RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG/M/46 
12 June 2007 
 (07-2463) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements 
Forty Sixth Session  
 
 
 
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 14-15 MAY 2007 
 
Chairman:  Mr.  J.  Metcalfe (United Kingdom ) 
 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The 46th Session of the Committee on Regional Trad e Agreements (hereinafter CRTA or the 
Committee) was convened in Airgram WTO/AIR/2993, dated 4 April 2007.  
2. The Chairman  announced that under "Other Business", he  wished to raise the issue of the 
sample factual abstracts which were sent to delegations by fax on 4 Ma y.  He would do this, initially, 
in informal session depending on progress.  
3. The following Agenda was adopted.  
A. Adoption of the Agenda 
B.  Consideration of Regiona l Trade Agreements (RTAs) 
I. Status report on the Committee's work 
II. Free Trade Agreement between Thailand and Australia, goods and services III. Closer Economic Partnership Agreement between Thailand and 
New Zealand, goods 
IV. Protocol on Trade in the Southern  African Development Community, goods 
V. Free Trade Agreement between Armenia and Moldova, goods  
C. Other Business 
 4. The Chairman
 recalled that the Latin American Integr ation Association (the LAIA) had been 
granted observer status to the CRTA on an ad hoc  basis and sought confirmation to extend an 
invitation to LAIA to attend the Committee's next meeting.  It was so agreed . 
 
B. CONSIDERATION OF REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS  
5. Before beginning the consideration of RTAs the Chairman  suggested that it might be a good 
idea to encourage parties to RTAs to revert back to capital with any unanswered questions during the 
course of the meeting.  He proposed  to give an opportunity to parties at the beginning of the following 
day's meeting to provide an oral response to ques tions.  This was not an obligation but a suggestion 
that might save the parties subsequent work.  Dele gations would, of course, still retain the option of 
providing a written question to which the parties w ould reply in writing.  But allowing an oral 
response on the next day could lead to a more i mmediate response which would be contained in the 
minutes of the meeting.  He also asked for Member s' indulgence on one agreement for which replies 
to questions had been distributed very recently.  He hoped that since this Agreement was due to be 
discussed towards the end of the meeting, all de legations would have ha d an opportunity to 
understand the answers that had been provided and th erefore the Agreement could be considered in WT/REG/M/46 
Page 2  
 
  the current session.  He also emphasized the impor tance of respecting the timetable envisaged under 
the Transparency Mechanism (henceforth TM) despite the difficulties, especially for small 
delegations.  If the TM was going to work as smoothly and constructively as possible, all Members should endeavour collectively to respect the timeta bles and he thanked them in advance for their 
cooperation. 
6. The representative of the United States
 thanked the Chairman fo r emphasizing the need for 
timely submission of replies and accepted the pro posal to consider the answers received recently 
towards the end of the meeting.  She believed it was important for her authorities to consider the 
replies, which, she noted from point 4 of the age nda, were supposed to have been provided at least 
three working days before the meeting.  The Unite d States was willing to be flexible, but requested 
that that particular agreement be considered on the last day of the meeting to give sufficient time for 
consideration of the answers. 
B.I.  Status report on the Committee's work 
 7. Under this item, the Chairman
 updated Members on the implementation of the TM.  He 
informed Members that the WTO website had been updated in English (French and Spanish 
translations were pending) and now included the fo llowing elements:  a list of early announcements 
made to the WTO, together with the text of the early announcement as submitted by the parties;  a 
proposed schedule for factual presentations showing the RTAs scheduled for the next CRTA meeting, 
together with document circulation deadlines which Members should pay particular attention to;  the 
list of RTAs in force showing whether a factual presen tation or factual abstract was to be prepared;  
and a proposed timeline for factual presentations in  the CRTA and CTD.  Some of these changes were 
already on the website, while others would be added in the next few da ys.  This information would be 
updated regularly by the Secretariat.  On behalf of Me mbers, he thanked the Secretariat for this work.    
He recalled that a work programme for the CRTA had been distributed to Members in March of this 
year, but unfortunately the Secretariat had inform ed him that there had been some difficulties in 
adhering to this work programme.  He gave the floor to the Secretariat for further details.   
8. A representative of the Secretariat  noted that, as had been found in the exercise of the Trade 
Policy Review Mechanism, it was a good idea for the Secretariat to keep Members informed about 
where the Committee stood, so that it knew the progress that was being made, and the stumbling 
blocks.  The fact that there were certain difficulti es was in a sense to be expected.  When a similar 
mechanism had been started for trade policy review s, there had also been considerable teething 
problems at the beginning.  He expected that it was possible to find a way to smooth those over, but 
the Secretariat needed to work very cl osely with the delegations involved.   
9. For the CRTA meeting scheduled for 23-25 July, the Secretariat had adequate data to be able 
to complete factual presentations on EFTA – Ch ile for goods and services, and on United States – 
Australia also for goods and services.  However, there were difficulties with regard to EFTA – 
Tunisia, where the Secretariat had received import tariff data from Switzerland and Norway;  for 
Tunisia the Secretariat had received tariff data fo r HS Chapters 25-97, but no tariff data for the 
remaining chapters and no import data;  from Icela nd, the Secretariat had received import data at the 
HS two-digit level, but as yet no tariff data.  That, unfortunately, meant that the Secretariat could not 
presently do that particular Factual Presentation for the July meeting as originally envisaged.  That 
Agreement had therefore been moved for consider ation at the following CRTA meeting scheduled for 
31 October – 2 November.   
10. Similar difficulties, perhaps somewhat more severe, were being faced with the Factual 
Presentation for EC – South Africa.  Although th e Secretariat had received import data and MFN 
tariffs from South Africa, import data from the EC had not been received.  While the MFN rates were 
available in the IDB, there was however a particul ar difficulty faced by the Secretariat which seemed  WT/REG/M/46 
 Page 3 
 
