RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
11 January 2001
(01-0120)
Sub-Committee on Least Developed Countries
Twenty-first Session
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 16 -17 OCTOBER 2000
Chair:  Ambassador Benedikt Jónsson (Iceland)
A. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
1. The Chairman, on behalf of the Sub-Committee, recognized the presence of and welcomed to
the meeting, the 42 participants from the 3rd WTO Short Trade Policy Course for Least-Developed
Countries.
2. The Sub-Committee adopted the proposed agenda contained in document
WTO/AIR/1392/Rev.2.
3. Before proceeding with the  agenda, as adopted, the Chairman recalled that at the previous
meeting of the Sub-Committee, the UNCTAD Secretariat had reported on the preparatory process of
the Third United Nations Conference on Least-Developed Countries (LDC-III).  Following the report,
it had been agreed that the Sub-Committee, at this meeting, would discuss possible contributions toLDC-III.  The Chairman informed the Sub-Comm ittee that it had been brought to the attention of the
WTO that same item was also on the agenda of the forty-seventh session of the Trade and
Development Board (TDB) of  UNCTAD for the following day, 17 October 2000.  The Secretariats of
UNCTAD and the WTO had been in contact, it appeared reasonable and more efficient to have a joint
meeting for the purpose of a joint briefing.  As a result of the consultations between the two
Secretariats, the TDB had invited the Members of the Sub-Committee to a joint meeting on the
agenda item at the Palais des Nations.  On this basis, the Chairman therefore proposed that the Sub-Committee agrees to the invitation for the joint m eeting for the purpose of a briefing by the UNCTAD
Secretariat on the preparatory process for the LDC-III.
4. It was so agreed.
5. The Chairman stated that at the next meeting the Sub-Committee would revert to the item and
would exchange views on possible contributions that could be made by the WTO to  LDC-III.  Hewelcomed the decision for the joint meeting, noting that such joint meeting could increase cooperation
between two sister international organizations with areas of common interest, such as in assisting the
integration of LDCs into the multilateral trading system.
B. 
REQUEST FOR ATTENDANCE OF AD -HOC OBSERVERS
6. The Chairman recalled that at the twenty-fifth session of the Committee on Trade and
Development (CTD) Members had agreed to invite ad hoc  observers from several inter-governmental
organizations (IGOs) to meetings of the CTD and the Sub-Committee on a meeting-by-meeting basis.
The list of all IGOs with ad hoc  observer status in the CTD and the Sub-Committee was contained in
document WT/COMTD/W/22/Rev.5.  The Chairman proposed that the Sub-Committee decides to
invite these IGOs to participate at this and the next meetings.  It was so decided.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 2
C. ATTENDANCE OF LEAST -DEVELOPED COUNTRIES AT MEETINGS
7. The Chairman stated that the level of particip ation of LDCs meetings had generally been low
and was a cause for concern.  In some cases, the cancellation of  meetings, already convened, due to
low attendance by LDCs, had cost implications for the WTO conference services.  In some meetings,
several agenda items had not been fully addressed because of the absence of LDCs, whose inputswere indispensable in ensuring that decisions taken would take account of the concerns and positions
of LDCs.  The problem of LDCs' attendance at meetings had to be recognised, and had to be
addressed with a view to facilitating their partic ipation and assisting their integration into the WTO.
The establishment of the Secretariat Working Group for LDCs and the Integrated Framework, which
was a focal point for LDCs in the Secretariat, located in the Office of the Director-General, was one
of the Director-General's efforts to assist the institutional integration of LDCs into the WTO.  The
Chairman asked Members how the problem could be addressed.
8. The Representative of Lesotho stated that the problem of LDC's attendance at meetings
should be addressed in the context of on-going consultations on how to improve overall participation
of developing countries in WTO meetings.  The central issue was the limited capacity of developing
countries in terms of the size of delegations, relative to the number of meetings.  Hence, the absence
of LDCs at meetings was not an indication of their lack of commitment to the WTO.  As itscontribution to the agenda item, Lesotho had initiated consultations with other LDCs regarding ways
and means of improving coordination, by sharing the responsibility of covering various subsidiary
bodies of the WTO among individual LDCs, based on issues of interest to them.  In the view of
Lesotho, this was one of the ways in which LDCs could maximise their participation in meetings
within their limited human resources.
9. The representative of Uganda stated that he fully agreed with the comments by the
representative of Lesotho.  The problem of LDC's attendance at meetings needed to be addressed
together with the scheduling of meetings, in which he requested the Secretariat to avoid scheduling
meetings that would overlap and conflict with each other.  Moreover, he emphasised that the
provision of interpretation was essential for LDC's participation in meetings.
