proceed with regard to
this matter.  In the light of this, he  looked forw ard to Members' cooperation  in discussions during the
consultations.
The representative of the United States said that her delegation was not in a position to agree
that the selection of individuals to carry out consultations concerning the selection of the next
Director-General would be limited only to Heads of Delegation.  Other qualified persons within the
WTO system should also be taken into consideration.
The representative of Mexico said that, like the United States, he believed that no limitations
should be imposed with regard to this process and that any decision thereon had to be taken by
Members.  He was not certain whether the individual or the two individuals to be selected on the basis
of the consultations carried out by the Chairman  would receive a mandate from the General Council
or whether they would carry out the process on behalf of the Chairman.  In accordance with the
guidelines for the selection of the Director-General, the Chairman of the General Council had to carry
out consultations for the reasons outlined by Amb. Rossier.  He therefore sought clarification as toWT/GC/M/31
Page 22
whether the General Council would take a  decision with regard to their mandate or whether these
individuals would act on behalf of the Chairman of the General Council. This issue could also be
decided in the course of consultations.
The Chairman said that, as noted previously, the guidelines for the selection of the
Director-General were to be applied flexibly.  In line with the recommendations by Amb. Rossier, it
was his intention to request the General Council to give a mandate to an individual or  individuals
selected in the consultations.  The General Council would take a decision on this matter, and he hoped
that this could be done as soon as possible.
The representative of Brazil said that as stated by the Chairman, it was the responsibility of
Members to manage the process for the selection of the next Director-General. The one or two
persons to be appointed to carry out the process of selection should be permanent representatives.This would be in line with the statement made by th e Chairman that the selection of the next Director-
General was the responsibility of Members;  this process should be carried out by Members through
their Permanent Representatives, which were the expression of governments.
The representative of Jamaica said that in July 1998, his delegation had supported the
institutional approach with regard to the selection process.  This meant that Jamaica believed it
necessary to follow the WTO rules and procedures while preserving some flexibility.  His country had
participated in the consultations held by Amb. Rossier.  It strongly supported the institutional
approach since it believed that the WTO rules, guidelines and procedures would enable Members to
ensure that their decision-making process was comprehensive.  In the informal meeting on29 September, after Amb. Rossier had made his report, Jamaica had expressed its views on this
matter.  After that meeting, a considerable number of delegations had stated their support for
Jamaica's views.  His delegation had not consulted with the Chairman prior to the present meeting
since it believed that no decision had yet been taken until the report by Amb. Rossier was formally
introduced to the General Council.  Jamaica was concerned about the current developments withregard to the flexibility outside of the rules.  Brazil had stated that Permanent Representatives were
the expression of governments and the Chairman had stated that the burden of responsibility
concerning any process aimed at decision-making was on Members.  Therefore, there was no
distinction between the process and the result thereof.  Permanent Representatives and Members had
to be fully engaged at all stages of this process.  If his understanding of these statements was correct
he would agree with this view.  For that reason, he could not agree with the US view.  It was
important to ensure that this task not be given to an individual who had no responsibility and was notaccredited to the WTO.  On 29 September, the Chairman had been requested to prepare a written
statement to enable Members to take a decision and become part of the record for future guidelines.
At the present meeting, the Chairman sought Members' approval of a process to enable him to put
forward the names of persons.  In the light of the US statement he was not sure whether the Chairman
would only put forward names of permanent represen tatives or whether he had sought authorization
of a process whereby, when these individuals were se lected, they would be approved at an appropriate
time by the General Council and then act on behalf of the General Council.  He preferred  that the
General Council take a decision to ensure that the process was without reproach and proposed that the
Chairman indicate in writing how he envisaged the process leading up to a point when the General
Council would have before it an item which required Members to take a decision consistent with adecision to be taken at the present meeting.  He was aware of difficulties associated with the
appointment of the next Director-General, and therefore, a decision on this matter would be very
important.  Clear rules and procedures were required to ensure that the majority of  Members or the
full membership of the WTO supported su ch a decision and a new Director-General.
The Chairman said that it was his intention to submit the results of his consultations to the
General Council for consideration and adoption.  With regard to the point made by Jamaica that the
General Council would delegate the responsibility to one or two individuals, he wished to clarify that
this was not how he would proceed.  He said that  he was now in the process of identifying two
persons or one to carry out consultations on the selection of the next Director-General.  TheWT/GC/M/31
Page 23
responsibility to do this was placed on Members and the General Council.  He noted the statements
made at the present meeting and said that he would revert to this matter with a carefully worded
proposal after the completion of consultations, since at that point he would have a better
understanding of Members' preferences.  His intention was to continue this process urgently for the
reasons that he had outlined previously.  At the present meeting, he only wished to inform the General
Council that he would engage in this process as a result of the outcome of the consultations carriedout by Amb. Rossier.  He did not seek the General Council's approval of this process, and he would
report on this matter at the next meeting of the General Council.  At the present meeting, it was his
intention to request the General Council to agree to invite the candidates to come and meet informally
in Geneva.  He requested the General Council to authorize him to undertake consultations with the
delegations that had nominated the candidates in order to determine the best arrangements for
organizing such a meeting as early as possible.  He proposed that the General Council agree to
proceed on the above-mentioned basis.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed
 to the Chairman's proposal.
Upon resumption of the General Council meeting on 23 October, the Chairman read out the
following statement:
"At the meeting on 14 October Amb. Rossier reported on the consultations which he had
undertaken at the request of the General Council of July 15. In his report, he presented his conclusions
and recommended that I undertake consultations with a view to identifying two individuals (or failing
that one individual) who would be jointly charge d with the conduct of the consultations on the
selection of the next Director-General. I thanked Amb. Rossier for his work and fully accepted his
conclusions and his recommendations.  I reported also that, because we had had an opportunity to
discuss the same matters at the Informal Meeting of the General Council on September 29, I had
already begun, but not completed, my consultations with Members.
"In a first round of consultations centred on October 13 I heard from 23 delegations including
representatives of the European Communities, ASEAN and CEFTA. In this first round I asked
Members to tell me who in their view should be asked to take on these consultations. Eleven different
individuals were identified by delegations and a number of other considerations advanced in this first
round of consultations. I then conducted a second round of consultations centred on October 15 in
which I heard from 29 delegations including representatives of the European Communities, ASEAN,
CEFTA and the African Group.
"In the second round, I assumed a more active role to try to bring matters to a head, giving
representatives some sense of my conclusions from the first round. I made the same points to each
delegation I met. I said that most delegations favoured the idea of identifying two representatives for
the task although some still favoured one and a couple thought three might be better. I noted that Isensed those who favoured one or three would be prep ared to show flexibility. I also noted that there
was a broad view that the individuals we selected should not have any conflict of interest, real or
apparent, direct or indirect, with a candidate. Furthermore, I noted that the view had been expressed
that there should not be a candidate from a country whose representative had been chosen to conduct
the consultations. I also reminded each delegation that the individuals we were selecting would beexpected to facilitate the choice by the Members of the next Director-General; their task was not to
influence the Members in making their choice. Finally I noted that there was wide spread agreement
that the two individuals would need to enjoy the broad support of WTO Members. Next I reported to
delegations that eleven individuals had been suggested to me in the first round of consultations. I told
delegations the names of those individuals who were mentioned to me five or more times. I theninvited delegations to react to what I had said.
"There was a general view that we should proceed to complete the process of selecting two
individuals as quickly as possible. I was also pleased to see that delegations were prepared to be
flexible. I consider that I am in a position to recommend two individuals to you. I will also make aWT/GC/M/31
Page 24
proposal concerning the mandate that the General Council confer on these individuals which is a
matter that several delegations have raised with me.
