RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/GC/M/129 
16 February 2011 
 (11-0794) 
General Council 
14 December 2010  
 
 
 
MINUTES OF MEETING 
 
Held in the Centre William Rappard  
on 14 December 2010  
 
Chairman:  Mr John Gero (Canada) 
 
 
 In the course of the meeting,  the Chairman and delegations bade farewell to Ambassadors 
who were leaving their posts at the WTO, and expr essed appreciation for their valuable contribution 
during their time as Permanent Represent ative of their respective delegations. 
 
Subjects discussed1:  Page  
 
1. Transparency for Preferential Trade Arrangements – Draft Decision ...............................2  
2. Report by the Chairman of th e Trade Negotiati ons Committee ..........................................6  
3. Work Programme on Small Economies................................................................................17  
(a) Report by the Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the Committee on Trade and 
Development.................................................................................................................... .........17  
(b) Graduation of Maldives from LDC status  on 1 January 2011 – Communication from 
Maldives....................................................................................................................... .............18  
4. Follow-up to the 1 August 2004 General Council Decision and the Hong Kong 
Ministerial Declaration on the Doha Work Programme – Statement by the Director-General on the development assistance aspects of cotton....................................20  
5. Work Programme on Electronic Co mmerce – Review of progress ...................................21  
6. Review under Paragraph 8 of the Decision on the Implementation of 
Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaratio n on the TRIPS Agreement and Public 
Health – Report of the Council for TRIPS ...........................................................................23  
7. Accessions ..................................................................................................................... ...........27  
(a) WTO Accessions: 2010 Annual Report by the Director-General – Statement by 
Director-General ............................................................................................................... ........27  
(b) Accession priorities for 2010 in respect of LDCs – Communication from Zambia on 
behalf of the LDC Group ........................................................................................................ ..27 
8. Amendment to the procedures leading to the Certification of HS2002 changes 
– Draft decision ............................................................................................................... ........36  
9. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration – Report of the 
Committee on its meetings of  November and December 2010............................................37 
                                                     
 
1 The Proposed Agenda was circulated in document WT/GC/W/628/Rev.1. WT/GC/M/129 
Page 2  
 
  10. Waivers under Article IX of  the WTO Agreement..............................................................39  
(a) Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 changes into WTO schedules of tariff 
concessions – Draft decision................................................................................................... ..40 
(b) Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 changes into WTO schedules of tariff 
concessions – Draft decision................................................................................................... ..40 
(c) Review of waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement ......................................40  
(i) Kimberley process certification scheme for rough diamonds, granted on 
15 December 2006 until 31 December 2012 ............................................................................40  
(ii) Canada – CARIBCAN, granted on 15 December 2006 until 31 December 2011 ....................40  
(iii) Cuba – Article XV:6 of GATT 1994,  granted on 15 December 2006 until 
31 December 2011 ............................................................................................................... .....40  
11. Review of WT O activities....................................................................................................... 41 
(i) General Council, Dispute Settlement B ody, and Trade Policy Review Body ...........................41  
(ii) Sectoral Councils.............................................................................................................. ........41  
(iii) Committees on Trade and Environment, Ba lance-of-Payments Restrictions  and 
Budget, Finance and Administration ........................................................................................41  
(iv) Working Groups on Trade, Debt and Finance  and Trade and Transfer of Technology..........41  
(v) Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements .............................................................41  
12. Appointment of Officers to WTO Bodi es – Announcement by the Chairman 
pursuant to Paragraph 7.1(a) of the Guidelines...................................................................47  
13. Chairmanship of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and 
Development – Statemen t by the Chairman.........................................................................47  
14. Administrative Measures for Members in arrears – Statement by the 
Chairman....................................................................................................................... ..........48  
ANNEX – Statements by delegations at the informal meeting of the Trade Negotiations 
Committee on 30 November 2010.................................................................................................. .....49  
 
 
1. Transparency for Preferential Trade Arrang ements – Draft Decision (WT/COMTD/71) 
1.
 The Chairman  recalled that in December 2006, the Council had adopted a Decision with 
regard to Transparency for Preferential Trad e Arrangements, under which the Committee on Trade 
and Development had been asked to consider transparency for preferential arrangements under 
paragraph 2 of the Enabling Clause – other than RTAs  – and to report back for appropriate action by 
the General Council.  The Decision had been adopted without prejudice to the results of the deliberations of the CTD.  He also recalled that, at  the Council's October meeting, the Chairman of the 
CTD had reported that the CTD's consideration of this matter, which had be gun in early 2007 based 
on the mandate given by the General Council, had b een concluded.  At its October meeting the CTD 
had approved a text on a transparency mechanism for PTAs and had agreed to transmit the text, 
contained in WT/COMTD/71, to the Council with a recommendation for adoption.  He had also noted 
that some Members had yet to complete their intern al procedures in order to allow the Mechanism to 
be adopted.  The Council Chairman understood that these internal procedures were now completed. 
2. All Members who spoke expressed their appreci ation for the dedication, assistance and 
tireless efforts of the CTD Chair and his predecessor and for the constructive engagement and 
flexibility Members had shown in the negotiation of this mechanism.   
3. The representative of the European Union
 expressed his delegation's satisfaction that a final 
agreement on the PTA Transparency Mechanism had been reached.  All had worked hard and been  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 3 
 
 
  actively engaged in the negotiations which had finally delivered an outco me satisfactory to all.   The 
EU trusted that this new Mechanism would increase the transparency of the functioning of PTAs and 
their impact and interaction with the multilateral tr ading system.  The EU wished to recall that as 
agreed by the Parties, a decision on the permanent application of this Mechanism would take into 
consideration the status of the Transparency M echanism for Regional Trade Agreements which had 
been adopted by the General Council in December 2006. 
4. The representative of India  said his country was one of the initial proponents of the PTA 
Transparency Mechanism.  It was gratifying that f our years of negotiations had finally culminated in 
the text contained in WT/COMTD/71 which was re ady for adoption by the Council.  As Members 
were aware, in its decision of 14 December 2006 (WT/L/672), the General Council had invited the 
CTD to consider transparency for PTAs under paragr aph 2 of the Enabling Clause, other than RTAs, 
and to report back for appropriate action.  The last  four years had witnessed numerous iterations of the 
text and a mock Factual Presentation based on the US GSP Scheme.  His delegation recalled that during the negotiations on the PTA Transparency M echanism, it had been cons idered that a decision 
on its permanent application would take into account the RTA Transparency Mechanism.  Though the 
number of proponents had increased during these years, it would be wrong to attribute the success of 
the negotiations on the PTA Transparency Mechanis m to the proponents alone.  The negotiations had 
been an inclusive process, and the interest shown by  Members was reflected in the fact that the small-
group informal meetings called by the Chair had no longer been small.  The PTA Transparency 
Mechanism was now the property of the General C ouncil.  His delegation wished to specifically 
acknowledge the contribution of the Secretariat, in  particular the Development Division, the CRTA 
section and the statisticians.  The entire process had b een guided by the able chairmanship of the CTD 
Chair and his predecessor.  While the RTA Transp arency Mechanism was considered one of the 
concrete outcomes of the Doha mandate, the PTA Transparency M echanism was an outcome of a 
General Council decision.  The message was cl ear that Members accorded high priority to 
transparency as a systemic issue, and there w as a common desire to understand the workings of 
regional and preferential trade arrangements.  The two Mechanisms would no doubt strengthen the 
WTO. 
5. The representative of China
 associated his delegation with the statements by the EU and 
India.  As a co-sponsor, China was pleased to wi tness that through nearly four years of painful 
negotiations, the mechanism aimed at enhanc ing Members' understanding and increasing the 
transparency of PTAs was finally being adopted .  China had very much enjoyed the close 
collaboration with Brazil, India and the US.  The whole process had clearly demonstrated Members' 
firm resolve to enhance transparency and promote the multilateral trading syst em.  His country looked 
forward to the early and faithful implementation of this Mechanism and recalled that during the 
negotiations on it, it had been considered that a deci sion on its permanent application would take into 
account the status of the RTA Transparency Mechanism. 
6. The representative of El Salvador  said her delegation supported the transparency Members 
were seeking through this Mechanism for the be tter understanding of PTAs.  This mechanism had 
stemmed from consultations in the CTD.  Members had been able to achieve an instrument that 
promoted transparency and did not discourage the formation of new PTAs.  The Mechanism would be efficient and practical.  For example, PTAs would not be subject to notifications, presentations and 
examinations that were redundant.  Very often, PTA s were related to aspects that were indirectly 
connected to trade, such as human ri ghts and illegal trafficking of weapons, inter alia .  In this regard, 
Members should focus their efforts and discussions in  order to maintain the work of the CTD as one 
of the bodies making up the WTO.  She wished to confirm her country's willingness to participate in the work of the CTD for the implementation of this  mechanism, which would enable all Members to 
hold discussions based on the scope and functioning of the multilateral trading system established by 
the WTO Agreements. WT/GC/M/129 
Page 4  
 
  7. The representative of Egypt
 thanked the CTD Chair for his re port.  Egypt also wished to 
acknowledge his efforts and the role of the delegations of Brazil, China, India and the United States in 
devising the terms of reference for the PTA Transpar ency Mechanism.  This Mechanism would be an 
addition to enhancing the transparency procedur es and requirements of non-reciprocal preferences 
accorded to developing and least-developed countries.   In this regard, his delegation wished to stress 
the central role the CTD would play in implemen ting the Mechanism, and its congruent role in 
enhancing the transparency of RTAs notified on th e basis of the Enabling Clause.  Moreover, Egypt 
recalled that paragraph 4 of the te rms of reference of the CTD entrus ted it to "consider any questions 
which may arise with regard to either the app lication or the use of special provisions in the 
multilateral trade agreements and related Minister ial decision in favour of developing-country 
Members".  As such, Egypt looked forward to the adoption of the Mechanism and its application on a 
provisional basis. 
8. The representative of Switzerland  said his delegation endorsed the statements by the 
proponents who sought to take into account th e developed experiences stemming from the 
transparency mechanisms on PTAs and RTAs.  Th is link was essential for systemic reasons.  
Moreover, it was impossible to appreciate the effect of such agreements on world trade flows without 
also examining other applicable agreements.  Su ch an overview was essential to pinpointing the 
relationship between multilateral rules and rules established under preferential or regional trade 
agreements.  The two transparency mechanisms were  therefore two sides of the same coin.  This 
needed to be taken into account in future reviews of the transparency which Members were seeking to 
implement provisionally now. 
9. The representative of Japan  expressed his delegation's support for the adoption of this 
Mechanism by the General Council.  RTAs a nd PTAs were exceptions from the MFN treatment 
stipulated in the WTO Agreement.  In this re gard, Japan recognized th at the enhancement of 
transparency was essential to strengthening the multila teral trading system.  With regard to RTAs, 
Members had already established a transparency mechanism on a provisional basis four years earlier.  
On the other hand, the establishment of the tr ansparency mechanism for PTAs had been a long-
standing agenda item in the CTD.  This new mechan ism would play an important role in enhancing 
transparency.  Japan would cooperate to implemen t the Mechanism while taking into consideration 
the need to avoid the duplication of work already done by UNCTAD.  On the other hand, negotiations to make permanent the RTA Transpar ency Mechanism were also going on in the context of the Rules 
negotiations.  Japan understood that all the Members were basically in support of a permanent RTA 
Transparency Mechanism, but that details needed to be worked out.  The present adoption of the PTA 
Transparency Mechanism should give Members further impetus to make progress in the RTA 
Transparency Mechanism negotiations with a view to arriving at a conclusion at an early stage. 
10. The representative of Brazil
 expressed his delegation's deep satisfaction with the adoption of 
the PTA Transparency Mechanism.  Brazil was convin ced that this Mechanism would be instrumental 
in enhancing Members’ understanding of the many ex isting PTAs.  It would also provide a necessary 
contribution to overall transparency in the multilatera l trading system.  As pointed out at the October 
meeting of the General Council, no tification and reporting provisions had been devised so as to keep 
the burden on the notifying countries to a minimum,  without reducing the necessary level of ambition 
of the Transparency Mechanism.  The final text  also took into account concerns of developing 
countries – especially beneficiaries of PTAs – related both to their particular technical constraints and 
to their request for adequate participation in th e notification process.  He recalled that during the 
negotiations on the PTA Transparency Mechanism it had been considered that a decision on its 
permanent application would take into account the status of the RTA Tran sparency Mechanism.  
Brazil wished to reiterate its appreciation to all th e delegations who had constr uctively participated in 
the drafting process, especially China, India and the United States, the co-proponents of the 
Mechanism.  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 5 
 
 
  11. The representative of Korea  said his delegation joined others in fully supporting the PTA 
Transparency Mechanism that ha d emerged from the long discussions in the CTD.  This mechanism 
had struck a delicate balance between the need for transparency in PTA s and the burden on 
developing countries in implementing it.  More impor tant, this Mechanism would greatly contribute to 
facilitating the transparency of Memb ers' trade prefer ence programmes. 
12. The representative of the United States  said he wished to echo the statements by the other co-
sponsors on the adoption of the PTA Transparency Mech anism, and in particular to join in their words 
of praise for the efforts of the CTD Chair and his predecessor.  The United States strongly supported the adoption of the PTA Transparency Mechanism.   This Mechanism would make an important 
contribution to facilitating transparency in Memb ers' trade preference pr ogrammes.  The US was 
extremely pleased with the intensity of the work by Members to resolve th e remaining issues in the 
text, and the efforts of the Chair to lead Members in these discussions.  It ha d valued the opportunity 
to collaborate closely with Brazil, India and Ch ina as co-sponsors in this work, and greatly 
appreciated the efforts undertaken by all Member s who had constructively participated in these 
discussions and helped achieve CTD approval of th is Mechanism.  He recalled that during the 
negotiations on the Mechanism, it had been consider ed that a decision on its permanent application 
would take into account the status of the RTA Tr ansparency Mechanism.  The US supported the 
adoption of the PTA Transparency Mechanism and looked forward to its successful implementation in 
the CTD Dedicated Session. 
13. The representative of Mexico
 said this was an issue of key interest for Mexico and it was 
delighted at the successful outcome of the negotiations .  This showed that where there was a desire 
and the imagination necessary to move forward, signifi cant results could be achieved.  He very much 
hoped this would serve as the beginning of chain reaction of agreements to bring Members to the 
ultimate destination of a Doha package at the end of  the first half of 2011.  Mexico encouraged all 
delegations to inject a similar amount of imagin ation and goodwill as they moved forward in these 
negotiations.  This was a clear indication of how Members should work in the coming months. 
14. The representative of Canada  said his country joined others in congratulating the CTD Chair 
and his predecessor, and also the proponents on the successful conclusion of their work to establish 
this Mechanism.  This would help strengthen th e multilateral trading system by bringing further 
clarity to preferential trade arrangements.  The ag reement on this Mechanism further demonstrated the 
capacity of the WTO and its Members to advance the organization's regular work agenda through 
finding common ground. 
15. The representative of St. Lucia  said his delegation welcomed the adoption of this Mechanism.  
Members would recall the adoption of the RTA Tran sparency Mechanism in December 2006.  That 
transparency mechanism had provided considerab le information on RTAs, which had gone a long 
way to demystifying them.  The PTA Transparency  Mechanism was a similar mechanism that would 
doubtlessly allow for enhanced transparency – in this instance on non-reciprocal arrangements which 
largely benefited developing and least-developed coun tries.  This agreement was the result of a hard-
fought compromise between interested parties.  As Members advanced into the end-game of the DDA 
negotiations, the adoption of this  Mechanism was a testament to the fact that hard work and 
compromise could result in meaningful outcomes. 
16. The representative of Cuba  said there had been widespread support for the PTA Transparency 
Mechanism which, as previously stated, had invol ved a long and difficult negotiation process lasting 
almost four years.  Cuba did not oppose the need to establish this mechanis m and continued to support 
the General Council's December 2006 Decision on Tran sparency for PTAs.  However, Cuba wished 
to express its concern and reservation regarding two i ssues.  In paragraph 9 of the Mechanism, Cuba 
did not agree on including "labour standards" and "environment" as provisions affecting trade in 
goods.  There were as yet no agreements governin g these matters within the WTO framework.  The WT/GC/M/129 
Page 6  
 
  relationship between trade and the environment wa s still under discussion in a committee established 
for that purpose, while labour standards were not even part of the WTO agenda.  Asserting, as in 
paragraph 9, that labour and the environment were areas affecting trade would set a precedent for 
future work.  It would also make the granting of  tariff preferences more heavily contingent on 
compliance with certain labour or environmental re quirements, on the arbitrary grounds that they 
affected trade.  Cuba could also not accept these  terms being used to cond ition the granting of trade 
preferences.  Consequently, the mechanism to be  adopted would in no way prejudge the future 
treatment that might be given to these matters in  the WTO, in particular that relating to labour 
standards.  
17. The Chairman
 proposed that the General Council adopt the draft decision on a Transparency 
Mechanism for Preferential Trade Arrangements contained in document WT/COMTD/71. 
18. The General Council took note  of the statements and so agreed .2 
2. Report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations Committee 
19. The Chairman  invited the Director-General, as Chairman of the TNC, to report on the TNC's 
activities since his last report to the Council. 
20. The Director-General, Chairman of the TNC , said3 that since the last meeting of the General 
Council, the TNC had held one info rmal meeting on 30 November.  At that meeting, participants had 
reviewed and assessed developments in the DDA,  following the meetings of the G20 and APEC 
Leaders and a second round of small-group brainstorm ing meetings.  His rema rks at that meeting, 
including the overview of Negotiating Groups, had b een circulated to delegations in document 
JOB/TNC/6.  Participants had welcomed the cl ear and strong political signals from Leaders to 
conclude the Doha Developmen t Round.  Recognising that 2011 was an important window of 
opportunity to achieve this goal, pa rticipants had agreed that the onus was now on them to urgently 
translate these instructions into action and show the required flexibility, compromise and constructive 
attitude in the negotiations.  In short, the time had arrived to move into real negotiating mode.  There 
had been strong agreement that in line with Memb ers' cocktail approach, every configuration and 
possibility for progress should be explored to the fullest .  In particular, participants had stressed that 
Negotiating Groups needed to be at the heart of in tensified efforts, with Chairs taking a more pro-
active role in accelerating work in the coming mont hs.  Delegations had endorsed the intensive work 
programme that the Chairs of Negotiating Groups  and he had proposed from the beginning of 2011, 
advancing on all fronts of the negotiation at the same  time.  In light of the intensification of work, 
there had been an understanding that in scheduling meetings, Members would approach their work in 
full accordance with the established principles and w ould make every effort to ensure transparency 
and full participation.  
21. A collective sense had emerged that texts in all areas of the negotiation would have to be 
developed so that they could appear towards the en d of the first quarter of 2011.  The various texts 
would mature according to the individual rhythm of  work in the Negotiating Groups.  All had agreed 
that they had to emerge from a Chair-driven bottom- up process, with the onus on participants to take 
an active role and make the required contributions w ith which to move towards consensus.  There had 
also been a general agreement that, at the right mo ment, a more global sense of what the final package 
would contain would need to be de veloped.  Although some had expr essed the view that this process 
should start sooner rather than la ter, and others that it should st art when there were texts, all 
participants had agreed that the details of this process would become clearer in light of substantive 
progress in Negotiating Groups.  There had also been agreement on the greater involvement of Senior 
                                                      
2 The Decision was subsequently ci rculated as document WT/L/806. 
3 The statement was subsequently circulated in document JOB/GC/7.  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 7 
 
 
  Officials as work intensified, and for the importa nce of Ambassadors remaining engaged personally in 
this intensified phases, as they would be central to the push for a final deal.  In sum, participants had 
agreed that they now had the right political signals , the technical expertise and the work programme.  
What was now needed was to transl ate these into a comprehensive deal that each Member could take 
home.  In his remarks to the informal TNC on 30 November, he had outlined the intensive work 
programme for the various Negotiating Groups begi nning the weeks of 10 and 17 January.  The 
Negotiating Group Chairs had followed up with more detailed communications to assist in Members' 
planning here and in capitals.  In addition, they were working hard to look further ahead in their respective negotiating processes.  All Members now had a clear picture of the meetings that would be held as from 10 January, and the issues that would be  addressed.  In the same spirit of transparency, 
he wished to give Members advance notice that he would be convening an informal TNC on 
2 February, preceded by a Green Room meeting on 26 January.  
22. He called upon all delegations to ensure that th eir representatives, at whatever level, were 
mandated to negotiate – he repeated, to negotiate .  At the present stage it was not enough to have 
answering machines around the table.  Members were at  the point where they had to have negotiators, 
and all negotiators had to be prepared to move out  of their comfort zones towards agreement.  There 
could no longer be any a priori red lines.  All Memb ers had to be in a positi on to engage on substance 
on a "without prejudice" basis, under the Single Undertaking.  He also wished to say that although Members obviously still had important challenges ah ead, he sensed a new energy, a determination 
among all participants to ensure that they grasped  the narrow, but real, opportunity to conclude the 
Round in 2011.  As he had said at the TNC, he ge nuinely sensed that the final countdown had begun.  
It was up to everyone to make sure that it ended in a successful lift-off.  
23. He then turned to the two TRIPS implementati on issues on which he had held consultations in 
his capacity as Director General – namely, the re lationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the 
Convention on Biological Diversity, and the issue of GI extension.  He had earlier reported that the consultations so far had usefully illuminated th e substantive features of these issues but had not 
touched on the questions of mandate  and linkages between issues.  The small-group exercise had also 
usefully shed light, but again without precipitating any significant breakthrough.  He had always sought to respect the widespread concerns of Me mbers that the consultation process should not run 
ahead of or lag behind the general pace of work.  Following further informal consultations, he would 
reconvene a further round of consultations early in 2011.  On TRIPS-CBD, Members would focus on 
the patent disclosure aspects of the discussion about misappropriation of traditional knowledge and 
genetic resources.  On GI extension, they would lo ok at the adequacy of existing forms of protection 
of geographical indications for products other th an wines and spirits.  These consultations were 
facilitative only, and would aim at clarifying substan tive issues.  They would be without prejudice to 
Members' position on the mandate and on linkages betw een the TRIPS-related issues.  Speaking also 
in his capacity as Director-General, he wished to mention briefly Aid for Trade, to announce that the 
Third Global Review would be hos ted in Geneva on 18 and 19 July 2011.  He looked forward to 
working with all Members and stake holders to shine a spotlight on the impact and results of work on 
Aid for Trade. 
24. The Chairman
 invited any delegation that wished the statement it had made at the informal 
meeting of the TNC held on 30 November 2010 to be  included in the Minutes of the present meeting 
to communicate this directly to the Secretariat.4 
25. All delegations who spoke  thanked the Director-General for his report. 
26. The representative of Gabon , on behalf of the African Group , thanked the Director-General 
for the relatively clear work programme proposed for th e first half of 2011.  He reaffirmed the African 
                                                      
4 Such statements are included in the Annex to the present records. WT/GC/M/129 
Page 8  
 
  Group's commitment, both technical and political, to the successful outcome of this Round of trade 
negotiations, with its ambition of providing a firm  response to development concerns.  The African 
Group pledged its complete and tota l determination to work with th e TNC Chair and with the Chairs 
of the Negotiating Groups to a ttain Members' common objective.  At the TNC's meeting in 
November, the Director-General had urged Members to prepare for acceleration in the pace of the 
negotiations in the different areas when work r esumed in January 2011.  The African Group hoped 
that by speeding up the negotiating process in the first quarter of 2011, Members would be able to 
reach a consensus on the modalities texts.  However,  this would have to be done on the basis of 
transparency and with the full participation of all Members.  In fact, there was a certain amount of 
uncertainty surrounding the participation of Senior Officials, who generally found it difficult to join 
delegations in Geneva.  Memb ers had grown accustomed to hol ding negotiating meetings by 
committee and by week.  The formula now being propo sed clearly implied that during the first quarter 
of 2011, committee meetings and other consultations in variously sized groups would overlap or even 
be held simultaneously.  Because they were unders taffed, the African delegations to the WTO would 
never be able to participate fully in all of these meetings, hence their concern and the need for an 
increased presence of capital-based delegates.  The African Group therefore asked the WTO to make 
a special effort to ensure that the countries with  weaker economies – the LDCs, for instance – could 
participate in this process so that Africa could be present and contribute constructively, along with 
other Members, to the work taking place in the diffe rent groups.  This approach, which satisfied the 
requirements of fairness, would have the advantage of enabling the small delegations and all of the 
regional groups – whether or not they had offensive or defensiv e interests in the subjects under 
negotiation – to be represented in th e different consultation formats.  What was at stake here was the 
credibility of the organization.   As Member s charted their course for 2011 with an eye on 
consolidating the draft modalities texts and concl uding the DDA, the African Group wished to stress 
the importance of ensuring that Members did not lose sight of what had made this Round unique – namely, the development dimension in a ll of the different areas of negotiation. 
27. The stocktaking meeting at the end of March 2010 had provided Members with a precise idea 
of the obstacles to be overcome before they coul d conclude the Round.  During that meeting, the 
African Group had reiterated its negotiating positions and its firm determinat ion to conclude the 
Round within a reasonable period of ti me.  This determination had also been reaffirmed at the Sixth 
Ordinary Session of the Conference of African Trade Ministers in Kigali, Rwanda, in November 2010.  On that occasion, African Minister s had recalled the danger of reopening issues that 
had already been consolidated in the different areas  of negotiation.  They had also reiterated once 
again their position on the stability of concessions obt ained and the gains unde niably recorded.  On 
the same occasion, the Ministers had further rea ffirmed their commitment to the multilateral trading 
system.  They had, however, expressed concern over the treatment of subjects of vital interest to the African continent – for example, the agriculture p illar, the cotton issue, sp ecial products, SSM, and 
the treatment of sensitive products for developing c ountries.  In this connection, the Ministers had 
appealed to the main trading partners, in pa rticular the developed countries among them, to 
demonstrate leadership in taking the negotiations fo rward on the basis of the agreed mandates:  the 
Doha Ministerial Declaration, the Framework Agreement of July 2004, and the Hong Kong 
Ministerial Declaration.  They had objected to an y attempts to reinterpret or change the existing 
mandates or deviate from agreed principles in th e negotiations.  The Ministers remained deeply 
concerned by all forms of selective re-sequencing of issues or reope ning of stabilized parts of the 
modalities.  It went without saying that the cons olidation of these concessions should enable the 
forthcoming consultations to focus as a matter of prio rity, but not exclusively, on questions that were 
still the subject of disagreement.  The African Group wished to take advantage of the momentum of 
the Third Global Review of Aid for Trade schedul ed for July 2011 to improve the Aid-for-Trade 
supply mechanism, while strengthening its mon itoring and assessment in order to maximize its 
effectiveness and impact.  Although the Single Undert aking remained the central target of the DDA, 
the African Group wished to remind all that an early  harvest in favour of the LDCs and other less-
advantaged Members remained a powerful means of  helping those economies to integrate into the  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 9 
 
 
  multilateral trading system, while at the same ti me generating the goodwill needed for a rapid and 
successful conclusion of the Doha Round.  Th ese concerns of the African Group were essential 
elements that had to be taken into consideration as Members continued to draw up their work plan for 
2011. 
28. The representative of the European Union  said his delegation had lately observed a real 
willingness and momentum to conclude the Doha R ound in 2011, and welcomed the determination of 
the membership to transform the strong politi cal signals and progress in variable geometry 
consultations over the past months into a proper multilateral negotiating process.  In particular, the 
small-group process had been instrumental in kick-s tarting the negotiations and the EU was pleased to 
have played a leading role in that process.  As th e Director-General had said, the time had now come 
to really negotiate.  The programme for the next  months seemed very ambitious, but it was the 
minimum necessary if the Round was to be concl uded within the narrow 2011 window.  Clearly, no 
effort could be spared in trying to reach this obj ective.  Members would need to provide continuous 
and constructive guidance to Negotiating Group Chairs.  Chairs would have to prepare on all topics 
negotiating texts that would allow political masters in  capitals to make the final political decisions to 
bring the Round to a successful conclusion.  Member s needed to move ahead on all fronts at the same 
time and, as the Director-General had said, on a "w ithout prejudice" basis.  Members should continue 
to use all possible formations and informal grouping s to facilitate progress in the negotiations, and in 
particular systematic guidance and participation of ambassadors and senior officials.  In the weeks ahead the EU looked forward to working with all delegations to negotiate the additional elements 
necessary for a broad Doha package that woul d boost growth, expand trade, and bring the 
development dividend to the poorest countries.  Th e EU was encouraged by the positive dynamics in 
Geneva.  It was time for Members to roll up their sleeves and "just do it". 
29. The representative of Zambia
, on behalf of the LDC Group , said the Group was pleased to 
note the momentum gained in all aspects of ne gotiations following the announcement made by the 
Director-General at the last TNC calling for inte nsified work.  The Group also acknowledged the fact 
that the process ahead would be demanding in terms of time and human resources.  The planning 
process in the scheduling of both formal and informal  meetings should therefore take due account of 
the capacity constraints of small delegations by mi nimizing parallel meetings, particularly in those 
areas where such delegations had important inte rests, such as Agriculture, NAMA, Services and 
Trade Facilitation, among others.  The LDCs wished to state that meaningful progress would only be possible where process and substance was informed  by the membership; hence the importance of 
maintaining inclusiveness and transparency at all times in order to avoid surprises.  As Members 
moved towards text-based negotiations, the LDC Group noted that there were still areas where Members had political sensitivities which might warran t engagement at that level.  The Group also 
wished to state that these issues should not hold th e negotiations hostage.  Progress could be made if 
all Members remained committed and engaged in a meaningful and constructive manner to resolve 
grey areas in the draft modalities text and other texts developed through a Member-led process. 
30. For LDCs, achieving tangible progress and outcomes on the draft Services waiver, Cotton, 
DFQF market access and accompanying simplified a nd transparent Rules of Origin, Trade Facilitation 
supported by effective S&D treatment provisions and firm commitment for technical assistance and 
capacity-building measures, and S&D treatment in ge neral terms remained a key development priority 
in these negotiations.  Therefore, the work prog ramme for 2011 should prioritize these issues.  The 
conclusion of the Round would pr ovide the necessary stimulus for growth and development of LDC 
economies.  As stated in the LDC Group's in tervention during the informal TNC held on 
30 November, concluding the DDA was the only stimulus  package within reach to  deal with the after-
effects of the financial and econom ic crisis.  The Group hoped that the Round would be brought to a 
successful conclusion, with development at the core  of the final package.  The LDC Group remained 
committed and pledged its constructiv e engagement in the process ahead. WT/GC/M/129 
Page 10  
 
