RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/TF/M/1 
6 December 2004 
 
 (04-5342) 
Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING  
 
Held in the Centre William Rappard
 
on 15 November 2004  
 
Chairman:  Mr.  Muhamad Noor Yacob (Malaysia) 
 
 
Subjects discussed :                     Page  
A. AGREEMENT ON WORK PLAN AND SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS ....................................................1  
1. Work Plan...................................................................................................................... ............1  
2. Schedule of Meetings ........................................................................................................... .....7 
B. AD HOC ATTENDANCE OF RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS , INCLUDING 
THE IMF,  OECD,  UNCTAD,  WCO  AND THE WORLD BANK, AT THE NEXT MEETING 
OF THE NEGOTIATING GROUP ...................................................................................................10  
 
 The proposed agenda was adopted by the Negotiating Group as contained in document 
WTO/AIR/2441/Rev.1.  A. A
GREEMENT ON WORK PLAN AND SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS  
1. Work Plan 
1. The Chairman recalled that Annex D, paragr aph 10, of the General Council's Decision of 
1 August 2004 required the Negotiating Group to agree on its work plan and schedule of meetings at 
the Group's first session.  He had been consulting as broadly as possible with delegations on that 
matter over the past weeks.  All Members had received an invitation to contact him in that regard with 
several of them actually having shared their views on those questions, for which he was thankful.  In 
those consultations, he had detected a number of  common elements in Members' thinking.   
2. With respect to the Work Plan, there seemed to be  a desire for it to be short and concise, with 
sufficient flexibility to adapt the substantive di scussion at each meeting to the Group's respective 
needs.  Members had also expressed their wish for a balanced approach , that reflected all the elements 
of the July mandate in an equitable manner, with  no judgements on priority.  Furthermore, he had 
sensed a need for the process to be member-driven, with work proceeding on the basis of Members' 
contributions and other input the Group might request.   
3. Those were the commonalities he had found in Me mbers' views.  And those were also the 
principles that had guided him when putting together a chairman's text.  His proposal sought to incorporate all those elements as they had emerged in  the consultations.  It had been circulated in 
document TN/TF/W/1 dated 5 November 2004.  The s uggested Work Plan called for work to proceed TN/TF/M/1 
Page 2  
 