"I would like to propose to you in the light of my consultations that the General Council
invite Amb. William Rossier and Amb. Celso Lafer to jointly assume responsibility for the conduct of
the consultations on the appointment of the next Director-General. It was clear that Members have
great confidence in the skills and integrity of these two Ambassadors. Members also considered that
they had shown an excellent capacity to work with all Members in the pursuit of consensus on various
matters, particularly during the periods when they held the responsibility of chairing the General
Council. In short Ambassadors Rossier and Lafer enjoy the full support and confidence of the
Members. I would like to add that those with whom  I consulted also had the highest regard for the
other individuals whose names had been mentioned. I would like to thank all those who allowed their
names to be considered in this process.
"Now I would like to propose how  we describe the task we confer on Ambassadors Rossier
and Lafer. Before I set out some specific points I woul d like to recall that we agreed in July to aim to
have identified the new Director-General, by consensus, by the end of November. At the same time
we agreed to aim to use the year end General Coun cil to confirm the appointment. You will recall that
we were motivated by the Director-General's recommendation that we agree on his successor "as soon
as possible, and certainly before the end of this year.
"I would also like to note that I have followed up on the General Council decision of October
14 concerning informal meetings of the General Council with each of the candidates for the post ofDirector-General. The Secretariat has circulated my letter to the four Missions who have candidates
confirming meetings with each candidate during the period November 10-12. I consider that the
intensive consultations with Members to arrive at consensus on the appointment of the next Director-
General should begin as soon as possible after those meetings.
"In light of what I have said so far, I will now propose several points which would serve as
guidance to Ambassadors Rossier and Lafer for the conduct of the consultations:
(a) The task is one which they should conduct jointly to the greatest extent possible.
(b) They should organise an open process of consultation in which the delegations of all
WTO Members will have an opportunity to express their views within the same time
frame. They should endeavour to be together when they meet with representatives. Iwould expect that on a matter of such importance the consultations would be at the
Head of Mission level.
(I have of course consulted with Ambassadors Rossier and Lafer.  It is their intention
to conduct the task jointly and to always be together when they meet with
representatives.  However, I have used the words in point 1 "to the greatest extentpossible" and in point 2 "endeavour to be together" to take into account unforeseen
circumstances such as illness.)
(c) They should report regularly to the General  Council on the progress in their
consultations. I would propose one such meeting just before the end of November.
(d) As Chairman of the General Council I must continue to accept responsibility for the
overall management of the process leading to the appointment of the next Director-
General. Accordingly I would expect Ambassadors Rossier and Lafer to keep me
informed about the progress of their consultations, without, of course, betraying any
confidences which it would be inappropriate for me to know in light of the fact that
there is a Canadian candidate. They would raise with me any problems or mattersWT/GC/M/31
Page 25
affecting the consultations, including those which might require our collective
attention or action.
"I propose that on the basis of what I have said in this statement we agree to invite
Ambassadors Rossier and Lafer to undertake the consultations with Members concerning the
appointment of the next Director-General."
The representative of Jamaica thanked the Chairman for his statement, which informed
Members of his consultations and set out proposals for decision by the General Council.  He recalled
that at the meeting on 14 October, the General Council had authorised the Chairman to consult with
Members as to the persons who would assist him in the process of identifying the candidate who
would then be appointed by the General Council by  consensus.  The record of the General Council
meetings since July reflected the consistent position of Jamaica which was a firm preference for clear
rules adopted by the General Council ensuring an open, transparent, democratic and accountableprocess, i.e., a decision taken by the full membership.  He believed that this was preferable to a series
of ad hoc steps, sometimes without the prior formal approval of the Council, which risked
complicating and undermining the rules-based institu tion that the WTO was.  However, yet another
meeting had been held to take decisions based on consultations among some Members who had met
in a private and confidential format.  This was not a process in which views had been heard anddiscussed and a consensus determined in an open format.  Jamaica continued to be flexible but not, as
it had indicated in the past, "flexible beyond and outside the bounds of reason and principle".
Following the discussion based on the Chairman's statement, he asked the Chairman to formulate the
decisions to be taken, indicating a clear path forward, with notice being made to all Members so that
those not attending the present meeting could be part of an open, transparent and accountable processinvolving the full membership.  There were a number of specific points in the statement on which he
asked for clarification:  (i) openness but no reference to transparency – was the guideline sufficient as
drafted?;  and (ii) a timetable should be set for the regular reports of the General Council and
Members notified in good time and in accordance with the rules of procedure.  Jamaica believed that
the process ran the risk of being "regionalised" on the basis of ad hoc consultations as indicated in theChairman's statement.  Jamaica also believed that the process was at risk of being complicated, since
the number of Deputy-Directors General had not been determined.  This issue should therefore be
explicitly excluded from any consultations.  Jamaica attached the highest importance to the
appointment of a Director-General and supported a process that served the interests of all Members
based on openness, transparency, participation and accountability.
The representative of Norway said he wished to raise some practical aspects related to the
procedure proposed by the Chairman.  All Members agreed with the aim that the General Council
formally appoint a new Director-General at its end-of-year meeting in December.  On the other hand,
the points proposed for guidance to Ambs. Rossier and Lafer provide for the meeting of the General
Council before the end of November to hear the report of the two Ambassadors.  His delegation felt
that this deadline was too close to the end-of-year meeting in December, and that it would be useful toadvance it to mid-November.
The representative of Egypt said that his delegation had full confidence in the way the
Chairman had conducted the consultations which had led to the proposal that the General Council
invite Ambs. Rossier and Lafer to jointly assume the responsibility in conducting the consultations onthe appointment of the next Director-General.  Egypt would lend its full cooperation to them in a
transparent and open process which would lead to the appointment of the next Director-General by
December.  Egypt wished to state, as mandated by the African Group, that H.E. Hassan Abouyoub,
former Trade Minister, Agriculture Minister and Minister of Tourism of Morocco was the candidate
of the African Group.  Egypt also wished to seek clarification with respect to the Chairman'sstatement, in particular on the role of the meeting proposed for the end of November, which should be
the last meeting in the process of consultations, and the one in December which in Egypt's view
should be devoted to the appointment of the next Director-General.  While his delegation had fullWT/GC/M/31
Page 26
confidence in the skills of Ambs. Rossier and Lafer, he suggested that if consensus was not reached
on the next Director-General according to the deadlines agreed, the matter be put to a vote by ballot.
The Chairman said that both Egypt and Norway had raised an important point that related to
the very tight time-schedule for appointment of the next Director-General.  It was important for
Members to be aware of this.  The aim was a consensus by the end of November with a view to takinga decision at the year-end meeting of the General Council in December.  He thought it was important
for Members to bear that in mind as they looked at the time remaining.  It had also been agreed to
have meetings between the candidates and the Ge neral Council in an informal mode and those
meetings would be organised on 10, 11 and 12 November.  In discussing the situation with some
delegations and also with Messrs. Rossier and Lafer, it appeared reasonable to allow a certain period
of time to elapse, a few days at least, after those consultations and before the intensive consultations
with Members began, to give delegations an opport unity to report to their capitals and receive
instructions. He also noted that Members should not be overly pessimistic about the situation, as
governments had known since 1 October who the four candidates for the post of Director-General
were, and these four candidates had been very active, both in Geneva and in various capitals.
Governments had already had quite a good opportunity to think about what their position might be
with respect to the various candidates.  He suggested looking at the series of meetings in the week of10 November as the last chance to have an all-candidates meeting before moving into the final
process of determining who the next Director-General should be.  He hoped that the consultations
could proceed relatively quickly.  Regarding the proposal  to hold "one such meeting" just before the
end of November, he said that although it sounde d as though only one meeting was proposed, he had
meant that there might well be other meetings which would be organised.  However, it was importantto have a meeting near the end of November, which had been agreed as the date by which a consensus
would be reached.  At that time Members would ascertain whether there was a consensus or not.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed
 to the proposal set out by the
Chairman in his statement.
