RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/C/M/18 
1 July 2005 
 (05-2829) 
Trade Negotiations Committee 
19 May 2005  
 
 
 
MINUTES OF MEETING 
 
Held in the Centre William Rappard  
on 19 May 2005  
 
Chairman: Dr. Supachai Panitchpakdi (Director-General)  
 
 Subjects discussed
: Page  
 
1. Introductory statemen t by the Chairman...............................................................................1  
2. Report by the Director-General on his consultative process on all outstanding 
implementation issues under paragraph 12(b) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration. ................................................................................................................... ............3
 
3. Reports by the Chairpersons of th e Bodies Established by the TNC...................................5  
4. Statements by participants..................................................................................................... ..9 
 
 
1. Introductory statement by the Chairman 
1. The Chairman  said that the present meeting of the TNC took place against a somewhat 
brighter background than the April TNC, although s ubstantive progress since then had been limited.  
He said that recent gatherings at the Ministerial le vel had renewed the impetus in some areas of work, 
but the point he had made at the last TNC about the need for a greater sense of urgency remained 
valid and he had to underline it again.  Members were still well behind where they should have been, 
and time was not on their side.  Members had only some  30 working days left before the July TNC.  
This figure took into account several important Minist erial gatherings which would take place outside 
Geneva over the following two months.  It was ve ry important that these made positive and immediate 
contributions to the work in Geneva.  There wa s a great need for coordination between these two 
processes.  The Geneva process, in which all partic ipants were involved, was and had to remain the 
primary negotiating forum.  However, it was also im portant that the work in Geneva gave Ministers 
meeting in other parts of the world a clear picture of where they needed to  focus their attention. 
2. Without compromising the ambitions that governments had estab lished for the Round, 
Members now had to be clear about what it was that they could realistically expect by July, and what 
it was that they needed by then, keeping in mind the major goal of Hong Kong in December.  
Members were obviously not in the same situation as last July, and he did not think anyone envisaged 
a package of decisions such as last  July.  However, from his participation in the various ministerial 
gatherings, it was clear that Ministers were expecting more than just a set of progress reports.  As 
Chairman of the TNC, he would have to provide Members in July with a very good idea not only of 
the progress made, but also of what would have to be done to ensure a successful Ministerial Conference.  He was personally determined to do so as clearly and as frankly as possible.  To enable TN/C/M/18 
Page 2  
 
 him to achieve this, the negotiating groups had to ma ke every effort to narrow differences so that the 
respective Chairmen could provide him with their inputs and assessments by early July. 
3. In some areas of the negotiations, this woul d mean providing as much specificity as possible 
at that point in time on the shape of the likely outcome at Hong Kong.  In other areas, the level of specificity would, necessarily, be lower.  Over all, however, governments would need to have 
confidence that their priority interests would be ha ndled at the Ministerial Conference in such a way 
as to prepare for a successful concluding phase of the Round. 
4. He said that the substantive basis of whatev er progress he would report in July was being 
built at the present in the negotiating groups.  The further Members could get by the summer, the 
better the outlook for Hong Kong.  This was why he kept stressing the need for a greater sense of 
urgency.  Members had made up some ground, but they did not have any time to lose. 
5. He wished to say a few words about developments  in agriculture since the last TNC.  It was 
indeed a positive sign that ther e had been some significant progr ess recently on the issue of a 
methodology for estimating the ad valorem  equivalents (AVEs) of non- ad valorem  tariffs.  He 
understood that this had been discu ssed at open-ended informal consu ltations held by the Agriculture 
Chairman on 10 May and, as a result, work was now underway in some capitals to prepare their 
AVEs.  Although there remained some aspects of this issue that still needed to be resolved, including 
verification, the data prepared based on this met hodology, when presented, s hould enable delegations 
to address the complex and difficult set of issues re lated to market access for agricultural products.  
Some of these issues were to be the subject of  discussion during the agriculture week that was 
scheduled from 30 May.  He hoped that the moment um created by resolving the AVE issue would be 
continued and the AVEs would be presented in the near future, which would give delegations the 
opportunity to have a good discussion on agriculture ma rket access with a positive knock-on effect in 
other areas, such as non-agricultura l market access (NAMA).  In this  connection, he understood that 
the five NAMA proposals had had a catalytic effect, although there had been no convergence yet.  
6. Turning to other areas of the negotiations, he  said the CTD Special Session had now started 
on the Agreement-specific proposals on special a nd differential (S&D) treatment submitted by the 
least-developed countries (LDCs), which was a good sign.  He hoped that Members would allow the 
Chairman of the Special Session to find a way to m ove on to the other proposals as well.  Time was 
running particularly short here. 
7. On services, he had written to Ministers in January about the state of inertia that Members 
risked falling into if they did not get more offers  on the table, as well as substantive improvements to 
those already submitted.  He would be sending anothe r, stronger letter to Ministers of those Members 
that had not submitted an initial offer, asking them to do so quickly.  The letter would also serve as a 
reminder of the broader implications for the ove rall Doha Development Ag enda (DDA) negotiations. 
8. In the recent meeting of the Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation, the discussions 
continued to move ahead on the basis of quite a number of new proposals, including from developing 
countries.  This was an encouraging sign.  In the Negotiating Group on Rules, a meeting on regional 
trade agreements (RTAs) had just concluded, and the Group would take up its other track of work in 
the week of 30 May, on the basis of informal pa pers submitted for consideration at that meeting. 
9. He said that overall, the picture was probably better than at the last TNC, but still not good 
enough.  The level of commitment to a successful Ministerial Conference and the serious level of 
engagement in the negotiations both remained solid .  But alone they were not enough.  Concrete 
progress was also needed, and although Members had st arted to make some progress, they needed to 
make more, and had to do so as quickly as possible.  TN/C/M/18 
 Page 3 
 
 
 10. He said that while he did not want a discussion of  process at the present meeting, he wished to 
assure delegations that he was keeping the work  processes under review.  He believed it might be 
opportune to make greater use of informal proces ses in order to maximize the productive linkages 
among issues and to begin to develop a sense of coherence as Members moved ahead to Hong Kong. 
11. It was important that the most efficient use of the limited time at the level of both the 
negotiating groups and the TNC was made.  He said that  with this in mind, he had not yet decided on 
whether to go ahead with a formal meeting of the TN C in June or to use that time to step up his 
informal consultations.  As always, he would ma ke every effort to ensure transparency and 
inclusiveness, through informal ope n-ended meetings when appropriat e, and in every other possible 
way. 
12. The Trade Negotiations Committee took note  of the Chairman's statement. 
2. Report by the Director-General on his consultative process on all outstanding 
implementation issues under paragraph 12(b) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration. 
13. The Director-General  recalled that, in the Decision a dopted by the General Council on 1 
August 2004, which was usually referred to as the July  Decision, he had been requested to continue 
his consultations on the paragraph 12(b) implementation issues in his capacity as Director-General, 
including on issues related to the extension of the protection of geographical indications (GIs) 
provided for in Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement to  products other than wines and spirits.  He had 
also been requested to report to the TNC and th e General Council by May 2005.  The Decision had 
also allowed him the possibility of appointing Chai rs of concerned WTO bodies to act as his Friends. 
14. In accordance with the Decisi on, the process he had undertaken since July 2004 had been 
without prejudice to the positions of Members on an y of the outstanding implementation issues.  As 
he had reported on an interim basis to the TNC on a number of occasions, this work had been 
undertaken on two tracks.  The first track concer ned all outstanding paragr aph 12(b) implementation 
issues except the GI extension issue.  In the light  of initial consultations wh ich he had undertaken in 
October 2004, he had requested the Chairpersons of  concerned WTO bodies to act as his Friends.  He 
had asked them to carry out consultations, on hi s behalf, on the scope for progress on the issues 
relevant to the WTO body they were chairing at that  time.  They had all continued their work until 
quite recently, and he had met with them, and they  had all reported to him, on a regular basis. 
15. On the second track, namely the GI extension issu e, in the light of a number of consultations 
he had undertaken in October and November of th e previous year, he had requested Deputy Director-
General Mr. Thompson-Flôres to conduct, on his behalf , a technical level process aimed at clarifying 
the issues related to GI extension, building on the work already undertaken.  Mr. Thompson-Flôres 
had held a number of consultative meetings and had also reported to him on this process. 
16. He said that overall, there had been a good level of engagement by all delegations in the work 
on both tracks.  In a number of areas, ways to try to move forward had emerged which deserved to be 
further explored.  This was positive, and, he hoped,  a sign that Members might yet be able to reach 
appropriate solutions in some areas.  He said that although he was not able to report any 
breakthroughs on substance at the present meeting, he wished to identify so me areas where forward 
movement had been seen and to suggest  that this should be built upon. 
17. He now wished to make his progress report on the first track of work, which concerned the 
outstanding issues in seven areas.  In the TRIPS ar ea, two "dedicated" consultations in an open-ended 
format had been held on the issue of the re lationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the 
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).  This covere d aspects of four proposals made in this area.  
He said it was his understanding that this work had been widely found to be fruitful and constructive 
and that there seemed to be a widespread willingn ess to continue a process on this issue, although any 
unnecessary duplication with the discussion in the TRI PS Council would clearly ha ve to be avoided.  TN/C/M/18 
Page 4  
 
