RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/COMTD/SE/M/14 
7 June 2006 
 (06-2714) 
Committee on Trade and Development 
Fourteenth Dedicated Session  
 
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 26 APRIL 2006 
 
Chairman:  Mr. Faizel Ismail (South Africa) 
 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA ........................................................................................................1  
B. COMMUNICATION FROM ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA , BARBADOS , BOLIVIA , CUBA, 
DOMINICA , DOMINICAN REPUBLIC , EL SALVADOR , FIJI, GRENADA , GUATEMALA , 
HONDURAS , JAMAICA , MAURITIUS , MONGOLIA , NICARAGUA , PAPUA NEW GUINEA , 
PARAGUAY , SOLOMON ISLANDS , ST. KITTS AND NEVIS, ST. LUCIA , ST. VINCENT AND 
THE GRENADINES AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ENTITLED "WORK PROGRAMME ON 
SMALL ECONOMIES :  AN ASSESSMENT OF THE PROGRESS TO DATE" 
(WT/COMTD/SE/W/20) ............................................................................................................1  
C. PROPOSALS FROM ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA , BARBADOS , CUBA, DOMINICA , FIJI, 
GRENADA , JAMAICA , MAURITIUS , PAPUA NEW GUINEA , SOLOMON ISLANDS , ST. 
KITTS AND NEVIS, ST. VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES ON DESIGNATION OF 
REGIONAL BODIES FOR TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE , SANITARY AND 
PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES AND TRADE -RELATED ASPECTS OF INTELLECTUAL 
PROPERTY RIGHTS (WT/COMTD/SE/W/15/R EV.1, WT/COMTD/SE/W/16/R EV.1 
AND WT/COMTD/SE/W/18/R EV.1)...........................................................................................4  
D. PARAGRAPH 41 OF THE HONG KONG MINISTERIAL DECLARATION :  MONITORING 
PROGRESS OF THE SMALL ECONOMIES ' PROPOSALS IN THE NEGOTIATING AND OTHER 
BODIES ............................................................................................................................... .........9  
 
 A. A
DOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The Chairman  recalled that the draft agenda for the meeting was contained in 
Airgram WTO/AIR/2800, issued on 12 April 2006. 
2. The agenda was adopted . 
B. COMMUNICATION FROM ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA , BARBADOS , BOLIVIA , CUBA, DOMINICA , 
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC , EL SALVADOR , FIJI, GRENADA , GUATEMALA , HONDURAS , JAMAICA , 
MAURITIUS , MONGOLIA , NICARAGUA , PAPUA NEW GUINEA , PARAGUAY , SOLOMON 
ISLANDS , ST. KITTS AND NEVIS, ST. LUCIA , ST. VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES AND 
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ENTITLED "WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES :  AN 
ASSESSMENT OF THE PROGRESS TO DATE" (WT/COMTD/SE/W/20) 
3. The Chairman  noted that at the February and April informal meetings of the Dedicated 
Session there had already been some discussion of this paper.  However, he said the paper had not yet 
been discussed at a formal meeting and asked if  any of the delegations which had co-sponsored 
document WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 would like to take the floor to introduce it.  WT/COMTD/SE/M/14 
Page 2  
 
  4. The representative of Barbados
 said the objective of the paper was to give a general overview 
of the negotiations.  He noted that two new proposal s had been introduced in the Services and Rules 
negotiating groups and that proposals we re now included in the new document 
WT/COMTD/SE/W/21 which he hoped could provide a basis for monitoring the proposals made to date by the proponents of small economi es in the negotiating and other bodies.  
5. The representative of Mauritius
 said the mandate in paragraph 35 of the Doha Ministerial 
Declaration recognized the problems small economi es have with integrating into the multilateral 
trading system.  This situation stemmed from the pa rticular characteristics of small economies.  He 
said document WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 represented an  assessment of the activities under the work 
programme on small economies and was intended to f acilitate the work of the Dedicated Session in 
carrying out its monitoring and reporting functions.  He drew the attention of Members to a recent 
submission by the small economies to the Working Group on Domestic Regulation which showed that 
small economies were willing to enga ge constructively in the negotiations.  He noted that the special 
consideration being sought by the small economies in  no way signified an attempt to minimize the 
flow of special and differential treatment to developi ng countries.  This was in  line with paragraph 44 
of the Doha Ministerial Declaration which sought to  make all S&D provisions more precise, effective 
and operational.  He said a successful Doha Round wo uld bring economic benefits to all Members and 
that it was inconceivable that some Members would ga in at the expense of others since this should be 
a win-win situation for all.  He said the concerns  of small economies should be addressed to ensure 
that the work programme on small economies was fully implemented and its objectives realized. 