10. The representative of Bangladesh stated that the problem of attendance at meetings was not
only limited to LDCs, but also to a number of developing countries.  The issue had been so grave that
it had been brought to the attention of the General Council which had set up a special committee to
find ways of rationalising meetings with a view to securing the increased participation of countries.
He expressed the wish that the Director-General could assist LDCs in finding ways to improve their
participation at meetings.  In this regard, Bangladesh supported the position of Lesotho, and sought
the Secretariat's assistance in examining the possibility of allocating issues and items to specificLDCs, who would then coordinate on those issues , on behalf of other LDCs. Moreover, he urged
better coordination in scheduling meetings, not only  within the WTO, but also between agencies like
UNCTAD.
11. The representative of the European Communitie s agreed with the previous comments and
urged the Secretariat to improve on the scheduling of meetings, and to improve on the preparation of
meetings, including by issuing documents in a  time ly manner. The EC was assisting the participation
of LDCs in the WTO through support for the establishment of a representative office in Geneva for
the ACP Secretariat.  The ACP representative office, when established, would ensure information
flow among ACP delegations, including amongst non-re sident.  He also suggested the creation of an
early warning system in which scheduling conflicts could be avoided by setting a hierarchy of variousmeetings in the WTO.
12. The representative of Haiti stated that the apparent lack of interest by LDCs was partly caused
by LDCs' disappointment towards the Integrated Framework.  LDCs' frustration caused by the factWT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 3
that few Round Tables had been organised, and for those round tables already held, no resources had
been generated, was also cause for the low attendance at the Sub-Committee.  Moreover, he stressed
that there was a need to address the lack of coordination among different divisions within the WTO
and among different agencies in Geneva.
13. The representative of Sudan (Observer) stated that the small size of his delegation and the
number of meetings often did not allow the Sudanese delegation to attend meetings of the Sub-
Committee.  Therefore, he extended his full support for the proposal made by Lesotho to ensure the
active participation of LDCs at each meeting.
14. The Chairman thanked Members for their views and suggestions.  He requested the
Secretariat to take account of the views and suggestions that had been made and to continue to work
to improve the participation of LDCs at WTO meetings.
D. FOLLOW-UP TO THE HIGH-LEVEL MEETING ON LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
15. The Chairman stated that the Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG) had met in Washington
D.C. on 14-15 September 2000 to discuss the follow-up to the Joint Statement issued by the Heads of
Agency on 6 July in New York.  The IAWG, inter alia , had assessed the reactions from their
memberships to the Joint Statement and had drafted the draft terms of reference for the new IF
institutional arrangements.  The Chairman invited Mr. Osakwe to provide a report on the outcome ofthe IAWG meeting, which was also contained in document WT/SWG/LDC/IF/5.  Document
WT/SWG/LDC/IF/6, part of the implementation of  the IF, contained a compilation of combined
schedules of World Bank Consultative Groups, UNDP Round Tables, and World Bank/IMF calendars
for Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) as well as Interim PRSPs.
16. Mr. Osakwe, WTO Special Coordinator for LDCs, stated that the Secretariat had scheduled
informal consultations on two occasions, on 25 and 26 September, to brief Members on the outcome
of the IAWG meeting held in Washington D.C. on 14-15 September 2000.  Rather than repeating the
briefings, he considered that it was better to list and respond to a set of questions that had repeatedly
been raised by Members.
(i) What is the value-added to the new arrangements agreed to and proposed by the Agencies for
the effective implementation of the Integrated Framework?
17. Mr. Osakwe stated that value-added was evident on three counts.  First, was that the new
arrangements clearly allocated responsibilities amongst the agencies: the WTO was responsible for
coordination, UNDP for resource mobilisation, the World Bank for mainstreaming trade into country
development strategies and PRSPs, UNCTAD for delivery of trade-related capacity building and
research, and the ITC for assisting project designs and trade advisory services.  In doing so, the six
agencies would complement each other's work within their competence and mandates.
18. Second, value-added was evident in the new focus and the enhanced arrangements for
"mainstreaming" the IF.  The three-year experience of the IF had revealed the weakness that trade
policy had not cohered with other development policies in LDCs and that the IF had not been an
integral part of development architecture.  The effective and successful implementation of the new
arrangements therefore would depend on the implementation of mainstreaming trade into countrydevelopment plans and poverty reduction strategies.