 on the basis of Members' contributions and other input that the Negotiating Group might request.  The 
agenda of the Group was proposed to cover all elem ents of Annex D.  Those had been grouped into 
six clusters, without that in any way altering the mandate of the Negotiating Group.   
4. In taking up those items, he suggested it to be  understood that work would be pursued in a 
flexible way, without being bound by a particular  sequence.  Delegations would be free to address 
items in an integrated way, and to raise issues in  a cross-cutting manner.  The Work Plan would also 
be without prejudice to the possibility for the Group to  have formal or informal meetings on particular 
items.   
5. Another element of the suggested Work Plan c overed the attendance of relevant international 
organizations, including those mentioned in para graph 8 of Annex D (namely the IMF, OECD, 
UNCTAD, WCO and the World Bank), at each fo rmal meeting of the Negotiating Group on an 
ad hoc  basis.  That would greatly facilitate their c ontribution to the Group's work while at the same 
time offering Members a maximum of flexibility as to th e extend of those institutions' involvement in 
the negotiating process.   
6. The representative of Zambia
 apologized for his delegation not having been able to participate 
in the consultations on the Work Plan Members were  discussing and requested to take a decision on.  
He congratulated the Chairman on the work he had done  so far.  It was not his intention to delay the 
process.  Zambia would agree with whatever Members who had been participating in the consultations would agree on.  He was just seeking some clarification on one particular point.  While it seemed clear what Members were supposed to unde rtake under the Plan's first bullet point, Zambia 
would wish to obtain more clarity as to what exactly was envisaged under the second and third bullet.   
7. The Chairman
 clarified that the Work Plan listed all the elements of the July mandate as set 
out in Annex D.  It provided for a member-driven process, with work being guided by Members' wishes.  The idea was for delegations to put forwar d proposals – either through oral interventions or 
in written form - with those inputs then being considered by the membership.   
8. The representative of Zambia
 expressed his hope that, when adopting the Work Plan, the 
understanding would be for Members to be free to pursue their areas of interests under bullet points 
two and three, in the sense that they could not be prevented from doing so on the grounds of those issues not being covered by those bullets.   
9. The Chairman
 assured the delegate of Zambia that the suggested Work Plan was merely a 
short version of Annex D of the July package.  The Work Plan would in no way modify the modalities 
adopted in July, and not alter the negotiating mandate.   
10. The representative of the Philippines  thanked the Chairman for his proposed Work Plan and 
for the series of informal consultations conducted in its preparation.  Members had arrived at Annex D 
as a result of constructive cooperation and consu ltation.  The decision had been to limit the 
negotiations to Articles V, VIII and X of the GA TT 1994.  The Philippines welcomed the suggested 
agenda of the Negotiating Group and shared Zambia's  interpretation of the two bullet points.  His 
delegation was committed to cooperating constr uctively under the suggested Work Plan.   
11. The representative of Tanzania  congratulated the Chairman on having come forward with the 
suggested draft Work Plan.  His delegation associated  itself with the statements made by Zambia and 
the Philippines.  The proposed Work Plan and sched ule of meetings had helped Members focus on the 
issues at stake.  It showed the real aspects of  crucial importance to everyone.  Tanzania was 
encouraged by the Chairman's re marks on the negotiations being member-driven and the Work Plan 
being flexible.    TN/TF/M/1 
 Page 3 
 
 
 12. He expressed his hope for all meetings of th e Negotiating Group to be formal, as a general 
rule.  The conduct of informal meetings should be  undertaken only in exceptional circumstances as 
agreed upon by participants.  Notices of all formal and exceptional informal Negotiating Group 
meetings and consultations as well as of their agenda  should be circulated to all participants no later 
than three working days before the date of the mee ting to which the notice pertained.  All participants 
should be free to decide whether to participate in  those meetings or consultations.  The needs of 
smaller delegations like the one of Tanzania with its thin representation shoul d be taken into account 
by scheduling meetings in sequence and not in paralle l.  Minutes of all formal and informal meetings 
relating to the negotiations on trade facilitation should be recorded.  Such minutes should be 
circulated to all participants three working days be fore the next scheduled formal or informal meeting 
of the Negotiating Group.  Finally, all decisions taken by the Negotiating Group in connection with 
the negotiations should be by explicit consensus.   
13. The representative of Chinese Taipei  expressed his thanks for the efforts made in developing 
the suggested Work Plan.  Members had already had the opportunity to discuss issues related to trade 
facilitation to a certain extent, based on the common belief that it could benefit all Members in terms 
of their economic development.  A few concerns remained, however.   
14. Members needed to clarify and improve relevant aspects of GATT Articles V, VIII and X.  
The proposed agenda seemed to be well-balanced.  It was reassuring to find it contain most of the 
issues Members still had some concerns on, such as the ones relating to special and differential 
treatment, to LDC Members, the identification of  trade facilitation needs and priorities and to 
technical assistance and capacity building.  It wa s also encouraging to see this being done in a way 
that ensured that those concerns were actually addressed.  The Work Plan further proposed to invite 
relevant international organizations  to each formal meeting on an ad hoc  basis, which would not only 
save Members from repeating their work, but also a llow for the generation of additional input to the 
discussions.  It was Chinese Taipei 's believe that the Work Plan would provide Members with a good 
framework for future negotiations.  His delegation was more than happy to give the Plan its support.  
15. With the Doha Development Agenda being a Si ngle Undertaking, it was vital to achieve an 
overall balanced outcome in all areas for the a doption of the final package.  As substantive 
discussions on trade facilitation had not taken place before  the July deal, the top priority for the near 
future was to catch up with progress on other fronts.   His delegation would therefore like to suggest 
establishing a high frequency of meetings as of next  year, in order to have a chance to cover the 
ground and catch up with progress in other areas of the Round.  Chinese Taipei had every confidence 
in the leadership of chair and would like to pl edge its support for working towards a successful 
completion of the negotiations.   
16. The representative of Djibouti  noted that the issue raised by Zambia had to be given special 
attention before moving on any further.  With respect to the future work, things had to be very clear with respect to the issues mentioned in bullet points 2 and 3 to avoid any confusion.  More 
clarifications would be required.   
17. The representative of Pakistan
 noted that, in suggesting the present Work Plan, the Chairman 
had tried to be non-controversial by  simply listing the all the elements of Annex D as they had already 
been agreed upon by Members.  The Chairman's draft text merely reproduced wh at was already there.  
Pakistan saw no problem in that context.  With respect to the question of formal and informal 
meetings, his delegation was of the view that Me mbers should approach that as they went along.  
Other Negotiating Groups such as the one on agricu lture had started with formal meetings, with 
Members eventually realizing that this would not  deliver results, and the Group therefore moving 
towards informal meetings, which then started to br ing the previously missing results.  Pakistan would 
not call for one way or the other, but rather wished  for Members to adopt a flexible approach that TN/TF/M/1 
Page 4  
 