6. The representative of the United States  said the summaries presented in document 
WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 provided a useful overview of the proposals introduced in the various 
negotiating and other bodies.  She said she was c oncerned that it still remained unclear how one 
defines the potential beneficiaries of the flexibiliti es being sought in the proposals.  She said the 
question remained open about who benefits from what  and in which negotiating group.  She was of 
the view that this issue needed to  be approached differently.  The issue of who would benefit from any 
flexibilities accorded would be critical when it came to cooperating and coordi nating work related to 
the small economies' proposals. 
7. The representative of Switzerland  also raised the issue of who would benefit and noted that 
there were many differences among the proponents.  She cautioned that the issue of who would be 
included as a beneficiary should not be underestimated  and it deserved the attention of the Dedicated 
Session and the negotiating groups. 
8. The representative of the Maldives  said that as non-resident delegation he wondered how the 
Dedicated Session was dealing with the problems of the non-resident small economies. 
9. The Chairman  said that this was an important issue and that the Dedicated Session had to be 
mindful of the problems of the non residents to ensure representativeness in its work. 
10. The representative of El Salvador  said that with respect to the issue of who would be 
considered one of the beneficiaries, the probl ems suffered by the small economies were sometimes 
very different.  Some faced problems regarding the di versification of exports;  others had problems in 
having access to the sea.  He emphasized that it was the combination and intensity of these problems that constituted the vulnerability of the small ec onomies.  What the small economies needed to 
achieve their development was to generate more growth through trade and this was why proposals 
were being made in the different negotiating bodies.   
11. The representative of Barbados
 said that the proponents were seriously addressing the issue of 
who would be considered a benefici ary.  Given the pace of the negotiations he did not know whether 
this issue could be discussed in the Dedicated Session before engaging in  consultations in the  WT/COMTD/SE/M/14 
 Page 3 
 
 
  negotiating groups.  He said that small econo mies were not a homogeneous group and the 
membership of the WTO was also not homogene ous.  All Members had different problems and 
conditions.  The small economies had put forward proposals that recognized the situation of the group 
in general and were not limited to the proponents but  also embraced other countries that shared the 
same trade-related characteristics.  He said th e idea was to find solutions to the trade-related 
problems.  He thought that Members were closer to finding a solution, but that it would not be easy 
finding this solution because of the lack of homoge neity.  He thought the treatment issue would be 
easier to address once the issue of who would benef it was resolved.  He said there were no criteria 
that would not include some countries which some Members felt should not be included nor would there be any criteria that would exclude some c ountries that some Members thought should not be 
included.  
12. The representative of Mongolia
 said all groups in the WTO were diverse and that the situation 
with respect to each Member could change.  The small economies were united by a common characteristic which was their small share of world tr ade.  He also said that it was not possible to use 
the same formula and coefficients for tariff reduc tion for all WTO Members as this reduction would 
have a greater affect on small economies. 
13. The representative of the United States
 said that in regard to the beneficiaries of small 
economies and possible solutions, different negotiating groups were looking at different sets of beneficiaries. 
14. The representative of Sri Lanka
 said Members of the WTO were not a homogeneous group. 
