. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/MIN(05)/ST/25 
14 December 2005 
 (05-5990) 
MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE 
Sixth Session 
Hong Kong, 13 - 18 December 2005 Original:   English 
 
 
 
GUYANA 
 
Statement by the Honourable Clement James Rohee, MP  
Minister of Foreign Trade and International Cooperation  
 
 
On behalf of the Government of Guyana, I woul d like to congratulate the Hong Kong Special 
Administration Region Government for hosting this very important Sixth Ministerial Conference of the WTO, and for doing so at an extremely critical  juncture of the multilateral negotiations.  Thank 
you also for the warm welcome and courtesies extended to my delegation. 
I also wish to acknowledge the enormous ef forts and dedication of WTO Director-General 
Pascal Lamy and his predecessor Dr Supachai, and the staff of the WTO Secretariat in preparing the 
way to this Conference. 
The legitimate expectations of the small, vulnerable non-LDC economies of the Caribbean 
must be adequately reflected in the Hong Kong Mi nisterial text as well as in the post-Hong Kong 
Work Programme.  Unless this is done our region w ill be unable to join in any consensus at this 
Ministerial Conference. 
Mr Chairman, for the benefit of the records my delegation wishes to emphasize that our 
category one issues are:  SSM and SP, Longstanding Preferences and Preference Erosion, S&DT and Aid for Trade. 
Long Standing Preferences constitute a vita l concern for our small vulnerable non-LDC 
economies.  Consequently, these negotiations must positively address, as is the case with the July 
Framework, the erosion of preferences through conc rete and meaningful measures to mitigate the 
impact of reform on the preference receiving counties.  Failure to do so would impose a 
disproportionate and unjust share of the costs of reform on some of the poorest and more vulnerable 
non-LDC Members of the WTO. 
Preferential arrangements are legitimate and bona fide tools to promote trade and 
development and should not be outlawed.  While th e WTO is about opening trade opportunities at the 
same time, we must never forget that Member States in the Marrakesh Declaration expressed the desire to " operate in a fairer multilateral trading syst em for the benefit and welfare of our peoples ". 
We will continue to insist that the system oper ates in a fairer way to the benefit of non-LDC 
small, vulnerable economies.  And that trade-ba sed solutions, rather than hand-outs be the way 
forward. 
In recent times, it appears that the word "open" has taken precedence over the word "fairer" in 
the same way that legalistic arguments are given more weight over the socio-economic and political 
realities of the small, vulnerable non-LDC economies. WT/MIN(05)/ST/25 
Page 2  
 
 With regard to adjustments, I would like to poi nt out that the three adjustments we are being 
called upon to make are: 
- Adjustment as a result of preference erosion; 
- adjustment as a result of tariff reductions; 
- adjustment as a result of the deep cut in the price of sugar; 
These adjustments are clearly unconscionable  and will cause great pain to our people. 
Where is the "fairer multilateral trading system" when countries with a per capita income of 
over US$27,000 choose to further impoverish countries in the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), 
same of whose GDP per capita is less than US$900.00? 
Where is the fairer multilateral tr ading system when countries that account for 42 per cent of 
World Merchandise Trade and 52 per cent of World Commercial Services seek to further marginalize 
CARICOM countries whose percentage of world trade is a paltry 0.13 per cent while their share of 
world commercial services is a mere 0.32 per cent? 
How can countries which perpetuate such an unfair multilateral trading system claim to be 
committed to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs ) on the one hand, while on the other, take 
deliberate steps to undermine this very commitme nt which they proclaim from the mountain tops? 
How much more selfish and unrealistic can they get while pretending to be committed to the 
development outcome of these negotiations? 
I want to make it pellucidly clear that we are not prepared to compromise on the preservation 
of Long-Standing Preferences, in bananas and sugar for example, and more particularly Special and 
Differential Treatment (S&D) for sma ll, vulnerable non-LDC economies. 
The point is that for us in CARICOM, Sp ecial and Differential Treatment would be 
meaningless where long-standing preferences abolished as a result of preference erosion.  Further, the 
irony of this situation is that while we are pur suing Special and Differential Treatment in these 
negotiations, others are working feverishly to dismantle Long-Standing Preferences. 
A fundamental issue which calls into question the integrity of these negotiations is that on the 
one hand, while we are pushing for a pro-developmen t outcome, others have, at the same time, either 
adopted or are pursuing measures to further impoverish our people and exacerbate the under-
development of our economies. 
The recent decision on Sugar by the European Union which was applauded with "delight" and 
described as a "great day" by some, was in fact a sad and painful day for us in CARICOM. 
During our discussions in Hong Kong, we need to bear in mind some basic but non-
negotiable understandings.  These are: 
• The entire negotiation surrounding the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) is about a 
Single and Balanced Undertaking; 
• The July Framework must remain in intact; 
• There cannot be any pre-mature sign-off on issues of special concern to the small, 
vulnerable non-LDC economies while the negotiations in agriculture and industrial 
goals are delayed. 
__________