RESTRICTED  
  
WT/REG/M/92  
 
30 April 2019 
(19-3009) Page: 1/8 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements  
Ninety -Second Session    
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 1 APRIL 2019 
Chairm en: Ambassador Julian Braithwaite  (United Kingdom)  and 
Ambassador Carlos Mario Foradori  (Argentina)  
A.  ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1.1.  The 92nd Session of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (hereinafter 'CRTA' or the 
'Committee') was convened in Airgram WTO/AIR/RTA/1 7/Rev.1  dated 22 March 2019.  
1.2.  The Chairman  informed the Committee that under Other Business  the incoming Chair would 
provide the schedule of upcoming CRTA meetings in 2019. He said that t he Parties to the accession 
of Ecuador to the EU -Colombia and Peru agreement had asked that the consideration of their 
agreement be taken up last after Item F.V I.  
1.3.  The representative of the European Union  said that under Other Business she would make an 
announcement concerning a lunch seminar to be held that day on the effects of RTAs on third country 
market access organized by Sweden's National Board of Trade.  
1.4.  The Committee took note  of these points, including items under Other Business , and adopted  
the following Agenda:  
 Adoption of the Agenda  
 Election of Officers  
 Implementation of the RTA Transparency Mechanism - Status R eport on the 
Committee's Work: 
I. Early Announcements ( http://rtais.wto.org ) 
II. Notifications received pursuant to GATT Article XXIV:7(a), and GATS 
Article V:7(a)  
Free Trade Agreement between Peru and Honduras, goods and services - 
WT/REG393/N/1  - S/C/N/918  
Free Trade Agreement between the Philippines and the EFTA States, goods 
and services - WT/REG394/N/1  - S/C/N/919  
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership 
(CPTPP), goods and services – WT/REG395/N/1  - S/C/N/920  
Economic Partners hip Agreement between the European Union and Japan, 
goods and services – WT/REG396/N/1  - S/C/N/921  
III. Notification of changes to  existing RTAs  
  
Free Trade Agreement between the United States of America and the 
Republic of Korea, goods and services - WT/REG311/N/1/A dd.1 - 
S/C/N/621/A dd.1 
Mainland China and  Hong Kong, China Closer Economic Partnership 
Arrangement (CEPA), goods - WT/REG162/N/1/A dd.11 
 