He added that developing countries were also  not a homogeneous group, the only criteria being 
self-denomination.  He added that if Switzerland, however, were to declare itself a developing 
country, no Member would take it seriously, because there were certain unwritten criteria.  He said 
that when the issue of who was a small economy wa s discussed, it was a similar situation - there were 
no written criteria.  Developing and developed count ries in the WTO all had different problems and 
issues.  This was the reason wh y small economies were asking for certain flexibilities.  He thought 
that it was important to keep in mind that an y flexibilities accorded to small economies should not 
discriminate between countries in a similar situati on.  The flexibilities decided should be implemented 
in an objective manner.  Following his earlier exampl e, he said that if Switzerland were to say it 
wanted to take advantage of the flexibilities acco rded to small economies, no one would take it 
seriously.  He said that is why any criteria d ecided for determining who would benefit from a 
particular flexibility should be obj ective and not discriminate between countries in a similar situation. 
15. The representative of the Dominican Republic  said the small economies had been working in 
a constructive manner.  When the problems of a small group of countries were addressed, this 
demonstrated that the WTO worked for all its Memb ers.  He said that it was important that work on 
modalities in the agriculture and NAMA negotiations  should also address the problems of small 
economies. 
16. The representative of Surinam  supported the statements that had been made by the proponents 
of the work programme on small economies. 
17. The representative of Belize  said that her delegation would also like to be associated with the 
documents that were presented by the small econom ies.  The delegation of Belize would like to be 
considered as a proponent of those documents. 
18. The representative of Colombia  noted that document WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 was produced in 
February and covered eight proposals that had been made in the negotiating and other groups.  Since 
then, two new proposals had been introduced in se rvices and subsidies.  The document was very 
useful in assisting the Dedicated Session to asses th e tasks under its mandate given in the Doha and WT/COMTD/SE/M/14 
Page 4  
 
  Hong Kong Ministerial Declarations.  She proposed a methodology for carrying out the monitoring 
task given to the Dedicated Session.  First, she believed that the Dedicated Session should evaluate 
the introduction and the section that contains the reasoning for the proposals.  Second, the Dedicated 
Session should look at the proposals themselves.  Sh e referred to the characteristics pertaining to 
small economies cited in document WT/COMTD/SE/ W/20 and said that Colombia, although it did 
not consider itself to be a small economy, fulfilled 16 out of the 17 characteristics on the list.  She 
added that Colombia suffered from another characteristic that made  it a very vulnerable economy, and 
that this was violence and drug trafficking.  Therefore, she had trouble seeing why the small 
economies needed special flexib ilities when Colombia shared mo st of their characteristics. 
19. She said her delegation had problems with the prop osal that had been introduced by the small 
economies in the NAMA negotiations.  She noted that almost all of the proponents had bound 
100 per cent of industrial products at very high le vels, sometimes even at 500 per cent above the 
applied rates.  Even if the bound  tariffs were reduced by 15 per cent this would still not affect the 
level of the applied tariffs.  She said that a good contribution by these Members would be to bind the 
remaining unbound tariffs.  She said that among the proponents three of them had only bound 
5 per cent of their industrial goods.  Regarding the small economies' proposal on rules and fisheries 
subsidies, she cautioned against introducing ne w subsidies which would cause distortions.  
20. Regarding the proposals on Sanitary and Phyto sanitary Measures, Technical Barriers to Trade 
and Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Propert y Rights, she wondered why it would be necessary 
to designate a regional body to receive technical assi stance.  She also questioned how this could affect 
the WTO's technical assistance budget.  She said that  if the negotiations were to be successful and 
world trade would be further liberalized, then all Members had to make an effort and a proportionate 
contribution. 
21. The representative of St. Kitts and Nevis
 said his delegation was pleased with the recent 
progress made in the Dedicated Session.  He th anked the Chairman for having held informal 
consultations on the three proposals concerning the use of regional bodies for notifications to the SPS 
and TBT Committees and the TRIPS Council.  He said the consultations were useful in helping to 
clarify the issues concerning the use of regional bodi es in those areas.  He also understood that some 
delegations still had uncertainties pertaining to who was a small economy.  Sm all economies were not 
a homogeneous group and solutions to their different  problems were being sought in different WTO 
bodies.  Therefore, it was difficult to come up with a characteristic that would apply in all areas.  He 
thought that the solutions to the problems of small economies could only come from a dialogue 
between the Members and urged the Members to provide  their input to help find creative solutions to 
the problems of small economies.  He said that th e more advanced Members believed that free trade 
was the way to move forward because they were more competitive.  However, he said there were 
some Members that were less developed and needed to reach a higher level of development to embrace all aspects of trade liberalization in a way that benefited their economies.  He said that 
St. Kitts and Nevis, as a small economy, would c ontinue to have problem s related to exogenous 
shocks.  He said the work programme on small econo mies was the main issue of  interest to St. Kitts 
and Nevis in the negotiations and he looked  forward to more progress in this area. 
