WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/MIN(05)/ST/112 
16 December 2005 
 (05-6122) 
MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE 
Sixth Session Hong Kong, 13 - 18 December 2005 Original:   English 
 
  
SAINT LUCIA 
 
Statement by the Honourable Petrus Compton
 
Minister for External Affairs, In ternational Trade and Civil Aviation  
  
 When Saint Lucia, and much of the Cari bbean, became members of the WTO at the 
conclusion of the Uruguay Round, they had done on the basis of the proclamations made about the 
possibilities for economic transformation of the economi es of developing States that would be derived 
from membership therein.  We were impressed with  the idea that, notwithstanding its limited size and 
political influence, countries operating within this un ique multilateral system wo uld be able to address 
their trade concerns within a system which was fair and balanced.  This ideal, of creating a multilateral trading system within which the rela tive political influence of some developed States 
could be checked by a universal system of rules b acked by an effective dis pute settlement mechanism, 
proved too tantalizing a prospect try ignore.  Li ke other vulnerable States within the Caribbean, 
Saint Lucia believed that such a system presented greater security in the long term.  It offered protection from the gross inequalities and vicissitudes of bilateral negotiations. 
  Of course, membership had also been prompt ed, in part, by assurances of steady increases in 
investment and technology transfers as well.  We  believed membership in the WTO would lead to 
economic empowerment and stability, to incrementa l but steady increases in wealth.  In short, 
Saint Lucia's participation in the WTO was pred icated upon a belief that the multilateral trading 
system it embodied would promote increases in employment, investment, wealth, reduction in rates of poverty;  indeed, overall development of our small ec onomy. 
 
 Over 10 years on since the conclusion of the Uruguay Round, membership in the WTO has 
resulted in none of the employment, advancement, technological sharing, promotion of wealth or the 
reduction in extreme poverty which Saint Lucia believ ed would occur.  In fact, the impact of the 
WTO has been precisely the opposite.  Blind and arb itrary application of trading rules, enforced 
through a lop-sided dispute settlement mechanism, in  which States, that are materially affected by 
Panel and Appellate Body decisions, are unable to stand as full parties to disputes, have actually 
resulted in undermining the development gains wh ich small developing States like Saint Lucia had 
been able to achieve prior to the disastrous and unfortunate decisions in the EC-Bananas and Sugar 
cases.  
 As a consequence of WTO decisions on produc ts like bananas and sugar, the Caribbean has 
been the subject of an unprecedented economic assa ult through the WTO.  For Saint Lucia, the 
existence of the WTO has not created wealth or prom pted moves toward development.  Its impact has 
been the creation of unprecedented levels of un employment, economic contractions and increases in 
poverty in our banana producing co mmunities and it has significantly stunted Saint Lucia's ability to 
make the transition toward development.  Colleagues,  these are not exaggerations;  this is the reality 
on our small island. 
 WT/MIN(05)/ST/112 
Page 2  
 
  At almost every turn, the economic platfo rms upon which these small island States have 
rested is under attack.  It is beyond perverse to my mind that in a context of global discussion about 
"millennium development goals" and comba ting poverty, that the very preferences upon which some 
developing countries have relied to advance their de velopment are being removed, denied, eroded, or 
erased.  Of course, some will argue that preferences did not permit these States to develop viable and 
robust economies.  This misses the point.  Prefer ences, notwithstanding any distortions which they 
may facilitate, enabled significant moves toward th e attainment of several important social and 
economic milestones. It is preferences which is allowing us to make the transition from underdeveloped "third world" States to full partne rs in the international economic environment. 
 
 It is against this background, that Saint Luci a comes to these negotiations.  Yet, we come with 
a responsible attitude determined to play our part in ensuring that the Doha Development Agenda is 
achieved.  Saint Lucia has always operated on the basis of a commitment to responsible engagement 
and we will continue to do so until Sunday, and beyond.  
 Saint Lucia firmly believes that in respect of NAMA, small vulnerable States like ours should 
not be called upon to make tariff reductions that are incompatible with our small share of world trade 
and inconsistent with our trade reform efforts.  Fl exibilities must be adopted that are in sync with our 
particular circumstances and to this effect the principles of S&D and "less than full reciprocity"  must 
be treated seriously.  Special and differential provisions must be "of economic value, precise, effective 
and operational".   The principle of "less than full reciprocity" as articulated in paragraph 16 of the 
Doha Mandate and cons istent with Part IV and Article 36 of GATT is also critical. 
  The services sectors and modes of export of sp ecial importance to small vulnerable States like 
mine must be facilitated in their growth even as we acknowledge the right of States to determine the 
pace and timing for opening up their servi ces sectors.  Prescriptive and mandatory language in any text 
will not be helpful in this regard. 
  Saint Lucia maintains a very keen interest in  the discussions on agriculture, particularly with 
respect to the issue of commodities.  For us the key issues to be treated with here include preference 
erosion and indeed the very loss of long-standing preferences.  We are not convinced that the adjustment measures under consideration will ade quately compensate for loss of preferences.  
Moreover, our desire is not to be recipients of aid but to be participants in trade.  Our salvation lies 
not in receiving handouts but in generating inco me and wealth by the sweat of our brows. 
  Some have called upon members of this Or ganization to lower expectations while 
maintaining ambitions, Saint Lucia will find it diffi cult to be ambitious until we can be assured that 
those issues which are of vital importance to us, namely continued preferential access for bananas, 
and special and differential treatment for small vulnerable economies, among others, are likely to 
receive the attention they deserve.   If the WTO system is to have any legitimacy, if it is to be viable, if it is to promote the 
necessary confidence in its structures, procedures a nd practices to broaden its appeal, then it must 
address the need to give more than  just lip-service to the concerns of developing Members, who make 
up the majority of membership.  Conclusion  
 Let me reaffirm Saint Lucia's commitment to the WTO process as a useful multilateral forum 
within which trade related matters of concern to us all and more especially  to small and vulnerable 
States like my own may be resolved.  However,  our commitment is predicated upon a similar 
commitment by this Organization to its own procla imed "development mandate".  I fully expect that 
the concerns of my country and others like it w ill be accorded "appropriate and meaningful treatment" 
and that we will agree sustainable measures to ensu re that the developmental priorities of countries  WT/MIN(05)/ST/112 
 Page 3 
 
 
 like mine will not be compromised.  After all, th e benefits of the multilateral trading system must 
benefit all.  In the words of the 54 Heads of G overnment of the Commonwealth in their Valetta 
Statement on Multilateral Trade, "the weak and vulnera ble must benefit from an equitable share in the 
universally available opportunities prov ided through international trade". 
 
 We have less than 48 hours to construct a meaningful platform upon which this noble ideal 
may be achieved.  
__________