19. Third, value-added would be achieved through the proposal for  funding in the new
arrangements.  The fact that the IF had been an unfunded mandate in the first three years had been one
of the impediments for effective implementation.  In the view of the agencies, therefore, funding was
a critical aspect for the implementation of the IF, given that the agencies' budgets had not beenWT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 4
increased, and in some cases had been reduced, in the area of trade.  While funding would not solve
all problems facing the IF, it would be an important component for the new arrangements.
(ii) How will the new arrangements work?
20. The IF would now have an oversight body to provide policy guidance, assist resource
mobilisation, and make periodic reports to the governing bodies of the agencies.  The Board ofTrustees would manage the proposed IF Trust Fund, and the board, on which each core Agency would
be represented, would be chaired by the Administrator of the UNDP.  Decisions at the board would be
taken by consensus.  The IAWG would be base d in the WTO, which would provide secretariat
services and coordinate the efforts of agencies.  In the view of the agencies, the new arrangements
were not intended to establish  a heavy bureaucracy.  However, it was necessary to bear in mind that
the IF was a six-agency process which would naturally require a certain level of administration and
coordination.
(iii) Why was it necessary to create Window I in th e draft terms of reference for the IF Trust
Fund?
21. WTO Members had been virtually unanimous that resources should not be directed to
mainstreaming, but to projects.  Hence, the Windows approach would allow donors flexibility in
making contributions to their areas of interest.  While some Members had expressed doubt about theusefulness of having Window I in the draft terms of reference, the window was important because,
first, mainstreaming was an indispensable part of the new arrangement, and second, mainstreaming
entailed considerable costs.  Relatedly, some Members had asked whether it was possible for the
agencies to arbitrarily shift resources between Window s.  Mr. Osakwe stated that the agencies would
not do so, and that Members' contributions to Windows II or III were not a precondition to theircontributions to Window 1.  Nonetheless, the Windows were logically connected and had to function
coherently for the meaningful and effective implementation of the IF for the purpose of trade-related
development and poverty alleviation
(iv) What sort of projects will be financed under Windows II and III in the draft terms of
Reference for the IF Trust Fund?
22. Projects would be defined in accordance with expressed priority needs of LDCs.  Projects to
be financed would include those emphasising human resources, capacity building, project
formulation, etc.  Infrastructure-related projects would not be financed from the IF Trust Fund; the
bulk of resources for such projects would be generated at World Bank Consultative Group meetings
or UNDP Round Tables.  Moreover, regarding the question as to whether it would be possible to
finance projects by resources raised from debt relief, Mr. Osakwe said he would refer the matter to
the next meeting of the IAWG.  On another re lated question on whether US$20 million would be
enough to meet the requirements of LDCs in project areas proposed for priority action, Mr. Osakwe
said that there would never be enough resources available to finance all proposed projects, however,
all available resources would be distributed among LDCs in an effective, paced and equitable manner.
(v) Is the Integrated Framework really important?
23. The question was up to Members to answer.  Nonetheless, the agencies considered the IF as a
necessary and important platform for coordination among multilateral agencies dealing with trade,
finance and development matters.  The IF was a vital instrument in assisting the integration of LDCs
into the multilateral trading system and the globa l economy, and in mainstreaming trade into the
overall development policies of LDCs.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 5
(vi) What is to be done next?
24. The agencies considered that they had made good proposals for optimally efficient decisions
to improve the IF, and that the ball was now in the court of Members.  In the meantime, the agencies
would continue to deliver trade-related technical assistance within their existing resources and
competence.
25. The Chairman thanked Mr. Osakwe for his report.  He requested Members in their
intervention to make specific suggestion on how th e agencies could proceed with the effective
implementation of the decisions and proposal containe d in the Joint Statement, particularly with the
draft terms of reference for the IF Steering Committee, the IAWG and the proposed IF Trust Fund.
26. The representative of the United States stated that her country remained concerned with
several aspects of the new arrangements of the Integrated Framework.  In particular, the United States
was concerned that the new arrangements were adding another layer of bureaucracy on top of thealready existing bureaucracies.  Regarding the IF Steering Committee, and the terms of reference that
would govern the committee, the United State regretted that these had been decided by the agencies
without being approved by Members.  Moreover, it was concerned that the draft terms of reference for
the Steering Committee suggested that the committee would only be composed of the core agencies
and those donors contributing to the IF Trust Fund.  By implication, the Steering Committee would,therefore, exclude from decision-making, bilateral donors, like the United States, not directly
contributing to the Trust Fund, but who were supporting LDCs on a bilateral basis.
