RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/C/M/75 
1 March 2005 
 
 (05-0863) 
Council for Trade in Goods  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS  
1 OCTOBER 2004  
 
Chairman:  H.E. Ambassador Chiaradia (Argentina
) 
 
 
The meeting of the Council for Trade in  Goods, convened by airgram WTO/AIR/2391, 
proceeded on the basis of the proposed ag enda contained in document G/C/W/494. 
  The Chairman,
 before proceeding with the adoption of the agenda, drew Members' attention to 
the communication, received from Thailand on behalf  of Australia, Brazil, Malaysia, Argentina and 
Thailand, requesting that the issue "EC Enlargem ent: Procedures under Ar ticle XXVIII:3 of GATT 
1994" be included as an additional item for this me eting.  It had been faxed to all delegations on 
29 September 2004.  He had undertak en consultations with a group of Members on this matter and 
proposed that this issue be added to the proposed agenda.  
 It was so agreed
.  The agenda was adopted as follows: 
 
I. REVIEW OF THE OPERATION OF THE TRIMS AGREEMENT UNDER 
ARTICLE 9 ...................................................................................................................... .........2  
II. REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS ..................................................................................4  
A. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARMENIA AND UKRAINE – NOTIFICATION FROM 
ARMENIA (WT/REG171/N/1,  WT/REG171/1)...........................................................................4  
B. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARMENIA AND KAZAKHSTAN – NOTIFICATION 
FROM ARMENIA (WT/REG172/N/1,  WT/REG172/1).................................................................4  
C. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARMENIA AND MOLDOVA – NOTIFICATION 
FROM ARMENIA (WT/REG173/N/1,  WT/REG173/1).................................................................4  
D. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARMENIA AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION – 
NOTIFICATION FROM ARMENIA (WT/REG174/N/1,  WT/REG174/1) ........................................4  
E. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARMENIA AND TURKMENISTAN – NOTIFICATION 
FROM ARMENIA (WT/REG175/N/1,  WT/REG175/1).................................................................4  
F. PROTOCOL ON TRADE IN THE SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY – 
NOTIFICATION FROM TANZANIA (WT/REG176/N/1  AND REV.1,  WT/REG176/1,  
WT/REG176/2)................................................................................................................... ........4  
III. MARKET ACCESS MATTERS .............................................................................................4  
A. COMMITTEE ON MARKET ACCESS – PERIODIC REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE 
(G/MA/154) ..................................................................................................................... ...........4  
B. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 1996  CHANGES INTO WTO  SCHEDULES OF 
TARIFF CONCESSIONS – REQUESTS FOR A WAIVER ....................................................................5  G/C/M/75 
Page 2  
 
 (i)
 Argentina (G/L/693, G/C/W/493) ...............................................................................................5  
(ii) Israel (G/L/687, G/C/W/492).................................................................................................... ..5 
IV. EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ENLARGEMENT, PROCEDURES UNDER 
ARTICLE XXVIII:3 OF GATT 1994.....................................................................................5  
V. MAJOR REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT ON 
TEXTILES AND CLOTHING (ATC) IN THE THIRD STAGE OF THE 
INTEGRATION PROCESS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 8.11 OF THE AGREEMENT (G/L/683, G/L/692).........................................................................................8
 
VI. POST-ATC ADJUSTMENT-RELATED ISSUES ................................................................8  
VII.  OTHER BUSINESS................................................................................................................. .8 
 
 
I. REVIEW OF THE OPERATION OF THE TRIMS AGREEMENT UNDER 
ARTICLE 9 
1.1 The representative of Brazil recalled that Brazil and India had presented in July 2004 a pr oposal 
for terms of reference for a study on the effects of the elimination of TRIMs in document JOB(04)/93.  
The representative noted that their purpose was to set  the basis for an objective assessment that would 
assist Members in conducting the mandated review of the TRIMs Agreement.  He recalled that at the 
last meeting some delegations indicated their readin ess to look into their proposal and that they might 
be in a position to provide them with some initial comments.  The representative stated that he looked 
forward to engaging in a fruitful discussion of this matter. 
 
