RESTRICTED  
  
TN/C/M/34  
 
16 April 2014  
(14-2398)  Page: 1/44  
Trade Negotiations Committee 
7 April 2014    
 
 MINUTES OF MEETING 
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD ON 7 APRIL 2014 
Chairperson: Mr. Roberto Azevêdo (Director-General) 
Contents 
Page 
1   STATEMENT BY  CHAIRMAN ......................................................................................... 1  
2   REPORTS BY CHAIRPERSONS OF  BODIES ESTABLISHED BY THE TNC .......................... 3  
3   STATEMENTS BY  PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................. 8  
ANNEX I - STATEMENT BY AUSTRALIA ON BEHALF OF THE CAIRNS GROUP AT 
THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE ON 28 MARCH 2014 ................................................................................ 38
 
ANNEX II - STATEMENT BY BRAZIL ON BEHALF OF THE G-20 GROUP AT THE 
INFORMAL MEETING OF THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE ON 28 MARCH 2014 ................................................................................ 40
 
ANNEX III - STATEMENT BY CUBA AT TH E INFORMAL MEETING OF THE SPECIAL 
SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE ON 28 MARCH 2014 ............................ 41  
ANNEX IV - STATEMENT BY CUBA AT THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE 
NEGOTIATING GROUP ON MARKET ACCESS ON 31 MARCH 2014 .................................... 42  
ANNEX V - STATEMENT BY CUBA AT THE FORMAL MEETING OF THE SPECIAL 
SESSION OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN SERVICES ON  1 APRIL 2014 ......................... 43  
ANNEX VI - STATEMENT BY SOUTH AFRICA AT THE GENERAL COUNCIL MEETING 
ON 14 MARCH 2014 ........................................................................................................ 44  
 
1  STATEMENT BY CHAIRMAN 
1.1.  The Chairman recalled that in his remarks to the General Council on 14 March, he had said 
that Members had made a strong start in the discussions towards developing a work programme 
for the conclusion of the Doha Round. Since then, the level of activity had increased again and progress had been made. All of the negotiating gr oups had held an open-ended meeting – with the 
exception of the Rules Group which would be doin g so shortly. Everyone had had the chance to 
make their views known. He had also been meeting with the Chairs during this period – both individually and collectively – to hear their reports on what had been discussed and what progress 
had been made. His impression was that there had been a positive atmosphere in the 
consultations. Many Members had expressed willingness to be open-minded, creative, and to work together to find a way forward. While positive, the consultations had not yet produced anything 
very new in terms of Members' stated positions.  Well-known arguments around the "status of the 
modalities texts" (the draft Rev.4 modalities text in agriculture, TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4, and the draft Rev.3 modalities text for non-agricultural market access (NAMA), TN/MA/W/103/Rev.3 and Add.1) or "the question of balance" or "sequencing" or the need for "new data" had been rehearsed. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.2.  The Chairman had also been carrying on hi s own consultations with delegations in Geneva 
individually and in groups, such as the special meeting of the African Group held a couple of weeks earlier. He had also been taking the opportunity in his travel outside Geneva to consult with Members – with Ministers, senior officials and lead ers. In all these conversations, he had sensed 
that people wanted to find a way forward – they knew what was at stake for the multilateral 
trading system. People wanted to finish the job. The task now was to match the desire for progress with an acceptance of the practical steps needed to achieve it. In his view, the end of the 
first phase of this process had been reached. It wa s time to shift things up a gear and move into a 
second phase, focused on resolving the problems that had been outlined – testing what had gone wrong and putting forward potential solutions.  
1.3.  Everything he had heard in recent days and weeks suggested that Members needed to 
deepen their discussions, and engage in a more di rect, purposeful manner in order to identify the 
best way forward. Rather than restating old positions and aiming for perfect outcomes, Members had to accept that there were no perfect outcomes. Instead they had to focus on the art of the 
possible. For example, some had been saying that the negotiations needed to be concluded using 
the 2008 draft modalities texts as they were. These texts were an important part of how to assess the situation. They were the result of a genuine  attempt by the respective Chairs to strike a 
balance and to move towards a zone of convergenc e acceptable to all Members. However, despite 
their obvious contribution to the negotiations, Me mbers could not agree on those texts when they 
had been issued in 2008. They could not agree on  them at that time, they could not agree on 
them at that time. He said that if any Member insisted that those texts were cast in stone and 
unalterable, then that Member had made a choice; a choice that irreparably condemned any effort 
to failure. Members, therefore, had to resume th e task of finding the balance and the convergence 
that would enable progress towards the conclusion of the Round.  
1.4.  However, he stressed that while it was true that the 2008 draft modalities texts were not 
agreed, he firmly believed that they could offer very useful parameters to frame the efforts in 
shaping a work programme to conclude the Doha Development Agenda (DDA). Members had to 
build on the insights and recommendations containe d in those texts. The work that had been put 
into them could not be disregarded. Therefore, th ose texts had to be used as an important input, 
but Members had to look for solutions that could lead to convergence.  
1.5.  In his view, Members needed to be creative  in this exercise, rather than repeating well-
known positions. He did not think that kind of discussion was conducive to where Members needed 
to go. Instead, Members needed to test what op tions were available to find new solutions. In 
carrying out the work in this phase, he considered it helpful to recall the parameters from the 
February meeting of the Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC), which many Members had adopted: 
balancing realism and ambition by focusing on wh at was doable; being creative and open-minded; 
recognising that the issues were interconnected so  they had to be tackled together; being inclusive 
and transparent; maintaining a sense of urgency; and keeping development at the heart of the 
efforts. As Members began to put forward concrete ideas and proposals, these parameters would be even more crucial. In his view, they were the sine qua non  of everything Members were trying 
to do.  
1.6.  Moving into this new phase, he had asked the Chairs of negotiating groups to further broaden 
their contacts with delegations and conduct increasingly focused conversations aimed at identifying what could be done. He urged everyone to concentrate on what was possible; on what was doable. 
Unfortunately, every time he talked to a delegation about doability, he would get the same 
reaction. All delegations feared that doability was about taking the pressure off somebody else and keeping or increasing the pressure on them. He w i s h e d  t o  a s s u r e  t h e m  t h a t ,  a s  f a r  a s  h e  w a s  
concerned, doability was about finding a balance th at worked for everyone. So, he suggested that 
Members put aside the conspiracy theories and move into the second phase of discussions with an open mind and in good faith. Success was only possible if all Members were equally unhappy with the final outcomes. Delegations had to be prepared. He urged them to remain fully engaged and 
not to wait for the Chairs, but to talk to each other and test out their ideas.  
1.7.  He assured Members that he did not have a magic solution. But on the basis of his own 
consultations and what he had been hearing from Chairs, he was increasingly of the view that 
whichever approach, Members would need to tackle  the really tough areas of agriculture, NAMA 
and services. He was increasingly of the view that  Members had to look at these issues in a more 
integrated way than before. Agriculture was a central focus, as had been made clear in the Bali TN/C/M/34 
 
- 3 - 
 
  Declaration itself. But, there was no hiding from the reality that once Members started talking 
about one of these issues, the other two inevitably  would come into play. He was not suggesting 
that the Round should be based only on these i ssues – but he thought it was clear that without 
progress in the toughest areas first, progress on other issues would be limited, if any. For this 
reason, he was planning to intensify his own work in these areas, working closely with these three 
Chairs – and with the others as well. He would begin to consider what kind of approaches on these three core issues might be possible. He thought this needed to be done in a way that respected 
the levels of ambition inherent in the draft mo dalities texts under discussion in 2008, but equally 
in a way that respected the flexibility sought by many and which had been also somewhat reflected in those texts. He said that with some creative thinking – and openness to testing new possible solutions – the circle might be squared.  
1.8.  He said that Members had set themselves a big challenge. It was like trying to get an 
automobile that had been stuck in the mud, at the bottom of a very deep lake for six years, up and running and back on the road. He said that it was not possible to jump in and drive it away. It 
would take a lot of work – a lot of cleaning, a lot of oiling – but it could be done. This phase of 
work would be tougher. Therefore, he urged Memb ers to be ready to increase their engagement, 
and maintain the positive, constructive tone that had been seen so far. This was the moment to 
shift up a gear. Time was passing quickly. Members were already in the second quarter of the 
year. The December deadline was not so far away . But he was sure that, as long as there was 
engagement, the task was achievable. 
1.9.  The Trade Negotiations Committee took note of the Chairman's statement. 
2  REPORTS BY CHAIRPERSONS OF BODIES ESTABLISHED BY THE TNC 2.1.  The Chairman recalled that since the meeting of the General Council in March, four 
negotiating groups had appointed new Chairs. Also, since then, the Chairs had continued to 
provide Members with opportunities to expre ss their views on the DDA work programme.  
2.2.  As Director-General, he also said to those Members that had raised the question of how to 
deal with TRIPS implementation issues, that this was something he was continuing to give thought 
to in the context of the overall work. 
2.3.  Ambassador John Adank (New Zealand), Chai rman of the Special Session of the Committee 
on Agriculture, reported that since the previous General Council meeting, he had continued to hold 
consultations in various configurations, including an open-ended informal meeting of the Special 
Session of the Committee on Agriculture (CoA SS) on 28 March 2014. In preparation for that 
meeting and for the purposes of ongoing consulta tions, he had circulated a number of questions 
for Members to consider. Those were:  
 What did Members consider to be the desirable and doable aims for ongoing discussions 
and negotiations in relation to the three inter-related pillars of agriculture? 
 What contributions did Members consider they, and other Members, needed to make to 
this end? 
 What new information did Members wish to bring forward, or would encourage others to 
bring forward, to update earlier discussions  about policy settings and developments that 
might be relevant to the negotiations? 
2.4.  At the meeting on 28 March, he had report ed that his consultations had not so far provided 
clear answers to those questions, although the Me mbers with whom he had spoken all recognised 
the increasingly urgent need to get down to dealing seriously with the fundamental issues they 
represented. The discussion at that meeting had not materially changed the evaluation. Overall, 
Members' contributions on the way forward in the agriculture negotiations – and the responses that had been forthcoming at this stage to his questions – had remained at a rather high degree of 
generality. In concluding the meeting, he had noted that the discussion had at least signalled a 
beginning of re-engagement after some years.  TN/C/M/34 
 
- 4 - 
 
  2.5.  Concerning the issue of the status of the draft Rev.4 modalities texts in agriculture, he had 
noted that there were a range of nuances among Members on this issue. He did not think anyone could deny that past discussions had evolved to a certain point, but without any overall convergence, as reflected in Rev.4 and the Ch air's accompanying explanations. Some Members 
had emphasised how important they considered the Rev.4 text. Others had put emphasis on 
exploring alternative approaches. As  he had said, the key priority at this stage was to know more 
about the nature of the concerns that stood in the way of consensus on various issues in order to 
determine how and whether they could be resolved. 
2.6.  On the issue of information, Members noted that there had been a range of developments in 
recent years that affected the context for the discussions and that more information about these developments – whether they related to tariff or domestic support policy or other elements – could 
assist more focused engagement. 
2.7.  He had also signalled his intention to hold the first dedicated session on Cotton, in line with 
the Bali Cotton Decision, in June, back-to-back with the meeting of the Consultative Framework 
Mechanism on Cotton. In this regard, he intended to consult with the cotton Quad and other 
interested Members shortly. 
2.8.  Overall, in his view, Members needed to be moving into the less comfortable, but hopefully 
more productive, zone of testing each other's – and their own – capacity to contribute to results in 
line with the principles set out by the TNC Chairm an at the February TNC meeting. This was also 
the aim that he planned to pursue in his continuing consultations. These would require discussions in a range of formats to determine where consensus might be found. Members needed to deepen 
the engagement on substance. Therefore, he asked Members to be prepared to come to further 
informal consultations with responses to his questions in relation to all the three pillars – market access, domestic support and export competition. He would also ask what engagement with other 
Members they were pursuing in support of their positions and views. He would continue to work in 
full respect of transparency and inclusiveness. He  would schedule a further informal meeting of the 
Special Session at an appropriate time to report, and remained available to any delegation that 
wished to contact him in the meantime. 
2.9.  Ambassador Remigi Winzap (Switzerland), Chairman of the Negotiating Group on Market 
Access, said that since his report of 14 March to the Members on the work of the Negotiating 
Group, he had continued his consultations with individual Members. He had also held an informal 
open-ended meeting on 31 March 2014. The meet ing had allowed Members, with whom he had 
not had the chance to meet, to express their idea s on how to proceed on NAMA in view of the 
post-Bali work programme. At that meeting, he had asked Members to start thinking about where 
possibly they would like to go with NAMA and how. In his view, Members should move – as of the 
present TNC – from a kind of "inventory phase" – which, in his view, was completed – to a phase 
which should allow them to answer the question "how and under what circumstances Members 
could contribute to a meaningful NAMA result". He had encouraged Members to look ahead with an 
open mind and listen to others. He said that should a delegation restate its old positions, then it should also explain to the Membership – and he  quoted the TNC Chairman – "why this should 
work, now; what had changed since 2008 which would make something which did not work in 
2008 work today." 
2.10.  A positive result from the open-ended meeting of 31 March 2014 was the good 
engagement. Twenty-six Members had taken the floor. Members had confirmed the view that all 
three market access areas (agricul ture, NAMA, services) were interconnected, had to be treated in 
parallel and that there was a strong link between NAMA and what was happening in the agriculture negotiations. He had heard many Members restate the importance of the parameters defined by 
the TNC Chairman on the centrality of developmen t, transparency and inclusiveness as well as 
creativity and doability. He had also heard that Members should go into higher gear in updating their schedules to HS 2007. Several Members had asked to have a compilation of basic, recent tariff and trade data. As delegations had not object ed, he had asked the Secretariat to prepare this 
information and to circulate it to the Membership for their consideration. Furthermore, some 
Members had stated their interest to address non-tariff barriers (NTBs). 
2.11.  Looking ahead, he had emphasized in his open-ended meeting that there was more than 
technical work to be done. At this stage, discussions between Members were key. He urged all 
Members to get together, in all possible configurations, to discuss between them openly and TN/C/M/34 
 
- 5 - 
 
  frankly, without a priori and leaving entrenched positions behind them. On the way forward, he 
intended to build on what he had heard since February and on what he would hear at the present meeting. This might include another round of indi vidual and possible group consultations after this 
TNC meeting. 
2.12.  Ambassador Gabriel Duque (Colombia), Chairm an of the Special Session of the Council for 
Trade in Services, said that since being entrusted with the chairmanship, he had followed up on 
the work of his predecessor and undertaken inform al consultations with Members on the services 
component of the post-Bali work programme. In ad dition, a formal meeting of the Special Session 
of the Council for Trade in Services (CTS SS) had been held on 1 April to facilitate a broad exchange of views on this matter. Overall, view s most recently expressed by delegations were 
consistent with the report of the CTS SS Chairman of 21 March 2014 (TN/S/38). In view of his own 
consultations and the recent formal meeting, he highlighted the following key points. 
2.13.  He sensed readiness to engage on services in the context of the work programme. There 
was a common view that the three market access pillars should be addressed in parallel, that 
Members should concentrate on what was doable, and that the underlying process had to be 
transparent and inclusive. Many delegations had said that the development dimension should be 
fully reflected in any services outcome. It was generally felt that the level of ambition in services 
would have to be commensurate with those in agriculture and NAMA. Balance was also needed 
within the services agenda itself. Many had insisted that such a balance should also include the rule-making side of the services negotiations. Refe rence had often been made to the need to learn 
from the past DDA experience. A number of delega tions had felt it was important to avoid the 
sequencing of the DDA negotiations, which in their view had placed the services pillar at a 
disadvantage, while others emphasized the ce ntrality of the agriculture negotiations. 
2.14.  With respect to the plurilateral negotiations on services taking place outside the WTO, 
different views had been expressed. Most saw them as a parallel process. Some had taken the 
view, however, that negative externalities shou ld be avoided. Some considered that possible 
synergies should be further explored. And, finally, a few delegations thought that such initiatives 
could undermine the multilateral process.  
2.15.  The importance of operationalizing the le ast-developed countries (LDC) services waiver had 
also been stressed. The general view had been th at the implementation of Bali outcomes should 
take utmost priority. It had been noted that the regular session of the Services Council had been 
mandated by Ministers to address this matter.  
2.16.  In terms of getting to the key future step of having revised services offers, few delegations 
had offered specific ideas at this juncture, alth ough many had stressed th e need for openness to 
new approaches. Initial suggestions put forward had included: first, taking inspiration from 
regional trade agreements (RTAs) on services, where many Members had gone well beyond the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) in binding existing levels of access; and second, 
focusing on groups of sectors, such as those linked to the digital economy, e-commerce, supply 
chains, trade facilitation, or developing country interests. This type of approach had received 
general support from some delegations, while others had had concerns with any cherry picking. The views expressed on what should be done be fore submission of revised offers had been 
preliminary. While acknowledging that services negotiations did not take place in a vacuum, he 
had urged Members to purse their reflection and to come forward with more precise proposals so as to facilitate discussions on the services component of the work programme. For his part, he 
would pursue consultations in different formats, including, in possible frijolada  meetings, in 
homage to the very successful enchilada  format used by his predecessor, Ambassador Fernando 
de Mateo. 
2.17.  Ambassador Harald Neple (Norway), Chairman of the Special Session of the Committee on 
Trade and Development, said that since his assump tion of the chairmanship of the Special Session 
of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD SS) on 25 March, he had met a total of 17 
delegations, including representatives of proponen t groups. He had also held an informal open-
ended meeting on 3 April. At that meeting, he ha d provided broadly the same report that he would 
make at the present meeting. In all these meetings, he had conveyed the message that there would need to be a credible outcome from the CTD SS process and that it should also be kept in 
mind that the universe of development in the DDA was much broader than the work of the 
CTD SS. Development issues would also be addressed in other negotiating areas such as TN/C/M/34 
 