C. P
ROPOSALS FROM ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA , BARBADOS , CUBA, DOMINICA , FIJI, GRENADA , 
JAMAICA , MAURITIUS , PAPUA NEW GUINEA , SOLOMON ISLANDS , ST. KITTS AND NEVIS, ST. 
VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES ON DESIGNATION OF REGIONAL BODIES FOR TECHNICAL 
BARRIERS TO TRADE , SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES AND TRADE -RELATED 
ASPECTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (WT/COMTD/SE/W/15/R EV.1, 
WT/COMTD/SE/W/16/R EV.1 AND WT/COMTD/SE/W/18/R EV.1) 
22. The Chairman  said that agenda item C concerned the proposals by a group of small 
economies on the designation of regional bodies for notifications concerning the Agreements on  WT/COMTD/SE/M/14 
 Page 5 
 
 
  Technical Barriers to Trade, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and Trade-Related Aspects of 
Intellectual Property Rights.  The revised versi ons of these proposals had been circulated in 
WT/COMTD/SE/W/15/Rev.1, WT/COMTD/SE/W/16/ Rev.1 and WT/COMTD/SE/W/18/Rev.1.  He 
recalled that the Dedicated Session had discussed th ese proposals at previous formal and informal 
meetings.  As a result, the proponents revised th e language in the proposals concerning technical 
assistance.  
23. The representative of th e European Communities  said that it was unavoidable that the needs 
of small economies would have to be addressed and that this was made clear in the mandates from Doha and Hong Kong.  Documents WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 and WT/COMTD/SE/W/21 were very useful compilations of the different proposals that  had been made and allowed to better follow the 
different bodies where the proponents were pursuing their interests.  He believed that it would be 
difficult to identify ex ante  the beneficiaries of particular provisi ons.  This had already been tried in 
the Dedicated Session with no success, leading to the c onclusion that it was better to try to do this by 
focussing on the specific problems and issues.  He be lieved that for most of the problems identified, 
the solution would take the form of a description of the circumstances that the provision addressed, 
and the response that had been found through negot iations.  The question of who would benefit from 
the provisions should not be settled through self denomin ation or a closed list of countries but rather 
by compliance with the set of circumstances that the provision is meant to address, so the answers 
given in each forum may be different.  He said th at what was needed is  a reassurance, through 
dialogue between the Members, that the work programme was going in the direction set out by Ministers in Doha and Hong Kong.  He also said th at it was clear that a success in the work program 
on small economies was a prerequisite for a successful  conclusion of the Doha Development Agenda. 
24. The representative of Guyana
 said that more work was needed on the methodology for 
determining who was a small economy .  There should be a variable geometry to some extent on who 
was a small economy.  Otherwise some small economies would fall into a new category of 
"structurally and permanen tly impoverished economies". 
25. The representative of Vanuatu  said that minimal progress had been made in the work 
programme on small economies so far.  He added that he was hopeful that the Dedicated Session 
would now be able to make more progress in the future. 
26. The representative of Papua New Guinea  expressed support for the statement and efforts 
made by Barbados on behalf  of the small economies. 
27. The representative of El Salvador  said that countries were not small and vulnerable 
economies by choice and that this was a reality that so me countries had to face.  El Salvador had been 
making considerable efforts to help its people.  In  reply to the comments made by the delegate of 
Colombia, he recalled that the negotiations in the WTO concerned bound rates and not applied rates.  
He could also not agree that the application of a 15 per cent coefficient formula for tariff reduction 
would have little or no incidence on El Salvador's se nsitivities.  He also pointed out that his country 
was committed to engaging construc tively in the negotiations while respecting its own realities.  He 
invited the delegate of Colombia to engage in consultations to clarify any doubts arising from the 
small economies' proposals.      