27. The United States could not extend its full support to the structure of the proposed IF Trust
Fund as had been currently proposed.  First, the window approach in the draft terms of reference
appeared to suggest that the bulk of resources would be expended on administration and overheads,rather than on in-country projects.  The United States considered that the focus of mainstreaming
should not  only be on agency activities, but also on  activities in beneficiary countries.  Moreover,
there was a need to establish understanding on what activities constituted mainstreaming.   The United
States had taken the  initiative of  compiling  a list of trade-related technical assistance at the country
level, which could be considered by the agencies for planning their activities and projects.
28. The representative of the Lesotho stated that the implementation of projects under the IF
would largely depend on the mobilisation of political support from donor and recipient countries.  In
this context, Lesotho welcomed the direction taken by the agencies to mainstream trade into country
development strategies in LDCs, by highlighting the role of trade in addressing their development
concerns.  Lesotho also commended the Director-General's efforts to strengthen the WTO's capacity
to coordinate LDC-related issues, including activities of the IAWG, by establishing the Secretariat
Working Group on LDCs and the IF.  Moreover, the decision by the Heads of  Agencies to use the IFto  contribute to  LDC-III  was welcome.
29.  He reiterated the importance of funding to enable the effective implementation of  the IF.  He
urged the Director-General and the Administrator of the UNDP to intensify their efforts  at mobilising
resources for the IF Trust Fund.  Meanwhile, available resources should not be spent on analysis and
exchange of information on trade strategies and IAWG coordination meetings.  Rather, the IAWGcould utilise Information Technology means, such as videoconferencing, for inter-agency
coordination.
30. The representative of Zambia expressed her country's support for the proposal to establish   an
IF Trust Fund.  Decisions on how to implement the proposed Trust Fund would serve a basis for other
decisions to be taken for the implementation of th e new arrangements for the IF.  In the  view of
Zambia, a trust fund could increase predictability and continuity in the implementation of the IF, and
would be an important source of financing for trade-related technical assistance in LDCs. She,WT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 6
therefore, urged donors to support the Trust Fund, including Window I.  Window I was essential
because it could help raise the trade profile in LDCs' development agenda and accelerate
mainstreaming.  Window I should be one of the available options for donor's contribution and
contributions to it should not be imposed as a precondition for financing activities under Windows II
and III.
31. Zambia would support the participation of non-contributing donors in the IF Steering
Committee.  Those donors could initially be accorded observer status in the Steering Committee.
They may later decide to contribute to the Trust Fund.  The Steering Committee should be responsible
for monitoring the implementation of activities financed by the Trust Fund.
32. The representative of Djibouti stated that the IF had been aimed at assisting the integration of
LDCs in the multilateral trading system, but it had had no specific policy layout.  He wondered if it
was possible to review and re-organise the IF.
33. The representative of Norway stated that the integration of LDCs was a key challenge for the
world economy and that his country fully supported the IF.  Norway urged the agencies to pool their
resources together and coordinate their activities with a view to maximising their limited financial
resources at hand.  The IF needed to be strengthened by mainstreaming trade-related technical
assistance into country poverty reduction strategies.  This was a position that Norway had alsostressed in its bilateral development efforts. Trade-related technical assistance should be demand-
driven, and LDCs should have owne rship in the mainstreaming process.
34. The representative requested for clarification on sections of document WT/LDC/SWG/IF/5.
First, he sought clarification on paragraph 12, regarding the process of folding the Administrative
Unit into the WTO: had this been effected?.  Second, he requested for more information regarding theseminar to be organised by the six agencies on mainstreaming trade into country development
strategies.
35. The representative of the European Communities st ated that the IF was a vital instrument for
integrating LDCs into the multilateral trading system , and that the EC would continue to extend their
support to the IF.  However, there remained a number of issues and questions to be clarified on the IF.First, regarding the last sentence in paragraph 18 of document WT/LDC/SWG/IF/5, the representative
urged the agencies to establish a consensus on what constituted "mainstreaming trade" and to clarify
further how the IF would work.
36. Second, the EC expressed concern that the operation of the Trust Fund involved too many
bodies and that the functions of the Board of the IF Trust Fund, the Steering Committee and the
IAWG seemed complex and overlapping.  There was a need for further clarification on the
coordination between these structures in operating the Trust Fund.  Moreover, a better description ofthe Trust Fund Windows, in paragraph 3 of Annex 5 of document WT/LDC/SWG/IF/5, was
requested, as information provided was not sufficient as a basis for a decision for financing.  .
Furthermore,  the technical assistance activities  listed in Window II needed further elaboration.