 
  to him to be somewhat contrary to the TM.  Th e EC and South Africa had submitted Annexes of the 
Agreement together with modifications to the Agr eement in Word and PDF format.  That meant that 
the Secretariat would need to undertake a consider able amount of work to transpose those into a 
usable database format, which it was not equipp ed to do.  Moreover, it would require actual 
transpositions, which was a legal exercise, for whic h the Secretariat was not equipped to make the 
appropriate decisions.  He therefore urged the Parti es to ensure the data was presented in a way that 
both Parties had agreed to and that could be used in  database format form, to allow the Secretariat to 
complete the Factual Presentation.   
11. There was a similar difficulty for the Factual Presentation for the RTA between the EC and 
Egypt.  Both of these agreements together with  the EFTA – Tunisia Agreement were now scheduled 
for consideration at the CRTA meeting in October-N ovember, but he warned that this had created a 
very considerable workload for that meeting of some 13 or 14 factual presentations.  He urged the 
Parties to make this data available to the Secretaria t so that it could get its work done.  The Secretariat 
would be happy to work with the Parties to see how this could be done and to come to some 
understanding on how this data might be presented.  However, if data was presented in Word format, 
the Secretariat was essentially not ab le to use it and would have to put in a considerable amount of 
effort, some of which might be subject to challenge, before it could be put into a Factual Presentation.  
He appealed to the Parties to work with the Secretariat to find a way to make this data available.   
12. Another issue was that although the Secretaria t was currently doing factual presentations on 
goods and on services separately, there was consid erable overlap in many of these cases.  The 
Secretariat was therefore looking into the possib ility of making a single factual presentation for such 
FTAs rather than to separate them out.  Were the Se cretariat to do so, it would consult with the parties 
concerned.  It would be more efficient, and would give a better overview to have one, rather than two, 
documents. 
13. The Chairman  thanked the Secretariat for its clarificati on.  It was clear to him that the success 
of the TM would be determined by the willingness of  Members to comply with their obligations.  He 
therefore urged Members to try and provide data in the requested formats.  He also urged Members to 
take up the Secretariat's offer of close collaborati on in order to resolve any outstanding technical 
difficulties which would inevitably arise as this issue was tackled.   
14. The representative of the United States  said she looked forward to seeing what the Secretariat 
had in mind in terms of merging the goods and ser vices factual presentations and took comfort that it 
would be on a case-by-case basis, and when it made sense.  For example, provisions of an agreement 
might be incorporated by reference, but the distin ctiveness of the obligations and of the facts needed 
to be maintained.  The United States looked forward to continuing working with the Secretariat in the 
context of its Agreements, but this was something that  needed to be on an ad hoc experimental basis. 
15. The Chairman  proposed to move to another topic u nder the TM.  Paragraph 21 of the TM 
provided for the Secretariat to establish and main tain an updated electronic database which would 
include relevant tariff and trade-relate d information.  This database need ed to be structured so as to be 
easily accessible to the public.  As mentioned in th e fax sent on 4 May, the Secretariat proposed to 
make a short presentation on the first phase of the de velopment of the RTA information system and he 
invited the Secretariat to do so. 
16. A representative of the Secretariat  stated that right after the Decision had been taken, indeed 
even before the Decision to provisionally implement the TM had been taken, it had formed an ad hoc  
working group within the Secretariat including the Statistics section in the Economic Research and 
Statistics Division (ERSD).  The working group was ch aired jointly by the Directors of the ERSD and 
Trade Policies Review Division (TPRD) and consiste d of senior members of the Statistics Section and 
the RTA Section.  The group also included people from the Informatics Division to help with the WT/REG/M/46 
Page 4  
 