  31. The representative of Chile
 said his delegation endorsed the Di rector-General's statement with 
respect to the work programme for the coming months .  Similarly, Chile believed that in the process 
to begin in January, three conditions had to be me t – the "who", "when" and "how".  Regarding the 
"who", the major players had to spearhead this new and decisive stage.  They were the ones who had 
to set an example by displaying flexibility and by concluding this Round.  Two types of decisions 
were before Members.  There were the major conce ssions, which of course would be made at the last 
hour, but there were also decisions necessary for the process starting in January.  These were the 
conditions Members needed to meet in January, so that the process could truly make progress and 
move forward.  Turning to the "when", in Ja nuary Members needed to move forward without 
prejudging the final outcome.  They should leave the Single Undertaking for July.  Only after the 
summer would they look at the final package, and would take it or leave it, but they would not be 
dealing with it in January.  Looking at the "how", Members did not need to innovate, but rather to 
work as they traditionally had and according to past  practice in the house – in other words, by holding 
negotiating groups, informal meetings , consultations of the Director-G eneral, and groups made up of 
various delegations.  In the coming stage, Memb ers needed to attach more importance to the 
traditional "friends of the Chair" approach.  As ha d been pointed out by the Director-General, all of 
this would be on the basis of "FIT" – full particip ation, inclusiveness and tr ansparency.  There was 
another condition, as had been pointed out by the EU – all of this needed to be done with the Nike 
approach of "just do it". 
32. The representative of Brazil , on behalf of the G20 , said he wished to report that pending 
issues related to data on the value of producti on and its impact on the draft modalities text in 
agriculture had been addressed.  The parties involve d would take the necessary steps to implement the 
understanding in the next few days .  This development built confid ence, at a time when Members 
were to embark on an effort to conclude the DDA negotiations in 2011.  Nonetheless, this episode 
reiterated once more the relevance of transparency  and data availability.  The G20 stressed the 
importance of having all gaps filled in the draft modalities and the provision of outstanding data 
requirements of document TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4.  In accordance with the draft modalities provisions and 
for the objective of their operationalization, data ne eded to be submitted, verified and, when required, 
prepared for annexation.  These steps should be comple ted sooner rather than later, in all three pillars 
of the agricultural negotiations. 
33. The representative of Switzerland , speaking as Chair of the NAMA Negotiating Group,   
recalled that while there was an intensive negotia ting programme, it was up to the Members to use it 
or not.  He wished to invite them to use all po ssibilities to move forward, because there was not a lot 
of time.  In substance, this meant that Members had to depart from positions taken eight years earlier 
and to start building towards a consensus, having  in mind the objective of what they were doing, 
rather than maintaining prescriptions given at an ear lier time.  It also meant that Members should not 
over-engineer the process and should get the underst andings right before elaborating the form.  
Finally, it was a question of time.  Members did not have time to repeat, for the umpteenth time, what 
had been heard in the past years.  In the course of this work, as a chairman, some delegations would 
hate him and some would condemn him.  He said that in this phase, if Members succeeded, they 
would congratulate themselves, and if they failed, they would blame him.  That was the game.  He 
hoped that Members could mobilize a sense of humour  to help them navigate these roads which, like 
Alpine roads in winter, would necessitate the adequa te equipment.  As the TNC Chair had said, there 
was no energy in the house for answering machines, and the negotiations did not take place only in 
Geneva, but also in capitals.  Perhaps some who drew  up instructions might also come to a revision of 
these instructions, having in mind the overall picture of the negotiations. 
34. On behalf of Switzerland , he said that four objectives had to be pursued at the present 
juncture.  Three of them were already set fo rth in the Doha Declaration – strengthening the 
multilateral trading system, improving the mainstream ing of the LDCs and developing countries into 
the system, and resolving trade and political problem s that had not yet been resolved.  There was a  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 11 
 
 
  fourth immediate objective, which was providing a re balancing of various issues to achieve a global 
balance at the end of the negotiations.  For Switz erland, this meant that in Agriculture, one had 
practically reached the limits of what could in  fact be achieved.  In the NAMA negotiations, 
Switzerland was awaiting clarity in the areas of tariffs and non-tariff measures.  In Services, his delegation hoped that Members woul d move ahead in the direction of reflecting the progress made in 
autonomous liberalization and the liberalization measu res that were being prepared.  In addition, 
Switzerland was expecting a robust, solid outcome in  the area of domestic regulation and continued to 
hope for greater visibility of these essential negotia tions.  Switzerland, for its part, would focus on 
three issues:  Trade Facilitation, Trade and Envi ronment and TRIPS-related issues.  In this 
connection, he wished to thank the Director-General for his clarifica tions and his intention to resume 
consultations in order to make progress on these issues in parallel with all other issues.  Members had 
to move from a complicated situation of non-undertak ing to the situation of a Single Undertaking. 
35. The representative of Mauritius
, on behalf of the ACP Group , said the Group welcomed the 
intensification of the negotiating process in Janua ry with a view to taking advantage of the 2011 
window of opportunity to conclude the DDA.  The ACP accepted the work programme and was 
pleased with the sense of purpose and renewed commitment by Members to restart real negotiations.  
The ACP was very much part of this new dynamic and had contributed its share in the small-group 
meetings.  It pledged to engage fully and to contribute constructivel y in this process.  The ACP would 
not at the present meeting elaborate its full list of concerns and issues in the negotiations.  Rather, it 
would articulate these concerns in the respec tive Negotiating Groups, in which it would expect 
concrete outcomes and sympathetic  consideration.  However, the ACP wished to remind Members 
that they were still operating under an agreed manda te which had put development at its core, and it 
expected meaningful and concrete development de liverables at the end of this Round.  The main 
reason for the Group's intervention was to call the Director-General's attention to the capacity 
constraints of the ACP, African Group and LDCs in  the context of an intensification of work in 
January.  This had been referred to by Gabon in its  statement for the African Group.  However, the 
ACP Group wished to make it clear that it did not want to slow down the process and diminish 
intensification, but only to find ways and means to  enable the full participation of small capacity-
constrained countries.  The ACP Group therefore called on the Director General to take into 
consideration the following points:  (i) the organiza tion of work to avoid overlaps of meetings where 
the ACP, African Group and LDCs had serious nego tiating concerns;  (ii) advance notification, 
including pre-planning all meeti ngs and giving advance notice so  that these delegations could 
organize themselves in order to participate effe ctively;  (iii) possible assistance, including the 
sponsoring of participation of capital-based officials, mainly for LDC's;  and (iv)  logistical facilities 
that took account of the constraints of coordinati ng large groups, which was very important for the 
ACP, African Group and LDCs, i.e. ensuring ava ilability of meeting rooms and interpretation for 
group coordination meetings. 
36. The representative of Peru  said that as had been repeatedly  been stated in the General 
Council, there was a clear need to transform the politi cal will expressed at the most recent meetings of 
the G20 and APEC Leaders into conc rete and tangible results in the months to come.  All appeared to 
agree that the famous window of opportunity that appeared to open and close year after year should remain open once again throughout 2011.  Peru was encouraged by the widespread determination to 
preserve what had been achieved and the firm co mmitment to continue working with a view to 
concluding what Members had begun nine years earlier.  Members should not lose sight of the 
essential contribution the Round could make to growth in global trade, and above all to the economic 
and social well-being of all countries, particularly  the developing countries.  What was currently on 
the table represented the fundamental elements for th e package we still had to finish putting together, 
and which should be the target of Members' effort s over the next few months.  As his country had 
already said on several occasions, its objective was to  achieve far-reaching and ambitious reforms that 
would allow greater openness, security and transpar ency in the international trade regime, which 
should become increasingly equitable.  Members ha d to focus on the substance of the negotiations so WT/GC/M/129 
Page 12  
 
  that they could have texts for all the areas of ne gotiation.  When sufficient progress had been made, 
meetings of Senior Officials should be convened.   The negotiating formats should be those best 
adapted to each issue in question, without losing sight of transparency , inclusion and the need to make 
the agreements reached multilateral.  Thus, all requests made by Members to take part in these small 
groups should be met, so that even if they had not originally been invited, they could make concrete 
and substantive contributions.  For Peru, the eco nomic and social devel opment of developing 
countries was at the very heart of the Round.  Ther efore, it could not conceive of a successful Round 
that did not provide genuine trade opportunities in  the areas of agriculture and industrial goods.  
Accordingly, all the barriers preventing free access to markets and distorting trade in these two key 
areas should be comprehensively dismantled, ensuri ng that the principle of S&D Treatment was not 
infringed, and always assisting the weakest and the poorest, in line with a strategy of full but 
asymmetrical reciprocity between developed and developing countries. 
37. It was essential that the results of these ne gotiations took full account of the interests of 
developing countries in areas related to Cotton, e nvironmental goods and services, Fishery Subsidies, 
Trade Facilitation and trade in Services, inter alia .  Peru could not envisage a successful outcome that 
did not include proper protection for genetic res ources and the related traditional knowledge in the 
context of an amended TRIPS Agreement, thr ough practical and concrete mechanisms such as 
disclosure of the origin of genetic resources.  Peru was ready to contribute to these and other 
discussions in the negotiations to be held in the Negotiating Groups, as well as in the smaller groups 
in which it participated.  The Chairman could rely  on Peru's support to pursue the procedure proposed.  
In the past few weeks, one had h eard and read about the significant progress made recently in Russia's 
accession procedure.  Peru hoped this procedure coul d be completed successfully in the near future 
and that Russia would then become the 154th Member of the organization, joining in 2011, the year in 
which Members hoped to conclude this Round.  His de legation wished to stress the considerable value 
of perseverance and commitment on the part of all Members to conclude the negotiations.  This had 
been shown by two important achievements in 2010 – the Nagoya Protocol on biological diversity and 
the Cancún agreement on climate change.  He was ce rtain that 2011 would be the Members' year, the 
year of the Doha Round. 
38. The representative of Norway
 said she wished to make two additional points to those Norway 
had made at the informal meeting of the TNC on 30 November 2010.  On process, there was still 
some uncertainty on how to do what leaders had requ ested delegations to do.   The structure of the 
work programme for 10 January and onwards was star ting to emerge.  Invitations for meetings were 
being sent out.  The main question on process w as how to bring the negotiating areas together to 
provide the grounds for the necessary give-and-takes across the negotiating areas.  This might be done 
outside the system – risking the same uneasiness in  the membership as the small-group meetings of 
Ambassadors.  Alternatively, it might be for the Chai rs to take the initiative to  work together, rather 
than in parallel.  The process would have to be developed along the way.  However, history showed 
that a complicated process seldom succeeded withou t leadership.  Thus, a heavy burden rested on the 
key players as well as the Director-General.  On strategy, given the history of this Round it was only natural that there was still lingering uncertainty over wh ether this effort was for real.  However, in a 
negotiation there would always be a certain amo unt of uncertainty.  Members could not base 
themselves on "what if it isn't?".  Rather, each one should reflect seriously on the implications of 
"what if it is?".  She trusted that no one was comfor table with missing out on this historic chance to 
conclude this Round – with all the implications that had for development, for the global economy and 
the role of the multilateral trading system. 
39. Like the EU, her delegation sensed a collective willingness to give it a wholehearted try.  
While this was only an assumption, it seemed to be a shared one.  It then became a question of how, 
rather than "if".  Norway was less concerned with  setting deadlines for texts or dates for Ministerial 
meetings than with identifying some things Members should avoid, as these would keep Members 
from getting where they wanted to go in the time av ailable.  First, there was no time to do the whole  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 13 
 
 
  thing all over again.  Members had to build on the progress made.  Second, there was no time to allow 
anyone to hold areas of the nego tiations hostage, nor could anyone be allowed to block progress by 
playing games with other Members' core interests.  Finally, no one could do this job for the Members.  
This had to be a Member-driven process, and those that were true stakeholders in any given issue 
should be expected to contribute or risk being left behind. 
40.  The representative of Kenya  associated his delegation with the statement by Gabon for the 
African Group, Zambia for the LDCs and Mauritius for the ACP.  Kenya took note of the Director-General's report and reaffirmed its commitment to  support the programme as outlined.  It further 
reiterated that the 2008 Rev. 4 editions of the draft modalities for both Agriculture and NAMA 
remained the basis on which further work would be  based.  Kenya wished to emphasize the need to 
preserve what had been achieved thus far.  Give n the workload, and taking into account the process 
outlined by the Director-General and his intention to  involve Senior Officials from time to time, his 
delegation wished to underscore the need to factor in the issue of resource constraints faced by small 
delegations, and particularly LDCs.  Therefore, the timing of Senior Officials' presence in Geneva 
should not be skewed in favour of some delegations .  Although Kenya welcomed the participation of 
Senior Officials to help move the DDA forward, th eir presence should not be seen to replace the role 
of Geneva-based delegates.  There had to be a fair and realistic opportunity for all Members to 
participate in an all-inclusive and transparent pr ocess.  He again reaffirmed Kenya's unequivocal 
commitment to the successful conclusion of the Doha  Round.  His country woul d continue to engage 
and contribute constructively, and hoped that Member s' collective efforts under the Director-General's 
leadership would advance the negotiations.  Kenya looked forward to the early re-commencement of 
negotiations. 
41. The representative of Sri Lanka
 said his delegation was encouraged by the commitment of the 
Members to conclude the Round in 2011.  More than ever, there was a positive atmosphere and a 
great deal of energy, fuelled by the political will expressed at the last G20 meeting.  Sri Lanka, as a 
small, vulnerable economy heavily dependent on MF N trade for its economic development, placed 
great importance on the strengthening of the multilateral trading system.  In that context, it was 
critical that the Doha Round, with its developmen t mandate, be concluded as early as possible, but 
that in doing so it take on board all concerns of the developing countries.  On the process, while 
appreciating the need for a variety of meeting form ats to advance the negotiation as much as possible, 
Sri Lanka shared the concerns voiced by other de legations on the need to take into account the 
constraints of small delegations when scheduling meetings.  It would be extremely difficult for a 
delegation like his, which comprised only two people,  to effectively represent its country if critical 
meetings were scheduled to overlap or were held at extremely short notice.  Therefore, he urged that 
these concerns be taken into consideration when planning meetings.  This process also had to be 
transparent, inclusive and, above all, multilateral.   The end package should not be decided by only a 
few Members.  All had to be allowed to be ac tively involved and to share decisions on the final 
package.  Furthermore, while Sri Lanka looked forward to an early conclusion of the Round, 
Members should not sacrifice substance, particularly  the concerns of the de veloping countries, for 
deadlines.  Having said that, Sri Lanka reiterated its commitment to fully and c onstructively engage in 
the proposed intensification of work in the first quart er of 2011, with a view to contributing to revised 
Chairs' texts by the end of the first quarter. 
42. On substance, a number of issues of critical importance to Sri Lanka remained outstanding.  
In Agriculture, his country looked forward to advancement on the flexibilities for developing 
countries, particular SVEs, in terms of SSM and SP fl exibilities.  In particular, it wished to stress the 
need to deliver on a meaningful SP mechanism a nd a simple and effective SSM flexibility.  These 
flexibilities were extremely important to Sri Lanka, which was not only an SVE, but also an NFIDC, 
as these would allow it to achieve a sustainable le vel of food security, as well as securing livelihoods 
and ensuring rural development.   In NAMA, Sri Lanka looked fo rward to the modalities ensuring 
improved and meaningful market access for products of export interest to it.  As a small country WT/GC/M/129 
Page 14  
 
  trading largely under MFN tariffs, Sri Lanka antic ipated that the market-access modalities would 
eliminate export challenges faced in the form of high  tariffs and tariff peaks.  He recalled Sri Lanka's 
status as a disproportionately-affected country in th e context of the solution for preference erosion, 
and the need to provide a solution that would adeq uately address Sri Lanka's concerns – not a solution 
that handpicked only a handful of products for wh ich Sri Lanka would be deemed to receive MFN 
treatment.  His delegation had elaborated on these concer ns in the past and would continue to do so in 
the appropriate negotiating bodies.  While these is sues remained key for Sri Lanka, it also looked 
forward to advancement in other areas of interest to it, including Trade Facilitation, TRIPS, Services 
and Rules.  He reiterated Sri Lanka's commitment to an active and constructive engagement in the 
Round.  It wished to be part of the shaping of th e package that would lay th e framework for the future 
trading environment.  Therefore, it once again stre ssed the need for this pr ocess, at this critical 
juncture, to be transparent, inclusive and, above all, multilateral, and for the final solution to be 
cognizant of the development mandate of this Roun d and the development needs of all developing 
countries, particularly SVEs such as Sri Lanka. 
43. The representative of Cuba
 said her delegation had been pr ompted to speak after hearing 
Gabon express the concerns of the African countries,  which Cuba shared, regarding the constraints 
faced by small delegations in participating activel y in the negotiations over the coming year.  This 
problem had also been raised by Zambia on beha lf of the LDCs, Mauritius on behalf of the ACP 
countries, Kenya and Sri Lanka.  Likewise, Cuba supported Brazil's statement for the G20.  She 
reiterated that Cuba was not prepared to face or to  accept a final negotiating stage that was precipitate 
or did not include all Members on an equal footing to  the detriment of transparency and inclusiveness.  
Cuba was therefore highly concerned about the increase in the number of informal consultations.  In 
this broader context and for the sake of transparency , her delegation wished to repeat what it had said 
on 8 December at the meeting in Room E, to which only 38 Members had been invited by the Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture in Speci al Session.  As a founding Member of both the 
GATT and the WTO, Cuba was committed to the multila teral trading system and to completing this 
Round on the basis of what had been agreed in N ovember 2001.  Cuba would not accept undertakings 
in this Round without securing its interests in Agri culture.  As all knew, there was a proposal on 
export credits which, albeit not in square brackets, di d not fully meet its national interests.  All were 
aware of Cuba's special situation.  Hence, averting the risk of jeopardizing the food security of several 
Members was a task that had to be given the closest attention. 
44. The representative of Jamaica
 said his delegation fully endorsed the statement by Mauritius 
for the ACP Group.  There was no doubt that the coming months would once again serve to test 
Members' resilience and the extent to which they were prepared to give life and meaning to the 
commitments made so long ago in Doha.  As Members moved forward with the work programmes 
across the various Negotiating Groups, it would be imperative that the core principles of transparency, 
flexibility and inclusiveness were faithfully observed, in order to ensure true ownership of the process 
by all Members.  As Gabon and others had said, pa rticular attention had to be given to the capacity 
and other constraints faced by the developing and l east-developed countries.  Members also had to be 
guided by the principle of S&D Treatment and avoid the temptation to pursue a narrowly-defined agenda that gave primacy to market-access consider ations over development priorities.  It would be 
easy to say that Members had been on this road  many times since the launch of the DDA and that 
after repeated periods of intense activity, the results had not reflected the full attainment of the Doha 
mandate.  This time, Members were acutely aware of the very narrow window of opportunity that 
would emerge in 2011.  His delegation remained  fully committed to the process of constructive 
engagement that had to guide Members' efforts as they moved to conclude the DDA.  Each opportunity to sit and negotiate in 2011 had to enable Members to come away with more progress and 
greater understanding of the critical issues.  Jamaic a also looked forward to the Third Global Review 
on Aid for Trade to be held in July 2011, with the expectation that this activity would deliver renewed 
opportunities for partnership and enha nced development through trade.  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 15 
 
