RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/C/M/26 
16 October 2006 
 (06-4981) 
Trade Negotiations Committee 
1 July 2006  
 
 
 
MINUTES OF MEETING 
 
Held in the Centre William Rappard  
on 1 July 2006  
 
Chairman: Mr. Pascal Lamy (Director-General)  
 
 Subjects discussed
:  
 1. Statement by the Chairman 
2 Follow-up to the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration: 
- Agriculture negotiations:  establishment of modalities - NAMA negotiations:  establishment of modalities 
  
1. The Chairman
 proposed that the two items be taken up together. 
2. In his statement, the Chairman  started by recalling that, at an informal meeting of the TNC 
held on 28 June at the level of He ads of Delegation, Members had set out the immediate next steps in 
their process towards establishing modalities in ag riculture and non-agricultural market access 
(NAMA) on the basis of the texts that had been circul ated by the Chairs of the two negotiating groups.  
He had also announced that he would be undertak ing, in the course of the following few days, 
discussions in various formats toward s this end with the participati on of a number of Ministers, and 
that the process would culminate in a formal meeting of the TNC. 
3. Since the latest informal meeting of the TNC held on 30 June, he had continued contacts with 
a wide range of delegations, including the ministeria l consultative group.  He wished to thank all of 
the delegations, Ministers and Senior Officials who ha d been present in Geneva for their efforts.  He 
was grateful for their hard work, and for the cons tructive spirit in which it had been done.  In these 
discussions, he had also witnessed no acrimony ar ound the table, which was a positive sign. 
4. However, as he had informed delegations at the informal meeting which had just taken place, 
Members remained far from the necessary converg ence to be able to establish modalities in 
agriculture and NAMA, despite all the hard work put in by everyone.  They had tried hard, but had 
not managed to create the much needed landing zone that they had hoped for.  Members therefore had 
to face squarely the fact that they were now in a cris is situation.  They were in the red part of the red 
zone, and it would now be more difficult to conclude  the Round by the end of the year.  Therefore, 
since time was not on their side, the only guaran tee of success was what so many of them had been 
asking for – the readiness of Members to exchange, to  make concessions, in other words to negotiate.  
Everyone knew that a number of important players ha d to play a leading role in this process.   TN/C/M/26 
Page 2  
 
  5. In the light of the current situa tion, he did not intend at the pr esent meeting to review the state 
of play in all areas of the negotiations, with inputs  from the Chairs of the respective groups, or to 
update Members on his ongoing consultations on outs tanding implementation issues, as was usually 
done at TNC meetings.   
6. He proposed instead that Members focused on th e current situation, and the next steps.  
Although Members had to admit that they were in cr isis mode, the situation was not hopeless.  Over 
the broad scope of the DDA, the picture was by no means dismal.  Positive and substantive progress 
had and was being made in a number of areas.  However, the fact remained that all this effort and progress in a large number of areas was at risk an d probably would disappear  if the modalities were 
not unblocked.  He had heard good news in th e very strong commitment from Members to the 
objective of concluding the Round before the end of the year.  There had been total unanimity on this 
point, therefore the question was to find a way to preserve this chance of finishing this negotiation 
before the end of the year.   
7. On the basis of the suggestions that had emer ged in the informal consultations, and in the 
informal TNC meeting just preceding the presen t meeting, regarding further process towards 
establishing these modalities, he proposed that Members agree as follows:   
-  First, that in view of the crisis in the negotiations, the TNC request him to conduct 
intensive and wide-ranging consultations w ith the aim of facilitating the urgent 
establishment of modalities in agriculture and NAMA; 
- Second, that his consultations should be based on the draft texts prepared by the 
Chairs of the negotiating groups;  and, 
- Third, that he should report to the TNC as soon as possible. 
8. In the light of a number of observations by Members, he wished to be clear that these 
consultations would aim at facilitating and catalyz ing agreement among the membership in this time 
of crisis, and that the Members continued to re main the main actors in the process.  These 
consultations would be pursued fully in keeping with the principle of a bottom-up approach, and 
respect for transparency and inclusiveness, which he  believed everyone knew by now that he was very 
committed to, and which was the way Members had been  proceeding and he did not intend to change 
this. 
9. The Trade Negotiations Committee took note
 of the Chairman's statement1 and agreed  to 
proceed in the manner he had suggested. 
                                                      
1 Including the statements re flected in Annexes I and II.  TN/C/M/26 
 Page 3 
 
 
ANNEX I 
 
Statements made by participants at the informal meeting 
of the Trade Negotiations Committee  at the level of Heads of Delegation 
held on 30 June 2006 
 
  At their request, the statements made by a num ber of delegations at the informal meeting of 
the Trade Negotiations Committee at the level of  Heads of Delegation, held on 30 June, are 
reproduced below as part of the minutes of the formal meeting of the TNC held on 1 July. 
 
_______________ 
  
Statement by Zambia on behalf of the LDC Group
  
 
  On behalf of the LDC Group I would like to support the proposed structure of the up-coming Ministerial consultation process, with their emph asis on agriculture and NAMA modalities. We agree 
that these are the most important items to deal with this week, but we want to stress that there has to 
be a strong development component in Agricultu re and NAMA. Implementation of the Duty-Free 
Quota-Free Market Access provisions for LDCs, and accompanying Rules of Origin, together with 
other S&DT provisions, constitute this strong cr oss-cutting development component. Implementation 
of the decisions contained in Annex F is not to be  done as an afterthought. DFQFMA is and must be 
part of the main event this week.  
 One of the few perceived successes of the Hong Kong negotiations was the agreement on 
Annex F. What many may not know was the fight we, as LDCs, had to ha ve to get even this 
compromise position agreed, and then the strong and understandable reluctance of many LDCs to accept the 97% compromise position we had fought ha rd for in the “Green Room”. The LDC Group 
agreed to the Hong Kong deal in good faith, expecting to be able to work, after Hong Kong, with the 
rest of the WTO Membership to implement the Mini sterial Decisions, with the intention of gradually 
moving to duty-free quota-free market acces s for 100 per cent of products from LDCs.  
   Since the Hong Kong meeting, we have witnessed a cynical lack of interest in other Members wanting to engage with the LDCs. In Hong Kong we agreed on a framework for implementation of 
duty-free quota-free market access. Since Hong Kong, LDC attempts to engage other Members on 
how implementation should take place have faced a wa ll of negativism. Even the concept that there is 
something to negotiate has been challenged. To  challenge the right of LDCs to discuss the 
implementation issues of DFQFMA in CTDSS is preposterous and offensive. If DFQFMA was 
simply an extension of provisions of existing G SPs, we, as a group, woul d not have expended so 
much effort and energy on negotiating DFQFMA. We would have simply asked our partners to 
consider improving the provisions of existing GSPs.  GSPs, after all, are not negotiated. 
 