28. The representative of Venezuela  said that looking at some of the tables in 
WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 he noted that the share of world trade of the proponents of small economies did not exceed 0.5 per cent.  Therefore, it should not affect the interests of the bigger countries in the 
WTO to grant the flexibilities that were being requested by the small economies. 
29. The representative of Barbados
 said that regarding the sma ll economies proposals for regional 
bodies in the areas of SPS, TBT and TRIPS he cons idered that the Dedicated Session had exhausted WT/COMTD/SE/M/14 
Page 6  
 
  the discussions on this matter.  He felt the Dedicated Session should move on to drafting a 
recommendation to the General Council.  He said that if there were any more questions from 
Members he would be happy to answer them. 
30. The representative of Antigua and Barbuda
 expressed support for the proposals and the 
comments of Barbados. 
31. The representative of Fiji  said that a one size fits all solution in the negotiations was not 
workable as all Members were not on equal footing, so he urged Members to work together to find a 
solution to the problems of small economies.  He  also expressed support for the small economies 
proposals on regional bodies. 
32. The representative of the United States  said her delegation supported the thrust of the 
proposals.  She noted that there were many ex amples of successful regional collaboration among 
smaller WTO Members on these issues and that he r delegation was willing to work constructively to 
find ways to facilitate further regi onal collaboration.  She said that at  the previous meetings of the 
Dedicated Session, Members were able to gain a better understanding of the proponents' views and 
expectations.  The proponents had clarified that th ey did not intend to "bind" Members to provide 
technical assistance, nor were they seeking to be represented as a region, rather than individual 
Members, at the WTO or elsewhere.  She understood that the proponents were seeking ways that regional bodies could assist in practice, for example with cooperation in terms of laboratory facilities.  
She said nothing in the agreements on TBT, SPS or  TRIPS precluded Members from cooperating on a 
regional basis in such practical and prudent ways.  She said that pending agreement by the Members of the SPS and TBT Committees and the TRIPS Council, the United States would support the 
proponents' quest to seek formal recognition by  the General Council that the SPS, TBT and TRIPS 
agreements allow the use of regional bodies to he lp them meet their WTO obligations, such as 
notifications, assessments, etc., while each Member would remain entirely responsible for compliance.  Such recognition would also raise awareness that regional bodies can be a cost-effective avenue for technical assistance,  without necessarily entitling any regional group to specific amounts 
of assistance. 
33. The representative of Japan
 said that the instructions he had received from his capital on the 
proposals for regional bodies were very positive.  He  said the concerns he had raised at previous 
meetings regarding the provisions of technical assistance had been addressed.   
34. The representative of the European Communities  said he appreciated the clarifications that 
had been provided on the issue of  technical assistance and that this  issue had been addressed in the 
revised proposals.  He also agreed with the Un ited States that regional bodies could be a pragmatic 
way of dealing with the challenges of meeting obl igations and exercising rights.  The EC and its 
member states already worked with some of th e proponents on just these sorts of regional capacity 
building initiatives. 
35. The representative of Switzerland  supported the statements made by the delegate of the 
United States and encouraged the Dedicated Session  to come forward with a recommendation to the 
General Council. 
36. The representative of Mongolia  expressed support for the pro posals although his delegation 
was not one of the sponsors.  
37. The representative of Canada  said he saw the benefit in seeking input by the TBT and SPS 
Committees and the TRIPS Council.  However, he sai d his delegation was broa dly supportive of the 
proposals.  He also wanted some clarification th at there would not be any binding commitments to 
provide technical assistance by the WTO or Members to the newly created regional bodies.  WT/COMTD/SE/M/14 
 Page 7 
 
 
  38. The Chairman  said that the issue of technical assist ance had already been addressed by the 
proponents in the revised proposals and it had been ma de clear that there was no obligation to provide 
technical assistance. 
39. The representative of India  said that his delegation broadly supported the proposals.  His 
delegation was also aware of the shortage of capacity to provide technical assistance on TRIPS by the 
WTO Secretariat.  For this reason, the WTO signed an agreement with WIPO on the provision of 
technical assistance.  He suggested  that at the next meeting of the TRIPS Council where WIPO is to 
provide a report on its technical assistance activit ies, the small economies should explain their 
difficulties so that Members could understand why the current arrangements for technical assistance 
were not meeting their concerns. 