10. Conditions of Service of WTO Staff
(a) Draft decision (WT/GC/W/101, WT/GC/W/102/Rev.16, WT/GC/W/103)
The Chairman announced that the Working Group on Conditions of Service of WTO Staff,
under the Chairmanship of Amb. Farrell (New Zeala nd), had concluded its work.  He drew attention
to the draft decision submitted to the General Council in WT/GC/W/102/Rev.1, as well as to the
report by the Chairman of the Working Group in WT/GC/W/101, and the background documentation
contained in WT/GC/W/103.  He said that this had been a long and difficult effort, and the fact that
there was now a draft decision which would enab le the establishment of an independent WTO
Secretariat under the conditions set out therein was of major importance.  He expressed the hope that
the General Council would adopt this decision at th e present meeting so that the subsequent steps
could be taken in time to establish the independent Secretariat by 1 January 1999.  He then invited
Amb. Farrell, Chairman of the Working Group, to introduce this item.
The Chairman of the Working Group on Conditions of Service of WTO Staff, Amb. Farrell
(New Zealand), said that as Members already ha d his full written report he would focus on a few
points in order to put the proposed decision in context.  The Working Group's task had been to prepare
a detailed proposal for a WTO compensation and personnel plan which was independent of the UN
common system of salaries, allowances and benefits.  It had been guided by the Council Decision in
document WT/L/269, and in particular by considerations of overall cost neutrality, long-term financial
viability, and proper justification for new provisions.  The independent panel of actuaries appointedby the Director-General in July 1998 had indicated that the proposed package was both cost-neutral
                                                     
6 In the French and Spanish versions, WT/GC/W/102.WT/GC/M/31
Page 27
and viable, and had noted that the cost neutrality of the proposal would further strengthen with time,
beyond the seven-year time-frame set by the General Council.  He underlined what the report said
about both Members and the staff sharing an interest in an approach that was prudent and deliberately
risk-averse.  As with any pension plan, there were  elements of short- and long-term risk associated
with the WTO pension plan;  these were deliberately spelt out in the report.  Risk management tools
to address them had been carefully developed within the Working Group.  These were explained inthe report and embodied in the regulations and in the way the draft decision had been constructed.  It
had been vital that the proposal pass the actuarial test, and that it be prudent and risk-averse.  He
stressed two further points:  timing and balance.  If numbers were based on the target date of 1
January 1999 set by the General Council, there was a narrow time-frame in which to take a decision,
as there were two time-sensitive steps involved in moving to an independent Secretariat with its own
conditions of service by 1 January 1999.  One was notification to the UN Joint Staff Pension Fund
(UNJSPF) of the WTO's intentions to withdraw.  The other was the holding of a staff referendum onwhether or not to accept the package endorsed by Members.  It was necessary to have a definite
indication of staff support for the package ahead of  the convening of a special session of the UNJSP
Board in early November.  He hoped that the General Council would agree that the proposal reflected
the necessary balance among the interests of the Members, the interests of management, the interests
of the Secretariat staff and the common interest in ensuring that the effectiveness of the WTO wasmaximised. The balance struck in the proposal was a delicate one, and had required understanding and
compromise within the Working Group.  He asked that in addressing the draft decision Members keep
in mind the need to preserve this delicate balance.
The representative of the United States recalled the US statement made when the initial
decision on this matter had been taken in April (WT/GC/M/28, p.4).  She understood that the General
Council  had to take action on this matter before the end of October so as not to miss the annual
deadline for the evaluation of the UNJSPF as foreseen in the April decision.  She also understood that
the final details of the plan, and whether it would be possible to have an independent plan, would only
be possible once it was known what amount would be transferred from the UNJSPF.  Therefore, herdelegation hoped that this important issue would move forward.
The representative of Jamaica said that the package in document WT/GC/W/102/Rev.1 was
clear, thorough and comprehensive.  His delegation would join in any consensus that was possible at
the present meeting, on the basis that, as stated  in Part D of document WT/GC/W/103, the proposed
pension plan would be viable.  He said there appeared to be some grey areas, as some sections in the
document remained to be completed, for example the reference in the WTO Staff Rules on page 77 to"Definitions".  Assurance was needed that once a decision was taken there would be no further
negotiations that might change the balance in the package.  He said that should transitional
arrangements be required by the General Council as a result of transfers from the UNJSPF not being
of the required amount, it was not clear how the General Council would revert to this matter.  He drew
attention to Article 22 on page 33 of document WT/GC/W/102/Rev.1. which stated that "in the eventof dissolution of the WTO the General Council shall take the necessary steps to guarantee the benefits
acquired under these Regulations by participants and beneficiaries at the date of dissolution".  Risk-
averseness would require that the contingent liabilit ies for Members be known.  For the first time the
staff of the WTO had been a party to a decision of the General Council in that the staff would hold a
referendum on the package.  This transparent participation in a democratic process shouldcharacterize all decision-making of the WTO.
The Chairman of the Working Group said that assurance that the decision embraced all the
components of  the pension plan and staff-related measures was provided by page 5 of
WT/GC/W/102/Rev.1;  an Annex to the decision c ontained references to the specific documents
which set out all of the staff regulations, the staff rules, the pension regulations and the pension plan
administrative rules, in addition to the more general paper on the compensation philosophy.
Document WT/GC/W/102/Rev.1 was a comprehensive document;  there was no other associated
paper.  The Secretariat might be able to pr ovide information on some remaining elements of
documentation to be completed.  Regarding transitional arrangements and the possibility that theWT/GC/M/31
Page 28
conditions set in relation to the transfer sum might not be met, the draft decision was structured in
such a way that the penultimate provision, beginning "instruct the Secretariat …", would
automatically come into play should there be any aspect of the transfer arrangements that presented an
unexpected or unsatisfactory component.  That would automatically be referred to the General
Council, which would decide what action to take.  Automaticity of implementation related only to the
decision being met in terms of the transfer sum necessary to achieve cost neutrality.  Any deviationfrom that or any further unexpected development that could not be foreseen at present would prompt
the return of the matter of the conditions of service, and all associated questions of what would
happen in future, to the General Council.  Regarding the referendum to be conducted, if the staff
decided not to accept the package, that same element of the decision would come into play and the
matter would be back in the hands of the General Council.  Regarding the guarantee of benefits, page
9 of document WT/GC/W/103 contained a guarantee that in the event of the demise of the WTO, the
acquired rights of those who had contributed to the pension plan would be fully met.
Mr. Lavorel, Deputy Director-General, said that there were some specific rates that needed to
be included in the pension plan regulations which had to be approved by the management board in the
light of actuarial advice.  This would be done at the start-up of the plan.  The section on Rules
Governing Compensation in the Event of Service-incurred Death, Injury or Illness(WT/GC/W/102/Rev.1, p. 77) would be completed pr ior to 1 January 1999 and would be brought to
the attention of the General Council by the Director-General.  This action had no cost implications.
The representative of the United Kingdom said that it was better to be certain beforehand that
the crucial elements were properly addressed than to bequeath a flawed system to Members'
successors which might cause serious problems in future.  In light of this it had been essential to have
the serious and constructive discussions that had been held on this matter.  His government still had
some concerns about the contingent financial risks in the proposed independent pension fund.  Despite
the independent actuaries' certification, it was not certain that the present pension benefit package
would prove cost-viable over the long term.  It would have been more prudent to start on a more
conservative basis and to offer benefit enhancements if and when it became clear that these could be
afforded.  Like the Chairman of the Working Group, his delegation believed that the plan had to be
prudent and risk-averse.  The United Kingdom wanted to go on record that in its view, benefits, rather
than contributions, should be adjusted if at some future point an actuarial deficit in the pension plan
emerged.  In light of this, his delegation was ready to join a consensus to adopt the decision.