1.2 The representative of the European Communities  noted that the problem they were facing was 
not really a problem of process of moving to a study,  but rather one of substance and this had already 
been mentioned before on a few occasions.  The representative believed that the study would not 
resolve the substantial debate, given the fact that there had already been some very useful studies done 
on this, such as the joint UNCTAD/WTO study, which did shed light on the i ssue but did not really 
bring the two sides any closer together than they were before.  He recalled that when the Members 
launched the DDA they chose not to amend the TR IMS Agreement and it did not seem likely that 
they were going to reach consensus under an Article 9 review of this.  He said that they always stood 
ready to discuss specific problems on a case by case b asis, and the issue concerning Pakistan's TRIMs 
was up for discussion as a point under Other Business la ter, and they had had useful discussions with 
them and there was also the possibility of waivers u nder Article 9 if there we re concrete problems of 
implementation.  The representative asserted, however , that they were always ready to discuss the 
experience of other Members in the phasing out  of TRIMs and that this should continue. 
  
1.3 The representative of Canada  stated that he did not want his position to be construed as 
opposing further analysis, or further thought, but it was clear that any discussion under this item, or any link to the Article 9 review would not lead anywhe re.  He did not consider further analysis as bad 
but under this item he did not believe it would be  appropriate or that it would lead the Members 
anywhere.  The representative added that if ther e were any further discussion they would see it taking 
place somewhere else perhaps under the TRIMs Committee or somewhere else that was deemed 
appropriate by Members but not unde r this Article 9 review item. 
  
1.4 The representative of Japan  said that Japan's position on this issue remained the same, 
opposing any move to weaken the disciplines contai ned in the TRIMs Agreement.  He noted that 
Japan did not oppose looking into  situations concerning TRIMs measures on a case-by-case basis, but 
he did not think that it would be  appropriate treating this under the Article 9 review process.  The 
delegate stated that Japan remained open to discussions.  G/C/M/75 
 Page 3 
 
 
  
1.5 The representative of the United States  noted that their position on this issue was very similar 
to the EU.  The delegate did not really believe that  the study was going to lead the Members out of the 
impasse that had developed over the Article 9 review.  In that sense, it was not clear as to what use that would be.  The representative stated that th e US' position remained unchanged, meaning that the 
Article 9 review, as far as the US was concerne d, had been taken as far as it could and Members 
should formally conclude the review.  1.6 The representative of Pakistan
 said he believed that the last few interventions were trying to 
force the result, even previously to the study, that the Members were not getting anywhere.  He 
acknowledged the fact that they had debated this s ubject before and that Members had expressed their 
reservations, however there had been an indication th at Members would be sending this issue back to 
their administrations.  He stated that not later than fi ve years after the date of its entry into force, the 
CTG should review the operation of this Agre ement and as appropria te propose amendments. 
Accordingly, Pakistan shared the concerns expressed by Brazil, stating that it would like that this 
study go ahead as requested by Brazil and India. 
 1.7 The representative of India
 noted that India and Brazil had ci rculated a paper quite some time 
ago.  He strongly believed that in  the context of the developments that had taken place over the last 
few years, a study would provide additional inputs to  inform the debate as well as to help Members to 
understand trade development aspects of TRIMs.  Therefore, he shared the concern expressed by 
Brazil and Pakistan.  He also supported the necessity to take recognition of this paper and discuss it in 
detail and see what kind of changes could be made which could be of  great significance to developing 
countries.  1.8 The representative of Argentina
 supported the positions of Pakistan, India and Brazil 
regarding the advisability and the need to conduct a study as it had been proposed.  The delegate did 
not believe that any such study could be harmful, it could simply help the Members to have a better 
understanding of the situation in view of recent developments. 
  