 On the other TRIPS proposals, namely those re lating to extension of transitional periods for 
developing and least-developed countries and to tr ansfer of technology, he understood that no 
delegation had taken up the opportunities provided so far for consideration of these issues in the 
consultation process. 
18. In the balance of payments (BOP) area, he sai d the recent consultations  on tiret 3, which was 
a proposal for a complete review of GATT Article  XVIII, had focused on possible changes to the 
draft language set out in the BOP Committee's report to the TNC from November 2002.  At a recent meeting of the Committee, a discussion had taken place on a non-paper circulated by the Committee 
Chair which set out the changes proposed.  The Co mmittee Chair had reported that, in spite of the 
continued differences on what had been proposed , he believed that the Committee could make a 
valuable contribution  to further work in this area.  On the other proposal in this area, which suggested 
that only the BOP Committee should have the authority to examine the overall justification of BOP measures, he understood that the situation remain ed unchanged since the Committee's report to the 
TNC in 2002.  That report had indicated very divergent views on this issue. 
19. In the Market Access area there was only one issue, concerning a redistribution of negotiating 
rights, which had been originally proposed by Sain t. Lucia.  He said that Members were generally 
willing to consider this issue further, but many had indicated that, in order to engage usefully on it, 
more precision regarding the proposal would be necessary.  In the absence of the delegation of Saint. Lucia, he understood that Barbados and Antigua & Barbuda had undertaken to come forward with a 
paper aimed at providing more pr ecision regarding the proposal.  He also understood that the issue 
was still being discussed among the stakeholders and that the proponents would submit such a paper 
as soon as was feasible.   
20. In the area of TRIMs, the work had focused  on tiret 40, relating to the flexibilities for 
developing countries in the provisions of the TRIMs Agreement, as this seemed to encompass much, 
if not all, of the substance contained in the other th ree tirets in this area.  A further proposal had been 
made on this issue in 2002, and some very usef ul discussions had taken place in recent meetings.  
However, it had not been possible to reach agreem ent on how the work could be taken forward, and 
the Committee Chair believed that this issue would re quire attention at a more political level in order 
to be able to do so. 
21. On all five proposals with regard to the Cu stoms Valuation Agreement, he said that the 
Committee Chair had led him to understand that the discussion on the tirets as they stood appeared to 
have gone as far as it could at present and it seemed that there was no visible prospect of compromise 
as yet. 
22. On the single proposal in the Safeguards area , he understood that Members, including the 
proponent of the issue, had acknowledged that the situation remained unchanged since the Committee 
reported in 2002 that it had not been able to suggest a course of action on the issue due to a lack of convergence.  However, the proponent preferred that th e possibility of reverting to this issue at some 
point in the future was left open.  He wished to  note that work on Article 9.1 of the Safeguards 
Agreement, which was the main focus of the propo sal, also continued in parallel in the regular 
Committee. 
23. In the area of technical barriers to trade, while the Committee had undertaken work which 
was relevant to the issues contained in the two tir ets in the context of the follow up to the Third 
Triennial Review, no further substantiv e discussion of the implementation issues per se  had taken 
place.  In the light of his consultations, the form er Chair, had been unable to suggest a course of 
action to be followed on these tirets. 
24. Turning to the second track of work, which con cerned the GI extension issue, he said that 
Mr. Thompson-Flôres had held four consultative m eetings, three of which had been substantive 
discussions on a number of topics that he had suggested in the light of views expressed at the first, 
organizational consultation.  Mr. Thompson-Flôr es had reported to him that he believed these  TN/C/M/18 
 Page 5 
 
 
 technical level consultations, together with th e earlier work of the Council for TRIPS and the 
consultations that he had held as Director-General  in spring 2003, had served to bring the relevant 
technical issues onto the table and had enabled Members to have a useful exchange of views. 
25. At the request of delegations, the Secretariat had prepared a factual compilation of the issues 
raised and views expressed on issues related to GI ex tension in the various contexts in which this 
matter had been discussed in the WTO since the D oha Declaration.  This compilation had been 
circulated in draft form for Members' comments, and had recently been circulated in final form.  He said it was clear from all of this work that there remained differing views among Members as to whether the issues related to GI extension had been  sufficiently clarified and, more importantly, on 
the desirability of GI extension and its implications. 
26. He said that from his factual report on the work on both tracks, the signs of progress were 
rather modest, but taken together with the good leve l of engagement there had been in all of these 
processes, he remained hopeful that some substant ive results were still possible.  The question now 
was how to move ahead.  As his report had s hown, the picture was a mixed one, with more 
encouraging signs in some areas than in others.  However, Members had to keep working across the 
board.  He would therefore suggest to the General Council in the following week that the consultative 
processes should continue on both tracks.  He would th en report again to the July meetings of the 
TNC and General Council.  The aim would be to move  ahead wherever possible, so that the General 
Council would be in a position to review progress and take any appropriate action, in line with the 
July 2004 Decision. 
27. He once again urged everyone to make every effort  to allow progress to be made.  In the July 
Decision, Members had been asked to redouble thei r efforts to find appropriate solutions to the 
outstanding implementation issues as a priority.  Members would need both flexibility and creativity in their approaches to these issues if they were to be able to respect the mandate. 
28. The Trade Negotiations Committee took note
 of the statement by the Director-General. 
 3. Reports by the Chairpersons of the Bodies Established by the TNC 
29. The Chairman
 recalled that the last TNC had taken place on 28 April, and the rather short 
interval since that meeting, which had also include d a number of local holidays, meant that only one 
written report had been circulated in the following official document: 
Special Session of the Council fo r Services:   TN/S/19/Suppl.1 
 
30. Ambassador Jara (Chile), Chairman of the Special Session of the Council for Trade in 
Services , said that on 27 April the Special Session resumed its February meeting and his report was 
contained in document TN/S/19/Suppl.1.  On this  occasion, he wished to update the TNC on the 
group's activities since the last TNC meeting.  The group had received only one initial offer, from Brunei Darussalam, bringing the number of initial offers to 53, representing 77 Members, counting 
the European Communities as one.  This left 39 initial offers outstanding from developing countries, 
aside from the 31 outstanding by LDCs.  This was a big number and was in contradiction with what 
Members had agreed in the 2004 July Decision – th ose Members that had not submitted initial offers 
had to do so as soon as possible.  He wished to re mind Members once again that they were more than 
two years late.   
31. As he had repeatedly emphasized in the p ast, the services negotiations required time to 
achieve results because of their re quest/offer structure and time was not on the side of Members.  
Only six months remained before the Hong Kong  Ministerial and it was crucial that Members 
submitted their revised offers in May, as agreed.  He was pleased to report that Canada had submitted TN/C/M/18 
Page 6  
 
 its revised offer the previous evening.  He hope d this would provide a good example and that there 
would be more revised offers in the month of May. 
32. At the June Special Session, Members would have to make an assessment of where they were 
and express views about the state of play in the nego tiations in terms of the numbers of offers and in 
particular the quality.  In the meantime together w ith the secretariat, he was working with delegations 
on developing possible factual tools that could help  them in their individual assessments.  The group 
was also proceeding with the consultations on the S&D proposals that had been referred to it by the 
Chairman of the CTD Special Session.  Although this  work was proceeding slowing, he said that the 
group would reach some conclusions.  The group al so planned to do some work on the modalities for 
LDCs over the next weeks.  It therefore had a lot to  do, but most of the important activity had to take 
place in capitals in the preparation of good revised offers. 
33. Ambassador Jóhannesson (Iceland), Chairman  of the Negotiating Group on Market Access
, 
said that he had made a rather detailed oral report on the state of play in the NAMA negotiations at 
the last TNC.  Since then, no meeting of his Group had taken place and he di d not have much to add 
at this stage in terms of substance to that report.   He wished to remind delegations that the next 
meeting of the Group was scheduled for the week  of the 6-10 June and he had sent out an 
organizational fax.  As he had indicated in the fax, he intended to continue the work in room D and to 
focus on the formula, unbound tariffs and ad valorem  equivalents in light of the latest developments 
in agriculture.  He also intended to have an  intense brainstorming session on non-tariff barriers 
(NTBs).  The process which the Group had established before its last meeting, using room D as an 
open-ended informal forum for discussion had work ed quite well and it would continue with this 
process. 
34. He said that the five proposals on the formula had had a positive effect on the Group's work 
with good and focused discussions, although conv ergence was not yet taking place.  However, 
convergence was needed at this stage in the Group' s work.  Time was not on the Group's side and he 
wished to highlight the fact that the next meeting of the Group was the last scheduled before July.  He 
therefore once again appealed to all Members to ma ke the most of the June session.  He was aware 
that Members were working very hard in capitals and informally discussing with each other, exploring 
the issues and he could only urge and en courage them to continue that work. 
35. He also wished to inform the TNC that he w as using the time up to the next meeting of his 
Group for informal bilateral consultations.  The purpose was to allow himself to get a better and 
deeper sense of the issues at hand and where delega tions were coming from so as to prepare for the 
next session, keep the focus on the issues and emphasi ze the need to begin to think of ways in which 
divergent views could be bridged.   
36. Ambassador Ali (Bangladesh), Chairman of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade 
and Environment , said the Special Session had made a promising start this year and at its first meeting 
in February, it had been able to  discuss its targets for the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference.  Many 
Members were of the view that it might be possibl e to make significant progress on the paragraph 31 
(iii) mandate – trade liberalization in environmen tal goods – by Hong Kong.  Other parts of the 
Special Session's mandate continued to be of e qual importance and it was understood that Members 
would continue to work on them this year, in preparation for 2006. 
37. From the consultations he had held with Me mbers prior to, during and after the February 
meeting, it was his impression that, within the group, Members could work towards the preparation of 
a list of environmental goods as a potential outcome  for the Hong Kong Conference.  Five lists of 
environmental goods had been submitted, by Chin ese Taipei, European Communities, Japan, Korea 
and Qatar.  It was also his understanding that the submissions of other lists was imminent.  He said 
that for a WTO list to be developed, there had to be broad-based participation in the exercise.  He  TN/C/M/18 
 Page 7 
 