- 6 - 
 
  agriculture, NAMA and services. This did not, howe ver, reduce the importance of the work in the 
CTD SS. He had asked Members two specific questi ons: to hear how they saw the work of the 
CTD SS going forward, and how they viewed the relationship between the CTD SS and the 
Monitoring Mechanism. 
2.18.  As to the first question, his consultations had confirmed Ambassador Kwok Fook Seng's 
impression, as reflected in his report to the General Council (TN/CTD/28), that all Members seemed willing to continue the work of the CTD SS, with an open mind and without rigid views on 
how this should take shape. The proponents had informed him that they were undertaking an 
overall assessment of all of the Agreement-specific  proposals with a view to identifying how these 
should be taken forward. It was also his understanding that for them, the core mandate going forward remained paragraph 44 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration. The view from the middle 
grounders was one of willingness to do what was n eeded to ensure success in the process. Other 
Members had stressed the need for pragmatism in the work of the CTD SS. While waiting for the views of the proponents, they nonetheless cautioned about reverting to the circuitous discussions 
that had, thus far, characterized the work of th e CTD SS. Almost all delegations had stressed that 
any process in the Special Session be proponent-led. 
2.19.  In all, he had sensed openness and pragmatism. From the side of the proponents, this was 
manifest in their willingness to relook at all proposals, with a view to identifying those which 
should form the basis of work going forward. On the other side, there was a willingness to wait out the results of this work, with a preference to avoi d going back to past ways of working that were 
viewed as having been unsuccessful. He had recommended to the Committee to give the 
proponents some time to do their work. In the same vein, he had encouraged the proponents to 
do all they could to ensure that Members got their feedback as soon as possible to feed the results 
into the work programme. 
2.20.  As to the second question on the rela tionship between the CTD SS and the Monitoring 
Mechanism, there was a shared understanding that th is fell within the ambit of the regular session 
of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD). Some Members held the view that the 
Monitoring Mechanism presented the opportunity for evidence-based discussions, the absence of 
which, in their view, had made it difficult to gain traction on the Agreement-specific proposals in the CTD SS. The overall understanding seemed to be that the CTD SS should structure its work going forward with the objective of bringing to  closure the work on the Agreement-specific 
proposals. 
2.21.  In terms of next steps, while waiting to hear the outcome of the proponents' work, he would 
continue his consultations and remained available for consultations with individual Members. 
He would call open-ended meetings as and when needed. 
2.22.  Ambassador Dacio Castillo (Honduras), Chairman of the Special Session of the Council for 
TRIPS, said that, responding to the Chairman's call  for negotiating group Chairs to start a dialogue 
with Members in the post-Bali environment, hi s predecessor, Ambassador Alfredo Suescum, had 
held consultations with interested Members on 10 and 11 March, and an informal open-ended 
meeting on 1 April, on how to take forward the work of the TRIPS Special Session, and on how to reflect the process in a post-Bali work programme on the remaining DDA issues. He recalled that 
Ambassador Suescum had issued his report on these consultations which had been circulated to 
Members as document TN/IP/22. He quoted the following paragraphs from that report: 
"From these consultations, it seems that there have not been substantive changes in 
Members' negotiating positions in this group,  as they are documented in the previous 
Chair report TN/IP/21 and reflected in the Draft Composite Text that was circulated to Members as an Annex to that document. 
Notwithstanding my emphasis on the mandat e of the TRIPS Special Session, most of 
the Members that participated in these consultations concentrated on linkages between the work of the Special Session, and TRIPS implementation issues – the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the UN Convention on Biological 
Diversity (TRIPS/CBD) and the extension of th e protection of geographical indications 
(GIs) – outside the purview of this group, as  well as with the wider post-Bali process. 
Most of the Members participating indicated that, as a condition for work on the TN/C/M/34 
 
- 7 - 
 
  multilateral GI Register in the TRIPS Special Session, they would like to see 
parallelism with work on these other processes and issues. Other Members rejected linkages between these processes and issues, and would need assurances that the mandate of the TRIPS Special Session would be respected before agreeing to restart 
work in this negotiating group. The negotiations were described as complex and 
difficult by both sides of the debate, even within the mandate of the TRIPS Special Session, and most Members taking part in the consultations seemed hesitant to 
engage actively in negotiations until the overall scope and balance of the post-Bali 
work programme becomes clearer. 
It is my impression that, under current circumstances, Members are not ready to take 
forward substantive work on the GI Register as a priority. Finding a solution to 
Members' very different concerns with respect to the negotiating mandate and 
linkages to other WTO work continues to appear central to permitting substantive work in the TRIPS Special Session to resume." 
2.23.  He recorded his appreciation for the work of his predecessor, Ambassador Suescum, and for 
his clear assessment. Having assumed the chairmanship of the TRIPS Special Session at the beginning of the month, he said that he was committed to working with Members towards finding 
solutions to the current concerns voiced in the consultations. In view of the ambitious timeline to 
establish a work programme for the remaining Doha issues, he was looking forward to exploring with Members all possible avenues on how to achieve an outcome under the mandate of the TRIPS Special Session – and in the context of the post-Bal i work programme – that was acceptable to all. 
2.24.  Ambassador Wiboonlasana Ruamraksa (Thailand), Chairperson of the Special Session of the 
Committee on Trade and Environment, said that less than a month earlier, she had been given the 
task of chairing the negotiations on trade and environment and had been appointed at a formal 
meeting of the Special Session of the Committ ee on Trade and Environment (CTE SS). She 
thanked all delegations for the confidence they ha d placed in her and looked forward to working 
with all of them to help fulfil the objectives set for these negotiations. The previous week, she had 
held an informal open-ended meeting of the CTE SS. At that meeting, she had explained her 
intention to follow-up on the good work done by her predecessor and to initiate a fully transparent 
and inclusive process of informal consultations to explore ways to take forward the environmental chapter of the negotiations. Delegations had been fully supportive of the process and had 
reiterated the importance they attached to the environment negotiations as part of the overall 
Doha mandate, recognizing that many of them were  currently engaged in the early stages of their 
own internal consultations on post-Bali work.  
2.25.  Regarding the specific parts of the mandate, she had detected interest in what several 
delegations had referred to as an "informative step" that would help refresh Members' memory 
and clarify where they stood with respect to the mandate on the relationship between Multilateral 
Environmental Agreements (MEAs) and the WTO. On environmental goods, some delegations had 
expressed a degree of willingness to engage in  discussions that would help identify possible 
elements of interest to proceed with the mand ate on environmental goods. She trusted that 
delegations would take full advantage of the upcoming consultations to come forward with more 
concrete ideas on all parts of the Doha environment mandate. 
2.26.  Ambassador Wayne McCook (Jamaica), Chairm an of the Negotiating Group on Rules, said 
that following the 14 March 2014 meeting of the General Council, he had circulated to Members a 
written report describing in some detail his cons ultations with individual delegations, and with 
groups of delegations, regarding how they saw Rules issues fitting into the overall post-Bali 
context, with focus on the work programme to be considered for the completion of the DDA 
(TN/RL/W/255). In that report, he had indicated that he would make himself available for 
additional consultations around the time of the Rules Committee meetings in late April when greater capital-based involvement would be possible.  
2.27.  He did not wish to add to the circulated report, other than to confirm that he would be 
available for any further consultations desired by delegations during the week of 28 April, and in 
particular in the afternoons of Wednesday 30 April and Friday 2 May. He intended to convene an open-ended informal meeting of the Negoti ating Group on Rules following these April 
consultations. He was hopeful that these further consultations would give greater focus and clarity 
to Members' views on the way forward. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 8 - 
 
  2.28.  In the absence of Ambassador Ronald Saborío Soto (Costa Rica), Chairman of the Special 
Session of the Dispute Settlement Body, the Chairman read out his report. 
"In the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) negotiations, as recently reported to 
the General Council, work has continued on the basis of the "horizontal process" 
launched in June last year. In this phase, work has been based primarily on efforts 
driven by participants, with the goal of bu ilding convergence around approaches that 
would have the broadest possible base of support, in all areas.  
Meetings have been held approximately every six weeks (most recently on 1 April) to 
take stock of ongoing work and progress. In some areas (remand, post-retaliation, 
third party rights, strictly confidential info rmation), elements have been presented as 
possible bases for solutions. Similar work is ongoing in other areas.  
The next set of meetings is expected to take place early May. It is hoped that by then, 
possible elements of solution could be identified in a number of further areas where significant outstanding issues remain. Recent progress and ongoing efforts show a 
good level of engagement of participants in this work. Further progress now requires 
willingness to be flexible across-the-board, to develop achievable outcomes reflecting the interests of all participants." 
2.29.  The Trade Negotiations Committee took note of the reports by the Chairpersons of the 
bodies established by it. 
3  STATEMENTS BY PARTICIPANTS 3.1.  The representative of Myanmar, on behalf of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations 
(ASEAN), said that the Group highly appreciated the concerted efforts made by the Chairman and 
all negotiating group Chairs for paving the way forward to transform the Bali decisions into reality 
for the benefits of all stakeholders. The Bali Ministerial had brought back credibility to the 
multilateral trading system, and it was time to reinforce Members' collective efforts in the 
implementation process of those political decisi ons made by Ministers. In that regard, ASEAN 
pledged its strong support for the expeditious impl ementation of the Bali outcomes, in particular 
each of the agreed timelines for agriculture, the Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) and the LDC-
related decisions. A successful implementation of  the Bali Decisions would show the international 
community that the WTO was back in business and that Members' commitment to the multilateral trading system remained strong.  
3.2.  ASEAN was also committed to the formulation of a work programme for the outstanding DDA 
issues. This was a process and a conversation that would take some time as there were no easy answers. Leadership by the majors was essential, but so was the engagement with and by the rest 
of the Members who deeply desired an outcome. Ra ther than re-stating well-known positions and 
engaging in theoretical or ideological debates,  ASEAN urged Members to seriously examine what 
each of them could contribute. The Group called on Members to continue working in the pragmatic 
and positive spirit of Bali to identify what was doable and meaningful in today's context. While it 
might not be possible to repeat the Bali approach, Bali had shown that convergence amongst Members was possible if all operated in good faith and focused on meaningful deliverables.  
3.3.  The representative of Uganda, on behalf of the LDC Group, said that their goal had remained 
the same since and before Doha, that is, the Group sought the emancipation and consequent 
graduation of the LDCs from that status. The statistics available so far gave little hope regarding the structural transformation and trade performanc e of LDCs. The recent presentation by the WTO 
Secretariat during the meeting of the Sub-Committee on LDCs, held on 4 April 2014, on LDC trade 
performance had been very humbling. Despite the in crease in the share of LDCs in world trade in 
goods and services to 1.14% and 1.16% respectively, their trade had been in deficit at $18 billion 
in 2012 and their participation in world exports of commercial services had remained marginal, at 
0.6%. On the whole, LDCs were still unable to penetrate the higher segments of services trade. Members had fallen short of meeting the aspi rations of those who had crafted the Doha 
Declaration with a delicate but deliberate precision on development as a central outcome. He 
noted that meeting the development aspirations of  LDCs could only be made possible with the 
efforts of all WTO Members. Inevitably, the work going forward had real and practical implications TN/C/M/34 
 
- 9 - 
 
  on the plight of LDCs who continued to be poor, vulnerable and faced marginalisation in this 
System.  
3.4.  Regarding the work programme, he said that the LDCs were currently undertaking internal 
consultations within the Group and with respective capitals. Therefore, these were preliminary 
v i e w s .  H e  s a i d  t h a t  p r i o r i t y  s h o u l d  b e  g i v e n  t o  those issues in the Bali Package where legally 
binding outcomes could not be achieved, as mandated in paragraph 1.11 of the Bali Declaration. The Group considered all LDC-specific outcomes to  fall within this cluster. LDCs called upon 
Members to implement all the Bali outcome decision s with the same vigour they had attached to 
the TFA. This would go a long way in demonstrating to the sceptics that contrary to their strong beliefs, in the WTO, deals could be struck to benefit developed, developing and least-developed Members. It would also go a long way in maintaining the current momentum. 
3.5.  On the services waiver for LDCs, the Group called upon Members to operationalize it. 
Members should not restrain themselves from taking voluntary and proactive steps in implementing the Decision by ex tending preferences to LDCs' services and service suppliers that 
had commercial value and promoted economic benefits to LDCs. Further, in line with the Hong 
Kong Ministerial Declaration, Members should fully and effectively implement the modalities for the special treatment of LDCs in the services negotiations with a view to assisting them derive 
meaningful benefits from trade in services. Therefore, all issues of specific concern and interest to 
LDCs should be taken into account.  
3.6.  On agriculture, the best approach would be to focus on finding solutions to issues that had 
been the major stumbling blocks to moving forward the negotiations. LDC issues had not been 
among those that had caused the impasse. The draft Rev.4 modalities text of December 2008 
should be the basis of negotiations. LDCs expected Members to live up to commitments already undertaken in their favour as contained in the modalities text. Further, the negotiations in 
agriculture should not and could not be delinked from negotiations on domestic support disciplines 
of developed countries, especially those that caused market distortions. It was worth mentioning that export competition had also been highlighted as a key priority of the agriculture negotiations, 
in the context of the continuation of the ongoing reform process set out in Article 20 of the 
Agreement on Agriculture and in line with the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration.  
3.7.  The level of ambition in NAMA was intricately linked to progress in other pillars, particularly 
agriculture. LDCs were interested in any furthe r discussion with a view to ensuring that the 
integrity of the draft Rev.3/Add.1 modalities text was preserved and formed a basis for future 
work. Further, LDCs were looking for commercially meaningful market access, the reality of which 
would be manifested by commitments that went be yond mere tariff cuts. LD Cs considered that a 
credible outcome on NTBs and related initiatives, particularly rules of origin, would be vital in 
ensuring that market access accorded to the LDCs was meaningful.  
3.8.  On special and differential (S&D) treatment, LDCs believed that work should proceed along 
the lines of the mandate enshrined in paragraph 44 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration. They 
looked forward to continuing work towards reviewing S&D provisions with the view to strengthening them and making them precise, effe ctive and operational. While welcoming the Bali 
Ministerial Decision on the establishment of a Monitoring Mechanism on S&D, the LDCs cautioned 
that care should be taken to distinguish between the mandates of the Monitoring Mechanism and 
the CTD SS.  
3.9.  With regard to the TFA, Members continue d to work on the basis of the Bali Ministerial 
mandate on the TFA. LDCs wished to flag that f unding for the TFA was not clear, as it had been 
demonstrated in the past. Their worry was that upon entry into force of the Agreement, donor Members would cherry-pick countries to benefit from their assistance and support for capacity 
building. He suggested that the Chairman, as a confidence-building measure, create time within 
this forum or any other format, for a dedicated di scussion on this matter as soon as possible. 
3.10.  As indicated in the LDC Group's statement in the General Council of 14 March 2014, it was 
critical that in developing the work programme, the focus had to be on the conclusion of the DDA 
without introducing any new issues. There had to be balance in the post-Bali negotiations. 
Paragraph 47 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration an d the principle of the single undertaking should 
be preserved. Development should be the central pillar of negotiations. LDCs urged the Chairman TN/C/M/34 
 
- 10 - 
 
  to develop a clear and precise timetable on the work programme. While it would be important to 
have parallel approaches in the negotiations in NAMA, agriculture and services, the scheduling of meetings should take into account the needs of small and less resourced missions with a view to 
ensuring their full participation. As work proceeded, the Group invited Members to pause and 
reflect on what could be done differently to chan ge the current narrative on the plight of LDCs. 
3.11.  The representative of Australia, on beha lf of Cairns Group, said that the Group was 
prepared to work constructively with others to ensure that there was an ambitious outcome on 
agriculture across all three pillars of the agriculture negotiations and as part of the development of 
a broader work programme by the end of this year as instructed by Ministers in Bali.  The Cairns 
Group requested that its statement to the CoA SS of 28 March 2014 be reflected in the minutes of this meeting.
1  
3.12.  Speaking on behalf of Australia, he said that his delegation looked forward to working with 
the Chairs of the negotiating groups and with the Chairman to try and make sure that good 
progress was made in the next stage of discussions. Members were now four months into the 
twelve months that Ministers had given them to develop a work programme. If they were to 
achieve results, they needed to begin moving  beyond broad expressions of principles and 
identifying in more concrete terms what was doable and what was not.  
3.13.  Australia agreed with ASEAN that success would require leadership by the largest WTO 
Members. But, it would also require leadership and a fair contribution by all Members. At the heart of Members' efforts was a desire to ensure that  the negotiating leg of the WTO delivered results 
which would contribute to higher levels of ec onomic growth and more jobs. It was such an 
important endeavour that Members needed to move  forward as quickly and as seriously as they 
could. Australia pledged its support to the Chairman  and to the Chairs of the negotiating groups to 
try and move beyond the rhetoric and into something much more concrete over the coming few 
months.  
3.14.  The representative of Kenya, on behalf of the ACP Group, recalled that at the 14 March 
General Council meeting, the Group had noted that, during the informal TNC meeting held on 
6 February 2014, Members had committed themselves to start implementing the Bali ministerial 
decisions and had followed the Chairman's direction regarding the parameters to be applied in guiding the negotiating group Chairs in engaging with Members on the formulation of the post-Bali 
work programme. The Chairman's list of parameters had started with development at the core. 
Regarding market access, the Chairman had in dicated that Members could not ignore the 
interconnectedness of the three market access areas – agriculture, industrial goods and services – and the envisaged possibility of ending up with trade-offs. The Chairman had also rightly noted 
that everyone had to see themselves in the issues  on the table. The ACP commended the Chairs of 
the negotiating groups on their informal consultations and the recently-held informal open-ended meetings. These discussions had shed light on where some of the key partners stood.  
3.15.  The Group had placed on record at the General Council their view of the progress of work in 
fulfilment of the mandate to define a post-Bali work programme by the end of this year. The ACP 
Group had demonstrated its commitment to a successful outcome in Bali so that Members could breathe new energy into finding solutions to conclude the DDA. Equally, in defining a post-Bali 
work programme, the Group was proceeding with its own internal work plan to explore areas of 
priority that should be key inputs into defini ng the post-Bali work programme. Together, Members 
had to redouble efforts to pick up the outstanding areas central to the DDA, first and foremost in 
the development pillar, which had not been fully addr essed in Bali, in particular the S&D proposals.  
3.16.  At the same time, the ACP recognized that, to commence work within their Group, they had 
to explore how to best articulate their positions in today's reality, while at the same time reaching 
an understanding of what the proponents in a number of areas intended to put forward in the work 
programme that would help reach convergence. The Group had heard in the open-ended meetings of the NAMA and agriculture negotiating groups th at many of their partners had not changed their 
perception of the necessary recipe for their landing zones to conclude the Round. They had said 
that, in the present reality, the data showed that a few other players – who were not necessarily 
members of the ACP Group – had to engage at the table.  
                                               