 
  45. The representative of Mexico  said his delegation agreed with the content of the Director-
General's report.  Mexico wished to draw attenti on to three essential aspects.  First, bearing in mind 
the progress made in the negotiations and the need to move ahead, Members had to have the texts 
ready by the first quarter of 2011.  They did not ne cessarily have to be the final versions and could 
include a large number of square brackets, but th ey should be aimed at achieving a final package 
which could be ready at the end of June.  Second, the lists of concessions a nd the legal revision should 
take place from July 2011 onwards, so that the fina l package could be ready at the end of 2011.  
Third, during the Ministerial Conference to be he ld in December 2011, the results of this final 
package should be approved.  Mexico welcomed the efforts made to da te by all delegations, 
particularly those that had taken part in the di scussions in the small groups of Ambassadors, which 
were brainstorming sessions rather than real negotia tions.  Members now needed to move towards real 
negotiations, the most important step, and this should be according to variable geometry, so that in the 
final instance the work to be done was channelle d to the Negotiating Groups.  This process should 
always been in line with the fundamental prin ciples of transparency, and the texts should be 
developed by the Members.  Members had before them a timetable of meetings from January 2011 
onwards that called for closer involvement of Ambassadors and the presence of technicians from 
capitals.  It was therefore important to be clear th at the negotiations should not be compartmentalized.  
All the areas of negotiation on the table for consider ation were interlinked, and with the guidance of 
the Director-General, political determination and imagination – a great deal of imagination – 
Members should build the bridges needed to draw up  the scenario for the grand finale, with all the 
instruments and all the choirs doing their utmost, so that the process did not turn into Schubert's 
Unfinished Symphony and, on the contrary, so that Members successfully overcame any problems 
they might encounter. 
46. The representative of India  associated his delegation fully with  the statement by Brazil for the 
G20.  India welcomed the work programme announ ced by the Director-General and pledged its 
commitment to active and constructive engagement  in the intense phase of the negotiations.  His 
delegation wished to stress that these negotiati ons be Chair-led and respect the following two 
principles which were cardinal for achieving success in the negotiations:  (i) inclusiveness and 
emphasizing the representative composition of drafti ng groups; and (ii) transparency, which would 
clearly spell out the process and the outcome of sm all groups.  This would f acilitate all delegations 
working towards concluding the negotiations.  India also thanked the Director-General for restarting 
his consultations on the two TRIPS-related issues, i.e. GI extension and CBD-TRIPS.  These issues 
were a priority and critical for India, which attached great importance to an outcome on them in the 
final package of the Round. 
47. The representative of Turkey  said his delegation supported the work programme outlined by 
the TNC Chair.  Turkey was ready to enthusiastica lly intensify the work to bring the Doha Round to 
an end.  The process would have to be designed to take account of on-going needs.  At the same time, 
Turkey was expecting the major stakeholders to be  ready to take additional responsibilities, as they 
had done under the cocktail approach.  The small- group meetings they had been instrumental in 
organizing had contributed to the present upbeat at mosphere.  The progress Members had achieved so 
far and the stabilized areas should be the guide for future work.  All issues should be taken up, with 
no Member underlining its red lines.  Members should be flexible a nd acknowledge others' 
difficulties.  Inclusiveness and transparency were sacr ed principles to which Members should adhere.   
Faits accomplis  were to be avoided at all costs.  Howeve r, his delegation also wished to remind the 
membership that restraint should be exercised in  the negotiations, in terms of both ambition and 
expectation. 
48. The representative of Nepal  associated his delegation with th e statement by Zambia for the 
LDC Group.  Nepal took note of the good progress being made and expected intensive negotiations in 
different formats in the near future.  While Nepal was happy to work intensively with other Members, 
it was very concerned by its limited capacity regard ing its participation in the negotiations.  In this WT/GC/M/129 
Page 16  
 
  context, his delegation supported the proposal by  the LDC Group, the ACP Group and the African 
Group on minimizing any overlap in meetings on core areas of concern to these countries.  Nepal also 
supported the proposal by the African Group and the ACP to provide assistance to LDCs in order to ensure the participation of their Senior Offici als from capital.  Only this could enhance their 
participation in the process and make the overall pr ocess more inclusive and transparent.  Signals 
from recent meetings of the G20 and of APEC leaders should be seized as an opportunity to fully re-
energize the on-going negotiations and bring an e xpeditious conclusion of the Doha Round, with 
development at the center and with unhindered a nd predictable market access for all LDC products 
under simplified rules of origins.  The negotiation process had to remain multilateral and guided by 
transparency and inclusiveness.  Only a free and fair  global trading system could be responsive to the 
needs, priorities and concerns of the weakest memb ers of the international community.  In order to 
take advantage of these opportunities, LDCs need ed a comprehensive Trade Facilitation programme 
that would help build institutional capacity and prom ote development interests.   Recovery after the 
economic and financial crises had been uneven, frag ile and unbalanced.  There had been widespread 
impact on trade, services, jobs, and remittances, resu lting in falling exports, decreased tourist arrivals, 
increased unemployment, social dislocation, wid espread discontent, and diminished demand for 
Nepal's products and services.  
49. Global crises and challenges required global responses.  The LDCs were committed to 
multilateralism, to which there was no alternative.  As the economic and financial crises had been 
severe on LDCs, a routine approach was not enough to effectively address their plight.  In the context 
of the current dire situation of LDCs and its far-reaching implications, there should be an early 
implementation of the decision on DFQF market a ccess for all products originating in LDCs, as put 
forward at the LDCs' Ministerial meeting in Dar es Salam in 2009.  The current imbalances and distortions had been perpetuating the poverty of LDCs and had compounded their challenges.  They 
confronted supply-side constraints.  Nepal called for enhanced trade-related technical assistance and 
capacity building to build supply-side capacity and tr ade-related infrastructure in order to help LDCs 
to overcome supply-side handicaps and to better u tilize market-access opportunities.  While Nepal 
welcomed the operationalization of the Enhanced Integrated Framework as a vehicle to access Aid-for-Trade funding for LDCs, it was necessary to see trade in a holistic manner and to address trade 
capacity-building needs and ensure country ownershi p, greater coordination and additional financial 
resources to address the needs, priorities and concerns  of LDCs.  In less than six months, the LDCs 
would meet for the LDC-IV Conference in Istanbul .  The circumstances that had produced three 
programmes of action for LDCs in 1981, 1991 and 2001 had undergone fundamental changes.  Along 
with on-going challenges, new challenges were ar ising, which called for increased vigilance and 
concrete action.  Nepal acknowle dged the development partnership of three decades which had given 
attention to addressing the plight a nd marginalization of LDCs in several ways.  It appreciated the 
special attention of the Director-General to the needs and concerns of LDCs, and his commitment to 
the forthcoming LDC-IV.  It was in this context that Nepal saw the LDC-IV Conference as an 
opportunity to further strengthen the partnership a nd implement the commitments made.  Thus, Nepal 
urged the membership to endorse the inputs contai ned in document JOB/DEV/9 and to embark on a 
renewed and reinvigorated partnership to promote socio-economic structural transformation in order 
to remove all forms of human deprivations in LDCs , and to make a difference in the life of 12 per cent 
of the global population living in extreme poverty in these countries. 
50. The Director-General
 said he had three brief comments in reply to the important points made 
by Gabon for the African Group, Mauritius for the AC P and Zambia for the LDCs, pertaining to the 
organization of work.  Their concerns and the cons traints they faced were very well known to him and 
to the Secretariat, and would be taken into consider ation in the coordination meetings with the Chairs 
of the Negotiating Groups that he was chairing, wher e matters of substance, organization and logistics 
were being discussed.  Thus, on the three specific poin ts:  first, he would ensure that there were no 
two parallel meetings taking place at the same time, whether formal or informal.  This was something 
Mauritius had mentioned.  Usually, in the calendars  notified by the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 17 
 
 
  this situation did not arise, because there was an ove rall timetable.  If, by chance, there was a mistake 
somewhere, he asked delegations to point this out, so the necessary adjustments could be made.  
Second, insofar as possible, the Secretariat strived to  warn delegations of the calendars in advance, 
and this was why the previous day they had receiv ed the calendars for the entire month of January.  
Where there might be further substantial meetings, the Secretariat would try to do the same thing for 
February and March.  Third, for the logistical probl ems that might be met by the coordinators of, for 
example, the African Group, the ACP or the LDCs, the Council and TNC Division was there to 
provide assistance.  There should not be any problems, including during the time of the construction work.  The Secretariat had taken the necessary steps so that there were no additional constraints for 
delegations, and all were hoping to maintain the pace  of work, including with the three Groups he had 
mentioned, and to accelerate the pace of the negotiations. 
51. The General Council took note
 of the Director-General's report and of the statements. 
3. Work Programme on Small Economies 
(a) Report by the Chairman of the Dedicated  Session of the Committee on Trade and 
Development 
52. The Chairman  said that in line with the framework and procedures agreed by the General 
Council in 2002, the Work Programme on Small Economies was a standing item on the General 
Council's agenda and the Committee on Trade and De velopment reported regularly to the Council on 
the progress of work in its Dedicated Sessions on th is subject.  He invited Mr Erwidodo (Indonesia), 
Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the CTD, to  report on the progress of work in this area. 
53. Mr Erwidodo (Indonesia), Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the CTD , said the Dedicated 
Session had last met on 8 December.  Members had discussed the latest revision of a Secretariat paper 
(WT/COMTD/SE/W/22/Rev.5) which compiled all th e proposals, decisions and agreements which 
had been made since 2002 which concerned SV Es and the Small Economies Work Programme.  
Members had welcomed this latest revision, saying  it was valuable both in terms of its clarity of 
presentation and its record keeping of the most recen t proposals and decisions relevant to the Small 
Economies Work Programme.  At the 8 December m eeting, the proponents of SVEs had said they 
would continue to identify areas where they stood to benefit from the current negotiations and from WTO work in general.  The focu s on this work would continue into 2011 and would certainly 
intensify if the pace of the DDA negotiations picked up.  Key areas of focus where SVEs would continue to seek flexibilities concerned Agricu lture, NAMA and Services, as well as Subsidies 
disciplines, Trade Facilitation and Fisheries Subsidies. 
54. The representative of Barbados
, on behalf of the SVEs , thanked the Chairman of the CTD 
Dedicated Session for his report.  Since the Oct ober General Council meeti ng, the SVEs had made 
two contributions to the NAMA discussions on NTBs.  These submissions, on the Ministerial Decision on procedures for the facilitation of solu tions to NTBs and on the Negotiating Text on 
Liberalizing Trade in Remanufactured Goods, respec tively, posed clarification questions to the 
relevant proponents and outlined the need for flex ibilities for SVEs within the horizontal mechanism 
and the remanufactured goods proposals.  The SVEs  expected to engage further with Members on 
these issues.  These latest submissions had been included in the Secretariat's revised compilation 
document.  The SVEs wished to place on the record their appreciation to the Secretariat for its work 
on this revision, which the SVEs recognized to be more streamlined and to provide a concise 
collection of the most recent proposals and decisions relevant to the Small Economies Work 
Programme.  During the Dedicated Session, in add ition to the presentation of the revised compilation, 
the SVEs had presented a comprehensive assessment of the Doha Round, which would be formally 
circulated in the CTD.  They hoped there would be a further opportunity to have an interactive 
exchange with other Members on these views.  While  not seeking to repeat those views at the present WT/GC/M/129 
Page 18  
 
  meeting, the SVEs wished to underscore that as Members moved towards the final stages of the Doha 
Round, and in the fulfilment of Paragraph 35 of  the Doha Ministerial mandate for the further 
integration of small, vulnerable economies into th e multilateral trading system, the SVEs appreciated 
the generally positive responses to their concerns as addressed by Members thus far.  However, it had 
to be ensured that their outstanding negotiating issues and concerns were not overlooked until the 
endgame.  They therefore looked forward to ear ly and sustained engagement on the remaining 
negotiating issues with a view to the delivery of sp ecific and effective trade-related responses to their 
needs. 
55.  The General Council took note
 of the report of the Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the 
Committee on Trade and Development and of the statement. 
(b) Graduation of Maldives from LDC status on 1 January 2011 – Communication from Maldives 
(WT/GC/130) 
56. The Chairman  said the communication from Maldives in document WT/GC/130, requesting 
that this item be placed on the Agenda of the pr esent meeting, had been received on 1 December, and 
invited that delegation to introduce the item. 
57. The delegation of Maldives  said he wished to inform the membership that Maldives would 
graduate from the UN's list of least-developed c ountries as from 1 January 2011, as decided by the 
UN General Assembly in 2005.  It would be the fi rst time that a WTO LDC Member had officially 
graduated from the LDC list, thereby, in principl e, losing the S&D Treatment for LDCs under the 
various WTO agreements.  The UN's decision had b een based on the fact that Maldives' per capita 
income and human development indices had surpassed th e threshold for graduati on.  Maldives had not 
met the threshold for graduation under the third crite ria, economic vulnerability.  However, this had 
not been deemed to warrant retention of LDC stat us under the present criteria.  Maldives, like many 
other small economies, was acutely vulnerable at  economic, social, institu tional and environmental 
levels.  The most marked economic vulnerabilities in cluded the sectoral concentration of exports in 
tourism and fisheries, high transportation costs due  to geographic dispersion, and the diseconomies of 
scale resulting from its being a small island nation.  In addition, the impact of climate change 
threatened to hamper its long-term development.  N onetheless, despite the fact that UN criteria did not 
factor in these inherent vulnerabilities, in accep ting to graduate, his Government hoped that the 
country would not fall from its present growth trajectory in future. 
58. Maldives was graduating at a time of global economic difficulties as developed countries 
grappled with the effects of deficits and budget cuts.  In addition, it faced the reality of declining aid 
budgets and other support measures.  The issue of pr eference erosion, in view of imminent MFN 
liberalization as well as loss of LDC status, was l ooming large.  Maldives was keenly aware of the 
impact such changes would have on it as a sma ll and vulnerable economy.  This was why it would 
need adequate policy space to integrate beneficially into the multilateral trading system.  Accordingly, 
Maldives wished to appeal to the understanding of th e membership in providing  flexibilities that were 
accorded to small economies in various areas of the DDA negotiations, including NAMA, Fisheries 
Subsidies, etc.  In the coming days his delegation intended to work closely with the membership and 
its SVE colleagues on these flexibilities.  His delegati on wished to thank all its  friends and colleagues 
who continued to support Maldives, and to thank the Secretariat for its continued technical assistance, 
including the seminar on graduation being organized in  Male the following week.  He also wished to 
thank Maldives' trade partners who had pledged their support to the count ry.  In addition, he wished to 
pay tribute to colleagues in the LDC Group with whom  Maldives had worked cl osely for many years.  
As LDCs, all were future graduating countries a nd as such, their common interests and cooperation 
would always remain strong.  His delegation hoped that Members would extend all necessary 
cooperation and support to help Ma ldives to implement the WTO Agreements as well as to support 
the case of Maldives in the DDA negotiations.  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 19 
 
 
  59. The representative of the European Union  congratulated Maldives on graduating from LDC 
status on 1 January 2011.  This graduation was a positive recognition of the impressive economic and 
social development of Maldives during the past two decades, and the EU commended the country for 
the remarkable economic recovery after the tsuna mi.  However, the EU recognized the vulnerable 
position of Maldives' economy and the challenges f aced in the process of transition, such as the 
removal of tariff preferences under the special arrangement for LDCs.  Therefore, on 
3 December 2010 the EU had adopted a regulation that  would allow Maldives to continue to benefit 
from the preferences granted under the special arrangement for LDCs until 31 December 2013.  After 
that date, Maldives would continue to benef it from the preferences under the standard GSP 
arrangement, and if the necessary eligibility conditi ons were met, also from the GSP preferences. 
60. The representative of Zambia , on behalf of the LDCs , congratulated the Government and 
people of Maldives for the socio-economic progress achieved, which had gained them their graduation from LDC status.  Maldives would be the third LDC to graduate from the status of LDCs 
since the recognition of this category of countries by the UN in 1971 – Botswana had graduated in 
1994 and Cape Verde in 2007.  The small number of countries that had managed to graduate to date 
showed how challenging it was for LD Cs to attain levels of grow th and development that were 
sustainable.  In the case of Maldives, one had seen how this country had progressed to a level where it 
had been deemed fit to graduate by 2007.  Maldives had also been able to attain high growth rates in 
its export sector.  Maldives, like other countries at  low levels of development, faced numerous 
challenges, including the effects of climate cha nge and a high concentration in export products – 
chilled/frozen tuna accounted for 80.6 per cent of Mald ives' exports in 2008, and tourism remained an 
important source of export earnings.  The manufactur ing sector had been constrained by low demand 
levels and other limitati ons, and with ecological challenges limiti ng agriculture, this country remained 
a net food importer.  Members should also recall that Maldives was one of the countries hit by the 
tsunami in 2004, which had affected its services, exports and income from tourism, and had delayed 
its graduation.  The loss as a result of this natura l disaster was estimated by the World Bank at 62 per 
cent of Maldives' GDP.  Nonetheless, the LDC Group was pleased to note that Maldives had 
successfully managed to emerge out of the loss suffe red in 2004 and had been able to build resilience 
to external shocks, although the issue of global warmi ng and its effect of rising sea levels was an issue 
of concern to island countries like Maldives.  The LDCs hoped that Maldives would be facilitated and 
supported by development partners and the WTO member ship in its adjustment process, so that it did 
not slip back into LDC status.  To this end, the LDCs commended the EIF Board for its continued 
support to graduating LDCs for a limited period of tim e, in order to facilitate their adjustment, and 
called upon other partners to exercise flexib ility when dealing with graduating LDCs. 
61. The representative of Bangladesh
 congratulated Maldives on its remarkable achievements. 
His country was delighted that Maldives was graduating from the list of LDCs.  It was also encouraging for other LDCs, who aspired to gradua te at some point.  He wished to thank the 
development partners for their pr oductive engagement with Maldiv es, and hoped that Maldives would 
be on a continuous growth trajectory in future.   In this  regard, he wished to flag the role of fair trade 
in growth and development.  The outcome of the DDA would provide that opportunity for LDCs to 
move toward desired development goals.  Given thei r level of development and the status of their 
economies, LDCs needed more and clear flexibility under S&D treatment. 
62. The representative of Barbados
 welcomed Maldives into the family of SVEs.  Maldives had 
shown that it was a resilient economy and though expo sed to the effects of climate change and rising 
sea levels, had managed this challe nge well.  Barbados would work closely with Maldives in the 
coming months to ensure that its interests as an SV E in the multilateral trading system were taken into 
account into the Doha negotiations. 
63. The General Council took  of the statements. WT/GC/M/129 
Page 20  
 
  4. Follow-up to the 1 August 2004 General Council Decision and the Hong Kong 
Ministerial Declaration on the Doha Work  Programme – Statement by the Director-
General on the development assistance aspects of cotton 
64. The Chairman
 recalled that in Paragraph 1(b) of its July 2004 Decision on the Doha Work 
Programme, the General Council, inte r alia, had taken note of the bila teral, multilateral, and regional 
efforts to make progress on the development assist ance aspects of the Cotton Initiative, and had 
instructed the Secretariat to continue to work with the development community and to provide the 
Council with periodic reports on relevant developments.  The Council had also instructed the 
Director-General to consult with the relevant in ternational organizations, including the Bretton Woods 
Institutions, the Food and Agriculture Organization and the International Trade Centre, to direct 
effectively existing programmes and any additional resources towards development of the economies 
where cotton had vital importance.  Periodic Reports on this matter had been issued by the Director-
General in 2004, 2005 and 2009.  He invited the Di rector-General to update  the Council on the work 
in this area. 
65. The Director-General  said he had last reported to the General Council on the implementation 
of the Doha Mandate on Cotton in November 2009.  That report was contained in document 
WT/GC/120 – WT/CFMC/DG/3.  The report covered cotton-related developments from the Hong 
Kong Ministerial Conference in 2005 up until the end of  2009.  In between his reports to the General 
Council, Members had been regularly briefed by his staff in the Sub-Committee on Cotton through 
progress reports.  His brief statement at the present me eting reported on developm ents in 2010.  As all 
knew, the Doha Mandate on cotton was being implemented on two track s:  the trade-policy and the 
development-assistance tracks.  On the developmen t assistance aspects, the DDA mandate was being 
carried out within the Consultative Framework Me chanism on Cotton.  In 2010, two rounds of the 
Consultative Framework Mechanism on Cotton had taken place, namely, the 13th round on 7 June, 
and the 14th round on 9 December 2010.  He had been encouraged by the substantive results of the 
previous week's round of consulta tions.  Members had considered the 10th version of the Evolving 
Table on Cotton Development Assistance, containe d in document WT/CFMC/6/Rev.9, which he had 
circulated under cover of his letter on 5 November  2010.  To date, the value of specific development 
assistance to cotton stood at around US$570 million, while assistance within the broader framework 
for agriculture and infrastructure-related support amounted to US$4.2 billion.   
66. The contributions by Members and participants  at the 14th round had indicated satisfaction 
with the results so far under the development-a ssistance aspects, even  though there remained 
challenges that were being pragmatically addr essed – for example, for more rapid operational 
implementation and for faster disbursement rates.   He commended the traditional bilateral donors for 
their contributions, in particular, the European Un ion, the United States, Japan and Canada, and the 
multilateral institutions that had provided steady su pport since the 2004 mandate, namely, the World 
Bank, the IMF, CFC/ICAC, FAO, the AfDB and the IT C.  During the previous week's consultations, 
one had also heard widespread appreciation for the contributions of South-South Cooperation for 
Cotton Sector Development.  He wished to than k Brazil, China, India and Pakistan for their 
innovative contributions.  He also wished to conve y his personal appreciation to Burkina Faso for its 
leadership in coordinating the C-4, and to DDG Singh who had been conduc ting these consultations 
on his behalf.  On the trade policy aspects, progress was linked to the Agriculture negotiations.  The 
Chair of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session had resumed consultations on cotton the 
previous week.   That Chair had intensified his c onsultations and was placing priority on cotton, in 
accordance with the Doha mandate  for specificity and expediti ousness.  The Chair's recent 
consultations had reaffirmed the consensus that co tton should be resolved, in accordance with the 
Hong Kong mandate, building on the revised draft modalities for Agriculture of 6 December 2008 and 
associated documents.  He wished to reiterate hi s position as Director-General and as TNC Chair on 
the priority of the cotton dossier, in particular for those LDCs for whom cotton provided a "vital 
mainstay".  The satisfactory resolution for all releva nt parties remained a key test of the development  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 21 
 
 
  aspects of the Doha Round.  This was why he conti nued to urge Members, now more than ever, to 
give new impetus to the negotiations in the 2011 window of opportunity. 
67. The representative of Zambia , on behalf of the LDC Group , thanked the Director-General for 
his statement on the Development Assistance Aspect s of Cotton, and for the commendable work thus 
far undertaken through the consultative framework on cotton, under which to date he had held 14 
rounds of consultations.  This had been a useful  mechanism for Members to keep track of the 
developments taking place regarding the developmen t mandate of cotton.  The LDCs were pleased to 
note through the Evolving Table, the increase in both commitments and disbursements of 
development assistance to the cotton sector, whic h had increased from US$2.099 billion and US$25 
million, respectively, in 2007, to US$4.814 billi on and US$848 million, by November 2010.  The 
LDCs wished to thank those partners who had con tinued to provide support in this regard.  The 
combination of cotton-specific development support and overall development to the agriculture sector 
programmes that had a focus on cotton, as well as the inclusion of south-sout h co-operation, provided 
a good basis for effective monitoring of development assistance.  However, while substantial progress 
had been made on this aspect of the mandate, the tr ade aspects still lagged behind. There could be no 
meaningful development in the cotton sector wit hout the right and competitive environment at the 
global level, and this coul d only be attained by addressing all aspe cts that distorted international trade 
in cotton.  As the LDCs had said before, this  part of the mandate needed to be addressed 
expeditiously, specifically and ambitiously.  An out come on cotton remained an important litmus test 
for the development dimension of the DDA.  Th ere could not be a Doha package premised on 
development without a satisfactory outcome on cotton.   It was the LDCs' firm belief and expectation 
that Cotton would be among priority issues identified under the work programme on Agriculture, and 
that the consultation process, both formal and in formal, would be inclusive and transparent. 
68. The representative of Egypt  recalled that at the 30 November meeting of the TNC, the 
Director-General had said the final countdown of the Doha Round had started.  For the cotton negotiations, the final countdown should proceed ambitiously, expeditiously and specifically, as 
Members had agreed in the 2004 General Council Decision on the Doha work programme.  The 
cotton issue should symbolize coherence and a win-win for trade and development.  The Director-General had described cotton as the litmus test for the development commitment in the Doha Round.  
However, Egypt noted with concern the latest fi gures recently released by the International Cotton 
Advisory Committee revealed that the C-4 share in  the world cotton market had shrunk during the 
second half of 2000.  The 2010 harvested  area had fallen by 48 per cent,  yields had declined by 15 per 
cent and production had dropped by 56 per cent, compar ed to 3 per cent, 4 per cent, and 18 per cent, 
respectively, at the global level.  As a result, the C-4's share of world cotton production had fallen 
from 2.8 per cent to 1.5 per cent, and their share in world exports from 8 per cent to 5 per cent.  
Clearly, one needed to act and deliver quickly on cott on.  All Members needed to engage seriously in 
the negotiations and demonstrate utmost flexibility  when horizontal trade-offs started.  The 
Agriculture negotiations should put cotton at the fore front, and not let it be set aside or pushed away 
to a later date.  This was crucial for all LD Cs and developing-country producers of cotton. 
69. The Council took note
 of the statement by the Director-General and the statements. 
5. Work Programme on Electronic Commerce – Review of progress  
70. The Chairman  recalled that at their Seventh Session in Geneva in December 2009, Ministers 
had adopted a Decision on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce (WT/L/782).  In this 
Decision, Ministers had called, inter alia , for intensive reinvigoration of work under the Work 
Programme, and had instructed the General Council  to hold periodic reviews of the progress on the 
Work Programme in preparation for the next Mini sterial Conference.  He invited DDG Singh, who on 
his behalf and that of his predecessors, had been  dealing with the Work Programme on Electronic 
Commerce since 2005, to report on work in this area. WT/GC/M/129 
Page 22  
 
  71. Mr Singh, Deputy Director-General
, said that as the Chairman had indicated, in 
December 2009 Ministers had adopted a Decision that called, inter alia, for intensive reinvigoration 
of work under the Work Programme on Electronic Co mmerce, and instructed the General Council to 
hold a periodic review of the progress on the Work Programme at its meeting in December 2010.  He 
had been informed that no Member had raised any issue under the Work Programme on Electronic 
Commerce for discussion during the course of 2010 in the Goods, Services and TRIPS Councils or in 
the Committee on Trade and Development.  Similarly, there had been no call for a meeting of the Dedicated Discussion on cross-cutting issues in e-co mmerce.  Having said this, he understood that 
matters relating to electronic commerce had been di scussed in certain contexts outside the formal 
consideration of the Work Programme.  On 29 Nove mber, on behalf of the General Council Chair, he 
had held an informal consultation open to all Memb ers on the follow-up to the Ministerial Decision of 
2 December 2009 on E-Commerce.  Based on that c onsultation, he wished to make the following 
points.  First, in the course of 2010, no work had been done specifically under the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce in any of the relevant WT O bodies.  Second, several delegations had noted 
that work on issues related to e-commerce had been  done in other contexts.  Third, all delegations 
who had spoken at the meeting had expressed an in terest in re-invigorating the Work Programme.  
Fourth, several delegations had indicated they would provide proposals to give content to the Work Programme and to take it forward. 
72. The representative of Chinese Taipei
 said that all had witnessed the recent remarkable growth 
in both volume and value of electronic commerce.  His delegation agreed that it was important to 
establish a comprehensive work programme in order to properly examine the trade-related issues 
arising out of global electronic commerce, ta king into account the economic, financial and 
development needs of developing countries.  It was also necessary to reinvigorate work in 2011, with 
a view to better understanding and tackling the implications of electronic commerce in the areas of trade examined by the Council for Trade in Servic es, the Council for Trade in Goods, the Council for 
TRIPS and the Committee on Trade and Development.   His delegation wished to emphasize that it 
supported the continuation of the Work Programme  and stood ready to participate actively and 
constructively in the process. 
73. The representative of Cuba
 thanked DDG Singh for his information concerning the 
Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, which s howed there had been no results in 2010.  She 
would not remind Members of the mandate on e-commerce, but simply wished to re-emphasize the need, and Cuba's willingness, to contribute to the rev italization of this work, with a view to making 
decisions in this regard at the 2011 Ministerial C onference.  Her delegation had referred to these 
aspects at the informal consultations on electronic commerce on 29 November 2010.  As all knew, electronic commerce, in its broadest sense, consis ted of the buying or selling of goods or services by 
businesses, households, individuals, governments or other public or private organizations, through 
computer networks, whether in open environments  such as Internet websites, or in closed 
environments such as through electronic data inte rchange.  Access to the technologies linked to these 
computer networks was essential for the development of this activity.  Access had to be available not 
only to users, but also to governments, whic h were responsible for establishing the necessary 
regulations as part of public policy objectives aimed at  building a true information society.  However, 
in the initial discussions held in the Committee on  Trade and Development as part of the Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce, it had become clear that one of the main problems facing 
developing countries was their lack of access to th e information technology needed to conduct and 
ensure the expansion of this type of trade.  Th is only served to widen the existing digital divide 
between developed and developing countries.  Her delegation was especially interested in discussing 
this matter, particularly with a view to est ablishing measures to solve the problems faced by 
developing countries.  Cuba, for example, was de nied access to the information technology required 
to develop electronic commerce.  These restrictions , unfairly imposed on Cuba by the United States, 
also had a major impact on other countries – countri es which were being indirectly affected by US 
policy towards Cuba.  As a result of the absurd economic, commercial and financial blockade, Cuba  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 23 
 