 This denial that DFQFMA is part of the negotiations shows the level of cynicism and deception some of our partners have sunk to. If this  gathering of Ministers and senior political figures 
is not able to bring about a change in political a ttitude so that development is brought back to the 
forefront of the negotiations I fear the worst for th e WTO. Many Members are using the round, not to 
advance the development agenda, but to aggressive ly promote their own offensive market access 
positions which are aimed at obtaining improvements in real market access for their farmers, industrial producers and service providers through deep  cuts in tariffs. This is accompanied by an 
insistence on maintaining the strong existing defens ive domestic support structures. This position of 
demanding that others open up their markets while maintaining structures to keep out competitors 
may be understandable in a selfish ki nd of way but it is not development. TN/C/M/26 
Page 4  
 
   
 I have said before, no agreement is better for LDCs than a bad agreement. So, what 
constitutes a bad agreement for us? It is an ag reement without a strong development component. If 
Members are to save this Round, and not discredit the multilateral trading system, the consequences 
of which will be negative for us all, there needs to  be a re-arranging of political priorities so that self 
interest must be put to the back and development issues brought to the front. 
  For the LDC Group what would constitute a su ccessful round would be  negotiations which 
successfully conclude on the following main topics:  
- Agreement of modalities of implemen tating the Hong Kong decision on DFQFMA 
for the LDCs’, including Rules of Origin. 
 
- A decision on Food Aid which is flexible enough to address crises while minimising 
commercial displacement. 
 
- Implementation of the proposal by the C4 on cotton; 
 
- Inclusion of provisions for LDCs to utili se the Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM); 
 
- Agreement on a comprehensive Trade Facilitation programme which provides 
genuine and additional benefits to LDCs in  terms of reducing the costs of trade and 
reducing non-tariff barriers in addition to providing Technical Assistance and 
Capacity Building to address the demands arising from the commitments made;  
 
- Adoption and implementation of the recommendations of the Enhanced Integrated 
Framework, including an increase in financial resources allocated to the IF process 
and timely accessability to these additional funds. 
 
- Significant increases in funds made availabl e to remove supply-side constraints in 
developing countries through an Aid-fo r-Trade facility which has accountable 
disbursement mechanisms which are simplified but also transparent.  
 
 Finally, on a more personal note, while watchi ng the BBC last week, I saw an interview with 
Pascal Lamy. In this interview, P ascal likened himself to a conducto r – a conductor of an orchestra 
not of a bus – or maybe an Airbus. But Pascal, you need to make sure that each player in your orchestra has the same music in front of him or he r. Some of your orchestra seem to be practicing 
Chopin’s Funeral March, some for Tchaikovsky ’s 1812 Overture, complete with canons, while 
another group of 4, sometimes 6, occasionally nip off to another city to play their own music in secret. 
All they tell us about their secret practices is whether they have played well together or not. 
  Talking of Airbus, I believe that Pascal is something of a clairvoyant. I could never tell 
whether Pascal’s Airbus was taking off or landing – or even crash-landing – but his chosen analogy is 
still relevant. The fortunes of WTO and Airbus are st ill locked together – both are beset by technical 
problems, internal intrigues and insider trading wh ich are delaying the launch of the new product. In 
the WTO this new product is Development. Let us hop e, for both organisations, that the launch is only 
delayed and that the delay is not so long as to dest roy the credibility of the organisations in question. 
 
 Thank you. 
  TN/C/M/26 
 Page 5 
 
 
Statement by the Philippines  
   Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  
 We join other delegations in thanking you fo r convening this meeting today, and offering 
Members an opportunity to exchange views and ideas.  Process
 
 
 Mr. Chairman, let me begin my intervention by addressing the issue of process. My 
Government places maximum value on transparency in the negotiations and the bottom-up approach 
in consensus building.    We trust that the Chair of the TNC will find a way to strike the appropriate balance between 
efficiency in process and inclusiveness of consulta tions; and we support the ca ll for real negotiations 
with numbers.   My delegation will take this opportunity, ther efore, to underscore our most fundamental 
concerns, for the consideration of Members.  
Agriculture
 
  On agriculture, we fully associate ourselves w ith the Ministerial Communiqués of the G-33, 
and the G-20, which confirm that the majors must move ambitiously in market access and domestic support. 
 
 The Philippines has always championed the id eal of a multilateral trading system that 
operates under just and equitable rules that  benefit all countries, large and small. 
  The Philippines has always been committed to  making constructive contributions to the 
negotiations and in the implementation of a just reform program. 
 
 We wish to state, however, our firm expecta tion that the major players will not underestimate 
the need to ensure the availabilit y of Special Products and the Speci al Safeguard Mechanism, as an 
important aspect of the Doha Development Mandate.   
NAMA
 
  In NAMA, we fully associate ourselves with the NAMA 11 Ministerial Statement, and the 
intervention of South Africa on behalf of NAMA 11. We reiterate the principles on which a balanced 
and development-oriented modaliti es would need to be built.  
 
 Paragraph 24 mandates high ambition in NAMA an d it is the developed countries that are 
lagging in ambition with their offers of averag e cuts of 30% - well below the Uruguay Round cuts. 
Developing countries, on the other hand, heed the ca ll of ambition and are able to consider average 
cuts of above 40%.  This imbalanc e needs to be rectified urgently, and attempts to make developing 
countries pay more in NAMA will not rectify the imbalance. 
 