 would allow them to find out what worked best in the trade facilitation context and would enable the 
Group to adapt its mode of operation accordingly.   
18. With respect to the discussions on some of the other items of the agenda, Pakistan considered 
it a little early to address them in depth, as there were  no documents or papers av ailable yet.  All that 
existed were some previous submissions.  The Group n eeded to be more prepared to take them up in a 
meaningful manner.  Discussions at the present m eeting should therefore be limited to the Group's 
Work Plan and schedule of meetings.   
19. The representative of Romania
 commended the Chairman on his proposed Work Plan and 
schedule of meetings.  Romania supported the princi ple of work proceeding on the basis of Members' 
contributions and other input that the Negotia ting Group requested.  This would be fully in 
accordance with the July package.  With respect to the agenda of the Negotiating Group, her 
delegation was of the view that the suggested si x bullet points represented most of the subjects of 
interest to the Negotiating Group.  All those issues we re interlinked and had to be given attention in a 
flexible manner.  Furthermore, Romania also supported the idea of inviting relevant international organizations to attend the formal m eetings of the Negotiating Group on an ad hoc  basis.  This would 
ensure coherence and deliver positive results.  For those reasons, her de legation supported the 
proposed Work Plan. 
20. The representative of Jamaica
 noted that, as indicated in the informal consultations of 
2 November 2004, his delegation considered the Chairman's proposal for the Group's Work Plan and meeting schedule to be a good one.  Jamaica also  endorsed the call for a flexible approach in 
determining the Group's working method.  Such an a pproach would assist in ensuring that the process 
was educational and transparent, while seeking to  achieve the objectives of the Trade Facilitation 
negotiations as set out in their modalities.  That wa s particularly important as Annex D called for the 
negotiations to aim at clarifying and improving re levant aspects of Articles V, VIII and X of the 
GATT 1994, and required for that to be done withou t prejudice to the possible format of the final 
results, and the form of the outcome.  Jamaica s upported the suggested Work Plan and schedule of 
meetings.  His delegation had heard the comments  regarding some of their elements, but the 
Chairman's cross-reference to the relevant para graphs of Annex D shoul d help alleviating the 
concerns raised.  Jamaica was committed to work ing towards an outcome of the negotiations that 
would strengthen the efforts it had already undertaken in this area, and to ensure that they would not 
result in obligations that represented an additional burden to its resource-constrained economy.  His 
delegation expected the negotiations to lead to th e elaboration of effective provisions on special and 
differential treatment as well as on technical assistan ce and support for capacity building.  Jamaica's 
full support for trade facilitati on was reflected in its ongoing national programme for the 
modernization of customs systems and procedures, wh ich was now in its final implementation phase.   
21. With respect to meetings of the Negotiating Group, Jamaica awaited the evolution of the 
schedule, anticipating that the human resource constraints of developing and least-developed 
countries would be fully taken into account.  His delegation was looking forward to working with 
Members towards arriving at an outcome that was beneficial for all. 
22. The representative of Egypt
 reiterated the importance of bullet 4 of the Work Plan 
(identification of trade facilitation needs and prioriti es and concerns related to cost implications of 
proposed measures) as already stressed by his delega tion in the informal consultations preceding the 
present meeting.  He agreed with the suggestion for work to proceed on the basis of Members' 
contributions, but was of the view that, whenever a contribution was made, the first step should be the 
identification of trade facilitation needs and prio rities, as the other aspects of the Work Plan 
(improvement and clarification of relevant aspects of GATT Articles V, VIII and X, capacity building, special and differential treatment  for LDCs etc.) would depend on it.    TN/TF/M/1 
 Page 5 
 