 
  faced a great many barriers regarding accessing information technology.  All these prohibitions 
affected the growth of electroni c commerce in Cuba, which was a developing-country Member.  Cuba 
was in the process of preparing a document as part of the work being carried out under the Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce, and expected to  present it to Members at the beginning of 2011. 
74. The representative of China  thanked DDG Singh for his report.  China wished to stress that 
the basic WTO principles of non-discrimination, pred ictability and transparency, and the concerns on 
development-related issues should be considered carefully in the Work Programme.  The General 
Council should conduct periodic reviews of the progress of the Work Programme and urge the 
relevant subsidiary committees to resume their work.  At the same time, Members should be 
encouraged to submit proposals and recommendations as soon as possible.  China committed itself to 
working closely with the Chairman and with other Members in pushing the process forward. 
75. The General Council took note  of the statements. 
6. Review under Paragraph 8 of the Decision on the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the 
Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health (WT/L/540 and Corr.1) – 
Report of the Council for TRIPS (IP/C/57) 
76. The Chairman  recalled that in August 2003, the Ge neral Council had adopted a Decision on 
the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public 
Health.  Paragraph 8 of that Decision provided th at the TRIPS Council shall review annually the 
functioning of the system set out in the Decision with a view to ensuring its effective operation and report on its operation to the General Council.  He  invited Mr Glass (Hong Kong, China), Chairman 
of the TRIPS Council, to introduce that Council's report in document IP/C/57, and noted that a 
Corrigendum to this document had been issued the previous day in English only. 
77. Mr Glass (Hong Kong, China), Chairman of the TRIPS Council
, said that at its meeting of 26-
27 October 2010, the TRIPS Council had taken up the annual review pursuant to Paragraph 8 of the 
Decision on the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of th e Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and 
Public Health.  The TRIPS Council's report on this re view to the General Council had been circulated 
in document IP/C/57 and Corr.1.  The cover note to this document set out factual information 
regarding the implementation and use of the Sy stem established under the Decision, as well as the 
discussions on the operation of the System earlier in the year.  As had been agreed at its meeting in 
June 2010, the Council had set aside the second day of  its October meeting for this review.  Members 
had shared their experience on the use and implem entation of the System and had discussed any 
alternatives to it, as well as related matters affectin g access to medicines.  The Secretariats of the 
WTO, UNCTAD, WHO, UNAIDS and WIPO had provided information, inter alia , on their capacity-
building activities.  The WTO Legal Affairs Di vision had also briefed the Council about the 
procedural aspects regarding the acceptance of the Protocol.  In addition, the Council had discussed 
next steps and requested him to consult on follow-up  to the review.  This discussion had been based 
on a list of topics he had developed in consultation w ith a number of Members.  The full record of the 
discussion was contained in an annex to the aforementioned report to the General Council. 
78. The report also provided an update on the status of acceptances of the Protocol Amending the 
TRIPS Agreement that had been done in Geneva on 6 December 2005.  It was open for acceptance by 
Members until 31 December 2011 or such later date  as might be decided by the Ministerial 
Conference.  Since the review in October, an a dditional notification of acceptance had been received 
from Croatia.  As of the present, 32 notifications of acceptance of the Protocol, including from the 
European Communities, had been received.  In acco rdance with paragraph 3 of Article X of the WTO 
Agreement, the Protocol would enter into force for the Members that had accepted it upon acceptance 
of the Protocol by two-thirds of the Members.  He wished to call once more on those Members who had not yet accepted the Protocol to carry out prompt ly the necessary internal procedures so that they WT/GC/M/129 
Page 24  
 
  could deposit their instruments of acceptance as soon as possible.  To further assist Members in 
drawing up their instruments, the information the Secretariat had provided during the annual review, 
together with a model instrument of acceptance,  had been made available on the WTO's dedicated 
website on TRIPS and public health. 
79. The representative of Brazil
 recalled with satisfaction that very useful discussions on the 
implementation of the Paragraph 6 sy stem had been held during the last session of the TRIPS Council.  
Those discussions had stressed the increased relevanc e of the Paragraph 6 system after the transition 
period for the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement.   Further discussions needed to be conducted 
on this matter, in which all relevant  stakeholders should be involved. 
80. The representative of Cuba  thanked the Chairman of the TRIPS Council for his efforts in 
arranging a full working session to discuss Members'  concerns regarding implementation of the 
Decision on Paragraph 6 at the most recent meeting of the TRIPS Council.  However, Cuba was still 
concerned about the Decision's limited application to  date.  There were many  reasons for the latter, 
but none of them removed the doubts as to the effectiveness of the Paragraph 6 system or was sufficiently convincing to warrant the major legislat ive and administrative effort required of countries 
at the domestic level, should they need to make use of the system.  Although the Decision was 
designed to resolve the specific problem of Member s with insufficient or no manufacturing capacities 
in the pharmaceutical sector, this was not the only source of the difficulties faced by the developing 
countries in gaining access to medicines.  Member s should therefore perhaps engage in a more 
comprehensive analysis of the issue and give tho ught to what other decisions should be adopted, in 
order to find a truly effective solution to the overall problem.  One option might be to examine the 
effect of patents on the prices of medicines. 
81. The representative of India
 said his delegation wished to thank the Chair of the TRIPS 
Council for organizing a detailed review of the of Paragraph 8 of the Decision on the Implementation 
of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health of 
30 August 2003.  India was happy that instead of th e usual ritualistic annual review, Members for the 
first time had engaged in a substantive discussion on an issue as important as Public Health.  India had 
always been of the view that the Doha Declara tion on TRIPS and Public Health constituted a major 
landmark in the short history of TRIPS, because it recognized the primacy of public health needs and 
the sensitivity of this Agreement to the problems fa ced by the poor in the less-developed countries.  
Along with other Members, India had worked rele ntlessly on the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and 
Public Health and the Decision of 30 August 2003 on the implementation of Paragraph 6 of that 
Declaration.  It hoped that the August 30 Deci sion would genuinely and completely address the 
problems faced by Members with insufficient or no manufacturing capacity in the pharmaceutical sector to address their public health problems.  India was disappointed that as of the present, the 
Paragraph 6 provision had been used only once in ove r seven years.  Canada should be complimented 
on its efforts to supply AIDS drugs to Rwanda through the first and only operationalization of the 
Paragraph 6 system so far.  However it was also worth noting that it had taken about three years to 
supply the medicine.  He recalled that the Paragr aph 6 system was supposed to be an "expeditious 
solution" to the crisis in acces s to medicines by countries with insufficient or no  manufacturing 
capacity.  Experience clearly showed that it had been neither "expeditious" nor a "solution" to public health needs.   
82. In this context, it was important to have a t horough discussion on the legal, structural and/or 
administrative obstacles, if any, to the optimal implementation of the Paragraph 6 system.  Some 
developing countries, including India, had raised the demand for a dedicated workshop to discuss implementation of the Paragraph 6 system.  The s uggestion was that the workshop should be open to 
all Members, Civil Society Organizations in th e public health sector, such as Médecins Sans 
Frontières and UNITAID, for example, as well as Ap otex, the Canadian pharmaceutical manufacturer, 
to share their first-hand experience.  India was disappointed that in spite  of overwhelming support  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 25 
 
 
  from developing and least-developed Members, and also from developed Members, consensus had 
remained elusive, due to the intransigence of a few developed Members.  Another cause for concern 
was the slow pace of acceptance of the Protocol fo r amendment of the TRIPS Agreement, with about 
30 acceptances in over four years.  Members needed to analyse why countries with insufficient or no 
manufacturing capacity were virtually missing from the list.  He asked if this was due merely to 
domestic procedural reasons or whether it repres ented apathy to Paragraph 6.  The fact that 
discussions had gone on until late on  the second day of the last TRIPS Council meeting showed the 
interest among Members.  An in-depth analysis of  the issues just highlighted was called for.  The 
TRIPS Council should continue its discussion on th is issue both in the TRIPS Council as well as in a 
dedicated workshop. 
83. The representative of Ecuador  said his delegation recognized the work done in the review of 
the operation of Paragraph 6, which had been held in  October, and considered this to be a good basis 
for Members to continue with an evaluation of the effectiveness of such a me chanism.  In so doing, 
Ecuador reiterated the importance of conducting a br oad-based debate, going into further depth as to 
where all those involved in the promotion of public  health and protection of intellectual property 
rights were involved. 
84. The representative of Zambia , on behalf of LDC Group , thanked the Chairman of the TRIPS 
Council for his report.  The matters c ontained in this report were importa nt to the LDCs in view of the 
difficulties that most of these countries faced in accessing affordable medicines and diagnostic tools to effectively respond to public health pandemics, su ch as HIV/Aids, Tuberculosis and malaria.   The 
LDC Group wished to commend the TRIPS Council Chai r for undertaking consultations on the use of 
the system which had subsequently resulted in consensus among Members to share experience on the 
use of the system, in order to better understand its  functioning and the challenges faced by Members 
in the process.  It was clear from the review unde rtaken in October 2007 that there was still little 
information on how Members had been able to utili ze the system, due to the limited number of cases 
where the system had been successfully  used.  However, this was not to say that the system was not 
working, but rather set the basis for continued e ngagement among Members to ensure that the system 
was fully exploited, and that those for whom it had been designed were assisted in effectively utilizing 
it.  The LDCs took note that there were s till challenges in the process of acceptance of the 
amendments, as seen from the small number of count ries that had notified the Secretariat of the 
changes made to their domestic legal regimes in  order to facilitate implementation – only ten 
Members, counting the EU as one,  as highlighted in  the Chairman's report.  There was an equally 
small number of countries that had deposited thei r instrument of acceptance – 31 Members, counting 
EU as one, of which two were LDCs, as highlighted in Paragraph 6 of the annex to the Chairman's 
report.  The extended deadline of 31 December 2011 for acceptance was not fa r from the present, in 
view of the fact that the domestic processes for having the instruments of acceptance in place were 
laborious. 
85. This was an area where particular attention w ould be required, and where the involvement of 
IP and health experts was critical to the identifica tion of the gaps and solutions.  The LDCs therefore 
urged the TRIPS Council Chair to continue his consu ltative process on this matt er.  The present year's 
review undertaken on 26- 27 October 2010 had been  an enriching exchange.  The format and the 
direction of the agenda had added a unique depth of interaction that  had helped Members to gain a 
better understanding of the challenges they faced.  In this light, the LDCs supported the proposal that 
had been made by some Members for a workshop i nvolving a wider representation of stakeholders, in 
order to shed light on some of the key challenges th at were limiting the utilization of the system.  The 
LDCs welcomed more informal consulta tions by the Chairman on this matter. 
86. The representative of Canada
 said his country had been pleased with the historic and 
multilateral WTO solution of 30 August 2003.  This  had provided another avenue for developing 
countries to access medicines needed to respond to  public health problems, while assuring that WT/GC/M/129 
Page 26  
 
  intellectual property protection was maintained fo r the development of new and better drugs.  In 
October, Members had engaged in a constructiv e discussion on the operation of the Paragraph 6 
system.  Although this annual review had been in  place for some time, the October meeting had 
improved upon Members' collective understanding  of how some Members had implemented the 
system.  In addition, the meeting had provided a useful opportunity to exchanges views on various 
issues impacting the availability of safe and affordable  medicines.  Canada wished to thank the TRIPS 
Council Chair for helping to establish some clear parameters around the discussions on the Paragraph 6 system.  It looked forward to future consultations with the Chair on how future work on 
this issue might be shaped. 
87. The representative of Switzerland
 said his delegation had taken note of the report of the 
TRIPS Council and wished to thank the TRIPS Council Chair for his relentless efforts on this 
important matter of Public Health.  Switzerland ha d suggested, after the dedicated session in October, 
that the work be continued in the TRIPS Council, and in this regard it expected to hear more from the 
intended beneficiary Members about their exact con cerns and problems at the next meeting of the 
TRIPS Council.  Switzerland strongly encourag ed those Members who had not ratified the 
amendment yet to do so rapidly and in particular to implement it rapidly. 
88. The representative of China  joined previous speakers in thanking the TRIPS Council Chair 
for his hard work in the past year.  China attach ed great importance to the Doha Declaration on the 
TRIPS Agreement and Public Health.  However, the system established under the Decision of 
30 August 2003 to implement Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and 
Public Health had been used only once so far.  As  indicated by India, Ecuador and Zambia for the 
LDCs, many Members shared concerns over this si tuation and felt obliged to identify the reasons 
behind it and to find the means to address the po ssible difficulties and impediments.  During its 
regular meeting in October 2010, the TRIPS Coun cil had devoted a whole day to reviewing the 
implementation of the Paragraph 6 system, which ha d been very useful.  Further discussions among 
Members on this issue were necessary to ach ieve common understanding among Members and to 
better address the concerns over the issue of public  health.  In addition, China encouraged Members 
who had yet to accept the Amendment to do so as soon as possible. 
89. The representative of the United States  said that as already mentioned by a number of 
speakers, the TRIPS Council had spent the entire day reviewing the implementa tion of Paragraph 6.  
This review had been extremely productive.  Any fu rther review of the impl ementation of Paragraph 6 
should be within the TRIPS Council.  It was impo rtant to recall, however, that the Paragraph 6 
system's development was one element of a larger  international exchange of ideas that Member 
governments, the donor community, companies and ot her stakeholders had had – and were having – 
in order to improve access to medicines.  If Member s wished to review mechanisms to improve access 
to medicines, there were many other tools at their disposal besides the incentiv es of the patent system.  
For example, in some cases, taxes or tariffs we re levied on products being supplied at cost or on 
donated products, the cost of which was passed directly to patients.  As part of the NAMA 
negotiations, Switzerland, Singapore, the United Stat es and Chinese Taipei had proposed an Enhanced 
Healthcare Initiative for Members to jointly reduce or eliminate tariffs on medicines and key medical 
equipment and supplies.  Members could review the effect tariffs had on access to quality medicines, 
and the effect of tariffs on public health.  Weak drug procurement and delivery systems were another 
barrier to access to medicines.  Members could re view how strengthening government procurement 
could lead to improved public health.  His delegatio n recalled that in the case mentioned by India, the 
overall majority of time taken had been due to the procurement process of the country in question.  If 
the healthcare system was flooded with counterfeit or  falsified products, true access was not achieved.  
Members could consider how to improve the trad ing system to eliminate these products.  Access to 
medicines was a complex issue that required a multifaceted approach, and often a multi-sectoral 
approach that worked to address a ll aspects of the situation in a meaningful way.  The Paragraph 6 
system had to be located in this larger prism, and if the review was to be taken out of the context of  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 27 
 
 
  TRIPS Council, the other sectors that influen ced access to quality medicines should also be 
considered.  
90. The General Council took note  of the report of the TRIPS Council and of the statements. 
7. Accessions 
(a) WTO Accessions: 2010 Annual Report by the Di rector-General (WT/ACC/14) – Statement 
by Director-General 
(b) Accession priorities for 2010 in respect of LDCs  – Communication from Zambia on behalf of 
the LDC Group (WT/GC/129) 
91. The Chairman  proposed, and Members agreed, that the Council take up these two sub-items 
together.  He drew attention to the Director  General's report on accessions in document WT/ACC/14 
and invited him to introduce it. 
92. The Director-General  said he was pleased to present his Second Annual Report on 
Accessions, contained in document WT/ACC/14.  Th e year 2010 had seen significant developments 
on many accessions.  Long-dormant Working Parties had been reactivated and, because of the intensive engagement by Members and acceding governments, significant progress had been made, 
both overall and specifically with regard, in partic ular, to the accessions of Samoa, Yemen, Vanuatu, 
Serbia, Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation.  He commended Members for their engagement, 
support and commitment to achieve results, and be lieved that the organization was advantageously 
poised to harvest a number of accessions in 2011.  He  also continued to encourage resolution of the 
issues that impeded the accession of Montenegro.  In the course of 2010, he had received consistent 
messages from Members to improve accession-relate d transparency.  Measures had been taken to 
enhance transparency and improve inclusiveness in the accession process.  Participation in the 
Informal Group on Accessions had expanded and th e increase in Geneva-based chairpersons had 
ensured a more direct engagement in the Work ing Parties. A newsletter service for acceding 
governments had been established to provide informati on and to request feedback.  In addition, work 
had advanced on the establishment of an "Accession Commitments Database", which, when 
completed in early 2011, would enable Members,  acceding governments and the public at large to 
easily retrieve commitments undertaken by Recently Acceded Members (RAMs) since 1995. 
93. The WTO accession process had proved to be an important instrument in facilitating domestic 
reforms in acceding governments and in improving trade performance, with appropriate companion 
policies.  This was why he had added a new featur e in the current year's annual report, which was 
statistical analyses of the trade performance of RA Ms, in the period before and following their WTO 
accession, to assess the trade-related benefits of their WTO accession.  The initial review of the 
results indicated that RAMs had performed better in terms of trade performance in the post-accession period than in the period leading up to their WTO accession.  Their value of merchandise and services trade had grown faster than the world average.  He  would continue to carefully explore how one could 
expand and improve on this data  set, and he would welcome Members' comments to assist 
improvement in this regard.  Acce ssion to the WTO was a key instrument to assist the integration of 
LDCs into the multilateral trading system on a sound legal and technical basis and with development 
benefits.  In 2010, particular attention had been  accorded to LDCs' acce ssions.  The Dialogue of 
Acceding LDCs with Members had been deepened.  As Director General, he would continue to 
accord specific importance to LDCs' accession, and would exercise good offices whenever requested.  
In May 2011, Turkey would host the LDC-IV Conferen ce.  He urged Members to focus on this target 
date so that in combining substance with pr ocess, the WTO could provide clear LDCs' accession 
deliverables for the success of this Conference.  The accession prospects in 2011 were positive.  He 
urged Members and acceding governments to con tinue their intensive engagement on accessions, and WT/GC/M/129 
Page 28  
 
  invited Members to carefully review the report and provide feedback with suggestions that could be 
incorporated in the 2011 Annual Report on Accessions. 
94. The Chairman
 said the communication in document WT/GC/129 from Zambia, on behalf of 
the LDC Group, requesting that this item be placed  on the Agenda of the present meeting, had been 
received on 26 November, and invited Zambia to introduce it. 
95. The representative of Zambia , on behalf of the LDC Group , recalled that at the October 
General Council, the LDCs had asked to have an item on accession priorities for 2010 in respect of 
LDCs included on the agenda of the present meeting.  It had not asked to have this item be a standing 
item on the Council's agenda, as some  Members might think.   The Group wished to assure those 
Members that had expressed concern in this rega rd, that the LDCs were a constructive group and 
remained practical in their approach to this topic.   It believed that discussions on matters relating to 
the accession of LDCs would send an important message to the interna tional community as one 
approached the LDC-IV Conference in Istanbul.  Th is was one of the practical ways the WTO could 
give an encouraging message to acceding countries that their concerns were fully known and that 
every Member was rallying behind them.  In addition,  this process was important for those LDCs that 
had worked tirelessly to bring their accession pro cesses to a level of maturity, as was the case for 
Yemen, Samoa and Vanuatu.  Regarding the substan tive issues surrounding the three LDCs that were 
on the 2010 priority list, the LDC Group was in regular  contact with the Secretariat.  At the October 
General Council, Zambia had updated the meeting on the state of play of these three acceding 
countries, and he wished to provide the latest upda te to the General Council.  The Group noted that 
some work would need to be done by acceding gove rnments with the support of Members.  With 
regard to Yemen, the Group had taken good note of the excellent progress made at the informal 
Working Party meeting held on 13 December 2010.  He noted that Yemen's Minister of Industry and Trade was present at the meeting and would make a st atement to this effect.  The Group congratulated 
all bilateral partners that had successfully concl uded their negotiations, and urged those who were yet 
to conclude negotiations to e xpedite the process.  The Group hoped that the accession of Yemen 
would be firmed up by the next Working Party me eting, and urged all Members to support Yemen in 
this regard. 
96. On Vanuatu, the Secretariat had circulated, on 3 November 2010, the updated 2001 accession 
package and draft versions of some outstanding le gislation.  A reconvened Working Party meeting, 
open to all Members, had been scheduled for 1 D ecember 2010.  However, this meeting had been 
postponed until the end of January 2011 at the requ est of the Government of Vanuatu, in order to 
enable it to complete its process of enacting the out standing bills into law.  The LDC Group had taken 
note of the new date proposed and urged Memb ers to support Vanuatu during the January 2011 
reconvened Working Party meeting, so that this  accession could be concluded by early 2011.  
Regarding Samoa, the Group had been briefed by th e Secretariat on the state of play.  The draft 
Working Party report was under revision by the S ecretariat and would require validation by Samoa 
thereafter.  The Group noted that there was still some  work to be done by the Government of Samoa 
and would remain in close contact with the Secretar iat and continue to provide all support to Samoa.  
The LDC Group remained focused on all aspects of LDC accession and would continue to count on 
the membership for their successful conclusion. 
97. All delegations who spoke thanked the Direct or-General for his report on WTO accessions. 
98. The representative of the Dominican Republic
, on behalf of the Informal Group of 
Developing Countries , expressed the Group's support for the statement by Zambia for the LDC 
Group, and their appreciation for the Director General's report and for his efforts and those of the Secretariat to increase the pace of the different  accession working parties.  The IGDC was very 
pleased with the progress being made in several accession processes of developing countries, as had just been reported by the Director-General and by  Zambia for the LDCs.  The IGDC was one of the  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 29 
 
 
  few fora within the WTO in which developing coun tries that were not yet Members could interact 
with Members on an equal footing.  This was pe rhaps why the acceding countries were always very 
active in the IGDC's discussions.  The WTO accession process should be  governed by the principles 
of justice and equity.  It was also very importa nt that developing countries in accession be asked to 
undertake only commitments that were consistent with  their present and future development, financial 
and trade needs.  In particular, with regard to the accession of LDCs, the IGDC wished to see strict 
adherence to the 2002 guidelines on the accession of LDCs.  In this context, the Group wished to 
remind the membership that one of the principa l guidelines set out in this Decision called for 
Members to "exercise restrain t in seeking concessions and commitments on trade in goods and 
services from acceding LDCs, taking into account the levels of concessions and commitments 
undertaken by existing WTO LDC Members".  In  addition, it was commercial and technical 
considerations that should be the determining factor s in the adoption of decisions in the context of 
accessions, while political considerations should be left aside.  The IGDC was committed to 
continuing its work to strengthen and expand the multilateral trading system and the WTO.  The 
graduation of the Maldives from its LDC status and the optimism expressed at the present meeting 
regarding the conclusion of Doha Round in early 20 11, together were a clear signal of the attention 
Members should be giving the development dimension as a fundamental part of the final results of the 
Round, by making the Round a real boost for trade as a ke y factor of development.  In this way, this 
organization would succeed where others had failed in  linking development to their efforts to move 
LDCs out of that classification.   It was a shame that during the 39 years since the creation of that 
classification, only three LDCs had be en able to graduate out of it. 
99. The representative of Australia  said accessions remained a key priority area for this 
organization, as Australia had made clear on many occasions.  It therefore welcomed both the report 
from the Director-General and the statement by Zamb ia for the LDCs.  As the Director-General had 
already identified, the outlook for accessions in 20 11 was positive, with several accession negotiations 
poised for conclusion.  Australia had a particular  interest in seeing those negotiations involving 
countries in its region – namely, Vanuatu and Samoa – concluded in 2011, but of course wished to see 
all other accession negotiations move along as quick ly as possible in 2011, including Yemen and 
Russia.  His delegation hoped that the intens ity of work on accessions would match the renewed 
resolve in the Doha negotiations that Members were  now operating under, so that in addition to a 
successful Doha outcome in 2011, they could also welc ome a number of new members.  To do this, of 
course, Members and acceding governments would need to engage intensively.  Australia stood ready 
to do this, and in fact was already working closel y with Samoa and Vanuatu to help them finalize 
negotiations as soon as possible in 2011.  In providi ng this support, and recognizing the challenges 
faced by acceding LDCs, Australia would continue to support and assist LDCs with their accessions, 
consistent with the framework of the 2002 Accession Guidelines. 
100. The representative of Pakistan  said it was encouraging that several accession negotiations 
were likely to conclude in 2011.  The Secretariat a nd the Members needed to work together to finalize 
the process and ensure the smooth transition to th e multilateral rule-based trading regime for the new 
Members, especially LDCs.  During the next year, while Members made concerted efforts to complete the DDA negotiations and conclude the package, Members also had to remain engaged on the non-
Doha and on-going issues like accession, especially of LDCs.  Putting the accession process on a fast 
track would be important to make the WTO a trul y global organization and might even help in the 
DDA negotiations.  Members could reactivate this pr ocess by providing more technical expertise to 
LDCs and developing intensive training programmes to build capacity and human resources in the 
countries undergoing accession.  In addition, vacan t chairmanships of accession Working Parties 
might also be filled by Geneva-based Ambassadors.   
101. The representative of Nigeria
 said his delegation was happy to note that the Director-
General's report had significantly built on the prev ious one, and should ther efore constitute a good 
basis for Members' continued engagement on this issu e.  The following elements of the report were WT/GC/M/129 
Page 30  
 
  highly commendable and noteworthy.  First, there was a generally shared commitment by the entire 
membership to continue to stre ngthen and further improve transpar ency on WTO accession.  Nigeria 
therefore welcomed the general thrust of the repor t, which aimed at contributing to further improving 
the transparency of the accession process.  Sec ond, the Dialogue on LDC Accessions, as introduced 
by the Secretariat, had been productive.  Nigeria was therefore not surprised that the outlook for 
accession in 2011 was positive as a result of these efforts.  This dialogue should be sustained, with a 
view to improving transparency and the full impl ementation of the 2002 Accession Guidelines and the 
mandates by Ministers at Doha and Hong Kong, as well as ensuring the necessary policy space in the 
implementation of the WTO Agreements, including the provision of technical assistance and outreach.  His delegation also encouraged Member s to continue with this dialogue as well as 
accelerate the pace of work in the various working parties.  Third, the report had further provided 
Members the opportunity to engage and address so me of the concerns of acceding developing 
countries and LDCs.  Nigeria therefore fully suppor ted the statements by Zambia for the LDCs and 
the Dominican Republic for the IGDC.  In spite of the progress made, Nigeria remained concerned 
that many acceding developing and least-developed countries who were at various stages of the 
accession process had continued to experience delays, largely as a result of political considerations 
totally unrelated to the usual economic issues of c oncern to the multilateral trading system.  In some 
cases, acceding developing countries and LDCs ha d been or were being required to undertake 
commitments that were far beyond th eir development needs and capacities.  In many situations too, 
these commitments were often far in excess of those already undertaken by existing developing-
country Members who were at the same level of development.  Against this background, Nigeria 
called on Members to facilitate the accession of developing and least-developed countries by 
addressing the numerous constraints facing them, in cluding human and institutional aspects of their 
accession processes. 
102. Nigeria shared the view that accession was cen tral to achieving the "universality" of the 
multilateral trading system.  Therefore, the issue at  stake was the efficacy and efficiency of the 
existing accession mechanism and processes to achieve this goal.  Since Members were operating in a 
dynamic environment, there was need to alwa ys show understanding a nd exercise requisite 
flexibilities in the face of prevailing circumstances a nd realities.  Therefore, it was now time for some 
expedited action by the General Council toward s improving the systemic transparency of the 
accession process, specifically to review and ma ke recommendations towards undertaking reforms 
and clarifying the provisions of Article XII of the Marrakech Agreement establishing the WTO.  
Members needed to ensure that  accessions focussed primarily on the trade policies and practices of 
acceding countries, rather than on other extrane ous considerations.  An effective monitoring 
mechanism would be necessary in order to reali se this goal.  Therefore, what should remain 
paramount to Members should be the long term bene fits to the acceding countries in particular, and 
the multilateral trading system in general, par ticularly the ability of the acceding countries to 
undertake the appropriate domestic reforms that woul d enable them to fully integrate and benefit from 
the international trading system.  Therefore, it was Nigeria's expectation that the WTO would be in a 
position to showcase the achievements made rega rding the LDCs' accession during the forthcoming 
LDC-IV Conference in May 2011. 
103. The representative of Paraguay
 said his delegation supported the statement by Zambia for the 
LDCs regarding the different accession processes, and wished to draw particular attention to the 
situation faced by acceding landlocked developing c ountries.  His country called on all Members  to 
facilitate developing countries' accession and to take account of the situation of landlocked 
developing countries, given the special vulnerabilitie s stemming from their disadvantaged geographic 
situation. 
104. The representative of India  said the Director-General's report was very comprehensive and 
useful in providing a fair view of the accessi on process and the current accessions.  India fully 
supported the statement by Zambia for the LDCs and by the Dominican Republic for the IGDC.  India  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 31 
 
