RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/GC/M/121 
7 October 2009 
 (09-4852) 
General Council 
28 July 2009  
 
 
 
MINUTES OF MEETING 
 
Held in the Centre William Rappard  
on 28 July 2009  
 
Chairman:  Mr. Mario Matus (Chile)  
 
 Subjects discussed
: Page  
 
1. Report by the Chairman of th e Trade Negotiati ons Committee ..........................................2  
2. Work Programme on Small Economies – Report by the Chairman of the 
Dedicated Session of the Committee on Trade and Development ......................................15  
3. Transparency for Preferential Trade Arrangements – Statement by the 
Chairman of the Committee on Trade and Development ...................................................16  
4. Aid for Trade – Report by the Director-General on the Second Global Review ..............17  
5. Non-recognition of rights under Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of GATT 1994 – Communications from Honduras and Guatemala – Statement by the 
Chairman....................................................................................................................... ..........23
 
6. Seventh Session of the Ministerial Conference.....................................................................26  
(a) Statement by the Chairman...................................................................................................... .26 
(b) Systemic improvements of the WTO  – Proposals by India .....................................................27  
7. Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions................................................................39  
(a) Consultations with Ecuador ..................................................................................................... .39 
(b) Consultations with Ukraine..................................................................................................... ..39 
(c) Note on meeting of June 2009 ..................................................................................................3 9 
8. Waivers under Article IX of  the WTO Agreement..............................................................41  
(a) Cape Verde – Implementation of the schedul e of concessions – Request for waiver ..............41  
(b) Review of waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement ......................................41  
(i) LDCs – Article 70.9 of the TRIPS Ag reement with respect to pharmaceutical 
products, granted on 8 July 2002 until 1 January 2016 ...........................................................41  
(ii) European Communities –  Preferences for Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro, and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, granted on 28 July 2006 until 31 December 2011....................................................................41
 
(iii) United States –  Former Territory of the Pa cific Islands, granted on 27 July 2007 
until 31 December 2016......................................................................................................... ...41 WT/GC/M/121 
Page 2  
 
  (iv)
 Mongolia – Export duties on raw cashm ere, granted on 27 July 2007 until 
29 January 2012 ................................................................................................................ .......41  
(v) European Communities – Application of autonomous preferential treatment to 
Moldova, granted on 7 May 2008 until 31 December 2013 .....................................................41  
9. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration – Report on meeting of 
July 2009 ...................................................................................................................... ............42  
10. WTO Pension Plan – Amendments to th e Regulations of the Pension Plan......................42  
11. Accession of developing countries – Statement by Gabon on behalf of the 
Informal Group of Developing Countries.............................................................................43  
12. Chairmanships of the Working Parties on  the Accession of the Bahamas and the 
Seychelles ..................................................................................................................... ............44  
13. Administrative Measures fo r Members in arrears ..............................................................45  
ANNEX I Remarks by the Director-General at the informal meeting of the TNC 
 on 24 July 2009 ...........................................................................................................46 ANNEX II Statements by delegations at the 24 July 2009 informal meeting of the TNC ......52 
ANNEX III Statements by delegations at the afternoon session of the Second Global 
 Review of Aid for Trade on 9 July 2009 ................................................................. 57 ANNEX IV Statement by the Chairman at the informal meeting of the  General Council on 22 July 2009 ............................................................................. 61 
 
 1. Report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations Committee 
1. The Chairman
 invited the Director-General, as Chairman of the TNC, to report on the TNC's 
activities since his last report to the Council. 
2. The Director-General, Chairman of the TNC , said1 he wished to start by welcoming the 
participants to the WTO introductory course for Least-Developed Countries who had the opportunity 
to attend the present meeting.  He was pleased that this session provided them the opportunity to gain an overall picture of the WTO's work, in which the interests of the LDCs figured prominently.  Since 
his last report, the TNC had held one informal meeting on 24 July.  The purpose of this meeting had been to discuss the situation and next steps in the DDA negotiations.  His rema rks at that meeting had 
been circulated in document JOB(09)/84 which would be included in the minutes of the present 
meeting
2.  He would not repeat all the details, but wished to recall some of the points that had been 
made and build on the common threads that had emer ged in the discussion at that meeting.  He had 
provided an account of his recent contacts at politi cal level and the renewed impetus that leaders had 
given the DDA with the call that the Round be conclude d in 2010.  He had then set out an overview of 
the state of play in each of the negotiating areas, as well as an insight into the road maps envisaged by 
Chairs of Negotiating Groups in the weeks after the summer break.  Whether these were road maps, 
train timetables or GPS systems, whether they star ted in Versoix, Vevey or  Carouge, what he had 
heard at that meeting was that all of them pointed in one and the same direction – a conclusion of the 
Doha Round in 2010.  In the lengthy – and he believed productive – discussion, there had been unanimous agreement that if Members were to reac h their destination on time, the renewed level of 
political re-engagement by leaders urgently requi red translation into tangible progress in the 
negotiations.  There had also been strong support for the process set out in the detailed road maps and 
for the need for all participants to be ready to wo rk intensively in the autumn.  The message had been 
''all hands on deck". 
                                                     
 
1 The Director-General's statement was subse quently circulated in document JOB(09)/86. 
2 The statement is reproduced in Annex I to the present records.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 3 
 
 
3. While the need to work at all levels, includi ng the bilateral level, had been recognized, the 
primacy of the multilateral arena had been stressed by delegations.  Various views had been expressed 
about the possible impact of bilaterals on the speed  and transparency of multilateral decision-making.  
However, there had been wide agreement that b ilateral engagement should be no reason for slowing 
or holding up the multilateral process – the two had to  move simultaneously.  It had also been noted 
that bilaterals should not go on too long and s hould be conducted with the maximum possible 
transparency.  The strong position had been expr essed that scheduling in Agriculture and NAMA 
would be the arrival point, to be followed by a verification process.  Thus, there had been strong 
support for the "no surprises" principle, with regard  not only to the scheduling process in Agriculture 
and NAMA, but also to others areas under the Single Undertaking.  There had also been considerable 
discussion of the need to intensify and advance work  right across the scope of the negotiations.  While 
delegations had recalled the sequenc ing established by Ministers at Hong Kong, the need to arrive at 
an acceptable level of certainty in all areas at  the time of agreement on Agriculture and NAMA 
modalities had also been widely recognized.  Th is pleaded for more horizontal processes, using 
Members' established pattern of work ing in concentric circles.  This work should be text-based as far 
as possible.  To make such a process effective, it w ould be important that delegations signal their "big 
ticket" items, but equally that they refrain from " hostage-taking" behaviour.  He also wished to 
mention that many delegations had re-affirmed  the basic principles in those negotiations – 
multilateralism, development, and a bottom-up, inclus ive and transparent process.  As TNC Chair and 
as Director-General, he would do everything within his realm to uphold those principles. 
4. He then reported on the open-ended meeting on GI  extension and the re lationship between the 
TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, which he had held th e previous day under the mandate given him at 
the Hong Kong Ministerial.  As required by this mandate, he had earlier reported to the TNC and the 
General Council on past progress in this consultative process.  Since his last report to the General 
Council, he had been undertaking these consulta tions personally, with four sessions taking place 
between March and July.  In order to follow up on the work previously done by DDG Yerxa, the 
previous day he had convened an open-ended co nsultation for all Members and had provided an 
extensive report on the work done so far.  The re port at the present meeting would therefore be brief 
and would cover the most recent developments.  The consultations had concentrated on technical 
questions, with a view to assisting Members to understand more fully each other's interests and 
concerns, and to shed light on the technical aspect s of the two issues.  They had not focussed on 
questions of broad interest to Members, such as whether, and if so how, these issues should be linked 
to the broader negotiating agenda.  This was a question which still divided Members.  While the 
consultation process had not bridge d the gaps that had long defi ned debate on these issues, he 
believed the gaps were better defined and their c ontours better illuminated.  Members were gradually 
understanding more about the implications of diffe rent ways of bridging those gaps.  However, it 
should be clear that Members still did not agree on certain procedural issues and the status of these 
two issues vis-à-vis  the overall work programme and negotiating package.  Members also did not 
agree on substantive questions – for example, they continued to differ on whether the scope of goods 
afforded higher protection under Article 23 should be  extended or not.  They also differed on what 
specific action, if any, was required to ensure th at the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD were mutually 
supportive.  While Members differed on the need for GI extension, they seemed to agree that using 
the trademark, sui generis  legislation or other legal means were  legitimate ways of protecting GIs.  
The debate was more about whether and how such  systems could or should deliver on Members' 
expectations.  Delegations had also supported the essential objectives and principles of the CBD.  
Where they differed was on how to ensure that TRIPS and its implementation effectively supported 
those objectives and principles.  The previous da y's open-ended consultations had illustrated both 
these points of convergence and the continuing areas of divergence.  However, from the discussion he 
had been able to conclude that there continue d to be support among Members for this method of 
continuing consultations, provided th ere was adequate transparency, and he had therefore undertaken 
to continue this process along the same lines, for the moment, while ensuring transparency, including 
through reporting to the TNC and the General Council. WT/GC/M/121 
Page 4  
 
  5. Also, in the light of requests from Members and in  the interest of transparency, he had agreed 
to make available the text of the informal report he had delivered to Members, subject to the very strong caveat that it was only an informal impression of the process – informality being the lifeblood of such consultations.  Any sense that these conver sations would be reported or published in some 
authoritative or comprehensive record would be  completely self-defeating.  Thus, he asked 
delegations to treat his report as background only – not  as formal, complete or definitive in any way.  
He would be pursuing these consultations follo wing the summer break, with the next meeting 
scheduled for 8 October.  In conclusion, he said Members' task now was to match political promise 
with negotiating performance.  It was about less "tal k about the talk" and more "action".  It was less 
about "optimism or pessimism" and more about " activism".  As he had said the previous week, 
Members had come a long way and were not far from their journey's end.  The sense that they were 
entering the endgame needed to become both widely shared and more effective.  He hoped the holiday 
period would offer all the chance to not only to refresh  themselves but also to reflect and refocus, so 
that the autumn would indeed be a season of fruitfulness. 
6. The Chairman
 noted that the Director-General's stat ement at the previous week's informal 
TNC circulated in Job(09)/84 would be included in the records of the present meeting.  He suggested 
that any delegation wishing to include its statemen t at that meeting in the records of the present 
meeting so indicate to the Secretariat. 
7. The representative of Argentina  said his delegation wished to thank the Director-General for 
the information he had provided at the present meet ing as well as at the 24 July informal meeting of 
the TNC.  Argentina's comments would focus on the ro ad that lay ahead, but he wished to mention a 
few specific issues relating to the negotiations.  Fi rst, he referred to the statement signed by the 
Presidents of the MERCOSUR States in Asunción on 24 July.  With regard to the Doha Round, this 
statement read as follows:  "The Presidents reaffirm ed the need to conclude the Doha Round with a 
balanced agreement and with a comparable level of  ambition in the core negotiating areas, taking into 
account the principle of less-than-full reciprocity, so that the Round benefits above all the developing 
countries and strengthens multilateralism in trade.  They highlighted the importance of ensuring that 
the Round effectively fulfil its development objective,  contributing to the eradication of poverty and 
providing for flexibility in the implementation of pub lic policies".  There was no doubt that in the 
seven years Members had been negotiating this agreement, a number of understandings had been 
reached, and these were now embodied in th e Chairs' texts on Agriculture and NAMA.  
Acknowledging this fact was not the same as saying th at the level of ambition had already been set, 
since at no time had the membership in full given its approval to these documents.  The Agriculture 
text reflected certain partial equilibriums reached  through negotiation.  There were, however, some 
elements that still needed to be defined, and until this happened, a country could not know what 
market access it would obtain or what the real commitments, in terms of domestic subsidies, would be, amongst other things.  It should be noted that the agreements relating to Agriculture had been 
reached – in his delegation's opinion – thanks to a great deal of pragmatism from the negotiators on 
the whole, but also because they had so far include d a large number of flexibilities for the developed 
countries, in respect of both domestic subsidies and markets. 
8. With regard to NAMA, the current situation and imbalance were much more serious.  His 
delegation thanked Brazil for having  recalled, at the recent informal TNC, the importance of the 
concession made in NAMA by the developing countries in accepting a Swiss formula.  This 
concession had been pocketed by a significant numbe r of the countries involved in these negotiations, 
which meant that it had not been possible to set th e level of ambition Argentina had been trying to 
achieve in this area in a way that satisfied all countri es participating in the negotiations.  In this regard 
there was still quite a way to go before Members r eached a reasonable agreement.  In any case, and on 
the basis of the declaration by the Presidents of MERCOSUR, it was clear that there continued to be 
an imbalance in terms of paragr aph 24 of the Hong Kong Declaration with regard to the relationship 
between Agriculture and NAMA.  These were genera l comments on some of the issues relating to the  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 5 
 
 
negotiations.  Regarding the sugges tions made on how to proceed, above all in respect of procedures, 
the Director-General and the majority of the memb ership had recognized, after the informal TNC, the 
need to continue moving forward as part of a process that was bottom-up, multilateral and fully 
transparent, and that this approach had to remain at  the core of future work .  At the present stage of 
the negotiations, it was not wise to try to modify th e mandates or the sequencing agreed at Ministerial 
level.  In this context, attempts to impose ot her forms of negotiation could endanger pre-existing 
commitments and mandates.  If, as the Director-General said, Members were now entering the end-game, Argentina agreed with the idea that work in other negotiating areas should also be 
accelerated.  Here his delegation wished particularly to mention the issue of rules, both in respect of 
fisheries subsidies and anti-dumping.  One should not  be under any illusion here, like in Agriculture 
and NAMA, that still missing were the fundamental  political decisions required to get around the 
existing stumbling blocks.  Such decisions would en able the Chairman of the Group to put together a 
text that could act as a basis for future join t work and for reaching the conclusion of these 
negotiations.  Political decisions – not time-lines or s uggestions – were needed to  resolve this matter.  
The same applied to the extension of the protection of GIs.  At the present stage of the discussion, it 
was quite clear there was very little chance of a su ccessful outcome in this regard.  However, this 
issue continued to have considerable  potential to derail this exercise.  Lastly, he wished to refer to an 
issue referred to in the MERCOSUR Presidents' joint statement – the development objective and 
dimension of the Round.  It had always been acknowledged that this Round was conceived as a 
meaningful contribution to development.  However,  so far it was not clear whether one was moving 
closer to that objective.  Therefore, at some point Members would have to take into account the 
various elements in order to assess this situation pr operly.  In this regard, and in the light of the 
progress that might be made in the autumn, Members should, as soon as possible, carry out a substantive and comprehensive analysis of the development content of the Round, which would 
enable them to assess the extent to which they we re complying with this core aspect of the Doha 
mandate. 
9. The representative of Zambia
 said the Director-General's report defined a key question, which 
was that Members had to match political commitment with negotiating performance.  In this regard, 
his delegation wished to urge, par ticularly delegations' experts in Ge neva, that this meant translating 
their negotiating performance into concrete output s.  This would make the political commitment 
concrete.  A second matter was that LDC issues shoul d not remain at the margins of the outcomes of 
the process, but rather remain key priorities in th ese outcomes.  These were  the two key elements 
Zambia looked forward to.  His country remain ed committed to fostering a fairer and more 
predictable trade environment and would continue to play a critical within the LDC Group.  As an 
LDC, his country expected that the outcomes of the Round would focus particularly on the LDCs – 
duty-free quota-free treatment, simplif ied rules of origin, cotton a nd appropriate am endments to 
Article 24.  His country was also concerned that  any further delay in concluding the Round would 
create opportunities for protectionist tendencies that w ould not help the LDCs to arrest poverty or to 
deal with the financial crisis.  Thus, Zambia looked forward to Members seizing the momentum 
created at the political level and translating it into  concrete outputs.  His de legation would do anything 
it could to help maintain that momentum. 
10. The representative of Mexico  said he wished to point out that it was the responsibility of each 
and every delegation to make the necessary progress to conclude the Round as soon as possible and – 
based on the statements by the G-20 leaders and AP EC Ministers – by 2010.  Mexico was willing to 
contribute in any way possible to achieve this obj ective.  Recent political statements had given 
Members a tailwind that would help them reach the finishing line, but the problem was that they had 
been unable to hoist the sails in Geneva and were  trying to row.  However, some were rowing 
forwards while others were rowing backwards.  As a result, they were in the eye of the storm that was WT/GC/M/121 
Page 6  
 
  the world economy.  Still, his delegation was hopeful.  He requested that his delegation's statement at 
the 24 July informal TNC meeting be reflect ed in the records of the present meeting.
3 
11. The representative of Hong Kong, China  said that Members were currently experiencing a 
global downturn with immense impact around the vari ous corners of the world.  Although there were 
signs of some recovery, the world economy rema ined fragile and the outlook was still far from 
certain.  During these difficult times, Members needed to keep trade open and resist protectionist 
measures, and the best way to achieve this was to  conclude the Doha Round as soon as possible.  His 
delegation looked forward to this ha ppening in 2010, but wished to take this opportunity to inform 
Members that the Ministers of Chile, Colombia , Costa Rica, Hong Kong China, Liechtenstein, 
Mexico, New Zealand, Pakistan, Peru, Switzerland and Uruguay had made a joint statement at the 
OECD Ministerial Council meeting on 25 June on th e need to resist the urge to move towards 
protectionism.  The statement was available outside the meeting room, and Members were encouraged to study and sign on to it.  In the statement, Ministers reaffirmed their commitment to resisting 
protectionism and reaching an am bitious and balanced conclusion to  the Doha Development Round in 
the shortest possible time.  Concluding the nego tiations would contribute to economic recovery and 
reinforce the benefits of the multilateral trading system.  Reforms resulting from the Round would 
also provide valuable insurance ag ainst the threat of protectionism in future.  Members now had to 
show political will.  Senior negotiators had to r econvene in Geneva as soon as possible, and Members 
had to take advantage of every opportunity to en gage at the political level to drive progress over the 
coming months.  Hong Kong, China hoped that the st rong political signals sent out by the Ministers, 
as well as many other leaders, would finally be tr anslated into action in Geneva in the autumn.  
Members badly needed to reenergize the Negotiati ng Groups, and needed a clear road map on how to 
make progress on all fronts.  He would not go into further detail at the present meeting, but requested 
that his delegation's statement at the 24 July inform al TNC meeting be reflected in the records of the 
present meeting.
4 
12. The representative of Norway  said the Director-General's comprehensive report was helpful 
for the present phase of renewed engagement Members now seemed to have entered.  His report also 
further developed the strategy for the final phase of  negotiations.  There was obviously an imminent 
need to bridge the gap between political signals from the top and actual work on the ground, meaning 
by delegations in Geneva, in order to deal with th e growing credibility defic it.  This was not an easy 
task.  Timing, in combination with parallel steps in the right direction, and an overall process on all levels was necessary, particularly given that Me mbers had eight years of negotiations behind them 
and limited time to finish the Round before p assing the "use-by" date on the DDA package after 
which DDA might become unsalvageable.  This calle d for an atmosphere of sensitivity, sensibility, 
hard work and – last but not least – leadership.  The Members were not an easy group to lead in the 
same direction.  What was not needed was big word s and blame games, even if the latter was at times 
tempting and much more easy and entertaining.  Li ke many others, Norway believed that a number of 
processes needed to move in tandem, not only because Members had agreed on a Single Undertaking 
in Doha, but because it made sense at this late stage of the negotiations, in order to move away from 
positions of not being able to do anything in area a,  b or c before someone else did something in areas 
d, e, f.  Sometimes this was a reality, and so metimes it was a matter of hiding behind others. 
13. The Director-General's process of multitasking,  including major negotiating areas, bilateral, 
plurilateral and multilateral processes, in combination with a horizontal process to provide a forum for 
give and take across negotiating areas, seemed the ri ght way to restart the negotiations.  There might 
still be some lack of clarity on sequencing, but this could be fixed.  Also, it was almost naïve to think 
that what had not been possible to achieve over th e past eight years would suddenly become apparent 
and crystal clear by the end of July 2009.  Th e process the Director-General was proposing was 
                                                     
 
3 The statement is reproduced in Annex II to the present records. 
4 The statement is reproduced in Annex II to the present records.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 7 
 
 
different from the process in the past, which had taken Members a long way but not all the way.  There was great merit in changing pace and starting a process of real negotiation of the final balance across the negotiating areas.  However, while underlin ing the points made by Brazil, India, Canada 
and others at the 24 July informal meeting of the TNC, her delegation felt that Members did not have 
to include everything.  They did not need legal te xt on every detail, as long as there was an agreed, 
understood view of what the final package would be.  The main point was that each Member would 
have to see that its main interests or big-ticket i ssues were addressed in an acceptable way with the 
necessary respect for the interests and needs of othe rs as part of the package, but with no hostage-
taking in order to reach a final agreement.  All wo uld eventually have to let certain less important 
small-ticket issues go, in order to finish.  The subs tantial engagement and energy shown over the past 
weeks was a good sign, but the proof of the pudding was in the eating, and more was needed to 
sustain maxi negotiations in Geneva.  To that e ffect, Norway supported what Brazil had said at the 
recent TNC meeting about starting to work in accordan ce with the Director-General's plan right away, 
and then sometime in September e xpeditiously take stock of developm ents in real terms in order to 
adjust the process if necessary, including whether finalization of the Round seemed possible in 2010. 
14. The representative of Gabon
, on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing Countries , said 
that as developing countries, they were bearing the fu ll brunt of the economic crisis – a crisis that was 
not of their doing.  Although one was seeing hopeful signs of recovery, mostly in the major emerging economies, smaller developing countri es and LDCs were still in a very vulnerable state and faced an 
uncertain future with a great deal of social a nd economic upheaval.  They had heard statements from 
the leaders of several major developed and deve loping countries on their commitment to quickly 
finish the DDA because of the benefits it would bring at a time of economic insecurity that was 
haunted by protectionist fears.  It was time to br ing these statements to Geneva and start putting them 
into action in the negotiations.  The Informal Gr oup had listened with interest to the road map 
presented by the Director-General and fully concur red with him on the need for a clear path for 
engagement in Geneva in order to bring the DDA to  a successful conclusion.  It also agreed on the 
need to increase the pace of work in all the Negotiating Groups and that Members should aim to have 
most technical issues resolved before the end of  the year.  The developing countries were worried 
about the bilateral discussions taking place.  This wa s why they wished to reiterate the primacy of the 
multilateral process.  All Members needed to be kept  informed about every step taken, every proposal 
and every compromise reached or suggested, if they wi shed to respect the principle of "no surprises".  
As Members followed the road map that would lead  them to the successful conclusion of the Round, 
they should not stray from the overall directi on followed so far, which was that of a 
development-oriented Round.  The Informal Group reiterated the importance of sailing according to 
the navigational chart given by Ministers in Doha, a nd of not revisiting ports that were already behind 
them.  This meant that Members should not reopen cer tain issues at the risk of undoing the carefully 
crafted compromises reached thus far.  The Inform al Group assured the Director-General of its full 
support for his efforts and those of the Chairs of the various Negotiating Groups to trace the route that 
would soon take Members to the end of the DDA with an outcome beneficial to all. 
15. The representative of the European Communities
 said Members were now starting to get a 
clearer picture of the road ahead.  First, they ha d an unequivocal political commitment to conclude the 
Round before the end of 2010.  Against that bac kground, the Director-General had provided the 
elements of a road map that would allow Memb ers – through a multilateral negotiating process in 
Geneva and across all areas of the negotiation – to reach that goal.  There was a growing recognition 
that at the time of modalities, there had to be a high degree of understanding about the outcome in 
areas other than Agriculture and NAMA.  Those othe r areas needed to be substantively negotiated in 
the autumn, so that by the tim e Members were ready to close on Agriculture and NAMA modalities, 
they were also closer to finality.  There was also  a recognition that in support of this process, and in 
order to improve understanding of the content of a final deal, some Members would also engage in 
bilateral discussions.  His delegation expected these bilaterals to be transparent, constructive and 
expeditious.  The Director-General had said at the 24 July informal TNC meeting that for Members' 
political leaders, it was clear one was entering th e end-game.  This was certainly the case for his WT/GC/M/121 
Page 8  
 