 
 hoped that the developing countries who had signalled th eir intention to prepare lists at the February 
meeting would be able to table their submissions soon. 
38. To assist Members in their discussions, the Secretariat had prepared a document that 
compiled the five lists submitted and which brought t ogether the information in a concise form.  This 
document was without prejudice to the positions of Me mbers.  If Members were  to produce a list for 
Hong Kong, the Special Session would need to be mo re active in the coming months.  It was already 
clear from the submissions made so far that the construction of the list was fraught with technical 
complexity and it was vital that Members that so  wished, submitted their lists as early as possible. 
39. The next formal meeting of the Special Session was scheduled for 7-8 July.  However, he had 
indicated to Members his readiness to convene an in formal meeting to discuss new submissions that 
might be tabled.  Provided the gr oup received a substantial new subm ission in the days ahead, it could 
meet in the first half of June.  In order to make  substantive progress by December, he believed that 
Members would need to see enough proposals on the table in July. 
40. Finally, he wished to remind Members that they should be mindful of the fact that, as a group, 
they were nowhere near delivering anything tangible on paragraphs 31(i) and (ii) of the mandate.  The 
Special Session needed to continue examining this  part of the mandate.  It was his hope, that as 
Members used the rest of this year to make pr ogress on paragraph 31(iii), they would also work on 
narrowing the gap between the different pos itions on paragraphs 31(i) and (ii). 
41. Ambassador Spencer (Australia), Chairman of the Special Session of the Dispute Settlement 
Body , said that since the last TNC, the Special Sess ion had had one meeting and had continued with 
informal discussions of a number of proposals.  He said that he did not wish to overstate the group's 
progress because he was not certain how signifi cantly it had advanced towards convergence.  
Members all knew that there was a lot of work to be done and that they were not making as much progress as they thought they would.  At the last mee ting he had suggested to participants that at this 
point what he would foresee as the group's contribution to the July outcome would be a report to the TNC by the Chairman, on his own responsibility, on the recent work that the group had carried out 
and providing an indication of what it aimed to do for the Hong Kong Ministerial meeting.  He did not 
think that the group would have reached the stage by July where there would be agreement even on 
the elements of a draft text, and to that extent, it was a rather disappointing result.   
42. He would be consulting further with Members on this matter before their next meeting which 
was scheduled for the end of June.  He wished to cl arify something that he had said to participants at 
the last meeting of the Special Session, which was th at while he agreed that  they needed to move 
forward predominantly on a text based discussion, delegations should not expect the Chair to come 
forward at the end of the summer or some time in Se ptember with a draft text out of thin air.  The 
onus was still on Members to find a way forward in these negotiations. 
43. Ambassador Noor (Malaysia), Chairman of  the Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation
, said 
that the Group had last met on 2-3 May.  It had c ontinued meeting in a cons tructive atmosphere which 
had allowed for a largely de-politicized debate, w ith Members approaching the issues in a business 
like manner.  The Group had moved into substantive wo rk and this had led to notable achievements in 
framing the issues which Members had identified. 
44. Numerous inputs had been made on how to fu lfill the provision in the negotiating modalities 
on clarifying and improving GATT Articles V, VIII a nd X, with more than 32 submissions already 
tabled to this end.  Notably, about two-thirds of their sponsors were developing countries.  A common 
thread that run through all the proposals was thei r aim at expediting cross border transactions and 
cutting cumbersome red tape.  Emphasis had be en placed on simplifying and reducing import and 
export procedures and enhancing transparency.  Pr oposals had also been made to strengthen due TN/C/M/18 
Page 8  
 
 process and non-discrimination requirements and to allow for more predictability in the trading 
environment.  Contributions had equally been made on the integral elements of S&D treatment, cost 
implications and technical assistance and capacity  building.  The proposals would be compiled as a 
necessary next step in further considering the issues in this area of the negotiations.  
45. Ambassador Valles Galmés (Uruguay), Chai rman of the Negotiating Group on Rules
, said 
that the previous day the Group had concluded a meeting on regional trade agreements (RTAs), at 
which the work had focused on two main aspects – el ements for a transparency process and systemic 
issues. 
46. With regard to the elements for a process of tr ansparency on goods in RTAs, he had presented 
a new Chair's paper which reflected a number of  points of convergence with regard to early 
notification of RTAs, the way in which countries could report on the presentation of RTAs and on 
successive reviews and reports linked to RTAs.  Th ere had been a certain degree of convergence and 
progress in that area.  The Secretariat had made a factual presentation on a hypothetical case, taking as 
an example the case of the services agreemen t between Canada and Chile, analyzing the 
methodological difficulties that existed for the factua l presentation of a services agreement.  A certain 
amount of progress had also been made in this area. 
47. Under systemic issues, the Group had considered two important documents.  The first one had 
been introduced by Australia at a previous meeti ng and raised possible solutions to address the issue 
of "substantially all the trade" referred to in GA TT Article XXIV.  The Group had also considered in 
depth a document presented by the European Comm unities on the same issue.  There had been a 
discussion of disciplines that could be applicable  to RTAs reported under Article XXIV or under the 
Enabling Clause.  The atmosphere had been very  constructive and the discussion on these substantive 
aspects of the negotiation, although not representi ng progress as such, had helped clarify positions. 
48. At the end of the month, the Group would have its next meeting on anti-dumping, and 
subsidies, including fishing subsidies, and would consider a number of documents that were being 
submitted at the present.  
49. Mr. Ismail (South Africa), Chairman of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and 
Development , said he had not submitted a written report and would therefore be making an oral report 
to the TNC.  He wished to recall that at the last  TNC, he had informed Members that he had had to 
suspend the 20th Special Session held on 6 Apr il 2005 because Members had had different views on 
the agenda of that meeting.  Some Members had stated that they could not accept a discussion on the cross-cutting issues until all the Agreement-specifi c proposals had been addressed.  Other Members 
were of the view that the cross cutting issues s hould be discussed in parallel, because this could 
contribute to addressing the remaining Agreement-specific proposals. 
50. Since then he had held a number of consultati ons to try and find a way forward.  He was 
pleased to report that although there remained some  differences on how to structure future work, 
Members had agreed to address the LDC Agreement-specific proposals as  a matter of priority.  Thus, 
at the reconvened meeting of the Special Session held on the 10 May, the Special Session had began 
to discuss the LDC Agreement-specific proposals.  These proposals sought to amend the Understanding in Respect of Waivers of Obligations under the GATT 1994, the Enabling Clause, the TRIMs Agreement and the Decision on Measures in Favour of Least Developed Countries. 
51. The Special Session had been able to have a firs t reading of all, except one, of the remaining 
LDC Agreement-specific proposals at the 10 May m eeting.  Although the group had not gone into 
drafting of language on each of these proposals, the discussions had provided an opportunity to 
understand better the reasoning behind each of the pr oposals, and for Members to seek clarifications 
on some of the proposals.  At last the group had be gun to discuss substance rather than process and he  TN/C/M/18 
 Page 9 
 
 
 said that he now intended to hold small group inform al consultations to be gin work on the language 
that could help build consensus amongst Members.  This could provide a basis for possible recommendations to the General Council in July.  He said that although the group had made a slow 
start, he believed that it was now back on track a nd he hoped that the group would be able to deliver 
something by the July 2005 d eadline.  Progress depended on the continued support, flexibility and 
political will of all Members.   
52. The Trade Negotiations Committee took note
 of the reports by the Chairpersons of the bodies 
established by it.  
4. Statements by participants 
53. The representative of Korea  said that the Chairman had given Members an accurate 
assessment of the current situation, including wher e and how they had to move in the next two 
months.  Although Members had managed to reso lve the gateway issue of AVE conversion in 
agriculture, they still had an enormous amount of work to do.  If Members were to have a first 
approximation in July that would ensure success at  Hong Kong, they needed to pick up the pace of 
work with a greater sense of urgency through more m eetings in different configurations at appropriate 
levels in all areas of the negotiations.   
54. He wished to take up three areas of the nego tiations.  First on services, he introduced a joint 
statement on the services negotiations by the Mini sters responsible for Trade in APEC economies 
which had been circulated on 12 May in documen t TN/S/W/40.  APEC economies included 19 WTO 
Members, and two others, Russia and Viet nam were undergoing accession.  APEC economies 
attached great importance to the services sectors and it was not surprising that in  their joint statement 
the Ministers had expressed serious concerns about  the slow progress in these negotiations and had 
called for an urgent effort to impart momentum.  The Ministers had emphasized the importance of making meaningful offers in sectors and modes of supply of interest to all Members with particular attention being given to the interests of developing  countries.  They had also noted the importance of 
targeted technical assistance for developing countri es and the need to make efforts to conclude the 
negotiations on rule-making.  The Ministers had al so called on Members to submit urgently their 
initial offers if they had not yet done so, and meet the deadline of May 2005 for improved revised 
offers.  His delegation hoped that the joint stat ement would help in redoubling efforts to make 
sufficient progress by July in this important area. 
55. Turning to agriculture, he sai d that the agreement on AVEs reached at the Paris mini-
Ministerial meeting represented a significant break through, although both the process leading up to 
the agreement and the substance were far from satisf actory to Korea.  His delegation hoped that the 
membership would finally adopt the guidelines, includ ing on sugar, at the next agriculture week.  The 
long process had taught Members a valuable lesson, that those who had substantive interests, had to 
be involved in the process.   
56. On NAMA, as July was fast approaching, Members needed to narrow down differences on 
the formula as soon as possible.  One practical way of doing so was to conduct a number – crunching 
simulation on the formulae proposed to determine how  each could affect Members with different 
tariff profiles.  In this regard, he wished to emph asize that the ultimate test for each formula would be 
whether it could bring about commercially meaningf ul market access improvements.  While Members 
needed to place immediate focus on the formula, they also needed to work hard on other important 
elements such as sectoral initiatives and NTBs.  A viable NAMA packag e had to combine these 
elements with an ambitious formula to fulfill th e Doha mandate.  Members were facing an uphill 
battle, but the successful selection of the next Dir ector-General had shown that with political will and 
focus, they could make real progress in a short time. TN/C/M/18 
Page 10  
 