The representative of the Netherlands said that his delegation, like the United Kingdom, could
join a consensus to adopt the draft decision on the understanding that any possible remedial action
should primarily be sought in adjusting benefits rather than contributions.
The representative of Japan said that the proposal had three major advantages:  First, it was
financially prudent.  With the adjustment scheme  provided in Annex I of the draft decision, cost
neutrality would be preserved, even if the transfer amount from the UNJSPF was significantly low.  In
addition, Article 6.2 of the Staff Regulations provided for review of the salary scale every five years,
and Article 9 (d) of the Pension Regulations explicitly stipulated the possibility of adjusting benefit or
contribution levels in the case of a future actuaria l deficit.  With these built-in safeguards, the new
system would be started, and would remain, on a so und basis.  Second, the proposal was balanced.  It
reflected the divergent views expressed in the Working Group and struck a balance between the
interests of the staff and those of Members.  The proposal improved the existing system, but with due
attention paid to continuity with the existing system.  Third, the proposal was more fitted to the
WTO's particular characteristics.  As the new system would be denominated in Swiss Francs, the
impact of exchange rate fluctuations on the WTO budget would be significantly reduced.  With theinclusion of professional-staff post adjustments into the pensionable remuneration, the disparity in
pension benefits between professional and general service staff would be removed.  In addition, the
existing system of an automatic annual step increase would be modified to reflect the performance of
each staff member.WT/GC/M/31
Page 29
The representative of Egypt said that it was known that his delegation was concerned about
any damage which might occur to the UN common system if the WTO withdrew from the UNJSPF,
as other organizations might follow, thus creating a domino effect.  The second consideration was the
possible worsening of the conditions of service applicable to the WTO Secretariat should the WTO
withdraw from this Fund.  The third consideration was the possibility that in future, particularly after
the end of the transitional period, Members might be asked to contribute more to the WTO budget.This latter concern remained, as according to the plan submitted there was uncertainty about the
amount of assets to be recovered from the UNJSPF, and also uncertainty about the future of the
independent system beyond the year 2005.  He could not commit his government to paying any
additional contribution should cost neutrality not be insured beyond 2005.  With these reservations,
his delegation would go along with a consensus on the draft decision.
The representative of India said that the proposal was prudent and balanced.
The representative of France reiterated his government's attachment to the principle of a
common system covering all staff of the different international organizations.  France would have
preferred to see the WTO continue to apply the UN common system, which did not exclude the
possibility of finding some remedies to the dysfunctions in that system that had appeared in Geneva.However, and in order not to block a consensus on this matter, France had agreed to go along with
those who felt the WTO needed to be independent, on the condition that certain statutory and
budgetary requirements were respected.  The proposed decision in general addressed those conditions,
although France continued to have certain doubts, in particular regarding the pension fund, the future
of which seemed very fragile.  Despite these doubts, France could join an eventual consensus to adoptthe draft decision, on the following condition:  should the WTO pension fund incur a deficit that was
not due to general causes affecting all pension funds comparable to that of the WTO, this deficit could
in no way be met by a call for increased contributions by the WTO Members.
The representative of Germany said that his authorities had carefully studied the proposals of
the Chairman of the Working Group.  It was clear that one was close to a result which could find a
consensus.  However, he had just received instruct ions that the competent Minister in his government
preferred to have the decision on the German position taken by the new federal government, to be
constituted in the last week of October.  He would continue to work towards moving things forward
so that a decision could be taken within the shortest possible time-frame, and would keep the
Chairman informed of developments in the new government's position.
The representative of Hong Kong, China said that his delegation believed that the package
presented was viable, sufficiently risk-free and fair to all parties.  The package addressed the major
shortcoming of the present system with respect to professional staff.  It unified the pay scales, which
would contribute to the long-term health of the or ganization, and contained improvements to the areas
of staff management and motivation, such as merit pay.  The key financial change for the WTO wasthat it would become responsible for the pensions of its own staff.  This meant that Members should
be prudent.  The Regulations proposed contained sufficient safeguards to ensure that action could be
taken should a worst-case scenario emerge.  Regarding the detailed package of conditions of service,
many provisions hoped for by the staff had not been included;  however, the package proposed was a
reasonable one.  As it would not be known before 31 December 1998 exactly how large a transfer sumwould be received from the UNJSPF, there had been a need for a set of scenarios on how the package
might be pared down to ensure its cost neutrality, as agreed by the General Council.  All of these
scenarios retained the balance necessary.  His delegation urged Members to adopt the draft decision at
the present meeting.
The Chairman said that in the light of Germany's statement, he would propose at the end of
the present meeting that the meeting resume on Frid ay, 16 October, in the morning to further consider
this matter.WT/GC/M/31
Page 30
The representative of Switzerland said that the work of the Working Group, in which
Switzerland had actively participated, had involved both technical and political difficulties.  Hard
work had overcome the technical difficulties.  It had been hoped that the political difficulties could be
met by setting out the different views in a frank and open manner, and that the negotiators who had
achieved one of the major trade negotiations in history – the Uruguay Round – would be able to
achieve negotiations on a pension and salary scale and system for 500 people.  The package proposedrepresented a remarkable balance of the varying interests of the Members and of the Secretariat staff.
His delegation could have gone along with Germany's suggestion for a delay in consideration of this
matter were there not a long background to this issue and deadlines looming ahead.  It was essential to
find a rapid solution so that this matter could be resolved Friday morning at the latest.
The representative of Norway said that his delegation had put many hours into work on this
matter at all levels and had hoped to reach an operational conclusion at the present meeting.  That did
not seem to be the case.  The utmost had to be done not to delay, or to make the delay as short as
possible, as any delay would affect Members' credibility in serving the Secretariat.  He appealed to
both delegations who were not in a position to take a decision on this matter at the present meeting to
do their utmost so that this matter could be settled by the end of the week.
The representative of Australia said that this was a historic step for the organization and one
that naturally had been some time in the making, given the pros and cons that had had to be carefully
analysed.  The report of the Working Group did that;  it was a very strong and balanced document.
Australia hoped for a quick resolution to this matter.
The representative of Canada said that her delegation recognized that not all were content
with all aspects of the proposed package, but considered that it represented the best possible balance.
Canada understood that some Members might have continuing reservations, but the time had come to
take a decision and Canada looked forward to doing that on Friday.
The Chairman recalled what the Chairman of the Working Group had said about the tightness
of the time-frame, and that if the time-frame established by the General Council  was to be met, it had
to take a decision on this matter this week.  It seemed clear from the discussion that except for one
delegation, there was a consensus on this matter, even though some had expressed reservations.  He
suggested that the meeting be suspended until Friday morning.  He added that, as indicated when the
present meeting was convened, there would be a meeting of the Interim Committee for the
International Trade Organization (ICITO) following th e present meeting in order to take the necessary
decisions regarding the decision anticipated in th e General Council.  That meeting would now be
postponed until the resumed meeting of the General Council  on Friday.
Upon resumption of the meeting at 11:30 on 16 October, the representative of Germany said
that while a consensus decision was close, he had to reiterate that his authorities continued to have
doubts about whether the proposal was fully within the parameters agreed by the General Council.  At
least in the medium-term, his authorities saw considerable risks that salary and benefit levels might in
the aggregate exceed salary and benefit levels in the UN common system.  For this reason, Germany
could consider joining a consensus only if two change s were introduced into the text of the proposal.
The first change related to the review clause fores een for the salaries scale in Regulation 6.2 of the
draft Staff Regulations.  In view of the uncertainties of the actual environment, the possibilities for
necessary reviews had to be improved.  Also, the review period had to be shortened to three years.