37. Third, regarding mainstreaming, the EC representative commented on procedure and
substance.  On procedure, he noted that, while in paragraphs 11 and 12 of WT/LDC/SWG/IF/5, theagencies had suggested that the follow-up and refinement of the IF was contingent on an improved
funding situation,  it had to be clear that funding itself was dependent on clarifications and
improvements to the terms of reference of the IF Steering Committee and the proposed IF Trust Fund.
38. On substance, the representative referred to paragraphs 15-17 of document
WT/LDC/SWG/IF/5.  He noted that the paragraphs suggested that there were other factors beyondfunds which were relevant in the efforts of the World Bank to mainstream trade into PRSPs.  TheWT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 7
representative questioned the usefulness of Window I because if trade was a priority as stated by the
agencies, it would not be necessary to fund it separately into the strategy of these organizations.
39. Regarding the title of the proposed joint seminar, the representative suggested that it should
be modified to read, "Mainstreaming Trade into Country Development Strategies: Perspective of
LDCs and Agencies".  With reference to pa ragraph 4 of WT/LDC/SWG/IF/5, he thanked the
Secretariat for ensuring that the position of WTO Members on mainstreaming had been
communicated to the IAWG.  Lastly, he stated that the LDC-III Conference to be held in Brussels
next year, was of importance to the EC in setting out their relationship vis-à-vis the LDCs, and that it
would be an opportunity to make progress on  IF implementation.
40. The representative of Haiti requested clarification on item (d) in Annex 1 of document
WT/LDC/SWG/IF/5, regarding the assessment of the ag encies on follow-up assistance to LDCs that
had held an IF Round Table.  He noted that in Annex 2 of the same document, the agencies hadrecognized that the lack of concrete funding support would hamper the effective implementation of
the IF.  While the importance of mainstreaming was widely recognized, he expressed concern that
Window I of the proposed IF Trust Fund Windows, if given priority, would ignore trade-related
technical assistance.  Poverty Reduction Strategies, while beneficial to LDCs, would not focus on the
IF that was designed to target the provision of trade-related assistance.
41. He thanked the Director-General for his efforts to ensure progress  on the IF, but noted that in
the absence of funds this task would be difficult to fulfill.  He suggested that the IMF and the World
Bank could  resolve the difficulties with funding and the impasse in which LDCs  found themselves,
for instance, by allotting a quarter of debt-servicing to trade-related technical assistance programmes.
42. The representative of Bangladesh requested clarification on World Bank's efforts to
mainstream trade into country development policy.  Trade-related activities were already present as
major items in Bangladesh's national development strategy, and hence trade had been already
mainstreamed.  He therefore wondered if there were other aspects to mainstreaming of which they
were unaware.  Moreover, he sought  further explanation on the role of the IMF in the new
management structure, and also warned that the administrative arrangements should not create newtiers of bureaucracy or delays.
43. The representative of Canada stated that Canada had supported the IF in Round Table
preparations, particularly in the French-speaking countries.  She noted that three concepts had led to
confusion in the new arrangements proposed for the IF: a) coordinated delivery of trade-related
technical assistance and capacity building; b) mainstreaming which was not yet resolved in terms of
interpretation; and c) increase in trade-related technical assistance and capacity building.  Moreover,
the proposed terms of reference were still to be further studied.
44. Regarding the governance structure proposed in the new arrangements, she noted three levels:
(i) the IAWG, (ii) the Steering Committee with don ors and LDCs, and (iii) an IF Trust Fund with a
different board.  Canada suggested that the main governing body of the IF and the Trust Fund should
be one board comprised of donors, LDCs and the agen cies, which would set broad policy direction for
the IF and the Trust Fund, and review the selection of projects and their implementation.
45. The representative of Guinea thanked the Secretariat for organizing the Short Trade Policy
Course for LDCs which could assist the integration of LDCs into the multilateral trading system, and
support their efforts at mainstreaming.  She expressed concern about the lack of funds and coherence
amongst the various agencies for effective implementation of the IF.
46. The representative of Uganda recalled that the IF had been established at the Ministerial
Conference and at the High Level Meeting (HLM) with a view to addressing the problem ofWT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 8
marginalization of LDCs in the world trading system.  The IF had been conceived to be a coherent
and coordinating instrument among the agencies.  A limited success of the IF had so far been to raise
the profile of trade at the country-level.  After holding several IF Round Tables, it had become clear
that those projects resulting from the Round Tables had not been implemented due to  lack of
resources.  The representative therefore supported the establishment of an IF Trust Fund which soughtto correct  the lacunae in past IF operations.  However, such resources should not be largely spent on
bureaucracy, but on projects which would be prepared and mainstreamed into country development
strategy.