1.9 The representative of Cuba  reiterated the position which had been expressed by her delegation 
in previous meetings regarding the advisability of conducting such a study.  She believed it would be 
very useful in clarifying matters and Members should not prejudge the outcome of such a study.  She added that the study could not really have a negativ e impact and it would help to clarify the debate. 
 1.10 The Chairman
 stated that as far as the proposed study  was concerned, it would appear that 
Members needed more time to reflect on the possible scope of this study and the context in which the 
study would be carried out before reaching a final d ecision on this matter.  Consequently, he proposed 
that the Council take note of the statements made a nd that it agree that the Chairman should conduct 
informal consultations on this question and in par ticular on the context in which the proposed study 
might be undertaken; subsequent to these consulta tions the Chairman would then inform this Council 
of the result of these consultations.  It was so agreed .  G/C/M/75 
Page 4  
 
 II. 
 REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS 
A. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARMENIA AND UKRAINE – NOTIFICATION FROM 
ARMENIA (WT/REG171/N/1,  WT/REG171/1) 
B. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARMENIA AND KAZAKHSTAN – NOTIFICATION FROM 
ARMENIA (WT/REG172/N/1,  WT/REG172/1) 
C. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARMENIA AND MOLDOVA – NOTIFICATION FROM 
ARMENIA (WT/REG173/N/1,  WT/REG173/1) 
D. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARMENIA AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION – 
NOTIFICATION FROM ARMENIA (WT/REG174/N/1,  WT/REG174/1) 
E. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARMENIA AND TURKMENISTAN – NOTIFICATION FROM 
ARMENIA (WT/REG175/N/1,  WT/REG175/1) 
F. PROTOCOL ON TRADE IN THE SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY – 
NOTIFICATION FROM TANZANIA (WT/REG176/N/1  AND REV.1,  WT/REG176/1,  
WT/REG176/2) 
2.1 The Chairman  drew the Council's attention to the six Agreements listed under this item, 
notified under GATT Article XXIV.  The texts of th e Agreements and their notifications had been 
circulated in the documents listed.  2.2 In the absence of comments, the Chairman
 proposed that the Committee on Regional Trade 
Agreements carry out the examination of the a bove-mentioned Agreements in accordance with the 
following terms of reference:  "to examine, in li ght of the relevant provisions of the GATT 1994, the 
trade agreements just referred to and to submit a report to the Council for Trade in Goods.  It is 
understood that the understanding read out by the Ch airman of the Council for Trade in Goods under 
item seven of the agenda of the meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods on 20 February 1995, as 
contained in document WT/REG3/1, will apply mutatis mutandis  to the examination of the 
agreements.  It is also understood that, during the examination, due account  will be taken of the 
intrinsic differences between customs unions and free trade areas."  
 2.3 It was so agreed
. 
 
III. MARKET ACCESS MATTERS 
A. COMMITTEE ON MARKET ACCESS – PERIODIC REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE (G/MA/154) 
3.1 The Chairman  recalled that the Market Access Co mmittee had forwarded to Members two 
waivers, accompanied by the periodic report of the Committee.  As the report was factual in nature, 
and reflected the work undertaken in that body, th e Chairman suggested the Council take note of it.  
 3.2 It was so agreed.
  G/C/M/75 
 Page 5 
 
 
 B. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 1996  CHANGES INTO WTO  SCHEDULES OF TARIFF 
CONCESSIONS – REQUESTS FOR A WAIVER  
(i)  Argentina (G/L/693, G/C/W/493) 
(ii)  Israel (G/L/687, G/C/W/492) 
3.3 The Chairman  noted that two Members had forwarded to the Secretariat requests for waivers 
in connection with the introduction of the HS96 ch anges to their schedules.   In each case, draft 
decisions had been circulated in the G/C/W/ docum ent series to assist the Council in its consideration 
of these questions.  The Committee on Market A ccess had already taken note of the factual 
information provided by these two Members and prop osed that the Members take up the two requests 
together. The floor was opened for comments fro m delegations. Subsequently, the Chairman 
suggested that the Council approve the waivers re quested for Argentina and Israel and recommended 
that the draft decisions contained in G/C/W/493 and 492 be forwarded to the General Council for 
adoption.  3.4 It was so agreed
. 
 