 57. The representative of Mexico
 said that the atmosphere seeme d to be more positive than the 
last time the TNC had met.  The AVE issue had been solved, at least the main part of it, and this was 
positive.  But as the Chairman had said, a lot of work lay ahead.  Nobody had changed their ambition 
to conclude the negotiations in 2 006.  Everyone wanted to conclude the negotiations at the level of 
ambition established by Ministers and to take account of the interests of developing countries, in 
particular LDCs.  Unfortunately, the excessive zeal  negotiators had shown for discussing technical 
issues obliged Members to reduce not the level of am bition of the negotiations, but rather the level of 
what could be achieved in the first approximation in  July.  As the Chairman had said, Members were 
far from where they should be at this juncture.  This implied that what they had not done during the first six months of the year would have to be completed during the second six months. 
58. Turning to agriculture, he said that progr ess had been made on AVEs, although some 
elements were still missing – sugar and verificati on.  His delegation hoped that this meant progress 
would also be made in other areas in the market access pillar and that in Ju ly, Members would have 
an idea of the tiers and the formulas to be used in each of them, and a clear idea of where they were 
going in the domestic support and export competition pillars. 
59. In NAMA, as the Chairman of the Negotiating Group had said, there was now the necessary 
basis to make progress.  Convergence was missing,  but his delegation hoped it would be reached 
before July on both the formula and flexibilities for developing countries.  There were also other 
elements which might become a problem, but his de legation hoped they could be solved, like AVEs in 
agriculture.  Another element was the question of unbound tariffs, and his delegation, together with 
others, aimed to submit a proposal to help find a solu tion on this.  A clear idea would also be needed 
by July of what would be done about NTBs.  In se rvices, as the Special Session Chairman had said, 
the deadline was close but 39 initial offers were s till missing and there was also a need for revised 
offers.  This was a systemic problem that had to  be solved, which was probably not possible before 
July, and further reflection was necessary. 
60. In rules, his delegation was pleased to hear  the Negotiating Group Chairman's report that 
some progress had been made on RTAs.  On anti-dumping, a large number of proposals were now on 
the table, and Mexico had proposed that a compe ndium of the proposals be prepared, dividing them 
into different categories, such as dumping margin  calculations, initiations, lesser-duty rule, injury 
investigations and so on. In trade facilitation, the pace of the negotiations had been stepped up thanks 
to contributions by all Members and his delegation wished to see this maintained. 
61. Turning to development, he said that Mexico continued to believe that the best way of 
contributing to development was to ensure ma rket access for goods and services which were of 
interest to developing countries.  In the work on S&D, progress had been made and his delegation 
hoped that work on the proposals would continue with  due urgency, in particular on those submitted 
by the LDCs, so that a good result could be achie ved in these negotiations.  Implementation issues 
were part and parcel of the Round.  It was extrem ely important to deal with the real problems that 
were due to deficiencies or lack of implemen tation of the Uruguay Round Agreements, but care 
should be taken not to use this issue as a weapon to achieve undue protectionism.  
62. The dispute settlement negotiations were an area which needed to be closely followed.  This 
was a fundamental issue for the development of the institution and therefore would be a very 
important component at the end of the Round.  In conclusion, he said the time had come for 
delegations to pull up their sleeves and work so as th at Hong Kong would be a true watershed for the 
success of this round of negotiations. 
63. The representative of Rwanda
, on behalf of the African Group , said that the present meeting 
of the TNC was timely since it was at the eve of the summer break.  Members had only six months of work from the present meeting to December.  Give n the slow progress compared to the level of  TN/C/M/18 
 Page 11 
 
 
 ambition, there was a need to devise new strategi es to move forward significantly since everyone 
shared the sense of urgency.  He wished to reite rate that the Group was committed to the successful 
conclusion of the DDA because it was convinced that a successful DDA could make a vital 
contribution to the development, growth and povert y reduction goals of African countries.  The yard 
stick for the Round's success was a meaningful de velopment component and therefore the outcomes 
in agriculture, NAMA, services, development issues , and rules including trade facilitation had to be 
development driven. 
64. The real challenge for Members was to ade quately use the time available to find new 
strategies and measures to achieve the desired resu lts at the Hong Kong Ministerial, which would 
allow for the completion of the Doha Round before the end of 2006.  Given the current rhythm and 
slow progress in many areas of the negotiations, real political commitment and proactive attitudes 
were needed from all Members, particularly th e developed countries to make the Round a real 
development one. 
65. Since early in the year, a first approximation ha d been expected by July 2005 and this meant 
achieving substantial progress in the negotiations.  There were now two months remaining.  The 
Group wished to stress that the first approximation should have some kind of indication that would 
give it confidence that the outcome in Hong Kong would be balanced.  This meant that core 
modalities and S&D had to be given similar weight.   
66. He wished to make some observations on fe w issues under negotiation.  On agriculture, 
regarding AVEs, the Group had taken note of the concerns raised by some Members on the different treatment proposed for some products, especially suga r, in the AVE discussions and in this regard 
urged that the concerns of all Members should be ta ken into account, in order to move discussions to 
the other elements of the market access pillar.  Substantial progress in the other two pillars was 
equally important for a meaningful and balanced out come.  On NAMA, there was an urgent need to 
find a common ground from th e various submissions on the formula.   Less than full reciprocity and 
S&D had to be an integral part of the agreed approach.   
67. Turning to development issues, he said the Group wished to highlight that on S&D, Members 
had agreed to give priority to LDC Agreement- specific proposals and it supported this approach and 
wished to stress that this should result in a positiv e outcome.  On TRIPS and Public Health, the Group 
wished to commend the new Chair for the informal consultations he had unde rtaken and it hoped that 
other Members would show flexibility so that a positive outcome could be achieved by the next General Council.  The Group supported the initia tives on Aid for Trade which were signs of 
commitment to integrating poor countries into inte rnational trade, but it was concerned about reports 
of possible backtracking from this commitment by some development partners. 
68. In conclusion, he said the Group wished to re-emphasize that for the Group it was important 
that development needs should to be put back at the core of the Doha Work Programme and also 
reiterated the need for engagement so that th e desired goal at Hong Kong Ministerial could be 
achieved. 
69. The representative of Canada,
 said that his country had recently submitted its revised services 
offer and hoped that the improvements contained in it would play a constructive role in advancing the 
services negotiations towards an ambitious outcome.  Canada's revised offer built on its strong initial 
offer of March 2003 and on the advanced set of  commitments it had undertaken during the Uruguay 
Round.  The revised offer included, among other things: improvements to commitments in the 
temporary movement of business people, which furt her addressed the requests of both developed and 
developing countries; accounting, engineering and legal services; transport services, including maritime, highway and rail transport; financial services; horizontal commercial presence requirements; tourism services; courier services; and,  residency and citizenship requirements at the TN/C/M/18 
Page 12  
 
 sub-federal level.  Canada had also  offered to strike several exemptions to the MFN principle from its 
schedule of commitments.  In addition, it had made technical refinements to its offer, by adhering 
more closely to model schedules in mode 4 and mariti me transport.  In conjunction with the release of 
its revised offer, Canada had announced two ne w transparency initiatives aimed at improving access 
to its services market.  To facilitate the access of  developing-country service suppliers, Canada had 
launched an online GATS contact point, designed to provide information on its services market and 
regulatory regime to developing-country service supp liers.  In addition to the improvements to its 
mode 4 commitments, Canada had produced a mode 4 transparency template that provided links to 
the relevant parts of all its laws, regulations, po licies, practices or administrative guidelines associated 
with each specific mode 4 commitment. 
70. While many of the services offers fell short of Cana da's requests, it was prepared to do its part 
to help advance the negotiations.  Canada had been the first WTO Member to commit to making its 
services offer public.  Its experience had been that th is transparent approach had helped to increase 
public understanding of, and support for the negotia tions and it encouraged other Members to 
consider adopting a similar approach. 
71. He also wished to draw Members' atten tion to the announcement the previous week by 
Canada's Minister of Health of the coming into fo rce of Bill C9, an Act to amend the Patent Act and 
the Food and Drug Act and its accompanying regulations .  The regulations would be published in part 
II of the Canada Gazette on 1 June 2005 and this would complete the process of establishing a legal 
framework allowing lower cost versions of patent ed and pharmaceutical products to be exported to 
countries unable to manufacture such products, im plementing the 30 August 2003 Decision on TRIPS 
and Public Health. 
72. The representative of India
 thanked Canada for its revised offer and said this would be a good 
reference point for other countries.  He said that the last TNC had been held under the shadow of a 
major roadblock in the negotiations on agriculture  and while Members had since cleared their path, 
the road ahead remained long and bumpy.  His delegation therefore supported the Chairman in 
recognizing the urgency of work.  He wished to  express India's appreciation of the Chairman's 
personal contribution to taking the discussion on im plementation issues forward.  His delegation 
noted that positive signs had been identified in some areas, and it hoped that the emerging momentum 
could be sustained.  For India, enhancing th e development content of the TRIPS Agreement, 
especially through clarification of the Agreement so  that it was fully supportive of the objectives of 
the CBD, was an important element of the deve lopment agenda of this Round and essential for 
ensuring a balanced outcome.  This required sustai ned engagement and his delegation supported the 
proposal that work on implementation should continue  in the coming weeks with the Friends.  India 
also looked forward to intensif ied consultations towards an e xplicit recognition in the first 
approximation of a negotiating mandate on this issu e.  The issue of flexibilities for developing 
countries in the TRIMs Agreement was another impl ementation issue of major concern to India and 
other developing countries, and his delegation stro ngly supported the suggestion that the Secretariat 
prepare an options paper to revitalize the c onsultations undertaken by the TRIMs Chair. 
73. He wished to share some thoughts on the process in the coming weeks.  India saw some merit 
in basing the first approximation in July on the asse ssment of the Chairs of negotiating bodies on the 
existing state of progress, as this might be the only viable option available to Members.  However, intensive informal consultations were needed to further develop thoughts on this format.  The levels 
of specificity in the reports from the different Chairs  could be expected to vary to reflect the real 
progress of the negotiations, but the maintenance of  a broad overall balance was necessary.  This 
balance would need to encompass not only agri culture and NAMA, but other clusters as well, 
especially services and development.  TN/C/M/18 
 Page 13 
 