1 The statement is included in Annex I. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 11 - 
 
  3.17.  The Group's positions were very well known. The ACP maintained that in those areas the 
Group had not been the cause of the impasse. They had consistently taken the position that, once negotiations were re-launched, their core ga ins in the NAMA Rev.3 and agriculture Rev.4 
modalities texts, together with the advancements in negotiations recorded in the Chairs' 2011 
reports, should be preserved as a starting point.  The Group hoped that their partners could help 
them understand how they would show leadership as  the main proponents in the negotiations, and 
how they proposed to move forward on defining a work programme. The Group was considering 
where gaps needed to be filled in the data and anal ysis of the situation of Members today, so as to 
be able to engage constructively in the discussions.  
3.18.  Notwithstanding the suggestion in the Bali Declaration on areas central to concluding the 
Round, Ministers had recognized that development, agriculture and LDC issues constituted a 
priority for the commitment to define a work pr ogramme. Proceeding from the Bali Declaration, 
the ACP Group was interested in knowing what areas were considered as not having become legally binding in Bali and should be prioritized, as Members defined the work programme. There 
were also areas referred to in the Declaration as "not fully addressed in Bali" that would resume in 
the relevant negotiating groups and committees. In that light, the Group saw S&D proposals under the mandate of the CTD SS as key.  
3.19.  The ACP Group represented a large number of Members in the WTO, which were developing 
countries, LDCs and small vulnerable economies (SVEs). It, therefore, expected that, in charting a path to the conclusion of the DDA, a commitment from their partners to improve capacity building and technical assistance to enable them to impl ement the results of the DDA should be at the 
forefront in defining a work programme. At the General Council meeting on 14 March, the Group 
had also called upon the Chairman to help Member s begin to see light at the end of the tunnel on 
the road to December 2014. The ACP wished to see a schedule of meetings and the Chairman's 
ideas on how to move forward towards defining the work programme. The ACP Group would 
continue its endeavours to contribute in every possible way to the work of facilitating the elaboration of a practicable and balanced work programme.  
3.20.  The representative of Burkina Faso, on be half of Cotton 4 (C-4), supported the statement 
made by Uganda on behalf of the LDC Group, Keny a on behalf of the ACP, and Lesotho on behalf 
of the African Group. He recalled that at the 28 March meeting of the CoA SS, the C-4 had shared 
its vision on the implementation of the Bali Declaration and the post-Bali work programme on 
cotton. It had stressed that the Bali Decision on Cotton had mandated Members to start from the 
Decision adopted by the General Council on 1 August 2004, the 2005 Hong Kong Ministerial 
Decision and the revised draft modalities text in document TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4 of 6 December 2008, 
as a reference point for future work. In other words, cotton should be a priority in the post-Bali 
work programme. Therefore, the C-4 considered that the conclusion of negotiations on cotton fundamentally depended on the commitment and the determination of all Members in making 
rapid progress on the trade aspect of this issue.  As underlined by several Members, including the 
C-4, on several occasions and at the meeting of 28 March, further discussions had to be based on 
the progress made thus far in the agriculture negotiations, notably with regard to cotton, including the revised draft Rev.4 modalities text of 6 December 2008. Members had to start from 
somewhere to negotiate and not reject everything in block.  
3.21.  The Bali Ministerial Decision on Cotton had also mandated, in the context of transparency 
and monitoring in relation to the trade-related aspect of cotton, that Members hold a dedicated 
discussion on a biannual basis in the context of the CoA SS to examine relevant trade-related 
developments across the three pillars of market a ccess, domestic support and export competition. 
Undoubtedly, the existing mechanisms, such as the Quad and other formats that Members 
considered appropriate, remained crucial to facili tate work on the cotton issue. Therefore, there 
was a framework that would enable Members to find solutions on the three pillars in relation to cotton and also to identify any option enabling progress in negotiations in a constructive spirit. For the C-4, it was also appropriate that there be a transparent discussion on relevant and up-to-date 
data and information concerning the policies of the main cotton producing Members. The C-4 
remained open to discussions. It remained available and constructively engaged, and would spare no effort, both at technical and political level, for the implementation of the Bali Ministerial 
Decision on Cotton. 
3.22.  The representative of Brazil, on behalf of the G-20, said that the Group was of the view that 
the work programme should address the core el ements of the DDA agricultural negotiations, TN/C/M/34 
 
- 12 - 
 
  across the three pillars of agriculture, which incl uded market access, domestic support and export 
subsidies, and that draft Rev.4 modalities text should be the basis for the negotiations. The Group emphasized that agriculture remained the key determ inant of the level of ambition of the results of 
the DDA negotiations and the benchmark for the landing zones Members would arrive at. The G-20 
requested that its statement to the CoA SS of 28 March 2014 be reflected in the minutes of this 
meeting.
2 
3.23.  Speaking on behalf of Brazil, he said that, although strictly speaking this did not fall under 
the TNC's responsibilities, Brazil was committed to the full implementation of the Bali Package. His 
delegation was actively engaged in the work of the Preparatory Committee on Trade Facilitation, and would be equally engaged in the implementati on process of the decisions and declarations 
reached on agriculture and development. 
3.24.  Regarding the post-Bali work programme, Brazil had been pleased to take part in the 
consultations that had been conducted over the previous weeks. It had held useful meetings with the Chairs of the negotiating bodies, and had ex changed views with a number of other delegations 
in Geneva. The open-ended sessions organized by the Chairs had been a valuable, additional 
element in this exercise. There was still some distance to be covered before beginning to actually design a work programme as mandated in Bali. Th erefore, it was only natural that the present 
focus be placed on fundamental guidelines, rather  than on more detailed indications. In this 
context, Brazil was of the view that the basic a ssumption underlined by his delegation at the Ninth 
Ministerial Conference (MC9) remained valid: Memb ers should not attempt to repeat the approach 
adopted for Bali. They had to commit themselves to dealing with the core issues of the Round: 
agriculture, NAMA and services. In other words, there were notions that might apply on the Moon, 
but not in Geneva. "One small step for trade,  one giant leap for the WTO" would not work. 
3.25.  If Members truly wanted a result that was meaningful for the Organization and for the 
multilateral trading system, this result had to have a concrete and meaningful impact on the 
reality of international trade relations. If they really wanted a result that was capable of producing relevant effects on international trade, Members had to be able to achieve an important and 
concrete result in agriculture. The chronic incapacity to deal head-on with the immense trade 
distortions in agriculture lay at the core of the WTO's deficit of credibility regarding its ability to address the challenges of development, as well as the needs and demands of developing Members. If Members were still dealing with unresolved problems of the 20
th century, it was because they 
had been unable to right the wrongs in agriculture over the past decades. Those now wishing to 
fast-forward into so-called "21st century issues" should bear this in mind. There was no doubt that 
Members had to deal with the present and future challenges, but it was imperative that they 
solved the main pending issue of the past. A multil ateral trading system that needed to be both 
strong and fair could no longer coexist with that unfortunate and undeniable reality.  
3.26.  Therefore, agriculture and development had to be the centre of the work programme that 
Members were preparing to design and the basis of the negotiations they were committed to 
engaging in. He invited Members not to go back into drawing false lessons from past experience. 
The fact that such a result had not been achieved before did not mean that Members would not be capable of doing so this time. That was the ar gument of complacency or contentment, whose 
articulators preferred to call realism. On the contrary, realism meant that Members had to face 
reality, not try to avoid it. 
3.27.  For Brazil the reality was: first, that there would be no relevant multilateral negotiations 
without relevant results in agriculture, including market access, export competition and domestic 
support; second, that the level of ambition in the other core areas would, in no way, be set above or beyond the ambition achieved in agriculture.  This would not happen again. Working on that 
basis – as his Minister had said in Bali and his delegation had repeatedly been saying in Geneva – 
Brazil was ready to discuss in an open-minded and frank manner issues of agriculture, NAMA and 
services. It also remained open to examining ot her themes that might be proposed, on condition 
that they effectively contributed to the advancem ent of the multilateral trading system and that 
their consideration aimed to preserve the balance of interests in the negotiations, as well as to 
respond to the challenges of development. In that spirit, Brazil remained actively and constructively engaged as Members worked towa rds the completion of the tasks delegated by 
Ministers. 
                                               
2 The statement is included in Annex II. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 13 - 
 
  3.28.  The representative of Lesotho, on behalf of  the African Group, aligned his statement to that 
of Uganda for the LDCs and Kenya for the ACP. He said that similar to most Members, the African 
Group was undergoing a review of the 2008 draft modalities texts DDA negotiating texts in preparation for the substance-based negotiatio ns on the DDA work programme. The past two 
weeks of exchanges had given an insight into the enormity of the task before Members. There was 
a lot to do. What they had heard from the Chai rs' reports confirmed the substance of Members' 
deliberations over the past two weeks. The common thread in these reports was a clear 
disagreement amongst Members on whether the 2008 modalities texts should continue being the 
basis for negotiations.  
3.29.  For the African Group, the only port of entry into the resumed DDA negotiations were the 
Rev.3 and Rev.4 draft modalities texts for NAMA an d agriculture, respectively. The alternatives 
presented so far had failed to convince the Grou p that the departure from the draft Rev.3 and 
Rev.4 modalities texts translated into reneging on the Doha mandate itself. For the African Group, the deliberations on the legitimacy of the draft modalities texts could not be mutually exclusive 
from the notion of the legitimacy of the Doha ma ndate. On this basis, the African Group continued 
to rebut attempts to throw away thousands of ho urs and resources invested in constructing the 
draft modalities texts.  
3.30.  A secondary view that the draft Rev.4 modalities text should be preserved, with a view to 
having them  bear a limited function of serving the negotiations as a reference point, conjured up a 
further rebuttal. In this context, failure to convince the African Group of the fate of the 
architecture of the modalities had denied the Grou p clarity on what would be the precise function 
of the referential value of the draft modalities text s. At the moment, the destiny of the flexibilities 
in these texts, particularly the inherent recognition of the economic and developmental circumstances of developing countries and LDCs, remained uncertain. Some of the Bali decisions 
had been based of the draft modalities texts, such as the draft Rev.4 agriculture modalities. In this 
regard, the African Group had yet to understand what fate belied such decisions in the event that Rev.4 modalities text disappeared. He reiterated that for the African Group, the current DDA 
negotiating texts were the only port of entry into the post-Bali DDA negotiations. 
3.31.  The African Group was aware of the politic al question that was overshadowing the context 
within which Members were working. This question was the same one that had led Members to acknowledge, during the Eighth Ministerial Conference (MC8), that the negotiations were at an 
impasse. With this question looming on the horizon, the Group was of the view that no amount of 
tinkering with the draft modalities texts would wish them away. The modalities texts were the manifest translation of the DDA mandate. The im pression of the Group was, therefore, that 
starting negotiations on a clean slate would not make them any easier. There were still more 
questions than answers. This was probably natu ral because all Members, including the African 
Group, were exercising extreme diligence with a view to reviewing the issues on the table. 
Therefore, it was the hope of the African Grou p that the conversation would soon mature and 
Members would collectively find answers to these questions.  
3.32.  Turning to the perspectives of the African Group on specific technical elements, he said that 
the Group strongly believed that agriculture shou ld be at the centre of any outcome of the DDA 
negotiations. Ministers in Bali had directed Member s to prioritize non-binding outcomes of MC9, 
such as cotton and export competition, in the post-Bali work programme. The negotiations on agriculture had to cover all three pillars including th e areas identified by the Chair of the CoA SS in 
his report to Members. This was because any partial treatment of agriculture would greatly impact 
the level of ambition in other areas of negotiations. The Group was persuaded that engagement in agriculture would predicate the level of ambition in other negotiating areas.  
3.33.  On NAMA, the African Group referred to the statement it had made during the meeting of 
the Negotiating Group on Market Access. Services  trade continued to be an important part of 
international trade. The interests of the Group in this pillar of negotiations needed no repetition. The growing importance of trade and environment in international trade and in the DDA 
negotiations could not be overemphasized. It was therefore important to recognize that initiatives 
outside the multilateral trading system in these areas bore potential to cut-off African countries from international services trade and trade in environmental goods, particularly if the results did 
not apply on a most-favoured-nation (MFN) basis. On development issues, the African Group 
welcomed the fact that Members were rallying be hind paragraph 44 of the Doha mandate as the 
basis for further negotiations under the CTD SS. The Group, as a proponent in this area, had been TN/C/M/34 
 
- 14 - 
 
  working hard to ensure that as Members geared  up to define the contours of the DDA work 
programme, all the elements necessary to move the work forward would be on the table. 
3.34.  On trade facilitation, Members were en-route to fulfil the Bali Ministerial instructions. Some 
members of the African Group had begun to consult with their capitals on the implementation of 
the TFA. However, these efforts would not amount to much in the absence of clarity on the 
availability and terms of accessibility of resource s for the implementation of the TFA. Without this 
clarity, the assignment of commitments into th e three categories would compromise the overall 
quality of commitments to be made by developing countries. In order to remedy this information 
deficit, the African Group requested the Director-General to facilitate the creation of a forum that would serve to provide Members with information on assistance to be availed to developing countries in order to implement the TFA and the related terms of access.  
3.35.  On dispute settlement, the African Group shared the strong view of the majority of 
developing countries that the WTO dispute settlement system had to have universal accessibility, usage and benefits that accrued to all Members. In this vein, the Group held the strong view that 
any agenda and, subsequently, the outcome of th e DSU review negotiations had to capture the 
following issues: firstly, adequate  timeframes for specific needs of developing countries and LDCs; 
second, effective compliance with recommendations and rulings of the Dispute Settlement Body 
(DSB); third, mitigation of the high cost of litigation.  
3.36.  In closing, he said that the African Group considered it important that development became 
the linchpin of work, not only in utterance, but also in identifiable and measurable outcomes. The principle of the single undertaking had to be pres erved. Without this preservation, the internal and 
external balance of negotiations would be difficult to strike. Finally, the Group's view was that no 
new issues should be introduced on the negoti ating table during the life span of the DDA. 
3.37.  The representative of Chinese Taipei, on behalf of the Group of Recently Acceded Members 
(RAMs), said that her Group's overall sense from the recent consultations in different 
configurations was that the parameters provided by  the Chairman had been an useful guidance for 
discussions among Members, and the RAMs continued to believe in the value of those parameters. 
Among them, they wished to underscore the principl es of transparency and inclusiveness, as well 
as the centrality of the development dimension in the post-Bali work programme.  
3.38.  The engagements since the previous TNC meeting had indicated that Members were highly 
committed to making progress in the multilateral trading system. In addition, the RAMs had 
sensed that commonalities were starting to emerge among Members. In particular, they saw an 
emerging common view underlining the inter-connect ivity and balance across the three core issues 
of the post-Bali work programme, that is, agricult ure, NAMA and services - that they should be 
tackled together, simultaneously. The RAMs Group supported this view.  
3.39.  As the Chairman had pointed out, 2014 would be a defining year for the WTO. In Bali, 
Ministers had instructed Members to develop the post-Bali work programme on the remaining DDA 
issues by the end of the year. That left Members with less than nine months. The clock was 
ticking, and Members should not deviate from the course that Ministers had set.  
3.40.  Therefore, Members had to exercise cautio n against reinventing the wheel across the board. 
All Members could agree on the need to stay cr eative and open-minded. At the same time, the 
RAMs Group saw as sensible an approach to build upon the results and foundations that Members 
had achieved – sometimes through a lengthy and painstaking process – so that Members could move forward without returning back to square on e. It was in this spirit that the RAMs Group 
continued to believe that the draft modalities te xt should be the basis for future work on 
agriculture and NAMA. The Group also wished to stress that the draft modalities represented a stabilized outcome that reflected extensive discussions and negotiations among Members. These 
were a sensible and valuable basis for all Members to build upon.  
3.41.  Another important basis for Members to move forward was the fact that members of the 
RAMs Group had already made extensive commitmen ts during accessions, to the benefit of all 
Members. Ministers had recognized this fact, and in Hong Kong, Ministers had instructed Members 
to give due consideration to the special flexibility needs of the RAMs Group.  TN/C/M/34 
 