  Trade Commissioner and for the EU as a whole.  Nonetheless, some people still had doubts about 
whether Members were really serious about c oncluding the negotiations soon and devoting the 
necessary resources to doing so.  This was detrimental to the authority of those leaders, for Members 
and for the WTO.  The political engagement that l eaders had expressed in Bali, Paris, L'Aquila and 
Singapore would have to be adva nced now, and made more specifi c in New Delhi and Pittsburgh.  
Leaders would have to give precise instructions – including on flexibility – to Senior Officials, who 
needed to meet in Geneva starting in September to  develop a more precise and credible road map to 
implement the political commitments made.  This process, as the Director-General had suggested, 
should be a more horizontal process that could start progressively to carve out compromises and agreements on all but a handful of the most politically sensitive issues.  By being horizontal, such a 
process should allow Members to build up a balanced  package across the negotiating areas.  Members 
should start by trying to agree on some fairly firm deadlines, and a common understanding of what, on substance, needed to be done across the board, eith er at technical level or at the level of Senior 
Officials themselves, in order to position the Ro und for political decision-making on modalities by the 
end of 2009.  Members had to get into this kind of  negotiating mode in order to deliver the Round in 
2010.  The EC hoped Members could get a firm buy-in to  such an approach, and to be able to launch 
it at the meeting in Delhi. 
16. The representative of Singapore
, on behalf of the APEC Members , said that at the APEC 
Ministers Responsible for Trade (MRT) meeting which had taken place in Singapore the previous 
week, the APEC Ministers had had a frank a nd open discussion on the Doha Round and had 
committed to concluding the Round by 2010.  With th e deadline fast-approaching, the Ministers had 
also directed delegations in Geneva to exercise ma ximum flexibility in the negotiations, and to ensure 
direct engagement so that progress could be made pr ior to the Pittsburgh Summit in September.  They 
had also agreed on the steps n ecessary to accelerate the end-game Doha Round negotiations for the 
second half of 2009.  Specifically, these steps included:  (i) building on the good progress already made in the 2008 negotiations;  (ii) accelerati ng efforts to conclude Agriculture and NAMA 
modalities while advancing in paralle l the negotiations in Services, Rules, Trade Facilitation and all 
other remaining issues;  and (iii) utilizing all possi ble avenues of engagement, including bilateral and 
plurilateral, to encourage greater transparency and understanding of what was on the table, in order to 
fill the remaining gaps in the negotiations as soon as possible.  This was yet another step forward in 
terms of building on the political momentum genera ted by previous meetings in Bali, Paris and 
L'Aquila.  However, this fresh momentum and clear political commitment would mean nothing 
without a corresponding process in Geneva to move  negotiations forward.  As the APEC Members 
had stressed at the 24 July informal TNC meeting and in their statements at the present meeting, 
Members needed to translate this political momentum into real engagement.  In this regard, the APEC 
Members stood ready to abide by their Ministers' in structions, roll up their sleeves and get down to 
work.  At the informal TNC meeting, the Direct or-General had presented Members with a road map 
for negotiations following the summer break.  The ro ad map clearly outlined areas where gaps had to 
be bridged, and the issues for which more detailed te chnical work had to be carried out to prepare the 
ground for any decision-making at the political level.  September looked set to be busy, with a whole 
series of meetings lined up for the various Nego tiating Groups.  While the ground was fertile for a 
build-up in technical momentum, Members had to take ownership of the matter and capitalize on 
these meetings to carry out some real negotiation activ ity.  On the matter of resisting protectionism, a 
topic raised at the MRT, the APEC Ministers had had a very frank discussion.  In view of the APEC 
Leaders' commitment in Lima in November 2008, a report reviewing trade, fiscal and monetary measures undertaken by APEC economies as a result of  the current crisis had been adopted, based on 
reports by the WTO and APEC Business Advisory Council.  APEC Ministers had also pledged to 
continue regular reviews of the APEC commitment  to free trade and open markets.  More details 
could be found in the main MRT statement, and the separate Statement on Addressing the Economic 
Crisis and Posting for Recovery, both of which had been circulated as documents in WT/L/765 and 
766.  The post-summer break period would be ac tive and challenging.  The APEC Members stood  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 9 
 
 
ready to work with the Negotiating Group Chairs and all other Members towards an ambitious and 
balanced conclusion to the DDA in 2010. 
17. The representative of Chinese Taipei  said that as his delegation had indicted at the 24 July 
informal TNC meeting, Chinese Taipei welcomed th is road map for future work on the DDA.  In 
addition to accelerating efforts to conclude moda lities in Agriculture and NAMA, all the negotiating 
issues had to progress in parallel at the same rate, so  they were all ready when the time came to agree 
on a deal that would produce an ambitious and ba lanced outcome.  Also, the negotiations should be 
conducted in a manner that fully r espected the all-inclusive, botto m-up and multilateral principles of 
the WTO.  In this regard, as an APEC Member , Chinese Taipei fully associated itself with the 
statement by Singapore for the APEC Members, expressing their collective objective and effort to 
accelerate the progress of the Doha Round as well as to resist protectionism and maintain liberalized 
trade throughout these hard times. 
18. The representative of Tanzania , on behalf of the LDC Group , commended the Director-
General for his efforts, including the political canvassing, to accelerate the negotiating process and for 
the direction he had outlined for Members to follow after the summer break.  It was imperative that 
the goodwill shown by world leaders was translated  into real action in the Geneva process.  
Concluding the DDA negotiations would deliver the needed contribution to economic recovery and 
would demonstrate the benefits of the multilateral tr ading system.  The rule-based multilateral trading 
system under the WTO was required in order to prev ent the imminent disorderly reactions to the 
current crisis from degenerating into parochial market protectionism.  The Group called on Members 
to utilize all possible avenues of engagement, includi ng bilateral and plurilatera l consultations, to fill 
the remaining gaps in the negotiations as soon as possible, without compromising the principles of 
transparency and inclusiveness.  The impact of th e current crisis had been asymmetric, hitting the 
most vulnerable LDCs, who were barely surviving under substandard conditions .  Of greatest concern 
to the LDCs was the fact that while other countri es continued to adopt policy measures to contain the 
crisis – including provision of stimulus packag es and imposition of trade-restrictive measures to 
revive and sustain their economies and employme nt – governments in LDCs, which did not have 
resources, were left to absorb the full impact of a crisis that was not of their making.  With foreign 
direct investment, migrant remittance and Official  Development Assistance (ODA) diminishing, the 
ability of LDCs to respond to the crisis and reduce the tremendous human and social cost associated 
with it was becoming even more limited.  The Group reiterated its plea that developed countries 
implement their commitment to allocate at least 0. 7 per cent of their gross national incomes towards 
supporting developing countries in meeting the UN Millennium Development Goals, and deliver not 
only on new but also outstanding commitments.  Si nce ODA alone might not be enough, they called 
on developed countries to ensure predictable and su stained increases in aid and any further measures 
to help developing countries cope with the crisis.  They wished to appeal for practical support through 
the implementation of commitments by developed countries in this area.  The LDC Group was also 
concerned about the incremental build-up of restricti ons in response to the current global financial and 
economic crisis that could slowly strangle interna tional trade.  Despite the multitude of statements 
against protectionism by leaders in various fora in recent months, the merc antilist spectre was fast 
creeping into the national policies of many devel oped and developing countries, thereby drawing the 
trading world back to the trade protectionist era.   Governments, particularly in developed and 
developing economies, were increasingly engaging in  protectionism under the cover of such measures 
as TBT, SPS and Rules of Origin.  These measures were systematically driving resource-starved 
LDCs out of international trade.  The LDC Group appreciated the monitoring exercise and 
surveillance mechanism being promoted for iden tification and detection of potentially harmful 
measures.  Early conclusion of th e Doha Round held high potential fo r checking the proliferation of 
NTBs as a response to the current financial and economic crisis which had developed into a global 
social crisis.  The Group also tha nked the Director-General for his e fforts to revive discussions on the 
issues of GI extension and TRIPS/CBD, and for hi s decision to continue these consultations in the 
autumn.  He recalled that the LDC Group's position on these issues had been spelled at the 24 July 
informal TNC meeting. WT/GC/M/121 
Page 10  
 
  19. The representative of India
 said the Director-General's summary of the discussion at the 
24 July informal TNC meeting was extremely accurate  and comprehensive.  India continued to be 
disappointed that the steady stream of political si gnals to seek an early conclusion of the Round had 
not been translated into action through intens ive multilateral negotiations in Geneva.  The gap 
between the two was clearly due to the fact that  some Members continued to harbour doubts about 
whether one was really in an end-game situation.  It also had to be acknowledged that the issue of 
bilateral meetings was being viewed by some Members as a hindrance to multilateral engagement.  
From India's perspective, the only test of po litical will was the adopti on of a problem-solving 
approach by all Members in the relevant Negotiati ng Groups.  Sadly, there was no evidence of that at 
present.  His delegation had noted that the Agricu lture and NAMA Chairs had presented a fairly low-
key programme of engagement in Se ptember.  India had no quarrel with what the Chairs were doing.  
They were only interpreting the signals they we re receiving from Members.  However, it was 
important to note that the continuous defermen t of real engagement would have inevitable 
consequences for Members' goal of completi ng the Round by 2010.  There seemed to be an 
impression that bilateral meetings among some Me mbers were holding up the multilateral process.  
Such meetings were not a new phenomenon, and in th e past few years, India would have participated 
in scores of bilaterals.  However, bilateral m eetings could not be a substitute for multilateral 
engagement.  They could at best be useful in  clarifying positions.  Members should not allow the 
impression to gather ground that multilateral engage ment was being held hostage to the bilateral 
process.  It was essential to return  to the multilateral process with full vigour at the earliest.  The 
negotiating situation confronting Members at presen t was qualitatively different from what it had been 
in 2008.  Members seemed to be moving towa rds a definition of modalities that was more 
comprehensive and complete than in the past.  If so , this had obvious implications for the other areas 
in the negotiations.  The underlying principle of the Single Undertaking was horizontal trade-offs in all areas.  For this to happen, Members would need to ensure that all areas of the negotiations moved 
ahead commensurately.  The exact precision of th is parallel forward movement needed to be 
discussed.  For India, the areas of Services, Rules and the TRIPS issues would need to figure in the 
synchronized marching.  It was important to ha ve a shared understanding of how this could be 
achieved.  In this connection, he wished to associat e his delegation with the statement by Norway.  On 
TRIPS issues, his delegation wished to thank the Director-General for his consultative process since 
March, the open-ended meeting held the previous  day and his report to the General Council.  
However, these efforts, as mandated in paragra ph 39 of the Hong Kong Declaration, were only a 
means to an end.  Paragraph 39 also enjoined Memb ers to find "appropriate solutions" to these issues. 
India looked forward to further intensification of the Director-General's c onsultative process in the 
autumn so as to prepare the ground for a clear and informed decision by Ministers based on key 
parameters contained in document TN/C/W/52 and wi thin the framework of the Single Undertaking. 
20. The representative of El Salvador
 said his delegation shared the Director-General's view on 
the state of play in the negotiations.  It noted and endorsed the future work programme outlined by the 
Agriculture and NAMA Chairs.  In this regard, El Salvador was committed to continuing to take an 
active part in the negotiating meetings scheduled fro m September on, recognizing that there was still a 
great deal of work to do if Members were to ach ieve the objective of securing a balanced outcome to 
the negotiations as soon as possible in all areas unde r the Doha Agenda.  His delegation agreed that 
the membership should use the summer break to reflect on the work that had to resume in the autumn 
and should return with renewed energy, based on a ll the progress made to date, in the knowledge that 
much remained to be done before reaching the obj ective of completing the negotiations as rapidly as 
possible, and ideally by 2010.  Bearing in mind th e preparations that needed to be made for the 
upcoming Ministerial Conference, it was important  to take into account the capacities of small 
delegations when making these preparations and as the DDA negotiations proceeded.  It was also 
important to emphasize that the negotiating process,  which would intensify as of September, should 
continue on the multilateral basis that had enabled Members to achieve the progress made so far.  The 
process should remain transparent and, above all, con tinue to ensure that the interests and positions of 
all Members were taken into account.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 11 
 
 
21. In this context, he wished to refer briefly to  the negotiations on intellectual property.  El 
Salvador welcomed the detailed report on the Direct or-General's consultations with some Members 
concerning the extension of the protection of GIs and the TRIPS/CBD issue.  His delegation noted 
that these consultations did not prejudge Members'  positions and that they constituted a forum for 
holding technical discussions and clarifying these positions.  While El Salvador understood that 
consultations held under the mandate set out in paragraph 39 of the Hong Kong Declaration, as well 
as in the Doha Declaration, it wished to stress th e need for them to be representative of all the 
positions put forward on these issues, which were of  fundamental interest to his delegation.  
Document TN/C/W/52, which had been submitted by  several Members in Ju ly 2008, proposed that 
the negotiations on intellectual prope rty should be part of the horizontal process based on the Single 
Undertaking principle, thus putting the issues invol ved on a parallel footing.  Although his country 
recognized the merits of this proposal, it saw a pr oblem with this position, mainly because of the 
attempt to put the issues on a parallel footing.  It  was essential that all discussions on this matter be 
based on the clear mandates from Ministers.  As his delegation had pointed out on numerous 
occasions, each of these issues should be dealt with i ndividually and on its own merits.  El Salvador 
would encourage continued technical discussions on the establishment of the multilateral register, 
which had yet to be completed and for which th ere was a negotiating mandate.  Consequently, the 
Chairpersons of the TRIPS Council in both regular  and special sessions should provide a factual 
report on these discussions, in order to preserve the principle of no surprises in this process, 
particularly in view of the forthcoming Minist erial Conference, because discussions on the three 
issues had not reached the stage at which they could be taken to a higher level. 
22. The representative of Burkina Faso , on behalf of the C-4 , requested that the statement by 
Chad on behalf of the C-4 at the 24 July informal  TNC meeting be reflected in the records of the 
present meeting.5  After a mission to the United States from 20-23 July to raise awareness of the 
cotton issue, the C-4 trusted that the US Ambassa dor, on return to his country, would continue to 
monitor the cotton issue closely and would help to promote it wherever he might be. 
23. The representative of Guatemala  said that like many other delegations, Guatemala was 
encouraged by the political statements made by wo rld leaders against protectionism and by their firm 
resolve to press ahead with the Doha Round negotiati ons.  Fortunately or unfortunately, these political 
statements were valid only for a very limited time.  As a result, there was a need to translate words 
into action quickly.  Failing this, Members ran th e risk of losing credibility and wasting the 
momentum created by the international situati on to conclude the negotiations.  Guatemala was 
committed to the Round and to this organization.  However, the negotiations should not be concluded 
at any cost.  First, it was important that, throughout this complex Round, Members bore in mind and respected the mandates agreed by Ministers in Doha eight years earlier.  Respect for mandates 
included due regard for the development dimension.   Second, with regard to the process, when 
planning future work it was important to recognize the various stages which had been reached in the 
work of each of the Negotiating Groups.  It was cl ear that some had made more progress than others, 
which was not surprising, given that each issue had its own dynamics and its own complexity.  In that 
regard, once the political will expressed by world l eaders materialized into a definite date for 
concluding the Doha Round negotia tions, it would be easier to organize the work with a view to 
achieving that objective.  The organization of this work should be adapted to the dynamics of each 
group.  After all, like all good wine – and in the case of Guatemala, like all good rum – quality 
depended not only on tech nique, but also on the necessary maturation time. 
24. With regard to the Director-General's repor t on implementation issues – CBD/TRIPS and the 
extension of the protection for GIs – his delegatio n wished to thank the Director-General for his 
efforts to hold consultations and clarify the scope  relating to these two implementation issues, and 
also for his report to Members the previous day.  Guatemala had had the opportunity to participate in 
the consultation process led by DDG Yerxa, but not in the consultation and clarification exercise 
                                                     
 
5 The statement is reproduced in Annex II to the present records. WT/GC/M/121 
Page 12  
 
  initiated with a limited group of delegations.  For th at reason, his delegation asked that consultations 
be held in a more inclusive manner, so that th e interests of all Members were duly represented, 
especially those of small developing countries such as Guatemala, which had limited experience in the 
area of GIs and whose main regime for the protectio n of distinctive signs was the trademark system.  
He reiterated that Guatemala maintained reservations regarding the extension of protection to 
products other than wines and spirits, given that this  had legal and trade implications for his country.  
For this reason, the extension of this protection me rited further technical discussion.  For example, it 
was essential to know the justification for adopti ng higher levels protection.  In other words, 
Guatemala wished to have further information from the proponents of higher protection concerning 
the need to extend protection and their level of e xperience in this area.  It would also appreciate 
practical examples, in particular concerning the s ubstantive trade effects and the reasons warranting 
changes to the balance of rights and obligations under the TRIPS Agreement.  With regard to 
TRIPS/CBD, his country – which was extremely rich in genetic resources and which had a mainly indigenous population – attached pa rticular importance to this issu e and believed that it had been 
discussed exhaustively in the TRIPS Council.  The disclosure proposal was now relatively mature and 
therefore offered an appropriate solution to this matte r.  However, for progress to be made in relation 
to the CBD, the issue needed to be  dealt with independently from the extension of the protection of 
GIs, given that both issues had their own unique ness and were at different stages in terms of 
discussion. 
25. The representative of Cuba
 requested that his delegation's st atement at the 24 July informal 
TNC meeting be reflected in the records of the present meeting.6  His delegation wished to thank the 
Director-General for his reports both on the informal TNC meeting and on the previous day's meeting 
on TRIPS issues.  Cuba endorsed the statements by El Salvador, and more recently Guatemala, calling 
for the concerns and positions of sma ll delegations to be taken on board in dealing with this topic.  It 
also supported the idea of separating the issue of TRIPS/CBD from GI extension.  This would help 
re-energize the treatment of these topics.  His delega tion had listened with great interest to the various 
statements under this agenda item, many of which co incided with others made at the 24 July informal 
TNC meeting.  Cuba associated itself with the st atement by Argentina, which in many respects 
coincided with its own.  It also endorsed India's stat ement.  Cuba further agreed that, regrettably, the 
Negotiation Groups under the NAMA and Agriculture ma ndate had not received the needed impetus.  
In this connection, he recalled the words of Cuba's  best-known author, José Martí, to the effect that 
the best way of saying something was by doing it.  Many statements made both at the informal TNC 
meeting and at the present meeting had referred to  the gap between policy statements and what was 
actually taking place in the negotiations.  His de legation too would be happy to see those policy 
statements translated into tangible progress in this  framework.  There was talk of work programmes 
for September, but so far one had seen no concrete st atement regarding flexibility, in particular from 
the main players in these negotiations.  Cuba also wished to refer to the statement that Members 
needed fixed timeframes for September.  He regre tted having to repeat what his delegation had said 
on numerous occasions, which was that Members coul d not go on setting artificial dates, because not 
only would this undermine the credibility of the negotiating process, but it would – to echo the language of Argentina's statement – also undoubtedly derail the tremendous effort already invested in 
the Doha Round. 
26. The representative of Pakistan
 said Members were at present grappling with technical and 
political issues in moving towards the conclusion of the much-coveted Doha Round.  While there 
were still unresolved imbalances, that did not milita te against adherence to the Doha mandate, the 
development principle and an inclusive transparen t approach.  Members had indeed entered the phase 
of the end game.  He would not take up technical issues or point out the intricacies that might unfold.  However, he wished to underscore that this spurred activism involved collective consciousness, 
unflinching resolve, a spirit of accommodation a nd mutual understanding.  Engagement had to 
                                                     
 
6 The statement is reproduced in Annex II to the present records.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 13 
 
 
continue unabated at all levels and in all mode s to provide the necessary impetus and momentum to 
both substance and process.  It was the multilateral track that commanded primacy.  In an uncertain 
economic scenario, the Doha Round assumed even gr eater importance in ensuring that trade was 
allowed to play its role in mitigating damage to  economies.  This involved eschewing protectionism 
and reducing all barriers to trade.  His delegation wished to reiterate that  it attached special and 
increasing importance to constructive and positive engagement, not only regarding the big-ticket 
issues, but also other areas, to ensure balanced pr ogress towards the culmination of the Round.  It had 
been pointed out that there were gaps between th e political statements and the work in Geneva.  
Pakistan recognized that the last few strides were always difficult, but urged that the two avenues – 
the political engagement and the technical work in Ge neva – had to continue until they converged at a 
propitious time when Members coul d achieve their collective objective.  
27. The representative of the United States  thanked the Director-General for the orientation his 
report provided for work in the coming months.  He wished to clarify the US view on how it saw the bilaterals fitting into the negotiating process, and to  make a short statement on the "disconnect" issue 
– the difference between what leaders were saying and what appeared to be the case on the ground in 
Geneva – to which some had referred.  First, the United States subscribed fully to the primacy of the 
multilateral process and agreed with the Director-Gen eral that Members need ed to intensify work 
across the full scope of the negotiations.  There wa s no reason to hold up any part of the multilateral 
process because of any bilateral processes that we re going on.  A number  of delegations had 
expressed their views on the speed and duration of th e bilaterals, and several had talked about the 
need to ensure they did not go on too long.  As  had been said by other delegations, bilaterals per se  
were nothing new to the process.  They were always part of negotiations.  That said, the United States, 
as others, was promoting intensified bilaterals as a way of getting ar ound the roadblocks that had been 
repeatedly encountered and that Members needed to ge t beyond if they were to succeed.  Thus, in the 
US view the bilaterals were not so much a phase th at needed to be completed before Members moved 
to another phase, but rather they would need to continue until collectively Members were ready to 
move to scheduling under the "no surprises" concep t.  His country saw the scheduling as the final 
stage – other than simply verifying those schedules – to ensure there were no surprises.  It saw the 
bilaterals not as some sort of occasional consultatio n, but as serious negotiations to create the final 
Doha package that all could accept.  Therefore, th e United States understood that there would have to 
be some sort of multilateralization, some sort of tran sparency associated with th e bilaterals so that all 
felt that as they moved to scheduling, they knew what  they were going to get.  On the issue of the 
disconnect, there was a saying that "we have met the enemy and it was us".  If there was a disconnect 
between leaders' statements and what was going on in  Geneva, it was up to dele gations in Geneva to 
fix it.  One thing that would undoubtedly be required of all was work in capitals to ensure that they 
were actually in a position to negotiate in Geneva , as their leaders were expecting.  His delegation 
knew from its own experience that one of the bi ggest problems was convincing its Ministries and 
colleagues in capital that this really was the fi nal push for the Doha package, because all were 
reluctant to make those difficult decisions unless th ey were certain this was the final push.  His 
delegation was aware off this and was workin g on it, and hoped others would do the same. 
28. The representative of Australia
 said he had not intended to intervene but that comments by 
one or two delegations had encouraged him to do so .  Australia agreed with  the Director-General's 
report, particularly with the need for urgency and in tensification of real negotiations if Members were 
to reach the goal of completing the Round in 2010  demanded by Ministers most recently at the APEC 
meeting in Singapore.  At the 24 July informal TNC meeting his delegation had said that the gap 
between what Ministers were demanding and what de legations in Geneva were doing was getting to 
the stage of being an embarrassment, and that was still the situation.  Australia also agreed with those, 
such as India, who had urged that work across all areas of the negotiations be speeded up.  However 
in doing so Members had to recognize that th e implementation issues of GI extension and 
TRIPS/CBD simply did not have an agreed mandate  and did not fall under the Single Undertaking.  
Like El Salvador, Guatemala and Cuba, his country would also see real benefits in these issues being 
treated separately.  They were quite different issu es which commanded different levels of support in WT/GC/M/121 
Page 14  
 
  the WTO.  In the case of GI extension, there w as not even agreement as to whether there was a 
problem that needed to be addressed.  The situa tion on TRIPS/CBD was markedly different, and these 
issues should be treated separately. 
29. The representative of China
 said his country shared the Director-General's view that all 
Members should have a sense of urgency to conc lude the Round in 2010.  Such early conclusion 
would help fight protectionism and give a positive signal for overcoming the current financial and 
economic crisis.  China hoped that for Agriculture  and NAMA, more work could be done after the 
summer break to solve the outstanding issues in mo dalities, while preparing the technical work for 
scheduling, as modalities were the basis for the sch eduling work.  China agreed with the Director-
General that 80 per cent of the negotiations were al ready completed.  Members' future work should 
build on the progress already made, aim at resolvi ng the outstanding 20 per cent and not reopen what 
was on the table in a selective manner.  Second, Memb ers should always keep in mind that this was a 
development Round.  Therefore, the concerns of de veloping countries should be the top priorities, in 
particular the special concerns of LDCs.  Chin a strongly supported the positions of the LDCs on 
cotton, duty-free-quota-free treatment for LDCs and the LDC Services waiver, among others, as 
expressed by Zambia.  Third, as India and Argentina had said, the bulk of Members' energy should be 
devoted to the multilateral process.  Bilateral engagement might play some complimentary role, but it 
should not and could not replace the multilateral pro cess.  Both should be fully transparent.  The 
bilateral talks were for the purpose of tran sparency and not for negotiating flexibilities. 
30. The representative of Switzerland  said he wished to touch briefly on the political environment 
and to make a few comments both on the substance and on the process.  With regard to the substance, 
he wished to thank the Chairpersons of the Ag riculture and NAMA negotiations for enlightening 
Members on the reality of the schedules of conces sions.  With regard to Services, Members should 
have a political debate on the impact of the crisis on the regulation of Services,  particularly Financial 
Services.  After all, this was where Members face d the greatest risk of being exposed to financial 
protectionism.  His delegation was convinced that a debate of this kind coul d give an additional boost 
to the rules aspects of the Services negotiations.  With regard to the negotiations on Rules, 
Switzerland hoped Members would join forces to exercise maximum restraint in the use of 
instruments such as anti-dumping meas ures.  In Agriculture, Members were  still searching for a 
balance between liberalization goals and the ob jective of developing sustainable agriculture 
worldwide.  With regard to Trade and the Environm ent, together with the issue of market access for 
environmental goods, work towards achieving the pro cedural objectives should be stepped up so that 
progress could be reported in this area as well.  Re garding Aid for Trade, his delegation wished to 
reiterate its gratitude to the Director-General for his skilful management of a matter that was 
becoming increasingly important, as even the Swiss we re realizing.  Regarding the TRIPS-related 
issues, he merely wished to recall, for the benefit of those who were not aware, that the two subjects 
actually had something in common – a procedural aspect  – and this aspect should be dealt with in the 
same way.  Therefore, adequate procedures needed to be found in order for progress to be made in 
these vital areas.  Switzerland also wi shed to thank the Director-General  for all his efforts.  Achieving 
results in an ongoing exercise with participants with  such divergent views was already an admirable 
objective to meet. 
31. With regard to the process, Switzerland, like others, supported parallel progress in all areas, 
and if there was convergence – and it was hoped that in autumn Members would be able to see such 
convergence – Members could consider drawing up text s in all areas.  Switzerland also endorsed the 
Director-General's idea to hold restricted horizon tal consultations which w ould no doubt be followed 
by the transparency necessary for the success of the initiative.  Las tly, his country acknowledged that 
there was also a need for transpar ency in bilateral discussions so that all Members were aware of 
developments.  He wished to support the statem ent by Hong Kong, China concerning protectionism.  
His delegation reiterated its invitation to all Member s to support that statement and to consider how it 
could be developed in order to avoid abuses of ex isting flexibilities in the present crisis situation.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 15 
 
 
32. The representative of Bangladesh  said his delegation supported the statements by Tanzania 
for the LDC Group at the 24 July informal TNC meeting and at the present meeting.  His delegation wished to echo the statement by Zambia that LDC issues should not be pushed to the margin.  The 
LDCs' ambition was pure and simple – as the poorest  of the poor, they wanted market access in 
Agriculture, along with Cotton, NAMA, duty-free quota-free treatment, and the Services waiver, in 
order to reduce their poverty and embrace growth.  With this background, Bangladesh wanted to 
conclude the Round quickly, on the basis of the FI T theory enunciated by the General Council Chair – 
full participation, inclusiveness and transparen cy.  His delegation hoped that when the US 
Ambassador returned to his country, he would pe rsuade the US Administration to provide duty-free 
quota-free market access to LDCs in fulfilment of  the Hong Kong Declaration, following the good 
examples of other developed countries. 
33. The General Council took note
 of the Director-General's report and of the statements. 
2. Work Programme on Small Economies – Report by the Chairman of the Dedicated 
Session of the Committee on Trade and Development 
34. The Chairman  recalled that at its meeting in Febr uary and March 2002, the General Council 
had taken note of a framework and procedures fo r the conduct of the Work Programme on Small 
Economies, under which this Work Programme w ould be a standing item on the General Council's 
agenda.  The framework and procedures also pr ovided that the Committee on Trade and Development 
should report regularly to the General Council on th e progress of work in its Dedicated Sessions on 
this subject.  Furthermore, Ministers at Hong Kong had instructed the CTD, under the overall 
responsibility of the General Council,  to continue the work in the Dedicated Session and to monitor 
progress of the small economies' proposals in the ne gotiating and other bodies.  In December 2006, on 
the basis of a report by the Chair of the CTD in Dedicated Session, the General Council had taken note that Members in that body would be pursui ng the substantive work under the Small Economies 
Work Programme.  He invited Mr Servansing (Maur itius), Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the 
CTD, to report on the progress of work in this area since the May Council. 
35. Mr Servansing (Mauritius), Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the CTD
, reported that the 
CTD in Dedicated Session had met on 15 July and had considered an updated version of document 
WT/COMTD/SE/W/22/Rev.3 and Corr.1 which compile d proposals made on the treatment of SVEs 
in the various Negotiating Groups and other WTO bodies, their reflection in the different draft 
modalities and negotiating texts, and any decisions ta ken thus far on SVE issues.  Several delegations 
had welcomed the revised compilation and had request ed the Secretariat to keep updating it so as to 
reflect the latest developments concerning SVEs in  the negotiations and in the WTO committees.  He 
had also reported on work done to identify the scope  and possible repercussions of the economic crisis 
on the SVEs, as requested by Members in November 2008.  In this context, the SVE proponents had 
communicated their concerns to the Secretariat's Ec onomic Crisis Task Force,  which had taken them 
into consideration when preparing the Director-Gen eral's monitoring reports to the TPRB, including 
the latest one issued on 1 July 2009.  He wished  to express his  appreciation for the work done by 
Mr. Clarke (Barbados) as coordinator of the SVE proponents and also as former Chairman of the 
CTD.  The latter's leadership had made it possibl e to drive forward the Work Programme on Small 
Economies and achieve solid results. 
36. The representative of Barbados , on behalf of the SVEs , said the report by the Chair of the 
CTD in Dedicated Session factually captured the discussion at the group's most recent meeting and 
the continuing work of the SVEs in the negotiati ons, as well as the ongoing discussions they had been 
having with the WTO Task Force on the Economic Crisis, regarding the impact on their vulnerable economies of the global economic slowdown.  The SV Es would continue to dialogue and liaise with 
the Task Force to ensure their views were taken into account in further reports.  The SVEs also 
wished to thank the Secretariat for continuing to  update the monitoring document and for committing 
to reflect any new proposals or decisions that mi ght be taken regarding the Small Economies Work WT/GC/M/121 
Page 16  
 