 
 74. There was a growing concern among devel oping countries over progress towards the 
realization of the developmental promise of the ne gotiations.  Members could no longer delay further 
a development audit of the negotiations – a comp rehensive stocktaking across the entire mandate.  
This would be an essential first step towards deve loping an outline of the development deliverables 
for Hong Kong. 
75. Before concluding, he wished to say a few wo rds of caution on the process.  While Members 
aimed to be ambitious, the ambition should flow or ganically from the negotiations.  Above all, the 
pursuit of ambition should not override the mandate in any area of the negotiations.  Members also needed to remain sensitive to the interests and concerns of all constituencies in the membership, and 
work towards a balanced outcome throu gh an inclusive and transparent process. 
76. The representative of Zambia
, on behalf of the LDC Group , associated the Group with the 
statement by Rwanda on behalf of the African Group.  He said that the current state of play in advancing the development dimens ion of the DDA was of great concern to the LDC Group.  The 
Group had indicated at the last TNC that the needs of  developing, but particularly of least-developed, 
countries should take centre stage in the negotiations  as had been provided in the Doha Ministerial 
Declaration, the July 2004 Decision and the Marrake sh Agreement.  There had seemingly been a great 
level of engagement amongst all delegations in  the various negotiating bodies over the last few 
months and this, coupled with the necessary political  input from Ministers, should have led Members 
to a positive road towards the first approximation in  July.  Unfortunately, Members still appeared not 
to be making the move in the right direction. 
77. For the LDC Group, the question of incorporating S&D treatment in the areas of NAMA, 
agriculture, trade facilitation, services and develo pment had to be translated into a way of 
implementing the various provisions agreed to during the negotiations, in order to achieve sustainable 
growth and economic development.  All Members we re committed to a successful outcome of this 
Round, but success could only be attained if the needs of the developing countries, especially the 
least-developed, remained at the heart of the whole process.  Members were two months away from 
the approximations of what benefits the Hong Kong m eeting would be able to achieve for a fair and 
equitable multilateral trading system.  This was not a lot of time for the amount of convergence that 
was needed.  The Group therefore wished to appeal to  all delegations to make a serious and deliberate 
move towards the realization of what they all h oped would be the first approximation by July.  In 
conclusion, he wished to congratulate Canada on its revised offer and hoped other Members would 
emulate the same. 
78. The representative of Hong Kong, China
 said that he wished to make three related points.  His 
delegation supported the Chairman's call for a gr eater sense of urgency and his reminder to 
delegations that the clock was ticking towards the Sixth Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong.  No 
one was more anxious than Hong Kong, China that the Ministerial should be a successful event.  
Nevertheless, it was important to recall that the r eal political deadline for concluding the negotiations 
was the end of 2006 and working back from that, it w as absolutely vital that conclusions were reached 
on modalities in market access and their equivalents in other areas by Hong Kong.  In other words, 
Hong Kong was not just an event which should be  successful for the sake, but was vital for the 
progress of the Round as a whole.  The recent progress in the agriculture negotiations had provided a 
boost in the other areas, but much time had been lo st and progress still seemed to be inhibited by an 
emphasis on narrow defensive interests and on percei ved potential pains, rather than any positive 
assessments of the broader potential gains for everyone .  This was particularly true in NAMA, and his 
delegation hoped that the early sharing of data from simulations would help Members focus on what 
they stood to gain from improved market access everywhere.  This would hopefully facilitate 
convergence on the formula and other elements before July and also help to lift collective ambition. TN/C/M/18 
Page 14  
 
 79. Turning to the issue of the first approximation, he said that his delegation agreed that this 
should be different from last July.  The political masters needed a hard-h eaded, clear-eyed assessment 
by the Chairman and the other Chairs of where th e negotiations had got to, where the gaps were on 
the most significant issues, what the obstacles were a nd what needed to be done to shift them, where 
the balance point was and what needed to be done to attain it.  This would give them a feel of the 
balance of benefits across the whole agenda, which they  needed before they could take a realistic view 
on how high they could set their sights.  Progress in Geneva was ultimately dependent on the political 
masters convincing themselves that the game was wo rth the candle thus giving their negotiators the 
flexibility to drive towards convergence. 
80. In making his last point, he said that given the enormous amount of work needed to meet the 
targets set, Members would need careful organization.  Therefore, the first approximation in all its 
component parts had to provide a clear road-map a nd work plan for the period between the end of the 
summer break and the Ministerial meeting in Hong Kong. 
81. The representative of Kenya
 said that her delegation realized the urgency of ensuring positive 
movement in the negotiations because it was this progress that would determine the shape and the 
content of the July approximation.  She associated  her delegation with th e statement by Rwanda on 
behalf of the African Group. 
82. On agriculture, her delegation appreciated the e fforts made by the agriculture Chairman in 
advancing the work and wished to commend him fo r facilitating the recent discussions which had led 
to an agreement on the AVE conversion methodolog y which was before the membership for their 
consideration.  Her delegation was in favour of full y resolving this gateway issue, while ensuring that 
the interests of preference receiving countries were safeguarded.  This would allow for discussions to 
move to the other issues in the market access pillar, a pillar which was of particular importance to 
Kenya.  As the negotiations progressed, Members need ed to ensure that the development dimension 
was fully taken into account and her delegation believed that this was critical for the success of Hong 
Kong.  In this regard, it expected to see conc rete S&D provisions embodied in the results of the 
negotiations in accordance with the Doha mandate, pa rticularly in the market access pillar.  It also 
expected to see a more transparent and inclusiv e negotiating process in the lead up to Hong Kong. 
83. Turning to NAMA, she said that although ther e had been substantive discussions, lack of 
agreement on the core elements of the formula w as an issue of concern, since this would delay 
progress, not only in NAMA but also in the other areas of the negotiations.  As her delegation had 
repeatedly stated, S&D and flexibilities for developing countries should be clearly reflected in all 
elements of the modalities.  Kenya also wanted  to see progress on the issue of non-reciprocal 
preferences.  With respect to NTBs, work need ed to move from procedural issues to addressing 
substance and her delegation was pleased to note that  this was scheduled for the forthcoming meetings 
of the NAMA Group.  There was need  to ensure that there was bala nce between equity and flexibility 
in the NAMA negotiations. 
84. On development issues, her delegation was concer ned that no real progress had been realized.  
However, it appreciated the recent approach by the CTD Special Session Chairman, where priority 
had been given to reviewing all outstanding Agr eement-specific proposals, commencing with those of 
the LDCs which was in line with the Doha manda te and the 2004 July Decision.  Her delegation's 
view was that the same approach should be taken in addressing the Agreement-specific proposals 
referred to subsidiary bodies to enable Members meet the July deadline on this important issue. 
85. Regarding services, Kenya looked forward to the submission of revised offers by the end of 
the month and it was doing its best in this regard.  Kenya believed that the revised offers should create 
real market access opportunities for all Members by addressing the existing asymmetries in the 
commitments across sectors and modes of supply.  In order to address the development aspects of the  TN/C/M/18 
 Page 15 
 