IV. EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ENLARGEMENT, PROCEDURES UNDER ARTICLE 
XXVIII:3 OF GATT 1994 
4.1 The Chairman  recalled that a communication had been received from the delegation of 
Thailand on behalf of Argentina, Australia, Brazil,  India, Malaysia Ecuador, Uruguay and Thailand, 
requesting this agenda item to be included in the present meeting.  A communication had also been 
received from the delegation of the European Co mmunities and was contained in document G/L/695, 
dated 30 September.  4.2 The representative of Thailand
 made a statement on behalf of Argentina, Australia, Brazil, 
India, Malaysia, Ecuador, Uruguay and Thailand.  The representative said that Argentina, Australia, 
Brazil, Malaysia and Thaila nd had proposed the addition of this ag enda item because of their concerns 
about the negotiations under Article XXVIII of GA TT 1994.  Ecuador and Ur uguay had subsequently 
associated themselves with these concerns.  She noted  that the negotiations for compensation from the 
EC enlargement were ongoing at different stages among Members and the EC.  In some cases they 
had not even started, despite the fact that these Members had communicated in due time their 
intention to obtain compensation by virtue of Articles XXIV:6 and XXVIII of GATT 1994.  In light 
of this situation, the conclusion of these negotiations  would not be possible by the date in which the 
withdrawal of concessions must be notified, 1 October 2004.  This was why the request for an 
extension of the time period on the discussion and on the enlargement of the procedure under Article 
XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994 had been made.  She also requested that the EC communication in G/L/695, dated 30 September 2004, as well as the present statement,  be put in the report of this meeting.  She 
proposed that, in light of the EC's notification of its  agreement to such an extension, the CTG agree on 
the extension of the deadline to withdraw th e concessions for a period of six months until 
30 April 2005 for this particular case, without prej udice to the interpretation of Article XXVIII:3, and 
refer the matter to the General Council  for adoption.  4.3 The representative of the United States
 said that during that week, representatives from the 
EC and the US had had constructive meetings a nd her Government was encouraged that the EC 
seemed ready to engage seriously in negotiations  regarding its concerns.  She welcomed the 
communication from the EC as a sign that it had be gun to take a constructi ve stance towards its 
trading partners in this matter.  She believed it was important that the WTO take action on the EC's 
notification so as to extend the date for its Members to preserve their rights.  She noted that in 1995, 
the EC had requested that the matter of prolonga tion of all rights be placed on the agenda of the G/C/M/75 
Page 6  
 
 General Council, and the Council agreed that th e period referred to in Article XXVIII:3 would be 
extended.  Therefore, the United States fully supp orted the proposal by Thailand and other countries 
to put this communication on the record and amo ng, other actions, to recommend to the General 
Council to take note of the EC's notification and to  agree to the extension of the deadline for WTO 
Members at its next session in October. 
 
4.4 The representative of Costa Rica
 said that he supported the request presented by Thailand on 
behalf of a group of delegations.  He noted that hi s Government had previously asked for these rights, 
but the reaction of the EC was very slow.  These rights were recognised in a letter dated 
15 September, which he had received only that day,  due to a technical error.  He believed it was 
important to have an extension of  this period and he was confident that the letter sent by the EC on 
30 September was a sign of its readiness to take into account the interests and rights of the delegations 
that had made this request.  He also expressed hi s Government's readiness to start working with the 
EC.  Up to this date it had not received any reply, therefore it would like to join the group of delegations that had asked for the extensi on of this period for six further months. 
 