The second change related to the pension plan.  It had to be made more certain that the pension plan
benefits would really remain within the aggregate of benefit levels in the UN common system.  To
meet this target, the level of the surviving spouse's benefit as foreseen in Article 30 had to be reducedto a 50 per cent level.  He was fully aware that this change went beyond a mere technical adjustment.
For those concerned it meant a reduction of their benefits, and his government would have preferred
to agree to a more generous solution.  However, the system had to remain viable;  it had to be kept in
mind that other systems, in particular the UN system, also foresaw a 50 per cent rate for this benefit.
His authorities had gone a long way from their principle and well-founded position not to accept aWT/GC/M/31
Page 31
further compartmentalization of the salary systems fo r international civil servants.  However, if the
changes suggested were accepted, his authorities could join a consensus to adopt the draft decision.
The Chairman suggested that it would be useful for the Chairman of the Working Group to
describe the context in which these two matters had been considered in the Working Group.
The Chairman of the Working Group said that re garding the five-year review provided for in
Regulation 6.2 of the draft Staff Regulations, the Working Group had had to make a judgement as to
what frequency would be sufficient but not too onerous or costly for the General Council and for
those involved in the review.  Also, there were provisions in the various regulations which meant that
in the event of a serious structural deficit in the pension fund, there was a procedure for immediate
advice by the Management Board to the General Council.  One of the main drivers of pension liability
was the level of salaries.  Article 9 of the Pension Regulations provided that any measure, including areview of salary scales and automatic adjustment, could be examined at any time in the event of a
structural deficit.  Furthermore, in the case of an independent Secretariat, the General Council would
always be able to decide on a review of any aspect.  Regarding the surviving spouse benefit in Article
30 of the draft Pension Regulations, the impact of the suggestion that a figure of 50 per cent rather
than 60 per cent be used would be that a surviving spouse of a WTO officer would receiveapproximately 25 per cent of the final net pay of that  officer.  A 60 per cent figure would translate to
the surviving spouse receiving just a fraction over 30 per cent of the deceased officer's final net pay.
In deciding on this figure, the Working Group had been influenced by the fact that the independent
actuaries had observed that the 60 per cent figure was a widely prevailing practice in pension schemes
and by the fact that the vast majority of surviving spouses would find themselves resident inSwitzerland, where there would be no other safety net for them to fall back on.  Lastly, the cost
neutrality certified by the independent panel of actuaries included the provision for surviving spouses
at the 60 per cent level.
The representative of the United States reiterated that her delegation was prepared to join the
consensus to authorize the Director-General to send a letter to the UNJSPF initiating the procedures
for the withdrawal of the WTO from that Fund.  Th e US shared the views expressed by France, the
Netherlands and the UK that in the event of an actuarial deficit in the WTO pension plan, benefits
would be reduced until the deficit was remedied.  An  important element of the consensus was that the
proposed independent WTO system of salaries and pe nsions would be cost-neutral as compared with
what would have been the case if the UN common system were still applied, de facto, to the WTO
Secretariat.  Her delegation joined the consensus on this matter in the expectation, and on theunderstanding, that the plan would not exceed the compensation provided by the UN common system
in the aggregate.  In other words, the new system s hould not have either an initial or projected impact
on the WTO's budget, and should reflect no growth expressed in nominal terms.  She expressed
appreciation that the decision to be taken at the present meeting reaffirmed the long-standing practice
of taking decisions on budget and administrative matters by consensus.  Her delegation had been intouch with the Secretariat to obtain some additional information on some of the technical details of
the plan, which she expected would be forthcoming in the next few days.
The representative of Germany said that while he fully understood the concerns expressed in
the Working Group by some regarding the level of benefits for surviving spouses, others clearly
supported the 50 per cent level.  Many people in Geneva who worked for organizations that were part
of the UN common system had to live with the leve ls provided for.  This issue need not be a
stumbling-block to coming to a consensus decision on the proposal.
The representative of Switzerland said that in his government's view, one could not do better
than the package proposed.  His delegation had difficulty in understanding Germany's position.  Cost
neutrality had been assured and certified in two actuar ial reports that had cost more than half a million
Swiss francs;  thus, that condition had been met.  It was not possible to acquire more assurances or
guarantees than had been acquired.  His delegation wanted to avoid the WTO finding itself unable to
adopt an independent salaries and pension system, as Ministers had mandated, simply becauseWT/GC/M/31
Page 32
Members wanted to ensure that widows of deceased officials received only 25 per cent instead of 30
per cent of their deceased spouses' salaries. Consensus required that flexibility be shown on both
sides.  He expressed concern that altering the figure of 60 per cent might cause difficulty for many
administrations that currently applied that figure.  Further, it would be very dangerous to begin to
unravel the package at this juncture, as this could jeopardize the whole endeavour.  He said there was
no financial argument that could justify Germany's position on this matter, and hoped that reasonwould prevail.
The representative of Norway reiterated that his delegation could accept the package as it
stood;  it was not in a position to say yes or no to Germany's proposal and would have to ask for the
meeting to be adjourned so that he could consult with his government, particularly on the question of
the level of benefits for surviving spouses.
The representative of Japan said that Japan supported the proposal and strongly urged the
General Council to take a decision at the present meeting.  His delegation did not understand
Germany's position;  as long as cost neutrality was preserved, there was no need to consider whether
some aspect of the package exceeded what was provided for under the UN common system.
The representative of Hong Kong, China said that  the package had to be looked at as a whole,
not provision by provision.  The very change Germany had requested was envisaged, if circumstances
made it necessary, in Annex I to the draft decision;   therefore, the mechanism to ensure that the
scheme remained viable was already in place.  He associated his delegation with the points made by
Switzerland and Japan.  The package was fair to all parties, and his delegation continued to support it.
The representative of Canada said that her delegation continued to consider that the package
was fair and balanced, and that it met the conditions of cost neutrality Members had set for
themselves some months ago.  She associated her delegation with the remarks made by Switzerland
and Japan.
The representative of Egypt said that his de legation had been ready to go along with a
consensus on the draft decision on the understanding that he had set out in his statement on 14
October.  Any change in what Egypt had agreed to would require further consultations with his
capital.  He could not do this today as it was a holiday in his country.
The representative of Tunisia hoped that a final decision could be reached as soon as possible.
The representative of Korea said that the launching of an independent WTO Secretariat at the
beginning of 1999 was not only appropriate but necessary, since an independent WTO compensation
and personnel plan which took into account the specificity of the WTO staff would further enhance
the quality of the services provided to the Member s.  Korea attached importance to the requirements
of cost neutrality, long-term financial viability and proper justification for new provisions.  Korea
hoped that all Members could join a consensus on this matter.
The representative of Turkey said that the proposed package was balanced and fully respected
the requirement of cost neutrality.  Her delegation hoped a consensus could be found at the present
meeting.
The representatives of Japan, India , Switzerland , Norway , Australia , Canada , Tunisia , Korea ,
Turkey and Hong Kong, China  fully supported the proposed package and adoption of the draft
decision.
The Chairman said that he would make a suggestion which he would ask delegations to
consider, with the idea of suspending the meeting until the afternoon and allowing delegations to state
their positions on it at that time.  He said that years had been spent on this matter and that it was worth
trying to reach an agreement on it at a resumed meeting.  He then read out the following statement:  "IWT/GC/M/31
Page 33
propose that, in light of the fact that under Article 9 of the Pension Plan Regulations an actuarial
valuation would be conducted at least once every three years, the last sentence of Staff Regulation 6.2
should read:  'the salary scale and the method of adjustment shall be subject to review every three
years', and not every five years.  In the light of statements made by some delegations at the present
meeting, I further propose that on the occasion of the first actuarial valuation provided for under
Article 9 of the Plan Regulations, the Management Board shall report to the General Council inparticular on the consistency of maintaining the surviving spouse benefit at the 60 per cent level under
Article 30 with the maintenance of the long-term actuarial balance of the Plan."  He said that this
change should not change any basic elements in the package.  The review of the salary scale would be
at the same time as the review of the pension plan.