 
 services negotiations, the sectors and modes of expor t interests to developing countries should be 
given special attention in the revised offers.  On the issue of proposed benc hmarks, her delegation was 
concerned that certain proposals were inconsistent with the positive-list approach of the GATS.  In 
Kenya's view, benchmarks had been well defined in the guidelines and procedures for the services 
negotiations, which Members should strive to achieve in their revised offers.  In the area of rule-
making in services, there had been useful discussions based on a number of proposals on domestic 
regulations and Members appeared willing to build on the progress.  However, Kenya was concerned 
about the slow progress in respect to GATS rules a nd believed there was need to intensify efforts 
particularly where rules were meant to create tr ansparency and enhance predictability in market 
access commitments. 
86. On trade facilitation, there had been a subs tantive exchange of views on the proposals 
submitted.  However, her delegati on was concerned that some of these went beyond the scope of the 
negotiations, and it wished to appeal to Members to  refrain from bringing in issues that were outside 
the mandate.  The need to operationalize the deliver y of technical assistance in parallel with the 
negotiations, which was apparently lacking, was of particular importance to Kenya.  
87. The representative of Benin , on behalf of the ACP Group , associated the Group with the 
statements by Rwanda on behalf of the African Group and Zambia on behalf of the LDC Group.  He 
said that the concerns of the ACP Group in the negotiations had been stated on previous occasions, including at the last TNC, and he would not restat e them.  The mini-Ministerial meeting in Paris had 
allowed for reflection on the state of progress in the negotiations under the DDA.  Regarding 
agriculture, the Group was strongly concerned about th e singling out of sugar in the AVE discussion.  
For many countries in the Group, sugar was not only an agricultural product, but rather the lifeblood 
of their economy and society.  However, the Group welcomed the opportunity for further consultations on sugar and looked forward to contributing construc tively to the discussion to arrive at 
a satisfactory solution to the AVE issue for all Memb ers.  It was the thinking of the ACP Group that 
the results of the negotiations should be balan ced and equitable and should not lead to the 
disappearance of certain farming systems, especially among the vulnerable developing countries.  It 
was known that the Group's constituency comprised th e majority of NFIDCs, LDCs and vulnerable 
economies and therefore a holistic approach ai med at maintaining their domestic production, 
stabilizing market access and minimizing preference erosion for their economies should prevail as 
Members moved towards first approximations in agriculture. 
88. Given the importance of cotton to many ACP countries, the Group wished to underscore the 
need to harvest concrete results on the basis of the July 2004 Decision.  In this regard, the Group 
wished to express its support to the proposed elem ents of modalities on cotton submitted to the Sub-
Committee on Cotton in document TN/AG/SCC/GEN/2.  The Group urged Members to accelerate work on this issue of critical importance to many  Members in the Group that  were among the weakest 
and vulnerable, as Members moved towards the July first approximations. 
89. Turning to the NAMA negotiations, Members were already aware that the issue of preference 
erosion remained critical, in addition to the possibl e negative impact an ambitious formula could have 
on government revenues and domestic industries in ACP States.  The ACP Group was also paying special attention to developments in the negotiati ons on rules in general and on disciplines governing 
RTAs.  The last meeting of the Negotiating Group on Rules had received some positive signals on the need to inject some flexibility through appropriate  S&D provisions related to RTAs.  The ACP Group 
was committed to working in close collaborati on with all Members for the improvement of 
Article XXIV of GATT 1994 with a view to rec onciling those provisions w ith its developmental 
needs. 
90. On development issues, the ACP Group wished to recall that the July deadline was just 
around the corner, yet it did not see substantial progress despite the painstaking efforts by the TN/C/M/18 
Page 16  
 
 Chairman of the CTD Special Session.  Members had agreed in November 2001 to launch a 
development round and therefore ha d to reconcile the Work Programme with the needs and priorities 
of developing countries particularly the weaker  and vulnerable economies.  The Group appreciated 
the efforts undertaken so far to move the process forward on the treatment of LDCs and it was of the 
view that the proposals tabled by the LDC Group deser ved special attention.  In this regard, the ACP 
Group considered that as modalities were developed, targeted measure s should be crafted with a view 
to providing support for the diversification of the production and export base of LDCs.  Equally 
important was the provision of broader duty-fr ee and quota-free market access for all products 
originating from LDCs.   
91. In conclusion, he said that the ACP Group was committed to the objective of harvesting 
positive results in the first approximation by July 2005.  The Group was ready to contribute to the 
development of credible and subs tantial benchmarks for the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference on 
condition that its development concerns were also given the attention they deserved. 
92. The representative of Uganda
 associated his delegation with the statements by Rwanda on 
behalf of the African Group, Zambia on behalf of the LDC Group and Beni n on behalf of the ACP 
Group.  His delegation wished to highlight some of the issues that were of ut most concern to Uganda 
in the negotiations.  Starting with agriculture, he sa id that there had been a lot of talk about the 
breakthrough on the issue of AVEs which had been se ttled at the Paris mini-Ministerial.  It was the 
hope of his delegation that this would provide the gateway for a more focused discussion on all pillars 
in agriculture, especially in the ma rket access pillar, which his country considered the most important.  
Uganda wished to stress that what ever the meaning of the AVE issue, what was important for it as a 
country was that the negotiations resulted in increase d market access.  This was an important way in 
which its farmers could fight their way out of the poverty cycle and develop. 
93. On services, Uganda looked forward to a br eakthrough in the May deadline and hoped to see 
the tabling of revised offers that provided real commercial and business opportunities for its people.  
The importance of mode 4 liberalization in sectors of  interest to Uganda had been mentioned both at 
the TNC and in other fora.  His delegation hoped th at as Members continued to engage constructively 
in the request/offer process, they could come up with  results that were development-oriented through 
meaningful market access in the areas of export in terest to the weakest of the membership.   
94. Regarding trade facilitation, he wished to reite rate that Uganda considered this to be a 
negotiating area that had great potential to help it boos t capacity to engage in international trade more 
efficiently and competitively, and contribute to an incr ease in the inflow of foreign direct investment.  
Uganda looked forward to the issue of technical and financial assistance being addressed to assist not 
only in the negotiations, but also in the implementa tion phase.  It appreciated that these negotiations 
had picked up momentum, but wished to remind the membership that, as was provided for in 
Annex D of the July Decision, negotiations on tr ade facilitation were also aimed at enhancing 
technical assistance and support for capacity building.   His delegation therefore looked forward to an 
early harvest in this regard. 
95. On NAMA, his delegation recognized that vari ous proposals had been tabled.  Whichever 
formula was chosen, Uganda's major interest w as to secure guaranteed duty and quota free market 
access for LDCs, of which it was one and, in addition,  to retain its preferential markets because most 
of its trade took place under these regimes.  This was a matter of development.  Uganda therefore 
appealed to the membership to look fa vourably on this modest position.   
96. He wished to touch briefly on the issue of TR IPS and Public Health, which was of utmost 
importance to Uganda.  The Afri can Group had tabled a proposal for the amendment of the TRIPS 
Agreement to provide a stable, predictable and permanent solution to the problem of supply and 
importation of affordable medicines for HIV and other pandemics.  However, Uganda had not seen  TN/C/M/18 
 Page 17 
 
 
 any movement on the issue and therefore invited Memb ers to recall the content of paragraph F of the 
1 August 2004 General Council Decision, as well as  the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public 
Health, with a view to coming up with a timely so lution to the problem, since it was a matter of life 
and death for its people.  He wished to commend Canada for the positive legislation it had developed 
on the TRIPS issue and said that it was his delega tion's hope that other developed countries would 
also lend their support. 
97. Uganda wished to stress the need to deal with  issues that fell within the "other development 
issues" component of the July Decision such as commodities, which had to given very urgent 
attention.  Finally, with regard to the LDC Agre ement-specific proposals, he said that Uganda was 
consoled by the report from the Chairman of CTD Special Session that work in this area was 
progressing well. 
98. The representative of Botswana  said that it was important that Members took full advantage 
of the remaining few weeks to move the negotiatio n process significantly forward in order to achieve 
the first approximation in July.  This was essen tial for a successful outcome of the Hong Kong 
Ministerial Conference in December.  He associated his delegation with the statements by Rwanda on 
behalf of the African Group, Zambia on behalf of th e LDCs and Benin on behalf of the ACP Group.   
99. On agriculture, he said that Members needed to  ensure that the liberalization process would 
bring meaningful development benefits to develo ping countries, especially those that were single 
commodity dependent such as Botswana.  While th e commitment made last July to substantially 
reduce trade-distorting domestic support and phase out export subsidies by an end date still to be 
negotiated, remained the basis for the negotiations , it was equally important to ensure that S&D 
treatment remained an integral part of them.  This  would ensure that NFIDCs such as Botswana, were 
not adversely affected by the results of the Doha Ro und.  To this end, it was extremely important that 
Members reached agreement expeditiously on the modalities for the implementation of the Marrakesh 
Decision.  His delegation welcomed the breakthr ough that had been achieved on the issue of AVE 
conversion, and hoped that the resolution of this "g ateway" issue would facilitate progress in other 
areas of the agriculture negotiations as Member s prepared for the first approximation.  The 
compromise solution on AVE conversion which had been  agreed at the informal Ministerial meeting 
in Paris had proved the value of mini-Ministerial s.  As long as mini-Ministerials were properly 
planned and focused, they were quite valuable.  This experience had also demonstrated the 
importance of occasionally injecting political mome ntum into the technical process in Geneva, 
especially when there was a stalemate on a specific technical issue.   
100. Regarding the NAMA negotiations, his delega tion wished to underscore the need to 
incorporate the principles of less than full reci procity and S&D treatment.  These principles were 
important and had to be embedde d in the formula for tariff reduction.  While his delegation 
recognized that in principle there was agreement on a non-linear Swiss type formula, its expectation 
was that the coefficient for the formula would ta ke into account the industrial development efforts 
which countries such as Botswana had made, and th at these countries should not suffer prejudice or be 
penalized by whatever formula was finally agreed. 
101. Turning to trade facilitation, he said that his delegation welcomed the positive spirit that was 
being shown in the Negotiating Group and was en couraged by the work plan presented by the 
Chairman of the Group.  His delegation urged that the issues of technical assistance and capacity building should be an integral part of the discussi ons and in this regard recalled Annex D of the 2004 
July Decision.  The recognition of the need for the provision of technical assistance and support for 
capacity building to developing and least-developed countries was important especially for small delegations like Botswana to engage  meaningfully in the negotiations. TN/C/M/18 
Page 18  
 
