RESTRICTED  
  
TN/C/M/33  
 
15 October 2013  
(13-5650)  Page: 1/6  
Trade Negotiations Committee 
23 September 2013    
 
 MINUTES OF MEETING 
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD ON 23 SEPTEMBER 2013 
Chairperson: Mr. Roberto Azevêdo (Director-General) 
 
Contents 
Page 
1   STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN .................................................................................. 1  
2   STATEMENTS BY  PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................. 4  
 
1  STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN 
1.1.  The Chairman said that everyone was aware that the most significant challenge was the mere 
ten weeks or so that were left to prepare the basis for success at the Bali Ministerial. It was 
important therefore that time and efforts were directed towards substantive work to find convergence. He requested that the meeting be  brief and business-like and urged those that 
wished to take the floor to avoid lengthy and repetitive statements. Many delegations had been 
involved in the Room E/D process so they were already aware of the state of play and had had the opportunity to have their voices heard.  
1.2.  The TNC meeting was a transparency exercise for the Membership as a whole about what had 
been done since the General Council meeting of 9 September. His statement would be in three 
parts: a report about the meetings over the previo us two weeks; an overview  of the state of play 
in the three Bali deliverables; and the next steps in the process. 
1.3.  He started with the Room E and D horizontal process. As he had announced at the last 
meeting of the General Council, he had started a process of intensive consultations at the Ambassador-plus-one level on the three potential deliverables for Bali: trade facilitation, 
agriculture and development. This was a joint effort that he had undertaken with the Chairs of the 
Agriculture Special Session, Committee on Trade and Development (CTD) Special Session, Negotiating Group on Trade Facilit ation, the Facilitator for least-developed country (LDC) issues 
and the Friends of the Chair of the Trade Facilitation negotiations.  
1.4.  There had been a first run of all three topi cs in ten sessions. Specifically, in agriculture the 
meetings had covered the G-33 proposal on public  stockholding for food security and domestic 
food aid purposes, tariff-rate quota (TRQ) administration, and export competition. On trade 
facilitation, both sections I and II of TN/TF/W/165/Rev.17 had been covered. On development, the 
monitoring mechanism, the Cancún 28 propos als and LDC issues had been addressed. 
1.5.   He was glad to report that these discu ssions had been focused, precise and business-like. 
Members had actually been negotiating and interacting in a constructive manner. Delegations were 
in a solution-finding mode and he was encouraged by the new tenor to the discussion. If Members kept this mood and attitude in the upcoming weeks, he believed Bali would be within reach. This was a great and inspiring start, but more would be required. TN/C/M/33 
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.6.  Inclusiveness had been a tenet of the process with the participation of close to 
50 delegations. All major regional and group coordinators and Members most affected by the different issues had been represented. Anyone that had a very strong interest in the discussion had not been precluded from participation. His expectation was that coordinators of the respective 
regional and other groups had consistently kept members of their groupings abreast of 
developments.  
1.7.  He said that these large-format meetings had been frequently criticised for being 
unmanageable. But, that perception was being proven wrong. Discussions had been focused and 
objective. Delegations were taking the floor on ly when they had to and were keeping their 
interventions short. They were avoiding repetitive  or rhetorical statements. The meetings had been 
productive and were covering a lot of ground with in the short time available. There would also be 
regular TNC meetings, which he said were esse ntial for full and unrestricted transparency. 
1.8.  The Chairman then reported on his meetings  with Senior Officials. The good news was that 
there had been a positive indication by Members to get things done and find landing zones. 
Members had started to move in that direction, although not as much and not as far, as they had 
to. The clear message he had delivered to Senior Officials was that their continued political leadership and direction was crucial. Capitals had to be engaged. Many of the issues still pending 
were political. There was a limit to what the Permanent Representatives in Geneva could do. The 
Senior Officials in capitals had to help unlock the key negotiating areas without further delay.  
1.9.  Regarding the substance of the three key issues, on trade facilitation, all parts of the 
mandate had been covered: new disciplines (Section  I); flexibilities for developing countries and 
LDCs, and implementation plans (Section II); and customs cooperation, which was technically in 
Section I, but seemed to be a very specific p illar in the trade facilitation negotiations.  
1.10.  While there had been results, such as on Articles 1, 7 and 10, and while there were good 
prospects for further progress in the coming days, there were a number of topics where positions 
were not yet converging. They related, in particular, to the areas of: customs co-operation, where the discussion was still less mature; flexibilities for developing and least-developed countries and 
implementation plans; and a number of difficult issues in Section I including customs brokers, pre-
shipment inspection, consularization, and certain transit issues.  
1.11.  Therefore, a number of areas in which work was needed remained. To break up the 
blockages in those areas, several things had to happen. Proponents needed to come up with 
improved and manageable proposals, and opponents needed to equally move towards the middle 
ground. Some issues also needed to be addressed in bilateral or smaller group settings to help the efforts in the larger format, which would remain as the primary negotiating approach. 
1.12.  On agriculture, intensive consultations had continued on the G-33 proposal. Consultations 
had also taken place on the G-20 proposals on export competition and on TRQ administration.  
1.13.  On the G-33 proposal, the important deve lopment had been the agreement by Members to 
explore a due restraint provision as a possible in terim solution. He said that that was very 
important in itself. Before taking office and in his first few days in office, he had been extremely concerned with this issue because there had not even been a conceptual understanding of what 
kind of solution to explore. He was glad that in the Room E process it had been agreed that what 
was doable between now and Bali was an interim solution, without prejudice to whatever could be 
done in the long term.  
1.14.  Different elements of the solution had been  identified and discussed. Firstly, the nature of 
such an instrument, that is whether it was to be political or legally binding. Secondly, its character, 
that is whether it was to be automatic, non-automatic or some kind of hybrid. There had been a brief discussion and he thought some convergence was shaping up on this particular issue. Thirdly, 
its coverage. Fourthly, transparency and reportin g issues. He thought there had already been a 
very good conversation on this particular element and he did not think that any Member disagreed that these issues were going to be critical in order to find an interim solution. Fifthly, the safeguards that might be appropriate to minimize distorting effects. All Members had agreed that 
this was also going to be an important element of the discussions, but there had not yet been a 
deep conversation on this. Sixthly, its duration and how it would be reviewed. As in the case of TN/C/M/33 
 