 
  attached great importance to accessions, as these were important to make the organization universal.  
Each accession contributed to the universality of the WTO.  The acceding countries sought to benefit 
from the multilateral trading system in achieving th eir social, economic and de velopment goals.  India 
had provided assistance bilaterally to the acceding countries and would continue to do so.  In this 
context, India would be organizing, for the first time, a workshop in the first quarter of 2011 on 
accessions for those developing countries and LDCs in the accession process, to which Senior 
Officials of these countries would be invited.  In addition, it would also be inviting a recently-acceded 
LDC and a recently-acceded developing country to share their respective experiences.  This was 
important, as India continued to hear demands for technical assistance, but also because it was concrete proof that his country was making an effort in this direction. 
105. The representative of the European Union
 said the Director-General's report gave a useful 
photograph of the state of play on accessions and pros pects in the future.  The EU wished to thank all 
those acceding countries who had put genuine effo rts into the accession process.  It noted with 
appreciation that several initiatives had been take n in 2010 to increase the transparency of accession 
processes.  These had been useful, even if the EU shared the view  expressed in the report that 
eventually the most powerful transparency measure would be full and effective participation by all 
Members in Working Parties.  The EU also welcom ed the "activist" stance adopted by working party 
chairpersons, which was not necessarily related to th e fact that these chairpersons were Geneva-based.  
In fact, the EU did not appreciate the inference in the report that non-resident Chairs were inherently 
less equipped to do a good job.  There were other aspects of the report that the EU did not wholly 
agree with.  First, it was simply not correct to st ate that a meeting of the Belarus Working Party was 
envisaged in early 2011.  That depended on the fulf ilment of certain conditions.  Second, the section 
on RAMs, while extensive, raised questions, such  as whether 15 years was "recently acceded".  The 
EU did not want to see another category of Memb er institutionalized.  It had questions over the 
planned database mentioned in paragraph 3 of the intr oduction.  The EU wished to know if it was the 
intention in this database to include the draft bila teral agreements reached in accession processes, and 
also what the scope of this planned database would be. 
106. The EU was particularly pleased that in 201 0, Members had made enormous progress in 
bringing towards a close the accession of some LD Cs.  The EU had always held the view that 
Members should adopt a flexible and streamlined approach to LDC accession, in line with the 2002 
Accession Guidelines.  His delegation hoped to be  able soon to welcome three new LDCs as WTO 
Members.   Thanks to the efforts of these LDCs, completion of these accessions was in sight, and the 
EU hoped for a smooth finalization of these processes.  The finishing line seemed very close, in 
particular for Vanuatu, subject to all legisl ation being adopted, whic h the EU understood was 
imminent.  However, Members should be mindful that while they had a duty to be "activist" in their 
work on accessions, these processes were eventually driven by the political will of the acceding 
countries.  Members could set the ground for a smooth accession process, but there was no way this 
could be concluded unless the acceding countries ad opted the necessary legislation and enacted the 
relevant economic reforms.  As the Director-Gener al had just noted, there was one shadow in this 
bright picture – the situation of  one acceding country, Montenegro, for which draft goods and services 
schedules had been circulated two full years earlier and which was still waiting at the door due to the 
lack of an agreement with Ukraine.  Further,  the EU understood that similar difficulties were 
spreading to other accessions, including, regrettably, those of LDCs.  It sincerely hoped this problem 
could be solved and that Montenegro would be a WTO Member well before the Council's 
December 2011 meeting. 
107. The representative of Hong Kong, China  thanked Zambia, on behalf of the LDCs, for raising 
the issue of accession priorities.  The mutual be nefits of WTO accession to the acceding economies 
and existing Members needed no further elaborati on.  The empirical trade statistics spoke for 
themselves.  As pointed out in the Director-General 's report, during the past 15 years, the value of 
merchandise trade and trade in commercial services of the RAMs had grown at a much faster rate than WT/GC/M/129 
Page 32  
 
  the global average.  Those economies had fared be tter in withstanding the recent global economic and 
financial crisis, as reflected in the smaller than  global average decline in the value of their 
merchandise exports.  Accessions had not only enriched  the universality of this organization, but had 
brought substantive economic benef its to the populations of all the acceding economies and the world 
as a whole.  Therefore, economies who committed to  abide by the rules of the multilateral trading 
system and to offer meaningful market-access commitments commensurate with their stage of 
economic development should be welcomed to join the WTO.   The domestic legal and institutional 
reforms necessitated on the part of governments prior to their accession, would not only strengthen 
their own trade regimes and help them integrate in to the world trading system, but would also widen 
the coverage of the rules-based multilateral trading sy stem as a whole.  To this end, Hong Kong China 
was pleased to note the progress made during th e year in individual accession Working Parties, 
particularly those for the economies identified as priority cases.  The WTO should strive to continue enhancing the accession process, and his delegation supported the various initiatives highlighted by 
the Director-General in enhancing the participa tion in and transparency of accessions.  It was 
encouraged to note the report's positive assessment of the outlook for accessions in  the year to come.  
Several accession negotiations were  poised for conclusion in the shor t term, and his delegation looked 
forward to welcoming them as new Members and to  working closely with them in future for the 
liberalization of global trade. 
108. The representative of Japan
 said that WTO accession was important for the LDCs as it 
enabled them to be integrated in to the multilateral trading system and receive the benefits of free 
trade.  In this regard, Japan supported the early accession of acceding LDCs especially Samoa, Yemen 
and Vanuatu.  The accession process was a big challe nge for LDCs.  Through this process, acceding 
governments needed to develop domestic laws and regulations in accordance with WTO rules that 
would promote domestic growth and expansion of international trade, and therefore the strengthening 
of the multilateral trading system as a whole.  Japan reaffirmed that LDC accessions would be 
undertaken within the framework of the 2002 A ccession Guidelines and continued to support the 
efforts of acceding governments.   
109. The representative of Turkey  said that accession was an important agenda item that deserved 
more attention of the membership.  He joined th e Director-General in wi shing that the LDC-IV 
Conference would boost the accession processed of LDCs .  Turkey appreciated the Director-General's 
constructive and supportive approach to the issue of  accessions.  As specified in the annual report, the 
universal aspect of the WTO was essential to stre ngthening the WTO, and would also help create a 
better functioning and rules-based multilateral tradin g system.  It was a commonly shared view that 
the ultimate responsibility for accession lay with the a cceding country, but certain responsibilities still 
lay with the membership.  In this context, his de legation supported the statements by Zambia for the 
LDCs and the Dominican Republic for the IGDC in their call for the prioritization of the accession of 
Samoa, Vanuatu and Yemen in 2010.  Twelve of the 30 acceding countries were LDCs.  The WTO 
should be able to lower this figure soon.  Tu rkey acknowledged that the Russian Federation's 
accession had gained remarkable momentum in the r ecent past – comparable to the Formula One car 
race.  Another issue he wished to raise and reitera te was related to the Working Party Chairs – eight 
were non-Geneva based, and eight chairmanships we re vacant for various reasons.  Thus, he once 
again called on his colleagues to volunteer to be Working Party Chairs.  One hoped to see Chairs who 
were willing to become more systemically activis t.  Turkey also asked for the good offices of the 
Chairman to monitor and follow up on this issue. 
110. The representative of the United States  said his delegation congratulated Samoa, Vanuatu and 
Yemen on the progress made on their accessions dur ing 2010, and hoped the remaining requirements 
would soon be completed.  It was pleased to announce that the United States and Yemen had completed bilateral market-access negotiations for goods and services on 13 December.  The US 
greatly appreciated the hard work that Trade Mi nister Mutawakel and his team had put into the 
accession process, and believed that the Minister's presence in Geneva the past week had been a  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 33 
 
 
  positive reflection of the seriousness Yemen place d on its accession to the WTO.  His delegation 
noted that some outstanding issues remained c oncerning Yemen's specific commitments in the 
multilateral Rules negotiations, and encouraged Yeme n and all Working Party members to contribute 
to the timely resolution of these issues.  The US noted  that Vanuatu would be returning to Geneva for 
an informal Working Party meeting in January.  It urged other delegations that had not kept track of 
developments on this accession to review the updated package and come to that meeting prepared to 
help Vanuatu complete its accession process.  Th e US continued to base its approach to these 
accessions fully on the 2002 guidelines on th e accession of LDCs, which emphasized the use of 
technical assistance and transitional arrangements based on action plans and respect for the unique 
challenges facing LDC accession applicants.  The successful work to date on these accessions had 
clearly been due to the influence of these principl es on the negotiations.  The US urged delegations 
interested in the accessions of these and other countr ies to participate in the work of developing the 
terms of accession by attending Working Party me etings, reviewing documentation, and negotiating 
bilaterally to establish market-access commitments.  Regarding the Director-General's annual report 
on accessions, his delegation was disappointed that it had not been issued until the past week, as it 
was a long report and his delegation wished to study it closely.  In its review thus far, it had found a 
number of errors, which had been brought to the a ttention of the Accessions Division.  Like the EU, 
the US had been somewhat su rprised by the seeming distinction in the report between the 
contributions of resident Chairs and Chairs who ha d originally served in Geneva and were now non-
resident.  The US valued highly the contributions of all Working Party Chairs.  It also shared the EU's 
concern about the loose use of the term "RAMs" in  the report.  Given that the proposed database 
described in paragraph 3 of the report would d eal with information provided by Members in 
confidence to the Secretariat, there should be  consultations on this matter with Members. 
111. The representative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela  expressed his delegation's 
solidarity with the statements by Zambia for the LDCs and by the Dominican Republic for the IGDC.  
As had been repeatedly stated at the present m eeting, a group of devel oping and least-developed 
countries were experiencing considerable difficu lties in their WTO accession processes.  These 
obstacles had resulted in the slowness of the vari ous processes, due to commitments being required 
that went far beyond these countries' ability to comp ly, and the fact that these negotiations, in some 
cases, were affected by issues that were outside  of accession-related trade and technical aspects, and 
in some cases had a consid erable political component.  This issue n eeded to be carefully considered in 
order to ensure that WTO accession was achieved in  the most expeditious way possible.  With a 
prompt solution to this situation, not only would justice be given to those countries most in need, but 
the WTO's image as an institution that claimed to be  universal would be improved.  Universal status 
would not be achieved while doors remained closed to many countries who had expressed an intention 
to integrate into the multilateral trading system.  Venezuela joined in supporting the statements 
regarding the LDC-IV Conference to be held in Tu rkey in 2011 and in the wish that the WTO also 
show concrete results. 
112. The representative of China  supported the statement by Zambia for the LDC Group and by 
the Dominican Republic for the IGDC.  The annual report by the Director-General provided a clear 
picture of the work on accessions in 2010.  China shar ed the view that with Members' joint efforts, 
positive progress had been made on the accessions of several countries, such as Russia and Yemen.  
China commended and thanked the Secretariat as well as the relevant parties for their hard and 
effective work, and encouraged them to mainta in the present momentum and move forward more 
rapidly in 2011.  China consistently supported the early accession of all acceding parties, especially 
the LDCs, which was crucial for the inclusiveness and representativeness of this organization.  
Therefore, it always participated actively in all acceding Working Parties and committed itself to the 
systemic improvement of the accession process and the faithful implementation of the 2002 Accession 
Guidelines.  China stood ready to continue its e fforts with other Members and the acceding countries 
in this direction. WT/GC/M/129 
Page 34  
 
  113. The representative of Brazil
 said the Director-General's report shed light on the trade benefits 
associated with WTO accession, and brought great er clarity on recent developments in on-going 
accession processes.  Brazil supported the statements by Zambia for the LDCs and by the Dominican 
Republican for the IGDC.  His Government assigned great priority to LDCs' accessions to the WTO 
in accordance with the Doha Ministerial Declar ation, the 2002 Accession Guidelines and the draft 
Istanbul Programme of Action.  LDCs' accessions we re important not only for assisting the acceding 
countries in the process of domestic reforms, but also to contribute to making the WTO universal.  The latter would enhance confidence in the WTO and in the multilateral trading system as a whole.  
Brazil noted with concern that only three LDCs' acce ssions had taken place to date, and just one since 
2002.  Brazil recognized the efforts made by the Governments of Yemen, Vanuatu and Samoa in 
bringing their legislations in line with WTO rules,  and urged Members to exercise flexibility in their 
bilateral negotiations with these countries.  It  hoped that the accession processes of Yemen and 
Vanuatu would be concluded in the next few months. 
114. The representative of New Zealand
 thanked Zambia for raising the issue of LDC accessions 
and in doing, so keeping Members' attention focussed  on this issue.  New Zealand took particular 
interest in the accessions of its Pacific neighb ours, Vanuatu and Samoa.  Good progress had been 
made on both these accessions in recent months, a nd it was important to maintain this momentum.  
New Zealand welcomed the circulation of Vanua tu's updated accession package and of further inputs 
from Samoa, and hoped Members would reflect care fully on these over the next few weeks and come 
prepared to engage flexibly and pragmatically at the relevant working part y meetings scheduled for 
early 2011. 
115. The representative of Canada  said his delegation supported the goal of universal membership 
of the WTO and, as such, wished to see all accessions  proceed efficiently and to conclusion.  Canada 
also upheld the 2002 General Council Decision on the Accession of LDCs in its letter and spirit, and 
looked forward to working with Samoa, Vanuatu and Yemen, as well as with other Members, to 
advance and conclude their accession processes in 2011. 
116. The representative of Cuba  supported the statements by Zambia for the LDCs and by the 
Dominican Republic for the IGDC.  Cuba also fully shared the views expressed by Venezuela.  As her 
delegation had said at the October General Council, it was important fo r this organization to speed up 
the accession processes as s oon as possible, particularly for countries such as Samoa, Vanuatu and 
Yemen, and to ensure that th ese processes were conducted without  any conditionalities imposed by 
Members, particularly the developed ones.  It w as important not only that LDCs become Members, 
but that in order to broaden the membership of  the organization, other accession processes that had 
been under negotiation for years also be speeded up. 
117. The representative of Zambia , on behalf of the LDC Group , said the Group commended the 
Director-General for maintaining focus on issues th at concerned acceding countries through this series 
of annual reports.  This process was useful not onl y for transparency, but sen t to the international 
community the message of inclusive participation in the multilateral trading system.  The Group was 
pleased to note, in paragraph 5 of the report, th e prioritization of LDC accessions and the call upon 
Members and acceding governments to focus on th e possible contributions from the WTO to the 
Fourth United Nations Conference on the LDCs (L DC-IV) scheduled for May 2011 in Istanbul.  As 
highlighted in the Group's previous interventions, it believe substantial progress had been made on the 
accessions of three LDCs that were included on th e list of priorities for 2010, and these accession 
processes should be finalized, with the support of the membership, before Istanbul.  The LDC Group 
welcomed the introduction of a new angle in the Dir ector-General's report pertaining to RAMs, as this 
provided useful learning experience for those c ountries in accession, and had so proven in the 
discussions and input the RAMs were providing in the context of the Informal Group on Accessions.  
The Group also welcomed the progress thus far made following the appointment of the Chairperson of 
the Working Party on Ethiopia, with the next meeti ng scheduled for the first half of 2011.  The Group  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 35 
 
 
  also took note of the efforts the Director-Gener al was making to improve transparency on matters 
relating to accessions – the initiative, highlighted in paragraph 3 of his report, to establish a database 
on accession commitments by early 2011 in order to assist Members and acceding governments to rapidly and efficiently retrieve commitments by country and accession topic across all completed 
accessions.  The LDCs requested the Director-General to maintain this process of annual reporting on 
accession, which had proved to be an invaluable cont ribution to transparency.  The Group also wished 
to thank the Secretariat for the work it had undert aken in the past months in facilitating dialogue 
between Members and acceding governments, and al so those Members who had spoken positively on 
the accession of LDCs. 
118. The representative of Oman
 said his delegation supported the early accession of LDCs and 
other countries in the process of accession.  And as a member of the RAMs Group, which had made 
extensive commitments in their accession process, Om an urged Members to take into consideration 
the level of development and the financial burden on acceding countri es.  His delegation hoped to be 
able soon to welcome Yemen and other acceding c ountries as new Members of the WTO and of the 
RAMs Group. 
119. The representative of Chinese Taipei  said his delegation joined others in welcoming the 
statements by Zambia for the LDCs and by the Dominican Republic for the IGDC.  The past year had been notable for the positive progress made in th e accession processes of new Member applicants.  
Through the joint efforts of Members and the me mbership applicants, several accession negotiations 
were in their final stage of completion, while others  continued, but with pos itive progress.  It was also 
interesting to note that some had resumed work on their accession processes, after a gap of a few 
years, which was warmly welcomed.  This supp orted the universal belief of existing and new 
Members alike, that going through the WTO acc ession process not only strengthened the economic 
and trade regime of the individual economy itself, bu t also helped that country to become integrated 
into the multilateral trading system.  Being a newly-acceded Member itself, Chinese Taipei had 
experienced the kind of long and painful accession pr ocess that new applicants were going through.  It 
therefore urged all Members to do as much as th ey could to facilitate and accelerate the accession 
work of developing countries, and LDCs in par ticular, through the full and effective implementation 
of the 2002 Accession Guidelines.  His delegation looked forward to welcoming new Members once 
their accession processes were completed. 
120. The representative of Colombia
 thanked the Director-General for his detailed report on the 
status of accessions, the LDC Group through Zambia for having requested inclusion of this item on 
the Council's Agenda, and the Dominican Republic fo r its statement for the IGDC.  His delegation 
was pleased to note the steps that had been taken,  as outlined by the Dire ctor-General, to increase 
transparency and participation, as well as inte nsified engagement, in several individual accession 
processes, some of which were expected to be comp leted in the near future.  It was very good that 
progress was being made on some accessions, but ideally the accession system should operate 
efficiently as a whole.  One still heard complaints  relating to gridlock, no n-trade considerations 
regarding some accessions,  and excessive demands, pa rticularly in the case of some LDCs.  In view 
of this, it would be useful to give collective t hought to the need for a group assessment, centred on 
developing-country and, especially, LDC accessions, with a view to ensuring maximum transparency 
and efficiency within the system, as well as strict compliance with the rules.   In this connection, 
Colombia wished to highlight th e statement by Nigeria.  His delegation urged the membership as a 
whole to engage in a more substantive discussi on of this matter and to place due emphasis on the 
report introduced by the Director-General. 
121. The representative of Yemen , speaking as an observer , said that like the Director-General's 
earlier report on accessions, the current report had eloque ntly done justice to this important process.  
He fully associated his delegation with the communication from Zambia on behalf of the LDC Group.  
Yemen joined the call to place LDC accession high on  the WTO agenda, on the eve of the next UN WT/GC/M/129 
Page 36  
 
  Conference on LDCs.  His delegation also wished  to thank all delega tions who had supported 
developing and least-developed countries in their accession, including Yemen .   His country had been 
in the accession process for more than 10 years.  Initially, it had anticip ated less time and fewer 
complications, given Yemen's status as an LDC.  Hi s Government had done its utmost to complete its 
accession homework, both multilaterally and bilatera lly.  He acknowledged with gratitude having 
concluded bilateral agreements with  the US and eight other Members at an earlier stage.  Only one 
bilateral was still on-going, and Yemen hoped to r each agreement very soon.  He could finally 
confirm that Yemen's accession process had reached its  final leg.  Despite its many predicaments as 
an LDC, his country had worked hard to reach this  advanced stage in the accession process.  It also 
continued to stand ready to finalize the few remainin g issues, as highlighted during the previous day's 
informal stock-taking meeting of the Working Part y.  That meeting had been the second in 2010, in 
addition to two formal Working Party meetings, thus a total of four meetings in one year.  As one 
could see, Yemen aimed to conclude all accession ne gotiations on both the multilateral and bilateral 
tracks, hopefully by the end of this year.  Constr uctively working together, this target could be 
achieved.  On the other hand, one could equally re cognize that reaching the goal of accession, at this 
particular stage was totally in the hands of the WTO membership.  Therefore, Yemen looked forward 
to the membership's positive support in adopti ng its accession package during the next General 
Council meeting in February 2011. 
122.  The representative of Iran
, speaking as an observer , associated his delegation with the 
statement by the Dominican Republic for the IGDC.  He wished to make a few comments on the Director-General's report.  The report provided noteworthy information, enabling both the Members 
and acceding countries to have a better picture of this  important issue.  Such initiatives would expand 
the scope of transparency in the area of accessions and could shed light on difficulties and challenges 
of acceding countries – namely, difficulties inherent in  the technical nature of accession, such as the 
compatibility of domestic rules and regulations with  the multilateral trading system.  While the report 
took note of the development of Iran's accession, he wi shed to share some further information.  A year 
had passed since his country had submitted the me morandum on its foreign trade regime.  In mid-
2010, a special Working Group, comprising different Ministers and a representative from the private sector, had been established to further enhance coordination among stakeholders and also to 
accelerate the response to the questions posed by Me mbers.  He was pleased to  inform Members that 
at the present juncture, responses to more than two-th irds of the questions had been finalized.  While 
the work was proceeding well in a legal and tech nical context domestically, Iran was also looking 
forward to more constructive engagement from other pa rtners, in particular in respect of consultations 
for the selection of a chairman for the Working Pa rty.  The selection of an accession Working Party 
Chairperson prior to the first session of the Worki ng Party would encourage and facilitate the process 
of accession to the WTO. 
123. The General Council took note
 of the report by the Director-General and of the statements. 
8. Amendment to the procedures leading to the Certification of HS2002 changes – Draft 
decision (G/MA/W/104) 
124. The Chairman  drew attention to the draft decision in document G/MA/W/104 regarding 
proposed amendments to the procedures for the introduction of Harmonized System 2002 changes to 
schedules of concessions using the CTS Database.  This draft decision had been forwarded to the 
Council for adoption, by the Committee on Market  Access following its meeting in October. 
125. The representative of India  said the objective of this am endment was to provide for an 
expeditious certification of the HS2002 files once th e multilateral review had taken place.  However, 
it also provided a window of opportunity to Me mbers by prescribing specific timelines for submitting 
their comments on this particular certification.  This  was a very good balance and India supported this 
amendment.  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 37 
 
 
  126. The General Council took note  of the statements and adopted  the draft decision in 
G/MA/W/104.5 
9. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration – Report of the Committee on its 
meetings of November and December  2010 (WT/BFA/119, WT/BFA/120 and 
WT/BFA/121) 
127. The Chairman  drew attention to the reports of  the Budget Committee in documents 
WT/BFA/119, 120 and 121 and invited Mr Vaaranma a (Finland), Chairman of the Committee, to 
introduce the report. 
128. Mr Vaaranmaa (Finland), Chairman of  the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration , said that at its meetings in November  and December 2010, the Committee had heard 
progress reports on the budgetary and financial situ ation of the WTO and the extra-budgetary funds, 
as well as on Human Resources and the WTO Pension Plan.  The Committee had also taken note of 
the progress made on the building project.  The HE I library had been entirely demolished and the 
construction of the new Conference Centre was pr ogressing well.  The renovation project of the CWR 
was also on track, with the biggest move of staf f foreseen in January 2011.  There was further good 
news regarding the extra-muros extension – on th e new building foreseen for construction beginning 
early 2011, on 6 December the Swiss National C ouncil had approved the loan of CHF 40 million, 
which would allow starting work on the new building early in 2011, and a CHF 10 million grant for the construction of 200 parking places in the build ing's underground garage.  The previous day the 
Geneva Cantonal Authority had signed the final constr uction permit to allow the work to begin.  This 
meant that all pre-conditions had now been fulfilled and the construction work could start on time in 
February 2011.  He wished to express gratitude to th e Swiss hosts for this good news at the end of the 
year.  The funds for the Security Perimeter had also been approved, which would result in four 
construction projects on the WTO site in 2011. 
129. The Working Group on Administrative Measures had held several meetings to draft a revised 
set of Administrative Measures for Members and Observers with long outstanding arrears in 
contributions.  The Chair of the Working Group conti nued to hold consultations on this matter.  The 
Committee had reviewed and made a recommendati on on the Financial Performance Report 2009 and 
had also been presented with the Report of the Exte rnal Auditor for the financial period 2009.  The 
Committee had also been presented with a new paym ent plan aimed to liquidate the arrears in 
contributions of the Republic of Niger over 15 year s, and had made a recommendation to the General 
Council.  This represented the seventh payment plan  approved in the past two years.  The Committee 
had then examined the Mid-term Review of the Biennium 2010/2011 and had recommended to the 
General Council a reduction of the 2011 budget of 2.2 million Swiss francs, or 1.11 per cent.  The 
Committee had also taken note of the Mid-term Review of the ITC and the review of the ITC budget process.  The Committee had made a recommendation to transfer the 2009 Surplus to the Members' 
Transition Operating Fund, and had also approved the Secretariat using part of this Fund to finance 
the equipping of the South Courtyard Conference Centre. 
130. The recommendations following from these meetings could be found in document 
WT/BFA/119, paragraphs 14 and 16,  and in document WT/BFA/120, paragraphs 14, 18, and 19.  
Briefly, these recommendations related to:  (i) the transfers between budgetary sections and the 
audited accounts of the Financial Performance Report  2009;  (ii) the suspension of Administrative 
Measures for the Republic of Niger;  (iii) the revision of the Budget 2011 to the total amount 
196 million Swiss francs;  and (iv) the transfer of the Surplus 2009 to the Members' Transition 
Operating Fund. 
                                                     