 I must stress, however, that the Philippines believ es that, consistent with the principle of less 
than full reciprocity and S&D treatment, the paragra ph 8 flexibilities we have agreed to in Annex B of 
the July 2004 framework should be fully recognized , and the numbers in brackets be treated as bare 
minimum, and as such we need flexibility to exempt more tariff lines. We believe that this would be TN/C/M/26 
Page 6  
 
  fitting for a country like mine whic h has undertaken substantial unilate ral trade liberalization since the 
conclusion of the Uruguay Round.   It is also in this regard, that we reiterate our expectation, Mr. Chairman, that the negotiations 
will provide a pragmatic solution for those unbound lines with persistently low applied rates. 
 
Conclusion 
 
  In view of those concerns, Mr. Chairman, we c ontinue to urge you, as TNC Chair, to strike 
the appropriate balance between efficiency in pro cess and inclusiveness of cons ultations, and to urge 
the major players to achieve ambitious and ‘doable’ outcomes.  
  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.   TN/C/M/26 
 Page 7 
 
 
Statement by Tunisia  
   Mr Chairman,  
 I should like to congratulate you on the efforts you have consistently made since taking up 
office at the head of the WTO to bring this Round to completion and fulfil the development dimension 
so keenly pursued by all of us in order to achieve  results that are meaningful and of benefit to all 
Member countries.  
 The draft texts on modalities for Agriculture and NAMA reflect the current state of affairs.  
Allow me in this context to congratulate Am bassadors Crawford Falconer and Don Stephenson, 
Chairs of the Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture and of the NAMA Negotiating Group 
respectively, for the significant efforts they have made in preparing these documents, which serve as a 
reference for establishing future modalities. 
 
 We have come here to Geneva  to negotiate with all delegati ons with an open mind and in a 
constructive spirit in order to secure a positive and fruitful outcome to our work. 
  Having also a sense of balance, I should like on behalf of Tunisia to make a few comments on 
these documents. 
 
 First, with regard to agriculture, the docume nt of 22 June 2006 (Job(06)/199) has a number of 
provisions in favour of development in the three pill ars.  However, the elem ents relating to special 
and differential treatment would, in our view, ga in from being fleshed out at several levels: 
 
 With regard to market access, the aim is to st ate more specifically what the scope of special 
and differential treatment is regarding sensitive products and rights pertaining to tariff quotas. 
  With regard to domestic support, in the case of net-food-importing countries we believe that 
these countries should be exempted from all commitments to reducing their AMS and de minimis  
support. 
 
 We would also like to see more attention paid  to the issue of net-food-importing countries so 
that it receives the requisite treatment for speci fic modalities to be formulated in this area. 
  Secondly, with regard to NAMA, in Tunisia' s view it is essential that the developing 
countries' concerns about the coefficient, adequa te flexibilities, less than full reciprocity and the 
thorny issue of tariff preference erosion should be  dealt with adequately during these negotiations. 
  With regard to the formula for cutting tariffs, the coefficient to be agreed on should maintain 
the policy space that every developing country has in formulating and implementing its economic and 
social development policy.  Two fundamental elements  need to be taken into account in this context: 
 
1. The starting point for the cuts must be the bound rates. 
 
2. The cuts made by the developing countri es will be lower in percentage terms than 
those of the developed countries, in accord ance with the principle of less than full 
reciprocity. 
  As to the treatment of non-bound tariff lines, it should be noted that the binding of all these 
tariff lines constitutes a significant co ntribution to the Round.  The mark-up to be applied to these 
lines must be fair and adequate.  With regard to  flexibilities for developing countries under paragraph 
8 of the July Framework, the figures in this para graph are the bottom line:  the developing countries TN/C/M/26 
Page 8  
 
  should have the possibility of increasing them in order to take account of the sensitivity of certain 
sectors.   In the specific case of textiles and cl othing, Turkey's initiative concerning tariff 
harmonization for this sector, and the maintenance of the specificity and sensitivity of a sector which, 
as you know, is of particular impor tance to the economies of developing countries, warrants balanced 
and constructive considerati on by all Member countries. 
  On the matter of preference erosion, an issue relevant both to Agriculture and to NAMA, we 
believe that a satisfactory and fair trade solution should be found to offset, at least in part, the loss of 
long-standing preferences for all products of interest to the developing countries, without distinction 
or exclusion.   Thank you for your attention.  
  TN/C/M/26 
 Page 9 
 
 
Statement by Nicaragua  
   Mr Chairman,  
 According to the latest report on poverty pub lished by the World Bank, poverty in Nicaragua 
has been very responsive to economic growth because  of the nature of the growth, which relies on the 
rural sector and is characterized by its labour intensity.   In order to promote development in Nicaragua – which, according to the latest IMF figures, is 
among the 50 poorest countries in the world – and to improve the standard of living of the two thirds 
of its rural population living in poverty, and above a ll the 25 per cent of men, women and children in 
the rural sector living in extreme poverty, the agri cultural negotiations must achieve results that are 
both ambitious and equitable.  
 Ambitious for Nicaragua, means that the cuts in domestic support must amount to more than 
the 53 per cent proposed by the United States, and ta riffs must be reduced by more than the 39 per 
cent offered by the European Union;  in short, th ey must bring about an effective decrease in the 
support currently granted, and new and increased oppor tunities for access to the markets of our main 
trading partners.  
 For Nicaragua's struggling peanut industry - which has been unable to recover from the 
damage caused by the programme implemented since th e approval of the Farm Bill - to survive, there 
will have to be substantia l cuts in trade-distorting domestic suppo rt and strict disciplines for the amber 
and blue boxes as well as a reduction to the de minimis  cap for specific products. 
 