IV. Non-notified RTAs  WT/REG/M/92  
 
- 2 - 
 
  V. Status on the Preparation of Factual Presentations (including delays in the 
receipt of data and comments)  
VI. Status of Consideration of Gulf Cooperation Council Customs Union,  goods 
(WT/REG276/1 – WT/COMTD/RTA/9/1)  - request by the United States  
 Communication from the European Union – European Union follow -up questions 
to LAIA M ember countries  
 Implementation Reports under paragraph 15 of the Transparency Mechanism 
for RTAs 
 Consideration of R egional Trade Agreements  
(I) Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement between Hong Kong, China and 
Macao, China , goods and services  (WT/REG 390/N/1 - S/C/N/898 , 
WT/REG3 90/1, WT/REG390/2 ) 
(II) Free Trade Agreement between Chile and Thailand, goods and services 
(WT/REG387/N/1  - S/C/N/895, WT/REG387/1,  WT/REG387/2 ) 
(III)  Free Trade  Agreement between China  and Georgia, goods and services 
(WT/REG391/N/1  - S/C/N/900,  WT/REG391/1,  WT/REG391/2 ) 
(IV) Free Trade Agreement between Georgia and the EFTA States, goods 
and services  (WT/REG386/N/1  - S/C/N/891, WT/REG386/N/2, 
S/C/N/891/A dd.1, WT/REG386/1 , WT/REG386/2)  
(V) Accession of Ecuador to the Trade Agreement  between the European U nion 
and Colombia  and Peru, goods and services (WT/REG380/N/1, S/C/N/876, 
WT/REG380/1,  WT/REG380/2 ) 
(VI) Accession of Panama to the Central American Common Market (CACM), 
goods  (WT/REG384/N/1, WT/REG384/1, WT/REG384/2, WT/REG384/3)  
 Other business  
B. ELECTION OF  OFFICERS  
1.5.  The Chairman  said that f ollowing the General Council meeting held on 28 February 2019, he 
had the pleasure to propose that the Committee elect, by acclamation, Ambassador  H.E. Mr. Carlos 
Mario FORADORI of Argentina, as the Chairman of the CRTA.  It was so agreed. He said it had been 
a privilege to chair the Committee over the previous year . The CRTA played a crucial role in the 
monitoring and transparency  of core provisions of the WTO and the GATS. The CRTA also provided  
Members with a fascinating  insight into the latest provisions o n RTAs and how different countries 
and trading blocs approached liberalization. By looking at best practice and learning from others'  
experience and expertise, Members were better equipped to optimise their own liberali zation  efforts . 
It had been a pleasure to liaise with Members both in the Committee and in consultations. He 
thanked Members for their openness and for the constructive way in which they had engaged with 
him and his team. He said that going forward the Uni ted Kingdom would remain a strong supporter 
of the Committee's work and the WTO's transparency agenda. He thanked the Secretariat for their 
help and support  which had been invaluable. He also thanked Ms Lauren Boag of the UK mission 
who had done the real w ork wh ile he was Chair. Lastly , he wished his successor the best of luck for 
his Chairmanship. He was delighted to leave the Committee in such good hands.  
1.6.  The new Chairman  said it was an honour to be given the opportunity to coordinate the work of 
the Committee  which was particularly important with regard to the systemic function  of the WTO . 
He indicated his  intention to work with all Members and hoped to provide  momentum to the 
Committee 's work . He said it  was an enormous challenge for him to replace t he outgoing Chair  as 
he had done great work over the past year and it would be difficult to follow in his footsteps . He said 
that he was considering the possibility of appointing a vice Chair and would conduct informal 
consultations in th at regard . He knew  that it had been some years since this had been done  but he 
wanted to be proactive and give greater momentum to the work of the organization in order  to 
resolve some of the structural problems that had evolved over many years.  
C. IMPLEMENTATION OF TH E RTA TRANSPARENCY MECHA NISM - STATUS REPORT  ON 
THE COMMITTEE'S WORK  
1.7.  The Chairman provided Members with an update of the Committee's work and the 
implementation of the Transparency Mechanism. In order to reflect the Committee's work these had 
been divided into  separate elements, i.e. early announcements, notifications received since the last 
session of the CRTA, non -notified RTAs and status of the preparation of factual presentations 
(including delays in the receipt of data and comments).  WT/REG/M/92  
 
- 3 - 
 
  C.I  Early Announcemen ts 
1.8.  He said that a  total of 37 early announcements were currently on the WTO website (not 
counting those which ha d been subsequently notified). He thanked  Members who ha d submitted 
information in line with the requirements of the Transparency Mechanism and encourage d others to 
do so. Also , he reminded  Members to inform the Secretariat of any changes in the status of early 
announcements.  
C.II Notifications received pursuant to GATT Article  XXIV:7(a), and GATS  Article  V:7(a)   
1.9.  He informed the Committee that four notifications ha d been received since the airgram of the 
last meeting had been  issued – the Free Trade Agreement between Peru and Honduras, goods and 
services (document WT/REG393/N/1 and S/C/N/918), the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Philippines and the EFTA States, goods and services (document WT/REG394/N/1 and S/C/N/919), 
the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), goods and 
services (document WT/REG395/N/1 and S/C/N/920) and the Economic Partnership Agreement 
between the European Union and Japan, goods and services (document WT/REG396/N/1 and 
S/C/N/921).  
1.10.   The representative of the United States  welcomed the new Chair and said he was looking 
forward to working with him in the coming year to bring about improvemen ts in the operation of the 
Committee , an issue which his delegation took very seriously. He expressed his delegation's 
appreciation to those Members who had fulfilled their obligations through their notifications and 
looked forward to reviewing these impor tant agreements. Some of these agreements contained 
important digital rules and commitments to make permanent the customs duty moratorium on 
electronic transmissions. This was a growing trend among RTA partners and was supportive of 
Members' efforts inside  the WTO. He urged all Members to look seriously at outstanding notifications 
and to follow the good example set by these Members.  
C.III Notifications of changes to existing RTAs  
1.11.   The Chairman  said that s ince the airgram of the meeting had been  issued the following 
notifications of changes to existing RTAs ha d been received: United States -Korea, goods and services 
(document WT/REG311/N/1/Add.1 and S/C/N/621/Add.1); and China -Hong Kong, China, goods 
(document WT/REG162/N/1/Add.11).  
1.12.   The representa tive of the European Union  welcomed the new Chair and looked forward to 
working with him. She commended the parties to the US -Korea agreement (KORUS) for the 
transparency provided in the notification of changes to an existing RTA in accordance with the 
Transparency Mechanism. The Committee had in recent meetings discussed the notification issue 
and had deliberated on the question of what notifications fell under the category of changes to an 
existing RTA. The Committee had also recently adopted a new templa te for changes to an existing 
RTA. She welcomed the opportunity to raise some questions on KORUS as some modifications had 
been made. She asked the Parties to explain in more detail what improvements had been made to 
customs origin verification rules and h ow such rules would be implemented. Secondly, she asked 
them to provide more detail on the investment provisions mentioned in the notification, in particular 
what would chang e in practice. Lastly, bearing in mind the ongoing Section 232 investigations , she 
asked the United States what would have precedence , the bilateral trade deal or the outcome of the 
investigations.  
1.13.   The representative of the United States  said that this was his delegation's first experience 
with the new notification template  and it had tried to emulate China -Hong Kong, China who had 
notified 11 changes and set an excellent example. His delegation  had taken the most generous 
approach to notification  and had included some modifications that might not be technical changes 
to the Agreem ent. It would be interesting to have a more fulsome discussion on what constituted a 
modification. In response  to the EU's question on customs verification he said that USTR's website 
listed a number of documents on the KORUS page including letters of exch ange between the United 
States and Korea that set out an understanding between the Parties with respect to the modification 
and amendment of  notifications and in particular a commitment to the customs principles under the 
FTA. The customs principles tried to address some of the issues that the Parties had encountered in 
the implementation of the Agreement such as self -certification. The y re-established how the rules WT/REG/M/92  
 