 
5 The Decision was subsequently ci rculated as document WT/L/807. WT/GC/M/129 
Page 38  
 
  131. The General Council approved
 the Budget Committee's specific recommendations contained 
in paragraphs 14 and 16 of its report in document WT/BFA/119, a nd in paragraphs 14 and 18 in 
document WT/BFA/120, including the draft Resolu tion referred to in paragraph 14;  adopted  the draft 
Resolution on the Revised Expenditure of the WTO in 2011 and the Ways and Means to Meet Such 
Expenditure, in paragraph 14 of WT/BFA/120;  adopted  the Committee's reports in documents 
WT/BFA/119, 120 and 121;  and took note  of the statements. 
132. The Director-General  thanked the General Council for its decision to suspend the application 
of Administrative Measures to the Republic of Nige r.  He also thanked the Government and the 
Permanent Mission of Niger for finding a solution with  the Secretariat to the problem of contributions 
in arrears.  He wished to take this opportunity  to take stock of the situation of Members under 
Administrative Measures, a matter he had raised during the discussions with Members in April 2009 
regarding his second mandate, and on the steps he had unde rtaken with the Secretar iat in this respect.  
He recalled that Members which, at year's end, ha d more than one year of contributions outstanding 
were subject to Administrative Measures.  These m easures were incremental and divided into four 
categories, depending on the level of arrears.   Over the past 15 years, the number of Members 
subject to Administrative Measures had genera lly ranged between 20 and 30.  The accumulated 
arrears of these Members amounted to up to 17 mi llion Swiss francs.  In early 2009, the Budget 
Committee had established a Working Group to revi ew these Administrative Measures.  There had 
been 27 Members under Administrative Measures; 18 Me mbers with more than three years of arrears 
were accordingly considered as inactive.  Among these 18 Members, 14 Members were LDCs; 
13 Members had more than 10 years of outstanding contributions, several of them being over 30 years 
in arrears; and five Members had not paid any cont ributions at all since their accession.  The financial 
situation of these Members was a long-standing matter  and finding a solution would take time.  With 
the support of the Deputy Directors-General and t eams from the Secretariat, he had undertaken a 
whole series of steps.  First, he had approached the Geneva-based heads of delegation of the Members 
concerned, and had taken advant age of visits to Geneva and the Geneva Week to meet 
non Geneva-based delegations.  Second, he had written to all the Heads of State to apprise them of the 
situation and propose payment plans.  Third, while travelling, he had systematically broached the 
subject with the Ministers concerned.  He had al so made phone calls to m onitor developments or 
speak with a number of Ministers with whom he had not been able to meet. 
133. At the General Council meeting in May 2010, he had provided an initial update on the 
situation.  He had undertaken to reduce the numbe r of Members subject to Administrative Measures 
to its lowest level, by the end of the year.  That  objective had been achieved.  Only 11 Members were 
still under Administrative Measures to date.  In 20 months, the number of Members subject to 
Administrative Measures had been re duced from 27 to 11, i.e. by 60  per cent.  In order to avoid 
remaining under Administrative Measures, seven Memb ers had agreed to payment plans.  The others 
had made payments that put an end to, or te mporarily suspended, the Administrative Measures 
applied to them.  He wished to emphasize that three of the five Members that had not paid any 
contributions at all since their accession had made payments in 2011 totalling 610,000 Swiss francs.  
He wished to thank those Members who had undertaken  to find a solution to their financial situation 
at the WTO.  The Geneva-based delegations had cont ributed a great deal to finding solutions with 
their capitals.  He also wished to underscore, w ith thanks, the role played by the Budget Committee 
and, in particular, its Working Group and the numerous  meetings carried out by its Chair.  However, 
this did not mean that the work was finished, an d he was resolved to pursue it.  Out of the 
11 Members under Administrative Measures, two Memb ers were in Category I and a solution should 
promptly be found; from now on, he would focus on the other nine Members, which were in Category IV and considered inactive.  Lastly, the establishment of payment plans did not resolve the 
situation once and for all.  The Members concerned had to ensure that they adhered to these payment 
plans.  The road ahead would not be without challe nges.  All needed to remain vigilant regarding 
follow-up on these plans.  The situation had signifi cantly improved, but there was still work to be 
done.  The Secretariat was at the disposal of  the Members concerned to find a solution.  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 39 
 
 
  134. The representative of Niger  expressed his country's appreciation to the General Council for 
the decision just taken with regard to suspensi on of the Administrative Measures for Niger.  He 
wished to thank the Chair of the Budget Committee for the remarkable work he had undertaken and 
for all the efforts undertaken by hi s Committee over the past few years to  achieve this result.  He also 
wished to thank the Director-General and the Secret ariat for the time and effort they had invested in 
Niger's case, and all the energy put into achievi ng a solution.  Niger again thanked the General 
Council for this significant decision that would be of great benefit to it, and once again reaffirmed its 
commitment to respect the commitments it had entered into and to assure Members that its 
commitment would include the payment of all the arrears in contributions owed by Niger, which 
should be achieved within the timeframe agreed. 
135. The General Council took note  of the statements. 
10. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement 
(a) Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 chang es into WTO schedules of tariff concessions – 
Draft decision (G/C/W/637) 
 
(b) Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 chang es into WTO schedules of tariff concessions – 
Draft decision (G/C/W/638) 
 (c) Review of waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement 
 
(i) Kimberley process certification scheme for rough diamonds, granted on 15 December 2006 
until 31 December 2012 (WT/L/676)  
 
(ii) Canada – CARIBCAN, granted on 15 Dece mber 2006 until 31 December 2011 (WT/L/677, 
WT/L/804) 
 
(iii) Cuba – Article XV:6 of GATT 1994, gran ted on 15 December 2006 until 31 December 2011 
(WT/L/678, WT/L/803) 
 
136. The Chairman noted that the draft waiver deci sions for the matters listed in sub-items 10(a) 
and (b) had been taken up for consideration by th e Council for Trade in Goods at its meeting of 
30 November, and were matters fo r which the Chairperson of the Goods Council was required to 
report to the General Council.  He invited Mr Mar uping (Lesotho), Chairman of the Goods Council, to 
report on the Council's consideration of these matters  in a single intervention.  The General Council 
would then take up separately each of the draft decisions for action.  
137. Mr Maruping (Lesotho), Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods
, said that at its meeting 
of 30 November 2010, the Council had approved the dr aft waiver decisions in connection with the 
introduction of the HS 2002 and HS 2007 changes into WTO Schedules of Concessions contained in 
documents G/C/W/637 and G/C/W/638, respectively.  The current waiver decision for HS 2002 changes, contained in document WT/L/786, as well as the current waiver decision for HS 2007 changes, contained in WT/L/787, would expire on 31 December 2010.  The one year extension of 
these waiver decisions had been the subject of cons ultations at the formal meeting of the Market 
Access Committee that had taken place on 11 Octobe r 2010.  The Goods Council, when approving the 
draft waiver decisions in documents G/C/W/637 an d G/C/W/638, as forwarded by the Market Access 
Committee, had also agreed to forward them to the General Council for adoption.  WT/GC/M/129 
Page 40  
 
  (a) Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 changes into WTO schedules of tariff concessions – 
Draft decision (G/C/W/637) 
138. The Chairman
 drew attention to the draft decision in document G/C/W/637 and proposed that, 
in accordance with the Decision-Making Proce dures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO 
Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), th e General Council adopt this draft Decision. 
139. The General Council so agreed .6 
(b) Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 changes into WTO schedules of tariff concessions – 
Draft decision (G/C/W/638) 
140. The Chairman  drew attention to the draft decision in document G/C/W/638 and proposed that, 
in accordance with the Decision-Making Proce dures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO 
Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), th e General Council adopt this draft Decision. 
141. The General Council so agreed .7 
(c) Review of waivers pursuant to Ar ticle IX:4 of the WTO Agreement 
(i) Kimberley process certification scheme for rough diamonds, granted on 15 December 2006 
until 31 December 2012 (WT/L/676) 
(ii) Canada – CARIBCAN, granted on 15 Decemb er 2006 until 31 December 2011 (WT/L/677, 
WT/L/804) 
(iii) Cuba – Article XV:6 of GATT 1994, grante d on 15 December 2006 until 31 December 2011 
(WT/L/678, WT/L/803) 
142. The Chairman  recalled that, in accordance with para graph 4 of Article IX of the WTO 
Agreement, "any waiver granted for a period of mo re than one year shall be reviewed by the 
Ministerial Conference not later than one year af ter it is granted, and thereafter annually until the 
waiver terminates."  There were three waivers be fore the General Council fo r review.  Two of the 
waivers under review provided that an annual repor t should be submitted by the Members concerned 
regarding the operation or implemen tation of those waivers, with a view to facilitating their annual 
review by the General Council.  The reports from these Members had been circulated in documents 
WT/L/803 and 804. 
143. The representative of Jamaica , on behalf of CARICOM , reaffirmed these countries' strong 
support for the waiver that had been granted for the CARIBCAN Agreement.  The documents before 
Members in WT/L/677 and WT/L/804 provided a good overview of the rationale for the establishment of CARIBCAN and the key developments that had taken place within the scope of the 
programme over the past 10 years.  These documents, however, did not reflect the complete story that 
was encapsulated in the operationalization of CA RIBCAN as a trade and development cooperation 
instrument which had had a profound impact on the gr owth and development of beneficiary countries 
in the Caribbean.  Under CARIBCAN, Jamaica and its  Caribbean partners ha d benefited from trade 
expansion and diversification with  Canada and this process had cont ributed to the development of 
niche markets in agriculture and other areas.  Th e mutual benefits derived under CARIBCAN since 
1986 had inspired CARICOM and Cana da to take this trade relati onship to a higher level, and 
negotiations were currently under way for a recipro cal free trade agreement.  The negotiations were 
                                                     
 
6 The Decision was subsequently ci rculated as document WT/L/808. 
7 The Decision was subsequently ci rculated as document WT/L/809.  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 41 
 
 
  guided by fundamental principles, including transparency and asymmetry, and there was a clear 
commitment on both sides to the central role of development across the spectrum of topics and sectors 
under consideration.  CARICOM therefore wished to reaffirm its gratitude to Canada for the 
implementation of CARIBCAN and looked forward to  its continued operation as a living testimony to 
trade and development cooperation between the sm all, vulnerable economies in the Caribbean and 
Canada. 
144. The representative of Trinidad and Tobago  said that under the CARIBCAN agreement, 
member countries of the Caribbean Community en joyed non-reciprocal preferential access to the 
Canadian market for a negotiated range of products.  This mechanism had proven to be an extremely 
valuable platform for trade co-operation that r ecognized and built upon a longstanding special trading 
relationship that had existed between the Caribb ean Community and Canada for centuries.  While 
Trinidad and Tobago remained committed to th e multilateral trading system and to its phased 
integration into it, the peculiar structural realiti es of Caribbean economies ch allenged their ability to 
trade as equal partners in the existing highly competitive open global trading regime.  CARIBCAN 
therefore provided a bilateral framework to stimulat e and expand the productiv e capacity for tradables 
within the Caribbean Community as a stepping stone towards the eventual assumption of the 
obligations of the multilateral trading system.  As such, it remained a short-term temporary 
arrangement.  He expressed his Government's a ppreciation to Canada for its sensitivity and 
commitment to facilitating the growth of Caribbean trade and, more generally, to Caribbean development. 
145. The General Council took note
 of the reports in documents WT/L/803 and 804, and of the 
statements. 
11. Review of WTO activities 
 Reports of: 
 
(i) General Council (WT/GC/W/627 and Corr.1), Dispute Settlement Body (WT/DSB/51 and 
Add.1), and Trade Policy Review Body (WT/TPR/269) 
(ii) Sectoral Councils (G/L/947/Rev.1, S/C/34 and IP/C/56) 
(iii) Committees on Trade and Envir onment (WT/CTE/17), Balance-of-Payments Restrictions 
(WT/BOP/R/101) and Budget, Finance and Administration (WT/BFA/122 and Corr.1) 
(iv) Working Groups on Trade, Debt and Finance (W T/WGTDF/9) and Trade and Transfer of 
Technology (WT/WGTTT/12) 
(v) Committees under the Plurilateral Tr ade Agreements (GPA/106, WT/L/805) 
146. The Chairman  said that before taking up this Item, he wished to say a few words regarding 
the reports Members would be considering.  On a number of these reports, delegations had already 
had a substantive discussion in the respective bodies.   He would therefore suggest that, as usual, 
Members not repeat those discussions at the present meeting, and that delega tions take the floor only 
if they felt they had to draw particular attention to  any aspect of the work reported on, or to add to a 
previously expressed position.   The reports under th is Agenda item had been drawn up in pursuance 
of the Decision concerning procedures for an annual overview of WTO activities and for reporting 
under the WTO (WT/L/105).  Delegations would have noticed that the Proposed Agenda did not list 
reports from the Committees on Trade and Developm ent and on Regional Trade Agreements.  The 
Chairmen concerned had informed him by letter th at their respective Committees had been unable to 
adopt their reports in time for the present meeting.   These letters had been circulated in documents WT/GC/M/129 
Page 42  
 
  JOB/GC/5 and 6 for the information of delegations.  In the interests of moving the meeting along in a 
smooth and efficient way, he proposed that the Chairs of the various bodies not introduce their 
respective reports at the present meeting.  He woul d invite any Chairpersons who wished to draw 
particular attention to some aspect of the work carried out in their bodies, or who wished to add 
anything to their reports, to take the floor. 
147. Mr Niggli (Switzerland), Chair of the Committee on Government Procurement
, said he was 
taking the floor for two important reasons.  First, there had been significant developments in the GPA 
negotiations recently that were not reflected in th e Committee's annual report.  Second, the range of 
developments over the past year in the Committee on Government Procurement was such that a short 
statement was warranted.  As all knew, the renegotia tion of the GPA – both its rules and its market-
access commitments – had been under way for a good num ber of years.  Members were now close to 
reaching a conclusion on this matter, although the parti es had still to walk the extra mile to finish the 
job.  The following developments had occurred in 2010, including in a very intensive session that had 
started a week earlier and that had ended only the previ ous day late in the evening.  First, in line with 
the roadmap for the negotiations which he had tabled  in April 2010 and which all parties had strongly 
supported, a total of eleven new offers had been r eceived in the coverage ne gotiations, and more were 
expected to be tabled by the end of the week.  Th is was a very significant uptick of activity.  Second, 
that week the Committee had completed the verifica tion of the linguistic e quivalence of Articles I 
through XXI of the revised GPA text, and this had no w been completed.  The up-to-date, verified text 
was in the process of being issued in all three languages and would be on  the WTO website and 
available to all shortly.  This was another signifi cant milestone in these negotiations.  Third, striking 
progress had been achieved just in the past week  on defining the future work programme of the 
Committee, which had emerged as being of central importance to the overall negotiation.  This was 
expected to encompass a range of elements that  would enhance the relevance of the GPA for the 
world economy and for international governance.  
148. Based on the progress achieved in the past  week on these and other aspects of the 
negotiations, he had outlined a plan to  conclude all aspects of the negotiati ons in the first half of 2011.  
The plan was realistic and complete, and deserved the full support of all parties.  Conclusion of the 
GPA negotiations would be a major development, not only for the parties to the GPA, but for the WTO, and potentially for the world economy.  In pa rticular:  (1) conclusion of the negotiations would 
yield gains in market access within the existing me mbership of the Agreement which – even if they 
were not as significant as originally hoped by some parties – were far from trivial;  (2) conclusion of 
the negotiations would enable the revised GPA te xt, which had been under development for many 
years, to finally come into force – a developmen t that would make possible enhanced flexibility and 
efficiency for all parties to the Agreement;  and (3) it was hoped that the coming into force of the 
revised text – which was a more balanced, flexib le and development-friendly instrument – would 
substantially facilitate future accessions to the Ag reement.  On the subject of accessions, he was 
delighted to confirm that, as had been reported on the WTO website, the previous week a decision had 
been
 taken to invite Armenia  to accede to the Agreement on the basi s of terms that had been agreed 
with the parties.  As th e Director-General had said in his sub sequent statement, the decision was good 
for Armenia, good for the GPA and good for the WTO sy stem.  It had clearly shown the relevance of 
the GPA for transition economies and as an instru ment of good governance.  Work on the accession 
of China  was also proceeding well, with the full and very active engagement of China and the existing 
parties.  He hoped and expected that progress on China's GPA accession would continue and even 
accelerate significantly in 2011.  Las tly, Jordan's accession to the GPA  was also at an advanced stage, 
and he hoped it could be  concluded in 2011. 
149. Mr González (Paraguay), Chairman of the Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance , said 
the report of the Working Group reflected a continuous focus of the Group, dating from the beginning 
of the recent financial crisis, on the issue of the availability and accessibility to Members of adequate 
and affordable flows of trade finance.  As indicat ed in the report, 2010 had been for trade finance  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 43 
 
 
  markets one of great contrast, in which, on the on e hand, international pri ces had fallen and liquidity 
seemed to have fully returned to the main routes of trade – Europe , North America and Asia , and 
between Asia and the rest of the world.  On the other hand , traders at the periphery of important trade 
routes, particularly low-income countries, remain ed subject to the greatest difficulties in accessing 
trade finance at affordable cost , particularly in import finance .  This situation was explained by a 
banking environment in which cap ital had become scarcer, and the selectivity of risks had become 
greater .  In addition, new regulatory requirements aime d at securing financial transactions, including 
more stringent information to be provided on counter party banks and traders in poorly or non-rated 
countries, might be increasing the cost of doing bus iness in these areas altogether, deterring banks and 
investors.  As a result, the "lower end" of th e trade finance market was relying increasingly on 
development bank risk-mitigation instruments.  As evident from the report, Members were concerned 
about this situation.  He understood that in the G20 context, Leaders had also acknowledged the 
problem and called for solutions .  He had read in paragraph 44 of the Seoul Summit document that 
Leaders had highlighted their commitment "to support trade facilitation and to support measures to increase the availability of trade finance in developing countries, particularly LICs
8.  In this respect, 
we also agree to monitor and asses s trade finance programs in support of developing countries, in 
particular their coverage and impact on LICs, a nd to evaluate the impact of regulatory regimes on 
trade finance."  As Chairman of the Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance, he could only hail 
this commitment.  However, it see med that the WTO as an institution also had a role to play in 
helping implement such a commitment, first, because these measures ultimately aimed at avoiding traders and trade financiers from LICs being ma rginalized from world trade – hence, this was 
important for world trade.  Second, because the WTO w ould need to work with partner institutions, be 
they active in finance or in the field of developmen t, to deal with a complex issue that was at the 
intersection of trade and finance – hence, this  was important for the coherence of action among 
international institutions.  Therefore, he wished to call the attention of both the General Council and 
the Director-General to the need  for the WTO to participate in finding appropriate solutions, along 
with the other institutions concerne d, to the problems faced by LICs in respect of accessibility of trade 
finance.  By raising awareness on this issue, he wish ed to invite Members to discuss within their own 
government and constituencies, the ways and means to mobilize the regulatory, financial and trade 
communities over this issue, in order to foster dial ogue and solutions.  At the multilateral level, he 
wished to ask the Director-General what coul d be done at his level, knowing that sensitive 
consultations with multilateral de velopment institutions, regional development banks, and possibly 
with banking regulators might also be necessary .  Finally, he would be grat eful to receive any other 
comments from delegations on how this Working Group c ould be helpful in addressing this situation.  
150. The representative of Cuba
 said that although Cuba had no objection to any of the reports 
submitted for consideration, her de legation wished to refer to the report of the Dispute Settlement 
Body and to express Cuba's deep concern over the Un ited States' repeated failure to comply with the 
recommendations adopted.  Cuba wished to draw atten tion to the fact that in six of the ten disputes 
under the item on "Surveillance of implementation of recommendations adopted by the DSB", the US had obligations to comply, and that several of these disputes had already been on the DSB's agenda 
for eight to ten years.  This was especially the case regarding the Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998, which had been examin ed month after month in the DSB and the same 
rhetoric had been used in the status reports presente d by the United States, showing its lack of respect 
for the multilateral trading rules.  The United States  had always maintained that the protection of 
intellectual property rights was a priority.  Howeve r, its conduct, in additi on to being unlawful and 
shameless, constituted the greatest absurdity in terms of  intellectual property law, to the extent that it 
had kept in place legislation inconsistent with the TRIPS Agreement for eight years.  Cuba could not 
remain silent when a Member's lack of compliance had facilitated and permitted the usurpation of 
renowned trademarks, such as "Havana Club", on its terr itory.  Repeated failure to comply on the part 
of a Member that did not enjoy exceptional rights or any exemption from obligations might lead to 
                                                     
 
8 Low-income countries. WT/GC/M/129 
Page 44  
 
  non-compliance on the part of other Members.  It w ould be unfortunate if th is organization's dispute 
settlement mechanism, which had been recognized as  one of the most significant achievements of the 
Uruguay Round, were to be so severely undermined. 
151. The representative of India
 said this agenda item was extremely important, since it provided 
for the Chairs of various Committees to report on their work during the calendar year.  India noted 
with great concern that reports on the work of the CTD and the CRTA during 2010 had not been 
presented.  While each Committee had its own specific mandate and responsibilities in the WTO architecture, India was particularly concerned that the report of the CTD could not be presented.  This 
report was extremely important since, in addition to other issues, it included a synopsis of the work of the Sub-Committee on LDCs, the Dedicated Se ssion on Small Economies and progress on Aid for 
Trade.  Members would also miss out on a report on  extremely important issues such as the accession 
of LDCs, the status of the LDC-IV Conferen ce scheduled for May 2011, and progress on the Hong 
Kong Decision on DFQF market access for LDCs.  The lack of consensus on the CTD's Annual 
Report was symptomatic of the obstacles being placed in the way of discussions on issues of 
importance to developing and least-developed Me mbers.  His delegation understood that the 
paragraph which had eluded consen sus related to specific and systemic issues relating to RTAs 
notified both under the Enabling Clause and GATT Ar ticle XXIV, in particular the GCC Customs 
Union.  There continued to be a stalemate on this  issue for the past two years, due to lack of 
constructive engagement by some developed-country Members.  India noted a concerted effort to 
dilute and undermine the Enabling Clause, not only in  deliberations of the CTD, but also in the CRTA 
and other WTO bodies. 
152. These efforts to damage the Enabling Clause were not  new.  In the context of notifications of 
RTAs, it dated to 2002, when India and Sri Lanka had notified their RTA under the Enabling Clause.  
One developed-country Member had even questioned whether the notification was to be made to the 
CTD or the CRTA.  His delegation further understood  that the factual paragraph referring to the GCC 
Agreement proposed by the Chair had been accepted with minor modifications by all Members, until 
one Member had reneged on this agr eement.  Since then consensus on th e paragraph had been elusive.  
India had urged the CTD Chair that in accordance with Rule 33 of the CTD's Rules of Procedure, 
issues which eluded consensus in the CTD should be br ought to the attention of the General Council.  
A position taken by one Member could not stall di scussions and decisions on important development 
issues.  India hoped that this intransigence had nothing to do with a particular developed-country 
Member's consistent refusal to fulfil the oblig ation regarding implementation of DFQF for least-
developed Members.   Similar is sues related to dual notifications and efforts to chip away the 
Enabling Clause had also resulted in the CTRA's report not being finalised.  India was deeply 
concerned and hoped that such issues would not snowball and obstruct the smooth working of the CRTA.  It urged developed-country Members to engage constructively on  all issues, particularly those 
relating to special interests of developing count ries, such as the Enabling Clause, which was an 
integral part of the WTO acquis. 
153. The representative of Egypt
 said he had heeded the Chairman's suggestion and was taking the 
floor because it was extremely necessary  for Egypt to express its concern.   Egypt associated fully with 
the statement by India.  Pursuant to the 1995 General Council Decision on the Procedures to be 
followed for the Annual Reporting on WTO activities,  the CTD "should submit a factual report on its 
activities to the General Council for adoption by the end of each year ". This decision revealed the 
importance of the activities undertaken by the CT D in favour of developing and least-developed 
Members, and accentuated the CTD's role within the architecture of the WTO.  As such, Egypt would 
have expected the Annual Report to be issued in  accordance with rule 33 of the CTD's Rules of 
Procedure, while emphasizing that it was up to the Ge neral Council only to take decisions over issues 
that had continued to elude consensus in the CTD.  It was therefore regrettable to observe that this 
decision had not been complied with.  It was of an even greater concern that the CTD had been 
inhibited from fulfilling its terms of reference to report in a factua l manner on several important legal  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 45 
 
 
  and procedural systemic issues.  In fact, this ma tter should have been brought to the attention of the 
General Council to avoid any further infringement on the rights and interests of developing countries 
under the Enabling Clause, and to uphold the role and mandate of the CTD.  Therefore, Egypt 
expected the Council to safeguard the integrity of the multilateral trading system and to refute any 
attempt by some Members to take actions or ma tters in their own hands over emerging systemic 
issues under discussion, over which multilateral discip lines had yet to be devised.  These disciplines 
should be established in order to allow for appr opriate consideration of all RTAs with dual 
notification status under the Transparency Mechanis m for RTAs, and before it became applicable on a 
permanent basis. 
154. The lack of consensus on the CTD's annual re port was merely a symptom of the systemic 
issues that needed to be addressed.  Egypt would have expected that after two years, a more serious 
engagement would take place on these issues.  Instea d, the WTO was now facing the predicament that 
the consideration of RTAs with dual notificati on status were to be placed on hold because the 
systemic issues had never been addressed, nor ha d the necessary disciplines been devised to unable 
the WTO to cope with the proliferation of RTAs wi th dual notifications status.  Evidently, there was 
no such rule to strengthen the multilateral tradi ng system and its development dimensions.  His 
delegation understood that a consensus had also eluded Members over the CRTA's annual report, due 
to differences over very specific and systemic issues.  It noted in this regard that China, India, Egypt 
and other developing-country Memb ers had called for prudence in dealing with a number of factual 
inconsistencies in the draft CRTA annual report as well as in the RTA database, where the Enabling 
Clause notifications of three RTAs with dual notific ation status had been completely ignored.  The 
selective consideration and reflection of notifications  was a matter of serious concern.  Egypt noted 
that concerted efforts were had been made to undermine the Enabling Clause and selectively report on 
RTAs with dual notification status, not only in the context of the CRTA but also in other WTO Bodies. 
155. Finally, his delegation wished to voice its  concerns over the manner whereby the GCC 
Customs Union, one of the RTAs with dual notifi cation status and still under consideration by the 
CTD, had been included in the work programme of the CRTA.  This had come as a surprise, given the 
lack of procedures allowing its inclusion, all the more so because it was contrary to the assurances 
given by the Secretariat of the CRTA to developing-country Members, as well as to the Chairs of the CTD and CRTA, that no such action would be taken w ith regard to this agreement.  That such an 
undertaking not only prejudiced the outcome of the c onsideration of the specific and systemic issues 
in the CTD and other WTO negotiating bodies, but al so prejudiced the rights of developing-country 
Members who had notified the RTAs on the basis of the Enabling Clause.  Egypt therefore expected 
that neutrality and transparency would be retained  on all matters that were  under consideration by 
Members and on other issues of importance to developing countries.   
156. The representative of the European Union
 said he felt constrained to speak on this issue 
because a number of delegations had raised it.  The EU in many ways shared the concerns expressed 
by Egypt over the fact that it had not been possible, at least so far, to adopt the CTD's or CRTA's annual reports.   The Chairs of both those Committees  had worked hard and had consulted extensively 
with the membership on these reports.  They had made  a good effort to do wh at they were meant to 
do, which was to arrive at purely factual reports that reflected in a neutral, objective and factual 
manner the deliberations of those two bodies.  It was beyond his delegation's understanding why it 
had not been possible in a factual report to refl ect, as a matter of fact, the disagreement between 
Members on a number of systemic or rule-making issues.   It should have been possible to do that in 
the reports without prejudice to any Member's diffe rent positions on the substance.  Unfortunately, 
what should have been an automatic procedure of fi nalizing these factual reports turned into a kind of 
proxy-negotiation over the interpretation of Artic le XXIV of the GATT under the Enabling Clause, 
and whether, and if so when, it was possible for di fferent kinds of RTAs of Customs Unions to be 
notified under the CTD of CRTA or both.  That was an issue that needed to be addressed, and it was a WT/GC/M/129 
Page 46  
 