- 15 - 
 
  3.42.  The multilateral trading system was the principal forum for promoting global trade. The 
RAMs Group therefore urged Members to complete the DDA and all its mandates, which included reaching a comprehensive final package. Members should also be flexible at looking at all possible approaches that could help achieve the completion of the Round. Time was of the essence. 
Members needed to re-double their efforts to de liver on the instructions that Ministers had 
provided in Bali.  
3.43.  The representative of Switzerland, on be half of the G-10, said that the G-10 wished to 
remind Members of its statement at the CoA SS of 28 March where it had expressed its readiness 
to engage in discussions on the basis of the si x parameters that had been highlighted by the 
Chairman at the TNC meeting of 6 February.  
3.44.  With regard to the substance, the G-10 emph asized that the three pillars of agriculture were 
closely interconnected. The G-10 reaffirmed that negotiations had to cover the three pillars and 
other issues in a balanced manner. At the end of the day, the outcome of the negotiations in agriculture had to strike a balance between what net importers could do and exporters sought to 
have. In addition, future outcomes in agriculture had to give room for manoeuver in domestic 
policy design and take account of the different roles of agriculture in society (the non-trade concerns). 
3.45.  Further, the G-10 was of the view that only  parallel and horizontal discussions on all issues 
would allow Members to set the appropriate level of ambition for the overall negotiations. 
3.46.  Speaking on behalf of Switzerland, he said  that, so far, his country was pleased with what 
had been achieved since Bali. All committees were operational, including the Preparatory 
Committee on Trade Facilitation. With the nomination of Steffen Smidt as Facilitator for LDC 
issues, this important aspect of implementation had been strengthened. In respect of the work 
programme – which was part of implementation of the Bali outcome – consultations had taken 
place on all aspects of the DDA. The Doha Round was being tackled in a comprehensive way and 
all the three market access pillars were being addressed in parallel.  
3.47.  What was important now was the timely implementation of all the Bali decisions. This was 
important for the credibility of the Bali outcome and of the WTO. In accordance with the deadlines 
fixed in Bali, Members would soon face a first litmus-test on trade facilitation. The deadline of July 2014 decided by Ministers in Bali had to be kept.  
3.48.  Members now also had to focus more than as in the past on the regular WTO work. First, 
because in Bali they had decided on work to be undertaken in the Committee on Agriculture, the 
Committee on Rules of Origin, the Committee on Trade and Development and the Council on Trade 
in Services. This work had to be started, where it had not yet, and he trusted that the Members 
with stakes in these issues would take the lead. Second, regular WTO work was important to 
enable meaningful negotiations: up-to-date notifications in all areas and up-to-date certified goods schedules as well as recent trade data were of crucial importance. All this was in the remit of WTO 
committees.  
3.49.  Regarding the establishment of the work programme: the task now was to proceed from the 
Chairs' inventory to a next phase which led Members to the establishment of a work programme. Members needed to identify how they could get to  results which were meaningful, of interest to 
their stakeholders and doable.  
3.50.  He had three observations on the discussion s of the previous weeks. First, Members were 
very much tempted to dive back into the trenches that they had dug in their previous negotiations. 
Switzerland was of the view that Members could not just restart in 2014 where they had left in 
2008. But it was also conscious that there had been  a lot of debate and work in the past which 
could not simply be ignored today. Second, Member s insisted too often on what they could not do, 
or – in his view even worse – what others should not ask for. It was better if Members started 
signalling what each of them could possibly do if conditions were right. Third, at this stage, it seemed normal to him, that Members were signalling what they wanted from others. 
3.51.  Switzerland was keen on the calibration of  the level of ambition across agriculture, NAMA 
and services taking also into considerations issues  such as NTBs in NAMA, domestic regulation in TN/C/M/34 
 
- 16 - 
 
  services, the GI register, GI extension, disclosure of source and TRIPS/CBD as well as paragraphs 
31(i) and 31(ii) of the Doha Declaration on Tr ade and Environment. What treatment any given 
issue would get in respect of the work programm e would, however, depend on the traction any 
proposal might gather.  
3.52.  Using some of the Chairman's pre-Bali lang uage, he said that in his view, Members had to 
figure out broadly where the territory behind the many icebergs lay and what shape it had. Only 
then, would Members be able to decide on how to pass between the icebergs, with what ships and 
how to avoid the rough seas. He could also use words of the Roman statesman Seneca, who had 
said: "If one does not know to which port on e is sailing, no wind is favourable."  
3.53.  Looking ahead, he said that it seemed important to him that Members proceeded with 
caution and with an open mind. Members had to listen to each other and to engage in discussions 
amongst themselves, in different configurations. Members should not immediately say no, even if 
there were ideas that they might like less and th ey should neither draw conclusions too quickly, 
nor get lost in theological debates. In closing, he reminded Members that without their willingness 
to succeed nothing would happen.  
3.54.  The representative of Indonesia, on behalf of the G-33 said that during their meeting in Bali, 
WTO Ministers had given Members twelve months to agree on how best to tackle the remaining 
DDA issues. The Group shared the Chairman's vi ew that development and S&D treatment had to 
be the integral part of work programme and that agriculture would determine the level of ambition. He said that the Bali model should not be replicated. 
3.55.  The draft Rev.4 modalities text had to be the basis as it had been the result of collective 
undertaking and reflected an enormous amount of negotiations since the launch of DDA 
negotiations. He urged Members to re-double their efforts to address outstanding issues. Members that rejected the latest draft Doha text had to come up with a clear alternative. 
3.56.  Finally, the Group committed to engaging constructively in the discussions to determine 
what constituted doable in the next negotiations. The Chairman's introductory remarks were useful input for Members on how they should engage to establish the work programme. 
3.57.  The representative of Dominica, on behalf of the Member States of the Caribbean 
Community (CARICOM), said that CARICOM placed the utmost value and priority in the completion 
of the entire DDA as Ministers had instructed. Therefore, a clear, well-defined post-Bali work 
programme by the end of the year was a sine qua non towards this goal.  
3.58.  This would be a challenge. Members had been at an impasse for some time and the issues 
that had brought about this remained to be addr essed and resolved. Members would have to find 
the delicate balance and path towards conclusion, consistent with the agreed negotiating 
mandates, the MC8 political guidance and the instructions of Ministers in Bali. Members had also 
taken on board the Chairman's list of parameters which should guide their work. In developing the 
work programme, Members would have to ask and answer some tough questions and make 
difficult decisions. On the one hand, Members had noted that they could not repeat Bali; and by 
that his Group understood this to mean that it would not be feasible to have another early harvest or a staggered approach towards the conclusion of the DDA. On the other hand, Members were to 
develop the work programme in a way that was consistent with the MC8 guidance, and to focus on 
what was doable. For CARICOM, the single  undertaking remained fundamental.  
3.59.  After having participated in the various special session consultations, it was worth 
reiterating that for CARICOM, the development objective of the DDA remained the main objective 
of this Round.  
3.60.  As small economies, CARICOM members placed significant value in the current agriculture 
and NAMA draft modalities texts which contained flexibilities for SVEs which they considered 
stabilised. Consequently, those modalities should not be reopened, but rather preserved in the 
negotiations going forward.  
3.61.  In the services negotiations, he said that CARICOM wished to stress the primacy of the 
multilateral framework – the GATS principles and Annex C of the Hong Kong Ministerial TN/C/M/34 
 
- 17 - 
 
  Declaration. His Group had listened carefully to the interventions thus far from some Members who 
were of the view that a two track approach in services was possible – he was referring to a multilateral and plurilateral approach. CARICOM was not convinced of this.  
3.62.  On development, CARICOM wished to reaffirm  the importance it attached to the work of the 
CTD SS and the need to complete the work on paragraph 44 of the Doha mandate. While his 
Group welcomed the outcome at Bali on the Monitoring Mechanism it wished to caution that the Monitoring Mechanism was not the only outcome in pursuit of paragraph 44 of the Doha 
Declaration.  
3.63.  His Group noted that Rules – fisheries subsidies needed careful navigation. As island 
economies, they had both offensive and defensive interests in this area. In that regard, his Group hoped that like the other core issues, fisheries subsidies would be given due consideration as well.  
3.64.  He said that as small delegations, they appreciated the transparent and inclusive nature of 
the consultations and looked forward to further contributing towards the collective goal.  
3.65.  Time was not on the side of Members and the summer recess was nearly upon them. His 
Group hoped that Members would have made sufficient progress before the summer break 
towards completing the work programme with clear indications on the way ahead for the completion of the DDA. His Group was ready to play its part in finding solutions and bringing 
Members towards a successful conclusion of the Round. His Group also knew that the heavy lifting 
would need to come from their partners who had greater power and therefore greater responsibility and would need to show the necessary leadership.  
3.66.  The CARICOM Group associated itself with the statements by the ACP, G-33 and SVEs.  
3.67.  The representative of Jordan, on behalf of the Arab Group, said that the level of 
engagement in the consultations and the negotiat ions had shown that Members were still strong 
believers in the multilateral trading system and were working hard in order to show the world that 
they could still deliver and make progress in the WTO negotiation. 
3.68.  He said that the importance of full part icipation, inclusiveness and transparency, should 
always be respected throughout the process. His Group wished to emphasize that the single 
undertaking was still relevant as the only princi ple that could ensure the right balance among the 
outcomes of the Doha Round, as confirmed by paragraph 47 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration. 
3.69.  The Arab Group like others fully supporte d the view that Members' approach should be 
balanced across and among the three pillars of the negotiations namely agriculture, NAMA and 
services. 
3.70.  Members needed to emphasize the importance of respecting and acknowledging the work 
accomplished since the beginning of the Doha Round 13 years ago. The Arab Group did not 
support any attempts to add "new issues" to the WTO mandate before concluding the DDA. 
3.71.  His Group recognized that agriculture held a central role to a successful DDA. It considered 
that the draft Rev.4 modalities text should be the basis for Members' future work. Any further 
discussions on it had to be focused on the outstanding issues defined in the CoA SS Chair's report 
of April 2011. 
3.72.  His Group wished to emphasize that withou t any tangible agriculture outcomes, there would 
not be any further success stories like the Bali Package. Developing countries needed a permanent 
solution to unequal rules in agriculture, in order to promote an agenda for decent jobs, food 
security and sustainable development. Therefore,  the development aspects of the Round needed 
not only to be safeguarded but also strengthened. 
3.73.  The representative of Guatemala, on behalf  of Small and Vulnerable Economies (SVEs), said 
that SVEs had always been an active group within the negotiation pillar of the WTO. As countries 
with a special economic situation, it was in their interest that their particular circumstances and 
concerns were taken into account at all stages of the negotiations, and reflected in the final 
outcome of such negotiations. This was why SVEs strongly supported a transparent, inclusive and TN/C/M/34 
 
- 18 - 
 
  bottom-up process that would allow all WTO Members, including SVEs, to participate effectively in 
the multilateral negotiations.  
3.74.  Regarding the way forward on the post-Bali work programme, SVEs believed that Members 
had to advance on the process and finalize the basis for the negotiations towards concluding the 
DDA as Ministers had mandated in MC9.  
3.75.  For SVEs, the development dimension had to remain as the main objective of any future 
negotiation process.  
3.76.  SVEs attached importance to having meaningful  results in agriculture as an integral part of 
the DDA. As a Group, they believed that the draft Rev.4 modalities text had to be the basis of 
further negotiations, as it was a result of collective undertakings and reflected an enormous amount of negotiations and understandings since the launch of the DDA negotiations. Any future 
negotiation should take into account the recogn ition of the special circumstances of SVEs and 
preserve the flexibilities reflected for these members, in the draft Rev.4 modalities text.  
3.77.  In the same line, in the NAMA negotiations, the flexibilities of the Group, which were 
stabilized and contained in the draft Rev.3/Add.1 modalities text, should not be reopened. The 
recognition of SVEs' particular circumstances in those negotiations had to be preserved in any future negotiating process in this area.  
3.78.  In the area of services, the Group wished  to reiterate its preference for a multilateral 
approach based on Annex C of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration which remained the cornerstone of Members' work on trade in services, and had carefully charted the objectives and approaches to be undertaken.  
3.79.  In that sense, any future process had to be guided by the GATS principles and, in that 
regard, flexibilities had to be given to developing countries and due consideration given to proposals on trade-related concerns of small ec onomies and their developmental needs. The Group 
reiterated that targeted technical assistance as agreed in paragraph 10, Annex C of the Hong Kong 
Ministerial Declaration should enable developing countries to participate effectively in the negotiations.  
3.80.  The representative of Pakistan said that for the past two months, Members had been 
focused on the implementation of the Bali deci sions. Ministers had given Members the task of 
completing all work relating to the TFA before the summer recess and to begin the process of ratification of the Agreement by Members' capitals in accordance with their respective legal and 
constitutional provisions. Regarding the legal scr ubbing exercise, proposals had been received 
from 23 Members. Verbal submissions during discussions were also not precluded. To move further in an efficient manner, it was important to keep  in focus the principle that in case of non-
consensus on any of the proposals, Members might go back to the Bali text. Renegotiation of any 
of the provisions of the Agreement was likely to di sturb the critical balance that had been achieved 
multilaterally at Bali. He was positive that work on the TFA was doable within the timeframe 
decided at Bali.  
3.81.  He said that the appointment of a Facilita tor for cross-cutting LDC issues by the Chairman 
had been an important step. Two important issues, however, that is, rules of origin and implementation of the LDC services waiver would be brought forward for discussion in the current 
month. His delegation would be constructively engaged. He believed that more informal meetings 
in these areas would be held by the respective Chairs.  
3.82.  The Bali decisions relating to agriculture had been discussed at the committee level. These 
were complex issues and required careful negotiations based on reliable data while addressing 
concerns of all Members. He said that positive movement in agriculture would unlock other difficult issues.  
3.83.  At Bali, Ministers had also instructed the TNC to prepare a clearly defined work programme 
on the remaining Doha issues by the end of the ye ar. They had also instructed that issues where 
legally binding outcomes could not be achieved would be prioritized. In a manner, developing a work programme, emanating from the Bali Declaration, was also an implementation issue. During TN/C/M/34 
 
- 19 - 
 
  the past two months, Chairs of negotiating groups  had remained engaged in informal and formal 
consultations with Members to define a broad outline of the programme. There was convergence on the fact that the post-Bali endeavour would include market access issues in agriculture, industrial goods and services. Besides, development would remain as the central pillar. Although 
there were differences of opinion relating to the agriculture and NAMA draft modalities texts of 
2008, Members generally acknowledged that these modalities were a good basis for further work.  
3.84.  After the TNC, Members would enter into a new phase by addressing substantive issues in 
the Chair-led process to develop broad convergence on issues at macro level, before the summer 
vacation, to enable Members identify landing zones and prioritize the issues for further negotiations. Success at Bali had re-energized Members' engagement to strengthen the negotiating pillar of the Organization. His de legation would continue to make substantive 
contributions.  
3.85.  The representative of the European Union (EU) said that the EU remained strongly 
committed to the objective of concluding the DDA and was ready to engage in preparing a 
balanced and reasonable outcome. The main task ahead of Members was clear – they needed to 
agree on a realistic work programme by the end of the year that provided a clear path toward the 
conclusion of the Round.  
3.86.  It was important for the next steps to draw lessons from the past and avoid getting bogged 
down in unhelpful discussions. All Members knew the reasons for previous failures and had to steer away from them. The world had changed and evol ved. Members' discussions had to reflect the 
problems and questions they faced today, and not those they had faced five or ten years ago. The 
overall balance and level of ambition that Member s sought had to reflect today's world and what 
each one of them could deliver today.  
3.87.  The issues that Members needed to address were clear to everyone. In order to move 
forward Members needed to confront the question of how to achieve a balanced and satisfactory 
outcome on agriculture, NAMA and services. This  was not an easy question, but Members had a 
wealth of experience from previous years to inspire them in this task. He said that what he took 
from Members' previous attempts was that: first, they needed to simplify their approach; second, 
they needed to adjust their expectations; and, th ird, Members needed to address the issues with 
an open mind.  
3.88.  Although the approaches set out in the 2008 draft modalities texts had not worked and had 
not gained the acceptance of Members, this did not mean that Members had to start from scratch. 
To start with, the development objectives of the Round remained as valid as ever. The EU stood ready to explore with developing countries the most appropriate way of getting there. It was 
important to bear in mind that the biggest development benefits would come from an agreement 
on the core negotiating areas. On these, all Memb ers would have to contribute according to their 
level of development - with special attention to be given to the interests of LDCs.  
3.89.  His impression from the discussions that Members had had over the past three months was 
that the only way to move forward was to aim for an outcome that was ambitious but realistic, reflecting both a balance between the core areas and developments in global trade, whilst being 
doable and agreeable to Members. In this context,  Members needed to ensure that work advanced 
with appropriate parallelism and with a similar level of ambition on all of the key issues: 
agriculture, NAMA, services and rules. Striking the right balance within and between these issues would require an evaluation and calibration of Memb ers' expectations. The EU was ready to do this 
as long as others were also ready and that this was done across the board. Conversely, 
maintaining high ambition in one area while decreasing the ambition in others would not bring results.  
3.90.  With regard to the individual negotiating ar eas, the EU was ready to engage. On agriculture, 
issues that Members needed to work on were export competition and domestic support. The questionnaire on export competition was an important first step. Market access for agricultural and non-agricultural products were two sides of the same coin and had to be handled as such, in a 
balanced manner, together with services. It would be challenging. But, if Members calibrated their 
ambitions and looked at approaches that had work ed in the past, then they could move forward, 
provided that they all engaged and sought soluti ons. Services would need to reflect the overall TN/C/M/34 
 
- 20 - 
 
  level of ambition and Members had to try to identify areas of common interest where progress 
could be achieved. Finally, any DDA package would need to contain a Rules component. Traders and industry around the world were looking to the WTO to address issues such as horizontal subsidies, in addition to agriculture subsidies, and the WTO needed to be in a position to deliver. 
TRIPS issues, in particular GIs, were also  an important element of this component. 
3.91.  The EU looked forward to further discussions with Members and would be ready to move 
forward under the guidance of the Chairman. Bali  had shown that Members could achieve results. 
Members needed to show the world that this was not a one-time result but a new beginning.  
3.92.  The first step in this regard was to implement the Bali outcomes. Good progress was being 
made to meet the deadlines set by Ministers on trade facilitation. The EU urged all Members to quickly implement the TFA and reiterated its commitment to support developing countries in 
implementing the Agreement. Several initiatives and activities were ongoing to demonstrate that 
assistance was available. To encourage developing countries to implement, the EU would, together 
with other donor countries, organize a conference in Geneva in June to showcase successful 
arrangements and concrete examples of cooperation in the area of trade facilitation. 
3.93.  The representative of Nigeria said that the frank report on the state-of-play on the DDA 
negotiations, including the assessment and possi ble options presented by the Chairman, had 
provided Members with a good platform to decide  on the way forward. Members were mindful of 
the useful parameters earlier outlined by the Chairman that were intended to provide necessary guidance in their engagements on the two signif icant tasks before Members: (i) the need to 
implement the Ministerial decisions and agreements reached in Bali; and (ii) the need to come up 
with a clearly defined work programme on the re maining DDA issues by the end of 2014. Members 
needed to concentrate their efforts on how to accomplish these challenging tasks, consistent with the hope and promise of the DDA, without compromising on any of its core elements. 
3.94.  Nigeria was committed to the implementation of the Bali decisions and to the preparation of 
a credible work programme that would ensure that Members delivered tangible results. As a Member-driven organization, there was need to ensure that the negotiating process, under the 
Chairpersons of the negotiating groups, adhered to the core principles and values, particularly, the 
primacy of the multilateral process, inclusivene ss and transparency, which all Members cherished. 
In addition, Nigeria believed that Members sh ould build on the convergence that had been 
achieved on the basis of the agriculture and NAMA draft modalities of 2008. 
3.95.  Agriculture was one of the strategic sector s being addressed in the transformation agenda 
of the Government of Nigeria. Therefore, his delegation wished to underscore the need for rapid results in the reform process in agriculture, in accordance with the Doha development mandate. 
Distortions caused by high levels of protection in agriculture, including subsidies, continued to 
undermine the long-term development aspirations of many developing countries, especially LDCs that depended solely on agriculture as the mainstay of their economy. It was a disappointment 
that the target of 2013 that had been set in the Hong Kong Ministerial De claration for elimination 
of all forms of export subsidies and disciplines on all export measures with equivalent effect had not been achieved. It was the expectation of Nigeria that full modalities in agriculture and NAMA would be accomplished, as soon as possible for the Doha Round to be concluded in a timely 
manner. His delegation looked forward to an expeditious and meaningful solution to the cotton 
issue, in view of its importance to the economy of many African countries, particularly, the cotton-dependent LDCs. 
3.96.  Furthermore, his delegation wished to underline the importance of preserving the flexibilities 
agreed for the developing countries, LDCs, and SVEs in the modalities on agriculture, NAMA and services. His delegation called on all Members to intensify negotiations in an honest, transparent 
and inclusive manner. The tempo of the progress ma de in Bali had to be sustained, while Members 
ensured a horizontal balance in all the areas of the DDA negotiations. 
3.97.  On the TFA, his delegation noted the progress  that had been achieved so far at the level of 
the Preparatory Committee on legal scrubbing, including contributions by Members in form of 
proposals. It urged Members to ensure that the ch anges they proposed to the texts did not affect 
the substance of the texts or alter the delicate balance already achieved, as a result of hard negotiations and flexibilities. It was also desirable that the WTO provided a platform for regular TN/C/M/34 
 