4.5 The representative of Japan
 said that it would have been desirable for the Article XXIV:6 
negotiations between the EC and interested Members to have been completed prior to the alignment 
of the new EU members' tariff schedules on 1 May 2004.   He expressed concern over the fact that five 
months had already passed from that day, and his Go vernment had yet to receive the information from 
the EC on any proposed modification or compensation to interested Members re ferred to in paragraph 
5 of document G/SECRET/20, dated 30 January 2004.  However, in view of the recent 
communication from the EC (G/L/C/695) and also th e proposal by the delegation of Thailand, his 
Government fully supported the proposal to tran smit this matter to the General Council for action. 
 4.6 The representative of Panama
 also supported the notification of the EC regarding the 
extension of these negotiations.  She noted that Pa nama was awaiting the confirmation from the EC of 
its note showing interest regarding this matter.  4.7 The representative of Korea
 reported to all Members that his Government was looking 
forward to the early conclusion of its bilateral negotiations with the EC under Article XXVIII of 
GATT 1994.  His Government also welcomed the EC  initiative for unilateral extension of this 
negotiating period and supported the Thailand initiative and the transm ission of the decision to the 
General Council.  4.8 The representative of Canada
 noted with interest the EC's submission in document G/L/695.  
With regard to the enlargement of the EU and concerning the negotiating rights of Members under 
Article XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994, he supported the st atement made by Thailand, and the suggestion 
by the US that the Council recommend that this notification be agreed by the General Council at its next meeting.  The representative asserted that for Ca nada the notification from the EC dealt strictly 
with respect to the rights under Article XXVIII:3.  It did not preclude in any event the timeframe for 
the negotiations per se of the modification of the schedules of the ten new EU members and of the 
EC.  The delegate also noted that Canada was also  awaiting additional related data and other material 
from the EC which was required to carry out the ne gotiations.  Until the EC submitted such material it 
would not be possible to predict the length of time th at might be needed to complete the process.  He 
urged the EC to provide the information required to  allow them to commence the negotiations as soon 
as possible and conclude a mutually satisfactory agreement in this matter.  
4.9 The representative of New Zealand
 supported the initiative of the group of countries led by 
Thailand, and the EC's proposal in document G/L/ 695 to extend the deadline for the withdrawal of 
concessions under Article XXVIII:3.  In addition, she also agreed that the matter should be 
transmitted to the General Council for approval.  G/C/M/75 
 Page 7 
 
 
 4.10 The representative of Chinese Taipei  welcomed the EC's willingness to extend the mentioned 
period.  His authorities were working with the EC to  determine a date for the first consultation.  The 
representative also supported the proposal of Thailand on behalf of a group of countries, and that of 
the US that this issue should be forwar ded to the General Council for adoption. 
 
4.11 The representative of Pakistan  supported the statement made by Thailand and welcomed the 
communication from the EC in document G/L/695 to  extend the deadline for withdrawal of 
concessions.  Furthermore, the delegate requested from the EC and the Secretariat some technical assistance to those who might need it for eff ectively participating in these negotiations. 
 
4.12 The representative of Guatemala
 supported the request by the EC for the extension of this 
deadline and agreed with the statement made by Thailand and the other de legations which supported 
this submission.  He also noted that Guatemala ha d received a reply from the EC to their request only 
during the previous week, and it was be ing examined by his authorities. 
 
4.13 The representative of the Philippines  supported the initiative of the group of countries led by 
Thailand.  The delegate also noted that this in itiative seemed to propose that the CTG agree already 
on the extension of the deadline and refer the ma tter to the General Council for adoption.  He 
requested clarification on whether the extension referred to in the EC communication G/L/695 was 
being granted to all WTO Members and not only to Members that had made cl aims.  He put on record 
that the Philippines was still awaiting consultations  with the EC at the earliest possible time. 
 4.14 The representative of Colombia
 supported the proposal made by the delegation of Thailand on 
behalf of a number of other countries and also  welcomed the communication from the EC, dated 
30 September, 2004. 
 
4.15 The representative of  the European Communities  thanked Thailand and the US for their 
helpful statements.  He noted that the process that  was initiated by the EC notification of 19 January, 
circulated by the Secretariat on 29 January, was well underway, but clearly not yet finalised.  The representative acknowledged the frustration expressed by a number of delegations, which would be 
conveyed back to Brussels, including the requests fo r data which came from a number of delegations.  
He believed that the EC communication G/L/695 gave  effected Members the greatest possible legal 
certainty.  He also noted that the extension of the negotiation period for six m onths in no way implied, 
on the Communities' part, less urgency with respect to the finalisation of the negotiations as soon as 
possible.  The delegate stated that the EC would cont inue doing its utmost to inform the results of the 
examination of the claims from WTO Members who had not yet received a reply to their claims.  The 
representative understood the Philippines' statement to  mean that the extension proposed by the EC 
would not refer to a period for entering new claims but applied to those Members who had made claims.  He would report back the Philippines' stat ement on that particular point.  The representative 
stated that they were happy to agree to the exte nsion which was requested, in particular, by Thailand, 
and for the matter to be forw arded to the General Council. 
 
4.16 The Chairman
 proposed that the CTG take note of all the statements made and also of the EC 
communication contained in document G/L/695, and th at it agree on the extension of the deadline as 
set out in that document, and finally, that the C ouncil agree to refer the ma tter to the General Council 
for adoption. 
  
