RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/CTD/M/21 
19 September 2005 
 (05-4122) 
Committee on Trade and Development 
Twenty-First Special Session  
 
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 19 AND 27 JULY 2005 
 
Chairman:  Mr. Faizel Ismail (South Africa) 
 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA ........................................................................................................1  
B. AGREEMENT -SPECIFIC PROPOSALS ............................................................................................1  
C. CHAIRMAN 'S REPORT TO THE GENERAL COUNCIL .....................................................................3  
D. OTHER BUSINESS ........................................................................................................................3  
 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The draft agenda for the meeting as containe d in Airgram WTO/AIR/2622 of 8 July 2005 was 
adopted . 
2. Before moving on to the substance of the agenda, the Chairman  informed Members on how 
he intended to proceed at the meeting.  He said that the two items on the agenda related to the 
Agreement-specific proposals and the Chairman's re port to the General Council.  He said that under 
the first item, he would inform Members on the work  that had been carried out over the past few 
weeks on the remaining LDC proposals, a copy of the last language on which was available for Members' consideration.  Under the item on the Chai rman's report to the Gene ral Council, he intended 
to inform Members on the structure of the report and seek guidance on some of the elements relating 
to future work in the Special Session.   
B. A
GREEMENT -SPECIFIC PROPOSALS  
3. The Chairman  recalled that at the last informal cons ultations held in June 2005, Members had 
taken up the five remaining LDC proposals and ha d a first reading of the remaining Agreement-
specific proposals tabled by the African Group.  During discussions on the LDC proposals, a number of concerns and suggestions had been made whic h he believed had provided a useful basis for the 
LDCs to revise their proposals.  Since those consul tations, a number of plurilateral consultations had 
been held in an attempt to reach convergence on th e LDC proposals.  Based on those consultations the 
LDCs, with the assistance of other Members, ha d redrafted their proposals.  Further intensive 
consultations had been held with a group of Memb ers in an attempt to come up with language that 
would be acceptable to Members and provide a basis for making recommendations on the LDC 
proposals.  Based on these consultations he had, on his own responsibility, put forward language that 
in his view could create a basis for possible consensu s.  While he recognised that there might still be 
some discrepancies with the langua ge that he had put forward, he  did believe that considerable 
progress had been made and that the language prov ided a useful basis on which Members could work 
towards reaching convergence.  He urged that wh en considering the language, Members should keep 
in mind the basic objective of supporting the needs and concerns of LDCs.  He said that a large 
number of political commitments had already been made in this respect, including at the last TN/CTD/M/21 
Page 2  
 
 G8 summit, and Members should now concretise some  of those commitments made in favour of the 
LDCs.   
4. Thereafter, the meeting continued in an inform al mode during which the Chairman introduced 
the changes made to the last la nguage considered on the five rema ining LDC proposals.  As Members 
seemed close to an agreement on two of the proposals, discussions focused on the remaining 
proposals relating to the Understanding in Respect  of Waivers of Obligations under the GATT 1994; 
the Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measur es;  and that relating to the Decision on Measures 
in Favour of Least-Developed Countries. 
5. During the discussions, Members again express ed their commitment towards addressing the 
problems faced by the LDCs.  However, a number of them expressed concern about the open-ended 
exemptions being sought in some of the proposals.   They felt that seeking such exemptions from the 
WTO Agreements would not necessarily lead to deve lopment.  During discussions on the proposal on 
waivers, a number of Members reiterated the need to ensure that the granting of waivers would not be 
detrimental to the interests of ot her developing country Members.  The LDCs stated that even though 
their intention was not to seek waivers that would ne gatively affect the interests of other Members, in 
actual practice it may be difficult to seek a waiver th at did not have some effect, however minimal, on 
other Members.  They therefore felt, that speci fying this as a conditionality in the recommendation 
would render the proposal ineffective.  The LDCs  also felt that the language under consideration 
already provided Members with the opportunity to consider the waiver request and decide on whether 
or not to agree to grant it.  On the proposal se eking 'bound' duty-free and quota-free market access, a 
number of Members stated their willingness to accept language that would ensure predictable, secure 
and sustainable market access for LDCs, but said that  they could not agree to the binding of this 
preferential access.  However, one Member felt that providing predictable, secure and sustainable market access could be interpreted as an obligati on to preserve preferences which would be difficult 
to accept.  Another Member stated that binding market access would be legally difficult since this would entail binding schedules which were currently  provided on an MFN-basis.  Although, [the 
proposal relating to the TRIMs Agreement,] Members appreciated the changes that had been made to 
the original language on a number of them remain ed concerned about the self granted exemption 
being sought from the TRIMs Agreement.  Some  Members felt that new TRIMS should be best 
considered through a waiver process and that  existing TRIMs be provided a new period of 
notification.  These Members believed that it was im portant for any proposal to maintain existing 
TRIMs or to introduce new TRIMs to be a result of due process rather than on the basis of the kind of 
automaticity that was implied in the proposed language. 
6. Although Members engaged constr uctively in the process and seemed close to agreement on 
some of the proposals, they were unable to come  to an agreement on recommendations on any of the 
LDC proposals.   
7. The meeting was suspended
 and thereafter reconvened  on 27 July 2005. 
8. The Chairman  conveyed his appreciation to Members for their active participation in the 
consultations on the LDC proposals that he had carri ed out over the past few months.  Members had 
engaged constructively in what ha d at times proved to be a difficu lt debate.  The exercise had been 
constructive and intellectually stimulating, and it was encouraging that Members had approached the 
work on the LDC proposals with seriousness and ha d made a conscious effort to bridge their 
differences on some conceptually difficult and techni cal issues.  He believed that the negotiations on 
S&D over the past few months had been a period of  learning.  Members had become made aware of 
the needs and interests of the LDCs and had an opport unity to consider what was needed to be done in 
order to assist the LDCs.  He was certain that the LDCs had in turn learnt a lot from the discussions, 
which would come in use when continuing work on their proposals after the summer break.  He said 
that Members needed to realise that they would n eed to make some sacrifices and maintain a spirit of  TN/CTD/M/21 
 Page 3 
 