 For the agro-export sector in general, althou gh the reduction coefficients applied by the 
developed countries are considerable, they are ultimat ely less decisive than th e exceptions that they 
are able to apply through the desi gnation of so-called sensitive products. 
  A study by the Secretariat has identified, for each of the Quad countries, the two per cent of 
tariff lines with the highest applied tariffs, which correspond in their great majority to tariffied 
products, and are therefore strong candidates for the list of sensitive products.  In the case of the EU, 
for example, products thus identified represent 36 per cent of Nicaragua's agriculture exports. 
  Of course, this means that if, in the modalities that we agree upon, this figure is multiplied by two, three or four as certain Members would like,  the new opportunities that the Development Round 
would provide for my country would be almost nil. 
  But I was saying that in addition to being ambitious, the results must be equitable. 
  Mr Chairman,  
 Nicaragua's average applied tariff is 4.8 per cent in the industrial sector and 11.4 per cent in 
the agricultural sector, and the few tariff peaks, if  they can be called that, do not exceed 60 per cent.  
We have one single exception, the tariff on chicken cuts, and everyone in this room knows the special 
circumstances and market distortions affecting th at product.  To ask a country like Nicaragua to 
reduce its applied duties makes absolutely no sense. 
 
 Let me now turn to the issues that some ha ve described as peripheral, but which, for my 
country, are central.   First of all, we fully support the proposal  of the G33.  Special products respond to a 
fundamental need – the survival of our rural sector – and consequently, they are not negotiable. TN/C/M/26 
Page 10  
 
   
 We also support the position put forward by the small vulnerable economies.  These countries, with their disproportionately small dome stic markets and their limited resources, need 
additional flexibilities to enable them to reinvent their policies in order to adapt to the globalized 
world. 
 
 Finally, I would like to refer to two subjects of  crucial importance to my country.  First, there 
is the subject of the erosion of long-standing agricu ltural preferences.  The list of products in Annex G 
of the document on modalities, which in itself is a shortened list, in the case of the EU represents 
30 per cent of Nicaragua's agricultural exports. 
 
 To cite an example, the bovine sector is one of the productive clusters or conglomerates that 
representatives of the school of competitiveness of Mi chael Porter actually helped to identify as a 
possible source of competitive products in the intern ational market that w ould use abundant natural 
resources and could be of particular importance to the development of rural communities. 
 
 Nicaragua supports all initiatives in favour of  the least developed countries, but under no 
circumstances could it accept any delay in the open ing up of the European meat market for the 
purposes of maintaining preferential access for thre e countries whose per capita income is between 
four and nine times higher than its own.  
 The other subject that I wish to mention is textiles and clothing.  Mr Chairman, the textiles 
sector is experiencing serious difficulties in many c ountries throughout the world.  In Nicaragua, like 
in most developing countries, it is an important source  of employment.  Consequently, we need to find 
a solution that enables this sector to make  the adjustments necessary to its survival. 
 
 Thank you Mr Chairman. 
  TN/C/M/26 
 Page 11 
 
 
Statement by Nigeria  
   Mr. Chairman, my delegation would also like to  congratulate you for the efforts and zeal, and 
the strong sense of commitment, which you have demonstrated towards ensuring that Members 
`achieve the goal of establishing modalities on agricu lture and NAMA. I acknowledge that a lot of 
work still needs to be done. It should, however, be recognised that whatever we  do must be consistent 
with the Doha Mandate, the July Framework and the decisions that we made at Hong Kong. The 
challenge facing us at this critical phase of the nego tiations is to resist any temptation to lower the 
level of overall ambition for the Round by diluting the mandate, or even attempting to rewrite or 
renegotiate it. 
  On that note, my delegation would like to r estate here that the redressing of the historical 
imbalances in agriculture is of fundamental impor tance to Nigeria. We therefore call on the major 
players to make the necessary decisions that they ha ve to make in order to reform their agricultural 
policies and open up their markets to agricultural exports from developing countries.  The time is 
now. Any further prevarication would be harmful to the economies of developing countries.  The 
major players must, therefore, dem onstrate leadership and exercise th e requisite flexibility to ensure 
that the DDA negotiations are concluded by December 2006.   Furthermore, Nigeria is highly committed to the development ambitions of the Doha 
Development Agenda. In that regard, we reaffirm the principles of special and differential treatment 
enshrined in all areas of the negotiations.  We are also committed to fully addressing the existing 
imbalances in the Agreements. We  look forward to an ambitious and expeditious solution for the 
problems of poor cotton producing countries.  
 In terms of process, we welcome and would continue to support the bottom-up approach. We 
urge that the different positions of Members should always be covered and reflected in a balanced 
manner. The task of addressing the prevailing ga ps and differences mu st be done through a 
transparent negotiating process that involves the full participation of  all Members. Consequently, the 
process that we have embarked upon at this end of  June modalities meeting, must allow all voices to 
feature and to be heard on all areas of the negotia tions. Although we have no problem with the list and 
sequencing of issues regarding the modalities for ag riculture and NAMA, we urge that the linkage 
between this approach and the modalities papers released by the Chairs must remain clear to 
Members. Perhaps, you may wish to explain how you wish to achieve that objective, even if it is only 
for the sake of those of us who are new or may just be joining this process. 
 
 My delegation would further like to make a few comments on substance. In agriculture, we 
support the present provisions made for countries with  ceiling bindings. However, we do believe that 
it is not appropriate to use applied tariffs as the benchmark to measure the level of ambition. The 
range of thresholds and cuts for proposed tariff re ductions by developing countries contained in the 
Chair's report to the TNC of 23 November 2005 (Job (05)/306) should be maintained. The designation 
of special products should be guided by the indicators that satisfy the criteria of food security, 
livelihood security and rural development. The LD Cs should also have full access to the Special 
Safeguard Mechanism on all agricultural products.   On commodities, we call on Members to address two cardinal issues. The first is to ensure 
that the outcome of the negotiations is not prej udicial to long standing preferences. Secondly, the 
issues of technical and financial assistance for di versification, including the periodic review of 
developments in world commodity markets and their impact on the trade and economies of commodity dependent countries, should be included in the draft modalities text as well as the Understanding on the provisions of Articl es XX(h) and XXXVIII of GATT 1994 as included in 
Annex M. 
 TN/C/M/26 
Page 12  
 