  Programme.  As the SVEs continued to contribute  to the discussions in the Negotiating Groups and 
other WTO bodies, they remained active in the area of Aid for Trade, where a Ministerial statement 
on behalf of the SVEs had been delivered by th e Minister of Economic Affairs, Empowerment, 
Innovation, Trade, Industry, and Commerce of Barba dos at the Second Global Aid for Trade Review.  
In that statement a number of critical areas of impor tance to the SVEs in the Aid for Trade debate had 
been emphasized, and the SVEs looked forward to working with the WTO and their international 
development partners to ensure that the SVEs c ontributed to and benefited from the Aid for Trade 
work programme.  As Members began discussions on the upcoming Ministerial meeting, the SVEs 
would be working within the CTD in Dedicated Se ssion to determine how best to reflect the progress 
and priorities of the SVEs Work Programme in any reports to Ministers.  They would operate under 
the principle that the Work Programme had been mandated by Ministers, had succeeded in addressing 
some of the SVEs' needs and continued to serve as a useful vehicle to allow them to pool their 
negotiating resources to achieve a common negotiating goal.  The SVEs would continue to promote 
this as an important medium to ensure the furthe r integration of their vulnerable economies into the 
global trading system and to seek appropriate flexib ilities in line with their structural differences.  
They once again committed themselves to the Work Programme and to finding appropriate solutions 
to their systemic problems. 
37. The General Council took note
 of the report of the Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the 
Committee on Trade and Development and of the statement. 
3. Transparency for Preferential Trade Arrangem ents – Statement by the Chairman of the 
Committee on Trade and Development 
38. The Chairman  recalled that in December 2006, the Council had adopted a Decision with 
regard to Transparency for Preferential Trad e Arrangements, under which the Committee on Trade 
and Development had been asked to consider transparency for preferential arrangements under 
paragraph 2 of the Enabling Clause – other than RT As – and to report back within six months for 
appropriate action by the General Council.  The De cision had been adopted without prejudice to the 
results of the deliberations of the CTD.  Subseque ntly, in July and December 2007, and again in July 
and December 2008, on the basis of reports from the Chairman of the CTD, the General Council had 
agreed to extend by successive six-month periods the deadline for the CTD to c onsider this matter and 
to report back for appropriate action.  The lat est extension ran until July 2009.  He invited 
Mr Servansing (Mauritius), Chairman of the Committee on Trade and Development, to report on the Committee's consideration of this matter since his last report in December. 
39. Mr Servansing (Mauritius), Chairman of the Committee on Trade and Development
, recalled 
that he had informed the General Council in Decemb er 2008 of the circulation of a draft proposal by 
Brazil, China, India and the United States on a Transparency Mechanism for Preferential Trade 
Arrangements.  The draft proposal in JOB(08)/103 had been introduced by the proponents at the October 2008 meeting of the CTD.  Subsequently, he  had held several rounds of small-group informal 
consultations in order to give Members an opportunity to  consider it in detail, and to try to iron out as 
many outstanding issues as possible.  The delegations  involved in these small-group consultations had 
included the four proponents as well as Barbados, Canada, Chile, the EC, El Salvador, Japan, New 
Zealand, Norway and St. Lucia.  These consultations  had continued into the early part of 2009.  In 
light of the discussions and comments made in these small-group informal consultations, the proponents had indicated they wished to hold further consultations with intere sted delegations with a 
view to revising their draft proposal.  He ha d encouraged the proponents to continue these 
consultations, so as to be in a position to finali ze their revised document as soon as possible, and the 
consultations were continuing.  He stood ready to  convene small-group meeti ngs as soon as he heard 
back from the proponents, and to then call an in formal, open-ended meeting of the Committee to 
consider the revised proposal.  At the same meeting,  he would also like Members to consider a mock 
Secretariat factual presentation of a PTA, which would be based on the GSP scheme of the United  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 17 
 
 
States.  While progress had certainly been made  on this matter, there were still a number of 
outstanding issues to settle.  He was optimistic that  Members would be able to sort out these issues, 
but it was clear that more time would be required be fore this could be done and before the CTD would 
be in a position to take a decision.  As he had informed Members at the July 2009 CTD meeting, he 
intended to continue working with Members on this  matter.  He would see how the process could be 
moved forward, with a view to having the prop onents' revised draft proposal considered by the 
membership as soon as possible.  This matter would al so be taken up by the CTD at its next formal 
meeting.  On this basis, the CTD had agreed at its July meeting that a request for more time to deal 
with this matter should be made to the General Council.  Therefore,  he requested that the General 
Council allow the CTD until December 2009 to consider  this matter and report back for appropriate 
action. 
40. The representative of Brazil  expressed his delegation's thanks to the CTD Chair for the work 
he had been conducting on this issue.  This was an  absolutely crucial component of Members' work.  
While more progress could have been made in the re latively long time that had been devoted to this 
issue so far, no matter how intelligent and dedicated a chairman was, there was only so much he could 
achieve if Members did not contribute.  There had been some difficulties in the past, but Brazil was 
hopeful that all parties would continue to engage constructively and that a successful conclusion to 
this issue could be achieved in the following sem ester.  By successful conclusion he meant one that 
provided for full transparency in preferential trade arrangements. 
41. The General Council took note  of the report by the Chairman of the CTD and the statement, 
and agreed  that the deadline for the CTD to consider th is matter and to report back for appropriate 
action be extended to December 2009. 
4. Aid for Trade – Report by the Director-General on the Second Global Review 
42. The Chairman  recalled that the Second Global Review of Aid for Trade had taken place at the 
WTO on 6-7 July 2009, and invited the Directo r-General to report on this important event. 
43. The Director-General  said7 that at the Second Global Review of Aid for Trade, all the key 
partners had been represented at the highest level, thereby reaffirming their continued support to this 
initiative even in these difficult times.  The presence of the UN Secretary General, heads of 
international organizations and Mini sters had been a clear demonstration of their collective resolve to 
collaborate to address the capacity challenges facing  developing countries.  The assessment was that 
this conference had been successful in taking st ock of overall progress achieved since the initiative 
had been launched in 2005, and also in highlig hting the need for additional and substantive 
commitments from donors, particularly at the presen t juncture when developing countries were facing 
even bigger challenges as a result of the current globa l economic crisis.  The conference had also been 
successful in stressing the leadership role now pl ayed by many developing countries in articulating 
their priorities, with the support of regional econom ic communities.  In terms of moving forward on 
the Aid for Trade agenda, a few key issues had been identified as priorities for future work.  First, 
regarding the need to reinforce the regional dimensio n of aid for trade, it was encouraging to see that 
the regional partners, the regional development banks, regional economic commissions and regional 
integration communities had reaffirmed their commitm ent to play a leading role in this regard.  
Second, on the need to maintain momentum on co mmitments post 2010, he ha d already begun making 
this point to all donors in his interactions with them.  He had also raised this point in his interactions 
with leaders at the recently concluded G-8 summit in Italy and intended to continue to do so in future 
bilateral contacts.  He was happy to note that at  least at the present juncture, he had not heard any 
donor declaring its intention to scale down its Aid for Trade support.  In fact, a number of them had already indicated additional pledges to their 2005 fi gures, despite current budgetary constraints they 
were facing.  Third, the conference had also been unanimous on the need to enhance the role of the 
                                                     
 
7 The Director-General's statement was subse quently circulated in document JOB(09)/87. WT/GC/M/121 
Page 18  
 
  private sector in this initiative.  For his part, he would be consulting extensively with private-sector 
groups on this and had been assured by other Aid for Trade partners that they would be focussing on 
ensuring that the private sector was fully engaged. Lastly, the conference had highlighted the need to 
focus attention on evaluating the impact of Aid for Trade interventions in developing countries.  The 
rationale for this was very clear – for this initiative to maintain  the current level of political support, 
there was a need to demonstrate clearly and convi ncingly that Aid for Trade was bearing fruit on the 
ground and that the capacity to trade in developing  countries was effectively being enhanced.  He had 
already begun consulting with the WTO's partners to  borrow from their experiences in evaluation.  In 
sum, the Second Global Aid for Trade Review had provided a clear road map of work on Aid for Trade under the leadership of the CTD.  The Aid for Trade initiative had the potential to make the 
difference for developing countries' ability to r ealize the developmental gains from a successful 
conclusion of the Doha Development Agenda.  He re mained fully convinced that one was on the right 
track. 
44. The Chairman
 suggested that in the interests of effi ciency, Members not seek to replicate at 
the present meeting the discussion held during Sessi on 9 of the Second Global Review, and that any 
delegation wishing to have the statement it made on th e afternoon of 7 July refl ected in the records of 
the present meeting should contact the Secretariat after the meeting. 
45. The representative of Tanzania , on behalf of the LDC Group , said the Group viewed the 
Second Global Review as very timely, particularly in the context of the current global financial and 
economic crisis, which had had a dverse effects on LDCs.  The meeting had come against a very 
different backdrop than the buoyant global econom y that had existed during the First Global Review 
in 2007.  However, in view of the current globa l crisis, now more than ever, Aid for Trade was 
indispensable for helping LDCs to  build their supply-side capacity to enable them to penetrate 
international markets.  Effective implementati on of Aid for Trade required better coordination 
between donors and recipients in order to provide a more reliable platform for discussions aimed at 
addressing any specific gaps that might occur in th e course of such implementation.  In allocating 
resources for Aid for Trade, donors and agencies shoul d be guided by priority needs, projects and 
programmes identified by developing countries a nd LDCs.  The LDC Group strongly believed that 
needs identified under the Integrated Framework (IF ) – Diagnostic Trade Integration Studies (DTIS) 
and the governance structure already established under the IF facility – would be an essential 
foundation for strengthening the demand side of Aid for Trade in LDCs.  Aid for Trade should cover 
some trade capacity needs, partic ularly those identified in the DTIS  that were not addressed under the 
Enhanced IF.  The LDC Group attached great importan ce to Aid for Trade, as they considered it to be 
an effective vehicle for the meaningful integra tion of their economies into the multilateral trading 
system.  So far, the Group appreciated the regional Aid for Trade projects that had materialized, particularly in the North-South Corridor project th at had been launched in Africa by COMESA, EAC 
and SADC to address infrastructure and energy challenges, as well as the Greater Mekong Sub-region 
Program, with support from the Asian Developm ent Bank and other donors, to implement high-
priority sub-regional projects in transport, ener gy, telecommunications, environment, human resource 
development, tourism, trade, private sector investment and agriculture. 
46. The representative of Japan
 said a successful outcome of the Doha Round would bring 
benefits to all Members, in particular developing-coun tries. In this connection, he wished to stress that 
open trade and Aid for Trade were two wheels of the same cart to put Members back on track for 
growth and to overcome the current economic turmoil.  Bearing this in mind, Japan had announced at 
the Second Global Review the Development Initiati ve for Trade 2009, through which Japan would 
provide US$12 billion through bilateral assistance  and technical assistance for 40,000 persons from 
2009 to 2011 for Aid for Trade.  This was a US$2 billion increase from the previous one, against the financial difficulties the Director-General had explained.  All Members who were prepared to do so 
could deliver assistance to developing countries in  cooperation with the World Bank, the OECD and 
the regional development banks.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 19 
 
 
47. The representative of Peru  said his delegation wished to acknowledge and express 
appreciation for the leadership shown by the Directo r-General and the Secretariat in this matter.  The 
Aid for Trade initiative was of substantial interest not only to the developing countries, but to the 
entire membership, since all Members would undoubted ly benefit – particularly in the current 
circumstances – from its main outcome, which was the increased participation of all countries in 
world trade.  The statement by Japan could not prov ide a more encouraging illustration of the concrete 
commitment made by donors to turn this programme into reality.  His delegation wished to thank the 
Director-General for inviting it to participate in one  of the Second Global Review sessions.  On that 
occasion, Peru had been able to share its experi ences relating to the incorporation of trade into 
national development and competitiveness strategies, a nd, in particular, its experience of the private 
sector's active participation in the country's trad e policy.  Peru had prioritized foreign trade, 
considering it a fundamental tool and engine for the development of its economy, on the basis of 
which it was possible to improve the quality of life of its population and reduce poverty.  His country was flattered that it was considered a model in te rms of Aid for Trade, and this reaffirmed its 
commitment to continue expanding and improving g ood practices in this area.  To accompany this 
deeper commitment by Peru, which had to be shar ed by all countries associated with the Aid for 
Trade initiative, the donor countries also had to make  a deeper commitment to ensure that the most 
substantial Aid for Trade flows announced by certa in countries and financial institutions during the 
Second Global Review were channelled effectivel y towards tangible actions for the associated 
countries.  It was therefore important to perf ect monitoring and coordination and to improve 
information on how to access resources within the fra mework of this initiative, as had been suggested 
by the Director-General in his concluding remarks on the Second Global Review.  Peru hoped it 
would be possible to address this and other issues related to the Aid for Trade initiative at the next 
Ministerial Conference. 
48. The representative of Ecuador
 said his delegation welcomed the Director-General's report and 
wished to make a few small points.  Aid for Trad e should be non-repayable.  Moreover, it should be 
preferential, unconditional, non-concessional and pr ovided in addition to Official Development 
Assistance.  Otherwise, one would return to the vicious circle of permanent indebtedness with the 
resulting burden for developing countries.  The centr al objective of Aid for Trade should not be to 
promote trade in itself, but rather – and this was ve ry different – to promote better conditions for fair 
trade.  Ecuador was looking for trading partners who valued a type of trade that fostered human 
development.  Furthermore, his de legation was concerned to note that, despite the increase in Aid for 
Trade, Latin America and the Caribbean continued to derive relatively limited benefits from such aid.  
For that reason, it was calling for this aid to not be concentrated among a small number of countries or 
regions, but instead for it to be distributed on the basis of real support for the development of all developing countries.  Regarding the document entitled "Aid for Trade at a Glance 2009", Ecuador 
noted with regret that, due to the urgency with which the document had been drawn up, there had not 
been enough time for the countri es assessed to check and to expr ess their agreement with the 
information provided.  Thus, under the heading "Basic indicators" on page 178, concerning the profile 
of Ecuador, the study indicated that Ecuador's  annual gross domestic product per capita was 
US$7,398, when in reality, on the basis of info rmation from the World Bank itself, his country's 
annual per capita income was US$3,110. 
49. The representative of the European Communities
 said the EU wished to thank the WTO for 
bringing Aid for Trade onto the international age nda and for fostering policy dialogue.  The WTO had 
an important role to play as an advocate for ma intaining the momentum on Aid for Trade, supported 
by other relevant organizations.  Although the EU would have wished to see more discussion on the 
way forward, the Second Global Review had been a success.  It had brought together all relevant 
players at high level, from both donors and partner countries, with a clear message on a strong, shared 
commitment to the Aid for Trade initiative.  The EU was strongly committed to the Aid for Trade 
initiative and would continue to play a full and active role, including in respect of financial support.  
This had been demonstrated by, inter alia , the announcement during the Global Review by three EU 
member States – the UK, France and the Netherland s – of additional specific commitments totalling WT/GC/M/121 
Page 20  
 
  about Euros 2.5 billion.  The EU also supported the Director-General's conclusions on the importance 
of (i) strengthening the regional dimension of Aid for Trade, (ii) involving the private sector, and 
(iii) focussing on impact evaluation. The EU also  considered making progress on aid effectiveness to 
be a key priority area for future efforts. 
50. The representative of Brazil
 said his delegation appreciated the Director-General's personal 
involvement in the Aid for Trade initiative, which ha d helped raise the political profile of the topic 
since 2005.  Aid for Trade had become a success story, as witnessed by the increasing levels of 
resources committed to it.  Brazil also commended th e Secretariat, and DDG Rugwabiza in particular, 
for their hard work in the past months, which ha d set the stage for the success of the Second Global 
Review.  The efforts by donors and partners to mainstream the concept of Aid for Trade in their 
domestic agenda were noteworthy.  The much hi gher response rate from partner countries to the 
questionnaire, if compared to the first exercise in  2007, was remarkable.  Br azil was also pleased to 
see that, despite the current economic and financial cr isis, donors had pledged to increase the levels of 
assistance in the near future.  It hoped those pledg es would be met.  As to the way forward, more 
active participation of Members throughout the whol e process of the monitoring exercise could be 
achieved if one put in place a better coordina tion mechanism among developing countries themselves 
and also with the Secretariat.  Consultative sessions could be arranged with that aim.  Also, delegations would benefit if formal sessions of th e CTD on Aid for Trade were scheduled further in 
advance.  Those practical measures might help Memb ers to have a more fluid debate whenever the 
CTD met on Aid for Trade.  He reiterated his dele gation's satisfaction in relation to the treatment 
given to South-South Cooperation during the Second  Global Review.  In peri ods of economic crisis, 
countries had a tendency to rely even more on th eir intra-regional trade, thus requiring further 
coordination within their regions that favoured th e establishment of South-South partnerships.  The 
break-out sessions during the Second Global Revi ew had highlighted the importance developing-
country Members attached to infrastructure in their regional undertakings.  Brazil looked forward to strengthening the fruitful exchanges regarding South-South cooperation. 
51. The representative of El Salvador
 said his delegation wished to thank the Director-General 
and the Secretariat for their contribution to what his country considered to have been a successful 
effort in the Aid for Trade area and for their ro le in the Second Global Review.  His country's own 
experience had shown it how important, indeed fu ndamental, the mobilization of resources in El 
Salvador had been, and his Government was convinced  that these resources would serve to alleviate 
the impact of the present crisis and, more importantly , enable it to take advantage of the benefits of 
the opening up of trade.  El Salvador therefore ag reed with the Director-General and encouraged him 
to continue assessing the impact of these initiatives on the relevant economies.  At the same time, just 
as it was important to solicit the contribution of the donor community, it was also important to thank 
them for having remained firm in their commitmen ts and for their contributions to these efforts. 
52. The representative of Barbados , on behalf of the SVEs , requested that his delegation's 
statement on behalf of the SVEs at the Second Gl obal Review be reflected in the records of the 
present meeting.8  That statement reaffirmed the importance of the Aid for Trade mandate to SVEs 
and also pointed out some specific areas where SVEs could benefit from this topic.  The Second Global Review and the regional Aid for Trade meet ing for Latin American and Caribbean countries 
held in Jamaica had continued to raise the profile of  Aid for Trade in that region.  The SVEs thanked 
the Director-General, DDG Rugwabiza and the Secretar iat for organizing what they considered to be a 
highly effective Second Global Review. 
53. The representative of Trinidad and Tobago
, on behalf of CARICOM , said the review had 
been most encouraging, given the commitments expressed by the donor Community to increase their 
support and financial contributions to Aid for Trade.  It was clear  that a considerable distance 
                                                      
8 The statement is reproduced in Annex III to the present records.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 21 
 
 
remained to be travelled in optimising the benefits of a broad-based global strategy for Aid for Trade, 
so as to ensure an equitable distribution of benef its to all developing countries, including those of 
Latin America and the Caribbean.  CARICOM had been  pleased to participate actively in the review, 
and he requested that the statement by Guyana on behalf of CARICOM at the Second Global Review 
be included in the records of the present meeting.9 
54. The representative of China  said his delegation highly appreciated the comprehensive report 
by the Director-General on the Second Global Revi ew.  He wished to congratulate the WTO on the 
successful conclusion of this review and to th ank the Secretariat and DDG Rugwabiza for their 
tireless efforts in making it happen.  The review ha d been conducted at the most opportune time, when 
the world was experiencing a crisis unprecedented si nce the 1930s, with the developing countries, 
particularly the least developed among them, hit th e hardest.  China was enco uraged by the outcome 
of this review, which demonstrated that moment um should be maintained and aid flow could be 
sustained.  The pledges made by some develope d countries, such as Japan and the EU, during the 
review were highly welcome.  China called upon ot her developed countries to follow their lead to 
make Aid for Trade an important investment that could help many developing countries to exit the 
crisis.  As his delegation had said during the revi ew, South-South cooperation was a growing trend.  
China was making every effort to provide assistance within its capacity to other developing countries, 
and was committed to making further contributions to this initiative.  He reiterated the close 
relationship between Aid for Trade and the Doha Round.  As Cambodia had said during the review, 
Aid for Trade and the Doha Round were Siamese tw ins.  They could not be separated, because they 
shared one heart.  Therefore, speedy conclusion of the Doha Round and maintaining the momentum 
of Aid for Trade were the key priorities of the WTO in the current period of economic downturn and 
needed collective efforts from all Members. 
55. The representative of Zambia  said his delegation wished to thank the Director-General for 
maintaining the momentum with regard to Aid for Trade.  He wished to give an example of the 
practical results of Aid for Trade, particularly w ithin the context of Southern Africa.  The three 
regional groups – SADC, COMESA and EAC – had me t at summit level on 22 October, and there had 
been two key outputs.  One was that the three regions  had to be collapsed into one free-trade area.  
The other was that the countries involved needed to  focus on the development of corridors to promote 
trade within the region and also promote trade intern ationally.  The key issues were the need for these 
countries to create a competitive environment at th e regional level, to reduce the cost of doing 
business and to enhance their opportunity to meet the Millennium Development Goals.  They had 
called for a meeting to be held in April in Lusaka to begin the process of mobilizing resources.  Prior 
to this meeting, work had been done to identify th e corridors, and one of the key corridors identified 
was the North-South Corridor, covering almost 12 countries within Southern Africa.  The countries 
involved had identified the routes and the projects to be carried out on these routes, as well as the bottlenecks.  For example, Zambia was at the centre of this corridor.  At present it took approximately 
ten days to transport a 20-foot container to Durban.  The target was to reduce this to four days.  At 
present it cost almost Zambia US$250 to take a 20-foot container to Durban, making it totally uncompetitive – even if it had market access, that  access would be irrelevant, because the goods could 
not be transported competitively.  As one had to d eal with first things first, a pledging conference had 
been held in Lusaka in April with two key focu ses – the transport infrastructure and the energy 
infrastructure.  Regarding the transport infrastructur e, pledges to the extent of US$1.4 billion had been 
made in Lusaka, with US$1.3 billion for the energy infrastructure.  Of all the pledging conferences 
held in Africa, in terms of an integrated commitmen t, this had been one of the major ones.  Zambia 
now had US$2.7 billion of pledges to support the removal of bottlenecks within the context of the North-South Corridor.  Since April, the countries had worked hard.  First, at the national level, the countries along the corridor had to identify what compone nts each would be able to contribute to the 
North South Corridor, as well as what needed to be done at the regional level.  They had also 
identified the elements that did not require mone y – things that the countries could do themselves, 
                                                     