  pity that the annual reports had been taken hostage  to that important systemic discussion.  In the 
CRTA and the CTD, the EU and several other Member s had suggested that this systemic issue should 
probably be taken up in the group that had developed the RTA Transparency Mechanism, namely the Negotiating Group on Rules.  The EU would support that  happening.  It had also asked the Chairs of 
the CRTA and the CTD to continue their consulta tions in 2011 and to try to secure Members' 
agreement that whatever was reported in their respec tive reports should be a factual description of the 
situation, even where there was not yet consensus on some issues of substance.  In that way, Members 
would be able to see these two reports adopted by  the next meeting of the General Council.  
157. The representative of China
 associated his delegation with the statements by India and Egypt 
on the regrettable situation of the failure to adop t the CTD and CRTA annual reports.  Like India and 
Egypt, China attached great importance to both re ports and had made its best efforts, under the 
leadership of respective Chairs, to find proper langua ge to reflect objectively the work undertaken by 
the respective Committees in 2010.  He recalled th at the GCC Customs Union, the India-Korea and 
the ASEAN-Korea FTAs had been notified under both the Enabling Clause and Article XXIV of 
GATT 1994.  This new phenomenon of dual notificati on posed challenges to the system, since the 
current RTA Transparency Mechanism did not contain provisions on how to deal with such cases.  In 
this regard, he wished to draw attention to the s ubmission by India, Egypt and China, in which these 
countries raised a series of questions on the impli cation of dual notification for the RTA Transparency 
Mechanism, the CTD terms of reference and the En abling Clause.  Although the usefulness of this 
document had been recognized by many Members,  China was deeply disappointed that during the 
past few months, the CTD had spent most of its time discussing whether the GCC should be included 
on the agenda or not, rather than having a substan tive discussion on the submission.  China still firmly 
believed that the consideration of RTA dual notifi cations should be kept on hold until Members had 
properly address the concerns illust rated in the submission, and had made a decision on the proper 
way to proceed. 
158. He wished to emphasize two points, which Chin a believed were of paramount importance to 
developing Members.  First, the rights of deve loping-country Members under the Enabling Clause 
should be fully respected.  It had been clearly dem onstrated that the Enabling Clause was an effective 
tool for developing-country Members to better inte grate into the multilateral trading system and to 
achieve their development goals.  Article 2(c) of  the Enabling Clause had b een increasingly used by 
the developing-country Members to foster sound relati ons and open trade with each other.  This trend 
should continue and be encouraged.  Any resolutio n of RTA dual notifications should not negatively 
impact the rights of developing-country Members unde r the Enabling Clause.  Second, the central role 
of the CTD in development-related issues should be maintained and strengthened.  According to its 
terms of reference, the CTD shoul d serve as a focal point for consideration and coordination of work 
on development.  It should consider any questio n which might arise with regard to either the 
application or the use of special provisions in the multilateral trade agreements and related Ministerial 
Decisions in favour of developing-country Member s.  The GCC and the two RTAs, to which the 
Enabling Clause was applicable, were certainly unde r the competence of the CTD.  China understood 
that the CTD needed to consult with relevant bodi es in the WTO.  However, it would not accept that 
the CTD simply passed its duty to other WTO bodi es.  China called upon all Members to actively 
engage in future consultations with an  aim to finding a satisfactory solution. 
159. The representative of Zambia , on behalf of the LDC Group , expressed the Group's deep 
concern at the failure to adopt a CTD annual report,  as this body took up issues of vital interest and 
highlighted issues that were critical to the LDCs.  In that regard, the Group supported the statements 
by Egypt and India.   He would not repeat the important issues that had been raised by those 
delegations, but wished to reiterate that the need to  deal with the systemic issues of strengthening the 
WTO system and the development dime nsion could not be over-emphasized.  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 47 
 
 
  160. The representative of the United States  said the depictions his delegation had heard of things 
that had been done or said were simply not accurate.  The US agreed that it was regrettable that the 
two reports could not be agreed.  It was all the more re grettable in that this had been totally avoidable.  
The US commended the respective Chairs for their e fforts to conclude the reports and their skilled 
efforts to overcome differences.  Me mbers needed to keep in mind that annual reports should just be 
factual compilations of the activities of WTO bodies.  They were not an appropriate platform for 
trying to resolve or affect substantive divergences am ong Members.  Some of the issues that had been 
raised, including in consultations on the CRTA and CTD annual reports, related to the RTA 
Transparency Mechanism.  This  Mechanism would be reviewed in the Rules Negotiating Group in 
order to make it permanent.  The US looked forward to discussing these issues in the Rules 
Negotiating Group in the context of that review. 
161. The General Council took note  of the reports of the WTO bodies, including the reports of the 
Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreemen ts, listed in the Proposed Agenda, adopted  the draft 
report of the General Council in document WT/G C/W/627 and Corr.1 (in English only), on the 
understanding that the Secretariat would make the necessary adjustments to that report to include 
matters that had been considered at the present meeting, and took note  of the statements. 
12. Appointment of Officers to WTO Bodies – A nnouncement by the Chairman pursuant to 
Paragraph 7.1(a) of the Guidelines (WT/L/510) 
162. The Chairman  recalled that the Guidelines for the Appointment of Officers to WTO bodies 
(document WT/L/510) provided that the outgoing Chairman of the Genera l Council would conduct 
consultations on the appointment of chairpersons to  the WTO bodies in Groups 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the 
Annex to the Guidelines.  The Guidelines also provide d, in paragraph 7.1(a), that in order to promote 
transparency, the selection process should be starte d with an announcement by the Chairman at the 
General Council meeting held in December each year.  Accordingly, he wished to inform the General 
Council that he would be starting the selection pr ocess for the appointment of chairpersons to the 
WTO bodies in the Groups he had just mentioned.  In accordance with Paragraph 7.1(b) of the 
Guidelines, he would be assisted in the selecti on process by the serving Chairman of the Dispute 
Settlement Body, Mr Agah (Nigeria), and Mr Matus (Chile), former Chairman of the General Council.  In line with paragraph 7.1(d), Messrs Agah, Matus and he would communicate, as early as possible, a specified time-period in which they would be availa ble to hear the views and suggestions, if any, of 
Members, individually or in groups.  Furthermor e, as provided for in Paragraph 7.1(c) of the 
Guidelines, a list of past Chairs of major bodies was available to delegations at the present meeting in 
order to provide some structure for their subsequent deliberations on the possible distribution of 
chairs, based on past practice and the need for ba lance . Finally, he wished to note that, in 
accordance with paragraph 2.1 of th e Guidelines, representatives of Members in financial arrears for 
over one full year could not be considered for a ppointment.  In addition, he wished to inform 
delegations that in the interests of using everyone 's time efficiently, he also intended to use these 
consultations to start discussing various aspects of  the Eighth Ministerial Conference, such as its 
format and programme, in line with his statement on this matter at the October General Council.  This 
would only be the start of this particular pr ocess, and further consultations on these issues would 
undoubtedly be necessary. 
163. The General Council took note
 of the statement. 
13. Chairmanship of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Development – 
Statement by the Chairman 
164. The Chairman , speaking under "Other Business ", said that as he had announced in a fax sent 
to delegations on 3 December, he had recently held  consultations regarding the appointment of a 
successor to Mr Thawatchai Sophastienphong (Thaila nd), Chairman of the Special Session of the WT/GC/M/129 
Page 48  
 
  Committee on Trade and Development, who had inform ed him he would shortly be leaving Geneva.  
These consultations, which he had c onducted with the assistance of Mr Agah (Nigeria), Chair of the 
Dispute Settlement Body and Mr Matus (Chile), fo rmer Chairman of the General Council, had shown 
a consensus among Members on the appointment  of Mr Shahid Bashir (Pakistan) as 
Mr Sophastienphong's successor.  Mr Bashir would be elected Chair at the next formal meeting of the 
CTD Special Session. 
165. The General Council took note
 of the statement. 
14. Administrative Measures for Members in  arrears – Statement by the Chairman 
166. The Chairman , speaking under "Other Business ", recalled that at its meeting in May 2006, the 
General Council had approved a recommendati on from the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration regarding revised Administrative Measures for Members in arrears.  Among these 
Administrative Measures was a requirement that, at each meeting of the General Council, the 
Chairman of the Committee on Budget, Finance a nd Administration should provide information with 
regard to which Members were under Administra tive Measures in Categories II through IV.  He 
wished to begin by inviting Mr Mignon (France), on behalf of Mr Vaaranmaa (Finland), Chairman of 
the Budget Committee, to provide the Council with this information. 
167. Mr Mignon (France), on behalf of the Chairman of the Budget Committee , said that as 
required by the decision of the General Council,  he would list the Members under Categories II 
through IV of the Administrative Measures as at  13 December 2010.  Sin ce the last report, the 
Secretariat had received payments from Peru (formerly in Category II), Grenada (formerly in Category III) and Nicaragua (formerly in Category IV ), who had been taken off the list of Members 
subject to Administrative Measures.  Consequently , there were no more Members in Categories II and 
III.  Following the earlier decision of the General Council, there were now only 9 Members in Category IV.  These Inactive Members were Bur undi, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, 
Djibouti, Dominica, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritan ia and Sierra Leone.  This was the lowest 
number of Members under Administrative Measures since 1995. 
168. The Chairman
 said that under the revised Administrative Measures, he was also required at 
each Council meeting to request those Members in Ca tegories III and IV to inform him, before the 
next meeting of the General Council, as to when their payment of arrears might be expected.   
169. The General Council took note  of the statements. 
 
_______________ 
  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 49 
 
 
  ANNEX 
Statements by delegations at the informal meeting  
of the Trade Negotiations Committee  
on 30 November 2010  
 
 
 At their request, the statements made by a number of delegations at the above-mentioned meeting are included below as part of th e Minutes of the General Council meeting. 
 
1. Barbados 
 
 We wish to address the belief that small ec onomies only need special flexibilities for short 
periods of time. I would like to take the opportunity  to point out that many of the diseconomies of 
scale and high-levels of capital per unit relative to the development of each sector in small economies, 
is not as temporary as we think, and that phase-out pe riods must be looked at in this light.  Economies 
which are geographically small today will be geogr aphically small tomorrow. There is nothing that 
will make them geographically larger in, say, five ye ars.  We therefore urge that in considering phase-
out of flexibilities for small economies that we bear this in mind, particularly in certain sectors where 
small size is a larger-than-usual handicap.  
2. Barbados for the SVEs 
  I wish to thank you for your update this mo rning.  We have heard the pronouncements, most 
recently by the G20 and APEC Members that 2011 should be seized as a window of opportunity for the conclusion of the Doha Round.  As you have poi nted out, in order to respond to this call and to 
conclude the Doha negotiations in  2011, a clear roadmap will be n eeded that outlines the outstanding 
areas and the envisions timelines.  As you noted, th e membership needs a clea r work programme that 
incorporates the development goals of the Round at  its centre, to serve as a common platform from 
which we will all be operating.  We must now use ou r time most efficiently and make every effort to 
ensure that all issues are brought to similar levels of maturity, taking into account that the driver of the 
Round has always been Agriculture.  The SVEs note that the small-group discussions have proven 
useful, in keeping with the cocktail approach which you outlined in March 2010, but we believe that it 
is desirable now to return to the multilateral a pproach as it involves the full participation of all 
Members and ensures transparency.  We believe, how ever, that useful ideas from the discussions of 
the small groups can be brought into the Chair-led  Negotiating Group processes for due consideration 
by all Members, as the Negotiating Group process ensu res that there is a bottom-up approach to the 
development of modalities.  In our haste, we mu st not ignore the small a nd vulnerable among us, and 
the need to ensure that the need s, interests, constraints and con cerns of this group are taken into 
account in the formulation of any work programme .  The SVEs would welcome timely discussion of 
our issues and concerns, so that we avoid dealing w ith the issues at the eleventh hour, when there may 
not be sufficient time to consider the required flexib ilities for SVEs.  With a share of less than 0.1 per 
cent of world trade, the flexibilities we have tabled in the various areas have minimal or no impact on 
overall world trade, but can serve to assist with th e fuller integration of our economies into the world 
trading system, bearing in mind that the princi pal aim of the Round is the development of our 
countries.  During the course of the negotiations, SV Es have been participa ting constructively and 
several proposals were introduced in the Negotiation Gr oups.  We are of the view that those initiatives 
address many of our legitimate development concerns .   Our Group considers that future progress has 
to be achieved based on the current Chairs’ Texts whic h, for the most part, reflect an adequate balance 
and address many of the concerns of our Group in areas such as Agriculture and NAMA. We 
therefore urge Chairs to restrain from any attemp t to reopen the specific SVE provisions included in 
the different texts.  The SVEs reiterate our commi tment to the Round and our willingness to intensify 
efforts to work towards the conclusion of  the Doha Development Round in 2011. WT/GC/M/129 
Page 50  
 
  3. Plurinational State of Bolivia  
 
 Thank you for your report, which we see as valu able and useful, particularly as my delegation 
has made it a point to keep itself informed of wh at is happening in this house through the press and 
meetings of ad hoc groups, so that we are abreast of the discussions and agreements reached in small 
groups such as the Green Room and now the G-23, in which only certain de legations take part.  
Concerning the message from the G20 and APEC, we ar e aware that in the present situation, in which 
serious problems caused by the crisis, such as unemplo yment and a so called "currency war" persist, 
the Doha Round has been one of the topics, alt hough not the main one.  Nevertheless, a political 
indication of a possible window of opportunity for conclusion of the Round this coming year has 
emerged, and negotiations may be entering their fina l phase.  We take note of the political indications, 
but emphasize that neither the G20 nor APEC repres ent all 153 Members of this organization, and the 
fixing of arbitrary dates for the Round's conclusion h as greatly harmed the organization when they fail 
to be met, one after the other.  They have only served to put pressure on developing countries to show 
greater flexibility in the negotiations, but not on th e most powerful countries.  With these messages 
from the G20 and APEC, the Chairman's consu ltations commenced and some Negotiating Groups, 
such as NAMA, have already decided on an accelerated  programme of work in order to have revised 
texts ready by April, while other groups are moving in the same direction.  Nevertheless, it is in the 
TNC first and foremost that we must hold discussions and take decisions based on the terms of reference given by our Ministers.  If necessary,  we should draw up a work programme based on 
suggestions from all Members, not simply to meet artificial deadlines, and one that meets the interests 
of developing and least-developed countries as re gards "development" and based on substantial 
progress, which we do not yet see.  We should constant ly bear in mind that development is the focus 
and objective of this Round and not market access as such.  This is very easily forgotten, and the 
interests of developed countries attract  all the attention in the negotiations. 
 
 Recently, we have been subject to the political  and economic agenda of a single country, and 
we now react to its interests alone, which propose to complete the package on the table, raising the 
level of ambition and with new concessions by some  developing countries.  We have never been in 
agreement with this way of conduc ting multilateral negotiations, and we continue to disagree with it.  
This is why we propose that a programme of work  that takes into account the following points should 
be discussed:  We are not in favour of small gr oups taking decisions on behalf of all Members, 
followed by so called information or transparency  sessions seeking to make them multilateral.  We 
have always stated that we are looking for an eff ective negotiating process that is inclusive, with full 
and democratic participation by all Members.  It should of course also be transparent, bottom-up and 
conducted by the Members.  At previous meeting,  this delegation expressed its doubts regarding the 
procedure that involved small brai nstorming groups.  We are now convi nced that our work should be 
centralized in the Negotiating Groups, in which we should all be able to  participate if the meetings are 
organized sequentially and not in parallel.  We should follow the terms of reference given by our 
Ministers, in both the Doha and Hong Kong Declarati ons, particularly with regard to S&D Treatment 
for developing and least-developed countries, as the most important element of the Round.  The sequence determined in the terms of reference should be followed, namely, Agriculture and NAMA 
should be first, and Services shoul d come only afterwards.  The packag e we have on the table is still 
unbalanced in favour of developed c ountries, giving them a wide margin of flexibility.  It does not 
impose significant cuts in agricultural subsidies a nd does not in any way guarantee market access for 
developing countries.  This is why work must go on to ensure results for development, which we still 
do not see.  In addition, the concerns of small dele gations must be taken into account when planning 
meetings.  This is extremely impor tant for delegations with just one or two members, because it is 
humanly impossible to attend several meetings at the same time.  The Secretariat should therefore 
ensure that topics such as Agricu lture, NAMA, Services and standards, inter alia, do not coincide.  
The same applies to documents, which should be circ ulated in the official languages of the WTO in 
sufficient time to be examined both in Geneva and in capitals.  The points you mentioned do not 
appear to coincide with the issues raised by my delegation.  Moreover, it is difficult to endorse them  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 51 
 
 
  immediately, if your proposal is not amended by the proposals made by all the countries that have 
spoken, particularly as it is the first time we have heard it.  
4. China   
  China associates itself with the statement by Brazil on behalf of the Geneva G20 and by the 
Philippines on behalf of the G-33.  One of the majo r achievements of the G20 Summit in Seoul is that 
Leaders reaffirmed their strong commitment to the DDA and directed us as negotiators to engage in 
across-the-board negotiations to promptly bri ng the Doha Development Round to a conclusion 
consistent with the mandate and built on the progr ess already achieved. Leaders also recognized the 
urgent need to seize the window of opportunity in 2011, albeit narrow, and intensify engagement in 
order to complete the endgame. The Leaders’ m eeting and the APEC Ministerial meeting also 
reiterated the importance of translating political co mmitment into concrete actions toward a final 
conclusion of the Round.  Now it is upon us to shoulde r the task of implementing the instructions of 
our Leaders.  The Leaders recognized that the window  of opportunity in 2011 is indeed narrow.  In 
our view, the narrowness lies first and foremost in the f act that time is not with us, thus it is important 
to plan wisely the year ahead.  Since we last met,  Ambassadors have been able to conduct the final 
round of small-group brainstorming. The Chair-led process has also restarted. We believe the brainstorming has been a helpful exercise in the sense that it not only enables Ambassadors to have 
thorough exchanges on all topics, but also paves the way for possible progress in quite a few areas, 
such as development, rules and dispute settlement.  Bu t after all, this brainstorming is not and cannot 
replace negotiating sessions, and negotiations from now on should be centered around the Chair-led 
multilateral process, a primary objective of which is to  come up with revised texts as soon as possible, 
based on Members’ intensified engagements in th e coming months.  Across-the-board trade-offs 
could have a better chance when we have the text s on the table. The guiding principle, undoubtedly, 
should be transparency, inclusiveness and bottom-up.  For this purpose, Senior Officials should also 
be involved as much as necessary.  In order to seize the window of opportunity and complete the 
endgame, the Leaders’ instructions must be honoured  in letter and spirit, which means, I repeat, a 
balanced and ambitious outcome to be achieved through respecting the mandate and building on the 
progress already achieved.  Here I would like to offer a word of caution.  Any unilateral movement of 
the goalpost or change of the rules in the endga me would cause further delays to the negotiations. 
Therefore, we encourage each and every Member to take a realistic and pragmatic approach to the 
negotiations.  Last but not least, it is to be str essed again that this Round is a development round. 
Many things could be said of the outcome of the Round, but above everything, it has to be 
development-oriented.  In this regard, China is in favour of addressing in real earnest the concerns of 
the LDCs and SVEs as a priority, in line with the st atements by Zambia and Barbados.  China is ready 
to keep playing an active and constructive role and work with all Members to turn this Round from a 
"distressful, difficult and awful Round", as describe d by a former General Council Chair, into a 
"desirable, doable and agreeable Round".  
5. Colombia   
 
 We would like to thank you for your report on  the current state of the negotiations and the 
next steps in the negotiating process.  Our delega tion wishes to express its support for the statement 
by Australia on behalf of the Cairns Group.  Colomb ia is not a member of either the G20 or APEC.  
Nevertheless, we recognize the importance of th e political mandate contained in the communiqués 
issued by both groups of leaders at their recent meetings.  The message sent out by those Leaders is powerful, clear and specific, emphasizing thei r will and commitment to conclude the Doha 
Development Round negotiations.  This will and commi tment must now be reflected, without delay, 
in the action taken by the various Geneva-based representatives.  Today you have outlined a work 
plan which, together with the aforementioned politic al mandate, should lead us to the final stage of 
the negotiations.  We endorse this work plan, but would like to make the fo llowing comments:  (1) A 
so called brainstorming exercise has just taken place.   This allowed ambassadors to become directly WT/GC/M/129 
Page 52  
 
  involved in the discussion of complex issues and gave a group of Members, including the largest 
ones, the opportunity to engage in dialogue and exchange ideas on possible solutions to issues of 
divergence.  The positive results of this experience must be put to good use during the new stage of 
the process.  In particular, we consider the involve ment of ambassadors and, where necessary, Senior 
Officials, to be fundamental to addressing the most  complex issues.  (2) Thanks to the aforementioned 
brainstorming exercise, the largest Members be gan to assume leadership responsibilities in the 
negotiations.  These responsibilities do not stop there.  On the contrary, they have only just begun, and 
must be demonstrated, especially during the more intense interaction that is to come.  (3) The 
Negotiating Group Chairs play a fundamental role.  They must be empowered to work with the 
Members with energy, creativity and firmness, with  a view to moving towards the timely issuing of 
texts.  (4) We insist on there being as much transparency as possible, but through institutional 
channels and without using mass m eans of communication.  (5) The Memb ers, in particular the largest 
ones, must remain genuinely involved in finding solutions, including through a horizontal process.  
We hope that the next stage will not be used as a screen for not negotiating.  The political will clearly expressed by the G20 and APEC must be demonstrated.  Time is running out.  We urge all Members 
to continue working tirelessly to ensure that the Doha Round yields the desired results in a timely 
manner, while fully reflecting the development dimension.  
6. Costa Rica  
 
 Thank you for your report and views.  We s upport the work programme you have described.  
We also endorse the statement by Australia on behalf  of the Cairns Group.  We welcome the signals 
from the G20 and APEC Leaders, who have called for negotiators to intensify their efforts to reach 
the final stage.  Costa Rica supports these effort s, as the results of the Round will provide new 
opportunities for economic growth and, with it, deve lopment.  In our view, development cannot be 
postponed.  We cannot miss this opportunity to show  that we have the capacity to maintain and 
improve the legacy received in the form of the mu ltilateral trading system.  2011 is the time for the 
current generation of governments and negotiators to demonstrate th eir political will to conclude the 
negotiations.  The small-group stage was useful in ma ny ways.  It allowed for intense interaction and 
conceptual discussions in which we saw progress that  will help work move forward in the Negotiating 
Groups.  It was also very useful in the sense that the discussions included the participation of a large 
number of developing countries with different objec tives.  Development is fundamental, but there is 
no accepted definition of the way in which the Round can contribute to development.  Some believe 
that greater ambition in Agriculture, NAMA or Trade Facilitation will contribute to their development.  Others feel that less ambition and mo re flexibility would respond better to their needs.  
This forces us to recognize and respect the different  positions that exist in the developing world and, 
given the nature of the WTO, we must all seek to re ach agreement.  This stage was more balanced in 
terms of the positions of the developing countries which view ambition as fitting for their 
development strategies, and we trust that this will no t change in the next stage.  The involvement of 
ambassadors was enriching, and the Negotiating Groups  must ensure that they add this important 
ingredient to the cocktail.   The stage of intense negotiation we are now en tering must be efficient, as we do not have 
much time, but we must also ensure that it has the elements of the cocktail that make it inclusive for 
all Members.  The right we all have to participat e comes along with a duty to make real contributions, 
commitments and offers that will help to move the negotiations forward.  For this reason, Costa Rica 
urges all Members to identify their new positions, b ecause returning to the negotiating table with the 
old red lines that prevented progress in the past would not help and would be a recipe for disaster.  We 
must all review our positions and negotiate in good faith.  Moreover, the Chairs will only be able to 
facilitate negotiations and the achievement of resu lts if Members inform them of the progress and 
convergence that we have achieved.  Variable ge ometry will give everyone, especially the major 
players, the opportunity to transform their political  signals into construc tive negotiating positions.  
Without this ingredient, this exercise will not be  successful and those which suffer most will be the  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 53 
 
 
  small and medium sized developing countries and the LDCs.  This is why Costa Rica urges the major 
players to assume their responsibilities.  
7. Cuba 
 
 Thank you very much for having convened this  meeting and for the information transmitted, 
which outlines the intensive work we will have to do in the coming months.  However, I also wish to 
express my concern over the fact that my delegation raised its flag the moment the floor was opened, 
and not simultaneously with others, bu t it turns out that Cuba's statement will be nearly the last of the 
meeting.  Fortunately, some of Cuba 's concerns were raised in the statements by Barbados on behalf 
of the Small Economies, by Brazil on behalf of the G20 and by the Philippines on behalf of the G-33, 
all of which Cuba was a member. We also fully sup port Bolivia’s statement.  Cuba carefully took note 
of your notification of this meeting, in which, with  full optimism, we viewed the possibility of moving 
from words to action, in response to an alleged po litical momentum that you had sensed as a result of 
the financial G20 meetings in Seoul and of the m eeting of APEC Ministers in Yokohama. As we had 
mentioned in our last statement at the TNC, toda y we still do not perceive the real proposals for 
solutions, as well as the necessary political decision from  those who are expected to make them, with 
the purpose of fulfilling the commitments on development mandated in the Doha Round.  Let me reiterate that we are still waiting for the real involve ment of one Member in the negotiations, with no 
prospect of that happening in the short or medium term. As we had noted earlier, the current exercise 
of brainstorming has not provided real contribution,  and we continue to make no progress on the most 
controversial issues at the level of the negotiating bodies.  While some developed countries insist on 
keeping to their current political constraint and refuse to accept the Doha mandate in favour of 
developing countries, the final outcome of the Round would continue to be extended.  In 2011, this 
Round would be the longest in the history of the multilateral trade system, and concerns and pressures 
could rise to force some sort of conclusion to restore the credibility of the organization. 
 