- 21 - 
 
  dialogue between the donors, developing countries and LDCs in order to give the necessary 
assurance that the technical assistance and capacity building support required by Members would be provided to enable them to fulfil their obligati ons. The issue of update and revision of the needs 
assessment exercise, which in some countries, including Nigeria, were inconclusive, had to be 
given priority as a starting point. Nigeria was willing and committed to the implementation of the 
TFA in accordance with the Bali decision. 
3.98.  In conclusion, he said that Members should be reminded that Ministers in Hong Kong in 
2005 had emphasized the centrality of development in every aspect of the Doha Work Programme, 
including the commitment towards making it a reality, in terms of the results of the negotiations on market access, rule-making and specific development-related issues. Accordingly, S&D treatment for developing countries and LDCs had to remain the central element in all areas of the 
negotiations. It was his delegation's view that the major concern of some of the Membership was 
that some important issues to some delegations were yet to be addressed in a fair and balanced manner. His delegation urged Members to show greater commitment to the multilateral trading 
system by showing more flexibility required for the conclusion of a balanced, credible and 
equitable outcome of the DDA, in line with the Doha Ministerial mandate. Nigeria remained willing and committed to working closely with all Member s to achieving their set objectives and more 
importantly, towards the preparation of a credible and realistic DDA work programme that would 
ultimately, take into consideration the interests of developed, developing, least-developed countries and SVEs by the end of 2014.  
3.99.  Nigeria, therefore, supported the statements made by Lesotho on behalf of the African 
Group, Kenya on behalf of the ACP, Brazil on behalf of the G-20, Indonesia on behalf of the G-33, 
and Burkina Faso on behalf of the C-4.  
3.100.  The representative of Colombia said that the task given by Ministers in Bali had been to 
ensure that the objectives of the Round were re ached. The construction of the work programme 
implied finding the best means to do so, taking into account current realities and recent experiences. Unquestionably, the priorities that ea ch Member attributed to the different pillars of 
the Round did not necessarily coincide. Many developing countries, such as Colombia, believed 
that agriculture was the priority and should maintain a central role in Members' work. Members had to be realistic. It was neither possible nor viable to expect that Members achieved results only in areas of interest to them or which they considered to be a priority. This tunnel-type approach 
reduced the possibility of finding alternatives in achieving balanced results which were acceptable 
to all, and would only lead to limited outcomes.  
3.101.  Achieving ambitious results meant that these results should meet the priorities and 
interests of all, without setting aside development as the central focus of the Round. It meant that 
Members had to be willing to discuss and to search for compromises in all areas to identify what was doable, without, as in the past, leaving certain areas lagging behind. Quoting Henry Ford, "If 
there is any one secret of success, it lies in the ab ility to get the other person's point of view and 
see things from his angle as well as your own." There was sufficient value on the table for all Members, if they kept an open mind in the discussions. The WTO provided Members with unique opportunities to achieve results that were commercially and economically viable for all, find 
solutions to the challenges faced by world trade, and solve the various priorities and concerns of 
all Members. Colombia invited the Membership to bear this in mind.  
3.102.  The representative of Japan said that his delegation had noticed from the reports that 
conversations were still at a preliminary stage or, in other words, at the first stage – as were 
Japan's positions. It did not mean that the first quarter of this year had been lost in vain, because in order to come up with a credible work prog ramme, Members needed good planning, which fully 
took into account the past mistakes, with a sense of urgency. He mentioned three points that 
would help Members enter into the second phase.  First, the common objective should not be to 
have full agreement on the modalities of the negotiations. Members needed more flexible and new approaches, as it had been agreed at MC8 and wh ich had led to the success of MC9. Therefore, he 
agreed to take a step back on the debate over th e status of the draft Rev.4 modalities text as it 
had been suggested by the NAMA Chair.  
3.103.  Second, regarding the so-called core issues, interconnectedness as well as parallel and 
simultaneous approaches seemed to be gaining major support – in other words, the need for a 
balanced outcome of the negotiations. To that , he added the importance of the balance of TN/C/M/34 
 
- 22 - 
 
  contributions amongst Members in other important international organizations, such as the 
International Monetary Fund (IMF). Adjustment of Members' rights and obligations were being 
seriously discussed. It was time to work toge ther to modernize the Organization. Third, in 
formulating the work programme, timeframes should be taken into account. For example, 
negotiations on Rules remained an important priority for Japan, but his delegation was aware that 
it could not strongly insist that an outcome on the anti-dumping negotiations should be a must for the deliverables of the Tenth Session of  the Ministerial Conference (MC10).  
3.104.  In conclusion, with regard  to trade facilit ation, Japan reiterated its support for Ambassador 
Esteban Conejos' leadership as Chair of the Preparatory Committee and expressed support for what Switzerland, Pakistan and the European Union had stressed in this respect.  
3.105.  The representative of Ecuador said that the post-Bali work programme needed to be 
exclusively focused on the areas contained in the DDA. The needs and interests of developing 
countries had to constitute the centre of the work programme, that is, agriculture had to be the centrepiece of the programme. The work programme had to be based on the results achieved so 
far and on the principle of the single undertaking. He added that the post-Bali work programme 
and the implementation of the Bali Package had to  be taken up simultaneously and in parallel.  
3.106.  Agriculture was a decisive factor in determining the level of ambition of outcomes in this 
entire process. Furthermore, from a broader perspective, he stressed that, on one hand, Members 
would have to move forward and build future agreements on the basis of the balance reflected in the Marrakech Agreement between trade and no n-trade concerns, which was particularly 
important in the area of services, where there needed to be effective preservation of national 
regulatory space in a functional way, in line with Members' constitutional and developmental 
objectives. On the other hand, Members would have to ensure that the need for specific flexibilities, such as those recognized in favour of RAMs, SVEs and LDCs, translated into concrete 
S&D treatment. The same went for those issues that related to the interests of those Members, 
such as liberalization of trade in tropical products, diversification and preference erosion.  
3.107.  Finally, he made reference to the process in the DSB SS. In this regard, Ecuador supported 
the statement by Lesotho on behalf of the African Group. In light of the discussions in previous 
years, between June and November 2012, a large number of developing countries had submitted proposals with revised legal texts on timeframes, the mitigation of high litigation costs and effective compliance. Any outcome of this process would have to include these issues, especially 
those concerning effective compliance, with the objective of giving content and concrete 
significance to the S&D provisions already contained in the DSU. Ecuador supported a prompt conclusion of this process. 
3.108.  The representative of the United States sa id that Members' task in defining a post-Bali 
work programme was daunting but would offer new opportunities to chalk up results in the Doha 
negotiations. The United States remained focused on the new opportunities part of the equation, 
and welcomed the chance to outline some of its broad perspectives on how Members could make 
progress by the end of the year. 
3.109.  As Members moved forward, it would help all of them to remember the significance and 
lessons of the Bali Ministerial. Members could not rest on past accomplishments, but they could 
draw practical inspiration from what they had accomplished. 
3.110.  In Bali, Members had achieved the first new multilateral agreement in the WTO since its 
creation. The Bali outcome was substantial, but the credibility of the WTO would depend upon 
Members' ability to finish what they had started, completing the steps necessary to implement the 
TFA, and all elements of the Bali outcomes, so that  all could benefit. His delegation was heartened 
by the efforts on TFA implementation to date. His sense was that the vast majority of Members 
were treating their Bali commitments and deadlines seriously.  
3.111.  Even with the Bali results, the credibility of the WTO's negotiating arm was tenuous at 
best. This was why it was essential that Members met the modest deadlines established in Bali, in order to ensure capitals and stakeholders would remain engaged in the WTO's next steps.  TN/C/M/34 
 
- 23 - 
 
  3.112.  Members knew that targeted, practical technical assistance was a key part of the equation 
of successful implementation of the TFA. In this context, the United States was pleased with the 
successful engagement it had had already undertaken with Members such as Tanzania, Sierra Leone, Namibia, Macedonia, Tunisia, Morocco, the Philippines, and a number of Central American 
countries. The United States stood ready to engage directly with any interested Member. It was 
encouraged that many Members were already reaping the benefits of moving forward. 
3.113.  The parameters that the Chairman had laid out in the first post-Bali TNC – development, 
doability, balance, creativity, inclusiveness and transparency, and urgency – reflected exactly the 
factors that had led Members to success in Bali. If Members abandoned these tenets and returned to the stale debates and impasse that had prevailed prior to MC8, Members would fail. The inescapable reality was that, while Members had been negotiating the Doha Round, time had 
passed and the world had changed. The term "rec ently acceded", for example, had a different 
context in 2001 – or even 2008 – than it had today, years later. He said that Members could pretend otherwise, but it would not help them to solve problems.  
3.114.  His delegation welcomed the Chairman's ongoing efforts to move Members forward, and he 
was pleased that President Obama had been able  to reaffirm the US commitment to the WTO's 
work when the Chairman had recently visited Washington. 
3.115.  It had also been useful to reconvene th e dormant negotiating groups. For his delegation, 
those meetings had involved listening as well as speaking. They had been inclusive and instructive. But Members had to recognize that the frequenc y and number of meetings in coming months 
would not be the most reliable indicator of prospects for future success. What Members needed 
most were new ideas and an ability to break away from engagement modes that had not been 
successful. Rather than opportunities to repeat rehearsed narratives, Members needed creativity and a spirit of pragmatism. His delegation would welcome and give its closest attention to any new 
idea, from any quarter, that was genuinely moti vated by a desire to take Members forward. 
3.116.  He wished to make a few points to reflect his delegation's thinking on the key areas of 
agriculture, NAMA, and services.  
3.117.  As his delegation had noted in each of these negotiating groups, it was essential that 
Members' work in these areas was well-informed by the latest data on trends in trade and barriers 
to trade. This data had to include an accurate picture of agricultural subsidies as they existed today. Agricultural subsidies might be a 20
th century issue, but to address this issue in the 21st 
century, Members had to understand who was subsidizing today and how. In a global commodities 
market, no other approach could be effective. Members could not make progress if they were still looking to the past – sometimes decades in the past – to provide the factual basis for their 
negotiations. This started with required – and in many cases long-overdue – notifications. He said 
that Members who clamoured for progress in Doha but failed to meet this basic obligation would have little credibility.  
3.118.  Furthermore, any impulse to return to prev ious ways of working, with a rigid focus on the 
same negotiating texts that had failed in the past, would doom Members' efforts now. This should not mean that Members could not draw on ideas that might have been circulating at earlier stages of the Doha negotiations. But nor should it mean that Members could not draw on new ideas. He 
emphasised that pragmatism represented the key.  
3.119.  In addition, as in Bali, Members would also need to continue with a process and a way of 
working that allowed all Members' contributions to  be explored, particularly those who benefited 
the most from their participation in the global economy.  
3.120.  Balance would be the key to finding a successful path forward. Any deal had to be 
balanced among agriculture, NAMA, and services. It had to be balanced within individual pillars, 
and with regard to individual issues. 
3.121.  As many had reiterated at this meeting, this remained a round of negotiations with 
development at its core. Members had made deliverie s on that at Bali, and they needed to follow-
through. A post-Bali work programme that was broad-based and increased global trade would 
deliver additional development results. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 24 - 
 
  3.122.  All Members were familiar with the data from WTO economists and other reliable sources, 
such as the World Bank, that increased integration of more developing countries into the global marketplace offered increases in the value of their trade and resulting increases in jobs and incomes. He said that it was easy to look around  the room and point to the dozens of compelling 
examples of developing countries who had promoted their development through greater 
integration into the global economy. There were no examples of countries that were succeeding by increasing their isolation.  
3.123.  All Members had a profound stake in generating another success in the WTO – a 
considerably bigger success than Members had achieved in Bali. He said that the more that result could increase South-North trade, North-South trade, South-South trade, and even North-North trade, the better for all, particularly those develo ping countries most in need of increased trade. 
3.124.  The representative of Argentina associated his delegation with the statements made by 
Brazil on behalf of the G-20 and Austra lia on behalf of the Cairns Group. 
3.125.  Regarding the consultations process to define a post-Bali work programme his delegation 
wished to make the following comments. 
3.126.  Although, according to some, the three main areas of negotiations – agriculture, NAMA and 
services – could be interlinked, this linkage should not be aimed at balancing initiatives and results 
in the three areas. For Argentina and for a large number of developing countries, the level of 
ambition of any result reached in agriculture would have to determine the level of ambition in the other areas of negotiation.  
3.127.  Members also had to ask themselves what they were trying to do by seeking a parallel 
focus in negotiations in three areas, as some reports indicated. There was no similarity between 
the levels of liberalization in agriculture, NAMA and services. Clearly, agriculture was far behind the two other areas. This was why, already in the Uruguay Round, Members had committed to 
developing the reform process in agriculture. Even today, developed countries, especially the 
larger ones, continued to grant high levels of subsidies, not only in domestic support in general, but also trade-distorting support in the amber and blue boxes, of amounts several times higher 
than the rest of the Membership, whilst refusing to eliminate export subsidies.  
3.128.  In agriculture, whilst substantial reductio ns and elimination of distortions in the three 
pillars were urgent, the elimination of agriculture export subsidies had to be immediate and within a set deadline. Consequently, and in line with the Doha mandate, in 2005 Members had agreed to 
the elimination of the export subsidies remaining in the Schedules of Commitments of the Uruguay 
Round and the elimination of all forms of export subsidies by a set date. Therefore, the elimination of export subsidies was the first matter that had to be solved as decided by Ministers in Bali. It 
was not acceptable that because of a supposed link between the three areas of negotiation – 
agriculture, NAMA and services – Members sought the same level of results and tried to bypass the 
commitment made in Bali to address the elimination of export subsidies as a priority.  
3.129.  Finally, the parameter of the centrality of development had been recognized by all 
delegations and was reflected in the Chairs' reports. For Argentina, the centrality of development concretely meant that any work programme had to start from the premise that there would be binding results in agriculture in line with the priorities established in Bali, and that developing 
countries would be granted room for manoeuvre fo r the implementation of their growth policies. 
The negotiating principles of S&D treatment and le ss than full reciprocity (LTFR) were the pillars 
supporting the centrality of development. For Argentina, a post-Bali work programme had to be 
focused on achieving progress in agriculture in line with the Doha mandate and the priorities 
agreed in the Bali Ministerial Declaration. Ther efore, any discussion in the other areas of the 
negotiations had to be determined by the progress made in agriculture and be aimed at ensuring 
the necessary policy space for developing count ries and LDCs to implement their development 
policies. 
3.130.  The representative of China said that as a member of the G-33 and G-20, it supported the 
statements by Indonesia and Brazil on behalf of these Groups.  TN/C/M/34 
 
- 25 - 
 
  3.131.  On the implementation of the Bali Package, he said that faithful implementation of all the 
Bali decisions remained the top priority for all Members. The TFA represented an important outcome achieved with the joint efforts of all Me mbers. All of them should ensure that all the 
implementation work be completed comprehensively before the end of July this year as set out in the Bali Ministerial Decision. In the meantime ，the rights of developing countries and LDCs under 
the TFA had to be fully guaranteed and the S&D tr eatment, including the provision of assistance 
and support for capacity building, should be  materialized, in order to ensure the due 
implementation of the TFA. 
3.132.  This TNC was critically important. It re presented a transition of Members' work on the 
post-Bali work programme, that is, from the first stage to the second stage, although the two were 
interwoven together and it was not easy to draw a boundary. 
3.133.  In the past three months, Members had b een working very hard. There had been intensive 
consultations and meetings organized by the Chairs  of Special Sessions of negotiating bodies and 
within groups. Members had expressed and clarified their views and positions respectively. The 
spirit of bottom-up, Member-driven, inclusive an d transparency as proposed by the Chairman had 
generally been shared by Members. The first stage had proved to be positive and meaningful, as it 
had shown Members a clearer picture of things bo th agreed and disagreed. He therefore thanked 
the Chairman and all Chairs of negotiation bodies and encouraged the Chairs to continue the good 
work.  
3.134.  Before moving to discussion of how Members should proceed in the second stage, he 
wished to share some of his observations and reflections. 
3.135.  First, Members had to put things in perspective. They could not go forward without the 
past. Where had they come from? Where were they  going? What were they working for? The DDA 
was not a short journey. From its start back in 2001 in Doha, until before Bali, Members had been 
at the other side of the river. The Bali Ministerial had been a bridge, which had helped Members get across the river and reach the other side. But Members were still on the same road, following 
the same traffic rules and road signs. Members were still searching the way out to the destination. 
Members knew that they were not far from it. Their greatest assets were the experiences and lessons gained from the past, which would shine on the way forward. All that had been achieved was embodied in the Doha mandate, the single undertaking, modalities and consensus reached in 
2008 and relevant Ministerial Declarations and Decisions. Members could not ignore or skip them.  
3.136.  Second, DDA stood for development, which had to be the centre piece for Members' 
discussion in the coming second stage. Development was about materialization of the S&D 
treatment and technical assistance and capacity building. It also meant how much help and 
assistance the post-Bali package could offer to the developing and least developed Members, helping them narrow the development gap. The existing S&D clauses were evidently not enough, 
and some core concerns of the developing and least developed Members had not been fully 
addressed. Something more needed to be done. In this spirit, any Member should not raise any new request or new concept which was at odds with the DDA mandate and detrimental to the completion of the work programme.  
3.137.  Third, time was not on the side of Members. Members only had nine months to work out 
the post-Bali work programme. For the second stage, Members needed to have a sense of urgency, which called for frankness and trust am ong Members, who were in the same boat. The 
question was how to strike a balance between "the doable" and managing the level of ambition. 
The lessons that Members had learnt from the fail ures in the past were that "too many" and "too 
much" had been requested in the negotiations. Me mbers had made it in Bali because they had 
succeeded in managing the level of ambition in terms of "too many". If Members wanted to repeat 
the success post-Bali, they had to bend "too much" to a doable and realistic level. Members should not challenge each other's red lines.  
3.138.  For work in the second stage, he believed that three key words were relevant: 
"substantive", "constructive" and "convergence". Members needed to capitalize the good practice 
and experience that had been gained in the first st age and joint efforts in boosting the crafting of 
the work programme. In this regard, he  shared three concrete suggestions.  TN/C/M/34 
 
