RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONTN/C/M/2
8 May 2002
(02-2595)
Trade Negotiations Committee
24 April 2002
MINUTES OF MEETING
Held in the Centre William Rappard
on 24 April 2002
Chairman:  Mr. Mike Moore (Director-General)
Prior to the adoption of the agenda, the Chairman welcomed all delegations to the second
meeting of the Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC).  He wished to stress the "all", since he was very
pleased that the colleagues and friends who were not normally resident in Geneva were present.
Ministers had instructed that the negotiations be conducted in a transparent manner in order to
facilitate the participation of all.  This was precisely why this meeting was being held in the middle of
Geneva Week – so that all could take part.  He hoped that the next Geneva Week could also coincide
with a TNC meeting.
Subjects discussed:
1. Reports by the Chairpersons of bodies established by the TNC2. Participation and observership in negotiating bodies
3. Technical Assistance
1. Reports by the Chairpersons of bodies established by the TNC
1. The Chairman recalled that the TNC's mandate from Ministers included supervising the
progress of the negotiations.  This agenda item offered the first opportunity for a collective review of
progress.  Before taking up the reports themselves, he wished to say a few words on the situation
overall.
2. First, he thanked the new Chairpersons for making a good start to their work and also
welcome them in their functions.  He wished also to  thank participants for their spirit of constructive
cooperation, both with the Chairs and with himself.  He believed the work was now approaching the
end of the immediate post-Doha phase;  the phase of establishment.
3. However, there was no room for complacency.  One should not lose sight of the fact that the
work was taking place under a very tight deadline.  The negotiations had been set to conclude not later
than 1 January 2005.  It was already more than five months since Ministers met in Doha, and they
would meet again in Mexico the following year to  take stock of progress and address some important
decisions.  Even before then a number of significant deadlines had to be met.
4. In the start-up phase, differences on procedural issues had emerged in some groups.  This was
perhaps not surprising.  But everyone had a collective responsibility to resolve these differencesTN/C/M/2
Page 2
quickly so they could focus fully on substance, and he knew that the Chairs were working hard to do
this.  He asked all delegations to show them, and each other, the necessary flexibility.
5. As participants would have seen from the Chairpersons' reports, work on substance had
already started in parallel with work on setting up the individual bodies, and he applauded them forthis.  By the time of the next TNC meeting, in July, it would be necessary to have a clearer and more
precise picture of the road map to Mexico and beyond in each sector and in the negotiations overall,
bearing in mind the single undertaking.  He would be working with the other Chairs to this end.
6. Turning to the reports by the Chairs, he said that, as participants knew, these bodies had been
established as proposed by the Chairman of the General Council at the first TNC meeting held on
28 January and 1 February 2002, the minutes of which had been issued in document TN/C/M/1.  TheirChairpersons had been subsequently appointed following the consensus on the slate of names reached
in the meeting of the General Council held on 13 and 15 February and 1 March 2002.  Since then,
these bodies had all started their work and their Chairpersons had all issued reports to the TNC on
their work to date.
7. These reports had been circulated in the following official documents:
Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture:  TN/AG/1
Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services:  TN/S/1
Negotiating Group on Market Access:  TN/MA/1Special Session of the Council for TRIPS:  TN/IP/1
Negotiating Group on Rules:  TN/RL/1
Special Session of the Dispute Settlement Body:  TN/DS/1
Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment:  TN/TE/1
Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Development:  TN/CTD/1
8. He noted his understanding that this last report was without prejudice to the position of any
Member on the nature of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Development.
9. He suggested that the Chairs could be spared from having to read their reports.  On the other
hand, they were welcome to add any remarks if they wished.  Also, at this early stage of the work, he
did not think it would be productive to engage in a subject-by-subject debate, so he inviteddelegations to raise any points they might have with  regard to these reports or to make any comments
of a more general nature in one single intervention.
10. Ambassador Jara (Chile), Chairman of th e Special Session of the Council for Trade in
Services, said the Chairman was right in pointing out that the work was taking place under a tight
deadline.  In the Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services there had been no difficulties
thus far, and of course the Council had benefitted from work undertaken before Doha.  As the
Chairman had pointed out, the statement in document TN/S/1 reflected the latest developments in the
Special Session.  The only point he wished to add was that the services negotiations were gradually
moving into a new phase in which Members were devoting an increasing part of their attention totheir preparation of initial requests which were due to be submitted by end of June 2002.  This
important task required a lot of preparation by capitals and was to some extent causing the Special
Session to reallocate some of its negotiating time.  In paragraph 8 of his statement in TN/S/1, there
had been reference to the possibility of reducing the time of the next cluster of meetings from two to
one week only.  After further consultations, this had actually been decided, and therefore the meetingswould place during the week of 3 June only.