- 4 - 
 
  of origin certification was supposed to work. Eight principles had been articulated in the 
understanding between the Parties. He was happy to send them to the EU as he might not do justice 
to a technical discussion.  
1.14.   On investment, again a number of clarifications and a re-establishment of a common 
understanding of what was already included in th e text  had been made . The amendments included 
clarifications of selected definitions , rules and dispute settlement procedures. Many could be found 
on the USTR website which showed the specific changes that had been made. Given that the changes 
touched upon  investment, the US had made reference to both the goods and services aspects of the 
Agreement. As the EU's last question went beyond the scope of the FTA he would revert with a 
written response.   
1.15.   The representative of China  welcomed the new Chair and tha nked the previous Chair for the 
excellent job done. Regarding the China -Hong Kong, China Closer Economic Partnership Agreement  
(CEPA) which had first been notified in 2004  and for which annexes  had been signed in 2013 , the 
Parties had submitted eleven noti fications of changes affecting the implementation of the CEPA 
including the current notification. He looked forward to receiving any questions from interested 
Members  in writing.  
1.16.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  said that he would consult with his capital in the 
event the European Union required further clarifications.  
C.IV Non-Notified RTAs (WT/REG/W/13 8) 
1.17.   The Chairman  said that an  updated list of non -notified RTAs had been  circulated on 15 March 
as WT/REG/W/138 and contain ed 83 RTAs issued in factual presentations up to 15 March 2019. No 
RTAs ha d been removed from the list and the following ha d been added: Iceland -Greenland, 
Panama -Israel, Panama -Trinidad and Tobago and Cuba -Ecuador.  
1.18.   The representative of the United States  acknowledged the importance of the list and reiterated 
his delegation's strongly held view that the Committee should take the list of non -notified RTAs 
seriously and identify ways to improve Members' compliance with their important obligations. The 
United States had made multiple suggestions in the past on how this might be achieved,  and they 
continued to wait for serious responses from other Members.  
1.19.   The representative of the European Union  reiterated the importance that it attached to the 
issue and to the document that provided an important tool for transparency. The EU  would revert 
with further comments under Item D on the issue.  
1.20.   The representative of China  emphasized the importance of the list for transparency and said 
China would like to work  with others to enhance notification disciplines. There were already clear 
disciplines and the United States, the EU, Japan and others had cosponsored a proposal on enhancing 
transparency and notifications in goods. She wondered if these Members had any pl an or intention 
to further improve this part. The proposal had been submitted to the CTG and it was clear that it 
intended to enhance transparency and notification in all WTO areas .  
1.21.   The representative of the United States  replied that while  he could not speak to the CTG 
proposal itself, he had on  multiple occasions said in the CRTA that notifications were requests from 
Members to derogate from WTO rules. If Members chose not to notify RTAs they remained vulnerable 
to dispute settlement actio n by other Members. The United States had encouraged Members to make 
notifications. He assumed that people were operating under the assumption that they were protected 
from dispute settlement but if the requisite notification had not been made under GATT A rticle XXIV 
or GATS Article V they were vulnerable. The se were distinct from the notifications covered in the 
CTG where programmes or policies needed to be notified. RTAs were exceptions to WTO rules and 
for that reason they had not been included . However,  the Committee should have a discussion on  
the implications of some  120 RTAs that were outside WTO rules and what options Members ha d 
other than dispute settlement.  WT/REG/M/92  
 