   On the modalities for NAMA, we call on Memb ers to be sensitive to the right of the 
paragraph 6 countries to maintain policy space and avoid the consequences of de-industrialization, as 
a result of the liberalization arising from the Round. We therefore insist on a binding coverage of 70% 
at the overall average rate of 28.5%. We believe th at this is necessary to pr ovide adequate flexibility 
for those countries to expand and strengthen their curre ntly weak industrial base, due to the impact of 
autonomous liberalization measures imposed by inte rnational financial institutions under structural 
adjustment programmes. Indeed, this flexibilit y will promote and sustain the current regional 
integration efforts which constitute a necessary st ep towards the full integration of our fragile 
economies into the international trading system. Ni geria greatly sympathises with the challenges and 
circumstances of small and vulnerable economies. We  therefore urge Members to favourably consider 
their objective of achieving a paragraph 6 type solution in the NAMA negotiations. 
  In conclusion, my delegation fully supports th e Statements made by Benin on behalf of the 
African Group, Brazil on behalf of the G20, Indo nesia on behalf of the G33 and Mauritius on behalf 
of the ACP. 
  TN/C/M/26 
 Page 13 
 
 
Statement by Switzerland  
   The time has come to negotiate which implies realism, pragmatism and also flexibility.  In 
order to move forward, we have to go step by step.  I see two stages which are already in action and 
we need to allocate roles.  The fi rst stage is what we now call preparing the landing zone.  It is up to 
the G6 countries and the major players to set th e parameters.  The second stage will be to get 
everyone on board, so this landing zone has to be prepared, corrected, improved upon through all the 
other instruments we have, such as sensitive produc ts, the treatment of sensitive products and other 
elements. 
 
 Just a few further comments regarding the landi ng zone.  It has three essential elements, as I 
see it – market access, agricultural domestic support and NAMA, and the three biggest players are 
each called upon to act in their own sector.  On mark et access it is the European Union, and with it 
undoubtedly the G10, who will have to move.  On  agricultural domestic support, it is the United 
States who are called upon to improve substantially th eir offer. And on NAMA, the G20 must be able 
to move.     Up to now, the European Union has sent out some positive signals, but aside from that I have 
not seen anyone move.  Even some of the figures that you mentioned in recent days, Mr. Chairman, do not seem to me to be those which will help us.  I think that for agricultural domestic support, a 
volume of $20 billion only represents a marginal effort for the United States.  Or for industrial goods, 
a Swiss formula with a coefficient of 20, hardly modifies the terms of trade for some countries and 
does not at all modify the terms of trade among the G20 countries.  So on these points, efforts must be made on this basis in order for us to move to the seco nd stage, and in this first stage account must also 
be taken of the need for flexibility for the sec ond stage, in particular for sensitive products. 
 
 I would now like to say a few words regarding the G10 who held a ministerial meeting yesterday and who reviewed the main issues whic h are under consideration this week.  The G10 
remains determined to make a contribution in the th ree pillars of agriculture.  We will continue to 
make constructive contributions to the pro cess through our proposals and our ideas.  The 
communication which we released to the press yester day is available for all Members and I will only 
refer to the three main points contained therein. 
  One, the G10 rejects a concept of capping of  duties.  This morning in the Green Room 
emphasis was laid on us remaining faithful to agreem ents reached at previous meetings and I think 
this is a point that should be stressed here too.   
 
 On agricultural market access, the parameters of the G20 proposal go beyond our zone of possibility.  We also stated in the Green Room, how ever, that if the European Union is somewhat to 
the south of the G20, in this area we are even further to the south th an the European Un ion.  This is 
just to situate the respective positions as we start our discussions.  
 Finally, third point, three issues are crucial for the G10.  The rate of reduction in the formula, 
the number of sensitive products, as well as the trea tment for sensitive products.  These are three 
closely interlinked issues and they must be resolved simultaneously.    Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for all the efforts that you have made up to now, and you 
can count on my cooperation and that of my  delegation to move things forward. 
 TN/C/M/26 
Page 14  
 
  Statement by El Salvador, also on behalf of
 
the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua  
   Mr Chairman, 
 
 I should like to make this statement on be half of the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, 
Honduras, Nicaragua and my own country, El Salvador.   I shall be very brief, since I believe that th e Membership is already fully aware of the wide-
ranging and constructive efforts that our countries have  been making in their work in this Round, as 
small, vulnerable economies.   Accordingly, we should just like to welcome the clarification that you have made to the effect 
that the current discussions will include the subject  of small economies, from the agricultural and the 
industrial standpoints. 
  We should also like to acknowledge and emph asize the support expressed by the G20 and the 
G33 in their respective communiqués, which made it clear that all aspects of the needs of the small, 
vulnerable economies should be addressed, with a vi ew to achieving greater integration of our 
countries into international trade. 
 
 In conclusion, we should like to reiterate our  special interest and full commitment to work 
constructively so that the future modalities are a bala nced reflection of the positions that we have put 
forward in the course of these negotiations and, on that basis, achieve the successful conclusion to the 
Doha Round that we all seek. 
 
 Thank you very much.    TN/C/M/26 
 Page 15 
 
 
ANNEX II 
 
Statements made by participants at the informal meeting 
of the Trade Negotiations Committee  at the level of Heads of Delegation 
held on 1 July 2006 
 
  At their request, the statements made by a num ber of delegations at the informal meeting of 
the Trade Negotiations Committee at the level of Heads of Delegation,  held on 1 July, are reproduced 
below as part of the minutes of the formal meeting of the TNC held also on 1 July. 
 
_______________ 
  
Statement by Kenya
 
 
  Thank you Mr. Chairman for your leadership and commitment to a successful conclusion of 
the Doha Round of Negotiations. We agree with your assessment of the current situation in the 
negotiations.   
 The African Group came into these consultations  with full mandate to negotiate. However in 
spite of our efforts it is unfortunate  that we have not mana ged to make progress.  We therefore have to 
deal with the situation that we find ourselves in now.  At this juncture it is more important to deal with 
the process of how we should move forward and clearly design a transparent and acceptable roadmap 
for the completion of our work. 
 