 
9 The statement is reproduced in Annex III to the present records WT/GC/M/121 
Page 22  
 
  such as documentation, creating order at border posts, creating lanes for vehicles and separating 
passenger vehicles from others, etc.  These did not require money or Aid for Trade – just order and sanity at the regional level.  These things were be ing done at the regional level.  The countries were 
also addressing having common docum entation along the corridor.  This was critically important in 
order to realize the comp etitiveness the region needed. 
56. Projects had been packaged.  Some were viable  from the perspective of the private sector.  
Others necessarily be had to be done by government s, because they did not generate a return.  Also 
included in the framework was work being called pr ivate-public sector portions.  For those sections 
along the corridors where there was high traffic, th ese could be packaged by the private sector in 
association with governments.  Regarding the prog ress made since April, these countries were anxious 
to show that this actually worked – given that not hing succeeded like success.  One of the projects that 
would be commissioned in September 2009 was th e Chirundu one-stop border post, which was a key 
component on the route of the North-South Corridor.  At present at this border post, it took five days 
to transit between Zambia and Zimbabwe.  The inte ntion was that in September this would take under 
four hours, with a phenomenal impact on cost.  They were also looking at Beit Bridge as part of the 
next level, because whatever efficiencies one gain ed at Chirundu could be eroded if one did not deal 
with the problems there.  They were also looki ng northwards at Kasumbalesa, which was at the 
Zambia and Congo DR border, so that the whole corri dor achieved a certain level of efficiency at the 
border posts.  The goal was to achieve the result sought.  The countries involved invited the Director-General to attend the opening of Chirundu, as they needed to show that this arrangement actually 
worked and was producing results.  It was critica lly important, particularly for his country's 
cooperating partners, to see that r esources were being used appropriate ly and delivering results.  Even 
more important was that this was one of the first co rridors to be implemented in Africa.  If this was 
not done right, it would kill the entire initiative of  Aid for Trade.  Thus, the countries involved had a 
responsibility at the regional and globa l level to make sure that they did this correctly so that other 
corridors could also benefit and could be implemented on the basis of what was actually being done.  
The responsibility was colossal and was taken extrem ely seriously by the countries along the corridor.  
They had created institutional mechanisms fo r receiving the pledges, for monitoring, for 
implementation and for prioritizi ng and sequencing the work along the corridor.  Thus, the support 
these countries sought was (i) assistance in the conversion of the commitment and the pledges, particularly those made in Lusaka and at the first gl obal review, into funds in the basket of the North-
South Corridor;  and (ii) provision of approximate ly US$10 billion in order to address the region's 
energy deficiency – US$1.3 billion had already b een raised.  What these countries were offering in 
return was that they had moved away from looking at projects at the national level and were looking 
at them at a regional level.  In hydro devel opment, for example, one was no longer looking at 
individual countries but at the region and which country could produce that energy at the cheapest cost.  The idea was to put the plant in the count ry where the cost was cheapest.  Countries in the 
North-South Corridor were making progress and saw the importance of showing some success as 
early as possible, in order to maintain momentum an d enthusiasm, and also to show to their political 
constituencies that Aid for Trade act ually worked and was important. 
57. The Chairman
 said it was very interesting to have an example of what was actually being 
done with Aid for Trade resources, and that this was a call for action to combine the three elements of 
trade facilitation, Aid for Trade and open trade. 
58. The representative of Norway  said she wished to start by c ongratulating the Director-General 
and the Secretariat on the successful Second Global Re view.  This review clearly demonstrated the 
commitment from beneficiaries as well donors regarding the further implementation of this crucial 
initiative.  Momentum had been main tained even in a time of financial crisis.  Concerning the way 
forward, Norway had been pleased to see the focu s on the regional dimension during the review, 
which it agreed should be given further priority.  Members should continue to improve monitoring 
and evaluation, with targets for indicators and achieve ments.  Norway wished to reiterate that more  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 23 
 
 
attention should be given to women in trade, with a stronger emphasis on gender-specific analysis, 
and assigning trade development programmes woul d further improve the agenda.  Enhanced 
transparency was vital for good governance.  It was also one of the main priority areas in the 
Norwegian Aid for Trade action plan.  As was clear fr om the statement by the Minister of Zambia, the 
trade facilitation negotiations could make an impor tant contribution in this respect.  A trade 
facilitation agreement would also unlock further development of the Aid for Trade initiative.  With 
the Enhanced Integrated Framework now fully ope rational, it was important that LDCs use this 
opportunity to identify the needs and use of this tool. 
59. The representative of Rwanda  associated his delegation with the statement by Tanzania for 
the LDC Group and by Zambia.  Rwanda fully supp orted projects such as development of transport, 
infrastructure and trade facilitation which were cruc ial for all countries, particularly the landlocked 
ones.  It commended the Director-General for his repor t and particularly for his leadership in raising 
the profile of Aid for Trade worldwide, and co mmended DDG Rugwabiza for her dedication in the 
preparation and conduct of the Second Global Review.  Aid for Trade was becoming recognized as part of WTO work and as part of the DDA, as China had said, and this was raising the profile of the 
WTO and its credit.  A commitment by donor s to support productive capacities in developing 
countries and raising and expanding trade was a le gitimate recognition that this body was no longer 
supportive of mercantilist interests, but rather was an organization that defe nded and supported the 
interests of all trading partners, including the poor – which was an argument to discourage all activists 
against globalization and the WTO.  Rwanda ap preciated the development partners and their 
commitment to continue supporting this issue, a nd looked forward to the implementation of various 
projects, such as those highlighted by Zambia.  For future monitoring, his country of course supported 
this regional dimension and looked forward to elab orating clear indicators against which to measure 
performance.  Although the national approach was not very popular, some countries could volunteer 
to conduct national monitoring and evaluation which would show some cases that were successful.  
With commitment to shared collective responsibilit y, ownership and good governance, there was no 
reason Members could not succeed. 
60. The General Council took note
 of the Director-General's report and of the statements. 
5. Non-recognition of rights under Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of GATT 1994 – 
Communications from Honduras and Guatem ala (WT/GC/85, WT/GC/90 and Corr.1, 
WT/GC/100, WT/Min(05)/9) – Statement by the Chairman 
61. The Chairman  recalled that this matter had first been  raised by the delegations of Honduras 
and Guatemala at the Council meeting in December 2004 .  It had subsequently been considered by the 
General Council at each of its regular meetings sin ce then, without resolution.  In the light of the 
views expressed at these meetings, and the re quests for consultations made by Honduras and 
Guatemala and other delegations, his predecessors as Chair, and he, had held consultations regularly 
in order to assist in finding a way forward.  He recalled that the matter referred to the General Council 
concerned the non-recognition of claims of substa ntial interest submitted by Honduras and Guatemala 
in the very specific context of the EC's modification of its concessions as a result of enlargement from 15 to 25 members, and the modification of its  concession on bananas in its move to a tariff-only 
regime as from 1 January 2006.  This matter had been  brought to the General Council in keeping with 
Paragraph 4 of the 1980 Procedures for Negotiati ons under Article XXVIII, under which, when a 
Member renegotiating its Schedule did not recognize a claim of principal or substantial supplying 
interest, the Member making the claim "may refer the matter to the Council." 
62. At the May General Council meeting, he had reported to delegations on his most recent 
consultations.  In view of the statements made at  that meeting, he had proposed that the General 
Council revert to this matter at the present meet ing.  The previous day he had held further 
consultations on possible ways to find a solution to  the non-recognition issue.  He had invited to the 
consultations all delegations  who had spoken on this issue at previous meetings of the Council, and WT/GC/M/121 
Page 24  
 
  had made clear that the consultations were without  prejudice to any Member's rights under the WTO.  
While there had been little substantive development overall since the May Coun cil, the consultations 
had proved useful in clarifying both the current stat e-of-play and its ramifications, as well as the steps 
that were intended to be taken in the coming w eeks towards a resolution to the concerns of the 
delegations involved. 
63. The representative of Honduras
 said the legal and commercial arguments put forward by his 
country in an attempt to gain recognition by the EC of its interest as a substantial supplier were widely 
known, but he would reiterate them as they remain ed valid.  It was also known that on 27 July 2008 – 
exactly one year earlier – the EC and the Latin American countries had concluded an agreement providing a comprehensive solution to the banana is sue and, had the EC applied that agreement, the 
General Council would have  had no reason to be discussing the matter at the present meeting.  As a 
Latin American banana supplier, Honduras, togeth er with other countries in the region, had held 
meetings with the EC, but had been unable to conduc t genuine negotiations because the EC refused to 
lift conditions which should never have been put on th e table.  The following were some examples of 
the reasons Honduras could never accept the EC's c onditions:  the banana issue was not a matter of 
compliance by Latin America;  on the contrary, it was a question of securing compliance by the EC;  
Honduras was referring to measures which had most  often been condemned by the WTO dispute 
settlement system;  the most recent condemnatio n, originating from the Appellate Body in the 
Article 21.5 actions brought by Ecuador and the Unite d States, added weight to Latin America's case.  
Honduras was willing to negotiate, but had minimum requirements which had to be met if progress 
was to be made in the talks with the EC.  In brief, its requirements were as follows:  only the EC and 
Latin American countries should participate in the discussions;  the EC could not blame third parties 
or other circumstances for its failure to comply;  the banana agreement could not be subject to 
concessions on Honduras's part in respect of other products of interest to it;  Honduras had to have 
adequate safeguards to ensure that the EC w ould fulfil its WTO obligations;  the EC had to 
compensate Honduras for the losses incurred as a result of its delay.  The outlook at present was 
bleak, and if one considered that the EC was trying  to lay down conditions in the full knowledge that 
nobody could accept them, it was valid to ask whethe r there could be any doubt that the EC had no 
interest in putting an end to decades of non-comp liance and that, knowing the enormous cost its 
illegal measures had had and conti nued to have on developing economie s, it believed it had found the 
formula for imposing an unfair and completely unba lanced agreement which a fforded the parties no 
legal certainty.  This strategy would not work.  No one should assume that Honduras would accept an 
agreement at any cost, given that over the many years during which this dispute had been ongoing, it 
had put its trust in the dispute settlement system a nd was confident it would not be let down.  The ball 
was in the EC's court, because only the EC could put an end to the banana issue and therefore to this 
agenda item. 
64. The representative of Guatemala
 said he would not repeat what his delegation had been 
saying in the General Council for more than four years.   It had been firmly established at each of these 
meetings that Guatemala had a twofold interest in this matter and that the solution was dependent on 
the political will of the EC.  Together with showin g political will, the EC also had an obligation to 
rebuild its relationship of trust with the Latin Amer ican countries, after that trust had been severely 
shaken by events following the conclusion of  negotiations on the agreement on bananas on 
27 July 2008, which had taken place as if nothing had happened a year earlier.  A comprehensive 
solution to the banana issue would bring closure to  all ongoing disputes and legal proceedings relating 
to bananas, including the current claim under GATT Articles XXIV and XXVIII.  However, the 
ability to resolve once and for all the question of non -recognition of Guatemala's rights lay in the EC's 
hands.  He recalled that his dele gation's mandate was to protect Guatemala's commercial and systemic 
interests.  Guatemala would therefore continue to exercise its rights in this General Council and in any 
other relevant body of this organi zation until the EC effectively fulfille d its obligations in this regard.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 25 
 
 
65. The representative of Peru  said it was frustrating to see that the General Council's agenda  
once again included an issue which had first been raised in 2004, but for which no solution had been 
found to date.  As his delegation had stated on pr evious occasions, for Peru this subject was of 
particular systemic importance, because even though Honduras and Guatemala had been raising the 
issue of the non-recognition of their rights under Articles XXIV and XXVIII of the GATT 1994 since 
2004, any other developed or devel oping-country Member could raise a similar issue in the future.  
This was clearly not healthy for the multilateral trad ing system which all were striving to strengthen 
and promote.  For this reason, hi s delegation considered it vital a nd urgent that Honduras, Guatemala 
and the European Communities continue to engage  in the constructive dialogue they had always 
pursued, in order to come up with a prompt solution to  this matter.  Peru also welcomed the efforts the 
Chairman was making through his consultations on this issue and trusted that his leadership would 
facilitate an understanding between the de legations concerned as soon as possible. 
66. The representative of Colombia  said the issue under the present agenda item could have been 
solved in its entirety with the agreement conc luded by the European Communities and the Latin 
American countries exactly one year earlier.  Un fortunately, the EC had decided not to sign that 
agreement, and consequently, the parties involved had had to continue along the arduous path of 
dispute.  Colombia had begun a fairly complex nego tiating process to try to reach an agreement that 
took account of the interests of all parties, and was committed to that objective.  Colombia was 
confident that if there was sufficient flexibility, part icularly on the part of the European Communities, 
this agreement could materialize.  While Colomb ia was only moderately optimistic, it was entirely 
committed to pursuing efforts in that direction. 
67. The representative of Ecuador  thanked the Chairman for his re port and for his consultations.  
As had been said in the past, for his delegation th is was a systemic issue that was critical to the 
recognition of the rights of small exporters unde r Articles XXIV:6 and XXVIII of the GATT 1994.  
This agenda item had always sparked lengthy de bate on the whole banana problem, a debate which 
avoided the substance of the issue because of a decisi on by the EC to seek to resolve all of the matters 
relating to the long-standing banana dispute in a single package, including the complaint by Honduras 
and Guatemala.  On 11 December 2008 the DSB ha d adopted an Appellate Body report which once 
again upheld Ecuador's request and condemned the EC 's banana import regime.  To date, the EC had 
given no indication as to when it expected to comp ly with the DSB's recommendations and rulings in 
this case.  In addition, the EC had offered the MF N banana suppliers an agreement which was subject 
to a series of conditionalities that went far beyond  the banana dispute and made any understanding 
more complex.  These issues had nothing to do with compliance with the recommendations and 
rulings of the DSB in the dispute won by Ec uador and the compensation it claimed for the 
enlargement of the EU.  It was precisely for this r eason that Ecuador had been obliged to suspend the 
negotiations on the bilateral multi-pa rty agreement with the EU, in pr otest at the delay in resolving 
this dispute.  Nevertheless, Ec uador was still open to finding an immediate negotiated settlement in 
the WTO. 
68. The representative of Panama  said his delegation endorsed the statements by Honduras, 
Guatemala, Peru, Colombia and Ecuador on a matter  which had been on the General Council's agenda 
for a long time.  Panama hoped it would be possible to find a solution very soon and that the General 
Council would be able to rid itself of this issue once and for all. 
69. The representative of Mexico  said his delegation welcomed th e information provided on the 
consultations held the previous day by the Chairman  to resolve this matter.  Mexico reiterated its 
support for the requests for recognition of right s under Articles XXIV:6 and XXVIII and was very 
keen to see a satisfactory solution found as soon as  possible.  For these reasons, his delegation would 
be grateful to continue to be involved in the c onsultations the Chairman was organizing as a follow-up 
to the present meeting. WT/GC/M/121 
Page 26  
 
  70. The representative of the European Communities
 said his delegation had listened to the 
statements under this item and fully understood the concerns and sense of frustration – shared by the 
EC – that this long-standing issue was not yet de finitively settled.  On th e substance of the EC 
position on the specific issue of non-recognition of rights, he had nothing to add to what he had said 
previously.  However, he wished to inform Members that the parties were in intensive negotiations to 
conclude a banana agreement that should also so lve the issue presently under discussion.  The Latin 
American countries and the EC had held numerous meetings in 2009, and the parties were narrowing 
their differences regarding substance and pro cess.  With some common sense and good will on both 
sides, a solution should be ach ievable after the summer break. 
71. The representative of the Dominican Republic  said her delegation had taken note of the 
statement by the European Union according to whic h the latter was engaged in intensive negotiations 
with the Latin American countries to try to settle a ll of the banana-related issues.  Her country simply 
asked that the interests of the ACP countries be ta ken into consider ation in these negotiations, and that 
they also be taken into account in future consultations on this matter. 
72. The General Council took note  of the statements and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
6. Seventh Session of the Ministerial Conference 
(a) Statement by the Chairman 
73. The Chairman  recalled that, at its meeting in May, the General Council had taken a Decision 
on the date for the Seventh Session of the Minister ial Conference, its venue, and its overall theme.  
The Decision also gave a mandate to him, as Gene ral Council Chair, to undertake all necessary action 
to prepare the Seventh Session in consultation with  Members and in cooperation with the Director-
General and the Swiss authorities.  Since the May Council, he had consulted with a wide range of 
delegations, individually and in gr oups.  In all these consultations he  had sought delegations' views on 
the same points, namely:  (i) the organization of the meeting and the discussions;  (ii) the possible 
sub-themes for discussion;  and (iii) the selection of the Chair and Vice-Chairs.  As part of his 
consultative process, he had convened an informal meeting of the General Council at the level of 
Heads of Delegation on 22 July in order to discu ss the various aspects of these points.  At that 
meeting, he had made a statement setting out the areas in which greater clarity or convergence had 
emerged.  Following the meeting, his statement ha d been circulated in document JOB(09)/81, and 
copies were available at the present meeting.  In the interests of efficiency, he did not intend to repeat 
his statement, and suggested it be read into the minutes of the present meeting on the basis of the 
document to which he had just referred.10  At the informal meeting on 22 July, Members had had a 
productive discussion, which showed that they all shared the approach he had suggested in his 
statement.  He had taken note of th e comments and questions raised at that meeting, and proposed that 
any delegation wishing its statement made on that occasion to be read into the minutes of the present 
meeting contact the Secretariat.  In his consulta tions, all delegations had shown willingness to temper 
ambition with realism, and he tha nked them for their cooperation in th is respect.  He believe that good 
progress had been made towards putting the Minister ial on a solid consensual foundation.  He would 
be continuing his consultations on the preparati on of the Ministerial Conference in the autumn. 
74. The representative of Switzerland  said his delegation wished to make two points for 
clarification.  His country was obviously assisting w ith the organization of this Conference, as it was 
the WTO's host country.  However, Switzerland was not  the host country of this Conference.  Second, 
his delegation wished to remind Members that vi sa procedures for entering Switzerland had changed 
because it was now part of the Schengen Area.  T hus, it was important, mainly for delegations of 
                                                      
10 The statement is reproduced in Annex IV to the present records.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 27 
 
 
countries where Switzerland had no official representa tion, to take the necessary steps to secure their 
visas in time, because if they arrived via Frankfur t, Paris, Vienna or Rome, the Swiss authorities 
would not be able to help them if they did not have the requisite documents.  Members would have 
information on these procedures in writing in a few days' time. 
75. The representative of Angola  said that concerning the various possibilities that had been 
raised for the outcome of the working session during the Ministerial Conference, it was important to 
have a Ministerial Declaration, as had been the case  in Hong Kong, Doha and Seattle, rather than a 
Chairperson's summary. 
76. The General Council took note  of the statements. 
(b) Systemic improvements of the WTO  – Proposals by India (WT/GC/W/605) 
77. The Chairman  said the communication from India in document WT/GC/W/605 had been 
received on 2 July with the request that this item be included on the Agenda of the present meeting, 
and he invited India to introduce its communication. 
78. The representative of India  said his country had submitted the proposals in WT/GC/W/605 
based on an assessment of the perfo rmance of the WTO as an instituti on over the past decade and a 
half.  The proposals were aimed at making course corrections in key areas.  The underlying premise 
for these proposals was that the WTO, unlike the GATT, was much more than just a negotiating 
forum.  It was a service organization and had va luable and useful services to provide to the 
membership and the trading community at large.   Even before India had submitted the formal 
proposal on 2 July, it had been discussing th ese ideas with the larger member ship.  It had met at the 
level of Ambassadors, as well as at the technical level, with a wide range of Members, either 
individually or in groups.  It had been heartened by the reactions received across the board.  
Comments had ranged from wholehearted support to being told the proposals were common sense, 
which was high praise in Geneva, and certain conc erns had been expressed as to how the proposals 
would be implemented.  While I ndia was open regarding the technical details of the proposals and 
would continue to discuss and fine-tune them, the i ssue his delegation wished to address at the present 
meeting was the procedure for carrying these proposals fo rward.  In this regard, he wished to address 
individually each of the five proposals. 
79. The first proposal regarding the enhanced inte grated database that would include non-tariff 
data of Members, would need to be implemente d as a phased project, not unlike what had been the 
process for establishment of the CTS and IDB data bases.  The advantage Members had now was the 
experience gained in implementing those databases a nd that certain resources were already available 
with the Secretariat, which could be used effec tively for implementing India's proposal.  What India 
would be seeking at the Ministerial Conference was an acknowledgement that the CTS and IDB 
databases had been useful tools for the membership, that they now needed to be enhanced to give a 
broader picture of Members' trade regimes by in cluding non-tariff data deri ved from Members' WTO 
notifications, that this database should be made av ailable to trade operatives as a service, and that a 
project be initiated to efficiently and effectivel y complete this work in a phased and time-bound 
manner.  At the operational level, following the Mini sterial directions, the project could be designed 
in consultations with Members a nd the various WTO Divisions servicing the relevant Committees, in 
order to finalize the format and/or procedural cha nges that would be required.   Regarding the proposal 
for revitalizing the WTO Committees, the three elements  proposed would need to be incorporated into 
the agreed Working Procedures of each Committee.  Before this wa s agreed, the issues should be 
discussed and the nuances of the work of each Comm ittee should be taken into consideration by the 
membership.  In this case, India would be seeking di rections from Ministers regarding deliberation in 
each Committee on ways to revitalize them.  In so doing, Members would need to ensure that the 
following three suggestions made in the proposal we re discussed and appropriately adopted:  (i) the 
Secretariat should provide a factual and verified update on developments on the issues covered by the WT/GC/M/121 
Page 28  
 
  Committee occurring between formal meetings;  (ii)  there should be discussions in the Committee, 
including in the presence of outside experts, on the WTO disciplines covered by the Committee;  and 
(iii) timely problem solving for low threshold trade concerns should be allowed.  Since this was a 
cross-cutting issue, discussions on evolving suita ble language could be cen tered in the General 
Council. 
80. The third proposal regarding WTO's engagement with RTAs, was a critical issue to be 
addressed if the organization was to remain the fulcrum of the global trading system.  India proposed  seeking a direction from Ministers that (i) the WT O enhance its engagement with the RTAs for 
greater transparency about their content and intents,  (ii) the Secretariat assist Members in gaining the 
needed insight, and (iii) Members in the Commit tee on RTAs build this information into best 
practices for negotiating new RTAs.  Regarding the operational aspects of these three individually, the 
first part of the proposal sought to move forwar d, based on actual experience gained over the past 
decade and a half.  The transparency mechanism for RTAs had been provisionally implemented and 
was working well, and the one for PTAs was almost ready and there was no reason to believe that it would be any less useful.  India therefore sought th at Ministers agree to ma ke the RTA transparency 
mechanism permanent in accordance with paragraph 47 of the Doha Declaration, which stated that 
"agreements reached at an early stage may be impl emented on a provisional or a definitive basis."  
Ministers could also agree that the transparen cy mechanism for PTAs should be established on a 
permanent basis, whenever it was finalized.  The second part was about the Secretariat compiling the 
factual report on RTAs on an annual basis and produc ing an annual RTA review.  This would serve to 
enhance the transparency of RTAs by logically pu tting together the information into a structure and 
form that would help policy makers understand the trends in these agreements, and thereby serve as a 
valuable negotiating tool.  India would seek direct ions from Ministers that the Secretariat assist 
Members in gaining the needed insight into these agre ements.  The third part did not in any way imply 
a negotiating mandate for the Committee on RTAs.  It only suggested a logical conclusion to the first 
two parts, and it would be left to Members in the Committee to discuss and decide how to move 
forward in developing the "best practices" or guidelines. 
81. The fourth proposal was largely a housekeeping ex ercise, based on India's own experience in 
understanding the complexity in implementing LD C-related measures under the myriad existing 
provisions and instruments.  India was merely pro posing that Ministers direct the establishment of a 
steering group, under the General Council to discuss and finalize an "Omnibus Legal Instrument for 
Preferential Market Access to LDCs".  The terms of reference could be finalized by Members in the 
steering group once it was formed.  The final propo sal sought to focus attention on the fact that 
increasing use of national standards and conformity -assessment procedures was a major hindrance to 
smooth trade flows.  For developing countries especially, meeting these myriad requirements was a particular problem.  However, considering that this  issue was being discussed in various fora in the 
WTO, including in the ongoing negotiations, the pro posal simply sought a reaffirmation by Ministers 
that Members should respect and adhere to interna tional standards and standard-setting.  Once there 
was agreement on this issue, India would put fort h suitable language for Members' consideration.  
Having explained the proposals, and to the extent th ere was consensus on them at the conceptual level 
– which could be evaluated thr ough General Council meetings and in  the Chair's consultations in 
various formats with Members – India would be moving towards developing appropriate language for 
Members' consideration and agreement in the au tumn.  While at the present stage India did not 
envision the need for detailed technical discussions on the proposals, if Members wished to do so, his 
delegation was available and open for such  discussions in any appropriate format. 
82. All delegations who spoke th anked India for the proposals it had made in document 
WT/GC/W/605. 
83. The representative of China
 said his delegation had been in close contact with India 
bilaterally at both the ambassador level and as well as  the technical level to discuss various aspects of  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 29 
 
 
these proposals, during which China's preliminary reaction had been provided to India.  While his capital was studying the details of the proposals, his delegation generally supported their essence.  
China looked forward to working further with I ndia as well as with other Members to discuss the 
various aspects of these proposals and help rea lize the important objectives behind them – a more 
fruitful discussion by Ministers and tangible results from the upcoming Ministerial Conference. 
84. The representative of Tanzania
, on behalf of the LDC Group , said the Group commended 
India for its proposal on strengthening the WTO in th e five areas outlined.  In principle, the Group 
would support any initiative by any Member, provide d that such initiative was consistent with WTO 
rules and did not infringe the rights, privileg es and obligations of Members under the existing 
multilateral trade agreements.  It was hoped that mo re work would be done to evaluate the five 
proposals prior to the Ministerial Conference.  The proposal regarding the establishment of an 
omnibus legal instrument for preferential market a ccess to LDCs should not in any way interfere with 
the current process regarding a Services waiver fo r LDCs, or with the waiver already extended for 
goods.  Provided this was the case, the Group would ha ve no problem in principle with the proposals. 
85. The representative of Egypt , on behalf of the African Group , said the Group welcomed the 
proposals introduced by India on strengthening the WTO and supported all endeavors to enhance the 
effectiveness of this organization.  The Group attached great importance to these proposals and 
considered them to be very constructive.  They were currently being examined in capitals.  The Group 
agreed with India that such proposals should now be owned by the entire membership, and therefore 
felt the General Council should initiate a process of  consultation among Members to further improve 
the substance of those proposals with a view to reaching the necessary consensu s, and in addition to 
consult on how they would be addressed in the upcoming Ministerial Conference. 
86. The representative of the United States  said the proposals by India raised a number of 
interesting issues, but Members clearly needed to do  some additional work and reflection to determine 
whether specific proposals would be appropriate or  right for action at the upcoming Ministerial.  
Among the issues the proposals raised and that Members needed collectiv ely to consider further, was 
the need for more clarity on the obj ectives of each of the proposals.  Second, there was also a need to 
examine the degree to which the proposals might have some impact on the existing mandates for various WTO bodies, in order to avoid duplication or conflict.  Third, it had to be asked whether the 
proposed action was at the level of a matter that s hould be taken up by Ministers.  Any proposal for 
action, even of a procedural nature, if it was to be  forwarded to Ministers, had to provide full clarity 
as to its substance and implications.  Egypt had just  suggested, and he believed India had suggested at 
the informal HODs meeting on 22 July, that the pr oposal should be considered the property of the 
membership and that the Chair might host consu ltations on them.  His de legation was not sure it 
understood what "the property of the membership" meant.  These were individual proposals, and while there might be a certain amount of support w ithin the membership, nothing became the property 
of the membership until there was actual agreem ent.  As had been discussed in some of the 
Chairman's earlier consultations on  the Seventh Session, it was most appropriate that the Member 
suggesting an idea take the lead in working with ot hers to see if there was a consensus, since that 
Member was best placed to explain and discuss what it had in mind.  Thus, it would be premature to throw these proposals over to the Co uncil Chair at the present stage.  That said, his delegation did 
recognize that time was short for this dialogue, and in  that regard merely wished to recall that the 
General Council was authorized to perform any function of the Ministerial Conference.  Thus, 
Members should not be looking at the upcoming Mi nisterial as the unique, time-limited, once-and-
only opportunity to take action on these proposals. 
87. The representative of the Philippines
 said his delegation wished to give its preliminary view – 
in the context of the Chair's statement and gentle man’s agreement that on any matter to be brought to 
Ministers, progress had to be made towards consen sus in advance of the October General Council – 
on India's proposal on the Trade Information System Based on Member Notification.  All agreed that 
the information on tariffs and import data at tariff-l ine level in the IDB had been very useful in the WT/GC/M/121 
Page 30  
 