47. The representative noted that a central question for the IF was how to achieve better results.
While the Heads of  Agencies had made proposals to improve the implementation of the IF, by setting
up an oversight mechanism, comprising of representatives of the donors, agencies and LDCs, the
terms of reference governing the mechanism still ne eded to be improved by incorporating suggestions
from Members.  Moreover, he noted that in do cument WT/LDC/SWG/IF/5, the World Bank needed
to persuade their country representatives to mainstream trade, and he urged that the problem should be
addressed.  Lastly, Uganda sought further cohere nce among the agencies in organizing Round Tables
and in  facilitating the true demand driven nature of the IF.
48. The representative of Burundi said that the IF was a useful coordinating structure for
technical assistance to LDCs, and that resources were to be mobilized for carrying out projects
submitted by LDCs within the framework.  Effective mainstreaming of trade into development and
poverty reduction strategies would depend on the joint efforts of beneficiary countries and inter-
governmental agencies.  In this regard, Burundi had participated in a preparatory meeting for future
Round Tables which should take into account the concept of mainstreaming.  Moreover,implementation of the IF at the country level would require sufficient funds as well as  proper
coordination among the inter-governmental agencies, donors and LDC governments.
49. Mr Osakwe responded to the questions and clarifications sought by Members.  He said that
the IMF was a full and indispensable partner in the IF.  Mainstreaming was an important element in
the new arrangements for the IF, arrangements in which the IMF was involved.  The World Bank andthe IMF had circulated a schedule for the PRSPs , as contained in document WT/LDC/SWG/IF/6.
Responding to requests for defining the concept of mainstreaming, he said that it was the integration
of trade priorities into development plans, poverty reduction strategies and existing development
architecture such as the Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF), the United Nations
Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF), Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs), UNDP
Round Tables and World Bank Consultative Group meetings.  The need for integration, coherence
and mainstreaming within domestic policy-making was emphasized.  The connection between  trade
priorities with  overall development strategy had to be established and maintained.  He noted that in
Annex 6 of document WT/LDC/SWG/I F/1, the report of the independent IF Review, some of the
progress made in IF implementation, including in th e generation of resources such as at the CG in
Uganda,  had been achieved because trade priorities had been mainstreamed into overall development
plans.  Therefore, mainstreaming, had as in the case of Uganda and Bangladesh, mobilized someresources.  However, he added that these resources would not be adequate to meet all the needs
expressed.
50. He replied in response to a suggestion that the proposal to change the title of the seminar on
mainstreaming, to include "Agency Perspectives", would be conveyed to the Inter-Agency Working
Group at its next meeting.
51. Mr Osakwe said that concrete proposals and refinements to improve the draft terms of
reference for the new arrangements were welcomed and would advance the work by the Agencies.  In
response to  several questions on coordination, he said that it would encompass coordination ofWT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 9
policies to the extent possible, without ignoring different Agency mandates, but by seeking areas of
complementarity amongst them.
52. On the proposed IF Trust Fund, he clarified that Window I and resources in it would not
constitute any precondition to resources contributed to Windows II and III.  For the detailed
description of types of projects to be financed under Window II, he stated that this would typicallyinclude a) human resource development and capacity building, seminars, trade policy courses; b)
assistance for Implementation of WTO Agreements, including technical missions for drafting and
amendment of domestic legislation; c) assistance to LDCs to draft projects; and d) advocacy for trade
liberalization and reform, considering that these were comparable to public goods.
53. Responding to Haiti's request for clarification on the follow-up to the IF Round Tables that
had been held, Mr. Osakwe noted that at the last  IAWG meeting the discussions had been postponed
on item (d) in Annex 1 of WT/LDC /SWG/IF/5, as reflected in paragraph 23 of the document, because
the funding issue had yet to be resolved.  He stressed that the IF needed to be funded and its continued
operation as an unfunded mandate was not sustainable.
54. On the clarification sought in paragraph 12 of document WT/LDC/SWG/IF/5, regarding the
process of folding the Administrative Unit, currently based at ITC, into the WTO, he noted that
deferring a decision on this was linked to the overall strategic question on the long term prospects ofthe IF, in particular, the prospect for funding.  He added that the statement in Annex 2 of the
document, mentioned that the agencies would continue to deliver trade-related technical assistance to
LDCs within their competencies, mandates and existing resources, pending when the improvements to
the IF and the integration of the LDCs into the sy stem could occur.  Ongoing activities included the
Short Trade Policy Course and the circulation of the document WT/LDC/SWG/IF/6 on the combined
schedule for Round Tables, CGs and PRSPs, all under the current operation of the IF.