- 3 - 
 
  safeguards, the conversation had not gone deep enou gh yet. Finally, there also needed to be some 
work focusing on the post-Bali longer term solution.  
1.15.  All these elements were interlinked. Th ey had been discussed and there was no clear 
convergence so far on any of them. Common ground on some concepts was beginning to emerge, 
but very intense work was still needed in the coming weeks. Some Members had made it clear that 
they wanted to seek, not only an interim solution, but also a more permanent solution to the concerns that had led to the G-33 proposal. Other Members were mindful of the potential market-
distorting consequences of any solutions sought, wh atever their nature and duration. As far as the 
interim solution was concerned, his view was that the discussions on transparency and safeguards would probably frame the outcome in the other elem ents of the potential due restraint solution. He 
said there was no time to waste in moving to a solution in these critical areas. 
1.16.  Regarding other aspects of this issue, there seemed to be convergence around 
declaration/communiqué language for Bali recogn izing that public stockholding and food aid 
programmes in developing countries were important and legitimate policies and that the G-33 
concerns needed be addressed in a focused post-Bali negotiating effort. 
1.17.  On export competition, he said that the discussions that had taken place in recent days had 
confirmed the sensitivity and seriousness of this  issue. All Members agreed that the parallel 
elimination of all forms of export subsidies for agricultural products and disciplines on all export 
measures with equivalent effect was a key objective, and for some Members one of the priorities – if not the priority – of the Doha Round. This had helped explain why he had detected that everyone was increasingly prepared to accept the co ncept of some kind of outcome on this issue in 
Bali. There were differing views on what that appropriate outcome might be, as Members had 
expressed clearly very divergent views.  
1.18.  What was encouraging was that all participan ts had expressed, in recent discussions, a clear 
willingness to search for a landing zone. Not prejudging what that landing zone would be, some 
useful suggestions had emerged from the debate including: the reaffirmation of the final objective to be achieved on export competition; the recognit ion of the fact that the use of export subsidies 
had significantly decreased in recent years; some type of engagement to maintain this positive 
trend; or the need to improve transparency as regards the use of some export measures with 
equivalent effect to export subsidies. 
1.19.  Finally, on TRQ administration, many Member s continued to see this proposal as one that 
could realistically be part of a balanced outcome in Bali. However, the special and differential 
treatment (S&D) aspects of the proposal continue d to prevent the Membership from taking this 
issue forward for agreement. He repeated what he had said to Senior Officials and in the Room E 
process, that if this issue could not be resolved, then there was little hope for Bali. This was a 
simple and straightforward proposal that most Members tended to find well-calibrated and achievable. Therefore, he hoped that this could be done quickly so as to be able to concentrate on 
the more complex agriculture issues.  
1.20.  On development and LDC issues, Members had begun to close some of the gaps on the 
monitoring mechanism. Members were much clea rer about what the mechanism was, what it 
should do, and how. There appeared to be agreem ent on three characteristics of the monitoring 
mechanism, which did not exist in practice today. First, it should conduct regular reviews of 
existing S&D provisions. Second, it should have the ability to make recommendations to the appropriate technical body if a shortcoming was de tected in the monitoring mechanism's evidence-
based deliberations. And third, the recommendation could include the launching of negotiations on 
S&D provisions in the appropriate WTO body. However, more work still needed to be done to find an appropriate landing zone on a number of issues, in particular with regard to the relationship 
and interface between the monitoring mechanism and the relevant WTO technical body under 
whose remit an S&D provision fell. 
1.21.  On the Cancún 28 proposals, during the Room E consultations, Ambassadors had been 
asked the specific question of whether they could agree to adopt some of these proposals on which 
agreement was possible, in the event that Me mbers were not in a position to adopt all 
28 proposals in Bali. At that meeting, the African Group and the LDCs reiterated their position that 
they could only agree to the adoption of all the 28 Cancún proposals as a package. In case this TN/C/M/33 
 