  current NAMA and Agriculture negotiations.  The propo sal to set up a project to enhance the IDB to 
include also information on NTMs was timely given the increasing use by Members of NTMs in pursuit of trade policy objectives.  His country had high hopes that if the project was designed properly and eventually implemented, it would be in valuable and facilitating, as a one-stop source of 
information on tariffs, import data and NTMs at the tariff-line level, from which all Members and 
their trade operators would benef it tremendously.  His delegation ther efore supported this particular 
proposal in the context of obtaining general Ministerial guidance to enhance the IDB and to study how NTMs could also be included in an efficient manner, given that this would in no way affect 
negatively the utilization of the system as it currently  existed.  In addition, his delegation suggested 
that this should be accompanied by transitional training and provision of cap acity-building technical 
assistance for Members to adapt or learn a bout any new system to be established. 
88. The representative of Canada
 said India's communication in WT/GC/W/605 advanced a 
number of interesting proposals, and his delegation a ppreciated India's interest in obtaining Members' 
views and suggestions.  Canada had reflected on each of the proposals in the communication and 
wished to offer the following preliminary remarks.  An enhanced trade information system based on 
Member notifications was an interesting proposal an d one that merited further examination.  Canada 
understood that some informal discussions had already taken place in the Committee on Market Access, and encouraged the continuing of these di scussions so that Members could explore both the 
kinds of information to be gathered in the datab ase and the feasibility of using the information that 
already existed through WTO notifications, so as to create the proposed comprehensive information 
system.  Canada was sympathetic to the overarc hing objective of revitalizing the WTO Committees, 
and took note of the inspiration derived from the su rveillance and monitoring work being undertaken 
by the Trade Policy Review Body.  However, Members should look at the functioning of each 
Committee on a case-by-case basis.  It was also impor tant to be mindful of the capacity of the 
Secretariat to undertake additional tasks.  Concer ning the ideas pertaining to the WTO's engagement 
with RTAs, Canada welcomed efforts to provi de greater clarity and guidance regarding RTA 
obligations under the WTO.  The factual presentations  prepared by the Secretariat contained useful 
information on Members' RTAs and PTAs, and the s uggestion that these be used to produce an annual 
report identifying trends on content and structure w as interesting.  Canada's bilateral FTAs had very 
broad coverage, and it encouraged other Members to  have similarly broad, ambitious RTAs, whether 
or not this was referenced as a trend in an annua l report.  Canada remained open to working with 
other Members on ways to achieve this objective.  It  agreed that preferential market access, especially 
for LDCs, was important.  This was why Canada had a DFQF scheme for LDCs, with simple, 
transparent rules of origin.  It was also important  that there be transpar ency around such schemes.  
While the current consideration of these schem es was spread about within the WTO committee 
structure, it served the intended purpose and appropr iate measures were unde rway to improve it.  
Canada agreed on the importance of international st andards to trade and of Members respecting their 
current obligations.  However, the variable defi nitions of these standards across WTO Agreements 
made it difficult to discuss outside the individual committees – for instance, his delegation noted that 
India had a detailed proposal currently being di scussed in the TBT Committee.  The proposals 
emanating from the India's communication touched upon a number of important issues that merited serious consideration.  However, in each case it wo uld seem best to have the individual committees 
take up these issues.  Indeed, some of these ideas we re already being discussed at the committee level, 
for example in the TBT Committee. 
89. The representative of Israel
 said the upcoming Ministerial was a significant event, especially 
after such a long gap and even more so in the current time s of crisis.  The Ministerial would provide a 
welcome opportunity to discuss the role of the WTO in the next few years.  In this context, India's 
communication was very timely and constituted a good  starting point for collective reflection.  
However, some of the proposals put forward needed to be further defined and discussed.  Israel was 
still reviewing the document, but wished to share its  initial reaction on some of its elements.  As a 
general observation, his delegation understood that  India, as the proponent of this document, was  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 31 
 
 
trying to gather consensus on selected topics to be  discussed as part of the agenda of the upcoming 
Ministerial Conference.  Israel thanked India fo r the open and transparent manner in which it had 
approached this task, and took note of India's prev ious statements, as well as the clarification it had 
provided at the present meeting, in which it had pointed out that it merely sought collective 
understanding of the importance of the issues laid out in the paper, without necessarily prescribing 
decisions or actions by Ministers.  However,  the document as it stood might go a bit beyond this 
scope in its ambition.  His delegation's first comment related to the "revitalization" of WTO 
committees.  Israel agreed that the work undertaken by WTO committ ees was essential and that they 
should always strive towards greater efficiency.  Strengthening their work should indeed be one of 
Members' priorities in future.  Nevertheless, Israel  did not share India's assessment that there was a 
widely perceived declining utility of the committ ees' work.  This appraisal seemed too strong, 
compared to the reality of the committees' work.  However, the re inforcement of the work of these 
committees was an important topic and should be discu ssed further, especially in light of the detailed 
proposals to that end contained in the docu ment, in particular in paragraph B.6. 
90. Israel's second observation was on the actual ro le the document envisaged for the Secretariat 
in the near future, especially with regard to  monitoring, which was mentioned several times 
throughout the document.  The WTO was a Member-d riven organization, and one should be cautious 
when it came to extending the Secr etariat's competences and tasks.  These substantial proposals were 
worth debating in depth and should not be tackled in  the short time between now and the Ministerial.  
They might entail significant changes and would de mand careful weighing of their implications in 
terms of resources and overall mandate of the organization.  This might not be possible to do in the 
very short timeframe available and should rather be left for a more long-term consideration, to the 
extent that the membership found them worth di scussing.  Regarding the trade information system 
based on Member notifications, and more specifically  the proposal on NTMs, Israel agreed with the 
basic principle that there was a need to close the gap in the in formation available on NTMs.  
Nevertheless, this was a very complex exercise, an d at the present juncture this proposal should be 
developed further in order to give a better view of its consequences in practical terms for Members.  A 
further elaboration of India's proposal in this respect  was necessary.  Israel wished to join India in 
reaffirming the primacy of international standards and standard-setting for WTO obligations, i.e. the 
need for Members to base domestic regulations on international standards for trade in goods to the 
extent possible.  Israel stood ready to work in a c onstructive manner with the Chairman and the rest of 
the membership in order to come to an unders tanding regarding the agenda of and process for the 
upcoming Ministerial. 
91. The representative of the European Communities  said he wished to say a few words on the 
Ministerial Conference itself before commenting on I ndia's proposal.  He could confirm that the EC 
fully subscribed to the principl es the Chairman had presented to Members at the informal HODs on 
22 July to guide preparations for the next Minist erial Conference.  However, Members should further 
reflect on the organization of work between the Pl enary and the Working Sessions, and how to divide 
the time between interactive and free discussions, and issues for decision.  These discussions should 
result in some type of communiqué reflecting the views of the membership, provided this did not entail lengthy negotiations.  Regarding India's propo sals, these provided some useful food for thought.  
The EC had looked at this document with a pos itive and open mind, and found merit in working 
further on some of the proposals.  Specifically, it found interesting and was ready to work on the 
suggestions made on how to make the regular work of WTO committees more meaningful.  
Improving information on NTMs was al so important, but one should be careful not to duplicate work 
already going on in other international fora.  As to studying ways to minimize obstacles to trade 
arising from deviations from international standards,  this was surely a laudable purpose, but Members 
should be mindful at the present stage not to dive rt their energies from pursuing the work on NTBs 
under the DDA.  The EC also favoured increased transparency on trade preferences, whether 
reciprocal or preferential, and was open to working on the adoption on a permanent basis of both the transparency mechanism for RTAs and PTAs.  The EC  also shared India's view on the need to look 
more closely at RTAs and their impact on the multila teral trading system, but suggested that this work WT/GC/M/121 
Page 32  
 
  should be done in the relevant Negotiating Group.  Most of India's proposals were far-reaching and 
required in-depth discussion and appreciation.  It was essential that any work to prepare for the 
Ministerial respect the fundamental principles set out  by the Chair, notably:  (i) no distraction of 
attention and focus from the Round, either at Senior O fficials or technical level;  and (ii) any possible 
decision by Ministers, even if only procedural , should achieve consensus well in advance. 
92. The representative of Uruguay
 said India's proposal had inspired collective reflection and 
action which was already under way.  Ownership of these proposals undoubtedly belonged to India, 
but what perhaps belonged to all Members was the re flection on how to strengthen the WTO.  In some 
of the areas covered by the five proposals in India' s document, there was already some work, action or 
reflection under way.  Therefore, one of the step s Members were going to have to take was to 
determine when some kind of Ministerial action or decision might be necessary or advisable in any of 
these areas.  In some cases it might be necessary or advisable, while in others it might be neither.  All of the proposals appeared to merit analysis, but in  some cases rules already existed, and to legislate 
when there were already rules al ways raised the problem of establishing what political clarification 
objective one was trying to achieve.  In other cases there was a negotiating mandate under the Doha 
and Hong Kong Declarations, and in those cases Me mbers would need to analyse how these proposals 
fitted in with an existing mandate.  All of this coul d and should be analysed, first in terms of need and 
advisability, in the regular committees, and second, those proposals relating in some way to areas of negotiation covered by the Doha Round should be considered in th e respective negotiating groups.  
Uruguay assumed that India planned to refine these proposals further so that Members could perhaps 
have specific texts and drafts that would help them  with their analysis.  Whatever the case might be, 
Uruguay wished to thank India, because strengthening the work of the WTO was nothing new and 
something that concerned all Members. 
93. The representative of Australia
 said India's submission was a welcome contribution to the 
discussion on reform of aspects of the WTO's work.  It was particularly useful in its focus on practical 
improvements in the way the membership conduct ed the regular business of the organization, 
including improving WTO committee processes and ensu ring the WTO remained relevant in light of 
developments in the global trading environment.   Some specific aspects of the proposals would 
require further clarification and discussion.  There might be alternative approaches in some cases to addressing the underlying objectives raised by India, and Australia was happy to discuss these further 
with India.  He wished to make a few brief comments on some of the specific elements in the 
communication.  Australia supported efforts to impr ove the transparency of NTMs and consideration 
of improvements in the accessibility of such inform ation to Members.  For most businesses, NTMs 
were at least as important as tariff measures, but less accessible and less transparent.  India had 
recognized that there were signficant challenges in  seeking to integrate the plethora of NTMs across 
Members into a single database, but this was not  a reason not to examine further the specific 
suggestion.  Some of India's suggestions on rev italizing WTO committees ha d strong parallels with 
Australia's own interests in advocating improvement s in monitoring and surveillance of commitments.  
Australia was pursuing these actively in the contex t of the Doha Round itself.  In improving these 
arrangements, one would need to be careful to st rike the right balance between the role of the 
Secretariat in monitoring developments, and ensuring that Members took a greater responsibility themselves in ensuring timely and full notificatio n.  On the WTO's engagement with RTAs, his 
country agreed with India that the transparency mechanism which had been provisionally adopted had 
been a success in terms of increasing Members' unde rstanding of existing RTAs, and wished to see it 
formally adopted as part of the Doha package.  Ho wever, it was also important as part of the Doha 
Round that Members fulfil the remaining elements of the mandate relating to the so-called RTAs 
substantive issues.  Further discussion of Indi a's paper would help Members to gain a better 
appreciation of the intent of some aspects of the proposals and also the appropriate forum to pursue 
such issues.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 33 
 
 
94. The representative of Korea  said the ideas in the document were interesting and might 
contribute to further strengthening and reinforcing th e functions of the WTO, even though some of the 
proposals needed to be clarified.  Some ideas we re closely related to what was currently under 
discussion in some Negotiating Groups, others seemed to aim at a more ambitious target than what the 
WTO could manage with current resources.  His de legation looked forward to India providing more 
clarity and details on the proposals in the future .  He expressed Korea's willingness to engage 
constructively in future cons ultations on this matter. 
95. The representative of Mauritius , on behalf of the ACP Group , said the Group noted that in the 
introductory part of the submission, India emphasize d the initial character of its proposals and that 
none of them was cast in stone.  It further noted that the submission was meant to allow a productive 
discussion on systemic issues in the WTO, with a view to strengthening the multilateral trading 
system in the run-up to the Seventh Session.  India had also indicated that the five proposals in the 
submission did not imply any significant additional administrative burdens on Members, particularly 
on developing-country Members, and advocated appropriate technical assistance where the need arose.  The ACP Group, therefore, was favourably dis posed to consider these proposals.  However, in 
the case of any new proposal, it would require a more  in-depth analysis of the submission, at the 
country level, the collective ACP level and the mu ltilateral level.  At the present stage, the Group's 
general feeling was that the submission was i nnovative in many aspects and deserved Members' 
consideration.  At the same time, however, further clarification and elaboration was required in many 
areas.  These clarifications would be obtained as Members proceeded with a multilateral examination 
of each proposal in the appropriate body and form at decided by the Council.  The Group therefore 
requested that the Council provide such direction in  a manner that did not prejudge the final outcome 
of the proposals and that would allow Ministers to reflect on them and give further guidance. 
96. The representative of Japan
 said his delegation understood that at the Seventh Session, 
Ministers would have opportunities to discuss and reconfirm the role of the WTO and to guide delegations toward future prioritized activities.  In this context, Japan recognized that the theme of the 
proposal by India, "Strengthening the WTO", matche d well with the purpose of the Seventh Session.  
Japan welcomed and appreciated India's initiative to start discussion from a systemic point of view on how to improve the functioning and efficiency of the WTO.  All five proposals contained important 
and, at the same time, technical points.  If Memb ers sought to have action taken by Ministers, as 
confirmed at the informal HODs meeting on 22 July and reconfirmed at the present meeting, 
consensus-building well in advance of the Conferen ce was necessary.  This required certain detailed 
discussions.  Members also needed to think about ho w best to engage themselves in those discussions.  
Some aspects of the proposals, for example, ha d been already addressed by either regular WTO 
bodies or Negotiation Groups.  Others might requi re a thorough review of existing Agreements.  
Members needed to sort out whether and how the regular Ministerial Conference should take up these 
issues.  With regard to the proposal for a trade information system based on Member notifications, 
one example of current ongoing discussions was that  every Council and Committee had been working 
for the improvement of notifications, in response to  the General Council Chair's invitation to do so.  
In some Committees, new formats for notifications ha d been explored, and in others, the possibility of 
improving and expanding databases had been discu ssed.  These activities were regular work and 
might not necessarily require Ministerial action. 
97. The representative of New Zealand
 said the WTO as an organization was a little bit like a 
three-legged stool – it had the legislative leg, th e government leg and the implementation leg, in 
which he would include dispute settlement.  If the legs were uneven, the stool was rather 
uncomfortable to sit on.  If one or more of the le gs were missing, the stool would fall over.  Members 
were struggling a bit at the moment with the challe nges of the legislative leg, so it was good to see 
some proposals addressing the strengthening of the other legs – for example, the proposal on best 
practices for RTAs.  It was New Zealand's practice in these matters to look to eliminate over time, 
tariffs on 100 per cent of tariff lines, so if the codi fication of genuine best practice across the various 
areas involved in RTAs would provide inspiration to Members engaging in those things, that could be WT/GC/M/121 
Page 34  
 
  a very useful exercise to engage in.  His dele gation had a number of detailed comments on each of 
these proposals, which were more appropriate for th e process of consultations India had indicated it 
would be undertaking than for the present meeting, an d New Zealand looked forward to taking part in 
that process. 
98. The representative of Chinese Taipei
 said his delegation found India's submission useful and a 
good contribution to the strengthening of the mu ltilateral trading system.  The proposals covered 
broad areas of work and involved far-reaching impli cations on which Members needed to reflect, as 
the efficient and effective functioning of the WTO was an important issue for all.  Members should 
not only address the problems they were currently facing,  but also the challenges of  the future.  In this 
regard, his delegation was committed to participating in all future discussion on this important issue. 
99. The representative of Nepal  associated  his delegation with th e statement by Tanzania for the 
LDC Group.  Nepal thanked India for showing a keen interest in the systemic improvement of the WTO, particularly for initiating proposals in the interest of LDCs.  While his capital was examining 
the document in detail, his delegation extended its in itial support for it.  In this context, he recalled 
that India had been playing a very active role in pr otecting the interests of LDCs.  Its recent initiatives 
for DFQF and its leading role in the issue of an  LDC Services waiver were commendable.  Nepal was 
benefiting from the liberal attitude shown by India bo th as one of its closest neighbours and also as an 
LDC. 
100. The representative of Switzerland
 said that, by way of a preliminary reaction, his country 
shared the view that these were important systemic  issues, and Ministers should put their stamp on the 
future of Members' activities.  For this reason, th ese were subjects that should be dealt with under the 
WTO's regular work programme rath er than through negotiations.  Ho wever, the Ministerial level was 
clearly not the most suitable forum for discussing the technical aspects of these proposals.  He said it 
was hard to picture his Minister engaging in a Minist erial debate on notifications , even if she were an 
expert.  Switzerland agreed that the five subject s should be considered ,as long as the list was a 
non-exhaustive one and Members we re willing to contribute to a review of which aspects should be 
tackled through negotiations, and whic h should be examined as part of the WTO's regular work.  He 
then made the following specific comments.  Fo llowing on New Zealand's reference to the three-
legged stool, there was an additional leg – the Gene va leg.  Regarding the trade and information 
system based on Member notifications, his delega tion suggested examining the activities of other 
organizations, such as the ITC, which were wo rking on such a database, probably on behalf of 
UNCTAD.  Thus, in order to avoid duplication, it might be useful to look into these activities.  
Members had always had a problem identifying what an NTB was, and this would make it difficult to 
have such a system.  Regarding the suggestion of  revitalizing WTO committees, this was dependent 
on the initiative of the Members, as this was a Me mber-driven organization, but his delegation was 
ready to look into what the committees could do and what other bodies, such as the TPRB, were 
doing.  Regarding the WTO's engagement with RTAs, this was certainly part of the negotiations on 
one side, but there were some formal issues that c ould be taken up outside of  the negotiations, and it 
might be useful to look into the details of th is.  Regarding the omnibus legal instrument for 
preferential market access to LDCs , Switzerland was in favour of this.  Regarding the primacy of 
international standards and standard-setting for WTO obligations, this was part of the NAMA 
negotiations.  Switzerland was ready to partic ipate in any consultations on these matters. 
101. The representative of Bangladesh  said the package of proposals in India's submission would 
be an excellent recipe for Ministers' consultations  at the Seventh Session.  The submission depicted 
India's intellectual capability, which would cont ribute to the Geneva process considerably.  
Bangladesh supported India's initiative, not becau se India was its largest trading partner and 
neighbour, but because the submission contained potential elements that could revitalize and 
strengthen the multilateral trading system.  Bangl adesh fully associated with the statement by 
Tanzania for the LDC Group on this issue, and wi shed to add a few points.  He expressed his  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 35 
 
 
country's gratitude to India for pioneering the extens ion of the waiver to provide for preferential tariff 
treatment to LDCs by developing countries up to June 2019.  India also deserved appreciation for 
providing DFQF market access to LDCs in pursuance of the Hong Kong Declaration.  In addition, 
India had always been a friend of LDCs and suppor tive of LDC issues in the WTO.  He wished to 
make a brief initial remark on the Services waiver without any prejudice to the omnibus instrument 
for LDCs' preferences proposed by India.  The Se rvices negotiations were vital for LDCs' market 
access.  To integrate the LDCs into the multilateral trading system, special priority was enshrined in 
the GATS Article IV.3 in 1995 along with the crea tion of the WTO.  The LDC modalities in 2003 had 
stressed developing an appropriate mechanism to pr ovide special priority to LDCs’ services suppliers.   
The Hong Kong Declaration in 2005 had gone one  step farther by providing a deadline for 
implementation of this mechanism.  Now in 2009, the LDCs were negotiating a draft waiver proposal 
with both developing and developed-country Member s.  At this critical juncture, the momentum 
gained through the past 14 years should be retain ed.  He thanked India for the flexibility it had 
demonstrated in the proposal.  India had rightly poi nted out that the proposals made in this submission 
were not cast in stone.  With this open mind, Members should contribute to and strengthen the 
proposals. 
102. The representative of the Dominican Republic  said her delegation viewed in a positive light 
the first proposal on Ministers directing the setting up of a project to enhance the Integrated Database 
by including, in an appropriate format, non-tariff data, based on the current notification obligations 
under WTO Agreements.  However, it had to emphasize th at in order to be able to support this idea, it 
was important that the project in question did not entail additional obligations for developing-country 
Members, in either financial terms or in terms of notification requirements.  Such a project, if 
approved by Ministers, should not become an admi nistrative burden for developing-country Members.  
The second proposal on the revitalizing of WTO Comm ittees was interesting, but care had to be taken 
not to increase the burden for developing countries w ith small delegations in Geneva.  While it would 
be positive to extend the recent experience in the Trade Policy Review Body to all WTO Committees 
– something that would undoubtedly make discuss ions in the Committees more interesting – one 
would also have to make sure that the exercise  did not become a process whereby Members were 
pinpointed for adopting trade policy instruments that were legitimate.  Her country could not, however, support the part of the proposal that re lated to increasing the frequency of meetings, since 
the current schedule was already fairly intensive, and it was very difficult for small delegations like 
hers to attend all the meetings that took place simultaneously.  Neverthele ss, meetings should be 
streamlined and made more efficient, so as to produce clear results. 
103. The Dominican Republic also considered inte resting the proposal on Ministers giving 
directions to monitor the developing trends in  RTAs and developing non-binding best-practice 
guidelines for reference in negotiating new RTAs, but the Committee on RTAs was already carrying 
out good work with the transparency mechanism,  and one should not overburden or increase the 
Committee's work.  Nor did her country  feel comforta ble about including an issue that was part of the 
Doha Round, when Members had already agreed that this would be a regular Ministerial Conference 
and not one involving negotiation.  With regard to Mi nisters reaffirming the provisions relating to the 
need to adopt international standards in respect of  sanitary and phytosanitary measures and technical 
barriers to trade, which stressed the need for Member s to base domestic regulations primarily on such 
international standards for all trade in goods, it w ould be positive for Ministers to make such a 
statement as reminder to Members, as in recen t years developing countries had suffered from the 
application of non-international standards, in the case of TBTs, and private standards, in the case of 
SPS measures, both of which could represent serious  market access barriers for their products, in 
particular in respect of access to developed-country markets.  La stly, the Dominican Republic wished 
to express its support for the idea of submitting th ese proposals to the General Council for discussion 
and analysis.  Her delegation hoped to be able to continue participating not only in discussions on this 
matter, but in future open discussions with a view  to confirming the Ministerial Conference agenda. WT/GC/M/121 
Page 36  
 
  104. The representative of El Salvador
 said India's proposal put forward a number of ideas for the 
systemic improvement of the Organization and included some interesting elements that deserved attention.  His delegation was assessing the variou s elements of the proposal on the basis of the 
principles governing the Seventh Ministerial Conference, notably the need to avoid overloading the agenda and the need for all substantive issues requi ring a decision to be agreed prior to the meeting 
and included on the basis of a consensus.  El Salva dor agreed that the Seventh Ministerial Conference 
would provide Ministers with an opportunity to refl ect on the systemic aspects of the Organization, 
and hoped that such reflection would result in the strengthening of the multilateral trading system, 
mainly for the benefit of the developing count ries and without creating any additional burden for 
them.  His country's general view was that the points proposed by India might help to improve work 
at the WTO, but it was important to assess the impact  of these proposals by studying them and their 
scope more closely, and to avoid the duplication of work in both regular and special WTO committees.  His delegation hoped to continue worki ng with India and the rest of the membership on 
this and other matters with a view to achievi ng a positive outcome in respect of these important 
issues. 
105. The representative of Chile
 said his delegation liked many of the subjects put forward in 
India's proposal, and agreed with some of India's a ppreciations in the document and with the need to 
seek constructive and simple solutions.  Chile also  had serious doubts regarding some of the points 
being discussed in the WTO committees, which conflicted with and undermined the negotiating 
mandates – for example, paragraph 8 of the section on regional agreements.  It had even greater 
doubts as to whether this was the right moment to  submit these ideas.  First, there was not enough 
time.  Second, when Members took the decision to hol d a Ministerial at the end of the year, they did 
so on the understanding that Ministers would not be adopting decisions or "dir ections".  As several 
delegations had mentioned, including the Philippines, there was a gentleman's agreement that if there 
was no consensus on this or other proposals by the be ginning of October, none could be brought to the 
attention of Ministers.  One did not want surprises.   However, the proposed ideas did warrant serious 
discussion unaffected by time constraints.  He theref ore suggested that Members use the time they had 
and see how far India could go in clarifying the objectives it was pursuing, in dispelling the doubts 
that were emerging, in assessing the consequences of  each of its proposals, and in examining what 
was already being done in the WTO committees  and whether it was necessary to introduce 
improvements or other elements in their work.  For example, in connection with the first proposal on 
trade information, the previous Friday had seen the launching of th e new TBT Information 
Management System.  Members should take a close look at this system and see whether it met the 
objectives pursued by India.  Chile would particip ate constructively in discussing the proposal with 
India and other Members. 
106. The representative of Brazil  thanked India for its comprehensive and clear presentation of its 
submission.  The proposals were under active cons ideration in his capital.  Brazil's preliminary 
assessment was that the proposals were far-reaching in addressing syst emic issues and dealt with 
important questions having the potential to furthe r energize WTO work.  In brief, Brazil considered 
that the proposals were in line with the overall them e of the Seventh Session.  At the present juncture, 
and in light of the comments made, the formal  setting of the General Council was not the most 
conducive to an in-depth discussion of the pr oposals in terms of their scope, content, 
complementarities and the definition of the decision- making level required for their implementation.  
Therefore, Brazil suggested the establishment of an informal process to take up the Indian submission 
and any other proposals that might be presen ted in the lead-up to the Ministerial. 
107. The representative of Angola  said that at the present stage,  as Egypt for the African Group 
and Tanzania for the LDC Group had said, the proposal s had been sent to capitals for examination and 
delegations were awaiting further comments.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 37 
 