40. The representative of the Solomon Islands  said he supported the statements made by the small 
economies on document WT/COMTD/SE/W/20.  He also expressed his full support for the proposals on regional bodies in the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS. 
41. The representative of Mexico
 suggested that the proposals on the use of regional bodies for 
TBT, SPS and TRIPS notifications could also be discussed in the respective technical bodies.  With 
regard to the SPS proposal she said that interesti ng results could be achieved if the proposal was 
linked to Article 6 of the SPS Agreement.  This w ould avoid duplication with  the work done by other 
international organizations.  Regard ing the TBT proposals, she was of the view that this issue could 
be dealt with in the context of the triennial re view on the TBT Agreement currently being conducted 
in the TBT committee. 
42. The Chairman  recalled that at the last informal meeting of the Dedicated Session it was 
agreed that the Chairmen of the Committees on TBT, SPS and TRIPS Council would consult within 
those bodies on the proposals by the small economies  and report back to the Dedicated Session with 
their feedback. 
43. The representative of Brazil  said that his delegation was ready to support the proposals on 
regional bodies in the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS on  two conditions.  First, that it be made clear 
that the responsibility for implementation of the agr eements remained with the individual Members.  
Second, that the proposals do not lead to an amendm ent of the Agreements concerned.  He also noted 
that the World Bank in a recent report recognized  the effectiveness of the technical cooperation 
delivered through regional bodies. 
44. The representative of Papua New Guinea  expressed support for the proposals on regional 
bodies in the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS. 
45. The representative of Argentina  said his delegation agreed conceptually with the proposals.  
However, he said that the technical debate on th eir implementation should be done in the respective 
technical bodies. 
46. The representative of China  said that in his view nothing in the Agreements concerned 
prevented a regional approach to their implementation as was being suggested by the small 
economies.  Nevertheless, he said that for the sake of legal certainty, positive consideration should be 
given to the proposals.  He also looked forward to the feedback that was going to be provided by the 
technical bodies.  He suggested inviting the WTO' s Institute for Technical Cooperation and Training 
to brief the Dedicated Session on the success and le ssons learned on regional technical assistance so 
that Members would know how to better operationalize the proposals. 
47. The representative of Costa Rica  said he recognized the con cerns of small economies. 
However, any solutions to address their concerns s hould not affect other developing countries.  The WT/COMTD/SE/M/14 
Page 8  
 
  Dedicated Session and the negotiating bodies to wh ich small economies proposals had been submitted 
should focus on which countries would benefit from any agreed flexibilities.  Regarding document 
WT/COMTD/SE/W/20, he said that Costa Rica could also be identified with sharing the characteristics listed in the paper.  However, Cost a Rica saw special and differential treatment from an 
offensive point of view and as something to be used  to obtain access to markets and the elimination of 
trade distortions.  This was the best way to integr ate into the multilateral trading system.  Special and 
differential treatment was not just a means to obtai n exceptions from liberalization.  He shared the 
comments made by the delegate of Colombia  on the small economies issues in the NAMA 
negotiations and added that the c oncerns of small economies should be  covered by paragraph 8 of the 
Annex on NAMA in the 1 August 2004 Decision of  the General Council.  Regarding the comments 
by the delegate of El Salvador on applied rates,  he said it was clear from the current state of the 
negotiations that applied rates would also be affect ed.  Regarding the proposals on regional bodies in 
the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS he said there had already been some experi ences on this matter and 
that he had some doubts about the scope of the prop osals and looked forward to participating in any 
informal consultations where these issues could be clar ified.  He also agreed with those Members that 
said the proposals should also be discussed  in their respective technical bodies. 
48. The representative of Guyana
 wished also to be considered a sponsor of the proposals on 
regional bodies in the areas of TBT, SPS and TR IPS.  He said the WTO could draw from the 
experience of agencies such as WIPO and the FAO on assisting countries to discharge their 
obligations under the agreements concerned.  