 We support the proposal that has been made for you to lead consultations in various formats 
in an inclusive and transparent manner with a view  to securing convergence to allow for a Ministerial 
Meeting to take place fairly soon.   We think your  consultations together with the processes that the 
Chairmen of Agriculture and NAMA have been undertaking could enhance the bridging of the 
differences that still exist among ourselves.  The two draft texts form a good basis for your 
consultations.   
  Your consultation outside Ge neva should lead to fresh instructions from capitals to 
negotiators in Geneva with the aim of achieving convergence.  
 I wish to conclude with two points: one, I must strongly restate that development is at the core 
of these negotiations and must not be sidelined.   Secondly, I wish to urge my colleague Minister s as they return to capitals to help enhance 
political commitments to the pro cess at the highest level and tran slate that commitment into new 
flexibilities at the negotiating table. 
 
 Thank you Mr. Chairman. TN/C/M/26 
Page 16  
 
  Statement by Colombia
 
   Thank you Mr. Chairman.  
 People and institutions become what they are, because of will. Without will, the WTO would 
have not become what it is now.   Therefore, the only possible explanation for th e difficulties encountered in fulfilling the Doha 
mandate is lack of political will, rather than lack of efforts. 
 
 Such lack of political will is ultimately refl ected in the many flexibilities that each Member 
pursues.    We have called this roun d, the Development Round. 
 
 Throughout the negotiations, it has been evidenced  that countries have different views as to 
the link between international trade and developmen t. Some countries have sustained that market 
opening will lead to closing of enterprises, which, th erefore, will translate into unemployment. Also, 
we have heard testimonies on how interna tional trade has triggered development. 
 
 On the other hand, other countries have pr ofited such views and have made proposals on 
agricultural issues that do not match with th eir high ambitions regarding industrial goods. 
  This is not the right time for recrimination. We are all responsible for the present situation 
and, failure is the worst possible scenario fo r both developed and developing countries.  
 
 Consequently, and for practical purposes to  overcome the current difficulties, Colombia 
proposes granting for the near future, a mandate to our Director General Mr. Pascal Lamy to conduct 
high-level consultations and to report the outcome fr om such consultations to this Committee, as soon 
as possible. The above, in order to ad opt modalities in the forthcoming July. 
 
 We sense that Mr. Pascal Lamy should undert ake hearing the Members and their particular 
difficulties, rather than drafting a modalities text for which the moment is not ripe yet.   Colombia assures the Members that we are able of reaching agreements. Indeed, we 
witnessed the conclusion of an agreement relating tr ansparency on regional trade agreements. And, 
there is also another agreement between some de veloping countries and the major Member of this 
organization, regarding a sensitive product, which is in good track. 
  I hope Colombia’s proposal is given the support from the Members.   Thank you Mr. Chairman  TN/C/M/26 
 Page 17 
 
 
 
Statement by Switzerland on behalf of the G10  
   On behalf of the G10, I would like to express our regret that it has not been possible to find 
the common ground necessary in order to enter into deeper negotiations.   
  We believe that, as a first step, it is up to the G6 to find an accommodation among themselves on the three corners of the triangle.  We note that  the European Union gave signals of flexibility, 
where market access is concerned, but no move came from the G20 or United States on what is 
intended on domestic support or the NAMA coefficients.   
  The G10 is prepared to enter into negotiations in having given signals of flexibility, but also in recalling its own redlines.  We support and re quest you, Mr. Director-General, to intensify your 
consultations in order to facilita te the convergence of these differe nt positions, and to consult of 
course beyond the G6 in order to address also the elements necessary to bring all other countries, once 
we have this common ground, on board and in order also to go beyond of course these three elements 
in the triangle.   Finally, I would express the hope that it will be possible to come back to Geneva before the end of July. 
 
 Thank you. TN/C/M/26 
Page 18  
 
   
Statement by Benin on behalf
 
of the Co-Sponsors of the Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton  
  
 Mr Chairman, 
  On behalf of the Co-Sponsors of the Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton, I should like to 
thank you for your sustained efforts to move th e negotiations forward and ultimately to establish 
modalities, including modalities for cotton. 
 
 Despite your own efforts and those of other WT O Members, we have not been able to achieve 
modalities on the two issues set for completion by th e end of June 2006, name ly Agriculture and Non-
Agricultural Market Access.  
 The situation is serious and presents us with a challenge, albeit obviously in different degrees. 
  It represents a challenge in particular for those who do not wish to make sacrifices or to make the necessary concessions that would enable us to break  the deadlock, that is to say the real players 
who are on the playing field but do not wish to follow the rules.  
 The Co-Sponsors of the Sectoral Initiative in  Favour of Cotton and all the African cotton 
producing countries are deeply concerned about the st ate of inertia in which we find ourselves, and 
the serious economic, social and psychological consequences of this lack of movement. 
  These consequences are particularly serious fo r a trading product like cotton, which accounts 
for more than 12 per cent of the gross domestic produ ct, more than 40 per cent of total export earnings 
and more than 70 per cent of agricultural export earni ngs in the countries of West and Central Africa, 
countries which are calling for the adoption of fair an d equitable rules to govern international trade in 
cotton.   Ministers and Heads of Delegation of West, Central and other regions of Africa came to 
Geneva over the last few days with high hopes th at modalities and appropriate solutions would be 
achieved for the vital issue of cotton.   Unfortunately, that has not been the case.  
 We shall therefore be returning to our capita ls, villages and hamlets with the message that 
certain major players in the international cotton tr ade have refused to change their position, setting 
their face against solutions to the problems e xperienced by the cotton-producing communities. 
  We would point out that tens of millions of people are being sacrificed by these major players on the altar of unfair, inequitable laws which favour only a small minorit y of persons engaged 
elsewhere in the same cotton-producing activity. 
  This situation is prejudicial to our States a nd our populations, who must continue to face the 
harsh reality of the continued decline in intern ational cotton prices on account of subsidies and 
domestic supports granted by certain developed coun tries to their cotton producers.  This disastrous 
situation is made even worse by the concomitant  decline in the dollar exchange rate for these 
countries in the zone of the CFA franc, which is pegged to the euro.   We wish to see an end to the log-jam as quickly  as possible, in the next few days, before it is 
too late.  TN/C/M/26 
 Page 19 
 