 
 23. The representative of Nigeria  welcomed the Chairman’s draft Work Plan.  It reflected the 
modalities set out in Annex D of the July package te xt.  His delegation had taken note of the Chair’s 
remarks on all issues being important and given the same  priority.  As stated by Nigeria in the process 
leading to the adoption of modalities for negotiations  on trade facilitation, as well as in the informal 
consultations conducted by the Chairm an following his appointment last month, his delegation wished 
to underscore the need for giving adequate priority to technical assistance and capacity building.  
Some Members had only agreed to the modalities fo r negotiations after explicit reference to those 
issues in Annex D.  He hoped that Members, par ticularly the developed ones, would match those 
words with actions. 
24. Nigeria agreed with the Work Plan having to  be flexible and completely supported the 
Chairman’s draft.  His delegation was fully committed to the negotiating process and hoped that it 
would actually be beneficial to all.   
25. The representative of Rwanda  expressed her thanks for the extensive consultations the 
Chairman had conducted with Members.  Her dele gation was also thankful for him having come up 
with a draft Work Plan and schedule of meetings, which reflected Rwanda’s main concerns.  As a 
landlocked country, Rwanda’s interest in trade f acilitation rules was particularly great.  Improved 
facilities in areas such as the clearance of goods at  ports and other entrance points represented positive 
opportunities for Rwanda’s business community.  Due to  its landlocked-status, Rwanda’s transport 
costs were 50 per cent above those of neibouring countries with access to the sea.  Therefore, for 
Rwanda, transport costs were a more prohibitive trade barrier than tariffs.  This had been reflected in a 
report by the Secretariat that year which had shown that in Africa, transport costs almost doubled the 
world average.  Her delegation therefore liked to underscore the need for a national assessment to 
identify the trade facilitation needs, which would greatly assist negotiations in this area.   
26. With respect to the scope of the negotiations, Rwanda would like to emphasize that it had to 
be limited to the delineations cont ained in paragraph 1 of Annex D.  Her delegation would also wish 
to stress that technical assistance and support for ca pacity building were vital in all stages of the 
negotiations and an eventual implementation phase.  Rwanda looked forward to the implementation of 
the relevant parts of Annex D, particularly paragra phs 5 and 8.  Special and differential treatment was 
an integral element of the negotiations, and Rwanda was very happy to see that reflected in the Work 
Plan.  Her delegation expected an outcome that w ould take the principle of such treatment into 
consideration by coming up with meaningful provisi ons to that end.  Rwanda was fully committed to 
those negotiations in order to make them useful for the entire membership.   
27. The representative of Nepal  noted Members had had extensive deliberations on trade 
facilitation during the work on the July package.  When accepting trade facilitation as an area for 
negotiations, Nepal had thought - an d still thought - that that was one of the areas where capacity 
building would be essential.  As a landlocked count ry, Nepal attached great importance to trade 
facilitation.  But it had to be based on support for capacity building, and not be carried out in a 
manner which would make it difficult for least-developed countries to implement.   
28. Nepal supported the suggested Work Plan and sch edule of meetings.  His delegation had also 
taken note of the Chairman’s proposal for work to be member-driven and carried out in a transparent 
and flexible way.  Nepal supported Zambia’s call fo r the Work Plan not to exclude the addressing of 
any issues Members may wish to take up during the ne gotiations.  His delegation had always held that 
trade facilitation matters had to be looked at in  a comprehensive manner in view of countries' 
development, financial and trading needs, especia lly those of LDCs and landlocked countries such as 
Nepal.   
29. The representative of China  noted that the current meeting had been rendered possible by the 
efforts and the hard work of all participants si nce the adoption of the July package.  China was TN/TF/M/1 
Page 6  
 