49. The representative of Mauritius  expressed support for the comments made by El Salvador and 
Guyana.  He said small economies were seeking soluti ons to their trade-relate d concerns which were 
not the product of human actions, as were violen ce and civil war.  He said small economies were 
willing to make a contribution to the negotiations  which was consistent with their level of 
development.  
50. The representative of St. Kitts and Nevis  thanked those Members who had made constructive 
comments in support of the three proposals.  He also  agreed with the mechanism that had been set up 
at the previous informal meeting on having the re levant bodies consult on these issues and report back 
to the Dedicated Session.  He said most of the c oncerns that had been expressed had already been 
addressed and that it was time to move forward with the proposals.  
51. The representative of Suriname  said that her delegation would lik e to be included in the list of 
sponsors for the proposals on regional bodies in the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS. 
52. The Chairman  said that there had been a very fruitful exchange of views and he was happy 
that most, if not all, of the concerns had been addressed by the proponents in the revisions.  It was 
clear that Members were close to  a convergence on their understanding of these proposals.  He also 
noted that the technical bodies would be meeting to discuss these proposals.  He said the Committee on TBT would be meeting on 7 June 2006, the Committee on SPS would meet informally on 
24 May 2006 and formally on 28 June 2006, and the TRIPS Council on 14-15 June 2006.  He hoped 
that some of the issues that had been raised coul d be further discussed in these bodies and that their 
respective Chairs could report back to the Dedicated Session. 
53. The Chairman suggested that the Dedicated Se ssion discuss at its next formal meeting the 
reports which had been requested from the Chai rs of the SPS and TBT Committees and the TRIPS 
Council.  As a parallel process, the Dedicated Session could begin work on drafting a 
recommendation to the General Council which would recognize the rights of Members to designate 
regional bodies in the three areas of SPS, TBT and TRIPS.  Any recommendations resulting from the consultations in the technical bodies could then be incorporated into a draft recommendation.   WT/COMTD/SE/M/14 
 Page 9 
 
 
  54. It was so agreed . 
D. PARAGRAPH 41 OF THE HONG KONG MINISTERIAL DECLARATION :  MONITORING PROGRESS 
OF THE SMALL ECONOMIES ' PROPOSALS IN THE NEGOTIATING AND OTHER BODIES  
55. The Chairman  recalled that the monitoring role of th e Dedicated Session was part of the two 
track approach on small economies stated in paragra ph 41 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration.  
He noted that on this issue, the proponents ha d submitted a new document titled "Small Economies 
Work Programme:  The Monitoring Role of the Committee on Trade and Development in Dedicated 
Session" (WT/COMTD/SE/W/21).  He then asked the proponents of this document if they would like 
to introduce it to the Dedicated Session. 
56. The representative of Barbados  said that from his perspective there were two different aspects 
of the monitoring role of the Dedicated Session.   One was monitoring the progress of the small 
economies' proposals that had been made in the nego tiating and other bodies.  The other was that the 
Chairman could request any Member to engage with  the Chairs of the negotiating and other bodies to 
discuss the progress on the proposals made by small economies.  On the former, the proponents had 
tabled this new document which gave a brief history of what was achieved in Hong Kong and 
replicated the precise proposals for decisions and recommendations tabled in the negotiating and in 
other bodies.  This had been presented not for any decision to be taken on these matters but for 
acknowledgement, discussion and clarification if necessary.  
57. The representative of the United States  said that on the question of monitoring, what 
Barbados had pointed out were two of the forms in which the Dedicated Session could exercise its 
monitoring role.  She said the Chairman's reports to the General Council were also part of the 
monitoring process as well as the reports to the De dicated Session on activities carried out in the 
negotiating and other  bodies on the proposals in those bodies submitted by small economies.  She asked if the Secretariat could periodically update the compilation documents such as WT/COMTD/SE/W/21. 
58. The Chairman
 proposed that that the compilation document - WT/COMTD/SE/W/21 - should 
serve as the basis for future work  in monitoring progress of the small economies' proposals.  This 
document could be further supplemented by reports received from the Chairs of the negotiating and other bodies and through inputs by the Secretariat.  
59. It was so agreed
. 
60. The meeting was adjourned . 
__________