 
  For this reason, Mr Chairman, the Co-Sponsors of the Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton 
wish to reiterate their support for your efforts to  solve the problems confronting African cotton. 
  They also wish to assure you of their backing for the consultations you plan to carry out in the 
coming days. 
  You will thus have their full support in impl ementing the planned consultations, including 
those on cotton.  
 The Co-Sponsors of the Sectoral Initiative in  Favour of Cotton would point out that their 
proposals for cotton modalities, as submitted on 1 Ma rch and supplemented on 16 June 2006, provide 
an essential foundation for solving the problem s faced by the cotton sector in Africa. 
  Lastly, our countries hope that the forthcomi ng consultations will make it possible to achieve 
just, equitable and sustainable solutions to the cotton issue. 
  Thank you.  
 TN/C/M/26 
Page 20  
 
  Statement by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
 
   Thank you Mr Director-General.  
 To begin with, we share your view that there is a crisis.  This is because certain Members, 
particularly the developed countries, have not s hown the political commitment needed to guarantee 
the development dimension in the discussions.   As regards the mandate that Members ha ve given the Director-General to conduct 
consultations, it is important that these consultations  should be carried out on a broad basis.  They 
must not revolve around a small group of countries.  Moreover, they must be based on the modalities 
papers produced by the Chairmen of NAMA and Ag riculture.  They must refer specifically to 
numbers and disciplines:  we do not want any new pa pers, particularly if they seek to redefine the 
mandate.  It is also important, Mr Director-General, that we maintain the bottom up approach.  In this 
connection, we note that no new deadlines are needed.  We need to work on th e basis of those already 
established at the Hong Kong Ministerial Meeting.   For the purposes of transparency, our entire me mbership should be informed periodically of 
the results of the consultations, and as far as partic ipation is concerned, the G-6 is not representative 
of the full range of interests of Members.  Conseq uently, the consultations should not be limited to 
that group alone. 
  Finally, the consultations should result in full modalities, in keeping with the concept of the 
single undertaking.   TN/C/M/26 
 Page 21 
 
 
Statement by El Salvador on behalf of  
Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic  
   Mr Director-General, 
 
 On behalf of the delegations of El Salv ador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the 
Dominican Republic, we wish to thank you for your report on the status of the consultations on the 
establishment of modalities in the negotiations  on agriculture and non-agricultural products. 
 
 We agree with you that we should intensify our efforts in the search for solutions for the 
establishment of modalities.  Our delegations are co mmitted to the multilateral trading system and the 
Doha Round, as we firmly believe that trade plays a vital role in the economic development of our 
peoples and in reducing poverty.  
 This meeting provides us with a point of refere nce with a view to redoubling our efforts, and 
in this connection we wish to re iterate our confidence that you will be able to intensify the process 
and achieve the desired outcome.   It is obvious that consultations with all – I re peat, all – WTO interlocutors must be intensified 
for the sake of consensus, the aim being to find so lutions that correspond to the objectives of the Doha 
Development Round. 
  Your future reports on the cons ultations should deal comprehensively with the topic of small, 
vulnerable economies, in relation to the negotia tions on agriculture as well as on non-agricultural 
products. 
 
 Mr Director-General,   We wish to reiterate that you can count on the support of our countries in the search for solutions that meet the concerns of the small, vulnerable economies.  TN/C/M/26 
Page 22  
 
  Statement by Cuba
 
   First of all, the Cuban delegation would like to  thank the Director-General for the information 
he has provided, as well as for his efforts to try to reach a result.  We regret that, once more, the main 
players – the developed countries – have not made a new offer, not even a conditional one, that would 
respect the development mandate of this Round and e liminate or reduce substantially their agricultural 
policies which constitute an outstanding issue from the Uruguay Round.  Instead, they had continued 
to ask the impossible of developing countries and to play the media game of who to blame for a failure. 
 
 This was bound to happen – a lack of political will from these countries to take historical 
decisions which would correct the injustices and st ructural inequalities of a trading system which 
benefited only rich countries.  
 This should be cause for reflection.  In the time that we have been meeting here, thousands of 
people in developing countries have died of hunge r or illnesses, whose prevention or treatment often 
cost cents, due to the lack of resources in these c ountries, which could be ge nerated through fair and 
equitable trade, among other means.   However, let us not lose heart – this is not th e end of the story, nor the end of the negotiating 
mandate in the Doha Work Programme and the Hong Kong Declaration.  The dates have changed or 
have not been respected many times, and other Rounds, such as the Uruguay Round, lasted more than the four years and eight months of the Doha Round.   What is necessary to start with are, among ot her things, the precise figures up to which the 
main developed players could go, since you alone  cannot move the process forward without the 
political will and flexibility of these Members.  As you have said on other occasions, this Round has many more and much more complex issues than th e previous ones, which are difficult to resolve. 
  Mr. Chairman, we have heard many statements  reiterating the commitment to the conclusion 
of the Round, at the latest at the end the of the year.  We hope that these translate into deeds, and 
become reality in the next weeks and months. 
  There is no sense continuing this series of meetings over the weekend, since what has not been achieved in the last few days will not be achieved in one more day.  
 The Director-General should undertake the wi dest possible consultations, not only with the 
main players who had to provide the main part of th e harvest, but also with all Members, in particular 
on the essential figures so that the other questions could be unlocked.   The Director-General's consultations can onl y take place on the basis of the documents on 
possible modalities prepared by the Chairmen of  Agriculture and NAMA, upon which there is no 
consensus because they omit certain issues of interest to developing countries, and were not discussed 
in depth nor negotiated, but which were the result  of our agreement to intensify the negotiations 
during the last two months on the basis of a bottom-up approach and with the transparency and inclusiveness which also should be the central pr inciple to be followed in any consultations. 
 