  programming.  Advice from other Divisions would also be taken, as necessary, particularly the 
Information and Media Relations Division (IMRD) wh en it came to putting it on to the internet.  
Considerable progress had been made.  The Secretaria t needed to have a very good idea of what at 
least phase one was going to look like and the presen tation would allow Members also to know what 
was being done.  The Secretariat had also estimated  the cost of phase one and knew how it would like 
to expand this database into phase two to make it a fully functionally research type database for those 
who might want to use it as such.  
17. Another representative of the Secretariat
 explained that access to the database would be 
through the WTO's webpage on Regional Trade Agreem ents.  The database would allow the retrieval 
of information on RTAs notified to the GATT and th e WTO in four different ways;  by Member;  by 
criteria, allowing a dynamic search on all notified RTAs;  by agreement;  and by pre-defined report 
(such as by notified RTAs in force, by data of entry into force, by examination status etc).   A search 
by Member would take the user to a world map, which would allow selection either through a list of 
countries, or by clicking on the country directly on the map.  Selecting Chile on the world map, for example, would lead to a webpage on Chile which would list all notified RTAs to which Chile was a 
Party, as well as relevant WTO documents.  Among the other relevant WTO documents, one would 
find the trade profile giving all the trade indicators available in the WTO;  the latest Trade Policy Review (TPR), and also the MFN or the bound tariff pr ofile available in the WTO.  The country page 
would also give details, and allow consultation, of all notified RTAs that Chile was a Party to.  For 
example, information on the RTA between Chile a nd the Republic of Korea, would include "the 
ID card" which would contain comprehensive fact ual information on the Agreement, and tariff and 
trade data which would give all the RTA tariff and tr ade data provided by the Parties to the RTA.  The 
ID card gave basic information including the title of the RTA, the signatories, the WTO Articles it 
was notified under etc.  It would also give a link to the official website and to the text and relevant 
annexes as notified to the WTO.   All the WTO docum ents related to the particular RTA in question 
would also be available including through a link to WTO documents-on-line, factual examinations 
and factual presentations, as relevant.  Another usef ul part of the database would link to individual 
regulatory provisions in the agreement, such as for exam ple, rules of origin, etc.  The list of provisions 
could be expanded.  
18. The second element of the database included tari ff and trade data which would allow users to 
access directly the RTA tariff and trade data that ha d been provided by the Members themselves.  In 
the case of the RTA between Chile and the Republic of  Korea, this would be the tariff schedules and 
trade data provided by the Parties for the Factual Presentation on the RTA.   
19. The second way to access the information would be to go directly to the agreement which 
would again direct the user to the ID Card and tari ff and trade data.  The third way would be to search 
by criteria, such as whether the agreement was a customs union, an FTA or an economic integration 
agreement, the date of entry in to force, the composition of the RTA, whether it was bilateral or 
plurilateral, whether it was cross-regional, wh ether there was a WTO factual presentation and 
regulatory provisions.  For example, a search by agre ement that could be an FTA or an EIA, which 
entered into force in 2005 or 2004, which was b ilateral, cross regional, which had a WTO factual 
presentation and had regulatory pr ovisions on TBT, SPS and intellect ual property but not global 
safeguards would result in a list of all the agreemen ts meeting these criteria, which would then again 
provide the same ID card and tariff and trade data as  before.  Finally, a search could also be done by 
pre-defined report such as agreements by date of entr y into force, by examination status, by type of 
agreement etc. 
20. The first representative of the Secretariat
 explained that it was now at the stage of building the 
functional specifications for each of the pages th at had been presented to allow easy access.  
Following this, consultants would need to be hired to  write the software.  The Secretariat expected the 
current work to be completed within the next y ear which should allow phase one of the database to  WT/REG/M/46 
 Page 5 
 
