WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/MIN(99)/ST/90
2 December 1999
(99-5314)
MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE
Third Session
Seattle, 30 November - 3 December 1999Original:  English
JAMAICA
Statement by the Honourable Seymour Mullings
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade
We come to Seattle with a sense of disappointment.
We have had to confront the reality that for small developing countries the WTO experience
has represented a large difference between what was hoped for and what has been actually achieved.
When we met in Geneva last year we celebrated the 50th Anniversary of a world trading system
governed by multilateral rules and disciplines.  We had high hopes then and made important
commitments to formulate an agenda for the WTO which would take the multilateral trading system
into a new century.  Here in Seattle, we had hoped that this agenda would reflect the lessons of thepast;  recognizing that our collective future, our collective success, rests on cooperation and creatively
building on an understanding of the differing interests and economic realities of our diverse
Membership.
The latest Annual Report published by the WTO, points out that small economies and the
least-developed countries potentially stand to benefit the most from trade liberalization.  It also states
that there is no evidence of a systemic  marginalization of developing countries.  We acknowledge the
theoretical soundness of the first proposition and challenge the second.
Let me briefly highlight what has been the experience of Jamaica, a small, open economy
committed to the process of economic liberalization.
Jamaica, a heavily trade-dependent country, in which imports and exports of goods and
services account for over 100 per cent of gross domestic product, has seen increases in total trade.
These increases however, have been primarily the results of an expansion in the level of imports
which more than doubled between 1988 and 1998.  Exports grew by only 49 per cent.  Imports during
the 1990s have expanded by 66 per cent, while exports grew by only 42 per cent.  Imports intoJamaica are now twice  the level of exports with the fastest growing component being consumer goods
which have more than doubled between 1994 and 1998.  Since 1990, Jamaica has continually
registered a trade deficit which has grown by 25 per cent between 1995 and 1997.
I cite these figures in order to illustrate that the potential benefits from trade liberalization, as
identified by the WTO Secretariat, have yet to be realized by my country, and indeed by many others.
Recent studies indicate that this experience is not unique to Jamaica.  Trade deficits in many
developing countries have widened during the 1990s.  Rapid liberalization has led to a surge in
imports, but has not contributed to growth in exports.  Many of our countries have yet to realize the
gains from the Uruguay Round.  Instead, most benefits have gone to the more developed economies,
thereby aggravating existing inequalities in the world economy and hindering the effective integration
of many countries into the multilateral trading sy stem.  Deep concern over marginalization, which
many of us signalled at our Conference last year, continues.WT/MIN(99)/ST/90
Page 2
We stress, therefore, that trade liberalization must be progressive and carefully managed.
Failure to do so leads to serious dislocation for local industry, reduced income levels for workers in
import-competing industries, balance-of-payments difficulties and eventually, a lack of domestic
support for further liberalization at the regional and multilateral levels.  Governments, such as mine,must have flexibility to introduce and maintain a ppropriate initiatives for inward investment and
diversification.
This is why Jamaica, together with its Caribbean Community partners and other small
economies, have proposed that this Conference agree to establish a work programme to address the
problems of small economies.
If the WTO is to prove itself representative, inclusive and sensitive to the legitimate concerns
of all its Members, this proposal must be adopted.
In making this proposal, we are not seeking to divide developing countries or to divert
assistance from the most needy among us.  We would, however, wish the international community torecognize that small economies have special needs which constrain their full and effective integration
into the multilateral trading system.  I must emphasi ze that the impact of multilateral trade rules on
small economies is, in a fundamental sense, disproportionate because of the very high trade to GDP
ratio, characteristic of many small developing countries.
We have presented certain claims and technical arguments which can be translated into
concrete measures.  Structural features such as a high degree of economic specialization, income
volatility, the absence of economies of scale and limited institutional capacity are some important
elements which must be addressed.  Our vulnerability to natural disasters, which has been clearly
demonstrated yet again by the damage wreaked on a number of Caribbean economies a fortnight ago,will have to be taken into account.
My Government therefore joins those who insist that the WTO address the development
dimension.  The WTO and the Agreements it administers, must reflect the concerns of developing
countries which represent the majority of its Membership.  What would therefore constitute a practical
and appropriate response to these concerns?
First, there must be a review of the existing Agreements and Decisions, with particular
emphasis on the effective implementation of special and differential provisions in those Agreements.
Secondly, the Organization must recognize that preferential arrangements between developed
and developing countries are important mechanisms for facilitating phased integration into themultilateral trading system.
Thirdly, there must be strengthened efforts to provide appropriate technical and financial
assistance to developing countries, as they seek to implement their WTO obligations.
In the months leading up to the Conference, we were encouraged by statements which
suggested that many influential Members were sensitive to these concerns.  It  was even proposed that
a new round of trade negotiations should be called the "Development Round".  Yet, in the preparatory
process in Geneva, this sensitivity to the concerns of developing countries appears to have greatly
diminished.
We cannot agree to a programme of future work which may be beyond our present capacity to
cope.  We are not convinced that given the experience of the Uruguay Round a new comprehensive
round at this stage will yield benefits for countries such as ours.WT/MIN(99)/ST/90
Page 3
As is the case in many countries throughout the world, concern is being expressed by many in
Jamaica about the benefits to be derived from Membership in the WTO.  There is a perception that the
WTO represents the interests of only some countries who reap all the benefits.  It is vital that we, as
government representatives, ensure that decisions taken in Seattle provide clear evidence that this
Organization can in fact, bring benefits to all, particularly to those in many parts of the developingworld.  This is the only basis on which institutional legitimacy can be built and sustained.
This leads me to the issue of transparency on which a great deal of emphasis has been placed
by some Members.  While we can agree with the fact that there is a need for greater transparency in
the WTO, we must be careful that in addressing th is issue, we do not forget to examine the internal
procedures of the Organization itself.  Members must ensure that negotiations at all times are
conducted in a non-exclusionary manner.  Negotiations must be organized in such a way to enable theparticipation of all those who have legitimate interests in the issues under discussion.  The WTO
cannot afford to retain the image of the "GATT", which for many years operated as a club to which
only a few were privileged to be invited.  Our internal procedures must take account of the increased
Membership of the Organization.
In concluding, Jamaica joins others in calling for the WTO to focus on development concerns
in order to integrate all developing countries into the multilateral trading system.
We would therefore wish to see in another round:
- The mandated negotiations on agriculture and services;
- the mandated reviews built in to existing Agreements;- the establishment of an implementation review mechanism which would complete its
work in one year and would address in particular, identified imbalances in existing
Agreements.
We would wish to see here in Seattle immediate decisions on implementation issues where
consensus is possible, agreement on establishing a work programme on smaller economies and
recognition of the need to continue preferenti al trading arrangements between developed and
developing countries.
The achievement of these goals will represent a successful outcome to the Third WTO
Ministerial Conference.  These would be important confidence-building measures for countries such
as my own as we consider the scope and content of further negotiations.
May I take this opportunity to thank the Government of the United States of America and the
City of Seattle for hosting this meeting.
__________