- 5 - 
 
  C.V STATUS ON THE PREPARATION OF FACTUAL PRESENTATIONS (INCLUDING DELAYS 
IN THE RECEIPT OF DATA AND COMMENTS ) (WT/REG/W/139) 
1.22.    The Chairman  said that a s regards the preparation of the factual presentations under the 
remit of the CRTA, in the case of RTAs involving WTO members only there were currently 19 RTAs 
for which a factual presentation ha d to be prepared, counting goods and services separately. 
Members would  recall that at the Committee's 52nd Session held on 4 March 2009, Members agreed 
to begin considering RTAs involving non -Members under the TM's procedures. Thus, factual 
presentations o n a further 28 RTAs involving non -Members were to be prepared. Members agreed 
that those RTAs notified since 14 December 2006, including future notifications, should be taken up 
before the others. Data requests for RTAs notified since the adoption of the T ransparency Mechanism 
had been sent to the relevant parties.  
1.23.   Regarding the backlog due to late receipt of data necessary for the preparation and drafting 
of factual presentations and comments on factual presentations, the Secretariat ha d continued 
consult ations with a number of delegations and he hoped that delegations would provide missing 
information as soon as possible. An updated list of all such RTAs ha d been recently circulated as 
WT/REG/W/139/Rev.1. He passed the floor to the Secretariat to provide more details on the status 
of the preparation of factual presentations.  
1.24.   A representative of the Secretariat  said for Agreements among WTO Members, no comments 
had been received for GCC -Singapore, services. For EU -SADC, goods, the Secretariat was awaiting 
comments. For Korea -ASEAN, goods, the Secretariat was awaiting final comments. For 
EU-Cameroon, EU -Papua New Guinea , Fiji, Korea -India and ASEAN -Japan, all goods, data was not 
complete , but the Secretariat was beginning to draft the factual presentations fo r some of these 
agreements . For the Pacific Alliance, goods and services, and Armenia -Kazakhstan, goods, 
comments were being incorporated. For Peru -Honduras, goods and services, the Secretariat was 
drafting the factual presentation. For the GCC, goods, the  Secretariat was awaiting responses to 
Members' questions. For Turkey -Singapore, goods and services, the factual presentation had been 
sent to the parties for comments. For EU -Japan, goods and services, data was due on 27 March and 
the Secretariat had been  in touch with the parties  about their data submission s. For Hong Kong, 
China -Georgia, goods and services, data was due by 3 July.  
1.25.   As regards RTAs with non -Members, for CEFTA Enlargement, goods, the Secretariat was 
awaiting comments from the Republic of No rth Macedonia. For EAEU -Viet Nam, goods and services, 
the Secretariat was awaiting finalization of comments from Viet Nam. For the CIS Agreement, goods, 
some comments had been received. For the GUAM Agreement, goods, the factual presentation  was 
being draf ted. For the following agreements data was not complete: EFTA -Lebanon, Turkey -Syria, 
Ukraine -Azerbaijan, Ukraine -Turkmenistan, and Russian Federation -Turkmenistan.  
1.26.   Finally, there were three agreements which were not in force for all Parties namely the  
EU-Central America  and EFTA-Philippines agreements , and the CPTPP that was in force for some 
parties, namely Australia, Canada, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore and Viet Nam. For some 
of these parties the Secretariat  had requested data.  As per its procedures, the Secretariat would 
start the transparency process once it had confirmation from all parties that the agreement was in 
force for all of them.  She added that a  new notification for Israel -MERCOSUR had been received 
after the document had been  circulated . 
1.27.   The representative of the United States  said that this information was a critical piece of the 
Committee's work and he appreciated the way that the tables had evolved over time. He took the 
opportunity to single out a few RTAs. The GCC -Singapo re agreement had been on the list for quite 
some time and he called upon the parties to provide comments so that the agreement could be 
moved forward. He was encouraged with the recent move with respect to Korea -ASEAN and he 
commended the parties for provi ding the data. He encouraged all parties, except Thailand which had 
already provided comments, to provide comments. It had been almost ten years since the agreement 
had been notified and the Committee ought to be able to proceed with it. In the decade -old camp, 
he asked India to provide data for the Korea -India agreement. While India might take the position 
that the agreement belonged in a different Committee, the CRTA had a notification and Members 
had been waiting a decade and needed to make progress on it. Korea deserved to have its agreement 
considered in a timely manner. Finally, he urged the parties to the GCC to resolve the issue that had 
been pending for almost 15 years.  WT/REG/M/92  
 