Upon resumption of the meeting at 14:30 on 16 October, the Chairman referred to the text he
had read out earlier in the meeting and proposed two changes to it.  The revised text had been
circulated in the meeting room.  The first change was in line three of paragraph 1, where the word
"five" had been replaced with the word "three".  The second related to the penultimate line of
paragraph 2 which had read "surviving spouse benefit at the 60 per cent level under Article 30";  the
words "60 per cent" had been deleted, and the words "provided for" had been added after the word
"level".  He said that while there was a change in the words, there was no change in what wassuggested, as the 60 per cent level was, in fact, provided for. He reassured delegations that the first
change suggested was merely a procedural change regarding the period in which the review would be
conducted and had no substantive impact on the provisions that had been negotiated in the Working
Group.  The second change did not propose any change in the text of the draft decision but merely
offered a statement by the Chairman as to one of th e issues that would need to be addressed when the
review took place.
The Chairman of the Working Group confirmed everything the Chairman had said on these
two points.
The Chairman then read out the revised text as follows:  "I propose that, in light of the fact
that under Article 9 of the Pension Plan Regulations an actuarial valuation would be conducted at
least once every three years, the last sentence of Staff Regulation 6.2 should read:  'the salary scale
and the method of adjustment shall be subject to review every three years', and not every five years.
In the light of statements made by some delegations at this meeting, I further propose that on the
occasion of the first actuarial valuation provided for under Article 9 of the Plan Regulations, the
Management Board shall report to the General Counc il in particular on the consistency of maintaining
the surviving spouse benefit at the level provided for under Article 30 with the maintenance of the
long-term actuarial balance of the Plan."  He then  announced that immediately following the present
meeting there would be a meeting of the Interim Commission for the International Trade Organization
(ICITO).
The representative of Germany said that his authorities were ready to go along with the
proposal as amended by the Chairman;  however, they continued to be very concerned about the
effects of the WTO's departure from the UN common system on the overall cohesion of the UN
system.  For this reason and for the reasons mentioned in his earlier interventions, he made the
following statement for the record :  (i) Regarding the salary scale, Germany understood that the
review stipulated under Regulation 6.2 of the draft Staff Regulations would include a careful and
precise comparison with the then existing salary system of the United Nations as applicable to Geneva
posts.  (ii) As to the pension plan, Germany shared the concerns expressed by the United Kingdom,
the Netherlands, Egypt, France and the US with regard to the risks that might be incurred by WTO
Members in setting up the independent pension fund with the proposed regulations.  Germany joinedthese countries in stating that any deficit occurring in the pension fund could not be met by higher
contributions of Members.  In the case of an actuarial deficit in the future, benefits would have to be
adjusted.  (iii) As to paragraph 2 of the Chairman's statement, Germany understood that there was
agreement on the instruction to the Management Board that the first actuarial valuation should include
in the consistency test the maintenance of the aggregate level as defined in the Decision of theWT/GC/M/31
Page 34
General Council of 21 April 1998 (WT/GC/W/83).  Germany would not stand in the way of the
Chairman stating that the General Council had come to a consensus on this difficult and important
matter, subject, as agreed, to the conclusion of satisfactory transfer arrangements with the UNJSPF.
The Chairman proposed that the General Council take note  of the statements, take note  of the
report by the Chairman of the Working Group in document WT/GC/W/101, take note of the
certification provided by the panel of independent actuaries in document WT/GC/W/103, and adopt
the draft decision in document WT/GC/W/102/Rev.17.
The General Council so agreed.
The Chairman of the Working Group thanked all those who had helped bring this matter to a
successful outcome.
The Director-General said that the decision just been taken was the result of four years of
protracted and difficult negotiations.  He expressed gratitude to all those who had contributed to
bringing this matter to fruition, and to the Members who had shown the necessary flexibility to do so.
The present decision meant improvement for everyone concerned, and represented a fair and balancedoutcome for everyone.
The General Council took note of the statements.
11. High-level meeting on trade and environment
(a) Proposal by the European Communities (WT/L/273)
The representative of the European Communities, speaking under "Other Business", said that
the Community was pleased to see from its contacts with delegations that support was growing for its
initiative to convene a high-level meeting on trade and environment under the auspices of the WTO.The Community had put forward its proposal because WTO Members had a responsibility to ensure
that the multilateral trading system responded effec tively to sustainable development needs.  It was
essential that the trade and environment debate in the WTO respond to the combined challenges of
globalisation and the increasing pressure on the environment and natural resources.  In discussions
with many WTO Members the Community had noted that the majority preferred to hold the meeting
in Geneva, and that many preferred not to have to send ministers to represent them.  The meeting
could be held primarily at senior officials level, but each Member should be free to choose the level ofparticipation it felt appropriate.  It was essential to the success of the meeting that Members be
represented by people from capitals and, in particular, by ministries other than just trade – for
example, environment, development, natural resources and other relevant ministries – especially if the
meeting was to have a strong development focus.  International organizations which had specific
relevant expertise, such as UNCTAD, should be invited.  In order to promote broad participation fromdeveloping countries, the Community was prepared to support the meeting financially and urged other
developed countries to do the same.  Regarding the agenda, the aim of the meeting should be to
stimulate a free-ranging debate.  While the Community had suggested three themes, it welcomed
suggestions from Members to discuss issues they considered a priority.  Regarding the outcome of the
meeting, a Chairman's summary reflecting the views exchanged, but not negotiated by or committingany Member, would be a satisfactory conclusion.  A high-level dialogue could make an important
contribution to confidence-building and to highlighting the importance of trade and environment for
the WTO's present and future work.  With this in mind and given the broad and growing consensus
that had developed over the past weeks, the Community hoped that preparation for the holding of the
high-level meeting could, with the help of the Secretariat, now be finalized.
                                                     
7 The Decision was circulated in document WT/L/282.WT/GC/M/31
Page 35
The representative of Norway supported the Community's proposal.  The WTO had carried
out substantial analytical work on a wide range of topics within the scope of trade and environment
and should share its thoughts with other interested parties.  A high-level meeting would provide an
opportunity for a dialogue with ministries other than  trade, and with other international organizations,
politicians, the private sector and NGOs.  Sustainable development, particularly taking into account
the needs of developing countries, would be an important issue on the agenda of such a meeting.Norway agreed that the meeting should be in Geneva, but outside the formal WTO structure, during
the spring of 1999, and that preparations for the meeting should begin soon.  His government was
disposed to offering financial support for participation from developing countries.
The representative of the United States said that considerable discussions on this issue had
been held over the past months, and hoped that a deci sion to hold a high-level dialogue could be taken
in the near future.  Like the Community, the US view on this issue had evolved considerably on the
basis of the views expressed by many delegations.  It was up to each delegation to decide whether to
participate and at what level of government officials.  Her delegation supported a broad cross-section
of developed and developing-country NGOs and business participation, and encouraged the Director-
General to urge delegations to contribute funds to  allow participation by developing country NGO and
business interests.  The US would look for separate  funds for this.  The purpose of the meeting would
be to promote dialogue among the diverse participants in the area of trade and environment, and
would not involve a negotiated outcome.  Her delegation fully respected the Director-General's and
the Secretariat's ability to craft a balanced agenda, as they had done for the two earlier symposia in
1997 and 1998.
