RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  GPA/M/26 
13 April 2005 
 (05-1521) 
Committee on Government Procurement  
  
 
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 14 MARCH 2005 
 
Chairman:  Mr. Niklas Bergström (Sweden)
 
 
 
1. The Committee adopted  the following agenda, as outlin ed in Airgram WTO/AIR/2519 of 
25 February 2005: 
A. Election of Chairman for 2005 
 
B. Other Business. 
 A. 
ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN FOR 2005 
2. The Committee elected  Ambassador Tae-yul Cho (Korea) as its Chairman for 2005, with 
effect as of the end of the week. 
B. OTHER BUSINESS  
(i) Statement by Israel 
3. The representative of Israel  thanked all Parties of the GPA Committee for the constructive 
way in which they had dealt with the issue of offset s and Israel's needs in that regard.  The Decision 
taken by the Committee in December 20041 had given all Parties extra time to reflect on their needs 
regarding offset requirements and how the Agre ement on Government Proc urement should address 
this issue. 
4. Israel's statement to the Committee at the meeting of 17 November 20042 had outlined the 
main features of the structure of the Israeli economy  and the fact that the vast majority of firms in 
Israel were small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs) .  Studies undertaken for the preparation of that 
submission had generally shown that, due to their size, Israeli SMEs were effectively excluded from 
the government procurement tenders of other GPA Par ties.  Entering into the tenth year of Israel's 
participation in the GPA, his delegation was unde r the impression that government procurement 
markets were dominated by large corporations and fi rms.  Israeli authorities had recently decided to 
initiate a thorough research project in order to stud y the effects of participation in the GPA on the 
Israeli economy, in particular on Israel's trade balance, industry, employ ment and development. 
                                                      
1 GPA/83 of 17 December 2004. 
2 GPA/M/24, paras. 65-80. GPA/M/26 
Page 2  
 
5. Similarly to other Parties, Israel recognized  the importance of the GPA as an agreement 
securing more transparency and efficiency in procur ement processes.  At the same time, Israel also 
recognized that, when dealing with public needs a nd funding, all aspects and interests had to be duly 
addressed.  An agreement on government procurement th at did not reflect a balance of interests for all 
Parties would never be able to expand its member ship.  His delegation felt that the Committee should 
be aware of this reality and should put in place appr opriate instruments that w ould enable Parties with 
economies dominated by SMEs to benefit from the Agreement.  The use of limited and transparent 
offset requirements in government tenders was one ex ample of such an appropriate instrument.  As 
his delegation had explained several times, it view ed offsets as a means to facilitate industrial 
cooperation between world-class foreign bidders and capable local industry, to the benefit of both 
Parties.  At the same time, his delegation did no t exclude the possibility of using other instruments 
and mechanisms besides offsets. 
6. During the process of renegotiating the provisions of the Agreement on Government 
Procurement, the Committee had an opportunity and an obligation to deal with the inherent imbalance 
in the Agreement.  The Committee should not ignore the fact that membership  in the Agreement had 
remained virtually unchanged during the years.  By  incorporating the appropriate measures into the 
Agreement, the Committee would send a positive si gnal to WTO Members that had hitherto not 
joined this important Agreement.   Israel was working in this direction and was open to working 
together with other Parties in order to find cons tructive solutions to the current situation.  His 
delegation considered it to be essential to find su ch solutions, and hoped that all Parties understood 
the urgency of this issue for Israel and the Agreemen t in general, and would join Israel in trying to 
find an acceptable way to deal with the requirements of  Parties such as Israel with respect to offsets, 
so that a balanced Agreement could be achieved for all Parties. 
7. The Committee took note
 of the statement made by Israel. 
(ii) Future work with regard to negotiations pursuant to Article XXIV:7(b) and (c) 
8. The representative of the European Communities  said that the Committee had made much 
progress in the negotiations pursuant to Article XXIV :7(b) and (c) of the Agreement, and that it 
needed to maintain that momentum in order to fini sh the review of the text of the Agreement as soon 
as possible.  Parties should aim at finishing the re view of the text of the Agreement by summer 2005 
but, in any event, not later than October 2005 in view  of the Ministerial Conference to be held in 
Hong Kong, China at the end of 2005. 
9. The representative of the United States  agreed that Parties should aim to finish the revision of 
the text of the Agreement by the summer, although sh e noted that there were some issues that it might 
not be possible to resolve by that time.  With re gard to the overall timetable for the negotiations 
pursuant to Article XXIV:7, she emphasized the im portance of completing the negotiations no later 
than the end of 2006, in line with the scheduled co nclusion of the Doha Round.  Accordingly, while 
ideally the Committee would focus on market access negotiations after it had finished revision of the 
text, the text work was sufficiently advanced th at the two processes could proceed in parallel, if 
necessary. 
10. The representative of Japan  supported the proposals made by the representatives of the 
European Communities and the United States.  He not ed that the bilateral request/offer negotiations 
had now begun in earnest, and that without politi cal impetus no progress would be achieved in that 
process.  This was a reality of trade negotiations.  A realistic view had to be taken with regard to 
negotiations on the Agreement on Government Procurement.  GPA/M/26 
 Page 3 
 