- 6 - 
 
  1.28.   The representative of the European Union  attached importance to the document for  tracking 
where Members stood. She provided two updates on EU agreements: for EU -SADC the parties had 
asked the Secretariat for a delay for the submission of comments till early May; and for EU -Japan 
the EU was in touch with the Secretariat to clarify some  technical aspects regarding the data request.  
C.VI STATUS OF CONSIDERATION OF THE GULF COOPERATION COUNCIL CUSTOMS 
UNION,  GOODS (WT/REG276/1 – WT/COMTD/RTA/9/1)  - REQUEST BY THE UNITED 
STATES  
1.29.   The representative of the United States  said it had requested the item on the Agenda in an 
attempt once again to seek clarity from the Parties to the GCC customs union on the delay in allowing 
WTO Members to conduct the required review of the agreement. As Members would recall the 
Committee's Annual Report had mentio ned a disagreement yet nothing in the minutes supported 
the conclusion that there was a disagreement among Members as to how to proceed. He was curious 
if that meant that there was a disagreement within the GCC which would be understandable , but he 
would a ppreciate transparency from GCC Members. He asked them to indicate whether they were 
prepared to proceed with scheduling the overdue review of the agreement, and if not, to provide  the 
reasons for the delay. If they were not present at the meeting, he aske d that his statement be 
included in the minutes and captured in the Annual Report and he requested the Chair to undertake 
consultations to try and resolve this 15 -year old issue.  
1.30.   The representative of India said that on the issue of the consideration of th e GCC customs 
union, in the 91st session of the CRTA the Chairman had assured Members that he intended to 
continue consultations with all interested parties and report back to the Committee. Her delegation 
appreciated the Chair's efforts on the matter, how ever in the absence of a report to the Committee, 
India wanted to reiterate its position that it had strong reservation s on any discussion in the CRTA 
on RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause or those notified under the Enabling Clause and GATT 
Article X XIV, the so -called dual notifications. India believed that the correct forum for these 
discussions was the Committee for Trade and Development as there was already a standing Agenda 
item in the CTD on those  notification s under the Enabling Clause.  
1.31.   The repr esentative of the United States  said that the GCC factual presentation had been 
submitted to the Committee and circulated for questions and therefore it was up to the GCC to move 
the process forward. The United States had said repeatedly that this was not a situation of a dual 
notification as there was a valid GATT Article XXIV notification . He would welcome a discussion  on 
the appropriateness of GATT Article XXIV and customs unions and the limitations with respect to the 
Enabling Clause and customs unions.  Nevertheless , the CTD had had 15 years to solve the problem 
and it had done nothing. There was no discussion in the CTD on the issue , no one had spoken on it, 
it had languished, and another  Committee had to pick it up and move it forward. He was suggestin g 
that the CRTA do so given that there was a factual presentation and general incidence calculation 
before it. The Committee could have a separate discussion on whether or not the Enabling Clause 
captured customs unions. His delegation had been clear on th at issue in the CRTA and the CTD. 
There was a considerable amount of historical documentation and he encouraged Members to go 
back through the records. The Committee had a resolution and a pathway forward and to have it 
just disappear from the Agenda was a  dereliction of duty. It could not just pretend that it had not 
happen ed. 
1.32.   The representative of the European Union  thanked the United States for requesting an  agenda  
item on the status of the consideration of the GCC customs union. As the EU had stated on previous 
occasions it regretted that there was thus far no path forward on the consideration of the GCC 
customs union in the CRTA despite the factual presentation an d general incidence calculation 
prepared by the Secretariat. She reiterated the EU's position that developing countries could form 
an FTA based on the Enabling Clause  rather than GATT Article XXIV. However, in the EU's view, this 
choice did not exist for a  customs union which involved not only the reduction of duties but also the 
modification of external tariffs. She urged the GCC parties to fulfil their obligations to the rest of the 
WTO membership and undergo the mandated review of the agreement in a time ly manner. She 
reiterated that the EU stood ready to engage in informal consultations to move the long -standing 
issue forward.   WT/REG/M/92  
 