- 26 - 
 
  3.139.  First, Members needed to work jointly on the results of 2008 at the technical level, led by 
Chairs of negotiation bodies. This would help them prioritize their work and find a way from the woods to the highway.  
3.140.  Second, Members needed to engage their capitals and pump the political oxygen into the 
discussion at every possible opportunity, such as the OECD mini-Ministerial, the meeting of APEC 
Ministers Responsible for Trade (MRT) in May and the G20 Ministerial meeting in July. It was advisable to have a capital-based senior officials meeting before the next TNC meeting.  
3.141.  Lastly, Members needed to strengthen the dialogue and interaction between various 
regional or negotiating groups, which would help them better understand each other's positions and facilitate the negotiation. 
3.142.  The representative of Mexico said that it had been fifty years since GATT Part IV had been 
adopted. It was quite clear that those who had drafte d it would be highly satisfied for two reasons.  
3.143.  Firstly, the central role played by  development had been recognized. Trade and 
development were positively linked and placed at the heart of an important round – the Doha 
Round. Secondly, the drafters would be extremely satisfied to see that over the past fifty years, 
the participation of developing countries in world trade had grown by a factor of 1.6 and had gone 
from 23% in 1963 to 36% in 2012. Maybe in 2013 or in 2014, that figure would be even higher.  
3.144.  However, the drafters would be somewhat concerned that the trade benefits for developing 
countries had not been shared on a fair basis. There were regions that still had to benefit from such trade, as mentioned by Uganda on behalf  of the LDCs. Perhaps, the founding fathers of 
Part IV would not be unanimous in their vision of how S&D provisions functioned, but he was sure 
they would be unanimous in wishing that the Doha Round be a success.  
3.145.  The success of the Doha Round had started in Bali. The present TNC meeting and the 
Chairs' reports showed that Members had moved fo rward towards the setting up of the post-Bali 
work programme. As the Chairman and several delegates had said, the parameters that the 
Chairman had spelled out in the February meeting had been very useful.  
3.146.  It was also important that the negotiating groups, in their different configurations, had 
been meeting after three years. This was why he could not agree more with the Chairman that 
Members had to change gear. As several speakers before him had said, they had to move into a 
new phase. The car had been bogged down for too long. Therefore, Members would need to get out and push it because simply shifting gear wo uld not be enough. Members had to start talking 
about specific elements. He thought that the current meeting was the last day when Members 
could dust off their statements and revisit their positions. It should serve as an opportunity for Members to start discussing how to find a solution to conclude the Doha Round.  
3.147.  There were three elements which had been cl early spelled out by the Ministers. Firstly, the 
work programme should be ready by December. Se condly, the Ministers had said that the work 
programme should be substantive in nature. It was clearly spelled out in the Declaration. The 
programme had to have content. Thirdly, work should be carried out so as to conclude the Doha 
Round.  
3.148.  The Chairman and several delegates had said that Members had to move on to specific 
discussions and set aside general statements and declarations of principle, without posing any pre-
requisite. Continued discussions on what the basis for negotiations should be would lead nowhere. 
Members should instead review each one of the i ssues and have a discussion with the respective 
Chairs. He thought that this was what the Chairman had said the Chairs were intending to do, and 
there should be no preconditions in doing so. 
3.149.  Members had to have clearly defined guidelines in the different issues, including 
agriculture and its three pillars, NAMA and servic es. With respect to that point, his delegation 
agreed with the Chairman that it had to be done in an integrated fashion. If they moved forward 
on those issues, it might be easier to move forw ard on other issues. They had to finally recognize 
that without necessary progress between now and the summer break, there might not be many more opportunities to advance. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 27 - 
 
  3.150.  In the 50th anniversary of GATT Part IV, he hoped that the objectives set therein would 
become reality and that developing countries co uld continue benefitting from world trade. To 
benefit from world trade, the best way was to do so through a round which would benefit all. For a round to be beneficial to all, the levels of ambition needed to be established in such a way that 
they were acceptable to all. Members were not going to gain all of what they wanted from the 
Round and might have to pay more, but that was how negotiations worked. 
3.151.  The representative of Honduras, also on behalf of the delegations of El Salvador, 
Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Dominican Republic, said that they had recognized the Chairman's 
leadership in the consultations which had taken place with Members on the post-Bali work 
programme, along the lines of the mandate entruste d by their Ministers at MC9. They supported 
the statements made by Indonesia on behalf of  the G-33 and Guatemala on behalf of the SVEs. 
3.152.  The delegations were aware that having a defined work programme and a roadmap, which 
would enable them to implement the Bali decisions, were essential to reactivating the negotiations within the structure laid out in paragraph 46 of the DDA. This would enable Members to complete 
the Doha Round successfully, taking development as the benchmark of those negotiations and 
preserving the principles of the single undertaking,  full participation, transparency, and sustainable 
development, and the non-negotiable issues, as established in the DDA in paragraphs 47-52. 
3.153.  It was necessary that the Chairman instructed the Chairs of the different negotiating 
groups, horizontally, to continue their work with a bottom-up approach to give meat and flesh to the Bali decisions. Within the framework of the nego tiations taking place under the authority of the 
TNC, the delegations were in favour of a process which fully preserved S&D treatment as had been 
established in paragraphs 35, 44 and 50 of the Doha Declaration.  
3.154.  El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Dominican Republic and Honduras reaffirmed 
their commitment to the decisions taken by their Ministers in Bali and supported a prompt 
completion of the Doha Round. 
3.155.  The representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia said that his delegation shared the 
Chairman's assessment and suggestions as pointed out in his report. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 
associated itself with the statements made by the Arab Group and the RAMs Group. 
3.156.  His delegation believed that the work programme should cover all negotiating issues 
mainly agriculture, NAMA, and services. Members should use every opportunity to have a meaningful and balanced outcome towards the conclusion of the DDA. 
3.157.  In order to save their precious time, Members should build on the work undertaken in the 
previous decade and ensure that the negotiated  outcome was self-balancing. The overall thrust 
and pace of negotiations should be designed in such a way that it took into account all elements of 
the post-Bali work programme with equal priori ty, keeping the special needs and interests of 
developing countries and LDCs at the forefront. His delegation believed it was important to conclude the Doha Round before any new issues were added to the agenda. 
3.158.  While Members were shaping their negotiating agenda and the way forward, they should 
take into account the special situation of the RAMs, since they had undertaken extensive market access commitments at the time of their accessions. 
3.159.  He said that time was passing very fast and Members should intensify their efforts in a 
problem-solving mode and a trust-building spirit.  
3.160.  The representative of Egypt associated his delegation with the statements made by Jordan 
on behalf of the Arab Group, Lesotho on behalf of  the African Group, and Brazil on behalf of the G-
20. His delegation also supported the statements made by Uganda on behalf of LDCs and Kenya 
on behalf of the ACP. 
3.161.  Egypt was committed to the multilateral trading system and was convinced that concluding 
successfully the DDA would ensure the integrity and credibility of the WTO. The momentum gained 
from the success in Bali should be maintained and further activated in order to achieve the real developmental objectives of the Doha Round. The main objective behind the initiation of the Doha TN/C/M/34 
 
- 28 - 
 
  Round negotiations had been the streamlining of development into the architecture of the 
multilateral trading system. His delegation hoped that the post-Bali work programme would reflect 
that objective, taking into consideration that it would be the true test of the credibility of the WTO to deliver real developmental outcomes, and bearin g in mind that Members could not have another 
Bali, but they could have another, and much more  comprehensive, success story if they were all 
committed to the development dimension of the DDA.  
3.162.  He made some comments regarding the ongoing consultations in the main areas envisaged 
for the post-Bali work programme. The negotiations on the three pillars, namely agriculture, 
NAMA, and services, should be guided by the single undertaking principle in letter and spirit, which was the only way to ensure striking the right balance among the potential outcomes of the Round. 
3.163.  Egypt expressed its concern regarding the tendency to neglect the 2008 modalities texts in 
agriculture and NAMA. It was concerned that the so -called "innovative approaches to negotiations" 
could jeopardize the developmental objectives of the Doha Round. The 2008 draft agriculture 
modalities text addressed some of the systemic imbalances inherent in the Agreement on 
Agriculture, and it was not clear how innovative  approaches would address those imbalances. The 
draft Rev.4 modalities text should be the basis of  the work of Members. Future discussions on the 
draft Rev.4 modalities text should address the ten outstanding issues as mentioned in the report of 
the Chair of the CoA SS on 21 April 2011. The interests of the Net Food-Importing Developing 
Countries (NFIDCs) and the issue of food securi ty had to be satisfactorily addressed. His 
delegation underlined that concrete and tangible results on agriculture were indispensable for a successful and development-oriented post-Bali work programme. 
3.164.  The principles of LTFR and the S&D treatm ent provided for developing countries and LDCs, 
needed to guide the NAMA negotiations. Egypt re cognized that the architecture of the NAMA 
modalities text of 2008 reflected that principle in the differentiation of coefficients of the Swiss 
formula between developing and developed countries as  well as in the flexibilities provided for the 
developing countries to implement their commitments. During the open-ended meeting held by the NAMA Chair, his delegation had taken note that there were some Members who had called for 
employing the methodology of the request-offer ap proach to the negotiations. From its point of 
view, it had doubts that the request-offer approach would achieve the development objective of the negotiations, which was the equitable integration of the developing countries into the multilateral trading system. That approach would le ad to bilateral negotiations where the principle 
of LTFR would be at stake. It considered the request-offer approach not to be the appropriate 
methodology to resume the NAMA negotiations. Rather, Members could build on the 2008 modalities taking into consideration the above-mentioned principles. Without clear developmental 
objectives, the developing countries would not have incentives to participate in the NAMA 
negotiations. Similarly, any negotiation on services needed to tackle the areas of interest to developing countries, particularly "mode 4". 
3.165.  The negotiations in the CTD SS needed to be guided by paragraph 44 of the Doha 
Declaration, which stipulated the strengthening of S&D provisions in the Multilateral Trade Agreements with a view to making them more e ffective, operational and precise. As had been 
mentioned by Lesotho, the African Group was conducting internal consultations in order to identify 
S&D provisions that could be included in the post-Bali work programme. 
3.166.  He highlighted that his country strongly believed that it was not in a position to add new 
issues to the agenda of the multilateral trade negotiations before Members finalized all the issues 
on the agenda of the DDA.  
3.167.  As he had expressed in his previous statements, Egypt agreed on the parameter of 
doability set by the Chairman for conducting the negotiations. However, there was a fine line 
between doability and selectivity. His delegation could work on the "doable deliverables" provided 
that the basic developmental objectives, as he had previously mentioned, were inherently integrated in all areas of the negotiations and were adequately addressed.  
3.168.  Egypt, being a country with 7500 years of civilization, could not afford to accept ignoring 
the principle of building on accumulated agreements and achievements of the past. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 29 - 
 
  3.169.  The representative of India expressed his de legation's fullest support to both the Chairman 
and the respective Chairs in their endeavours, and assured the Chairman of its utmost 
cooperation.  
3.170.  His delegation was still exploring options for laying out the contours of the work 
programme as well as the modalities for accomplishing closure on various aspects of the Doha 
mandate. There were a few core principles that Members needed to recapitulate so that they remained faithful to the DDA mandate. Although some might see the reiteration of those principles 
as being akin to holding up a candle to the sun, in its view, it was important to do so until 
Members had completely internalised them in their collective conscience. A successful conclusion of the DDA was the overarching goal for all of them but the quest for success should not lead 
Members astray into territory that was alien to the spirit and substance of the Round. Nor should 
Members abandon the valuable work that they had pu t in so far. Instead, they should build on it. 
3.171.  The credibility of the multilateral trading system hinged on the implementation of all the 
decisions taken in Bali, in good faith, not just one. The Ministerial decisions on public stockholding 
for food security, export competition, cotton, du ty-free quota-free (DFQF), among others, needed 
to be implemented in order to reduce to some  extent the inequity and imbalance that the 
developing countries and LDCs suffered from, in agriculture in general, and public stockholding 
programmes in particular. 
3.172.  First and foremost, as the Chairman had himself acknowledged at the TNC on 6 February 
2014, development should be the key abiding principle that informed Members' discussions on the work programme in: (i) prioritizing different areas of the negotiations; (ii) determining the content 
of each area; and (iii) sequencing their work. This was the surest way to further shore up the 
credibility of the WTO and to build on the success in Bali. The implication of this was that Members needed to prioritize those issues in the work programme where binding outcomes could not be 
reached in Bali. The other implication was that among the negotiating pillars, it was the agriculture 
pillar that needed to receive the highest prio rity as that was where the interests of most 
developing countries and LDCs resided.  
3.173.  His delegation believed that the level of am bition in all other areas of negotiations should 
be calibrated by and should remain in sync with what Members decided to do (or not do) in agriculture. It would closely watch and monitor the progress in other areas vis-à-vis  agriculture. 
His delegation believed that negotiations needed to proceed on the basis of texts that had reached 
a fair degree of stability. In agriculture, the dr aft Rev.4 modalities text had to be the basis of 
future negotiations and a wholehearted attempt by the entire Membership to resolve the outstanding issues of the Rev.4 modalities text wo uld, in its view, open up the path for positive 
movement. 
3.174.  It was with disappointment that his delegation noted that new concepts, contrary to the 
principles contained in the Hong Kong Ministerial and the July Framework, were being proposed by 
some of the Members, for example, in the name of data collection in agriculture, and calls for 
varying contributions from among developing count ry Members. His delegation viewed those as 
highly counterproductive in as much as they would delay and complicate the resolution of issues; consume valuable negotiating capital; and divert attention from real issues. Those who adopted 
such tactics did not seem to have an interest in the early conclusion of the Doha Round. It 
emphasized the need to ensure that progress in all areas of negotiations happened at an even 
pace and not just in a select few. 
3.175.  The Membership would recall that at th e 6 February TNC meeting, the Chairman had 
stressed the interconnectedness of issues and the cr iticality of balance. There could be no better 
way of achieving balance than adhering to the principle of the single undertaking. In his 
delegation's view, the conclusion of the Doha Round was feasible and within reach if all sides 
showed flexibility and understanding. He urged Members not to settle for inferior alternatives such as more partial harvests that did not necessarily contain something of everybody's interest and might give the few a chance to run with the ball. 
3.176.  His delegation believed that the high standards of transparency, inclusiveness and a 
Member-driven approach that the Chairman had reinforced in the Organization would continue to infuse all the work including the development of the post-Bali work programme. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 30 - 
 
  3.177.  His delegation associated itself with the statements made on behalf of the G-20 and the  
G-33. 
3.178.  The representative of Peru stressed the determined commitment of her delegation to 
implement, as soon as possible, all the decisions adopted in Bali and to start working on the task 
of establishing a work programme. 
3.179.  In trade facilitation, Peru had been contri buting to the legal review process in the context 
of the Preparatory Committee's work. Her delegation believed that technical assistance for 
implementation of the Agreement was of crucial importance. 
3.180.  As noted by her delegation in the February  TNC meeting, Peru hoped to achieve results in 
all areas of the DDA, including in the three pillar s – agriculture, NAMA and services – and, as a 
matter of priority, in the following areas: fishery subsidies, liberalization of tropical products, 
protection of genetic resources and traditional knowledge associated to those resources in the 
patent system, and greater commitment in services mode 4. 
3.181.  Although her delegation appreciated the important result achieved in Bali of an early 
harvest, it felt that, in this phase, the negoti ating process needed to tackle all the outstanding 
issues of the DDA, whose delicate balance had been modified by the Bali outcome. 
3.182.  Peru recognized that according to the WTO statistics, there was a positive trend in the 
global economy and in international trade which should be taken advantage of in the context of 
the negotiations. In 2013, the volume of trade in goods had grown by some 2.5% and, for 2014, it was forecast to have a 4% to 4.5% growth rate. It was also forecast that in 2014 there would be an increase in exports from both developed and developing economies. This compiled with the new 
dynamic of inclusiveness and transparency esta blished under the leadership of the Chairman, 
which had led to the success achieved in Bali and which had given new credibility to the negotiating function of the WTO.  
3.183.  Those were new elements which needed to be the starting point for Members to find 
creative solutions in all of the issues under the Doha Round. She reiterated that Peru would not be able to go along with an outcome which would lead to an "early harvest II", in terms of another 
small package excluding those area s of highest priority for developing countries. Her delegation 
considered that Members could advance on the basis of the parameters that the Chairman had proposed and with which they agreed. They need ed to focus their work, in compliance with the 
instructions that Ministers had given in Bali to es tablish, by the end of the year, a clearly defined 
work programme on all the remaining DDA issues. 
3.184.  The representative of Korea agreed with the assessment of the current state of play with 
regard to the post-Bali work programme in the general context and on each pillar. It was April and 
Members were already a quarter of the way th rough the year. He, however, believed that 
Members had made a good start by identifying th eir positions on each negotiating pillar and 
making progress in the Preparatory Committee on Trade Facilitation. 
3.185.  His delegation had also felt the sense of uncertainty and cautiousness among Members 
during many open-ended consultations. In a warm-up session, that approach was necessary and it was understandable to repeat each Member's position without a contour of the post-Bali work programme at that stage. To spearhead the current  situation, Members should continue exploring 
diverse and multi-level consultations during the first half of the year with open, creative and 
flexible minds taking into consideration the Chairman's parameters. 
3.186.  Along those lines, he shared three points regarding the preparation of the work 
programme before the summer break.  
3.187.  First, many Members had said that agriculture was a tone-setting pillar in their 
consultations. Even though other pillars were also an essential part of the work programme, it was 
hard to deny that argument in some senses. Ho wever, Members should also keep other engines 
such as NAMA and services running forward. They did not need to ru sh at this point, even though 
they should have a sense of urgency. Small prog ress, inch by inch, in every pillar could be TN/C/M/34 
 