 
  become available by that time.  He had no doubt that it would be the master database on RTAs 
available anywhere and would supply Members with a ve ry rich source of information.  It would give 
Members everything that had been presented to the Secretariat, and in a fully-searchable form.  The 
data added in phase one would be th e data that had been supplied to the Secretariat by Members, and 
would, unless constantly updated, become obsolete re latively quickly.  It would give a picture of an 
RTA at the moment it actually went into force or was notified to the WTO.  Phase two would involve 
working together with Members, as was also provi ded for in the TM, to keep the information updated 
and to add analytical data so that the data could be worked with to enable answ ers to questions such as 
to the amount of trade creation, trade diversion th at resulted from a particular RTA, the interaction 
between the regulatory structures and the trade flows etc.  The Secretariat anticipated that phase two 
would take no more than a year thereafter, and r esult in a  database that would allow very serious 
work to be undertaken on the functional operatio n of RTAs, how they were developing and for 
Members on their own to be able to come to an understanding of how RTAs co mplement or otherwise 
the multilateral trading system.   
21. The cost of phase one was estimated at no mo re than CHF 160,000, which he believed was 
relatively cheap at the price.  Financing for ph ase one, which was currently being looked at, was 
available.  For 2007, this would come from the current WTO budget.  The budget for 2008 would need to take into account at the least the second pa rt of phase one covering work to be done over the 
beginning of 2008.  He believed that this was also in hand, but wanted to be fully transparent with 
Members and to let them know exactly where things stood.   
22. The Chairman
 thanked the Secretariat for the presentation.  He believed it was a rather 
impressive exercise and one he was sure would be wa rmly welcomed by all Members.  He opened the 
floor to any delegations wishing to ask questions on the Secretariat's presentation noting that the issue 
of cost would perhaps best be left for the Budget Committee. 
23. The representative of Chinese Taipei  expressed appreciation for the Secretariat's work on the 
database which he believed would be very helpfu l for understanding the current agreements.  He 
wondered if the demonstration by the Secretariat would be available to the Members as it would be 
useful for his colleagues in Chin ese Taipei to see the demonstration so that more opinions could be 
collected and reflected upon.  Regarding the conten t he asked whether the search by criteria would 
allow a horizontal comparison across agreements, for example of competition provisions.  In addition, 
he wondered whether a horizontal search across agr eements was also possible according to product, 
for example Korea in this particular case extending different tariff treatment under different RTAs.  
He believed such a comparison across RTAs would be very useful.  
24. The representative of the United States  agreed that based on this initial presentation, the 
Secretariat had been working very hard to create the kind of database she believed Members had had 
in mind when negotiating the TM – something that  would be user-friendly and would not require 
businesses to be calling government officials all th e time for the information.  This looked like a 
one-stop shop kind of situation and it was exactly wh at the United States had in mind – at least based 
on the presentation.  Regarding other elements of th e TM, she asked about the Secretariat's experience 
with the early announcement provisions and whethe r these were on the database.  The United States 
had not wanted to bombard the Secretariat with information about the Agreements it was negotiating 
that would fall under the non-notification provisions of the TM such as the early announcement.  If that aspect of the TM was functioning, she, a nd perhaps other Members, would like to know.  
Regarding phase two she believed that the data base was supposed to be based on information 
submitted by Members, so before anything along the lines of phase two was pursued, the United 
States would want to know exactly what was being contemplated and did not really see the basis for 
analytical work being pursued in the context of a database.  She was interested in others' views and 
from the Secretariat.   WT/REG/M/46 
Page 6  
 