 
 solidarity for an agreement to be reached on the LDC proposals.  In this context, it was heartening to 
note that the LDCs had shown that they were also  willing to be flexible to take into account the 
interests of other Members.  It was important for Me mbers to build on that spirit of "give and take" as 
the negotiations progressed.   
9. The Chairman went on to say that it was clear  from the discussions over the past few months 
that it would not be appropriate to backload the work in the last few weeks before the Hong Kong 
Ministerial Conference.  A lot of work would need  to be carried out very quickly after the summer 
break because the issues were not only policitically difficult but also technically complicated.  It was 
also clear that Members would need time to re flect on the proposals as new language emerged.  
Undoubtedly, the work on S&D could not be rushed and Members would need to be ready to very 
quickly resume work in September 2005.   
C. CHAIRMAN 'S REPORT TO THE GENERAL COUNCIL  
10. The Chairman  indicated that his report to the Genera l Council would comprise three sections.  
The first section would be an introduction which woul d make reference to the different mandates, on 
S&D.  The second section would relate to the progr ess and status of work since the July Decision and 
would be largely factual.  This section would al so attempt to capture the concerns raised and 
comments made during the different meetings.  It would highlight the fact that all Members had 
engaged constructively in the ne gotiations and that discernable progress had been made in bridging 
some of the gaps, and as a result convergences had definitely emerged.  Though Members had shown 
a great deal of flexibility, there were still several  issues that remained unr esolved and the Special 
Session would therefore not be in a position to make any recommendations for a decision on any of 
the remaining Agreement-specific proposals.  The l ast section relating to future work, would detail 
how the Special Session should structure its work af ter the summer break.  The Special Session would 
no doubt have to take up the remaining Agreement- specific proposals in order to be able to report 
with clear recommendations to the General Council and the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference.  That 
work would be carried out within the parameters of the mandates contained in paragraph 44 of the 
Doha Ministerial Declaration, paragraph 12 of the Decision on Implementation-Related Issues and 
Concerns and the July Decision.  Secondly, the Special Session woul d have to continue to monitor 
and coordinate its efforts with the work of ot her WTO bodies to which the Category II proposals had 
been referred.  Finally, in this section he would re iterate, as mentioned in the July Decision, the need 
for the Special Session to continue to addr ess all other outstanding work including on the 
cross-cutting issues, the monitoring mechanism and th e incorporation of S&D into the architecture of 
WTO rules and report as appropriate to the General Council. 
11. In response to the representative of India, the Ch airman clarified that once work in the Special 
Session resumed, Members would begin by completing work on the remaining LDC Agreement-specific proposals and then move onto addressing the other remaining Agreement-specific 
proposals. 
D. O
THER BUSINESS  
12. Since no issue had been proposed for discussi on under "Other Business" the meeting was 
adjourned . 
__________