- 31 - 
 
  meaningful and helpful to garner more momentum  and to move the work programme forward as a 
whole. 
3.188.  Second, as China had pointed out, Members needed more political input from their capitals 
in their endeavours. In that regard, other regional and global institutions such as APEC, the G20 
and the OECD should demonstrate their commitment at the Ministerial or Summit levels towards 
facilitating the post-Bali work programme and the multilateral trading system. 
3.189.  Third, in the same vein, Members should consider possible ways, including more intensive 
consultations between Geneva and their capitals, to obtain more attention and engagement from 
capital-based officials in an appropriate and timely manner. 
3.190.  Korea fully supported every effort by the Chairman and the Chairs of the negotiating 
groups. His delegation continued to engage constructively to make progress with the tasks ahead. 
3.191.  The representative of Cuba said that he r delegation supported the statements made by 
Indonesia on behalf of the G-33, Brazil on behalf  of the G-20, Kenya on behalf of the ACP, and 
Guatemala on behalf of the SVEs.  
3.192.  Her delegation did not detect any substantial changes since the previous TNC meeting held 
on 6 February. The positions of certain developed country Members did not seem to be making a positive contribution to moving forward. 
3.193.  With so much work ahead, there was a risk that at the last minute, what would prevail 
would be a sense of urgency, sacrificing the interests of the majority. There could neither be any selective treatment nor any moving away from th e Doha mandate. Rather, the principle of the 
single undertaking should be respected and the Doha mandate should be preserved. Creativity 
should always be aimed at ensuring that by th e end of the year, Members had prepared a clearly 
defined work programme with development at its centre.  
3.194.  In the most recent meetings, Cuba had clearly stated its position. Her delegation 
requested that its interventions in the CoA SS on 28 March, the Negotiating Group on Market 
Access on 31 March, and the CTS SS on 1 April be  incorporated in the records of this meeting.
3 
3.195.  For agriculture, her delegation mentioned, as a point of concern, that after so many years 
and so many efforts, the overall work accomplished in the WTO could be dismissed by some who 
were trying to hamper further progress. There were some who hid behind new ideas, new data, 
new information, new concepts, new approaches to hide the real purpose and to perpetuate an unbalanced reality which had always been favourable to them.  
3.196.  On NAMA, she reiterated that Cuba could not imagine a balanced outcome in that area 
without the elimination of NTBs, which were inconsistent with the most fundamental principles, rules and agreements of the Organization. 
3.197.  Cuba maintained its commitment to the WTO and was willing to work constructively to 
ensure that the Doha Round would be firmly put back on track and that the objective would be achieved for a world alliance for development, wh ere the role of trade, as the Chairman himself 
had stated on 4 April in the Second Open Dialogue of the Sustainable Development Agenda for 
2015, was not simply reduced to liberalization but it became a tool for development policy. 
3.198.  Her delegation made reference to the negotiations on the DSU reform and supported the 
comments made by the African Group on that matter. It stressed the work that had been done in 
the DSB SS by developing countries that had submitted a number of proposed legal texts on 
timeframes, mitigation of high cost of litigation and effective compliance. Any outcome from that process would have to include and take into account those matters. Cuba gave its full support to a 
successful conclusion in those negotiations. 
3.199.  The representative of Turkey said that this was his first TNC meeting and he believed he 
had joined in an important, critical and challenging time. After his arrival, he had participated in 
                                               
3 The statements are included in Annexes III-V. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 32 - 
 
  the meetings of negotiating groups, and had visited a number of his colleagues. All those meetings 
and talks had been a very good opportunity to understand recent developments. 
3.200.  He underlined that the readiness and open-mindedness of the entire Membership was 
encouraging to carry on the negotiations in th e WTO. He was pleased to see that all of his 
colleagues kept their hope and determination for a doable outcome in the negotiations in line with 
the Bali Package.  
3.201.  Turkey also appreciated the efforts of th e Chairman to lead Members to an early and full 
implementation of the Bali Package as well as  a successful post-Bali work programme. His 
delegation strongly supported the Chairman's efforts. He also reiterated his delegation's determination to engage with all the parties in a constructive and open manner. 
3.202.  He had no intention to touch upon each and every point of Turkey's position at the 
meeting. However, he underlined a couple of poin ts that he had also witnessed as a generally 
shared view of the entire Membership.  
3.203.  Turkey had always been a staunch suppo rter of the multilateral trading system. His 
delegation also considered transparency and inclusiveness as important guiding principles for a 
successful negotiation in the WTO.  
3.204.  Turkey was well-aware of, and therefore a ppreciated the role of trade in development. His 
delegation believed that the centrality of de velopment in the negotiations ahead was as 
undisputable as it had been in the past.  
3.205.  There was a broad convergence on the linkage among the three pillars, namely NAMA, 
services and agriculture. He believed that Members could strike the right balance as long as they 
continued negotiating with an open-m ind and remained solution-oriented. 
3.206.  The success in Bali had opened a fresh window of opportunity for Members to work on the 
completion of the DDA. They should not lose the momentum. He believed that being realistic, 
pragmatic and seeking the possible would be key to a doable outcome. 
3.207.  He agreed with the Chairman that if Me mbers wanted to reach the objectives set out in 
Bali, they had to accept being equally unhappy from the result of the negotiations. 
3.208.  The representative of Chile said that at the TNC in February, all delegations had agreed 
that the success of MC9 had given a new breath of confidence to the multilateral trading system. 
3.209.  However, the euphoria of the success in Bali had left Members behind. They needed to sit 
down and work on the work programme instructed by their Ministers so that they could resume 
negotiations on the Doha Round. Over those months, they had had a number of understandings 
among themselves. For example, by December 2 014, they needed to have a work programme 
which was to be implemented in the course of 2015.  
3.210.  Members knew that agriculture would have to be at the centre of any future process, that 
the modalities, as originally designed, had not functioned, and that they all wanted to close the Doha Round. In other words, they had a number of points in common. The challenge was how to 
comply with those instructions. In Chile's view, that could be achieved by using the initials PPM: 
Members should be prudent, pragmatic and mindful.  
3.211.  Members should be prudent because, despite the sense of urgency, they needed dialogue 
among themselves in Geneva and a process of domestic thinking with their own capitals. They 
needed to consider whether the world situation had changed in the past ten years and it had 
probably also changed in their countries. Nonetheless their positions were still the same which had been reflected in the meetings of negotiating groups of the past few days. So they needed to 
review and update their objectives making it possible to refresh their positions.  
3.212.  Members should be pragmatic. They had to leave behind theological discussions and 
dogmatic positions which they all had maintained to the present. For example, currently, there was 
no real dialogue if Members said that the Rev.4 modalities on agriculture did not exist, and the TN/C/M/34 
 
- 33 - 
 
  same would happen if they asserted that the draft Rev.4 modalities text was untouchable. That 
was a dialogue of the deaf and there was a predictable outcome: nothing. In this case, there would be no progress which would not result in the completion of a work programme. As such, Members should be willing to open a dialogue without any a priori.  
3.213.  Members should be mindful. They should be mindful of the fact that every negotiation 
implied that they understood their counterparts' lim itations and they already knew what everybody 
wanted. To repeat over and over again the litany of their wish list was pointless. They already 
knew what that was.  
3.214.  In the new stage, Members had to change focus and ask what each of them was ready to 
give as they knew the needs of the others. In othe r words, and within the rules, they needed to go 
from a request-offer approach to an offer-request approach. Bali had left them at a new stage. 
They should take that opportunity to go back to the table with a renewed spirit, vision and 
ambition. 
3.215.  The representative Hong Kong, China pointed out that it was already April, less than nine 
months away from the end of the year. While the various Committees had been conducting useful 
consultations on what Members could do in the work programme, his delegation was concerned about the current state-of-play. The warm weather seemed to have lulled Members into an early 
torpor. 
3.216.  It was difficult to know where to start to resolve issues that had bedevilled the DDA 
negotiations for many years. In Hong Kong, the Ca ntonese speaking people would say it was like a 
mouse trying to pull a tortoise – when the whol e body of the animal was hidden inside an oval 
shell, how could one pull it? Where could one start? So Members needed to stick their hands and 
feet and neck out, to give their task a solid handle. 
3.217.  Members had been instructed by their Ministers to come up with a clearly defined work 
programme by December. They also had MC10 in sight and could not come out of it empty-
handed. They needed some real outcomes. To do so, they needed to work out very soon just how to manage the remaining DDA issues – for which a realistic target was probably the Eleventh 
Session of the Ministerial Conference (MC11). Unless Members already started a serious dialogue, 
they might not even make the first step.  
3.218.  But his delegation was not discouraged, yet. As the Chairman, the Chairs of the 
negotiating groups and many Members had already said at the meeting, there were clear signs of 
willingness to engage, and his delegation was positive about the process. 
3.219.  He shared three main points: 
a. The level of ambition was a key issue – it should be realistic.  
b. Members needed to strike a balance among the three pillars – agriculture, NAMA and 
services – with development at the heart of all three – and pursue all of them in parallel.  
c. Members should also not ignore other important issues – where his delegation would 
single out Rules.  
3.220.  He heard several Members and groups of Members on both sides of the agriculture issue 
set out some firm positions at the meeting. His delegation was the ninth largest importer of agriculture products in the world. But he made an assurance that his delegation would be very 
flexible in its negotiating approach. 
3.221.  At the same time as taking forward the work programme, positive action needed to be 
taken to expedite the implementation of the Bali Package, where bedding down the TFA was 
clearly key. 
3.222.  In this connection, while Members were still doing internal consultations, he was pleased to 
say that Hong Kong, China was minded to schedule all the provisions in Section I of the TFA as 
Category A commitments, and to implement them  once the Agreement entered into force. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 34 - 
 
  3.223.  Hong Kong, China fully agreed with the Chairman that Members already needed to move 
into phase 2. His delegation agreed with his ch aracterization of the 2008 texts: they could not 
simply be dusted off and signed up to – but they represented years of painful negotiation and covered most of the bases they would need to cover anyway if they were to start afresh. 
3.224.  In dragging the car out of the mud after six years as the Chairman put it, Members would 
all need to show more flexibility and willingness to compromise on standard than the "Bureau des 
autos" might show for the "visite". He though t the ASEAN statement at the meeting had been 
important in that regard.  
3.225.  Hong Kong, China remained committed to the process and the targets, and would work 
closely with all other Members for a doable and balanced work programme. His delegation looked forward to leadership from the major players and full participation for and attention to the great 
majority of Members that really wanted the Organization to succeed in its negotiating arm. 
3.226.  The representative of Israel believed that all Members agreed on how important it was to 
build on the momentum of the success of MC9. Hi s delegation understood that it was not an easy 
task, but was encouraged by the willingness of the Members to engage in discussions in the 
previous months and since Bali.  
3.227.  Israel was participating in  the consultation process and al though Members were still in the 
early stages of the process, his delegation was co nvinced that progress would only come if they 
had frank discussions and adapted themselves to the current reality.  
3.228.  What had worked well in Bali had been the clear realization that this was not a time for 
rehashing old positions and statements, but a time to be both pragmatic and proactive. As part of 
that mind-set, his capital was reviewing its previous positions. His delegation was open to 
considering all options and strongly supported searching for a proactive and productive way to renew the negotiations in the remaining DDA issues.  
3.229.  His delegation had listened carefully to the Chairman's report an d agreed that doability 
should be one of the guiding principles. However, that "doability test" should also be calibrated against the necessity of coming up with a meaningf ul outcome. In order to achieve that within the 
limited time frame Members were facing, it might be necessary to choose from within the broad 
DDA issues. 
3.230.  Israel looked forward to continuing engagement in order to come up with a meaningful 
work programme before the end of the year. His delegation stood ready to contribute and assist in 
any way it could in order to move forward and make progress. 
3.231.  The representative of Norway said that Ministers had given delegations their instructions 
through the Bali Declaration and his delegation was pleased to note that the necessary work to 
ensure the entry into force of the TFA was progressing well. At the same time, Members should 
not forget the other implementation issues going forward. 
3.232.  Members should already focus their effort s on drawing up the work programme, building 
on the parameters presented by the Chairman. Time  was of the essence. They had until the end of 
2014 to complete their work. 
3.233.  In order to move forward, his delegation believed it was important to do just that – 
Members needed to stop looking backwards, referring  to old texts and old positions. Instead, they 
should turn to the basics and should have a conv ersation about where they were and what they 
wanted. Members needed to have an honest and realistic conversation about what was possible. In doing so, they should try to talk about what they  could do and not be restating what they needed 
or wanted. As Members had stated on many occasions, they needed to address the difficult issues 
on their own merit, and not on the basis of old po sitions and texts, although these could serve as a 
source of inspiration. 
3.234.  Members should all contribute to the work of the various negotiating groups as well as the 
work of the regular bodies in their effort to define and frame the important issues which would TN/C/M/34 
 
- 35 - 
 
  form part of their post-Bali work programme co vering agriculture, NAMA, services and Rules, 
which others had also referred to at the meeting. Development should be at the centre. 
3.235.  His delegation urged all Members to engage in that process with an open mind, and ensure 
that the work done be proponent-driven and solution-oriented. 
3.236.  His delegation emphasized its support for the consultations under the leadership of the 
Chairman. Going forward, conversations needed to be held in various configurations and formats. That was necessary in order to ensure that Memb ers' concerns would be addressed and to pave 
the way for the honest discussions they needed to have. Throughout the process, the principles of 
inclusiveness and transparency should be upheld. 
3.237.  The representative of Paraguay said that Paraguay had a lot of expectations on the 
establishment of the work programme by December 2014 and trusted that the programme would 
have a high level of ambition and would ensure bi nding and meaningful results for the building of a 
fair and market-oriented multilateral trading system in agriculture, services and NAMA.  
3.238.  Paraguay was ready to rapidly embark upon the next stage of the negotiations in all pillars 
to explore the different venues which would make it easier to take steps towards the conclusion of 
the Doha Round objectives. His delegation was ready to work in parallel on the analysis and supply of information which would give greater security to the negotiating work. His delegation stressed 
the need to rely on information which would enable Members to identify both the progress and 
setbacks – if any – that had occurred in each Member during the time of the prolonged Doha Round negotiations. The effort of collecting information should take place at the national level. Members needed a self-portrait – a "selfie" – to see: how things had changed, for better or for 
worse, in the context of international trade an d what the new needs were to improve Members' 
integration into international trade. 
3.239.  Paraguay believed that the application and in terpretation of the draft modalities texts, as a 
basis for the negotiations, should be done according to the new realities prevailing in each country 
and in international trade. His delegation insisted  on the need to make an effort to update the 
information to know exactly where Members got to, while the negotiations had been paused.  
3.240.  In this new phase, while respecting the centrality of agriculture – and in this regard, 
Paraguay supported the statement by the Cairns Group and the G-20 – Paraguay had a specific 
interest in pushing the work in the services pillar, because of its contribution to improving competition in goods. His delegation thought that the services pillar contributed to development. 
By promoting this pillar, services could support the universalization of technological progress, 
enhance access to financial services, and ensure the connectivity of remote areas either through transport or telecommunications.  
3.241.  Paraguay, as a land-locked developing country, gave a lot of importance to the progress in 
the services pillar with a view to being able to connect to the world and reduce its production costs. His delegation believed, for instance, that  there was a direct link between services and the 
implementation of the TFA, an agreement which, as a landlocked country, was absolutely essential 
for Paraguay to take a greater part in international trade.  
3.242.  The representative of Tanzania aligned hi s delegation with the statement made by Uganda, 
on behalf of the LDC Group, Lesotho for the Africa n Group, and Kenya on behalf of the ACP Group. 
His delegation was fully committed to the upcoming negotiations on the DDA pillars and believed 
that the guidelines, even by Ministers during th e MC8, and the 2008 draft modalities texts laid a 
great foundation for convergence of the interests of LDCs and those of advanced economies. 
3.243.  His delegation reiterated the need to preserve the DDA spirit as a basis for equity in the 
international trade. Countries should pursue a co mmon objective of ensuring that the outcome was 
driven by reason and responsibility in order to produce benefit for all Members.  
3.244.  He also requested that the meetings be scheduled in a manner that avoided competing 
participation. He pointed out that, while the TNC meeting was being conducted, there was an ongoing meeting of the Trade Facilitation Preparatory Committee. He understood the current situation but said that those matters should be anticipated in the future.  TN/C/M/34 
 