  25. The representative of Canada
 agreed that the presentation was quite impressive and very 
complete.  Phase one, he felt, seemed to be what Memb ers had agreed to, so he was very pleased with 
it.  He would, however, strongly caution against th inking about additions which might depart from the 
more factual elements of a database to other in formation that might put Members in a slightly 
uncomfortable position given the legal rules that app lied to Members' obligations on RTAs.  He also 
understood that as required under the Decision of th e General Council, the database would be public.  
Did the Secretariat therefore envisage that restricted documentation would be on the database and would that prevent public access – at least to those part s of the database that were restricted?  He also 
asked whether information on RTAs under negotiati on that had been notified to the WTO under the 
early announcement provision of the TM was eas ily accessible by the public and other Members.  
26. The representative of the Secretariat
 informed Members that shou ld they wish to receive a 
copy of the presentation on the database, they sh ould contact the RTA Section which would send 
them a copy by email.  Regarding the questi on from the representative of Chinese Taipei, the 
horizontal comparison by provision would certainly  be possible in phase one.  Different tariff 
treatment, however, was a little bit more difficult at  present, and could be envisaged under phase two.  
With regard to phase two, he confirmed, as noted  by the representatives of the United States and 
Canada, that the Secretariat would have to consu lt with Members and see exactly how to do it.  The 
Secretariat did not intend to have anything on the da tabase that would be confidential or restricted and 
was aware that it needed to be available to the pub lic as part of the TM.  The Secretariat would be 
very careful to make sure that none of the info rmation that was on the database would compromise the 
position of Members vis-à-vis  each other.  So, the data would be the data that was fully available to 
everyone without being confidential.  With rega rd to the questions on early announcements, these 
were already available on the RTA website.  
27. The Chairman  asked if there were any other points th at delegations wished to raise on the 
presentation.  He then proposed to conclude this part  of the meeting by thanking the Secretariat for its 
work and asking it to continue its endeavours. 
B.II.-V.  (The minutes of the consideration of the Ag reements listed under agenda items B.II-V are 
being distributed as separate documents.) 
28. The representative of  Chile  had a question relating to procedure.  Since the next meetings of 
the CRTA were expected to cover two agreements signed by Chile he wanted to know whether the 
process envisaging reverting back to outstanding r esponses 24 hours later to a llow Parties to consult 
with their capitals, would apply to all consider ations.  He thought that the proposal was good as it 
helped to determine the size of the delegation a ttending the meeting, but he did not know how it 
would work for the last agreement on the agenda which could not benefit from the 24 hour period.  
29. The Chairman  stated he had made it clear that in orde r to expedite the work of the Committee, 
it would be helpful if time was available for delegatio ns to clarify points with their capitals overnight.  
He had also emphasized that that was not an obligation, but a voluntary process to enable the 
Committee to conclude discussions.  The procedure fo r an agreement being considered on the last day 
of the meeting may have to be different.  
30. The representative of the United States  asked whether a further exchange of questions and 
answers would take place outside the framework of the CRTA and if it would be reflected in a new 
questions and replies document or si mply in the minutes.  The Chairman  replied that it probably made 
sense for these to form part of the minutes, so that  they were freely and transparently available to all 
other Members.   WT/REG/M/46 
 Page 7 
 