 
108. The representative of Oman  said the ideas contained in the submission were very interesting 
and useful, especially the proposal on transparency for RTAs.  Oman would be studying the proposal 
in depth in order to come back with a concrete position. 
109. The representative Hong Kong, China  said his capital was studying the proposals in all their 
many specific details and welcomed the opportunity  to look at issues aimed at improving and 
strengthening the normal functioning of the multila teral trading system, especially proposals that 
sought to enhance the system's transparency.  Hi s delegation's preliminary comments ran to about 
three and half pages.  Thus, like others, it prefe rred to reserve these – on the five individual proposals 
as well as the interplay between them, the DDA negotia tion track and the existing work of the WTO – 
for further discussion during the consultation process. 
110. The representative of Argentina  said his delegation wished to join others in thanking India for 
the presentation of its submission, which had been ta bled at the previous General Council meeting.  
His capital was examining India's five proposals with great interest, and Argentina was highly 
encouraged by Members' preliminary reactions, wh ich seemed to indicate the interest – albeit to 
varying degrees – that these proposals had elicited.  Common to the five proposals for discussion 
during consultations were their systemic impact, the fact that they attempted to build on what already 
existed, and that they put forward some new ideas.  Similarly, most of them rested on two pillars, as one delegation had recently put it – one pillar referred to possible case-specific actions by Members, 
while the other referred to the work of the Secretar iat.  An appropriate anal ysis would have to be 
made of the tasks assigned to the Secretariat.  It  would be good to press ahead with these consultations 
led by India, irrespective of whet her these issues were also addressed  in some of the committees.  The 
consultations spearheaded by India should remain th e central forum in which to continue developing 
those proposals.  In that connection, he wished to turn to the way his delegation saw that consultation 
process potentially developing.  The proposals obviousl y needed some clarification, even though their 
objective emerged clearly from a reading of them.  However, several delegations seemed to need 
certain clarifications.  Another possibility would be that as this consultation process unfolded, it 
would be desirable to do some sort of priority -setting among the proposals with the greatest potential 
for further development at a later stage.  A determ ination should also be made of the best way to 
implement them in the event of consensus.  They could be taken to Ministers, or failing that, they could be pursued by some other possible avenue.  In any event, the ideas on the table should not be 
wasted, and it was hard to believe that at the presen t stage, time could be an issue for the purposes of 
developing these proposals.  Regarding the question of  how much time Members needed to be able to 
analyse and consider these proposals in view of the upcoming Ministerial meeting, Members would 
have to be flexible and make allowance for this fact or.  On this general topic, his delegation wished to 
refer to Argentina's document on the economic and financial crisis and its trade implications 
(WT/GC/W/602) which it had submitted in May 2 009, and to say that it had begun preliminary 
consultations which it would be trying to continue  and intensify over the summer break, with a view 
to examining the options for giving eff ect to the proposals in that document. 
111. The representative of India
 thanked all delegations who had spoken.  The response the 
submission had received had been positive and gratif ying.  Prior to the discussion, his delegation had 
had three questions in its mind.  First was whether the larger membership ag reed that these issues 
were indeed systemically important and needed to  be pursued.  Second was whether the membership 
believed the proposals should go to Ministers, and third was what the process should be leading up to 
taking these proposals to the Ministerial Conference.  He wished to briefly indicate India's assessment 
of the discussion, keeping in mind that it was not  a disinterested observer.  The responses had 
generally been very positive, though of course necessa rily provisional and preliminary.  That was as it 
should be.  Members had generally indicated that these were important issues for the future health of 
the WTO and needed to be pursued.  Whether all of them or some of them went to Ministers 
eventually would of course depend on the natu re of discussion Members would have between now 
and the Ministerial.  Therefore, the issue now was what kind of process Members needed between 
now and November so they could take a final view  on the merits of each proposal.  As Members had WT/GC/M/121 
Page 38  
 
  already pointed out, India was not wedded to these proposals.  Rather, they were some ideas his 
delegation had had, which a lot of Members had agr eed were good ideas.  However, if at the end of 
the day they did not obtain full consensus, India woul d be happy to move on.  It also agreed with the 
general principle the Chairman had defined for taki ng proposals to the Ministerial Conference, which 
was consensus and preparation.  India agreed as we ll that Ministers should not be tasked with detailed 
technical discussions on each of these proposals, as this  was not their job.  It was the job delegations 
in Geneva had, to be performed prior to the Ministerial Conference. 
112. A number of issues had been raised by Members.  The important ones were basically that 
these proposals required more definition and clarity .  Members needed to know whether they in 
anyway infringed on the negotiating mandate in any manner, whether they unduly empowered the 
Secretariat, whether they cast a greater burden on sm aller delegations in terms of compliance with the 
new norms, and also whether they actually needed to go to the Ministers at all or could be discussed 
and finalized at committee level, and so on.  Th ese were valid questions and deserved answers.  
However, the issue was through which process Member s would have this debate, ask these questions 
and obtain these answers.  This brought him to the is sue of ownership of the proposals.  It was self-
evident that the proposals were fo r the systemic improvement of the WTO.  They were not proposals 
made out of national interest for the improvement of India's position in the WTO.  If they were to have a future, the proposals obviously had to be eventually owned by the membership.  As the 
progenitor of these proposals, India had the respons ibility – and would discharge that responsibility – 
of answering questions, clarifying doubts and if  necessary, further refining these proposals, fine-
tuning them so that they met all Members' expectat ions.  However, at the end of the day, it would 
have to be a process where eventual ownership lay with the membership.  For that to happen, while 
India was available to answer all queries and res pond to all doubts, one would need an informal 
process of consultations to prepare the ground for an  eventual decision on whether the proposals went 
to Ministers or not.  That would need to be housed in some manner or other under the Chairman's leadership.  His delegation requested, through the Chairman, that the specific questions raised by 
delegations at the present meeting be sent to Indi a before the summer break, as this would give his 
delegation the occasion to work on them and to try to  provide answers as quickly as possible, so that 
immediately after the summer break Members could start a process in which the proposals could be 
further defined and refined.  His delegation thanke d all delegations for their positive and constructive 
comments.  India wished to institute a process fo r further clarifying and defining these issues, and 
hoped that at the end of the day, Members could come  to a consensus on their me rits so that Ministers 
could consider them. 
113. The Chairman
 said that as had been suggested by India itself and the majority of delegations, 
the proposals merited further analysis and discussion ahead of the Ministerial Conference.  In this 
sense, Members should collectively ensure that th ese proposals were discussed in an appropriate 
forum and form.  In any case, all agreed that this process should take place in conformity with the 
principles agreed earlier at the present meeting, in  particular those regarding consensus and prior 
agreement. 
114. The General Council took note  of the statements.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 39 
 
 
7. Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions 
(a) Consultations with Ecuador (WT/BOP/R/91) 
(b) Consultations with Ukraine (WT/BOP/R/93) 
(c) Note on meeting of June 2009 (WT/BOP/R/92/Rev.1) 
115. The Chairman  suggested, and Members agreed, to take  up the three sub-items together, and 
invited Mr. Mwape (Zambia), Chairman of th e BOP Committee, to introduce these matters. 
116. Mr. Mwape (Zambia), Chairman of the BOP Committee , said that consultations had been 
held with Ecuador on 22 and 24 Ap ril and on 2 and 3 June.  As a r esult of the consultations, Ecuador 
had agreed to replace most of the quantitative rest rictions it had imposed for balance-of-payments 
purposes with price-based measures no later than 1 Se ptember and to progressively modify the level 
and scope of other measures as its balance-of-pay ments situation improved.   Ecuador had committed 
to remove all trade measures for balance-of-payme nts purposes no later than 22 January 2010.  In the 
case of Ukraine, consultations had been held on 23 and 25 June.  Ukraine had committed to eliminate 
its balance-of-payments measures no later than 7 Se ptember and to firmly endeavour to eliminate 
them by mid July.  In the case of both Ecuador and Ukraine, the Committee had agreed to conclude 
the consultations.  He also wished to submit fo r Members' consideration a draft decision by the 
Committee on participation by Members in the Committee (WT/BOP/R/92/Rev.1), which would bring the Committee's procedures on membersh ip into line with other WTO Committees. 
117. The representative of Ecuador
 recalled that his country had held consultations within the 
Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions in connection with the adoption of import 
restrictions in the wake of the sharp deteriora tion in its balance of payments, a serious economic 
situation that had in fact been recognized by the IM F.  Thanks to the open attitude of his country and 
of the Members concerned during these consultati ons regarding the difficult situation Ecuador was 
facing, as well as Ecuador's significant efforts to di spel the concerns raised by its main trading 
partners – efforts which had resulted in a number of  individual commitments – it had been possible to 
produce a report reflecting a balanced consensus, prov ing that the system could indeed adapt itself to 
the needs of the developing countries and that it  was possible to reach a consensus in this 
organization.  He wished to point out that Ecua dor had already met these commitments prior to the 
agreed date.  The recognition by Members of the transparency with which Ecuador had proceeded 
throughout this matter was a source of satisfaction for his delegation.  However, certain developed-
country Members who had raised systemic concerns  during the consultations had not been quite as 
transparent with respect to thei r extensive safeguards and support me asures for their industries, and 
unlike Ecuador, they had yet to accept that these measures should be monitored by the WTO.  In 
conclusion, his delegation wished to thank the Ch airman of the BOPs Committee for the professional 
and efficient manner in which he had been able to  guide the delicate consultation process, as well as 
members of the Secretariat for their valuable support. 
118. The representative of Ukraine  said his country highly appreciated the consultations held in 
June 2009 on its balance-of-payments measures.  Ukraine wished to than k the Chairman of the 
Committee for his guidance of the consultation pr ocess, and the Secretariat for its professional 
technical support.  Ukraine had recognized th e constructive atmosphere during the Committee 
sessions and thanked all members of the Committee for their constructive questions, valuable views 
and joint work, which had resulted in a consensus report submitted the General Council.  Immediately 
after the consultations in the Committee, his Govern ment had made efforts to eliminate the measure 
completely at an earlier time, i.e. it had propo sed that the Parliament adopt an amended law 
eliminating the measure before its expiry on 7 Se ptember 2009.  His Government did not support any 
initiatives or proposals which might imply prolonga tion of the existing measure after that date. WT/GC/M/121 
Page 40  
 
  119. The representative of the European Communities
 said the EC looked forward to Ecuador's 
updates in meetings of the Committee on progress in  meeting these requirements, starting with the 
first meeting in September.  It also trusted that Ecuador would continue to abide to the commitment to 
remove all the remaining trade measures fo r balance-of-payments purposes no later than 
January 2010.  With respect to Ukraine, the 13 per cent surcharge applied on certain imported 
products inflicted real and substa ntial damage on EU exporters a nd was clearly designed to favour 
domestic producers.  At its June meeting, the Co mmittee had unanimously found that the 13 per cent 
surcharge was unjustified on balance-of-payments grounds, and was incompatible with the balance-
of-payments provisions of GATT.  In the consen sus report adopted by the Committee, Ukraine had 
agreed to eliminate its 13 per cent surcharge fo r both cars and refrigerators at the latest by 
7 September, which was the date on which the surcharg e was foreseen to expire in the initial law.  In 
the consensus report, Ukraine also committed to "f irmly endeavour" to repeal the measures by mid-
July.  The EC would be grateful if Ukraine could elaborate at the present meeting on the steps it had 
taken to meet this commitment.  On the other ha nd, the Ukrainian Parliament's Committee on Tax and 
Customs issues had recommended to Parliament to vot e in favour of a draft law that would extend the 
existing measures by 6 to 12 months.  The EC understood this had not been voted yet in the plenary.  It went without saying that this action planned by the Ukrainian Parliament would contradict not only 
Ukraine's "best endeavour" commitment in the Commi ttee to repeal the import surcharge by mid-July, 
but also the commitment to definitively phase the measu res out by 7 September at the latest.  In sum, 
the 13 per cent surcharge applied by Ukraine was no t in line with the relevant provisions of GATT, 
and the EC would continue to closely follow the situ ation.  It expected Ukraine to rapidly notify the 
WTO of any progress in implementing the commitme nts it had taken in the Committee consultations. 
120. The representative of Japan
 said the successful completion of reports on the import 
restrictions taken by Ecuador and Ukraine in the Committee was a positive achievement, and Japan 
appreciated the hard work of Ecuador and Ukraine, as well as other delegations.  At the same time, as 
his delegation had said during the consultations, Japan had concerns about import  restrictions such as 
those imposed by Ecuador and Ukraine from a sy stemic point of view, and believed that the 
introduction of such measures taken for balan ce-of-payments purposes should not be readily 
permitted.  Japan would continue to work closely with other Members to ensure that balance-of-
payments restrictions would not be u sed to justify protectionist measures. 
121. The representative of Ecuador  said that both the provisions of the GATT in Article XVIII.B 
and the Understanding on Balance of Payments we re specific and were to be implemented in 
accordance with the right each country had, so that  Ecuador did not agree with the suggestion that 
balance-of-payments provisions should not be us ed.  Nor could it accept that there should be 
unilateral interpretations of GA TT provisions unless these had been established by the DSB, which 
was responsible for interpreting the GATT, or thr ough a legal procedure within the organization. 
122. The representative of Ukraine  said he could be very brief, because the discussion in the 
Committee had been very fruitful and productive con cerning recent developments.  While there had 
been certain initiatives in Parliament, there was no support for these from the Government, and a 
strong commitment from Ukraine, reflected in the Comm ittee's report, to eliminate all existing 
measures before 7 September 2009.  He wished to  inform Members that his Government, which was 
in close contact with the International Mone tary Fund, had signed a document with the IMF 
incorporating a specific provision for the expirati on of Ukraine's balance-of-payment measures on 7 
September. 
123. The General Council took note  of the statements and of the in formation contained in the Note 
on the Committee's June meeting (WT/BOP/R/92/Rev.1), adopted  the Decision on Participation in the  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 41 
 
 
Committee in that document,11 and adopted  the reports on the consultati ons with Ecuador and Ukraine 
in documents WT/BOP/R/91 and 93 respectively. 
8. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement 
(a) Cape Verde – Implementation of the schedule of concessions – Request for waiver 
(G/C/W/622) 
124. The Chairman  said the draft decision in G/C/W/622 provided for a waiver on the 
implementation of scheduled concessions and commi tments for Cape Verde until 1 January 2010.  
This matter had been considered by the Council for Tr ade in Goods at its meeting of 29 June, and he 
invited Mrs. Johansen (Norway), Chairperson of  the Goods Council, to report on the Council's 
consideration of this matter. 
125. Ms. Johansen (Norway), Chairperson of the Goods Council , said that at its meeting of 29 June 
2009, the Goods Council had approved the draft waiv er decision for the im plementation of Cape 
Verde's schedule of concessions.  The request had been considered at the CTG's meetings of 24 March and 29 June 2009.   The CTG had agreed to forward the draft waiver decision (G/C/W/622) 
to the General Council for adoption. 
126. The Chairman
 thanked Mrs. Johansen for her report.  Unless delegations wished to comment 
on the draft decision, he proposed that, in acco rdance with the Decision-Making Procedures under 
Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement ag reed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), the General 
Council adopt the draft decision in G/C/W/622. 
127. The General Council took note  of the statement and so agreed .12 
(b) Review of waivers pursuant to Ar ticle IX:4 of the WTO Agreement 
(i) LDCs – Article 70.9 of the TRIPS Agreement with respect to pharmaceutical products, 
granted on 8 July 2002 until 1 January 2016 (WT/L/478) 
(ii) European Communities –  Preferences for Albania,  Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia 
and Montenegro, and the Former Yugoslav Republic  of Macedonia, granted on 28 July 2006 
until 31 December 2011 (WT/L/654, WT/L/763) 
(iii) United States –  Former Territory of the Pa cific Islands, grante d on 27 July 2007 until 
31 December 2016 (WT/L/694, WT/L/762) 
(iv) Mongolia – Export duties on raw cashmere, grant ed on 27 July 2007 until 29 January 2012 
(WT/L/695) 
(v) European Communities – Application of autonomous preferential treatment to Moldova, 
granted on 7 May 2008 until 31 December 2013 (WT/L/722, WT/L/764) 
128. The Chairman  recalled that, in accordance with para graph 4 of Article IX of the WTO 
Agreement, "any waiver granted for a period of mo re than one year shall be reviewed by the 
Ministerial Conference not later than one year af ter it is granted, and thereafter annually until the 
waiver terminates."  There were five waivers befo re the General Council for review.  Three of the 
waivers under review provided that an annual repor t should be submitted by the Members concerned 
regarding the operation or implementation of those waivers with a view to facilitating their annual 
                                                      
11 The Decision was subsequen tly circulated as WT/L/767. 
12 The Decision was subsequen tly circulated as WT/L/768. WT/GC/M/121 
Page 42  
 
  review by the General Council.  The reports from these Members had been circulated in documents 
WT/L/762, 763 and 764. 
129. The General Council took note
 of the reports contained in  documents WT/L/762, 763 and 
764. 
9. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration – Report on meeting of July 2009 
(WT/BFA/111) 
130. The Chairman  drew attention to the report of the Budget Committee on its meeting of July in 
document WT/BFA/111. 
131. Ms Swärd Capra  (Sweden), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration , said that at its meeting on 9 July, the Committee had reviewed the budgetary and 
financial situation of the WTO Secretariat and th e extra-budgetary funds at the end of June.  The 
Committee had then taken note of the progress made on the building project.  The City of Geneva had 
accepted the declassification of the land and the modification of the law on the protection of the lakeside, conditions sine qua non  for the construction of the new building and security perimeter.  
However, a referendum at city level was schedul ed for 27 September, and a second referendum on 
cantonal level could not be excluded.  This could de lay the finalization of the project and also have 
financial consequences, such as the payment of rent  for temporary premises at Chemin des Mines by 
the Host Country.  The Committee had concluded the review of the corrective actions proposed by the 
Management Board in order to maintain the ac tuarial balance of the WTO Pension Plan.  The 
Committee had endorsed the revised recommendation of the Management Board as presented to the 
General Council in the following item of the presen t meeting. The Committee had also reviewed a 
proposal to adjust the dependency allowan ces for WTO staff, and made the following 
recommendation:  "The Committee, bearing in mi nd that the methodology for adjusting dependency 
allowances was approved by the General Council in December, 2004 (WT/GC/M/90, paragraph 158), 
recommends that the revised allowances as set out in document WT/BFA/W/185 be incorporated into 
the WTO Staff Rules with effect from 1 January 20 09."  Finally, the Committee had been updated on 
the first meeting of the Working Group on Admi nistrative Measures, established to review the 
efficiency of the current measures imposed on Members and Observers with outstanding 
contributions. 
132. The General Council took note
 of the statement, approved  the Budget Committee's specific 
recommendation in paragraph 19 of its re port in document WT/BFA/111, and adopted  the report. 
10. WTO Pension Plan – Amendments to the Regulations of the Pension Plan 
(WT/GC/W/606) 
133. The Chairman  said the Amendments to the Regulations of the Pension Plan had been 
circulated in document WT/GC/W/606 and invite d Mr. Niggli (Switzerland), Chairman of the 
Management Board of the WTO Pension Plan, to introduce them. 
134. Mr Niggli (Switzerland), Chairman of the Management Board of the WTO Pension Plan , said 
document WT/GC/W/606 represented the culmination of considerable debate and discussion in the 
Management Board, extending over a period of more than one year.  The proposed amendments to the 
Plan Regulations had their origins in decisions ta ken by the Management Board, on the advice of the 
Consulting Actuary, to amend certain key assumptio ns underpinning the actuarial valuation of the 
Plan.  In particular, the Management Board had deci ded that the assumption with respect to expected 
future improvements in mortality should be adjusted  to reflect an improvement of 2 per cent over the 
next 20 years.  Furthermore, the Management Board had agreed that the assumed rate of salary progression attributable to seniority and promotions  should be increased from 3.5 per cent to 4.0 per  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 43 
 
 
cent.  Lastly, the Management Board had decided th at a smoothing approach to the valuation of Plan 
assets should be used in order to allow investment gains and losses to be recognized over a period of 
time and to smooth out the volatility in the asset valu e used to calculate the required Plan contribution 
rate.  The above amendments had had the effect of  increasing the required cont ribution rate to emerge 
from the 2007 actuarial valuation from 23.1 per cent to 27.0 per cent.  The cash contribution rate, on 
which current contribution rates were based, had re mained at 22.5 per cent since the inception of the 
Plan in 1999.  Therefore, the Management Board ha d had to consider corrective action to redress the 
actuarial deficit reported in the 2007 valuation.  After extensive debate, the Management Board had 
agreed by consensus to recommend the following two amendments to the Plan Regulations:  (i) the 
normal retirement age should be increased to 65 for st aff entering the Plan on or after 1 January 2010 
and existing staff should be entitled to exercise th e option to remain in service beyond the current age 
of 62;  and (ii) the overall rate of contribution to the Plan should be increased from 22.5 per cent to 
23.7 per cent for periods of contributory service as from 1 January 2010, the contributions of the participant and of the WTO thus being raised to 7.9 per cent and 15.8 per cent, respectively.  The 
Consulting Actuary had confirmed that, with the ab ove two amendments, the actuarial deficit reported 
at 31 December 2007 would have been corrected.  Th e actuarial balance of the Plan would next be 
verified in the context of the regular valua tion at 31 December 2010.  The Committee on Budget, 
Finance and Administration had endorsed both of these recommendations.  He wished to express his deep appreciation to all those who had contributed to the efforts to seek a solution to this issue and to 
the formulation of a set of recommendations which constituted a significant change in the conditions 
of service of the staff. 
135. The General Council approved
 the amendments to the WTO Pension Plan Regulations as set 
out in document WT/GC/W/606. 
136. The representative of the United States  said his country attached great importance to the 
solvency of the WTO Pension Fund and was pleas ed that the General Council had agreed on the 
means to address the current actuarial deficit based on the recommendations of the Management 
Board and the good work of the Committee on Budge t, Finance and Administration.  The United 
States was hopeful that such actuarial deficits would not be a recurring phenomenon.  However, for 
the sake of transparency, his authorities had asked th at he state for the record at the present meeting 
that if further corrective measures were needed in the future, the United States would be prepared to 
consider all options except an increase in the c ontribution rate that exceeded the UN Pension Fund 
contribution rate. 
137. The General Council took note  of the statements. 
11. Accession of developing countries – Statement by Gabon on behalf of the Informal 
Group of Developing Countries 
138. The representative of Gabon , speaking on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing 
countries and under "Other Business ", said his delegation had asked for the inclusion of this item 
under Other Business to once again convey to the Ge neral Council the Group's concerns regarding the 
accession of developing countries.  Accession, in particular in the instance of a developing country, was an issue that required urgent attention by all Members.  The group was above all worried that in 
many cases, the obstacles and delays that were en countered by some developing countries in their 
efforts to join the WTO were not technical in nature , but rather based on political considerations and 
issues that did not belong in this organization.  Fo r those countries fortunate enough not to encounter 
political hurdles in their accession process, the situat ion was not much better, as they faced demands 
that were not in accordance with their levels of  development or their ability to implement the 
commitments involved.  The Group was well aware th at the General Council Chair and the Secretariat 
were making every effort to improve the general situation of the accessions mechanism, but much 
more remained to be done.  The accession processes could benefit from greater multilateral 
transparency.  This was why it intended to initiate a process w ithin the Group with a view to WT/GC/M/121 
Page 44  
 
  requesting the inclusion of a standing item on access ion on the agenda of the General Council.  It was 
convinced that this would provide an opportunity to  keep Members informed of the state of progress 
in the various ongoing accession working parties and review some of the pending requests for the establishment of an accession working party. 
139. The representative of India
 said that for his country, accessions, in particular those of 
developing countries and LDCs, were an important matter and required ur gent attention.  India took 
note that the Secretariat had organized a dialogue with the acceding LDCs in May 2009.  A similar 
exercise for the developing countries would help in better understanding their concerns and finding 
ways to address them, in order for them to bene fit from the rule-based trading system and for the 
organization to become more representative.  Indi a also supported the statement by Gabon for the 
Informal Group of Developing countries. 
140. The representative of the United States  said his delegation was happy to consult with other 
Members on any issue of interest and had a very strong interest in maintaining a well-functioning 
accession process.  However, it wished to flag th at it had institutional concerns about creating 
standing agenda items on the General Council's agenda .  While Members were always free to ask that 
an issue be put on the agenda of a specific meeting if they had specific concerns, standing agenda 
items could lead to a poor allo cation of the time and energy of the General Council, because they 
required discussion even when there was no need for discussion of an issue at a particular meeting.  
141. The representative of Egypt , on behalf of the African Group , said the African Group had 
always supported the accession of developing countri es, particularly those in Africa.  Without 
dwelling on the importance of their integration in to the multilateral trading system and its positive 
contribution to their development efforts through tr ade – especially in light of the global economic 
and financial crisis – the African Group wished to reiterate once again its full support for Ethiopia in 
its accession process, and to call upon members of its  working party to facilitate and expedite its 
accession to the WTO.  
142. The representative of Iran , speaking as an observer , said his delegation wished to support the 
statement by Gabon for the Informal Group if Developing Countries.  Universality and development, 
as pointed out by various speakers on different occasions, were two important pillars of the functioning of the WTO.  Removal of political and other non-technical hurdles in the process of accession of developing countries enhanced the credibility of the multilateral trading system.  At the same time, his delegation attached importance to the role trade could play as an engine of  
development contributing to growth and employme nt.  Therefore, imposing an undue hindrance on 
the process of accession not only impacted negativel y on the development plans of these countries, 
but also delayed their full integration into the multilateral trading system. 
143. The General Council took note
 of the statements. 
12. Chairmanships of the Working Parties on  the Accession of the Bahamas and the 
Seychelles 
144. The Chairman , speaking under "Other Business ", informed Members that following 
consultations with Members of the Working Party a nd the authorities of the Bahamas, and in keeping 
with usual WTO practice, it had been agreed that Mr Peter Black (Jamaica) would serve as Chairman of this Working Party.  Also following consulta tions with Members of the Working Party and the 
authorities of the Seychelles, and in keeping with  usual WTO practice, it had been agreed that 
Ms Hilda Al-Hinai (Oman) would serve as Chairper son of this Working Party, replacing Mr Berthet 
(Uruguay).  On behalf of the General Council, he wished to thank Mr Berthet for having served as 
Chairman of this Working Party.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 45 
 
 
145. The General Council took note  of the statement. 
13. Administrative Measures for Members in arrears 
146. The Chairman , speaking under "Other Business ", recalled that at its meeting in May 2006, the 
General Council had approved a recommendati on from the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration regarding revised Administrative Measures for Members in arrears (WT/BFA/86).  
Among these Administrative Measures was a requirement that at each meeting of the General C ouncil, 
the Chairman of the Committee on Budget, Fina nce and Administration s hould provide information 
with regard to which Members were under Administ rative Measures in Ca tegories II through IV. 
147. Ms  Swärd Capra  (Sweden), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration , said the Members under Categories II through IV of the Administrative Measures as 
at 27 July 2009 were as follows:  Grenada and Peru in Category II;  Mali, Nicaragua and Paraguay in 
Category III;  and the following Members in Categor y IV:  Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, 
Commonwealth of Dominica, Côte d'Ivoire, Demo cratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Gambia, 
Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritania, Niger, Republic  of Congo, Senegal, Si erra Leone and Togo.  
Zimbabwe had recently settled it s arrears and was therefore no longer subject to Administrative 
Measures. 
148. The Chairman  then recalled that under the revised Administrative Measures he was also 
required at each Council meeting to request t hose Members in Categories III and IV of the 
Administrative Measures to inform him, before the next meeting of the General Council, as to when 
their payment of arrears might be expected.  In keeping with the Administrative Measures, he would 
report on Members' replies to the next meeting of the General Council.  Since the May General 
Council meeting, he had been informed that Zimbab we had liquidated its outstanding contributions in 
arrears.  
149. The General Council took note  of the statements.  
_______________ 
 
 WT/GC/M/121 
Page 46  
 
  ANNEX I 
 
Remarks by the Director-General at the
 
informal meeting of the TNC on 24 July 2009 (JOB(09)/84)  
  
 I would like to welcome everyone to this informal meeting of the TNC.   
  I thought it would be useful to review, before the General Council next week, where we are in 
the Doha Development Agenda nego tiations and consider the road ah ead.  Let me report to you on my 
most recent activities and meetings before we engage  in an exchange of views on the work and next 
steps in the DDA over the coming few months.     Since I reported to you at the May Council, the world economy has remained fragile and the 
economic outlook remains uncertain.  Although financ ial markets have recently shown signs of 
stabilization, and the trade contraction – now fo recast at 10 per cent in volume - seems to begin 
bottoming out, it is still unclear how and how long it will take us to exit the crisis. Although Asia is 
starting to see a rebound in trade from the very low figures in the first quarter of the year, I am still very cautious.  Unemployment continues to be on th e rise and its full social and political effects are 
still to be felt.      
 Against this uncertain backdrop, it is encour aging that many world leaders have signalled 
very clearly their determination to press ahead with the Doha negotiations  and move them to a 
conclusion very soon.  Negotiators here in Geneva have heeded to calls of leaders and got back to 
work reasonably quickly and seriously.  The collect ive commitment at ministerial level to the Round 
remains very strong and this should not surprise us.  This crisis is unprecedented in its width, depth 
and global impact and they consider that we mu st act collectively to send the right signals and 
establish an appropriate trade environment for a sustainable recovery for all.     Since the May General  Council I reported on a nu mber of meetings I had attended as well as 
on a series of contacts with Ministers and other policy makers.  I also previewed an intense series of meetings that I was to attend and has just concl uded with the very fruitful APEC Trade Ministerial 
Retreat in Singapore.   
  At the meetings of Ministers and Heads of State and government in Bali, Paris, L'Aquila and in Singapore, I have stressed three fundamental messa ges:  (i) we need to keep trade open and resist 
protectionist measures; (ii) the best way to keep tr ade open is to keep opening trade, hence the need to 
conclude the Doha Round as soon as possible.  In light  of this, I invited leaders to give the necessary 
instructions and flexibility to their negotiators and Se nior Officials so as to facilitate the narrowing of 
remaining differences and accelerate decision-making in  Geneva and, (iii) we must implement on the 
ground commitments to Aid for Trade and continue to provide the oil that runs the machinery of 
international trade – trade finance.    
 From all these interactions and in the comm uniqués issued after these meetings, there were 
firm statements of rejection of protectionist m easures.  I sensed a genuine and strong renewal of 
political commitment to re-engage in the Doha negotia tions and to conclude it in 2010.  There were 
expressions of the need to fill in remaining gaps and of the desire to enhance transparency and 
understanding of what is on the table.  I was enc ouraged by the determination to avoid theological 
discussions and instead engage in the common purpose of finding a pragmatic way forward.  In sum, 
we now have a change in atmosphe rics and a point of arrival.   
  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 47 
 
 
 I will continue these contacts with the objectiv e of keeping the focus on the need to advance 
the Round including at the upcoming Trade Ministers' meeting to be hosted by India and the G20 Leaders summit in Pittsburgh in September.     It is clear that for political leaders we are now  entering the end-game.  Therefore, we need to 
urgently translate this change in atmospherics into a clear path for engagement across the board in the 
negotiations here in Geneva so that we can get to the arrival point on time.  My sense, from my recent 
discussions with a number of you is that it is important  that we end July with a clear view of the next 
steps.    
 Both tracks which we discussed at our last TNC need to be re-energised and focused.  Starting 
with multilateral work in all negotiating groups.  Th is has been, is and will be the centre of our 
negotiations.     Bilateral discussions, on which a number of you are engaged, also need to be energised and 
you need to drill into specifics.  We need to see serious and honest engagement taking place now.  
However, bilateral engagement s hould not be a reason for slowing the multilateral process or for 
holding it up.  The two processes now have to move si multaneously.  It also remains clear, of course, 
that decision-making belongs only to the multilateral track.  To reinforce this point it is important to 
have the maximum possible transparency  about these bilateral discussions.   
 