 grateful for having been able to participate in  the informal consultations preceding the present 
meeting which had led to the elaboration of the draft Work Plan and schedule of meetings.  His 
delegation was prepared to continue working in a constructive and flexible manner so as to allow for 
concrete progress to be made.  China would also like  to take the opportunity to make a few comments 
on the suggested Work Plan and schedule of meetings.   
30. The circulated draft consisted of two parts:  one relating to the Work Plan and one to the 
schedule of meetings.  Part one could be understo od as a reproduction of Annex D, as some Members 
had already mentioned, while part two did not form  part of the July package text and represented a 
new element.  During the consultations, China ha d expressed some concerns with respect to the 
frequency of the Group's meetings.  During this mont h alone, the Group was scheduled to meet twice, 
which represented quite a record for a Negotiating Group.  But after some bilateral consultations, 
which had shown the difficulties faced by the Ch air and the Secretariat in scheduling the second 
meeting, he had been able to convince his capital of the impossibility to change the dates for the 
current year.  China was prepared to show some flex ibility in that respect but hoped that, in the future, 
meetings could be arranged in wa y that allowed capacity-constraine d delegations to take part in 
higher frequency.  China was not the only delegation facing those difficulties in that regard.   
31. Another issue he would like to raise in that context and that he would like to see taken into 
account when scheduling meetings next year was the question of desirability of having more meetings 
than other groups.  He wondered whether Members could ensure that a high frequency of meetings 
would actually lead to faster results and more progr ess.  China was not convinced by that argument.  
There were differences in opinion as to whether the Trade Facilitation Group had to catch up with 
others, or whether others would not actually have to catch up with the present Group.  The 
Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation had already some  agreed modalities, while others were still 
struggling to get there.  There were differences be tween the respective Negotiating Groups that should 
also be taken into account when scheduling the meetings for 2005.  That  would facilitate the 
functioning of the TF Group.   
32. The Chairman
 explained that he intended to share th e suggested schedule for next year at a 
later stage of the meeting with some explanations  on the points that the Chinese representative had 
raised.   
33. The representative of Uruguay  thanked the Chairman for his draft Work Plan.  Her delegation 
supported it and was committed to working cons tructively in the Negotiating Group.  Uruguay 
associated itself with the comments made by the Philippines, Chinese Taipei and Pakistan.   
34. The representative of Indonesia  noted that much had been said on what had to be the focus of 
attention in those negotiations.  He supported the statements made by the Philippines, Nepal and 
others in that context.  His delegation also s upported the Chairman's Work Plan and schedule of 
meetings.  He was however seeking some clarific ation as to how Members we re expected to conduct 
meetings of the Negotiating Group.  The agenda pr ovided for six bullets.  He wondered whether the 
intention was to have a parallel discussion or whethe r those points were to be taken up one by one.  
The second clarification he was seeking pertained to the suggested ad hoc  attendance of relevant 
international organizations.  He was wondering wh ether they would attend the whole sessions or 
whether they would just brief Members on issues th at had been requested.  That was important to 
Indonesia as his delegation might have different po sitions on various issues.  Indonesia wanted to 
work constructively with the Chair and all Member s for the negotiations to achieve good results.   
35. The Chairman  replied that it would be his intenti on to pursue work in a flexible manner 
without being bound by a particular sequence.  His proposal was to allow delegations to address items 
in an integrated way, and to ra ise issues in a cross-cutting manner, and for the Work Plan to be 
without prejudice to the possibility of the Group to  hold formal or informal  meetings that were  TN/TF/M/1 
 Page 7 
 