11. The representative of Japan joined the Chairman in expressing appreciation of the efforts of
the Chairpersons of the newly-established negotiating bodies.  Having said that, Japan was rather
disappointed as well as perplexed with the limited progress made in developing the work programmeTN/C/M/2
Page 3
and schedule of meetings in the Negotiating Group on Market Access.  As had been agreed in
paragraph 16 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, this was an area where participants were expected
to negotiate "to reduce or as appropriate eliminate tariffs, including the reduction or elimination of
tariff peaks, high tariffs, and tariff escalation, as well as non-tariff barriers, in particular on products
of export interest to developing countries" and "t he negotiations shall take fully into account the
special needs and interests of developing and least-developed country participants, including through
less than full reciprocity in reduction commitments."  In other words, in the view of his delegation,
this was an area where developing-country participants could expect clear benefits by positively
promoting the negotiations.  However, in order to promote the negotiations, it was essential to agree
on modalities as clearly stated in the same paragraph of the Doha Declaration.  Participants needed to
agree on a reasonable and clear schedule of work including a target date for establishing modalities at
an early stage of the negotiations.  In this regard, Japan requested the Chairman of the NegotiatingGroup to continue his consultations energetically so that Members could reach consensus on these
matters along the lines of the Chairman's proposal dated 10 April.
12. The Trade Negotiations Committee took note of the reports of the bodies established by it and
of the statements.
2. Participation and observership in negotiating bodies
13. The Chairman said that the questions of both participation and observership had been raised
in a number of the bodies established at the first TNC meeting.  In the course of his regular meetings
with the Chairs of those bodies, they had asked him to consult on these issues with a view to finding a
generally acceptable way of proceeding.  He had thus undertaken consultations with Member
delegations, with the assistance of Deputy-Director General Miguel Rodríguez.
14. Since the end of March, he had met with a wide range of delegations, both individually and
also in groups.  Miguel Rodríguez had also met, on his behalf, with a number of delegations and
groups.  These discussions had given them a good sense of possible avenues towards resolving these
issues, and allowed them to progressively develop a series of elements.
15. On 8 April, he had circulated to Member delegations a letter accompanied by a paper setting
out some elements for possible inclusion in his statement on these questions at the present meeting.Since then, he had received some further comments, and he had held an open-ended informal
consultation with Member delegations on 17 April, when he had informed them of the situation in his
consultations.
16. Three issues had been covered in his paper – participation in the negotiations, observer status
for Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs), and the status of Observer governments for whom an
accession working party had not been established.   He wished to first report on the second of these
issues – observer status for IGOs.  At all times in his consultations, he had emphasized that this issue
should be approached in a practical way, to find a provisional solution for the life of the negotiations
which would clearly be without prejudice to the issue of observership in the General Council andother regular WTO bodies.
17. In his consultations, the importance of observer status in the negotiating bodies for certain
IGOs had been stressed by a number of delegations.  This was because of the significance of some of
these Organizations in delivering Technical Cooperation and Capacity Building.  This was animportant part of the Doha mandate, and the WTO had been instructed by Ministers to work in
coordination with other relevant agencies to provide well targeted programmes.  Among the
Organizations which had been mentioned in this connection were UNCTAD, ITC, World Bank, and
IMF.  Their attendance was a question of efficiency, transparency and coherence – being present atTN/C/M/2
Page 4
the meetings and having access to the documentation could only facilitate their technical assistance
efforts.
18. Here he wished note that a letter concerning Observer status in the TNC and the bodies
established under it had been received from the IMF, as well as requests from the ACP Group, theOECD, and a further request from UNEP for such status in the Special Sessions of the Committee on
Trade and Environment.
19. The reactions to his possible elements concerning IGO observership had been constructive
and helpful.  Many delegations had expressed the view that these elements would be a sensible basis
on which to resolve the issue.  However, other delegations held the view that this issue should be
addressed within the wider context of observership in other WTO bodies.