The representative of Indonesia on behalf of the ASEAN members, said that while these
countries were still unclear as to the utility of such  a forum, they were prepared to go along with the
proposed dialogue on trade and environment, with some caveats.  The dialogue should be educational
in nature and with the objective of improving understanding and increasing public awareness of the
issues addressed, as well as an exercise in transparency, with no intention of coming to a pre-determined conclusion.  It would more appropriately be called a dialogue or symposium.  The level of
participation of the individuals invited – government officials, academicians, intergovernmental
organizations, etc. – should not be limited.  Th e ASEAN members would prefer that the meeting
immediately follow the meeting of the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE).  He emphasized
that this would not be a negotiating exercise but simply a brainstorming and exchange of views.
The representative of Egypt said that the high-level meeting should not interfere with the
work of the CTE, which was doing good work and was focussing on relevant problems at the trade
and environment interface. The developmental perspective should be taken fully into consideration in
the meeting's agenda, and should reflect the needs and priorities of developing countries, in particular
financial requirements, transfer of technology and capacity-building.  UNCTAD was doing very
useful work in the field of trade and environment and should be closely involved in the preparation ofthe meeting.  Civil society, including NGOs, should participate fully.  He had taken note of the
Community's statement as to facilitating the part icipation of NGOs from developing countries, and
stressed that the least developed countries should be fully represented.  Egypt was agreeing to the
Community's proposal on the basis that the meet ing would end with a summary by the chairman.
The representative of Australia said that the proposed high-level dialogue should be
approached from a practical point of view and th at there should be no unrealistic expectations about
its purpose and role.  It should be a means to improve dialogue between trade and environment
communities and to encourage a more informed public  debate on the complex issues involved in the
interaction between trade and the environment.  There would be a need to include and thoroughly
address the needs and concerns of countries at different levels of economic development.  A key
element in maximizing the value of the meeting would be adequate representation from both trade and
environment ministries.  An appropriate opportunity should be given to the full spectrum of
participants, including NGOs and industry, and there should be an adequate mix from the variousWT/GC/M/31
Page 36
WTO Member countries.  Australia looked forward to participating in the meeting and to contributing
to its preparations under the auspices of the WTO.
The representative of Hong Kong, China support ed an educational exchange of views on this
subject, provided certain parameters were respected.  First, this exchange should not be portrayed as a
meeting of a WTO body but should be a high-level  symposium outside the WTO structure.  Second,
there should be balanced participation including the private sector.  Lastly, there should be no
implications for rights and obligations, and the meeting should not result in any process akin to
negotiation in parallel with official WTO bodies.  Members should be aware of the possible
consequences, in terms of detracting from WTO core activities, of holding meetings of this type.
The representative of Brazil said that Brazil could go along with the proposal on the
understanding that, as the Community had recently said in an informal gathering, this event should not
be understood as a "short-cut to the Third Ministerial".  There should be no unrealistic expectations
regarding the Third Ministerial and the future of the WTO.  Before the Secretariat was delegated
organizational tasks for the proposed meeting, several important aspects had to be addressed.  There
was not, as yet, any common view on the format, agenda, outcome and venue of the meeting.  Some
common ground as to the level of representation was necessary to ensure a balanced and equitableparticipation, and there should be no unjustified expectations regarding the outcome of the meeting.
Regarding the agenda, Brazil favoured the discussion of issues such as market access, subsidies, eco-
labels and other trade issues closely related to further trade liberalization.  Regarding the outcome, he
said that for similar meetings in the past this ha d been oral remarks by the chairman summarizing the
proceedings, and a factual press release prepared by the Trade and Environment Division.  In thespirit of cooperation and consensus-building, Brazil could accept the idea of a chairman's summary,
provided that this did not involve any negotiated conclusion or commitments.
The representative of India said that his delegation had already made known its views on the
holding of a high-level meeting on trade and environment, was not in a position to agree to the
Community's proposal at the present meeting, and needed further time for reflection.
The representative of New Zealand welcomed the proposal for a meeting to deepen
understanding of the issues that underlay the debate on trade and environment issues.  Regarding
format, the meeting could be based on, and build on, past symposia organized by the Secretariat in
which government officials, business and NGOs had all participated.  Thus, senior level trade and
environment official participation, as well as participation by NGOs and business and industry groupswould seem appropriate.  The purpose would be to deepen understanding of the nature of the issues
underlying the trade and environment debate.  There would be no specific negotiated outcome;  the
aim would be a constructive exchange of views and information. A factual summary of the meeting
that accurately reflected the discussion could be issued.  While there should be some discussion of
issues related to Article XX of GATT 1994, there would also be a need to explore the positivesynergies between trade liberalization and environmental benefits.
The representative of Canada said that her delegation was pleased to hear the level of support
that had been building among Members for the holding of a high-level meeting on trade and
environment. It was clear that many Members saw this as a meeting that was meant to encourage
dialogue and improve understanding of the issues related to trade and environment.  It was also clear
that a number of matters needed to be discussed further.  Her delegation was encouraged that the
Community now saw the level of participation as senior official level, leaving Members free to decide
the level they considered appropriate.  Canada looked forward to working with others in coming to
further agreement on the format, agenda, timing and outcome of such a meeting.
The representative of Switzerland said that Switzerland had a favourable position with regard
to the proposed meeting.  His delegation's views we re very close to those of Norway, the European
Communities and the United States.  He emphasized that Switzerland shared the view that this
meeting should not address any recommendations for the Committee on Trade and Environment, norWT/GC/M/31
Page 37
should it address any recommendations to the Third Ministerial meeting.  The outcome of the meeting
should not create a political burden for the delegations involved.  The spring would be a good time to
hold the meeting.  While time was needed for appropriate preparation, the date of the meeting should
be a healthy distance in time from the Ministerial meeting in November 1999.
The representative of Pakistan said that his delegation was prepared to look at the revised
proposal from the Community.  However, Pakistan join ed those who felt that other issues had a higher
priority for many WTO Members.  Amongst these was the issue of a high-level meeting on trade and
development.  All proposals for high-level meetings or symposia should be considered further in
informal consultations before a decision was taken.
The representative of Mexico said that his delegation's priority in the WTO was the
preparation of a Third Ministerial meeting which should be positive and to the benefit of all Members.
Preparations for the proposed meeting, if done properly, would take considerable time, and other
issues related to the Third Ministerial, such as electronic commerce, would also take up economic and
human resources.  The work of the CTE had been very positive, not only in substance but also in
creating a favourable environment for a better understanding of issues, which were more of a
technical and legal nature than purely political. Unrealistic expectations from a meeting on trade andenvironment should be avoided.  Therefore, there should be further consultations before any decision
was taken, in order to pinpoint a series of topics or issues.  For example, a common denominator still
had to be found as to what would be the link or lack of link between this particular event and WTO,
what type of event it would be, what the level of  participation would be, when and where it would be
held, what the precise agenda would be and what the results were expected to be.  The mostappropriate outcome would be simply to reflect all the statements which had been made. Mexico did
not see the real usefulness of such an event, but woul d continue to participate in consultations to try to
shed light on these issues.
The representative of Korea said that his delegation supported the holding of a high-level
meeting which should aim to further enhance mutual understanding between WTO Members and civil
society, and to move forward the policy debate at  the political level in order to help reinforce
deliberations in the CTE.  The meeting should deal with a broad range of  subjects and should not be
limited to those currently under discussion in the CTE.  Further work would be necessary to establish
a balanced agenda.  Participation should also be balanced.
The representative of Cuba said that his delegation understood the Community's concerns in
promoting the issue of environment in the WTO.  However, Cuba was not ready to support this
initiative for a high-level meeting.  He agreed wi th Egypt that issues such as trade and development
were extremely important for a great number of Members and should be promoted to a greater degree.