4.17 It was so agreed . 
 G/C/M/75 
Page 8  
 
 V. MAJOR REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMEN TATION OF THE AGREEMENT ON 
TEXTILES AND CLOTHING (ATC) IN THE THIRD STAGE OF THE INTEGRATION PROCESS PURSUANT TO  ARTICLE 8.11 OF THE AGREEMENT 
(G/L/683, G/L/692) 
This section will be issued as an Addendum to this document. 
 
VI. POST-ATC ADJUSTMENT-RELATED ISSUES 
This section will be issued as an Addendum to this document. 
 
VII.  OTHER BUSINESS 
7.1 The representative of Argentina
 drew Members' attention to the subject of the Enlargement of 
the European Communities.  His delegation would be  grateful for a response to the communications 
which were submitted to the EC regarding Ar ticle XXVIII of GATT 1994.  The representative 
requested that the EC complete the information wh ich it had provided up to that moment regarding 
topics such as the treatment of preferential trade in  statistics presented by the EC; the conversion of 
non ad valorem  tariffs; the consideration of other instrument s of protection against the deterioration of 
market access conditions such as tariff quotas, speci al safeguards under Article 5 of the Agreement on 
Agriculture, inter alia,  in addition to tariffs.  He also noted that, outside the context of GATT Article 
XXVIII, Argentina would also be grateful if the EC  could provide them with  information concerning 
the application of subsidies in agriculture with  regard to the bound levels in Schedules and other 
commitments contained therein.  He expressed his delegation's willingness to hold constructive 
bilateral consultations with the EC. 
 7.2 The representative of Brazil
 supported the request made by Argentina.  He also noted that 
Brazil was also waiting for additional informatio n from the EC with regard to Article XXVIII 
negotiations so that it could enga ge in constructive consultations. 
 
7.3 The representative of Australia  supported the statements by Argentina and Brazil and said that 
Australia had similar concerns.  He recalled that sin ce Australia had last raised this matter in the July 
meeting of the CTG, there had been no action.  He noted that Australia had presented claims of interest in respect of the EC enlargement, that the complete information had not been provided, and 
continued to urge the EC to provide this in formation as soon as possible.  He also supported 
Argentina's request for information on agriculture do mestic support and export s ubsidies, as this was a 
matter that would have to be dealt with in the context of the new EC Schedule. 
 7.4 The representative of Thailand
 supported the statement made by Argentina and urged the EC 
delegation to accelerate initiati ng their bilateral negotiations. 
 
7.5 The representative of Panama  noted that she was also awaiting further information from the 
EC to enable their participation in the negotiations.  7.6 The representative of the European Communities
 stated that he would communicate the 
messages to Brussels, explaining certain frustrations from delegations. 
 
7.7 The Chairman  drew Members' attention to the request by Pakistan for an extension of the 
transition period pursuant to the provisions of the TRIMS Agreement.  He informed Members on the 
current situation of the request for extension submitte d by Pakistan at the end of 2003 and circulated 
as document G/C/W/478  The Chairman noted th at, subsequent to that communication, a 
communication was received from the United States wh ich contained questions regarding Pakistan's 
request in document G/C/W/480.  Pakistan's repli es were in turn circulated in document G/C/W/487,  G/C/M/75 
 Page 9 
 
 
 dated 16 April 2004.  Since the last meeting of th is Council, no information or additional comments 
had been received from Members with regard to th at request.  The Chairman emphasized that, as he 
had stated to the Council at that time, he rema ined ready to commence th e consultation process once 
delegations were ready to hold c onsultations and when that happened he would inform this Council.  
 
7.8 The Chairman  moved to the next item under Other Business concerning a change in the 
Chairmanship of the Working Party on State Trad ing Enterprises. This item was discussed but no 
action was taken.  7.9 The Chairman
 announced that the next meeting of the CTG was scheduled for Monday, 
18 October 2004, and that it would be dedicated to agenda item 5 of this meeting.  A subsequent 
meeting dedicated to agenda item 5 might also be necessary. In addition to this, the next formal 
session of the CTG was scheduled for Thursday, 25 November 2004.  The agenda for that formal session would close on Monday, 15 November 2004. 
__________