20. In sum, as he had reported to Members on 17 April, consensus had not been reached on this
particular issue at this stage.  He suggested that between the present meeting and the next one
everyone should reflect further on how it might be resolved.  Everyone was aware that restraint in
taking the floor on this issue the previous week and perhaps today did not mean indifference to theimportance of this issue.  Everyone knew that some  strong views were held in capitals.  Nonetheless,
he encouraged delegations to keep talking informally with each other, as well as with the Chairs of the
negotiating bodies and himself.  He continued to hope that the approach he had suggested would help
delegations reach a pragmatic solution in the interest of all participants in the negotiations.
21. He turned to the two other issues under this agenda item – namely, participation in the
negotiations and the status of Observer governments for whom an accession working party had not
been established.  Here, he was pleased to report that the elements set out in both areas in his 8 April
paper had won wide support from delegations and that he had been able to note an informal
understanding on these issues at the consultation on 17 April.  He proposed, therefore, that the TNCtake note of the following understandings.  First, with regard to participation in the negotiations:
• Acceding countries are full participants in the negotiations, subject to the qualification under
paragraph 48 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration.
• As a result, these countries have the right to attend all formal and informal meetings and can
table negotiating proposals and react to those submitted by other participants.
• However, they cannot participate in decision-making with respect to both procedural and
substantive decisions, which is reserved for Members of the WTO (i.e. they cannot block
consensus).
22. And with regard to status of Observer gove rnments for whom an accession working party had
not been established, which concerned Ethiopia, the Holy See, and Sao Tome and Principe:
• Governments which have observer status in the General Council for whom an accession
working party has not been established should be considered to have the same observer statusin the TNC and its subsidiary bodies in accordance with the Guidelines for Observer Status
for Governments in the WTO set out in Annex 2 to the Rules of Procedure of the General
Council.
23. The Trade Negotiations Committee took note of the Chairman's statement, including the
understandings on participation in the negotiations and the status of Observer governments for whom
an accession working party had not been established.TN/C/M/2
Page 5
24. The Chairman reiterated his suggestion that that everyone should reflect carefully on how the
issue of observer status for IGOs might be resolved.  For his part, he would continue his discussions
with the Chairpersons of the TNC's subsidiary bodies.
3. Technical Assistance
25. The representative of the Solomon Islands, speaking under "Other Business" also on behalf of
Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Tonga and Vanuatu, commended the WTO technical assistance
programmes that had been provided so far to their region.  They had certainly found them very useful
in building their capacity and in creating awareness of their WTO obligations.  Prior to the present
meeting, these delegations had met with the Director of the Technical Cooperation Division anddiscussed other specific areas in need of technical assistance.  They had raised with him the possibility
of sending a WTO technical assistance mission to the region to identify other areas in which their
countries might need technical assistance.  For their region, the most serious challenge at the present
time was to try to convince civil society, the private sector and Members of Parliament of the benefits
of trade liberalization.  An outreach technical assistance programme to target these groups wouldtherefore be very useful.  For these countries, technical assistance was therefore very important in
building capacity.  Technical assistance was so important that they suggested it should be included as
an agenda item for future TNC meetings.
26. The Chairman said he knew that the delegations for which the Solomon Islands had been
speaking had received a full briefing on WTO technical cooperation and training, and he would
certainly keep in touch with their region.  He would ensure that the Secretariat responded to their
points.
27. Before closing the meeting, he wished to touch on the question of future TNC meetings.  As
was indicated in the programme of meetings, the next meeting was scheduled for 18-19 July.  He
reiterated that by the time of that meeting, it would be necessary to have a more precise picture of the
road map to Mexico and beyond in each sector and in the negotiations overall, bearing in mind the
single undertaking.  He was not pushing the panic button at the present time, but substantial progress
would have to be made by then.
28. After the summer break, more TNC meetings would be necessary in the autumn and most
importantly in December, when the reports on outstanding implementation issues from the relevant
WTO bodies would be submitted to the TNC for appropriate action, in line with paragraph 12(b) of
the Doha Declaration.  He was in contact with his successor, Dr. Supachai, about the meeting
schedule for the latter half of the year and to keep him up to date on the progress made so far.  He had
also invited Dr. Supachai to attend the next meeting in July.
_______________