 102. He wished to comment on the development dimensions of the DDA and commended the 
Chairman of the CTD Special Session on the efforts he  had made to move work in this area.  S&D 
treatment provisions remained one of the critical areas of the DDA in which Members had to achieve concrete results by July 2005 as per their commitment in the July 2004 Decision.  His delegation hoped that by July, the Special Session would be ab le to make a report to the General Council with 
clear recommendations as had been agreed in that Decision.   
103. It was also important that progress was made in the other areas of the DDA, particularly rules, 
TRIPS and Public Health, as well as on outstanding implementation issues.  In conclusion, he said 
that, Members had to work hard in the remaining few weeks to ach ieve the desired results by the 
summer.  For this to happen, a considerable am ount of political will and commitment on the part of 
the entire membership was required.   
104. The representative of Singapore
 said that there had been a sense of relief that the AVE 
problem had been solved, but the fact that it had required Minist erial intervention to resolve one 
technical issue should give Members cause for concern a nd reflection.  In agriculture, the real work in 
the market access pillar could now start.  On  NAMA, his delegation agreed with the NAMA 
Chairman that Members needed to move towa rds some convergence on the formula by July.  
However, Members were lagging behind in services, rules and development and needed to intensify 
their efforts. 
105. The key question was what Members could realisti cally achieve by the end of July.  In his 
delegation's view, the July outcome would have to be more than a simple progress report and had to 
sketch out the parameters for the post-July nego tiations.  This would involve identifying areas of 
convergence and more importantly, the critical areas where divergences needed to be bridged.  This 
would give a clear sense of direction after the summer break when negotiations resumed. 
106. He wished to make a point related to an issue that was often discussed – the question of 
transparency and inclusiveness.  On the one hand,  Members had to be realistic about small group 
meetings.  They would never achieve perfect bala nce between complete inclusiveness and complete 
efficiency.  His delegation understood that sma ll groups were an essential part of the multilateral 
landscape, particularly in reconciling divergent inte rests among key interested parties.  Not everything 
could be done in a large setting such as the TNC and therefore smaller groups could be useful and 
could provide leadership at crucial moments in the process.  That much his delegation accepted.  
However, Members needed to be careful about  institutionalizing small groups that were not 
representative.  A balance needed to be struck be tween smaller and larger groups that were more 
representative.  Flexibility had to be maintained to accommodate the interests of all interested 
Members.  Ultimately, it was critical that the process was seen to be transparent and inclusive and that 
everyone had a sense of ownership of the consensus and so that it could be sustained.  This was 
crucial if Members wished to avoid problems in Hong Kong.  His delegation was encouraged by the Chairman's assurances that he would do his best to ensure transparency and inclusiveness and had no 
doubt that the Chairmen of the various negotiating groups would also do their best in their processes. 
107. The representative of Indonesia
 said that from the reports of the Chairman and the Chairs of 
negotiating bodies, it was clear that there had been very limited progress in the negotiations across all five core issues.  On agriculture, consensus had only been reached on the issue which was the gate 
way to further work on the agriculture tariff reduction formula, namely the AVE conversion 
methodology but much work still had to be done.  His delegation hoped that this progress would have 
a positive impact on the other issues in the agricu ltural negotiations.  On NAMA, not much progress 
had been achieved in the discussion of  the core issue of the formula.  For his delegation, the formula 
was a very important issue, a gateway in the NAM A negotiations, and it agreed with Singapore that 
this issue should be solved be fore the July approximation.  Negotiations on services, development, 
implementation issues and rules were equally importa nt to his delegation.  Some progress had been  TN/C/M/18 
 Page 19 
 
 
 registered on rules and services.  He congratulated Canada on its revised offer but underlined the need 
for technical assistance on making revised offers, as this was a problem for most developing countries, including Indonesia. 
108. In general, Members were still far from what  they wanted to achieve in July, but his 
delegation was not that pessimistic.  There were still two months until the first check point on the road 
map, which was the July first approximation.  His delegation agreed with the Chairman that Members 
had to redouble their efforts and de velop innovative ideas.  In this regard, he wished to emphasize that 
the process was just as important as the substance.   Members were entering a critical stage in 
achieving the first approximation, and it was vital th at they all had confidence in the process.  His 
delegation believed that there was room to contin ue increasing the transparency and inclusiveness of 
the process.  For instance, Members could be cons ulted and informed in an effective and timely 
manner on the issues raised in the negotiations to en able them to take positio ns in consultation with 
their capitals and contribute to consensus buildin g.  His delegation hoped that the process would 
continue to be more transparent and inclusive. 
109. Finally, he wished to emphasize that, althoug h Members were working on a tight deadline, 
substance should not be compromised, especia lly the level of ambition on the development 
component of the DDA.  The target should be to try to achieve the level of ambition set in the Doha mandate. 
110. The representative of Switzerland
 said that, although the Chairman had said he did not want a 
discussion of process at the present meeting, he wi shed to do so.  The TNC was not an active 
negotiating body on substance given its composition a nd the importance attached to it.  Rather, it was 
a body where signals on substance were given or rein forced and in this context his delegation agreed 
with the Chairman's comments.  His delegation also  agreed with the Chairman that Members would 
not match in Hong Kong, the level of ambition set at the beginning of the year if they did not 
substantially step up efforts.  In many ways, the negotiations were behind schedule and the large 
amount of time which had been lost had to be made up. 
111. At the beginning of the year, Members had ag reed that first approximations should be 
available by the summer break, but it was difficult at this  stage to predict the content of such texts, as 
well as their level of specificity, despite the reports that had been made by the Chairs of negotiating 
bodies.  However, the fact that work had not a dvanced as much as Members had wished should not 
generate a sense of fatalism.  Instead, Members should make the best use of the upcoming negotiating 
sessions.  There would also be a further occasion to  involve Ministers in the work, to narrow down 
differences on specific issues.  Such opportuni ty had to be seized and carefully prepared. 
112. Despite the uncertainties around the nature of th e first approximations, it was clear that they 
would differ in form and level of ambition across s ubjects.  But, this did not mean that a balance 
should not be struck in the most sensitive areas.  He said that it was unconceivable that the level of 
specificity and ambition on agriculture and NAMA differed significantly.  This was one of 
Switzerland's political signals.  On rules, incl uding trade facilitation, the main areas to be 
strengthened or developed n eeded to be identified. 
113. In the areas of S&D and implementation, efforts also needed to be redoubled.  Substantial 
progress had to be made on the two tracks of the work on implementation to reach tangible results by July.  In particular, his delegation wished to de plore that the work on the second track, GIs, had not 
been as constructive as it would have hoped despite  the efforts made by Mr. Thompson Flôres during 
his consultations.  His delegation had not registered  the expected responses from its partners despite 
the clarifications it had provided and the flexibility it had shown.  He said that for Switzerland, and 
this was its second political signal, this area remained  a crucial component of the overall balance.  His 
delegation supported the procedural outlines described  in order to pursue the work in this respect. TN/C/M/18 
Page 20  
 
 114. He said that the preparations for the Hong Kong Conference could also be moved forward by 
an efficient negotiating process and it was normal th at the process was adjusted and refined in the 
course of negotiations.  An inclusive and transpar ent process was fundamental to ensure a successful 
outcome and in that regard, not only formal meetings of negotiating bodies but also open-ended 
informal consultations were essential to decision- making.  Furthermore, as a complement to open-
ended informal consultations, cons ultations with groups of Members played an important role to 
evolve a consensus.  In such case s, Members with an interest in the specific issue under consideration 
should be given the opportunity to make their views known.  In other words, all sensitivities should be 
included in restricted consultations.  In his delega tion's view, the three types of meetings – formal, 
open-ended informal and restricted should be conducted by the chair, involve assistance from the 
Secretariat and include representatives of all sensitiviti es.  The three-step approach was called room F, 
room D and formal session in the systems of lock s inaugurated in the negotiations on agriculture.  
This method had been emulated in NAMA and c ould serve as a model for all negotiations.  In 
addition, as important deadlines were drawing close,  the role of the Chairman of the TNC would 
become increasingly important to secure an integrat ed approach to negotiations.  This did not only 
mean holding formal meetings of the TNC but also conducting informal consultations.  Such 
arrangements were part of an orderly process, consistent with the spirit of multilateral trade 
negotiations and the imperatives of inclusiveness and e ffectiveness.  It was the only way to ensure the 
ownership of the results and to avoid majo r disruptions, as recent events had shown. 
115. In conclusion, he said that his delegation was not implying that individual Members, forming 
a smaller group than room F participan ts, should not get together to facilitate a deal.  They could do so 
anytime and their discussions might even help the ne gotiations.  However, any solution worked out by 
such a group had to be regarded as nothing more than an input, among others, in the negotiations.  
Such spontaneous initiatives could not serve as a substitute to the room F consultations nor be 
considered as part of the orderly process.  Sin ce they operated outside the purview of the WTO 
machinery, his delegation questioned the participa tion of the Chairs and the Secretariat in such 
meetings. 
116. The representative of Malaysia
 said that his delegation was encouraged that the CTD Special 
Session was now focusing on substance, starting as priority with the LDC Agreement-specific 
proposals and it believed that there should be tangi ble progress before the Special Session embarked 
on other work.  His delegation was concerned and di sappointed over the lack of progress in the area of 
implementation and urged further engagement in areas of interest to developing countries. 
117. His delegation wished to recall that in Davos a nd recently in Paris, Ministers had instructed 
negotiators to present them with the difficult i ssues being faced in the negotiations as the year 
progressed, for political direction, with a view to ensuring a successful Sixth Ministerial Conference.  
In that context his delegation was confident that the Chairman was undertaking the necessary 
preparations together with the host of the Dalian mi ni-Ministerial, to ensure that that Ministerial 
gathering was taken advantage of, in order to continue to further progress overall. 
118. The representative of Thailand  said that her delegation agreed with the Chairman  that a sense 
of urgency was needed in order to speed up the negotiating process.  July was drawing near and 
Members were fast approaching the time to produ ce a document outlining the possible shape of the 
Hong Kong outcome.  Her delegati on believed that the outcome in July would augur success in Hong 
Kong.  Although the result in each area could not be  the same, by July, the overall work had to be 
substantially developed and indicat e a global balance.  Members could not wait to attain a balanced 
result at the end of the Round, rather they had to secu re the balance from July in order to be able to 
judge across the board whether they were on course for a significant outcome for Hong Kong.  From the present until July, the Chairs had to encourag e Members to interact more and embark upon 
substantive discussions with a view to having a clear understanding on key elements in the core issues 
like agriculture and NAMA.  Member s also had to design a roadmap to Hong Kong for other issues.   TN/C/M/18 
 Page 21 
 