 
  31. The representative of the United States  noted it was not the practice to include things not said 
in the meeting in the minutes.  She understood that the additional information provided by parties in addition to oral responses at the meeting would not be reflected in the minutes.   
32. The Chairman
 wondered whether it would be sensible for the Secretariat to circulate the 
additional documentation so that it was available to Members. 
33. The representative of Thailand  believed that the details he had given orally on the APEC 
non-binding principles on government procurement were sufficient for him for the record of the meeting. 
34. The representative of the European Communities
 stated one possibility was to wait for the 
minutes to be issued, while bilateral contact with th e parties could be continued to confirm that the 
information exchanged orally was correct and not misi nterpreted.  Alternatively, more time could be 
given to clarify any outstanding issues and conclude in the current session.  
35. The Chairman  suggested that the Committee conclude in  the session, but informally ask the 
parties concerned to continue to exchange bilatera l information, and the Committee could revert at a 
subsequent meeting once the minutes of the current discussion were available.  If in the next 16 hours, 
the parties and other delegations wanted to come back  and insisted on written circulation of answers and 
questions, the discussion could be reopened.  Otherw ise, he suggested that the Committee could take 
note of all of the comme nts made and deem consideration of  the agreement to be complete. 
36. The representative of the United States  did not have a problem with leaving the discussion 
open until the end of the meeting but did not want to  prolong the consideration if the exchange of 
written questions and answers went on for a long period.  She suggested therefore to keep the 
discussion open until the end of the current session, and leave any outstanding  issues up to bilateral 
meetings.  
37. The representative of th e European Communities  believed that the success of the TM would 
be measured by the fact that the process was concl uded quickly with the quality of the input that the 
Secretariat and the Parties had provided.  Ther e was no reason not to conclude discussion on any 
particular agreement in the current session.  The only question was whether or not Members raising 
questions should be required to say that the in formation provided was good enough or whether they 
would be given a bit more time to consider the responses.  
38. The representative of the United States  believed that giving the Parties a few hours to clarify 
answers bilaterally seemed not to be against the spirit of the TM.  But to suddenly burden countries with having to produce a lot of paper would be of co ncern.  So, she supported the suggestion of allowing 
a few hours for Members to clarify out standing questions bilaterally.  
39. The Chairman
 said he was happy to extend consideration for a few hours or a couple of days.  
He believed that a high degree of consensus had been reached to conclude consideration before the end of the current session of the Committee.  If that could be done by providing the parties and interested 
delegations with additional time to resolve their issu es, then he was happy to proceed on that basis.  
However, he did not know how quickly  the parties could exchange their written questions and answers.  
If the parties could come back by the end of the se ssion with responses in wr iting, the Committee would 
have to make a judgement as to whether there had be en time sufficient for the parties to put down on 
paper what they had already exchanged orally.  
40. The representative of the United States
 did not think there was need for approval from the 
Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) and asked for confirmation that the documents on the 
consideration would be pr ovided to the CTG and placed on the WTO website at the same time.  She WT/REG/M/46 
Page 8  
 
  noted that paragraph 13 of the TM required all the ma terials relating to the consideration of a RTA to 
be promptly circulated in all WTO official languages and made available on the WTO website. 
41. The Chairman
 confirmed that the material would be placed on the WTO website as soon as 
was practical.  There was no question about ge tting approval from the CTG but details of the 
consideration would be tran smitted to it as information. 
42. The representative of Canada  asked what form the report to the CTG would take.  It was his 
understanding, based on previous discussions and info rmal meetings, that this would be a periodic 
summary of the activities of the CRTA to the CTG or Committee on Trade in Services (CTS). 
43. The Chairman  said he thought this would involve sending the Factual Presentation, the 
questions and replies and the minutes of the meeti ng to the CTG and to the website simultaneously. 
44. The representative of the United States  wondered if it was necessary to send all the 
information to the Council. 
45. The representative of Brazil  said his delegation was not comfortable with a statement on 
whether transparency would be deemed to have been  achieved at the current session or at a later date.  
His understanding of paragraph 11 of the TM was that the Committee c onsider transparency and there 
would be no need to deem the cons ideration to be completed or fini shed.  He believed that Members 
would be more comfortable with a statement that tr ansparency had been considered at the meeting and 
that Members took note of that.  Members would, of  course, have the opportunity to discuss this more 
thoroughly in the appropriate fora.  He also noted that his comments related to general procedural and 
systemic concerns and not to any specific agre ement being considered in the current session. 
46. The representative of the United States  also noted the concern raised earlier that the questions 
and answers could not go on forever and hold up consid eration of the agreement.  She believed that 
Members would feel more comfortable if it was stat ed that there was no need for a further meeting 
and deadlines were provided for receipt of questions and replies.  She also believed that the issue 
needed to be clarified between Members, probably in the Negotiating Group on Rules. 
47. The Chairman  confirmed that although there was no suggestion of a further oral discussion 
after the meeting to consider an agreement, th e TM provided for a final exchange in writing of 
questions and answers.  His remarks at the comple tion of a consideration gave deadlines for a final 
exchange of written questions and answers.  He conf irmed that there was provision for a review of the 
TM, which would take place in the Negotiating Group on Rules.  If there were doubts they should be 
discussed in that group. 
C. OTHER BUSINESS  
 