 My contacts also indicate agreement that sch eduling in Agriculture and NAMA must follow 
the principle of "no surprises".  This means that all significant issues relating to schedules must be 
clear at the time modalities are esta blished.  In keeping with the Single Undertaking, a commensurate 
level of certainty will also be required in the othe r Negotiating Groups.  This implies that delegations 
must start thinking of the signals to send to all Ch airs about what they see as "big-ticket" items for 
them.  There will also have to be collective agre ement not to take "hostages".  Finally, more 
horizontal processes to address political sensitivities acr oss the board have to be put in place from 
September on.     Against this background, I now wish  to turn to each of the negotiating areas and provide you with a brief outline of the state-of-play as well as an insight into the sort of road map envisaged by 
Chairs of Negotiating Groups in the weeks after the summer break.   
 
As you know, work in agriculture  is continuing, particularly in light of the renewed political 
mandate from the G20 and G8.  The Revision 4 brack eted and annotated areas needing further work 
have been identified.  These include SSM (espec ially the architecture), cotton, issues related to 
sensitive products, preference erosion and tropi cal products, TRQ expansion as well as tariff 
simplification.  The Chair has indicated that cons ultations are underway to determine how best to 
broach these issues, with a view to a steady progr amme of technical work in late-summer through to 
the autumn.  The aim is to complete as much as pos sible of the outstanding technical work so as to set 
the stage for decisions on more political issues.   
 
Discussions are on-going on the templates for scheduling and on the required format of 
support tables and data needs – both for completion of the templates and fo r the establishment of 
modalities and of the time-lines and process for scheduli ng and verification.  It will be important for 
Members to take ownership of this matter so that you can be fully ready, with agreed time lines and 
formats, to complete the scheduling process in agri culture once modalities are established.  This is a 
very necessary, non-political work that should conti nue with greater focus from September onwards.   
 
In NAMA , apart from a number of open-ended transparency sessions in the first half of this 
year the Negotiating Group has also held two dedicated sessions on NTBs.  These sessions were 
useful in that they helped delegations to focus on the legal texts.  The Group has also been looking at WT/GC/M/121 
Page 48  
 
  scheduling issues, and a Workshop on Electronic Negotiating Files was organized the second week of 
13 July.  The feedback I have received concerni ng that Workshop has been very positive.   
 
On sectorals, the process continues to be led by  the sponsors of such initiatives.  During the 
first half of this year, the sponsors have been doi ng detailed technical work with a view to engaging 
with their trading partners on a factual basis with  numbers, sector-by-sector simulations and country-
by-country analysis.  I know that the Chair has met separately with a number of these groups, who 
seem to be at the stage of completing the tec hnical work and commencing their outreach activities 
with trading partners.    
Consultations on the case-specific flexibilities have  also taken place in order to see whether 
there have been new developments on those issues.  I believe that at this moment there are no specific 
developments to report.    
Concerning the work programme for the comi ng months, the Chair has planned three NAMA 
weeks starting in September at which time the emph asis will be on advancing the NTBs negotiations.  
This is an area where much work remains to be done.  Regarding the other open issues, the Chair's 
intention is to take them up when Members are ready to engage on them.   
 In connection with the scheduling workshops in both Agriculture and NAMA, I am well 
aware that some of you have raised the need to  provide technical assistance for your capital-based 
officials so that they can be fu lly prepared for scheduling when th e time comes. This need is now 
factored into our Technical Assistance planning fo r the coming months. As always this planning is 
being done in cooperation with a ll delegations concerned who are i nvited to contact the Secretariat 
concerning specific needs that may arise.  
 
 Turning to Services , over the past few months activity in the Special Session has focused 
mainly on technical work.  This has taken the form of bilateral and plurilatera l discussions, as well as 
friends' groups gatherings, held on the margins of the usual services clusters.  The technical 
discussions have centered on understanding better the requests and potential offers, and obtaining 
further precision on the results of last July's Mini sterial Signalling Conference.  The subsidiary bodies 
have also met and a Seminar on Financial Servi ces and a Scheduling Workshop have taken place. 
 
 The implementation of LDC modalities has always  been an important topic in the services 
negotiations and consultations are continuing on an anticipated subm ission regarding an LDC Waiver 
mechanism.  
 Looking ahead, Members agree that, in the context of the DDA, work in services should 
continue on the basis of last July's Report by th e Chair of the Special Session, as well as Annex C of 
the Hong Kong Ministerial. Work in this area s hould also be accelerated, both on market access as 
well as GATS rules.  The next cluster of services meeti ngs has been fixed for the week of 5 October.   
 
 In the Rules  area, the Chair circulated new texts on anti-dumping and horizontal subsidies in 
December 2008.  The Negotiating Group has met regul arly to review those texts, with sessions in 
February, March, May and June/Jul y.  Delegations are working systematically through the issues, 
taking up both bracketed and un-b racketed issues in the texts, as well as reverting to issues not yet 
addressed in the Chair's texts.  Members have al so begun a process, based on documents prepared by 
the Secretariat at the request of the Chair, to c onsider whether differences between the anti-dumping 
and countervailing provisions of the two Agreements might benefit from harmonization.  The Chair 
expects to continue this work in the Autumn, with a meeting scheduled for mid-September and a 
further meeting expected in October.   WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 49 
 
 
 With respect to fisheries subsidies, delega tions continue to work through the road map 
circulated at the same time as the December 2008 texts.  The Chair has indicated that he expects to 
complete the discussion of the road map during the c ourse of the Autumn, with a next meeting already 
scheduled for September and a further meeting expect ed in October.  Following the completion of the 
road map discussion, the Chair intends to provide  delegations with an opportunity to present any 
alternative visions as to the structure and subs tance of fisheries subsidies disciplines.   
  You will recall that the Chair emphasized when he issued his December 2008 text that he was 
taking the bottom-up approach to negotiations that de legations had requested.  It is his hope that the 
intensive ongoing discussions will put him in a position where he will be able to issue texts, hopefully 
reflecting some degree of convergence, which can only come from Members.   
  On regional trade agreements, there are two issu es that need to be discussed:  one is the 
review of the Transparency M echanism with a view to making it permanent, and the second is 
systemic issues.  On the first, Members still fe el that they are building up experience in the 
implementation of the Mechanism and therefore pref er to wait before undertaking the review.  On 
systemic issues, discussions are dependent on the submission of text-based proposals by Members. And although ideas have been floated on this issue in  the context of preparations for the Ministerial 
Conference, no specific text-based proposal has yet b een tabled.  I understand that the Chair intends to 
hold an informal meeting of the Group to determine how to take the process forward.    
With respect to the Special Session of the Council for TRIPS (the work on the register of 
geographical indications (GIs) for wines and spirits ), the intensification of technical work since 
November 2008 has led to useful clarifications of  the written proposals on the table, including with 
regard to how the various proponents for a regist er of GIs for wines and spirits would see their 
proposals implemented at the national level.  Consid erable work  has already been done on certain 
issues such as those relating to the elements of no tification and registration.  But further progress is 
likely to depend on resolution of two key issues on which Members remain divided:  first, the legal 
and procedural implications for national law and administration of registering a GI for wines and 
spirits;  and second, the voluntary or mandatory charact er of Members' particip ation in the register. 
Other issues, such as costs and burdens and special and differential treatment, will also need further 
negotiations. 
 
The Special Session Chair has called for a structured, substantive discussion on the 
outstanding issues.  To this end, he will intens ify as from September consultations with Members and 
substantive discussions.  The Chair has also called fo r a new or revised Member paper and, if no such 
paper emerges, he would not exclude the possibility of a Chair's text identifying the outstanding issues 
and options for resolving them. 
 As regards the CTE in Special Session , informal open ended transparency meetings were 
held in March and July, with Chair's consultati ons on the way forward also taking place during this 
period.  While there may have been a lack of "tracti on" to move ahead with the work in the first part 
of the year - given obvious linkages with the work of  other negotiating groups - there now seems to be 
a sense of readiness to proceed on the basi s of the July 2008 Work Programme.   
 The Committee will be meeting again in Se ptember and a Workshop on Environmental 
Goods and Services will be held back-to-back.  Th is event will provide an opportunity for further 
analysis and discussions of environmental goods and technology sectors, in addition to addressing 
development related aspects of the mandate.   
 The roadmap for work after September is set out  in the July 2008 Work Programme.  On sub 
paragraphs 31(i) and 31(ii), apart from certain issues  that will require further consultations, the next 
step will be text-based negotiations.  As regards s ub paragraph 31(iii), Member s will be invited to put 
forward submissions identifying environmental goods of  interest including goods that may be targeted WT/GC/M/121 
Page 50  
 
  as part of a request-offer process – as well as concrete proposals as to how the Committee may 
address cross-cutting or developmen t related issues under the mandate. 
 
 On special and differential treatment, work this year has mainly focused on the elements of 
a Monitoring Mechanism.  This work, which has largely taken place in small groups, was initially 
based on the submissions tabled by a few develope d and developing country Members.  Later, based 
on these submissions and the discussions that took place, the Chairman tabled a non-paper highlighting the possible areas of convergence.  Th is non-paper seeks to identify elements on which 
there is a greater degree of convergence and those where further work is required.    
 On the six Agreement-specific proposals on wh ich Members had been focusing, the Chairman 
indicated that the positions were not too far apart.  But he had put the discussion on these proposals on hold because it appeared that there was not th e necessary flexibility to move the process to 
convergence.    
 On the Category II Agreement-specific proposal s, the Secretariat has attempted to identify 
those proposals that are being addressed either in pa rt or in entirety, in the ongoing work in the 
different WTO bodies including in the negotiating bodi es.  The next stage will be to consider, in 
collaboration with the relevant Chairpersons, th e best way to expedite progress on these proposals, 
particularly those that are not being addressed as part of ongoing work.    
 On the way forward, the Chair has indicated th at he intends to continue concentrating on 
further refining the elements of the Monitoring Mech anism on the basis of his non-paper.  This work 
will continue in small group consu ltations, but with the usual open-e nded transparency meetings to 
keep all Members up to speed of any developments.    
 On the Agreement-specific proposals, the Chai rman has informed me that he may consider 
attempting to close the remaining gaps on the six proposals, which Members had earlier been addressing.  I believe that the gaps are few and th at we are not too far from convergence which would 
then enable us to add these six proposals to our exis ting list of 28 proposals agreed to in principle.   
  The Trade Facilitation  negotiations have advanced to a stage where the parameters of the 
envisaged Agreement are beginning to take clear shape.  After several rounds of reviewing the 
proposed texts, Members have reached a point wher e they now have a good sense of the measures it is 
going to contain.  Progress has also been made on the S&D side where elements of the targeted 
implementation mechanism are starting to emerge.    
 Having recently concluded a round of revising th eir negotiating texts, Members have agreed 
on taking the refinement and consolidation process to the next level by moving into a focussed 
drafting mode.  A first test of the new working method was undertaken earlier this month and will be 
rolled out more broadly in the fall.  To that end,  two meetings have been scheduled starting at the 
beginning of October.    
 Work on the implementation pillar will have to advance as well.  Progress will be captured in 
a summary document prepared by the Friend of th e Chair. Combining 3 existing documents, it will 
bring the different elements together in a se quential manner, allowing Members to base their 
negotiations on a comprehensive package of ideas.    
 Allow me now to address dispute settlement , even if it is not part of the Single Undertaking. 
Work in the Special Sessions since the beginning of the year has focused on a discussion of the draft 
legal text contained in the Chairman's document of last July, which Members recognized as basis for 
future work at the end of last year.   WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 51 
 
 
During the last consultations the Chairman a nnounced that he expects to hold another three 
sets of consultations before the end of the year.  The Chairman's objective is to be in a position to 
present a revised draft legal text as soon as possible.  
 
 Let me now briefly move to the issues related to GI extension and the relationship between 
the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD.  I have continued consultations  pursuant to the mandate given 
to me in paragraph 39 of the Hong Kong Ministerial D eclaration to intensify this process and to report 
to you regularly.  I have undertaken these cons ultations personally since March 2009, so far 
convening four meetings with a group of delegations and focusing on technical aspects of these 
issues.  I will provide the full membership with  a detailed report on this process at an open-ended 
consultation this Monday, 27 July. I will subseque ntly report to the General Council on Tuesday, 28 
July.   
A few words on Aid for Trade .  I think the timing of the Second Global Review of Aid for 
Trade here in Geneva a couple of weeks ago w as important both in terms of assessing the overall 
performance of this initiative and in seeking add itional and substantial commitments from donors. 
The presence of Ministers, the United Nations Secret ary General and the heads of international and 
regional institutions, including financial institu tions, sent a strong signal of the importance of 
international cooperation in the face of the current economic down-turn.  Of course, Aid for Trade is 
not part of the ongoing DDA negotiations, but I firmly  believe that the objectives of enhancing growth 
prospects by helping countries overcome their s upply-side constraints and increase their 
competitiveness and their effective participation in world trade places Aid for Trade at the centre of 
our trade and development agenda.    
This brings me to the end of my report.  I am sorry it has been lengthy, but I believe it is 
important at this stage of our work to shar e a full and clear picture of the road ahead.  
 
We have come a long way, and we are not far from our journey's end.  But we know that the 
last stretch will be an active and tough one.  
 From the road map I have just described the au tumn will be a very busy period. We have to 
ensure that the whole caravan moves forward togeth er and arrives on time.  I am confident we can do 
this if we keep our commitment strong and match it with action.  I hope you will all make the most of 
the holiday period so that we can come back re freshed and ready for a busy and productive autumn. 
 
_______________ 
  
 WT/GC/M/121 
Page 52  
 
  ANNEX II 
 
Statements by delegations at the
 
24 July 2009 informal meeting of the TNC  
  1. Chad (C-4)  
 Taking the floor on behalf of the coordinati on bureau of the co-sponsors of the Sectoral 
Initiative in Favour of Cotton, I wish first to tha nk Mr Pascal Lamy for his report as TNC Chairman 
and to thank the other Group Chairs for their reports  which were referred to by the Chairman of the 
Trade Negotiations Committee.  The C-4 wishes to emphasize the commitment it has made to 
concluding the Doha Round negotiatio ns expeditiously.  As you might suspect, the Round cannot be 
concluded without resolving the issue of cott on in accordance with the Hong Kong Ministerial 
mandate.  We reaffirm our commitment to multilate ralism in the same way as the G-20 in its London 
declaration, the Cairns Group in Bali, and the r ecent G-8 meeting in L'Aquila, all of which placed 
emphasis on reviving the multilateral process while identifying a clear roadmap for a balanced 
conclusion to the Doha Round in 2010 on the basis of  the results already achieved in the negotiations 
on modalities in Agriculture and NAMA.  Given this  background, the C-4 considers that it is high 
time to assign the highest priority to the conclusion of the Doha Round, including the issue of cotton.  
The C-4 is anxious that the Hong Kong mandate shoul d be respected and, in  accordance with that 
mandate, that cotton should be addressed am bitiously, expeditiously and specifically. 
  While recognizing the relevance of the cons ultative framework mechanism on development 
assistance in favour of cotton which you establishe d following the Hong Kong Ministerial meeting, 
the C-4 remains convinced that particular emphasis should be placed on resolving the commercial 
aspect of cotton.  The C-4 takes this opportunity to  express its gratitude to th e community of bilateral 
and multilateral donors for their steadfast financial support to the African cotton sector.  The recent 
international financial crisis, which has turned in to a global economic crisis, will no doubt negatively 
impact the achievement of the Millennium Developmen t Goals.  This is a good opportunity for us to 
acknowledge the efforts of the community of deve lopment partners which, at their most recent 
meeting in L'Aquila, re-committed themselves to he lp the poorest countries.  The C-4, through a 
Ministerial mission to Washington from 20-23 July 2009, led by H.E. Mamadou Sanou, Minister of 
Trade, Business Promotion and Handicrafts of Burkina Faso and Coordination Minister of the C-4, held bilateral discussions with the United States in an attempt to induce that country to move forward 
in its negotiating positions.  By going to Washington,  we wished to demonstrate a spirit of initiative 
and a willingness to find an appropriate solution to the cotton issue.  We have always considered that 
such bilateral contacts could provide fertile gr ound for the emergence of a multilateral solution. 
  Thus, meetings were organized in Washington  with members of the US Congress, the Senate 
and the press regarding trade-distorting subsidies, b ecause we consider that cotton must remain at the 
centre of the Doha Round negotia tions.  Parallel to this mission, the C-4 organized a cotton 
conference on 20 July 2009 at the Carnegie Endowment Centre for International Peace and 
Development in Washington, which was attended by institutions such as the World Bank, the 
International Cotton Advisory Committee, branches  of the US Administration such as USTR, USTA 
and USAID, and leading public figures such as the former Chairman of the Committee on 
Agriculture, Ambassador Crawford Falconer.  We  welcome the fact that the Chairman of the 
Committee on Agriculture resumed his consultations at the beginning of this week and plans to 
continue them from the first week in September afte r the summer break.  We hope, therefore, that all 
these efforts will be crowned with success and serve to help conclude the Doha Round with all due 
dispatch, as time is running out for the 15 million African cotton farmers who are faced with the imminent disappearance of their cotton-sector activ ities.  The C-4 fully supports and endorses the 
statements of the African Group, the ACP Group and the Group of LDCs.  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 53 
 
 
2. Cuba 
 
 First, the delegation of Cuba would like to thank the Director-General for convening this 
meeting and for his report on the state of play in the Doha Development Round.  Second, my 
delegation shares the views expressed by Deputy Secretary Falconer of New Zealand, former 
Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture.  My coun try continues to be committed to bringing this 
Round of negotiations to a successful conclusion as soon as possible in its multilateral format of 
committees and working groups in Geneva and based on the explicit Doha mandate of transparency, 
inclusiveness and full participation of all Members, but not as an end in themselves, or by means of 
bilateral or closed meetings here or elsewhere.   Our commitment to the Doha Round is based on a 
successful conclusion of the Round that ensures that development objectives are achieved through a 
balanced and fair agreement on market access for agricultural and industrial goods, taking into 
account the criterion of less-than-full reciprocity while giving the developing countries room to implement their national policies and meeting their special needs, in particular those of small 
economies, so as to enable them to in tegrate effectively in world trade. 
 
 We are yet again hearing something we have b een hearing for years, and that is a supposed 
renewed commitment or political impetus and statemen ts in favour of the rapid conclusion of the 
Round, arising from the latest meetings of the G-8+5, the G-20 financial summit and the OECD.  
However, these indications have never before been  translated into flexibility in positions.  We hope 
that they will lead to concrete action and will not  remain empty words as they have in the past.  A 
successful conclusion of the Round should also solve the implementation issues which have been left 
by the wayside and special and differential treatme nt and flexibilities for the developing countries, 
which leave much to be desired in the current text s and which are increasingly being cut, for example 
the anti-concentration clause on flexibilities for the developing countries in NAMA, which is 
non-existent for sensitive products in agriculture – chiefly benefiting the developed countries.  It 
should also solve the sectoral issues in NAMA and that  of the special safeguard mechanism, which is 
ineffective in practice and is more restrictive in te rms of the number of times that it can be used, the 
duration and the remedies available, compared to th e special safeguard in Article 5, used mainly by 
the industrialized countries.  In fact, based on the cu rrent state of texts and draft agreements, many or 
the majority of the developing countries would see cu ts in their tariffs actually applied, whereas the 
developed countries would in general not see any real cuts in their applied tariffs and subsidies, and 
would only see cuts in the consolidated figures in their schedules of commitments under the Uruguay 
Round.   So far, there have not been any changes in  the negotiating positions of the key developed-
country players, nor does it look like there will be any changes in the short or medium term.  As a 
result, we do not see where this euphoric target of  2010 for concluding the Round has come from, or 
why we are intensifying the work in all groups from September.  We woul d like to reiterate once 
again that the substance and fulfilment of the mandat es should take priority over timetables.  We are 
opposed to again setting new artificial deadlines whic h have proved unrealistic, and not one of which 
has been met in the past, especially  if they are linked to the domestic policy agenda and timetables of 
a major Member of this Organization.  One Member  that claims not to have a position continues to 
insist, as it has always done, that it has made nu merous concessions and that it has not received 
enough in return.  Like many Memb ers we believe the opposite to be tr ue, namely that this developed-
country Member has many flexibilities and has received a great deal in return for making very few, if 
any, concessions.  
 There is talk of a sense of urgency and of  the benefits of concluding the Round for the 
developing countries.  Let us be real istic.  Let us put things into perspective.  According to World 
Bank forecasts, the potential gains from concluding  the Round amount to 96 billion dollars, of which 
only 16 billion dollars, i.e. one fifth, would be nefit the developing countries, which are in the 
majority.  Under this scenario, the per capita gain s for the industrialized countries would be 25 times 
higher than those for the developing countries.  Furthermore, other studies reveal that the World WT/GC/M/121 
Page 54  
 
  Bank's projected gains from the Round are overestim ated.  Hertel and Keeney estimated in the 
International Journal of Political Economy in sp ring 2008 that the gains from this Round for the 
developing countries would be no more than 4 billio n dollars.  UNCTAD considered that the losses 
for the developing countries resulting from cuts in  their industrial tariffs (NAMA) would be 
63,400 million dollars, that is, four times higher th an the gains forecast by the World Bank for these 
countries.  Although there is still an imbalance wi thin and between all the proposals and reference 
documents provided by the chairpersons, and even th ough they have not been approved by consensus, 
they should continue to form the basis for the negotiation process.   There is talk here of simultaneously intens ifying negotiations in the remaining negotiating 
groups from September.  Some argue that this is to ensure a balance in market  access and other issues 
in all areas.  It should be recalled that the only bala nce required by mandate is the comparable level of 
ambition between Agriculture and NAMA, in acc ordance with paragraph 24 of the Hong Kong 
Ministerial Declaration.  It is impossible for nearly  20 negotiating groups to work in parallel, because 
this will prevent compliance with the Doha mandate concerning the real and effective participation of 
the overwhelming majority of the developing countri es.  Furthermore, it should also be recalled that 
there is an explicit mandate for the sequencing of  negotiations, approved by the Ministers in Hong 
Kong, which lays down unequivocally that the modalities for Agriculture and NAMA are to be 
finalized before agreements are concluded in ot her areas.  Work should  therefore be focused 
immediately on achieving these modalities.  We th erefore stress the need to fulfil the mandates 
concerning the single undertaking and full modalities.  Finally, as stated recently by the Commission 
of Experts established by the President of the Un ited Nations General Assembly, in paragraph 32 of 
its report, it has been recognized for some time that  financial subsidies can be just as detrimental to 
the efficiency of a fair trading system as tariffs.  Indeed, they may be far more inequitable, because 
the developed countries have more resources to support subsidies than the developing countries, 
which cannot compete.  Agriculture and development were the main reasons behind the launching of 
the Doha Round and are its driving force.  Tthey sh ould continue to be at the centre of the Round. 
 