 
 dedicated to particular items.  That would also addr ess the concerns raised by Tanzania with respect to 
informal meetings.  Informal meetings were impor tant at some stage.  If the concern was about 
transparency, he would propose to stick to his alread y started approach of info rming all delegations of 
the possibility to contact him whenever necessary.   With respect to the suggested rules on the 
notification of meetings and their participation ther ein, as well as regarding to preparation of minutes 
etc.  Members should stick to existing rules alread y applied in the WTO rather than try to establish 
new ones for that particular body.  Otherwise,  Members would get bogged down with procedural 
matters which would dela y substantive work.   
36. With respect to the issue of participation by re levant other international organizations raised 
by the representative of Indonesia, the normal prac tice was for them only being allowed to attend 
formal meetings.  They would not be permitted to  attend informal sessions.  But even here, the 
process would be member-driven, and Members may request to also have them participate in informal meetings.  His proposal was to approach all thos e questions in the spirit of flexibility based on 
Members' wishes.   
37. The Chairman
 invited Members to agree on the propo sed Work Plan on that basis.   
38. It was so agreed.    
2. Schedule of Meetings 
39. The Chairman  noted that, with respect to the scheduling of meetings, his proposal allowed for 
work to proceed expeditiously, while reflecting the resource constraints of small delegations.  It 
provided for two formal sessions that year, w ith the second one being scheduled for 22 and 
23 November.  He was grateful to the delegation of China for having shown flexibility on the question 
of when that final meeting for 2004 was supposed to ta ke place.  He also wanted to express his thanks 
to the African Group, which had indicated its w illingness to go along with those dates even though 
they coincided with a retreat the Group was holding in Tunis, keeping many of its members from participating.  In this context, he wanted to reca ll that he would be availa ble for consultations upon the 
Group's return from Tunisia and that he stood ready to offer any possible assi stance to the African 
Group in order to update them on the events of the second meeting.   
40. The intention would be for that meeting to be de voted, at least in part, to an educational and 
stocktaking process in response to the requests he  had received from a relatively large number of 
delegations for such work.  Members could invite the WTO Secretariat to br ief the Group on relevant 
issues, and organizations like UNCTAD, the WCO an d the World Bank to present the work they were 
doing and the programmes and facilities they were ab le to offer to support developing countries and 
LDCs through technical assistance and capacity building in that area.   
41. With respect to meetings of the Negotiating Group in 2005, Members would all be aware of 
the need to bear in mind two practical consid erations:  the availability of meeting rooms and 
interpreters, and the need to avoid, as far as po ssible, placing small delegations in the position of 
being faced with more WTO meetings being held  consecutively than their limited resources would 
allow them to cover effectively.  With those cons iderations in mind, the WTO Secretariat had drawn 
up a tentative list of dates for meetings of all Nego tiating Groups for the first half of 2005.  In doing 
so, the Secretariat had tried as far as possible to respond to requests the Chair had received from many delegations to schedule meetings of the Trad e Facilitation Negotiating Group back-to-back with 
meetings of the Group on NAMA, so as to allow fo r the cost-effective participation of capital-based 
officials.  For the period up to  July, the Secretariat had reserved facilities for meetings of the TFNG 
on the following dates:  7 and 9 February, 21-23 Ma rch, 2-4 May, 13-14 June and 25-26 July.  Having 
that list of meeting dates was important for planni ng purposes, particularly back in capitals, and to 
allow delegations and the Secretariat to make the ne cessary preparations to ensure for work to proceed TN/TF/M/1 
Page 8  
 