 The evolution and results of this process should be reported periodically to the whole 
membership.   Such a process should take into account that we  have a mandate for development, for full 
modalities, for a single undertaking and for S&D treatment which takes into account the special  TN/C/M/26 
 Page 23 
 
 
circumstances of developing countries and the enormous differences which separate them from 
industrialized countries, and that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.   In parallel, the work on other mandates should continue in Geneva, in the same spirit that 
work was intensified on Agriculture and NAMA, in cluding on implementation issues and in particular 
on the S&D proposals which up to now have been put to one side or have remained with no 
agreement because of developed countries' opposition,  without which we could reach consensus.  
   TN/C/M/26 
Page 24  
 
   
Statement by the Philippines
 
   Thank you, Mr. Chairman.   
 
 We join others in expressing our support to you and for the process that we now will 
collectively embark on, with the hope of reaching a landing zone that will take into full account, and 
accommodate to the fullest extent possible, the objectives of all Members, while preserving the 
bottom-up process. 
 
 The Philippines is prepared to make a contribu tion in this Round.  This will, however, be 
contingent on the major developed Members accepti ng the reality that developing countries will not 
renegotiate the development mandate of Doha, as already affirmed last December in Hong Kong. 
 
 In NAMA, we stand resolute with NAMA 11 and it is our expectation that realism would 
need to be injected in the quest  for an acceptable coefficient in th e Swiss formula, and treatment of 
unbound tariffs especially those that have been persis tently low.  Paragraph 8 flexibilities need to be 
improved as the numbers therein for now are only a bare minimum.   In Agriculture, I must also reiterate that all Members need to accept the mandate for the 
effective operation of SP and the SSM. Food security , livelihood security, and rural development are 
non-negotiable concerns.   I will refrain from speaking on other topics under the DDA.  The time for that will come later. 
 
 Let me conclude simply by saying that there is much hard work ahead, and we look at the 
outcome of this phase with the hope that our deve lopment aspirations will be respected and addressed, 
and that major developed Members will assume the leadership long expected of them.    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  TN/C/M/26 
 Page 25 
 
 
Statement by Argentina  
   Mr. Chairman, we would like to begin by expressing our thanks for the efforts by you and also by the Chairmen of the negotiating groups  in preparing the modalities, although we must 
recognize that the drafts, in some c ases, such as agriculture, need to be brought up to date.  We have 
noted that some submissions, including one we r ecently made in Job(06)/197/Rev.1, has not been 
included in terms of its substance in the modalities fo r agriculture.  With this caveat, we would like to 
state that a considerable effort has been made and that we have a good basis for continuing the 
negotiations. 
 
 We would also like to highlight our agreement with what many delegati ons have said today in 
supporting the consultations that Members have en trusted to you in order to obtain the required 
decisions so as to close the gap between the positions of Members that have stood in the way of taking 
the steps that would lead us to an agreement within the Round.  We therefore hope that the next time 
the Ministers come to Geneva or wherever they  might meet, that it will be for the purpose of 
successfully concluding our work.   Developing countries have been very clear that not only have they contributed, they are also willing to contribute substantively so that the Roun d reaches a safe haven.  I believe that the press 
release today by the G110 shows the conviction of developing countries and their support for the 
Doha Round.  We hope that, in the light of this c ontribution by developing countries, those who need 
to make the necessary structural changes will be willing to do so, so that you, Mr. Chairman, can 
proceed so the necessary decisions for reaching an agreement will be taken. 
  I would like to recall that, as our delegation has repeatedly stated, in 1958 in the GATT a 
decision was taken to eliminate subsidies on industr ial exports.  We will soon reach 2013, more than 
half a century later, when we hope the Round w ill have concluded successfully, and agricultural 
export subsidies will be eliminated.   In the area of market access, we are still hear ing positions that 100 per cent tariff cap is not 
sufficient.  These same countries are asking developi ng countries to reduce their industrial tariffs to 
under 15 per cent.  We feel that this imbalance does not respond to the decisions taken by Ministers in 
Hong Kong.  We therefore call on all participants to take into account the need for balanced positions 
in agriculture and NAMA.  Developing countries, in cluding Argentina, have indicated that where the 
principle countries are willing to go, we will follow.   That is, in both agriculture and NAMA in terms 
of percentage cuts, and naturally, as some dele gations have said, taki ng into account a smaller 
percentage cut for developing countries, based on the principle of less than full reciprocity and special 
and differential treatment.  We hope that there will be the conviction, the balance, the willingness, the 
political will and the leadership to conclude the negotiations appropriately.  Mr. Chairman, we will 
make every effort to contribute to the success of the Round.   Thank you very much. 
 TN/C/M/26 
Page 26  
 
   
Statement by Costa Rica
 
  
 Thank you, Mr Chairman. 
 I came to Geneva with the intention to help  narrow the gaps separating many of our positions, 
with a view to agreeing moda lities in Agriculture and NAMA. 
 After several days of hard work, particular ly among the Members of the G6, it has become 
clear that convergent positions cannot yet be achieve d on the triangle of issues, making it impossible, 
for the time being, to move forward in the other areas. 
 I should like to thank the Chairs of the two negotiating groups for their efforts.  It is we 
Members who are responsible for the lack of agreement and it is for us  to achieve such agreement, in 
the coming weeks I hope. 
 The G6 has played an extremely important role and we believe that they should continue their 
efforts to resolve the differences between them.  Howe ver, we believe that the only way in which this 
deadlock can be overcome is for all Members of the G6 to be more flexible regarding their respective 
defensive interests. 
 It is clear to us that this crisis has been caused by the limited ambition on the three sides of 
the triangle and each party's unwillingness to raise their levels of ambition significantly in the areas in 
which they have defensive interests. 
 The shifts in position that have recently occu rred in the G6 are not sufficient and do not 
provide a basis for a balanced agreement satisfactory to all concerned. 
 Mr Chairman, although the G6 will continue pl aying this key role, we think it necessary to 
seek new ways of facilitating the negotiations.  Thus , we think that you should assume a more active 
role in the negotiations, as facilitator of an agreement. 
 Costa Rica will continue participating construc tively in the negotiations.  We believe that the 
window of opportunity for a successful conclusion to  the Round is narrowing.  If it were to close 
completely, reopening it would be difficult and we  developing countries would be the ones looking 
through the glass while others continue on the path  of development.  It is we, the developing 
countries, who would be the biggest losers if that were to happen.  
__________