 
 This roadmap had to give the membership conf idence that a substantial achievement would be 
attained in Hong Kong and that eventually a balance would be struck amongst all issues. 
119. Regarding the services negotiations, she said that  while her delegation was open to the idea of 
finding possible tools that could help Members conduct their individual assessments on the quality of the market access offers on the table, it observed that there was no mention of the assessment of 
progress on the rules side.  Thailand believed that it was also important to realistically assess the 
progress in the rules aspect of the services negotiations, if Members genuinely aimed for progress on both the market access and rules areas.  The two had to be assessed together.  In this connection, 
Thailand wished to congratulate Canada on its revi sed offer and hoped that more offers would be 
submitted so that eventually there was real progress in the market access area. 
120. In closing, she said that her delegation suppor ted Singapore on the issue of transparency.  
Although her delegation appreciated small group efforts to narrow down the divergences among 
Members, it believed that it was vital that everyone  was on board and that there was respect for the 
sense of ownership and the principles of transparency and inclusiveness. 
121. The representative of Peru
 said that her country had an unwavering commitment to ambitious 
results in each area of the Doha Work Programme so that all Members could obta in concrete benefits.  
In this respect, her delegation agreed with the Ch airman on the question of urgency and welcomed the 
political compromise at the latest mini-Ministeri al in Paris on the issue of AVEs which would 
undoubtedly create renewed confidence in the process.  However, this was only the first hurdle on the 
long path ahead and which should culminate with resu lts which allowed everyone to be winners.  Her 
delegation believed that this progress in agricultu re should enable progress not only in the three 
pillars, but also in NAMA, services, and rules, w ith a special emphasis on fishery subsidies and on an 
issue which was extremely important to her count ry under intellectual property which was being 
considered as an implementation issue. 
122. In the consultations carried out by the Friend of the Director-General on the relationship 
between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, a hi gh number of countries had underscored the 
importance of incorporating new requirements on di sclosure of origin, prior informed consent and 
access and distribution of benefits from resources associated or not to the traditional knowledge of 
indigenous peoples, as a condition and requirement for patentability.  Peru was convinced that this 
element in the negotiation could contribute to reba lancing the TRIPS Agreement, which currently did 
not respond effectively to many developing-count ry concerns, as could be seen by the growing 
number of cases of bio piracy, among other issues.   
123. As her delegation had pointed out in the consu ltations on the issue and at the informal TNC 
meeting in March, Peru's aim at the end of th e Round was the mandatory disclosure of origin of 
genetic resources and traditional knowledge as a requi rement for patentability.  In this respect, it 
believed that the first approximation, as well as the text to be presented at the Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong, should include this matter as a stand alone issue, with a clear mandate to resolve it and 
agreed modalities, time-frames and the various components that should be included.  This issue was a 
matter of priority for a large number of delegations  and should thus be included in the July first 
approximation with a view to achieving a specific manda te in Hong Kong.  In this respect, like India, 
Peru supported the Chairman's proposal to continue  with a process of consultations on the issue. 
124. The representative of Bolivia
 said that, with 30 working days left before the first 
approximation, a realistic approach was needed and her delegation agreed with the Chairman that the 
level of specificity would not be the same in all ar eas.  For Bolivia, the level of ambition for Hong 
Kong was constant, in particular with regard to  market access in agricu lture, NAMA and services, 
which should be complemented by progress and ra pidity in the negotiations on trade facilitation, 
where Bolivia was a contributor.  Her delegation also  wished to underline the efforts needed in the TN/C/M/18 
Page 22  
 
 area of implementation, in particular with regard  to intellectual property.  Her delegation welcomed 
the revised services offer by Canada and wished to  underline Bolivia's expectations for the announced 
improvements in mode 4 in these negotiations.  At this stage of the work, the rhythm of formal and informal meetings would have to be intensifie d, as well as consultations , and, like others, her 
delegation believed that inclusiveness and transparency  should be part of this process.  Finally, her 
delegation supported the proposal by India on the need to conduct an overall consideration of 
development issues if it was undertaken in the form of an assessment of progress within the 
parameters of the Doha Ministerial D eclaration and the July 2004 Decision. 
125. The representative of Chile
 associated his delegation with the statements by India and Hong 
Kong, China regarding the July first approximation.  He said that by the end of July, Members should 
not expect to have a negotiated text, but rather wh at he called a reality check, which would help in 
identifying problems and establish a roadmap for the remainder of the year in the lead up to Hong 
Kong.  It was his delegation's view  that balance should not  be sought in July, if Members were not 
going to have a negotiated outcome.  Rather, ba lance should be sought in Hong Kong.  It was his 
delegation's understanding that agriculture had to lead  the way.  He said that in the TNC meetings 
from the present until Hong Kong, Members should signal those areas which were lagging behind or 
where there were problems, otherwise the balance in Hong Kong might be affected. 
126. The representative of Barbados  said that he wished to take up the question of a development 
audit which India had raised on a number of occasion.  His delegation wondered whether consideration should not be given to getting a group together to assess the merits of the proposals and 
explore whether this was something that should be do ne and whether the time was right to do it now.   
127. His delegation had often heard expectations expressed concerning an ambitious, positive and 
balanced outcome and it wanted to be sure that  everyone continued to focus on a developmental 
outcome.  A lot of the areas in the negotiations tende d to go through gateways and yet never had there 
been a development gateway.  In a developmen t round, his delegation would have thought that 
development was a key gateway.  His delegation did not mind if this key gateway was explored at the 
end, or in the middle, but certainly in the beginning it was not being explored, and the idea of a 
development audit would help Members to focus on development in terms of  where and how it should 
be placed, based on the mandate from Doha.  His dele gation wished to support India and Bolivia that 
some consideration should be given to this issue. 
128. In closing the meeting, the Chairman
 highlighted a few points that had been made by 
delegations that he would take into account in his work as Members moved towards July.  First, many 
delegations had made suggestions on  what they would like to see in July, such as a clear roadmap, 
reflection of convergence and divergence, an integr ated approach, a development audit, TRIPS and 
Public Health and developmental outcomes.  From th ese and other remarks, he said that it seemed that 
many delegations expected to see a comprehensive pi cture by July, with a level of specificity that 
would help guarantee success in Hong Kong.  He would certainly leave no stone unturned in his 
approach for July so that it was a success. 
129. However, he wished to underline that all dele gations needed to engage in real negotiations, 
defending their positions of course, but with an ey e on moving them forward as soon as possible.  He 
said that if all he had from the negotiating group Ch airs were just progress reports, he would not have 
enough to be able to set out the kind of roadma p that would help, as Members moved towards Hong 
Kong.  He therefore urged everyone to engage and to move forward. 
130. Secondly, much had been said on agriculture.  He believed the Agriculture Chairman 
maintained his optimism on the three pillars for July .  Many had said that balance was needed among 
the pillars, but delegations needed to start w ith real negotiations on market access during the 
agriculture week starting 30 May.  Delegations had to confront the key issues and go into the details  TN/C/M/18 
 Page 23 
 
 
 of the formula and issues such as the treatment of sensitive products and Special Products.  He said 
the sooner this started, the better, and he hoped it would then provide momentum to other areas.  By 
the beginning of July, he hoped Members would have a clearer idea about expectations in all three 
pillars. 
131. Thirdly, he said that delegations needed now to  reinforce their work in NAMA.  Ministers had 
told him that, by July, they expected to have a clear idea of the tariff reduction formula and the 
flexibilities available to developing countries.  Although more political convergence might be needed 
on the overall level of ambition, wh ich he would continue to bring to the attention of Ministers, 
delegations needed to develop a ba lance between the levels of ambiti on in agriculture and NAMA.  If 
this was a graph, he hoped the tw o lines would intersect before July, because they had to intersect at 
some point.  He invited everyone to make every effo rt to achieve this so that he could identify not 
only the divergences, but also what was available to narrow the gaps when he talked to Ministers.  
Delegations also had to reflect on whether they needed  an equivalent level of specificity in agriculture 
and NAMA. 
132. Fourthly, on development, he said it was his belie f that everyone had been encouraged by the 
report of the Chairman of the CTD Special Sessi on and urged all delegations  to support him in his 
work on the Agreement-specific proposals submitted by  the LDCs.  However, Members needed more 
than that.  In July, they would need to see balan ced treatment of the development-related issues as 
mandated in the July 2004 Decision. 
133. Finally, as he had said earlier, he  would not announce the date of  the next TNC meeting at the 
present meeting, because he wished to reflect on the best format for work at the level of the TNC, 
keeping in mind the need for transparency and inclus iveness.  At this level, Members needed to bring 
all the issues together so as to a ll reach the same level of ambition, and this might mean engaging in 
more informal processes leading up to July. 
134. The Trade Negotiations Committee took note  of the statements. 
__________