3. Hong Kong, China  
 
 Thank you for convening this meeting, whic h is very timely, and for your comprehensive 
stock-talking report on where we are now and where we are heading after the summer break.  We 
share your observation that in the past few months  there have been renewed signs of political energy 
in various fora. With such positive signs, we had hop ed for real re-engagement in Geneva before the 
summer break, but unfortunately this has not come  about.  Our leaders and Ministers have shown 
commitment to the conclusion of the DDA by 2010, as expressed in various fora, and most recently 
embodied in the specific commitments made by the APEC MRT in Singapore this week.  However, 
for that to happen we need to translate such politi cal will into action here in Geneva.  We therefore 
ag
ree with  you that we need to re-energise the Negotiati ng Groups and we need a clear roadmap on 
how to make progress on all fronts starting from September.  On Ag riculture and NAMA, as you have 
pointed out, we have had some very useful tec hnical discussions on scheduling earlier this month, and 
these have demonstrated the complexity of the t ask.  We support the continuation of the technical 
discussions to prepare Members for the scheduling stage.  However, it is equally, if not more, 
important to sort out the outstanding issues in m odalities, including for example SSM in Agriculture 
and sectorals in NAMA.  In NAMA, the fact-bas ed discussions on individual Members' flexibilities 
and on sectorals have been useful in increasing Member s' understanding of the issues, and this process 
may be used on other outstanding issues. We need  to have a better discussion on what is possible on 
sectorals, and all sorts of compromises and trade-offs  can be considered if engagement takes place in 
the right format.  Progress can only be achieved th rough a combination of bilateral, plurilateral and 
multilateral engagements, but any outcome in the bilateral and plurilateral discussions should be 
multilateralized as early as possible so as to comma nd the consensus of all Members.  We look 
forward to engagement at the level of Senior Offi cials, and more intensive and constructive discussion 
from September onwards.   WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 55 
 
 
 
 Services are an important pillar of the DDA ne gotiations for us. We attach great importance 
to having a good outcome in the Services negotia tions, both in the market access and the Rules 
components. In our view, the signalling conference held last July should provide a workable basis for Members to move on in deepening their Services market access offers. When the time comes as 
Agriculture and NAMA near modalities, we should al so be prepared to look at compressing the 
timeline for the submission of revised offers, taking into account all other developments.  In the same 
vein, it is essential that substantial discussions on the text of Domestic Regulations be advanced and 
the WPDR Chair should issue a revised text as a JOB/document as soon as possible, in tandem with the reinvigoration of the Round.  We must also continue our work on the front of Trade Facilitation, 
an equally important part of the Single Undertaking, building on the s
teady progress that we have 
achieved so far. Through the hard work of the Negotiating Group,  the final form of the various trade facilitation measures tabled is beginning to take shape in
 the JOB/document that you 
mentioned. To move the negotiations forward, compromises have to be reached between proponents 
of proposals and those making counter-suggestions.  Re lated textual submissions should be integrated 
and merged, and cross-cutting issues should be discu ssed in a horizontal manner.  We should keep up 
the part of negotiations on the S&D front, where en couraging progress has been made recently.  Hong 
Kong, China will continue its active participation in  the relevant discussion in order to expedite the 
work on this important pillar of the DDA.   On Rules, we are pleased to see the engagement shown by 
Members in the negotiations held in the first half of  the year on the basis of the new draft texts by the 
Chair issued last December.  The AD negotiation is always difficult and politically sensitive.  The 
current global economic crisis adds  a further layer of complexity and a sense of urgency to the 
negotiation.  In the face of the threat of rising pr otectionism, the need to strengthen the AD rules has 
become more important than ever.  We understand th at the Chair has been working hard to advance 
the AD negotiation, and we highly appreciate his tirel ess efforts in this regard.  However, we still  see 
the need to accelerate the AD negotiation if we wish  to conclude the DDA in 2010.  We need to 
consider development of a transparent work plan  and how to inject political impetus into the 
negotiating process so as to achieve our target.  Ap art from the foregoing, we also need to make 
parallel progress on other areas, including TRIPS and Trade and Environment, in line with the principle of the Single Undertaking.  In conclusion, Hong Kong, China stands ready to work with Members on bridging the remaining gaps on all is sues based on the December 2008 texts, which 
represent the culmination of seven years of painst aking negotiation and compromise.  We once again 
urge all Members to turn the political momentum bu ilt up recently into action, so as to reinvigorate 
the negotiations and conc lude the DDA in 2010. 
 
4. Mexico   
  My delegation wishes to thank you for your repor t on the state of play of the Doha Round and 
on plans for upcoming phases of the negotiations.  In recent months we have heard very positive 
messages at the very highest level regarding the dete rmination to give fresh impetus to the talks in 
Geneva, the most recent being the joint declarati on by APEC Ministers Responsible for Trade.  
Mexico today reiterates its willingness to be part of that endeavour, more specifically to give tangible 
expression to the signs of renewed commitment to the successful conclusion of the Round in 2010.  
To that end we need to translate the statements by leaders and Ministers into tangible progress in 
Geneva, something that has eluded us over the past year.  The fact that many of the preceding speakers have already pointed this out is proof of the genuine wish for us to start negotiating really 
seriously.  We therefore welcome the roadmap you have outlined for the upcoming period, and we 
echo the call on all Members to embark on that roadmap as the end game in which to wind up all 
outstanding negotiating topics.  In seven years of  negotiation we have made substantial progress, 
which is also reflected in the Chairs' texts, and this should not be thrown overboard.  Your detailed 
report illustrates the progress as well as the enormous amount of work that still lies ahead for each 
negotiating group.  Whether we are looking ahead or counting down, all the signs indicate that if we 
wish to conclude the negotiations in  2010, we have very little time left. 
 WT/GC/M/121 
Page 56  
 
   Bilateral and plurilateral engagement has always been essential to the success in any 
multilateral negotiation exercise.  However, the outcome s will have to be negotiated at the multilateral 
level.  The bilateral and plurilateral discussions  must go hand-in-hand with the negotiations on 
modalities designed to provide Members with cl ear guidelines on their future commitments.  
Irrespective of how they are defined – whether broadl y or in a stricter sense – we do need Agriculture 
and NAMA modalities as quickly as possible, but concluding in 2010 means that we cannot wait for 
those modalities if we are to make across-the-board progress on the other topics.   
_______________ 
  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 57 
 
 
ANNEX III 
 
Statements by delegations at the afternoon session  
of the Second Global Review of Aid for Trade on 9 July 2009  
 
 
1. Barbados (SVEs) 
 
 I take this opportunity to reinforce the positi ons of the Group of Small, Vulnerable Economies 
on this matter of Aid for Trade and the way forward.   I extend thanks to all of the presenters and 
panellists that have contributed to the discussion wi th their views and country experiences.  At the 
outset, we must acknowledge and commend the Director General for the activist role he continues to 
play in the Aid for Trade discussions. It is also im portant to recognise the work of the OECD and the 
regional development banks.  As you know, we ar e facing one of the worst financial and economic 
crises our world has experienced.  The WTO's Aid fo r Trade agenda predated this crisis, but it has 
now emerged as one of the indispensable inst ruments through which the WTO will deliver on its 
development agenda, particularly as it relates to Sm all, Vulnerable Economies.  This is even more 
important, as we fear that the full implications of  the financial crisis on our economies have not yet 
been felt.  With difficulty in accessing trade fina nce, fallen export volumes and receipts, decreased 
remittances and tourist arrivals, increased unemplo yment and social dislocation, and diminished 
demand for our products and services, SVEs will requi re certainty and predictability of aid in the 
years to come. 
  Aid for Trade is a crucial component of the development strategy of  the SVEs.  You will 
recall that as a member of the Aid for Trade Task  Force, Barbados was designated to represent the 
interests of the SVEs in the development of the reco mmendations of the Task Force.  On behalf of the 
SVEs we tabled a substantive document that set out  the characteristics and systemic vulnerabilities of 
SVEs and made a very strong and evidence-based case for the importance of Aid for Trade to our 
economies.  The need for flexibilities to be conferre d on SVEs is widely accepted and reflected in 
many areas of negotiations under the DDA.  However, if such flexibilities are to be truly effective and 
pro-development in their focus and impact, they need to be complemented with commitments to 
provide SVEs with a share of Aid for Trade res ources that would support the implementation of this 
development agenda.  A number of studies undertaken  by various international organisations and 
think tanks clearly illustrate that the SVEs require sustained and focused aid for trade.  This aid for 
trade supplements our respective efforts to incr ease our productive capacity and diversify our export 
base.  Infrastructure and trade facilitation assistan ce is critical if our small island, coastal and 
landlocked developing-country Members are to effec tively confront the distance between our markets 
and the main trading centres, the continued developm ent of our skills base and social capital, direct 
budget support and adjustment assistance, and aid to he lp us to further develo p value-added industries 
and strengthen our agriculture, SPS, TBT and intellectua l property architecture.  It is also clear that 
we will require assistance to confront  the challenges of climate change. 
  It is clear from these two days of discussi on that the key to moving forward is to work 
collectively and to collaborate on ensuring the effect iveness of aid.  We must ensure that the key 
elements envisaged in the Paris Declaration and the Accra Agenda for Action are complied with, and 
in so doing, our development partners must ensu re long-term planning of aid disbursements, an 
increase in the harmonisation of aid, greater ease of accessing aid and urgently enhancing the delivery of aid to developing countries.  We, as devel oping country partners, have the responsibility to 
continue to fully integrate trade in our national development strategies.  We take note of the 
discussion on indicators and the ongoing important work in the Committee on Trade and Development under the guidance of the Ambassador of  Mauritius on this critical issue.  We welcome 
the improvements that have been made to the E nhanced Integrated Framework (EIF) and we take 
great interest in the mechanisms established within the EIF, such as the diagno stic tool and the action 
matrix.  Although as SVEs, we are not members of the EIF, we believe they are interesting tools that WT/GC/M/121 
Page 58  
 
  could assist us in determining our specific needs and the types of interventions required to address 
these needs.  In addition, as we move forward in the Aid for Trade monitoring framework, I propose 
that the SVEs would be an important thematic focu s for evaluating the impact of Aid for Trade, and 
we look forward to continuing the dialogue with the WTO on how this can be implemented in the 
future.  Studies have shown that in SVEs, the prov ision of aid for infrastructure can have a multiplier 
effect on the efficiency and effectiveness of our eco nomies, and the same is true for aid for building 
productive capacity, especially in certain key sectors such as tourism, textiles and apparel.  We highlight the fact that the projects that are bei ng implemented in our regi ons, demonstrate the positive 
impact and externalities of trade facilitation pr ocedures, especially regional trade facilitation 
initiatives, and show how important these trade, tran sport and energy corridors can be for national and 
regional economies.  We look forward to learning fro m each other and to developing a compilation of 
ideas and best practices to allow all of us to implement these kinds of programmes.   We take note of the focus on the regional dimension for determining needs and delivering 
assistance, and confirm that initiatives to su pport and strengthen re gional integration are 
indispensable.  The need for financial assistance and capacity building to be focused on our regional 
mechanisms and regional organisati ons to allow them to effectively support the member states is a 
critical element that must be explored beyond this Global Review.  We are also of the view that 
channelling aid to the competent regional financial in stitutions for disbursement to national entities is 
an archetype that our international development part ners may wish to further explore.  It would be 
important that we work with our development partners to create an effective machinery for accessing 
and delivering the funds in a manner that is simp le, transparent and predictable, and the above 
suggestion may assist in that regard.  We have noted  with great interest the shared view that there 
needs to be an improvement in the involvement of the private sector and civil society in the 
determination of aid priorities and as major com ponents of any monitoring and evaluation scheme.  
We give importance to further examining ways to effectively enhance private-sector involvement at 
the national, regional and global stage in the aid for tr ade debate.  We take note of the future focus on 
private foundations as providers and partners of Aid fo r Trade.  This is an area that the SVEs are, in 
principal, interested in pursuing, and we take not e that some regional organisations, such as the IADB, 
have already developed a "donor index", which w ill prove a useful tool for engaging with these 
philanthropic organisations.  We are of the view that this is a best practice that could be shared.  We 
also welcome the move towards increased South-So uth and triangular coopera tion and reaffirm that 
even within the SVEs group there is much that we  can learn from each other.  Mechanisms should be 
established at the regional and global level to fac ilitate this form of sharing of best practices. 
  In conclusion, we reinforce that Aid for Tr ade is but a complement to the developmental 
outcome of the Doha Development Agenda and that  its full implementation is not contingent on a 
completion of this Round.  However, it is clear that Aid for Trade is a key policy instrument for many 
developing countries, especially SVEs, to assist in  the implementation of outcomes of this Round and 
of previous rounds of trade negotiations, as well as the new economic and financial challenges.  We 
have succeeded in raising the profile of Aid for Trade and in bringing the trade and the aid communities together under the umbrella of the WTO.   That in itself is a success.  We do, however, 
have much more substantive work to accomplish.  We are living in tumultuous times, but the key 
words of additionality, effectiveness and predictability are paramount and must guide our future tasks.  
We look forward to the day when there will be no n eed for any subject area called Aid for Trade, but 
until then we must ensure that the ideas behind th e concept will translate into tangible results which 
will benefit our countries.  2. Guyana (CARICOM) 
 
 Let me first express support for the statement made on behalf of the Small and Vulnerable 
Economies.  CARICOM countries are small, highly indebted, preference-dependent economies, and 
our efforts to use trade to spur development have  been severely handicapped by the current global  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 59 
 
 
economic downturn.  All Caribbean economies have experienced marked decreases in their earnings 
from the export of goods and services and from remittances.   This has forced us to look for new, fresh 
and innovative approaches to dealing with the daunting challenges which are well documented and 
include a high debt-to-GDP ratio, supply-side co nstraints, limited productive capacity, inadequate 
economic and trade-related infrastructure and falling commodity prices.  We would like to take this 
opportunity to express our appreciation to our devel opment partners for their sterling support in our 
efforts to meet these challenges.  I wish to also emphasize that these challenges are far more than just 
trade-related and prompt the need for strategic po licy interventions in key areas such as education, 
security and safety, macroeconomic stability and shoring up our economic infrastructure.  The 
concept of Aid for Trade is predicated on the understanding that improved market-access 
opportunities do not automatically translate into our  exporters penetrating global markets.  We 
therefore see the Aid for Trade in itiative as a vital and promising tool to help us to meet our 
development objectives.  Specifically, as regards th e region’s preference dependence, it should be 
noted that in 2006, for example, 57 per cent of our exports to the EU stemmed from just five commodities.  Yet that export path is unsustaina ble because of heavy preference erosion, as witnessed 
by the changes in the EU import regimes in sugar, bananas and rum.  It is for that reason that as 
members of the ACP Group, the Caribbean has fought  steadfastly for preference-erosion treatment on 
select export items in both NAMA and Agriculture.  We are still awaiting tangible proposals from our 
development partners as to how they will deliv er on these commitments.  Aggregate Aid for Trade 
flows to the Caribbean reached US$289 million betw een 2002 and 2005, with a 10 per cent gain by 
2007 to US$317 million.  In 2007, the Caribbean receiv ed 60 per cent more in Aid for Trade funds for 
productive capacity projects.  In light of a 2008 World Bank study on Aid for Trade Indicators that 
has shown that some of the highest levels of potential demand for Aid for Trade are generated in countries from the CARICOM region, these flows fall well below the level required if Aid for Trade 
is to have a meaningful role in stimulating expor ts and in contributing to the development objectives 
of Caribbean countries. 
 
 This Second Global Review is providing us with an opportunity to make a comprehensive 
analysis of the engagement of development partners  and their partner countries, and to highlight the 
extent to which Aid for Trade commitments are be ing fulfilled and being effectively utilized in both 
the bilateral and regional contexts.  Full atten tion must be given to issues of predictability, 
additionality and country-ownership, and to exam ining how these commitments can be maintained 
and enhanced in the present context of economic cr isis and liquidity cont raction.  We believe, 
however, that in addition to evaluating the progress that we have made since the First Review in 
November 2007, the following must be addressed.  We need to address the issue of sustainable economic development, especially where the gain s made by countries such as those in CARICOM 
may have effectively been reversed by the glob al economic crisis.  We need to get a clear 
commitment from development partners on the likely flow of  Aid for Trade funds, with a view to 
finding the best fit, given the peculiarities of each  aid-receiving country.  We need to build on the 
momentum created by the regional consultations whic h we have had and the solid research on Aid for 
Trade which has been done, in order to emerge fro m this Second Review better able to work towards 
matching funds against project proposals.  With re spect to the latter, we welcome the data and 
analysis provided both by the OECD and the WTO Secretariat.  At the Regional Conference held in 
Montego Bay in May, the discussions revealed that many countries were concerned that international 
development partners have broadly considered the funds provided in  support of social programmes, 
national budgets and general econo mic development initiatives as Aid fo r Trade.  Recipient countries, 
particularly those in the Caribbean, have been requ esting specific attention to those issues affecting 
trade development, for export diversifi cation and trade-related infrastructure. 
 
 In their response to the questionnaire on Ai d for Trade, CARICOM member States have 
identified the following five critical areas as prio rities for the region:  competitiveness and private 
sector development;  trade policy analysis, implemen tation and facilitation;  regional integration and 
cooperation;  network infrastructure;  adjustme nt and revenue implicat ions arising from the 
implementation of trade agreements;  and aligning Aid for Trade priorities.  Being cognizant of the WT/GC/M/121 
Page 60  
 
  importance of Aid for Trade, the CARICOM regi on has developed a roadmap which defines our 
regional integration and cooperation processes, re quirements for effective participation in the 
multilateral trading system and the related human reso urces requirements.  In a number of disciplines, 
CARICOM has developed a slate of specific needs and costed the interventions, thereby allowing us 
to effectively engage with our development part ners.  Regarding proposed strategies and the way 
forward, the following are necessary:  building on pr ogress made so far;  continued evaluation of the 
impact and effectiveness of Aid for Trade;  incr eased support to regional integration processes;  Aid 
for Trade delivery through the use of regional fina ncial intermediaries and other mutually agreed 
facilities;  greater participation in the design of Ai d for Trade interventions;  pursuing additionality as 
well to bring pressure to bear on international deve lopment partners to honour their commitments to 
the AFT initiative;  better ways to increase the participation of the private sector and planning 
agencies or those agencies involved in coordina ting development assistance;  stronger focus of 
development partners on capacity development of  both public and private-sector institutions;  
accessing Aid for Trade funds, preferably in grant form , bearing in mind that seven out of ten of the 
highest-indebted countries on a per capita basis ar e in the CARICOM region;  predictability and 
consistency of Aid for Trade in accordance with the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness;  and 
delivery of Aid for Trade preferably in the form of  budget support at the nati onal level.  Let me end 
by saying that we are defined as middle- and high- income developing countries.  It is highly probable 
that we will be excluded from access to Aid for Trad e resources on the basis of that definition.  The 
global community must pay greater attention to the peculiarities of CARICOM countries.  
_______________ 
 
 
 
 
  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 61 
 
 
ANNEX IV 
 
Statement by the Chairman at the informal meeting of  
the General Council on 22 July 2009 (JOB(09)/81 ) 
  
 The purpose of today's meeting is to upda te you on the progress in my consultations 
concerning the organization of the Seventh Session of the Ministerial Conference, in line with the Decision taken by the General Council on 26 May 2009.  
Since the May General Council, I have cons ulted with a wide range of delegations, 
individually and in groups.  In all these consulta tions I have sought delegations' views on the same 
points, namely:  1) the organization of the meeti ng and the discussions;  2) the possible sub-themes 
for discussion;  and 3) the selection of the Chair and Vice-Chairs.  
In these consultations  I have started by reiterating the c onstraints under which we will be 
working at the Ministerial, especially the time cons traint.  I have also recalled the understanding on 
which the General Council took its decision in May – that this Ministerial is not intended as a 
negotiating meeting.  These basic considerations mean th at we need to be realistic in our ambitions for 
the meeting.  
I am pleased to be able to report that in my  consultations so far delegations have shown 
willingness to temper ambition with realism, and I th ank them for their cooperation.  I think we have 
made a good start towards putting the ministerial on a solid consensual foundation.  
Let me outline the areas in whic h greater clarity or convergence has emerged so far.  The 
timing and duration  of the meeting has been agreed by the General Council, namely 30 November to 
2 December.  The venue  will be the Centre International de Conferences de Genève (CICG).  The 
Secretariat has recently issued th e first in a series of information notes for delegations concerning 
logistics.  
With regard to the election of Officers  for the Ministerial Conference, we have, I believe, 
convergence around the idea that this Ministerial Conference only, without establishing a precedent, 
will be chaired by the Minister of the Member providing the General Council Chair, which means the 
Minister of Chile.  The possibility has been raised that a process should subsequently be developed to 
guide this choice in future years.  
Assuming the issue of the Chair is agreed, the Vice-Chairs  would, as in the past, come from 
the remaining broad groups or regions – so that if the Chair is from Latin America, there will be Vice-
Chairs from the industrialized countries, Africa and Asia.  As at all past Ministerial Conferences, 
these Vice-Chairs are to be proposed by the groups concerned.  I suggest that we aim to take the 
formal decision on this matter at our  General Council meeting in October. 
 
I believe we have also made significant progr ess in my consultations so far on the overall 
structure  of the Ministerial Conference.  We have convergence on six basic principles which should 
apply to both the Conference itself and its preparation: 
 
 1. Our whole approach is based on the principle I suggested at the May Council 
meeting, summed up by FIT – Full particip ation, Inclusiveness, and Transparency; 
  2. We have agreed to hold a regular Ministerial Conference, which means that it should 
not be structured around negotiating processes,  but instead provide an opportunity for 
discussion and direction at Ministerial level across all the WTO's activities; 
 WT/GC/M/121 
Page 62  
 
   3. It is important not to overload the agenda of the Ministerial Conference; 
  4. Our preparatory work should not di vert energy and attention from the DDA; 
  5. Any issue for action or decision by Ministers proposed by Members should be 
developed by them in line with the normal consensus principle;  and 
  6. Related to the preceding one, any issue for action or decision by Ministers should be 
agreed well before the Ministerial Conference. 
 
On the basis of these principles, we should appr oach the meeting as essentially an opportunity 
for Ministers to discuss issues and provide their political perspectives without necessarily seeking to 
produce substantive negotiated outcomes.  This approach will be reflected in a meeting structure  
which provides for a Working Session, runni ng in parallel to the Plenary Session. 
 
First, let me make a few points concerning the Plenary Session .  This will take place in the 
CICG and will be based very much on past practice at  previous conferences.  An opening session will 
take place on the afternoon of 30 November.  Fo llowing this, Ministers will make their general 
statements according to the List of Speakers,  which will be opened a few weeks before the 
Conference.  As in the past, Ministers will be expect ed to limit their statements to not more than five 
minutes.  Longer statements in writing may, of cour se, be submitted to the Secretariat for circulation. 
 
The Plenary Session will continue through days 2 and 3, on the basis of normal WTO meeting 
hours.  I hope we will be able to avoid holding evening sessions, but that might be necessary, especially if we have to accommodate some accessi ons.  As in the past, the Plenary Session will be 
open to the media and a limited number of NGOs. 
 
The Plenary Session will conclude on the evening of the third day, with action by Ministers 
on any items as necessary, including the date and venue of the next Session.  
Let me now turn to the Working Sessions .  These two Sessions are aimed at providing an 
interactive forum for Ministers, giving them a pl atform for discussion under two broad sub-themes, 
one for each of days 2 and 3 of the Conference.  The suggestions for these sub-themes would be: 
  - "Review of WTO activities, including the Doha Work Programme" for the first day; 
and  
 
 - "the WTO's contribution to recovery, gr owth and development" for the second day.  
 
These two sub-themes are designed to be broa d enough to accommodate any issues Ministers 
want to raise.  In my consultati ons, delegations have recognized that we should not seek to  sub-divide 
these sub-themes further, because doing so would onl y make it more difficult to respect the FIT 
principle. 
 
One additional point that has b een raised which might merit further consideration is the 
suggestion that the discussion in each of the two sessions could be introduced by a suitable person, in 
order to provide more focus to the discussion.  
The Working Sessions will take place in the CICG  in a room adjacent to the Plenary Session 
room for ease of access for Ministers, and will follow normal WTO meeting hours. 
 Again, in line with past practice, it may be n ecessary to request Ministers to respect a time 
limit for their interventions in order to ensure equity  and full participation.  As in the past, this time  WT/GC/M/121 
 Page 63 
 
 
limit could be 3 minutes, which would allow around 1 00 Ministers to take the floor in one day.  
However, this could vary dependi ng on the level of demand among Ministers to take the floor.  As I 
mentioned before, the aim is to have an interactiv e discussion, and delegations will be encouraged not 
to make formal speeches, for which they have the Plenary, but to engage actively with each other. 
 
Finally, various possibilities have been raised  for an outcome, or product, of the Working 
Sessions.  Full records of the discussions will be prod uced by the Secretariat after the Conference, but 
there appears to be wide support for some other so rt of outcome, such as a Chairperson's summary on 
his/her own responsibility.  Another option which has been raised would be a brief agreed 
communiqué.  Ministers will be free, of course, to present their views to the public via the media in 
the press facilities which will be provided in the CICG. 
 
I would now like to turn to the substance  of the Ministerial Conference.  We have specific 
tasks in 8 areas mandated by Ministers at Hong Kong.  These are chiefly reports  in specific areas, 
namely Cotton (Development aspects), SVEs, Trade Debt and Finance, Trade and Transfer of 
Technology, work under Doha paragraph 19 on TRIPS issues, and Coherence.  Ministers at Hong 
Kong also set out two points for possible action – the moratoria on E-Commerce duties and TRIPS 
non-violation complaints.  
We already have a process in place to prep are these issues for the Ministerial Conference 
through the regular WTO bodies, the exception bein g E-Commerce, where we will launch a specific 
consultative process as in the past. 
 
Here I should point out that, as at every Ministerial, there is also a general reporting 
obligation for the General Council, DSB, TPRB, and the sectoral councils and committees under the 
General Council.  All these reports , which will cover the whole range of the WTO's activities, will as 
usual be circulated before the Conference. 
 
In addition, there is the possibility of some accessions .  I have been informed that the work of 
the Working Parties on Montenegro, Vanuatu and Samo a is well advanced, and we hope that some or 
all of these accessions will be ready for decision by the time of the Ministerial Conference. 
 
Finally, we have two areas of "possible" issues .  In my first round of consultations, quite a 
wide range of issues was mentioned by delegations , with varying degrees of specificity.  I have 
suggested ways of approaching them, based on the guiding principles I set out earlier.   
Firstly, possible issues for discussion .  As I said earlier, the two sub-themes we have for the 
Working Sessions are broad enough to accommodate any issues Ministers want to raise, such as Aid 
for Trade, the LDCs' issues , or any of the other matters raised in my consultations.  Again, we should 
not seek to sub-divide these sub-themes further, but rather just ensure that each issue can take its 
natural place under each sub-theme.  
Secondly, the possible issues for decision  raised by some delegations.  Members have, of 
course, every right to raise issues for decision by Ministers, but I have asked those delegations  to bear 
in mind the principles I mentioned earlier, and I believe they are prepared to do that. 
 In this regard, the formal proposals circulated by  India will be taken up, at the request of that 
delegation, in the General Council next week. 
 
Based on the principles I set out earlier, I think we now have wide acceptance by delegations 
of what I have described as a "gentleman's and ladi es' agreement" concerning the substance of the 
Conference.  That is, if any delegation is pursu ing an issue for decision, but has not achieved 
consensus on it 6 weeks before the Ministerial C onference opens – the deadline for inscribing items WT/GC/M/121 
Page 64  
 
  on the agenda – that delegation will not insist on putting the decision on the Conference agenda.  To 
do so would be unproductive, possibly divisive and contrary to our agreed principles.  
This approach has been widely supported in my  consultations, and I hope you can all agree to 
it, in order to make our preparations more transparen t and predictable.  It is a way of ensuring that, in 
this area of our work too, there are no surprises. 
 
__________