 
11. The representative of Israel  said that he would convey the proposals of the European 
Communities and the United States to his authorities.  His delegation had some concerns in regard to 
making too strong a link with the Ministerial Conference to be held in Hong Kong, China as prior to the Conference most of his delegation's resour ces would be focused on preparations for the 
Conference and on the Doha Development Round, wh ich would accelerate towards July 2005 and in 
particular in the second half of 2005.  While r ecognizing the importance of the GPA negotiations, a 
small delegation like his could not necessarily keep up with the proposed pace of the negotiations. 
12. The representative of Korea
 agreed with the European Co mmunities, the United States and 
Japan as to the proposed schedule of work.  It  was reasonable to follow the timing of the DDA 
negotiations even if the renegotiation of the Agreem ent on Government Procurement was not part of 
the DDA. 
13. The representative of Canada  agreed that Parties should strive to complete the review of the 
text of the Agreement by summer 2005, while recognizing that this might not mean that Parties were able to reach an agreement on every single item as th ere were several that were linked to the outcome 
of the market access negotiations.  Accordingly, the Committee should have a renegotiated text by 
July, even if it included some issues that would need to be set aside pending the market access 
negotiations, as all Parties would by then have their resources focused on the upcoming Ministerial 
Conference.  As to the market access negotiations, which by 2007 would have been under way for a 
decade, she noted that the current  deadline was January 2006, and that the proposal by the United 
States constituted an extension of that timetable.   If the Committee believed that such additional time 
was needed, her delegation was prepared to agree to  that.  In any event, the Committee needed to 
redouble its efforts to produce a result in a suitable time-frame. 
14. The representative of Switzerland
 supported the proposals by the European Communities and 
the United States, and said that the proposed time-frame was reasonable. 
15. The representative of the European Communities  said that he was pleased to hear Parties' 
positive response to the proposed deadline of summer 2005 for completing the renegotiation of the 
text of the Agreement.  In response to the concerns  of Israel, he said that his delegation was willing to 
address any problem that Parties might raise during the renegotiation process.  He added that the proposal by the United States regarding the timing of the negotiations was understandable as it might 
be difficult to conclude the overall negotiations pu rsuant to Article XXIV:7 of the Agreement by 
January 2006, as foreseen in  the Decision on Modalities.
3  However, he suggested that, for the time 
being, the Committee make all possible efforts to meet that agreed deadline, and that if it arrived at a 
point where the situation had to be reassessed, th e Committee consider the proposal of the United 
States regarding a revised overall deadlin e of the end of 2006 at that stage. 
16. The representative of the United States  said that her delegation al so continued to favour the 
deadline of January 2006 for the overall completion of  the negotiations pursuant to Article XXIV:7 of 
the Agreement.  However, she pointed out the need to be realistic.  The Committee had failed to meet 
several deadlines over the years, and her delegation was of the view that all aspects of the negotiations 
pursuant to Article XXIV:7 of the Agreement had to be  completed at the very latest by the conclusion 
of the Doha Round.  She suggested that without a co mmitment to finish the negotiations by the end of 
the Doha Round;  it was not clear when the Comm ittee would be able to c onclude the negotiations. 
                                                      
3 GPA/79 of 19 July 2004. GPA/M/26 
Page 4  
 
17. The representative of the European Communities
 said that it fully agreed with the 
United States that the negotiations pursuant to Artic le XXIV:7 had to be completed by the end of the 
Doha Round at the very latest, that being the ultimate deadline. 
18. The Committee took note  of the proposals made by th e European Communities and the 
United States, and of the comments made by other Parties. 
(iii) Jordan's statement on its accession to the Agreement 
19. The representative of Jordan  said that, since the last meeting of the Committee, his delegation 
had worked hard to complete its second revised o ffer, which it had intended to submit prior to the 
current meeting.  Regrettably, his delegation had no t been able to finalize that offer, although it had 
made good progress in that direction: 
(a) His delegation had been working on the comments and questions raised at the last 
plurilateral consultations, and had respo nded to most of these in a positive way. 
(b) In the context of the deliberations of Jord an's National Committee, the private sector, 
in particular the pharmaceutical industry, the Chamber of Commerce, the Chamber of 
Industry and various contractors had e xpressed serious concerns regarding the 
possible negative impact of the Agreemen t on their businesses and on the Jordanian 
economy.  Additional discussions were necessary to address such concerns. 
(c) The issue of including in Jordan's second revised offer non-sensitive procurement by 
the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of the Interior had led to some complications, given the overlap between sen sitive and non-sensitive material.  This 
question was still under consideration by the relevant ministerial committee. 
(d) The legal status of the Aqaba Special Economic Zone also was not a straightforward 
issue, since there were multiple organizations involved in handling business in that zone.  This issue would be addressed by competent authorities and progress would be reported to the Committee. 
(e) A regional workshop on government proc urement had been organized by the WTO 
Secretariat and the Government of Jordan in Amman.  It was attended by more than 
50 delegates representing 19 Arab States and others from the region.  The Jordanian 
experience in acceding to the GPA had been presented and a number of Arab delegates had requested that workshops be held in their countries to further discuss 
the Jordanian experience. 
20. In the light of the above developments, it had turned out to be impossible to finalize and 
submit Jordan's second revised offer prior to the me eting.  Jordan looked forward to submitting the 
second revised offer to the Committee in the near futu re, once the official approval of the Government 
and other internal procedures had taken place, wh ich his delegation hoped would occur in the coming 
weeks.  As to the review of Jordanian government  procurement legislation, he said that the draft 
unified procurement law had been completed by th e relevant committee, and had been submitted to 
the Government prior to undergoing the relevant constitutional procedures. 
21. He concluded by mentioning that hi s delegation would take advantage of  its stay in Geneva to 
hold bilateral consultations with some interested Parties. 
22. The Committee took note
 of the statement made by Jordan. 
__________