- 36 - 
 
  3.245.  Tanzania believed that with the guidance  of the Chairman, Members would not repeat the 
2008 deadlock. They needed to conclude the negotiations with a win-win outcome and his delegation was there to win. 
3.246.  The representative of Qatar associated hi s delegation with the statement delivered by the 
delegation of Jordan on behalf of the Arab Group.  
3.247.  There was difficulty in achieving a perfect outcome in the upcoming negotiations as had 
been reflected. His delegation recognized that there was need to move towards outlining the 
desirable outcomes and to set the level of ambiti on in the upcoming negotiations. However, on 
that point, his delegation regarded the single undertaking principle as the most balanced principle that could lead to a successful conclusion of the DDA. Progress should be further contingent on a 
balanced approach among and within the three pillars: agriculture, NAMA and services.  
3.248.  The momentum generated by the success in Bali should serve as a reminder that success 
was possible and achievable. The momentum of Bali should continue as his delegation urged all Members to accelerate the process of negotiat ions coming up to the December deadline.  
3.249.  The State of Qatar re-emphasized its commitment to work actively to cooperate with the 
Chairman, and with all Members, so that they coul d all come to a fruitful conclusion of the DDA. 
3.250.  The representative of Costa Rica said that Costa Rica was committed to the Bali mandate 
and that it was happy to be working on the TFA and on the other decisions that had been adopted 
at MC9, as well as on the establishment of a work programme which would help Members conclude the Doha Round.  
3.251.  He supported the statement made by Austra lia on behalf of the Cairns Group and the ideas 
put forward by other delegations, in particular Colombia and Chile, on the need to face the new 
stage with pragmatism and openness to find an agreement in all areas and to take up the challenges that trade and the world economy were faced with. 
3.252.  He called upon developed Members to commi t to the liberalization of trade in tropical 
products. In previous stages of the negotiat ions, Members managed to solve the differences 
between developing countries in the areas of tropic al products and preference erosion. In the new 
stage, the idea was to try and solve the common problem of all those countries and comply with 
the S&D treatment mandate in favour of the offensive interests of developing countries. 
3.253.  The representative of South Africa asked that the statement that his delegation had made 
at the General Council meeting of 14 March be included in the record of this meeting4.  
3.254.  The Chairman said that Members would be notified in due course about the date of the 
next TNC. 
3.255.  As he had said in his opening statement, Members had to move into a different phase of 
the conversation. His expectation was that Members could be more focused about what they 
expected and what they would like to see as solutions and outcomes.  
3.256.  He would be talking to Members individua lly and in groups. The Chairs would be doing the 
same. This would be mostly a Chair-led process. He would step in and talk to Members eventually 
in informal mode. He asked Members to be open-m inded when they talked to him and even more 
so when they talked to the Chairs.  
3.257.  He said that he had not heard anything at the meeting that was irremediably 
irreconcilable. He had heard many delegations say that they were open-minded, that they wanted 
to preserve what they had done and that the 20 08 draft modalities texts were important and they 
should be kept on the table and be a basis for negotiations. He had also heard others say that this 
was fine, as long as they were not deemed to be untouchable.  
                                               
4 The statement is included in Annex VI. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 37 - 
 
  3.258.  As far as he was concerned, he did not necessarily see a conflict. From his perspective, 
Members were only going to be looking at solution s once they felt comfortable that those solutions 
were things that they could handle and they could deal with; that they would still reach a benchmark or an end zone that they could sell back at home. That was understandable, that was 
where Members were at present.  
3.259.  He believed that everybody at this point in time was suspicious and he did not expect it to 
be otherwise. He asked Members to overcome the suspicion phase by putting things on the table. 
He believed that this was something that every Member would have to do.  
3.260.  All Members knew where they were. They al l knew they had individual difficulties. There 
were very few delegations that could live with the texts as they were. Most delegations could not.  
3.261.  He asked Members to be open-minded. He would hear from each one of them. He was 
sure that everyone had ambitions in some areas of the text and they would also need to be 
ambitious in the other areas of the text. Therefore, ambition and realism would have to walk hand-in-hand in all areas of the texts, both intra-text and inter-texts. He asked Members to be ready for 
that conversation. 
3.262.  The Trade Negotiations Committee took note of the statements.  
 
_______________  
 TN/C/M/34 
 
- 38 - 
 
  ANNEX I 
STATEMENT BY AUSTRALIA ON BEHALF OF THE CAIRNS GROUP AT THE INFORMAL MEETING OF 
THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE ON 28 MARCH 2014 
What do Members consider to be the desira ble and doable aims for ongoing discussions 
and negotiations in relation to the thr ee inter-related pillars of agriculture? 
 
 Cairns Group Members are demandeurs  for an ambitious agriculture package balanced 
across the three pillars of export competition, domestic support and market access. 
Nothing has changed in this respect- we recall the Cairns Group Ministerial Communique from Bali. Cairns Group Members continue to press for outcomes across the three pillars for the simple reason that agricultural markets remain heavily distorted. 
  
 We need to move decisively in all three areas.  
 
 Improved market access in agriculture based on the Doha mandate remains a critical 
deliverable for Cairns Group Members. Agricultural market access is still plagued by distortions that some members utilise. 
 
 On domestic support we would like to see an ambitious outcome that reduces substantially 
the provision of trade distorting subsidies, in  accordance with the Doha mandate. Domestic 
support remains important because it can only be addressed at the multilateral level.  
 
 It is also apparent that a desirable and doable aim of Ministers is to finally deliver on their 
long standing and overdue commitments on export competition, which was established as 
a priority by Ministers in Bali. The desirability is demonstrated by MC9. The do-ability is 
demonstrated by current policy settings. 
o The Membership has done the lion's share of the necessary negotiating work in this 
area, with Ministers agreeing that the (TN/AG/W/Rev.4) disciplines in export 
competition are an important basis for agreement. 
 What contributions do Members consider they, and other Members, need to make to this 
end? 
 Cairns Group Members are prepared to take commitments, in accordance with the Doha 
mandate, commensurate with their level of development, across all three pillars.  
 
 A question to others is what outcomes might be necessary for them in market access, 
domestic support or export competition to realize ambitious outcomes across all three 
pillars in agriculture? 
 
What new information do Members wish to br ing forward, or would encourage others to 
bring forward, to update earlier discussion s about policy settings and developments that 
may be relevant to the negotiations? 
 
Domestic Support 
 We should consider the domestic support policies of WTO Members today with regard to 
the Doha mandate. 
 Whilst trade distorting Agreement Measure of Support (AMS) expenditure has reduced over 
the last 10 years, we do not yet know the full distortive impact of new policies, such as the 
new US Farm Bill. 
 Any work on domestic support needs to help implement the goal of substantially reducing 
trade-distorting support in accordance with the Doha mandate. 
 
Market Access 
 Agricultural market access is heavily administered.  
 We need to understand how Members tariffs have changed since 2001, in accordance with 
the Doha mandate.  
 We need to deliver value and ambition in market access, in accordance with the Doha 
mandate. TN/C/M/34 
 
- 39 - 
 
   Going forward, for any conversation on market access there needs to be transparency in 
negotiations. 
 
Export Competition 
 Ministers have already answered this question  with respect to export competition in the 
sense that they have mandated an annual dedicated review in the Regular Committee on Agriculture. 
o We recall our paper to the regular CoA last week on how to approach the 
questionnaire, and recall the support from across the WTO Membership for the paper and need for Members to respond fully and timely to the Secretariat's questionnaire 
 There have been a number of developments in the area of export competition whilst such 
reforms are a step in the right direction they fall short of the ambition envisaged in the 
Doha mandate and the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration. 
 TN/C/M/34 
 
- 40 - 
 
  ANNEX II 
STATEMENT BY BRAZIL ON BEHALF OF THE G- 20 GROUP AT THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE 
SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE ON 28 MARCH 2014 
The G-20 would like to thank you for the report of your consultations and congratulate you for 
your efforts to encourage the negotiations.  
 The G-20 as a Group does not have definitive answers for the three questions you posed for this 
meeting. Consultations are still ongoing among us and with capitals.  
 Although still preliminary, and with the sole intention of helping us find convergent approaches for the DDA negotiations, the G-20 considers it appropriate to convey the following points. 
 
On ambition, as we have been saying, the G-20 is of the view that the Work Program should 
address the core elements of the DDA agricultur al negotiations, across the three pillars of 
agriculture, which include market access, domestic support and export subsidies.  
 The G-20's ambition is set by the Doha mandate. As you all remember, our mandate says, and 
I quote: "we commit ourselves to comprehensive negotiations aimed at: substantial improvements 
in market access; reductions of, with a view to phasing out, all forms of export subsidies; and substantial reductions in trade-distorting domestic support".   
As correlate point, emphasizing the centrality of agriculture for the DDA is never redundant. Let us 
make no mistakes: agriculture remains the key determinant of the level of ambition of the results of the DDA negotiations and the benchmark for the landing zones we will arrive at.  
We also want to recall the agreement reached at  MC9 that issues where legally binding outcomes 
could not be achieved will be prioritized in the post-Bali negotiations. Export competition is clearly one of them.  
 
On possible new contributions, the G-20 considers that the revised draft modalities for agriculture 
(TN/AG/W/4/REV.4) are the basis for a successful agreement and the basis for our discussions to develop.  
 
Finally, on the submission of new informatio n, the G-20 is open and ready to engage 
constructively in discussions that Members deem important. However we would not support 
sequencing the work we will carry out this year. We believe that the discussions on the 
implementation of the Bali results, on new in formation gathering exercises and on the Work 
Program should happen concomitantly. 
 TN/C/M/34 
 
- 41 - 
 
  ANNEX III 
STATEMENT BY CUBA AT THE I NFORMAL MEETING OF THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE 
ON AGRICULTURE ON 28 MARCH 2014 
We would like to thank you for your report dated 14th March and also for your introductory 
comments. Cuba fully supports the statements made by Brazil on behalf of the G-20, by Indonesia 
speaking on behalf of the G-33, and we also su pport the statement by Jamaica on behalf of the 
ACP. 
 
We would like to stress the fact that in future work of this Committee, what should be prioritized are the Doha pending issues. It is very important that this work be accomplished on the basis of an inclusive, transparent, bottom-up approach. It must also be a balanced process, respecting the 
principle of the single undertaking and where agriculture and development have a central place. 
 We endorse the fact that the Doha Round continues to be the centre of the work of this 
Organization and the main mandate for all of its Members.  
 We do not yet have our definitive answers to your questions; we would nevertheless have a few 
preliminary concerns to signal. We are concerned to see that after so many years and so much 
effort invested, the overall balance of work achieved in agriculture in the WTO could be considered by some who are trying to hamper any further progress. Some are hiding behind devices which 
are not very clear and are seeking to find new ideas, new data, new information, new concepts, 
and new approaches, so as to hide their true aims and perpetuate an unbalanced reality which has 
always been favourable to them.   
I regret that I would not be able to have gone with your request of not repeating well known 
positions. We do think that this matter deserves repetition due to its importance. Cuba reiterates that the Work Programme on agriculture cannot in any way whatsoever overlook the broad basis 
of work that accumulated over so many years. And in this respect, we cannot disregard the fourth 
revision of the draft modalities, however many imperfections it may have. Cuba in fact has a proposal for some changes to these draft modalities. Nevertheless, this should continue to be the basis for future negotiations as is also the Doha mandate. 
 
Cuba continues to be committed to the Round and is willing to advance in full respect of the 
principle of single undertaking. 
Argentina has already indicated that there is a great deal of work yet to be done and we truly do 
not have very much time.   
However if in trade facilitation, it was possible in  three months' time to eliminate some 600 square 
brackets, I am virtually convinced that we can do the same thing in agriculture.   TN/C/M/34 
 
- 42 - 
 
  ANNEX IV 
STATEMENT BY CUBA AT THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE NEGOTIATING GROUP ON MARKET 
ACCESS ON 31 MARCH 2014 
We would like to thank you for your introductory remarks and the report on the 14th of this month 
and we would also like to thank you for having held consultations with us in the course of your 
round of consultations prior to the General Council. We would also like to support the points expressed by El Salvador speaking on behalf of  the Small Economies and those spoken by Kenya 
speaking on behalf of the ACP.  
 Cuba is still reflecting on answers to the questions that you put to us in the convening fax for this meeting however we did have some general comments to make on a preliminary basis as to how 
we think that the negotiating process in this area should take place.  
 We believe that the starting point to continue negotiations is the draft modalities contained in 
TN/MA/W/103/Rev.3/Add.1 which does represent years and years of work and efforts and for Cuba 
it would not be acceptable to start again from scratch.   
As a means to move forward we could consider some of the elements contained in the draft 
modalities for example the formulas, the coefficients , the flexibilities so as to see where currently 
problems lie and where are the interests of Members and to see what would need to be modified in 
this draft. Without this in any way implying any backsliding from what has already been achieved 
to present.  
 Some delegations have already mentioned this but we would like to stress this point that if there 
are to be tariff negotiations in NAMA there must also be consideration of all non-tariff barriers. 
Cuba cannot conceive of a balanced outcome in NAMA without the elimination of non-tariff barriers which are inconsistent with the elements, pr incipals and fundamental standards of this 
organization.  
Furthermore as we see it there must be a parallel in the NAMA negotiations with other areas, in particular with agriculture and likewise consideration should be given to preference erosion and technical cooperation. 
 
Finally another preliminary comment is that we think it might be appropriate to try to conclude the HS2007 transposition exercise so that the certified schedules of 2007 are available for all 
Members. 
 TN/C/M/34 
 
- 43 - 
 
  ANNEX V 
STATEMENT BY CUBA AT THE FO RMAL MEETING OF THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COUNCIL FOR 
TRADE IN SERVICES ON 1 APRIL 2014 
Thank you very much Chair. Ambassador Duque,  on behalf of our Ambassador it is a great 
pleasure for us to welcome you and to congratulate you on being nominated as Chair of this Body. 
We don't want this to mean a complete goodbye to Ambassador de Mateo and we would like to underline his very important work within this body and we would like to wish him every success in 
his new position with the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB). For the future work of this body, Cuba 
would like to reiterate its position and indeed th ose that were expressed on previous occasions by 
other colleagues.   
We believe that the balance between the three pillars in terms on market access and agriculture 
should continue to be central and indeed a priority of the future work of this organization. Any attempt to make progress within services as part of the post-Bali work programme should be in 
coherence with the development agenda established in Doha and should not only be limited to 
issues which are related to market access and in this sense based on the Ministerial Decision in Bali. 
 
We should prioritise the implementation of special and differential treatment for services and service providers of LDCs. With regard to the pl urilateral negotiations, we would recall our well 
known position which states that we believe that these are not compatible or complementary to 
the negotiations which have been undertaken in the WTO. These are contradictory processes which 
go against various articles of the General Agreement on Trade in Services specifically articles 2, 5, 
8 and 20 amongst others as well as some provis ions of the 1994 GATT in terms of transparency. 
We believe that this is contradictory with regard to the results achieved in Bali which are aimed at 
ending the Doha Round and in strengthening the Multilateral Trading System and re-establishing the trust and confidence that was lost in this organization.  
 
Once again, Chair, we would like to reiterate our support to you and you can count on our country in searching for the best possible solution for the work of this body of which you take leadership of today.  
 
 TN/C/M/34 
 
- 44 - 
 
  ANNEX VI 
STATEMENT BY SOUTH AFRICA AT THE GENERAL COUNCIL MEETING ON 14 MARCH 2014 
Thank you very much Mr Chairman. Director General, let me take the opportunity once again to 
congratulate you on the outstanding efforts you made to deliver an outcome in Bali, a first major 
trade agreement since the Uruguay Round, almost 20 years ago. Director General, I have read 
with interest your speech to the US Chamber of Commerce recently. You are right about US leadership, not just in creating the Multilateral Trading System but also the two other pillars of 
global economic governance at Bretton Woods; the World Bank and IMF. It is also true that the 
United States was the driving force in each of  the eight rounds of the GATT, from 1947 to the 
Uruguay Round.   
For the majority of developing countries, their experience of this history was rather mixed. The 
exclusion of Agriculture at the outset of the GATT,  at the insistence of the United States and the 
Common Agricultural Policy in the EEC, blocked out the exports of developing countries. Similarly, 
the increasing protectionism in clothing and textiles through the shirt and long term textile 
agreement raised the barriers for much of develo ping country manufactured exports. The Uruguay 
Round went some way to address these issues for the first time but many writers, such as Micheal 
Finger to Joseph Stiglitz have made the argument that the results of the Uruguay Round were 
imbalanced against developing countries. Mr Chairman, it is for this reason that the Doha Round, the first under the new WTO, was mandated to address these inequities and asymmetries in the current WTO rules. The Doha mandate thus argued that the needs and intere sts of the developing 
countries should be prioritized this time.  
 Director General, your contribution at Bali and that of the Membership as a whole was immense. 
Bali has indeed deflated the doomsday predictions of the pessimists that the WTO cannot make 
decisions by consensus, that is that multilateralism cannot work. It is the pessimists that argued that the Doha Round is dead. They have also argued that the new phenomena of global value 
chains, in the world economy, have rendered tariffs to be obsolete and that it is only services and 
non-tariff barriers that matter. These analysts thus throw agriculture and the remaining extremely high tariffs, domestic support and export subsid ies into the dustbin of history, as they are 
considered to be yesterday's issues or no doable or realistic. It is amazing also how, rather than 
criticize those Members who strike major blows against the Multilateral Trading System, these 
analysts instead urge the protagonists of plur ilaterals and mega-bilaterals to impose these 
outcomes on the rest of the WTO Membership.  
 
Mr Chairman, for the majority of developing countries the Bali outcome was a demonstration of good faith. Their issues were subordinated in the interests of demonstrating that the multilateral 
system is important to all. They heard the arguments of some that trade facilitation will bring 
major gains for developing countries, with appropriate scepticism. However, the credibility of the WTO and multilateralism will be tested in the implementation of the post-Bali work program. It is clear that many of the poorest countries agreed to trade facilitation on the understanding that the 
issues that they have been fighting for, since Doha- 12 years ago, LDC issues, cotton and export 
subsidies will be addressed as a matter of priority.   
Mr Chairman, the world economy has changed; there are several major emerging economies in 
the developing world. However, the United States remains the largest world economy and emerging countries still development challenges. More than just US leadership will be required to 
break the impasse of the Doha Round. We all have an interest in building a more open, fair, 
balanced and inclusive Multilateral Trading System. Let us work together in the next few months to 
build a new vision for how to take the Multilateral Trading System forward.   
 
__________