55. The representative of Zambia recalled that the Chairman had requested Members to assist the
agencies to improve the IF, especially the proposed IF Trust Fund.  Apart from the reservation by one
Member, there was general support for the idea of a trust fund, although there was a lack of agreement
so far on the details concerning the decision to establish a trust fund. The representative suggested thatthe donors, agencies and the LDCs form a drafting group at the Sub-Committee with the purpose of
improving the terms of reference of the Trust Fund.
56. The Chairman stated that the Sub-Committee had taken note
 of the statements made, but that
further consultations were still required.  Therefore, the Sub-Committee would revert to this item at its
next meeting.
E. MARKET ACCESS FOR LEAST -DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
57. The Chairman drew attention of Members to three issues.  First, the European Commission
had recently proposed to grant duty-free and quota-free access to all products, except arms,
originating from LDCs.  He invited the EC to elaborate on its proposal and other Members who
wished to report on improvements in market access opportunities made or to be made since the last
session of the Sub-Committee.  Second, the Director-General had maintained consultations with
Members on the improvement of market access opportunities in favour of LDCs.  The Director-General had requested Members, who had taken, or had proposed to take, measures to improve
market access opportunities in favor of LDCs, to consider notifying these improvements.  Such
notifications would enable Members and the Secretariat to (i) establish the factual status of market
access opportunities in favour of LDCs; b) monitor improvements, and; c) evaluate the impact of
these improvements for LDCs.  The Chairman said that the Third UN Conference for LDCs, to beheld in Brussels in May 2001, would provide an impetus to establish this baseline situation.  Third, at
the previous session of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD), the Chairman of the CTDWT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 10
had said that he would consult with the Chairmen  of the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) and the
Sub-Committee on LDCs on the reporting procedures on market access for exports originating in
LDCs.  While awaiting  these consultations, th e Chairman noted that under current practice,
developed country Members notified market access improvements, under national GSP schemes, to
the CTD, and developing countries, pursuant to paragraph 2 of the Decision on the Waiver onPreferential Tariff Treatment for LDCs, notified to the CTG.  The Sub-Committee would be kept
informed of further developments.
58. The representative of the European Communities said that the EC had reported on its
initiative to the CTD, on the basis of which, if approved, it would provide duty-free, quota-free access
for all LDC exports, except three products (i.e. bananas, sugar and rice) that would have a three-year
phase-in.  The EC had so far had 99% of trade covered under preferential market access to LDCs.
This offer would extend to the remaining 1% that included sensitive products and therefore markedthe EC's effort in further opening of its markets to LDCs.  The EC was already the biggest market for
LDCs, absorbing more than a half of their exports.  He believed that with this proposal, the proportion
of LDCs' exports to the EC would grow further.
59. The representative of Bangladesh thanked the EC for its initiative and expressed the hope that
the forthcoming LDC-III C onference would be an occasion for implementing the proposed measures.
The proposed measures by the EC  were concrete steps, which would  strengthen the trade capacities
of LDCs and thus  assist their integration into the trading system and the  global economy.   He urged
other trading partners, particularly the Quad and OECD Members, to extend meaningful market
access to LDCs.
60. The representative of Mauritania welcomed the proposed initiative  by the EC to open its
markets to LDCs, but noted that this measure could acquire full significance when accompanied by
other measures to allow LDCs to develop their production base.  Most LDCs faced supply-side
constraints and there was a need to diversify their exports which were often limited to a few
commodities, as well as being subject to deterioratio n in terms of trade.  He said that complementary
measures needed to be reinforced and assistance given for export diversification.  Moreover, otherdisguised protectionist measures limiting market access of LDCs, such as anti-dumping, also needed
to be addressed.
61. The representative of Djibouti thanked the EC for announcing the proposed market access
measures and sought clarification on the existence of other elements that might hinder  the
implementation of the proposed measure. He thanked other Members that had offered market access
in favor of LDCs.
62. The representative of the European Communities underlined that market access was one side
of the equation, and that there was a need to address LDCs' supply–side constraints, as they were both
important.  He noted that the EC had never used anti-dumping measures  against LDCs.
63. The representative of Zambia assured the EC that like other LDCs that had not spoken, its
silence was not to be misconstrued: Bangladesh, as LDCs' Coordinator, had spoken for all LDCs.
64. The representative of Guinea thanked the EC for the proposed market access  improvements
for LDCs.