- 4 - 
 
  was not possible, it would be better that these proposals were taken up in the post-Bali work 
programme within the overall framework of the ma ndate of paragraph 44 of the Doha Ministerial 
Declaration. In the Chairman's view, this issue was not necessarily closed, but this was the situation at this point in time.  
1.22.  There had also been a round of discu ssions on the LDC Bali package. A promising 
development had been the revised submission from th e LDCs on preferential rules of origin. It was 
very encouraging to note that most Members had considered the revised submission as a step in 
the right direction. He urged Members and LDCs to make the most of the time available before Bali 
to come to an agreement on this area.  
1.23.  In two areas, namely cotton and the services waiver, Members were awaiting detailed 
proposals from the LDCs. He underlined that it was only on the basis of concrete proposals that 
Members could make progress for Bali. Time was not on their side. Concerning duty-free, quota-
free (DFQF) market access, he said that Member s needed to find a solution that could be 
acceptable to all stakeholders involved. Some real istic compromises were required from all sides. 
But the collective responsibility was clear: to ensure a meaningful package for the weakest and 
most vulnerable Members of the Organization. He assured the Membership that he was strongly committed to this. 
1.24.  Regarding the next steps, he believed that Members should aim to conclude the main part 
of the negotiations in Geneva by the end of October.  He said that by then, it should be possible to 
see the landing zones for Bali. Therefore, Members would not be standing still, but needed to roll 
up their sleeves for more focused work. The following day, he would resume the intensive 
Ambassadors-plus-one consultations in the Room E/D process through to the end of the week, 
covering all three Bali deliverables. This phase would be slightly different from the previous two weeks. The focus would be on making advances wh ere it would be possible on the critical issues 
requiring more concentrated attention. The schedule included two half-day sessions for agriculture 
and development issues, and two full days for trade facilitation. This second phase of consultations 
would conclude with a TNC on 30 September.  
1.25.  Work would need to continue after this se cond cycle of consultations. In this regard, he 
would ask the Chairs to continue meeting to look for convergence. He would probably be away from Geneva for brief periods in the first half of  October for outreach meetings with Ministers and 
other commitments that, he believed, would assist the efforts to get a successful Bali Ministerial. 
The Chairs would intensify their work whenever he was absent. When he returned to Geneva, 
delegations would need to be on notice in case there was a need to convene meetings at short notice and at unusual hours. From the week of 14 October onwards, Members would be in final 
countdown mode to the end of the month. A frank assessment of the progress that would have 
been made would be required. Members would also set the course for the final stretch of the path towards Bali.  
1.26.  He reminded Members that the Bali Ministerial meeting was in only ten weeks' time. The 
good news was that he was a lot more optimistic about the state of play than two weeks earlier. But that was just the start – an inspiring start, but there was a long way to go and the distance 
between positions in some of the issues was still  very large. Members needed to expedite the 
negotiations and work more intensely. The absolute need for close and more political effort could 
not be understated. He wanted capitals to contin uously engage and he would be delivering this 
message to Ministers in the near future. He said that looking at developments across the world 
and more importantly for the credibility of the Organization's negotiating function, the WTO could 
not afford to fail. 
1.27.  The Trade Negotiations Committee took note of the Chairman's statement. 
2  STATEMENTS BY PARTICIPANTS 2.1.  The representative of the Plurinational State of Bolivia said that as other Members, during the 
previous ten days, Bolivia had witnessed the new dynamics which had appeared in the 
negotiations in preparation for the Ninth Ministeria l Conference (MC9) in Bali. Bolivia had seen that 
a lot of high-level meetings had taken place to tr y and achieve progress and concrete results. In 
this context, he recalled the Chairman's words when he had taken on his new job at the helm of TN/C/M/33 
 