 smoothly.  At the same time, Members had all e xpressed the view that the Work Plan should be 
approached in a flexible manner, so that it woul d be responsive to their respective needs as they 
emerged, and he would like to encourage delegati ons to approach the question of scheduling of 
meetings with the same spirit of flexibility.  He h oped for their understanding when saying that he did 
not believe one could entirely rule out the possibility  of there being subsequent modifications to the 
schedule at the present stage.  As next year unfolded, there might be a need for the Group to shift a 
meeting from one date to another.  Equally, as the negotiations progressed, Members might find it 
helpful to the substance of their work to cons ider postponing a session, or adding an additional 
meeting.  With those considerations in mind, he  proposed for the Group to agree on the formulation 
regarding the scheduling of meetings as set out in document TN/TF/W/1.  As the Group proceeded 
with its negotiations, that would provide Members with the necessary flexibility to consult on the 
schedule of meetings for 2005 he had just read out.   
42. The representative of India
 noted that it was not her intenti on to hold up the proceedings but 
that she was seeking clarification on the tentative li st of dates for next year.  She was wondering 
whether this was merely an indicative list, with no ne of its dates having been firmed up, or whether 
the proposed dates would also be the ones actually  applied.  She had noted that the Chairman's 
proposal provided for meetings to take place al most at a monthly basis, which might need 
modification.  She would like to know whether in  agreeing on his proposal, Members would still have 
the opportunity to modify the schedule later on, as it was supposed to be a member-driven process.   
43. The representative of Nigeria  shared India's concerns with respect to the indicative number of 
meetings in 2005.  Looking at the list the Chairman had suggested, he found it to provide for meetings 
to take place almost every month.  Also, he had hear d that those meetings were supposed to take place 
back-to-back with NAMA.  He was not sure whet her the proposed dates would actually be in line 
with the schedule of the NAMA meetings.  He had no problems with the dates, but if there was the 
possibility to have three instead of the suggested fi ve meetings, with them being held alongside the 
NAMA ones, that would be helpful.   
44. The representative of Jamaica  noted that he also had concerns with respect to the schedule of 
meetings for 2005, which was very heavy.  The sugg ested five meetings were not even the meetings 
for the whole next year, but only for its first half.  Th at was really very difficult to service, particularly 
for small delegations.  Given the fact that it was to be a member-driven pr ocess with work proceeding 
on the basis of Members contributions, it would be  necessary to prepare in puts for the respective 
meetings, which might not be possible under the suggest ed rapid schedule, so that the indicative list of 
meetings would actually be counterproductive in this  context.  Jamaica knew that this was an 
indicative schedule but would still want to be able to revisit it.   
45. Jamaica took note of the effort to hold meetings of the Negotiating Group on Trade 
Facilitation back-to-back with those of NAMA so as to facilitate participation of capital-based 
experts.  But unfortunately, for quite a large numbe r of countries, there was no possibility of having 
people from capitals attend those meetings anyway, which would have to be serviced by the regular 
Geneva staff instead.  And that placed a great deal of strain on the resources of small missions.  The WTO might carry out a study to find out how many people would actually come from capital for many of those meetings.   
46. The representative of the Philippines
 supported India's statement and noted that it would be 
best to take the suggested schedule as an indicativ e one.  It would be necessary to talk about the 
schedule further in the future.  He also supporte d Jamaica's comments and stressed that very often, 
small staffed delegations had the burden of following all meetings related to the D oha Development 
Agenda.  Therefore, one should not just look at th e NAMA meetings, but also at the schedule of other 
Negotiating Groups such as, for example, the one on Rules, which seemed to have frequent meetings 
next year.    TN/TF/M/1 
 Page 9 
 