 In this context, our country will continue to demand, together with the rest of the Group of 
developing countries, that the word "development" is maintained at the centre of these negotiations, 
and that the flexibilities and S&D Treatment that h as been mandated are respected.  We reject the 
imposition of a final result that sacrifices the deve lopment issues and is subject to an arbitrary 
timetable which creates pressure to conclude the R ound.  Nor are we willing to accept a big rush in 
the final stage of negotiations, where not all c ountries can participate equally, especially small 
delegations, to the detriment of the principles of tr ansparency and inclusiven ess. We see with great 
concern the proliferation of informal consultations  that have occurred over the past two months under 
the "cocktail approach" proposed to accelerate the pr ocess.  We warn that not all Members can count 
on the human resources needed to keep pace with many meetings, and the problem is not simply 
solved with more groups of countries.  No me thod that is used to accelerate the Round may 
undermine the full participation of all Members in the negotiations, because there may be a threat of 
significant setbacks at the end.  Finally, we think th at the problem in this house is not that we lack 
intelligence to know what to do.  What we really n eed, we highlight once again, is the political will of 
those who have a high responsibility in this Round, and not by putting pressure to receive greater 
commitments and concessions from developing countries. 
 
8. Ecuador 
 
 At this stage in the negotiations, where we may be reaching the end game, we think it is 
relevant to raise the following points.  First, the importance of the development dimension and 
Members' commitment to its implementation has been underscored in this organization on many 
occasions and at the highest level in the on-going negotiating process.  At this juncture, there can be 
no question of any factor or circumstance, and especially any time consideration, serving as an 
argument or excuse to disregard or undermine that dimension.  On the contrary, Members must not only ensure "possible gains" or "potential gains"  for the developing countries, but must also make WT/GC/M/129 
Page 54  
 
  certain that the outcomes of the Round in themsel ves are tools that effectively support the economic 
development of Members.  In other words, firs t and foremost the outcomes must not hamper the 
development strategies of small economies and, se cond, they must not boil down to mere formal 
statements or mere expressions of good and general – or simply institutional – intent.  In this 
particular context, they must at the very least pr ovide for enhanced market access, balanced rules and 
well-targeted, sustainably-financed technical assistance and capacity-building.  Second, the 
negotiating process must take into account the deep a nd continuing uncertainty that has pervaded the 
international economy for some years now, and th e risks and dangers that may ensue from this 
situation, especially for smaller developing countr ies.  These past few years we have witnessed and 
are still witnessing events with unprecedented potential for destabilization, which may in turn have 
extremely serious consequences.  State intervention has been key in the handling of these events, in 
some cases with support from international cooperati on, which has led to vast inflows of resources, 
albeit with heavy conditionalities, in order to deal  with emergency situations.  The resources and 
social realities in small developing countries differ fr om those of countries that so far have directly 
faced such situations.  Hence, this element of uncer tainty and high risk will need to be factored in 
when the time comes to establish timeframes and th e depth of commitments, especially in terms of 
access, for the small developing countries.  
It will also be necessary to provide for means for these countries to safeguard their external 
balances effectively on an on-going basis.  Third,  the 2011 process calls for a minimum of planning.  
The Chair of the TNC should prepare for the Gene ral Council's consideration in December 2010 a 
draft indicative outline, with specific timelines, for the negotiating process in the coming year.  To our 
mind, such an outline should take into account:  (i ) the limited human resources available to small 
developing-country missions in Geneva;  (ii) th e high costs for the small developing countries of 
frequent travel by capital-based experts to attend re gular meetings and negotia ting events in Geneva;  
(iii) the need for the organization's various bodies to  carry on with their regular activities;  (iv) the 
absolute necessity for the negotia ting process to allow participation by all Members in negotiating 
events of interest to them;  and (v) the need to put an end to – or where this is impossible, to ensure 
that it is minimal – overlapping of negotiating events in each of the three key negotiating areas.   We 
consider that at its December meeting the Gene ral Council should be apprised of and approve the 
indicative outline for the 2011 negotiating process.  Fourth, the process must be transparent and 
inclusive.  There must be no question – as has al ready happened in one of the Committees – of any 
outcomes of restricted meetings being immediately, simply and fully endorsed by the Membership as 
a whole, under the pretext that they have been car efully negotiated and th at balances have been 
preserved.  Multilateralism does not go hand in hand with the intangibility of proposals and 
supremacy of the reduced membership criterion.  Th e process must genuinely be open to participation 
by all Members of the organization.  There can be  no meetings "by invitation only" or the like.  
Moreover, the Negotiating Group Chairs must immediat ely circulate, in writing, detailed reports on 
progress recorded in the meetings, and ensure a dvance circulation of notification of meetings, 
agendas, and proposals or specific issues to be addressed. 
 
9. Hong Kong, China  
 
 We join previous speakers in thanking you for your read-out of the recent APEC and G20 
Summits, and for setting out the resultant way forward.  Like others, we are very much encouraged by 
the strong political signals emanating from our leaders at both meetings, in that they have specifically 
pointed to the need for intensified engagement in Geneva and for negotiations across the board to take 
us into the endgame.  We are also pleased by th eir commitment to seek domestic ratification once an 
outcome is reached.  What we must do now is clear, and that is to act on these signals and translate 
them into real give-and-take in opening the window  of opportunity for us to close out the Round in 
2011.  In this regard, we consider the timeline br oadly outlined by you to be a sensible and pragmatic 
one and we fully support it.  Counting back a nd taking account of the time required for technical 
scheduling, our collective task is to achieve modalities by the middle of next year.   This will entail,  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 55 
 
 
  via a bottom-up approach, the rapid production and discussion of Chairs' texts around the end of the 
first quarter of next year.  This will be an importa nt but by no means easy task.  But it is certainly 
doable, so long as we all do it with a genuine willin gness to negotiate openly and in good faith.  In the 
intensified negotiations that are planned for each  Negotiating Group in the few months ahead, we 
must empower our representatives to display the necessar y flexibility as a prerequisite for us to reach 
compromises and hence facilitate production of the Chai rs’ texts on a well-balanced basis.  In tandem, 
the small-group process in the past few months has proved to be successful in bringing out new ideas 
to bridge the remaining gaps.  In the endgame negotia tion, we believe that such direct engagement at 
the Ambassadorial level, be they in the format of  small groups or in the Chair-led Negotiating Groups, 
should continue and increase.  The direct involve ment of Ambassadors in various negotiating areas 
will also help pave the way for the eventual horizont al trade-offs that should come soon.   We would 
not underestimate the complexity an d sensitivity of this process in this  final stage of negotiations, but 
we must embark on it and eventually succeed in order to bring the Round to the balanced and 
ambitious conclusion that all of us are seeking in the time available.  The coming few months are 
going to be critical if we are to “talk the talk and walk the walk” together.  We must work hard to iron 
out the remaining issues and build a package whic h carries a fairly high level of ambition.  My 
delegation will strive to do our utmost in our collective efforts to bring the Round to a successful 
close in 2011.  
10. Mexico 
 
 The directives given by the G20 and APEC Lead ers at their recent summit meetings in Seoul 
and Yokohama are the clearest and most concrete po litical signals we have received in the past few 
years to move promptly into the last stage of this  Round – that is to say, the final process of "give and 
take" inherent in any agreement.  If we recall your own words and the statements of numerous 
Members at our previous TNC meeting, such signals  were exactly what we had said we needed.  Now 
we have them, along with commitment at the highest  level to take advantage of what the leaders 
termed "a critical window of opportunity" to conclu de the Round.  More specifically, 2011 in fact 
constitutes the last window of opportunity for a successful conclusion to the Round.  Driven by the sense of urgency and collective responsibility given to us by our Leaders, we now truly need to move 
ahead.  This necessarily involves framing a decisive programme with very specific targets, to be 
achieved here in Geneva in the next few months .  Mexico accordingly supports your suggestion to 
continue using the cocktail appro ach, which will have to be injected  with an even stronger dose of 
intensity and substance as of this coming January, and to further concentrat e the focus on all the 
Negotiating Groups, led by their respective Chairs.  At the same time we need to move swiftly in 
establishing the horizontal process that will allow us to complete the ambitious and balanced package 
we all want and hope to achieve.  All of this must  be directed at meeting the following targets:  
production of revised texts reflecti ng as many advances as possible, in square brackets, towards the 
end of the first quarter of 2011; consolidation of  the final package towards the end of June; and 
preparation and verification of schedules of commit ments and legal revision of final texts during the 
second half of 2011.  We believe that such a roadma p is the only realistic way of proceeding that 
could enable us to hammer out the final deal of the Round at the Eighth Ministerial Conference, and 
thus to fulfil the mandate that has been entrusted to us.   We agree that the new texts will have to be 
based on Member-driven agreements and suggesti ons and build on the progress already achieved.  
Needless to say, if this new course of action is to  succeed, all delegations must be prepared to show a 
suitable degree of flexibility in the process which ha s resumed in recent weeks and will be gathering 
increasing momentum as of the weeks to come.  It  will also be critical for the process to be 
transparent and inclusive, for these principles have b een, and will continue to be, the cornerstone of a 
successful multilateral trading system. 
    WT/GC/M/129 
Page 56  
 
  11. Norway  
 
 We thank the Director-General for the outlin e of a process early next year. The process, 
although with some gaps still to be filled, is in our view what we need to start the endgame.  The 
initiative by the Big Five in setting up the brainsto rming process in small grou ps of ambassadors did 
inserted new energy into the process. As this  was brainstorming, not negotiations, no big 
breakthroughs have occurred.  But by looking clo sely, one could spot the development of possible 
solutions and trade-offs in certain areas which coul d and should be brought into the real negotiations.  
Negotiating outside the system is not a sustainable solution.  Full participation, transparency and 
ownership can only be achieved thro ugh a multilateral process.   The initiative and efforts of the Big 
Five to address the concerns of Members rega rding the small-group process and establishing the 
intensified and expanded process required by leaders,  is reassuring.  So, where do we go from here? 
Process is only a small step in the right direction. Th e real work remains. We need to build up a final 
agreement – in the texts – for our political leaders to  agree on.   Obviously, th is cannot be done in an 
open forum of 153 Members.  Let's face it, most of  the remaining issues, individually, only concern a 
small number of Members. Most of us only have a few "must have" issues pending.  In order to go all 
the way, we might all need to let go of some "nic e-to-haves".  To that effect, a great responsibility 
rests on the shoulders of Chairs to ensure that those concerned as to a particular issue are present 
when those issues are being negotia ted.  Also, the job cannot be done without the approval of the 153. 
The responsibility of transparency lies with the Dire ctor-General, to ensure that Members know what 
is going on, where and when, if not the details of ta lks between certain Members.  Furthermore, we all 
know that successful negotiations do not take place w ithout mutual trust. Willed or accidental leaking 
of things expressed in confidence as part of a negotiation process is a new development that might have the power to hamper not only the Doha Round,  but international coopera tion in general.  We 
have succeeded with all this in the past.  Hopefull y the knowledge of how and when has not been lost 
over the years.  We are scheduled to start on January 10.  This does not give us  much time.  Several of 
the Negotiating Groups will meet in the weeks to co me.  Here we have the opportunity to start to 
show that we mean business.  Finally, it is obvious th at the vast majority of Members need the system 
and want the Doha Round to be successfully finalized .  This includes LDCs, SVEs and medium-sized 
developing and develope d-country Members on all continents, not because we think this will 
immediately save the world economy from the present crises, but because it is important to sustain 
and strengthen the multilateral trading system and its role in providing the predictability and non-
discrimination that we depend upon.  The Big Five  have showed leadership in setting the process 
rolling, despite real and difficult differences between th em.  This is an indication that they appreciate 
the responsibility they all have for a successful c onclusion of this Round th at is of fundamental 
importance to the vast majority of Members.  12. Pakistan 
 
 Thank you for giving me the floor and for gi ving a brief but comprehensive account of the 
current state-of-play in the Doha Round, including your  interaction with the Leaders of recently held 
G20 and APEC Summits.  It is very encouraging th at the Leaders in both the Summits have expressed 
deep political resolve, and support for intensive nego tiations in Geneva to enter the endgame as early 
as possible to, hopefully, conclude the Round in  2011, which offers us a narrow window of 
opportunity.  The Ambassadors small-group engagement  during the past four months has generated 
positive ideas and the stage is now set to take the process to the Negotiating Groups. The ASG 
engagement has highlighted that along with technical  delegates, Ambassadors'  direct involvement in 
negotiations would be importa nt.  The timing of such interaction in variable geometry and the issues 
to be discussed in such meetings would be decide d by the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups.  After the 
winter recess, we are looking forward to an intensiv e process in all areas without exception, to bridge 
the remaining gaps and develop convergence which has eluded us so far. This would help the Chairs 
to revise texts in order to enter the next phase of text-based negotiations and trade-offs in a horizontal 
manner.  We need to utilize all avenues, incl uding Senior Officials from capitals, and also the  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 57 
 
 
  informal Ministerial gathering on the margin of the World Economic Forum in Davos, scheduled for 
29 January.  We may also remain mindful of th e core aspect of the current Round, which is 
development and concerns of developing as well as least-developed countries in the so-called market 
access and non-market access initiatives of this Round.   These countries have a firm belief in the 
multilateral rules-based equitable trading regime.  We  also remain committed to take this process 
forward and to engage with an open-mind. 
 
13. Singapore   
 
 Thank you for the assessment you provided on th e current state of our negotiations, and on 
the road ahead, which I fully support.  In view of th is, I shall keep my intervention this morning brief.  
There was admittedly, at our last meeting in Oct ober, still some degree of uncertainty as we looked 
ahead to the critical window of 2011.  Slightly more  than one month later, with our leaders having 
met in Yokohama and Seoul, a nd with Ambassadors having gone through more small-group 
brainstorming sessions, there now seems to be a health y desire to move ahead, and firmly grasp the 
opportunity before us.  Thanks to the clear political signals that emerged from the G20 and APEC 
Summits, we have a good idea of the tasks ahead.  If we are to make the progress necessary in the 
immediate weeks and months, our approach towards the negotiations will have to make a fundamental 
switch.  We have done the easy part of discussing process and in having some good discussions on the less mature negotiating issues.  However, with 2011 in mind, we will actually have to start 
negotiating, stop stating known positions, and begin making the necessary compromises and showing 
flexibilities.  It is also clear that we probably have  much less time that we think.  The weather has 
probably not helped in bringing forward a festive mood to our meetings, but whatever the case, our 
work for the year is already near its end.  When we start work on 10 January next year, the following 
three months will be crucial, as we accelerate and intensify work in the Negotiating Groups and begin 
to make the transition towards horizontalization.  Wh en the time is ripe, we will have to be prepared 
to make the necessary cross-issue interlinkages aimed at a final give-and-take.  Needless to say, each 
negotiating step we take must be commensurate with our collective commitment to seize 2011 as a 
narrow window of opportunity.   As far as texts are concerned, we should work  towards consolidating 
and reflecting any and all of the positive work that we have done in the past months.  In areas where 
we already have existing texts, we will need to update them as soon as possible, based on progress 
made.  Where there are none, we should strive towa rds a bottom-up process that assists the Chairs in 
reflecting areas of convergence.  We cannot afford  to lose any more time in discussing processes or 
sequences.  We will need to do what is expedient, and what can generate the most support.  In this 
regard, as we now walk the talk in putting into ac tion our work programme for 2011, Singapore stands 
ready to support the Negotiating Group Chairs as they  meet in all necessary configurations, and where 
necessary, to support you in your role as Chair of  the TNC as we make the final moves in the 
endgame. 
 
14. Switzerland   
 
 Switzerland welcomes the fact that appropriate methods are at last being put into place to enter the final stage in the negotiations.  This is  a recent development, and as we noted only this 
morning, a number of Members are not yet engaging  with any degree of credibility.  Although they 
have been pushing for quite some time for a prom pt conclusion to the negotiations they are still 
refusing to lend a hand, to address essential issues th at are essential for them as well, because if these 
issues are not dealt with, there will be nothing th ey can do about it when all is said and done, as 
everything is a question of balance, and balance lies in the whole.  I therefore urge them to adopt a 
more constructive attitude even if they are going to  have a very hard-earned vacation this summer.  
We are not only in a market-access negotiating process.  If a negotiating process such as ours takes 
time, by the end of it we should at least be able to see that the system we all depend on has been made stronger.  A strengthening of the rules and disciplines is critical in the medium-term, and in the long-term will be more important still than the conc essions granted, the future beneficiaries of which WT/GC/M/129 
Page 58  
 
  always consider inadequate.  What I mean is disc iplines relating to subsidies, whether for industrial 
goods or for agriculture, anti-dumping, trade facilitati on, trade and environment and, of course, issues 
concerning the TRIPS Agreement.  In parallel,  the revision of the Agreement on Government 
Procurement could open up new prospects, both in strengthening the system and in market access.  
We are aware of the importance of the substance and the process that are being put into place and will 
participate in a constructive way even if, and above all if, the focus is on development.  Indeed, it is 
critical for each participant to make an effo rt commensurate with its capacities and level of 
development.  I hope you will excuse the hesitation in  my voice today, which is hardly in tune with 
the dynamic approach we want to take, but we will have informal consultations with the NAMA Chair 
so that he at least furthers our objectives.  I sha ll conclude with the title of a song that is well known 
in a minority language, "It's now or never". 
 
15. Switzerland for the G-10  
 
 The G-10 reaffirms the commitment to undertake the necessary efforts to bring this Round to 
a successful conclusion.  The Agri culture package which is now on the table represents a high level of 
ambition and not really an equal repetition of benef its and sacrifices for Members.  Nevertheless, the 
G-10 has been and will continue to be engaged c onstructively in negotiations on the basis of the 
December 2008 draft modalities text and its attached working papers.  A final agreement can only be 
reached with a balanced outcome of the three p illars of the Agriculture negotiations. Outstanding 
issues in the December 2008 draft modalities are not is olated questions.  They are closely linked to 
stabilized issues the G-10 has been prepared to accept in long-standing negotiations, in order to reach 
and maintain a delicate overall balance.  As a group of net food-importing Members, the G-10 
reaffirms the importance of food security, particularly in the light of recent price hikes and export restrictions.  A final agreement has to ensure sustai nability of the agriculture sector.  In recent days, 
more precisely on 23 November 2010, the EFTA Mini sters met for their regular Ministerial meeting 
and supported the strong commitment expressed by G20 Leaders to use the window of opportunity in 
2011 to bring the Doha Round to a successful and ba lanced conclusion.   The Ministers underlined 
the need to expeditiously translate this commitment  into an intensified engagement to complete the 
Round  
16. Thailand 
  I would like to begin by thanking you for giving us the summary of the important political 
messages coming from the G20 Leaders' Meeting in Seoul and the APEC Summit Meeting in Yokohama, as well as giving us your thoughts on the work  program ahead of us.  Let me also take this 
opportunity to express our support for the statement by  Brazil on behalf of the G20 and by Australia 
on behalf of the Cairns Group.   We are very much  encouraged by the renewed optimism to conclude 
the Doha Round, as expressed by many Members who have spoken before me. This optimism was, in 
large part, ignited by the political statements made by both the G20 and APEC Leaders. It is undoubtedly clear that the leaders of the world's largest economies have sent their strongest signals 
with respect to their commitment to conclude the Round in 2011.  However, it is also apparent that in 
order to meet this target, time is unfortunately not on  our side.  Therefore, in order for us to turn this 
optimism into the needed result, we support y our outlined work program, as it provides clear 
milestones to complete our last stretch of the Roun d.  To ensure that this rather ambitious work 
program is achievable, we believe that first, Memb ers need to engage intensively and collectively in 
all appropriate configurations, and translate al l progress achieved in various small groups into 
substantive outcomes in the Negotiating Groups.  A ny intensification of work, regardless of its 
geometry or configuration, will nonetheless be we lcome in creating the needed momentum in the 
negotiations.  Second, the Negotiating Group Chairs w ould need to devise intensive work programs to 
be commenced as soon as possible, in order to furnish the texts with a good degree of convergence 
among Members, by April 2011.  To achieve this ar duous task, it is important to engage in a bottom-
up, Member-driven approach that focuses mainly on  finding solutions which will subsequently serve  WT/GC/M/129 
 Page 59 
 
 
  as the basis for the overall final package.  In add ition, we believe the small groups of ambassadors as 
well as Senior Officials meetings should be utilized to assist the Negotiating Groups' process, 
particularly when there are difficult issues that requi re political decisions.  Third, it is evident that 
there are interlinking issues which ultimately will require us to engage in across-the-board negotiations in order to strike the appropriate balance.  Delay in starting this process could result in a 
setback in completing the endgame, as stipulated by  the G20 Leaders.  Understandably, in order to 
engage in such negotiations, there needs to be  a commensurate degree of technical maturity on 
different negotiating issues. Therefore, we s upport the Negotiating Groups intensifying their 
deliberations, so that the TNC can make the appropr iate assessment as to when this across-the-board 
negotiation will be needed.  The year 2011 could ve ry well be the last window of opportunity to 
conclude this longstanding Round of ne gotiations.  It is in this light that I assure you that Thailand 
will continue to play a constructive role, and we sta nd ready to intensify our work in order for us to 
truly conclude the Round in 2011.  
17. Turkey 
  I thank you for your comprehensive report on the state of play.  We support the thrust of your 
approach in the way forward.  The exchange of ideas we have in this  platform will guide us to move 
faster in what appears to be a tight time frame.   With resolve we can succeed in completing the Round 
prior to the end of 2011.  In a way, as I have me ntioned in our previous TNC meeting on 19 October, 
we have made some progress thus far, which leads to optimism, yet does not suffice to provide 
certainty about the completion of the Doha Round.  Therefore, while seeing the year 2011 as a 
window of opportunity, we should keep the momentum  we have already gained.  We have received a 
strong message from the G20 in Seoul which, to some extent, goes beyond our expectations and 
provides a useful reference for us.  We can see th e sense of political commitment, the significance of 
2011 and the term “endgame” in the D eclaration.  I think the brainstorming meetings we engaged in 
have contributed to this result.  We have benefited from small-gr oup meetings.  I agree now is the 
time to transition these brainstorming activities into negotiation groups led by the Chairs.  We should 
do that transition in a smooth manner.  In doing so, the positive aspects or the progress achieved thus far in some areas of the small-group sessions should be maintained.  The inte gration and participation 
of high-level officials in the process is welcome.  We  are ready to work in that way.  We are more 
than ready to work intensively to bring the Doha R ound to an end, and to prepare the package for final 
decisions.  We should pave the way for the political gi ve-and-takes.  To this end, we must complete 
our work in Geneva, preferably before the end of the first half of 2011.  The process should be guided 
by the sacred principles of transparency and inclusiveness, as has been underscored by many 
colleagues.  We also need to continue in a bo ttom-up way.  Substance should lead the process and 
progress in substance should precede modality texts.  The development mandate of the Doha 
Development Round should be respected by beari ng in mind that this once-in-a-decade opportunity 
will take place in 2011.  The LDC-IV Conf erence is scheduled to take place in İstanbul on 9-13 May 
of next year.  It fits nicely with our work pr ogram, and I hope that the synergy created will be 
beneficial on both fronts.  The messages of Zambia , Barbados and Tanzania  should be taken into 
account.  Taking our hard work and constructive e fforts in small-group meetings in Geneva into 
consideration, and adding the strong message receiv ed from the G20 Seoul Summit, today we feel that 
we are more tuned to finish the DDA.  Turkey associates itself with the statement by the Philippines 
for the G-33.   
18. United States  
 
 I would like to thank the Director General for his report and to express our support for the 
process he has laid out.  The so-called “cocktail appr oach” we agreed in March of this year has served 
us well, and we see this latest plan as part of an on-going adjustment to the ingredients – rather than a 
change in approach.  The key is that we need to intensify our engagement in a variety of formats – 
with the emphasis on the word “engagement” rather than the word “format”.  We welcome the new WT/GC/M/129 
Page 60  
 
  emphasis on Negotiating Groups and Chair-led processes,  but at the same time direct engagement 
among Members will continue to be essential, particularly  at the bilateral level.  As I have said before, 
we have made the shift from process discussions to  brainstorming.  Now it becomes essential to pivot 
to true negotiating mode.  Failure to do so will re nder meaningless the direction from our Leaders to 
intensify into a true endgame, and w ill further erode the credibility of this project.  Over the past year, 
we have heard many reasons why it was not timely to enter into the serious give-and-take necessary to 
conclude the negotiations.  Today, all those reasons , whether real or imagined, are behind us.  Many 
have stressed the importance of political signals, par ticularly from Leaders gatherings such as the G20 
and APEC Leaders' meetings.  Some went the ne xt step and suggested what particular messages 
needed to be conveyed.  The signals from the G20 a nd the APEC Leaders' meeting were clear, and the 
content reflected those very messages that the broade r membership here called for.  But as we have all 
known all along, whether we will suc ceed or not all comes down to what  we do right here in Geneva.  
It is our job to translate words into actions.  We s hould start by avoiding repeating past mistakes.  In 
order to develop revised texts, we must negotiate with one another and not look to the Chairs – or 
other exogenous messiahs – to resolve disagre ements by handing down answers from above. 
 
 In a similar vein, while we fully agree that  we must proceed with a sense of urgency, 
deadlines have not yielded results.  In the final analysis, substance trumps process.  We need a 
readiness, without preconditions, to explore options for closing gaps.  We need an ambitious and 
balanced outcome that opens markets, providing new opportunities for growth and development.  We 
also need – and this is of course the trickiest part of our work – to negotiate our way to solutions that 
will enable all of us to sell a final DDA outcome  in our domestic political processes, as the G20 
leaders pledged to do.  We all need to be as forthr ight as possible about what it will take for each of us 
to make that case, and the United States will continue to do so.   In the past and again today, I have 
heard some say that the US approach needs to be mo re realistic in its expectations for the Round.  But 
we hold a different perspective on real ism in Doha.  What is not realistic is the notion that a few of the 
world’s most powerful trading nations can play by a set of rules that gives them largely unfettered 
access to global markets – without giving appropriate reci procity in return.  That is not the basis for a 
sustainable trading system.  And it cannot be the outcome of this Round.  Next year has been described as a window of opportunity.  But if we ar e to seize this opportunity we must make full use 
of this year to lay the necessary groundwork.   In  this connection, we welcome that the Chairs are 
already increasing the pace of work.  We need to head  into the new year with a spirit of determination 
to get the job done, understanding th at this will require us to get into the give-and-take of real 
negotiations on solutions to the hard issues that have eluded us thus far.  The United States is ready, 
willing, and able to negotiate a nd we look forward to working with our negotiating partners to 
conclude a package that is truly worthy of this once-in-a-generation opportunity.  
 
__________