The outcome of an eventual meeting on trade and environment should, in any case, not be
recommendations.  Countries should be properly represented, and issues such as market access andother points of interest to developing countries should be taken up.  Cuba shared the concerns
expressed by Mexico and Hong Kong, China as to the financial aspects and budget repercussions that
such a meeting would have, particularly as it would affect the countries with fewer financial resources
than others.
The representative of Argentina supported the Community's proposal.  His delegation would
participate in such an endeavour, and would focus on the issues to be included on the agenda.
Argentina would like to continue discussions on aspe cts of the meeting such as the format and the
results expected.  A dialogue should be established with different sectors of civil society, and the
different proposals made by Member delegations should be considered.
The representatives of Norway, Indonesia on behalf of the ASEAN members , Egypt , New
Zealand and Korea  agreed that the outcome of the meeting should be a summary by the chairman
reflecting the views expressed, and would not be negotiated by, or commit, any Member.WT/GC/M/31
Page 38
The representatives of the United States, Indonesia on behalf of the ASEAN members , Egypt ,
Australia, Hong Kong, China , New Zealand , and Korea  said that the agenda of the meeting should be
balanced and inclusive, including development issues, and should reflect the diverse elements of the
trade and environment debate.
The General Council took note of the statements.
12. High-level meeting on trade and development
The representative of Egypt, speaking under "Other  Business", said that after its consultations
with several developing countries, in particular India, Jamaica and Pakistan, his delegation was
proposing the convening of a high-level meeting on trade and development.  He would revert to this
matter at the next meeting of the General Council on the basis of a written submission.  He said thatthe Marrakesh Agreement contained the core objectives of the WTO, which included raising
standards of living, ensuring full employment and expanding the production of and trade in goods and
services.  The WTO had broad developmental objectives.  Given the present state of turmoil in global
financial markets, the marked slowdown in globa l economic growth and the rise in protectionist
sentiment, it was essential to undertake an in-depth examination of the WTO's role in achieving itsfundamental objectives.  The WTO's contribution towards promoting trade enabled countries to
achieve economic benefits.  However, questions had increasingly been raised on how widespread
these benefits had been  and to what extent the WTO Agreement had contributed to the objectives
stipulated in the Marrakesh Agreement, in particular in relation to developing countries.  The current
financial crisis had also given rise to concerns about the impact of liberalization on developingcountries' economic prospects.  The dramatic and painful social and economic reversals experienced
by many emerging economies could lead to an erosion of support for liberalization measures in many
countries.  The question of management and prevention of the financial crisis was being currently
addressed by the international financial institutions.  However, the critical interlinkages between trade
and the financial crisis had yet to be addressed in many fora.  The WTO had a natural responsibility totake a lead in addressing this issue, which related to its role towards promoting coherence in global
economic policy-making.  The discussion at the General Council informal meeting in September had
demonstrated that implications of recent economic developments for the global trading system and
economic and social developments were serious and complex.  These issues should be addressed by
senior-level policy makers responsible for the inter-related areas of finance, trade and development.
He drew attention to the joint statement by the Heads of the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO
which had been read out by the Director-General at the present meeting.  He referred to paragraph 2of the statement which read as follows:  " In our discussions today we have re-emphasized that pursuit
of policies facilitating a return to more orderly financial markets and exchange-rate stability are the
immediate requirements for recovery.  These policies, combined with sound macroeconomic
fundamentals, appropriate social safety nets, nondiscriminatory trade liberalization, structural and
financial sector reform, and the orderly integration of financial markets along with the safeguards andprudence such integration requires, are critical to promoting the common objectives of high-quality
economic growth, poverty alleviation, and broad-based economic development on a sustainable
basis".  A high-level meeting could serve these objectives by addressing trade, finance and
development policies.  It would lead to enhanced understanding of the impact of trade liberalization
on development and of the linkages between trade, finance and development issues.  This wouldcontribute to the formulation of better informed policies concerning future trade liberalization and to
the development of a global consensus in support of such liberalization.
He then drew attention to specific features of  a high-level meeting.  With regard to the
agenda, three broad issues might be included such as:  (i) the impact of the Uruguay RoundAgreements on developing countries and in particul ar the implementation of special and differential
treatment provisions in favour of developing countries;  (ii) implications of the global economic crisis
on trade prospects of developing countries;  and (iii) future role of the WTO in promoting
developmental objectives.  Such a meeting should be attended by senior-level officials responsible forWT/GC/M/31
Page 39
trade, finance and development, representatives of international organizations including the IMF,
IBRD and UNCTAD, as well as representatives of developmental NGOs and private business.  With
regard to the format, this could  be a three-day meeting.  Its deliberations, which could be chaired by
the Director-General, should be in the nature of a dialogue and short interventions rather than formal
statements.  The meeting could be held in Geneva in the first quarter of 1999.  The outcome could be
provided in the form of a record of proceedings or a Chairman's summary.  Egypt, together with
interested delegations from developing countries, would submit a joint paper for circulation to
Members in due course.
The Chairman noted Egypt's intention to circulate a paper on this subject and to include this
matter on the agenda of the next meeting of the General Council.
The representative of Indonesia, speaking on behalf of the ASEAN members, said that
ASEAN believed that the proposal to convene a high-level meeting on trade and development
deserved positive consideration since trade was inextricably linked to the issue of development.  This
was an important issue for developing countries.  ASEAN would follow this matter closely and would
participate in discussions to be held on this subject.
The General Council took note of the statements.
13. Chairmanship of the Working Parties on Accession of Georgia and Kazakstan
The Chairman, speaking under "Other Business", said that on the basis of consultations held
with interested delegations, he wished to inform the General Council that Amb. A. Anderson (Ireland)
had agreed to replace, as Chairperson of the Working Party on the Accession of Georgia,
Amb. Herfkens (Netherlands) and that Amb. P. Huhtaniemi (Finland) had agreed to replace, as
Chairperson of the Working Party on Kazakstan, Amb. Ekblom (Finland).
The General Council took note of this information.
14. State of play in accession working parties
The Chairman, speaking under "Other Business", recalled that at the July meeting of the
General Council a request had been addressed to the Secretariat to prepare a factual note on the state
of play in various accession working parties.  This note had recently been circulated inWT/GC/W/100.
The General Council took note of this information.
15. End-of-year review of developments in international trade and the trading system
The Chairman, speaking under "Other Business", recalled that at the December 1997
General Council meeting some delegations had expressed the wish to organize the end-of-year review
of developments in international trade and the trading system in such a manner as to give more time to
delegations to address this matter.  He suggested the following approach in order to handle thismatter:  (i) the end-of-year meeting of the General Council would include a special meeting of the
Trade Policy Review Body (TPRB), on the first day;  (ii) at the opening of that meeting, under the co-
chairmanship of the chairperson of the General Council and the chairperson of the TPRB, the
Director-General would be invited to make his stat ement on developments in international trade and
the trading system.  This statement would be understood to address issues which were pertinent bothto the examination of developments in international trade in the TPRB, and to the business of the
General Council;  (iii) the TPRB would then hold a full discussion on developments in theWT/GC/M/31
Page 40
international trade and the trading system, and the following morning the General Council would
continue its normal order of business.  He had discussed this matter with the Chairman of the TPRB,
and both the Chairman of the TPRB and the Director-General had agreed with this way of proceeding.
This would also meet the concerns expressed in the course of the past year of not being able to have a
proper discussion of developments in the trading system.
The General Council took note of the statement.
__________
At the meeting on 23 October, the Chairman proposed that the meeting be adjourned and
reconvened at an appropriate time to consider the matters of the Report of the Committee on Budget,
Finance and Administration and the appointment of the next Director-General, and perhaps
derestriction of WTO documents.
The General Council so agreed.
__________