 
 47. The representative of Japan  remarked that, while it might be right to say that the proposed 
schedule provided for 5 meetings in 7 months, a ca lculation of the overall m eeting sequence since the 
time of the launch of the negotiations in July would show that the Group would have had only 
7 meetings in a year, which was a good basis.  Everything was relative and could be looked at from different perspectives.   
48. The representative of Sri Lanka
 noted that his delegation had never been represented by an 
expert from capital over the last years, as his country could not afford it.  This would also continue to 
be the case in the future.  He ther efore fully supported the statement made by Jamaica with respect to 
the scheduling of future trade facilitation meetings , which were very important for Sri Lanka to 
attend.  The capacity constraints of smaller delegati ons had to be taken into account.  The suggested 
schedule should therefore be relaxed to allow his dele gation to take part in the negotiating meetings.   
49. The representative of Antigua and Barbuda  noted that the problem of small delegations 
having to deal with a variety of meetings was a very  frequent one for his country.  It was very difficult 
for his delegation to cover that many meetings.  At the moment, he was one person representing not 
only Antigua and Barbuda but also six other small co untries with similar interests, which made it very 
difficult for him and many other of his colleagues fr om small delegations to service those meetings 
efficiently.  Antigua and Barbuda certainly could not afford participation from capital-based experts.  
He therefore fully supported the intervention made by Jamaica.   
50. The representative of Trinidad and Tobago  joined Antigua and Barbuda, India and Jamaica in 
their concerns about the suggested meeting schedule.   Her delegation was also very small, and the 
proposed schedule for the first half of 2005 would be extremely onerous for her country and would 
make it difficult for them to participate in negotiati ons they considered critical.  Trinidad and Tobago 
would therefore take the proposed schedule as a merely indicative one.   
51. The Chairman  reminded delegations of the possibility for modifications to the suggested 
schedule to which he had already referred to earli er.  He called upon Members to see how the Group 
progressed over the course of next year.  There might be a need for postponements and rescheduling 
at some stage, but at the moment, that was simply too early to tell.  What he was seeking the Group to 
agree on at the present meeting was merely the c ontent of the circulated document (TN/TF/W/1), 
which only specified the dates for the current year.  The possible dates for 2005 he had referred to did not form part of that document.   
52. On the question of the indicated dates actually  being set back-to-back with those for the 
NAMA Group, he noted that, while the Secretariat had tried to ensure such linkage on the basis of the 
indications of the likely dates of the NAMA sessions as they had currently been available, he did not 
want to make a final declaration to this end as that would amount to him announcing the dates of the 
NAMA Negotiating Group, which was something he clearly wanted to avoid.   
53. He asked Members whether they could agree on the suggested schedule of meetings on that 
basis.   
54. It was so agreed.
   
 TN/TF/M/1 
Page 10  
 
 B. A
D HOC ATTENDANCE OF RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS , INCLUDING THE 
IMF,  OECD,  UNCTAD,  WCO  AND THE WORLD BANK, AT THE NEXT MEETING OF THE 
NEGOTIATING GROUP  
55. The Chairman  noted that, under this final item, the Group would take up the issue of 
attendance of relevant internati onal organizations, including tho se mentioned in paragraph 8 of 
Annex D, at the next meeting of the Negotiating Gr oup.  The Work Plan provided for them to be 
invited on an ad hoc  basis.   
56. He asked Members whether they would invite representatives of the IMF, OECD, UNCTAD, 
WCO and the World Bank to attend the Group's next meeting on such basis.   
57. It was so agreed .   
58. The Chairman  noted that the next meeting of th e Negotiating Group would take place on 
22 and 23 November as agreed by Members.   
59. The meeting was closed.    
 
__________