- 7 - 
 
  D. COMMUNICATION FROM  THE EUROPEAN UNION – EUROPEAN UNION FOL LOW -UP 
QUESTIONS TO LAIA ME MBER COUNTRIES (WT/R EG/W/124)  
1.33.   The repres entative of the European Union  said that it had requested that the item be kept on 
the Agenda as the follow up questions submitted to the LAIA member countries on 30 October 2017 
were still outstanding. At the last CRTA meeting in November LAIA countries h ad assured the EU 
that they were working on the replies. To date no answers had been received, neither in the CTD 
nor in the CRTA. As the EU's concerns had not yet been clarified it saw the need to continue to raise 
the issue. She reiterated that the EU wa s ready to engage on the issue in an informal process if 
necessary.  
1.34.   The representative of the United States  supported the EU intervention as it was something 
his delegation had also been working on and it would like to see responses to the questions and a 
fulsome discussion. His delegation was ready to engage in order to take the issue forward.  
E. IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS UNDER PARAGRA PH 15 OF THE TRANSPARENCY 
MECHANISM FOR RTAS  
1.35.   The Chairman  said that a n updated schedule for the submission of implementation reports 
had been distributed by the Secretariat ( in document WT/REG/W/140). Since the issuance of the 
document the Secretariat had  been informed that the date of implementation of the FTA between 
Armenia and Kazakhstan was 2003, not 2002. This would  be ref lected in a corrigendum. As of 15 
March 2019, implementation reports were due for 139 RTAs, and the end of implementation (EOI) 
for six RTAs was in 2019. The EOI for a total of 111  RTAs is from 2020 onwards, while for two RTAs 
the EOI year was not availabl e. He encourage d all Members to comply with their obligations and 
submit implementation reports in a timely manner.  
F. CONSIDERATION OF REGI ONAL TRADE AGREEMENT S  
ITEM F.I  
(The minutes of the consideration of th is Agreement are being distributed as a sepa rate document.)  
 
ITEM F.II 
(The minutes of the consideration of th is Agreement are being distributed as a separate document.)  
 
ITEM F.III 
(The minutes of the consideration of th is Agreement are being distributed as a separate document.)  
 
ITEM F.IV 
(The min utes of the consideration of th is Agreement are being distributed as a separate document.)  
 
ITEM F.V 
(The minutes of the consideration of th is Agreement are being distributed as a separate document.)  
 
ITEM F.VI 
(The minutes of the consideration of th is Agreement are being distributed as a separate document.)  
 
G. OTHER BUSINESS   
1.36.   The Chairman  informed Members of the tentative dates scheduled for the CRTA's meetings in 
2019.  These were 17 -18 September and 4 -5 or 7 -8 November. The November dates would depen d 
on the date of the General Council.  
1.37.   The representative of the European Union  informed Members of the lunch seminar that had 
been previously announced. The title was the effects of free trade agreements on third country 
market access  and would be relevan t to Members as they were all third parties to RTAs.  
1.38.   The Chairman  said it was his intention to give greater momentum to the work of the 
Committee and he would undertake  informal consultations and convene an informal meeting in June . 
A date w ould be provide d at a later stage. His goal was to improve the functioning of the Committee. 
As he had said at the outset he intended to appoint a vice Chair as the Committee had a lot of WT/REG/M/92  
 
- 8 - 
 
  long-standing issues that needed to be addressed. He hoped that with the cooperatio n of all Members 
and the greater momentum he wanted to give to the Committee it would be able to overcome these 
problems.  
1.39.   The Committee took note  of the comments made.  
__________