- 5 - 
 
  the Organization. On that occasion, he had said "My intention is to have a rolling set of meetings, 
giving the opportunity for everyone's voice to be heard across all these issues. There will also be 
regular TNC meetings, which I will convene as necessa ry." Bolivia trusted that this approach to the 
negotiations would contribute to achieving manageable results for all.  
2.2.  Regarding the results for Bali, he said that if there were Members who believed that trade 
facilitation alone could be a result for MC9, these Members did not want a positive result for Bali. As Bolivia had said in the past, any result in Bali had to be balanced, that is Bolivia hoped that 
there would be important results with the same level of legal involvement in agriculture, 
development issues and concrete results for LDCs, as in trade facilitation. His delegation hoped that under the format under which Members ha d been holding negotiations this would be 
achievable and that the appropriate priority would be given to all issues.  
2.3.  Regarding trade facilitation, the negotiations had to be realistic and reasonable. Bolivia hoped 
to have a meaningful Section II that gave sufficient flexibilities to developing countries to such an extent that the commitments which would be taken in Section I could be implemented on the basis 
of acquisition of capacity. Bolivia also hoped that MC9 would take concrete steps towards the 
elimination of export subsidies in agriculture, a credible monitoring mechanism and concrete and substantive results for the LDCs. Bolivia supported leaving aside the Cancún 28 proposals for a 
post-Bali process.  
2.4.  The representative of the Bolivarian Republic  of Venezuela said that his delegation wished to 
stress that trade facilitation, as well as the proposals in agriculture, would have a significant 
impact on Venezuela's trade policy. Therefore, in addition to transparency, which was welcomed 
and recognised, his delegation also called for inclusiveness. As the Chairman had said, any 
delegation with any particular concern would not be hindered from participating in the process. 
Venezuela wished to know concretely how delegations that wished to participate could do so.  
2.5.  The representative of Barbados, on behalf of Small and Vulnerable Economies (SVEs), said 
that SVEs hoped that the early conclusion of the talks in Geneva would lead to a successful 
outcome. While the continuing regular work of  the WTO continued to be important, because 
expectations were that the trade negotiations leading to MC9 had to result in meaningful 
deliverables and that success there could advance the chances of a successful completion of the 
Doha Development Agenda (DDA), the delivery of something meaningful in Bali had developed into a measure of the relevance and vibrancy of the WTO. While this was unfortunate, it was the 
reality, and was related to the inability to conclude the Round thus far and to the challenging goals 
which Members themselves had set since Doha. For this reason, it would be important to deliver some meaningful outcome at Bali.  
2.6.  SVEs wished to reiterate that continued emphasis on the development focus of the Round 
and a continuing commitment to recognition of the need for special flexibilities for the small and the vulnerable, should be an important context in which outcomes were delivered. At the same 
time, it was important that, in the anxiety to have a meaningful outcome, Members calibrated 
carefully the choices they made, taking into consideration the strengths and weaknesses of various developing country Members.  
2.7.  However, Members were only just two months  away from the next Ministerial and it would be 
important to come away from Bali with some structure or framework that could help to guide the 
post-Bali agenda – unless Members planned to depart from a biennial meeting and have the next Ministerial after one year. Developing a post-Bali structure would depend perhaps on how much 
brainstorming and preliminary thought could be do ne in the remaining time, given that Members 
were still preoccupied with the deliverables for MC9. SVEs reiterated their continued commitment to a transparent and inclusive process, to a succe ssful MC9 and to the further strengthening of the 
multilateral trading system.  
2.8.  The Chairman appreciated the contribution of all Members in making this meeting a focused 
one. Members needed time to work substantively on the issues that had to be addressed between 
now and Bali.  
2.9.  On the question of inclusiveness, he said  that the Chairs had helped framing the lists of 
delegations for the Room E/D meetings, inviting particularly those that had been active or had TN/C/M/33 
 
- 6 - 
 
  demonstrated during the discussions that they had very specific or particular concerns. There was 
an initial list, but any delegation that felt strongly about any of those issues and felt that it had a contribution to make individually was welcome to  make their views known to the Chairs. So far, 
everyone expressing an interest had been accommoda ted and he said that he intended to continue 
to do so. However, he cautioned that delegations that had group coordinators in the meetings 
were expected to show due restraint and rely on the coordination of their group. He had specifically requested the group coordinators to brief the members of their groups, get their views 
and come to the negotiating table with informed positions, so as to be able to react to what was 
going on in the room. If a delegation was to participate in the meeting, it had to be mindful that it was not expected to make long, political statements. Members had agreed to a one-minute rule and this was the kind of behaviour that delegations were expected to hold in the room.  
2.10.   He thanked everyone for the cooperation that they had shown over the past several days. 
They needed to continue in this mode and show ev en more flexibility in order to get to Bali with 
deliverables. He announced that the following day, he would resume the meetings in the larger 
format. The Chairs would also be engaging and holding consultations with Members in whichever 
way they believed it appropriate and helpful. 
2.11.   The Trade Negotiations Committee took note of the statements.  
 
__________