65. The Chairman stated that the item was significan t, particularly in light of the forthcoming
LDC-III Conference to be held in Brussels in May 2001, and having regard to the intention of the
Director-General to report on his consultations with Members, on the issue, to the General Council, in
December 2000.  He therefore proposed that the item be retained on the agenda of the Sub-Committeeat its next meeting.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 11
66. It was so agreed.
F. CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION ON ASSISTANCE TO LEAST -DEVELOPED COUNTRIES FACING
DIFFICULTIES IN IMPLEMENTING WTO A GREEMENTS
67. The Chairman recalled that Members had held discussions on this item at the Sub-Committee
in its March and July meetings, and that they had agreed to continue discussion at this meeting.  Two
options for proceeding with work had been presented.  The first option was that the Sub-Committee
could contribute to work on implementation to be undertaken by the CTD.  Based on this option,
implementation work undertaken by the CTD would include a section focusing on the implementation
difficulties experienced by LDCs.  In this regar d, two documents had already been prepared by the
Secretariat for the Sub-Committee (WT/COMTD/LDC/W/10 and WT/COMTD/LDC/W/19).  The
second option was that the Sub-Committee could constr uctively consider ways of assisting LDCs that
faced difficulties in implementing WTO Agreements, by forwarding recommendations on assistanceto LDCs to the General Council, through the CTD.  These recommendations would  also be used as
inputs towards the current review of WTO Technical Assistance.  The Chairman reminded Members
that the two options were not mutually exclusive.   He had also suggested carrying out a study that
would identify difficulties of individual LDCs in implementing WTO Agreements and technical
assistance requirements needed to meet these difficulties.  In the proposed "balance sheet approach",the identification of the gap could draw on WTO notifications, Trade Policy Review reports and work
done by other WTO subsidiary bodies. The exercise could be complementary to the work undertaken
at the General Council.
68. The Chairman noted that at the 20
th Session of the Sub-Committee these options had not been
fully discussed because of the presence of very fe w LDCs, but that there had been some useful inputs
from Members in the discussion.  First,  Zambia had submitted a position paper calling for  increased
and higher quality technical assistance that wo uld go beyond assisting LDCs in implementing WTO
obligations, and which  would assist also in im plementing their rights and in understanding the
obligations of LDCs in various WTO Agreements.  The need to operationalize provisions in the WTO
Agreements concerning technology transfer to LDCs had also been stressed.  Some Members hadwished to revert to Zambia's  proposal at this meeting.
69. Second, the Chairman noted that other Members had expressed doubt about the usefulness of
work on implementation in the Sub-Committee prior to outcomes from the on-going discussions at the
General Council Special Sessions on WTO Implementation.  Third, others had suggested that the
issue of WTO implementation should be addressed in the context of technical assistance and the
Integrated Framework.  The Chairman then invited Members to re-consider the issues raised on the
item.
70. The representative of Mauritania stressed that LDCs were confronted with the problem of
implementation of the WTO Agreements that often we re very technical for most of the countries in
Africa.  In this regard, he drew the attention of the Sub-Committee  to the opportunity provided by the
Meeting of African Trade Ministers, scheduled for Libreville, Gabon, where workshops would take
place to explain WTO Agreements and build African capacity and expertise on the Agreements.LDCs participation at these workshops would be beneficial.  He also noted that the
Ministries/Departments of Trade and Planning of ten had a problem of coordination in LDCs.  He
suggested that  a degree to decentralisation might be  necessary to strengthen the role of the Ministry
of Trade in decision-making at the national level.  Moreover, the involvement of regional and sub-
regional organizations in the implementation of WTO Agreements could be explored.
71. The representative of Djibouti wondered to what extent the Sub-Committee would deal with
the implementation issue concerning LDCs and whether the issue would be dealt with in the CTD and
the General Council.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/21
Page 12
72. The Chairman said that the Sub-Committee could reve rt to this item at  its next meeting.  In
the meantime, he would further consult with th e Secretariat and with Members on how the Sub-
Committee could proceed with work on implementation.
73. It was so agreed.
G. DISCUSSION ON POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE SUB -COMMITTEE TO THE THIRD UN
CONFERENCE ON LEAST -DEVELOPED COUNTRIES (LDC-III)
74. The Sub-Committee was informed that a report on the item could be found as part of the
reports of the 47th Session of the Trade and Development Board of UNCTAD.
H. OTHER BUSINESS
75. The Chairman, proposed that the Sub-Committee meet for its 22nd session on 6 December,
2000.
76. It was so agreed.
77. In the absence of any other business, the meeting was adjourned.
_______________