48. Under this agenda item, the Chairman  briefly summarized what had been agreed in the 
informal session to discuss the factual abstracts prepared by the Secretariat.  The Committee had 
expressed its appreciation to the Secretariat and to the Parties who were the subject of the factual abstracts.  There was a wide consensus that th ese were along the right lines and were helpful and 
useful.  There were some differences on whether they should contain up-to-date information and it 
had been decided, at the Chair's initiative, that th ere should be no such information.  But there was 
also agreement that the information contained in the additional information column was useful and 
would be retained as a standard, at least for the time be ing, subject to a review in three months or so.  
The Chairman was pleased that the CRT A had been able to cover so much  work in such a short time.  
That was a tribute to three features:  the quality of the factual presentations and abstracts prepared by 
the Secretariat;  the diligence and effort with whic h the Parties had their Agreements subjected to 
consideration and the speed with which they had been  able to turn around many of the queries put to  WT/REG/M/46 
 Page 9 
 
 
  them;  and the very constructive spirit of all delega tions.  He recalled the Secretariat's concerns about 
the ability to keep to the Committee's timetable.  In  part that was a teething problem, and related to 
the difficulties of Members being able to submit th e relevant information within a timetable that 
enabled the Secretariat to process that data a nd produce the paperwork according to the agreed 
timeframe.  On the other hand, the Committee had been able to complete three days work in two days.  
He suggested that rather than having three three-da y meetings during the year, it might make more sense 
to have four two-day meetings, thus spreading th e burden on both Members and the Secretariat.  This 
might be a better way to get through the work programme as originally set out by the Secretariat.  This 
would require the Committee identifying a further two da ys to meet assuming that the next meetings in 
July and October-November would also be for two days each.  He also took the opportunity to address 
a question raised by the United States on the estim ated time to be taken to process all the factual 
abstracts.  The Secretariat had estimated completion of the abstracts by the end of the summer, the exact timing depending on getting additional resources. 
49. The representative of the United States
 said that the end of the summer sounded like a 
reasonable estimate for the completion of the factua l abstracts with the understanding that it would not 
require additional budgetary res ources.  The United States was also  pleased that the quality of the 
factual presentations had provided a boost to transparency not just for Members but also in the future on the website.  However, her delegation remained a little uncomfortable about the procedures of the 
Committee and perhaps there needed to be more consultation with other Members to ensure efficient 
public access.  Her delegation was happier to meet fe wer times or for fewer days.  The representative 
of Chile had raised an important point about givi ng countries time to consider questions overnight.  
Just as with the TPR, it might be helpful to sche dule a period for countries to consider questions 
making sure that there would be an opportunity for the third or the last set of parties to the review to have a chance overnight to come back with furthe r information.  The United States believed that this 
enhanced transparency and obviated the need fo r a written exchange and opened up issues for other 
Members to discuss as well.  Condensing the meeting in to two days therefore may be a concern if one 
wanted to give this opportunity to all RTA parti es to come back with some helpful comprehensive 
responses that benefited the membership and the public.   
50. The representative of Australia
 remarked that having gone thr ough this process for the first 
time, Australia's experience was that it was quite intense.  Although the number of questions was not 
extensive, they all had had to be checked with the relevant agencies in capita l which had taken time.  
Australia had been lucky that the answers had been provided quickly.  However, in a situation with a 
larger number and more complex questions, and a mo re dense bureaucracy, it might be more difficult.  
The TPR example was a good one where there was  a meeting over two days with a day in between to 
allow delegations to get responses ready.  He belie ved it would be a real advantage if the CRTA could 
maximize the amount of time delegations  had to consult with their capitals. 
51. The Chairman  noted the points raised and agreed that having an opportunity for the parties to 
consult overnight had made a significant contribu tion to the success of the consideration by the 
CRTA, and he was glad that the Committee had taken that initiative and should try to preserve it.  The model of the TPR body was one that Members shoul d be looking at although that could impose an 
additional burden, especially on sma ll delegations.  However,  he would reflect on the suggestions.  He 
was also open to informal consultations on procedur al issues.  He was aware that there were some 
issues, which he hoped could be ironed out either form ally or informally.  However, there were some 
fundamental issues which probably needed to go back to the Negotiating Group on Rules who were 
ultimately the architects of the TM.  He thanked a ll the Members for their comments, and in particular 
the interpreters for their contribution.  52. The Committee took note
 of the comments made. 
 
__________