RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/GC/M/100 
27 March 2006 
 (06-1364) 
General Council 
1, 2 and 6 December 2005  
 
  
MINUTES OF MEETING 
 
Held in the Centre William Rappard
 
on 1, 2 and 6 December 2005  
 
Chairman:  Ms Amina Mohamed (Kenya) 
 
 
 Prior to the close of the meeting on 1 December, HE Mrs Latoundji Lauriano, Minister of Industry, Trade and Employment Promotion of Beni n, addressed the General Council.  Her statement 
is reproduced in Annex II.  
 Also, prior to the start of the meeting on 2 December, Mr. John Tsang, Secretary for 
Commerce, Industry and Technology of Hong Kong, China, and Chairman of the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference, addressed the General Council.  The full text of Secretary Tsang's statement, 
which was circulated subsequently in docum ent JOB(05)/317, is reproduced in Annex III.  
 
Subjects discussed
: Page  
1. China – Transitional Review Under Section 18.2 of the Protocol of Accession to 
the WTO Ag reement.............................................................................................................. ...3 
2. Implementation of paragraph 11 of the Decision on the implementation of 
paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaratio n on the TRIPS Agreement and Public 
Health......................................................................................................................... ................8  
3. Non-recognition of rights under Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the 
GATT 1994 – Communication from Hondur as and Guatemala – Statement by 
the Chairman................................................................................................................... ........12  
4. Enlargement of the European Union – Communication from the European 
Communities.................................................................................................................... ........19  
5. Review of the exemption provide d under paragraph 3 of GATT 1994 .............................21  
6. Waivers under Article IX of  the WTO Agreement..............................................................24  
(a) Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 changes into WTO Schedules of tariff 
concessions – Draft Decision................................................................................................... .24 
(b) Introduction of Harmonized System 1996 changes into WTO schedules of tariff 
concessions – Request for waiver by Israel ..............................................................................24  
(c) Review of waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement ......................................25  
(i) United States – Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, granted on 
15 November 1995 until 31 December 2005 ............................................................................25  
(ii) Canada – Caribcan, granted on 14 October 1996 until 31 December 2006............................25  WT/GC/M/100 
Page 2  
 
  (iii)
 United States – Former Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, granted on 
14 October 1996 until 31 December 2006................................................................................25  
(iv) EC – Autonomous preferential treatment to  the countries of the Western Balkans, 
granted on 8 December 2000 until 31 December 2006 ............................................................25  
(v) EC – Transitional regime for the EC autonom ous tariff rate quotas on imports of 
bananas, granted on 14 November 2001 until 31 December 2005...........................................25  
(vi) EC – The ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, granted on 14 November 2001 until 
31 December 2007 ............................................................................................................... .....25  
(vii) Cuba – Article XV:6 of GATT 1994, Granted on 20 December 2001 until 31 
December 2006 .................................................................................................................. .......25  
7. 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 ..........................................................................26  
8. Committee on Budget, Finan ce and Administration ...........................................................26  
(a) Report of the Committee on its m eeting of 29 September 2005...............................................26  
(b) Recommendations of the Committee follow ing its meetings of October and 
November 2005.................................................................................................................. .......27  
9. WTO Pension Plan............................................................................................................... ...28 
(a) Annual report of the Management Board for 2004...................................................................28  
(b) Amendments to the Regulations and Admi nistrative Rules of the Pension Plan......................28  
10. Appointment of Officers to WTO bodi es – Announcement by the Chairman 
pursuant to paragraph 7.1(a) of the Guidelines...................................................................29  
11. Review of WT O activities....................................................................................................... 30 
12. Preparations for the Sixth Session of the Ministerial Conference......................................31  
(a) Request for Observer Status by the PLO on behalf of the Palestinian Authority .....................31  
(b) Requests for Observer Status by Internati onal Intergovernmental Organizations:...................32  
(i) Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation ACP-EC (CTA) ............................32  
(ii) Basel Convention ............................................................................................................... .......32  
(iii) Council of Europe Development Bank......................................................................................32  
(iv) African Development Bank ....................................................................................................... 32 
(v) Andean development Corporation ............................................................................................32  
(c) Administrative arrangements – St atement by the Chairman.....................................................33  
(d) Reports........................................................................................................................ ..............35  
(i) Work Programme on Small Economies - Repor t by the Chairman of the Dedicated 
Session of the Committee on Trade and Development..............................................................35  
(ii) Work Programme on Special and Differential Treatment ........................................................38  
(iii) Work Programme on Electronic Commerce – State of play and reports by the 
Chairpersons of the Committee on Trade and Development and the Dedicated 
Discussions on cross-cutting issues under the auspices of the General Council......................44   WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 3 
 
 
  (iv) Follow-up to the July 2004 General Council Decision on the Doha Work Programme 
– Report by the Director-General on the development assistance aspects of cotton................47  
(v) Report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations Committee................................................50  
(vi) Draft Ministerial Text – Statement by the Chairman................................................................50  
13. Chairmanship of the Working Party on the Accession of Afghanistan .............................80  
 
 
1. China – Transitional Review Under Section 18.2 of the Protocol of Accession to the 
WTO Agreement (WT/GC/99, G/L/764, S/C/25, IP/C/39, WT/BOP/R/80) 
1. The Chairman  recalled that Section 18.2 of the Pr otocol of Accession of China to the WTO 
Agreement provided that:  "The General Council sh all, within one year after accession, and in 
accordance with paragraph 4 of Section 18, re view the implementation by China of the WTO 
Agreement and the provisions of this Protocol."  Section 18.2 also provided that "[t]he General 
Council shall conduct such review in accordance with the framework set out in Annex 1B and in light 
of the results of any reviews held pursuant to para graph 1.  China can also raise issues relating to any 
reservations under Section 17 or to  any other specific commitments made by other Members in this 
Protocol.  The General Council may make recommenda tions to China and to other Members in these 
respects."  The General Council's first review had b een conducted in December 2002.  Paragraph 4 of 
Section 18 further provided that this review should ta ke place subsequently in each of the eight years 
following the first review, with a final review in the tenth year, or at an earlier date decided by the 
General Council. 
2. The following issues were to be addressed by the General Council at the present meeting in 
accordance with Annex 1B of China's Protocol of Accession:  First, reports of subsidiary bodies on China's implementation of the WTO Agreement and of  the related provisions of the Protocol;  second, 
development of China's trade with WTO Members and other trading partners;  and finally, recent 
developments and cross-sectoral issues regardi ng China's trade régime.  She proposed that, in 
addressing this agenda item, China as well as other de legations address all three of these points in a 
single intervention.  In connection with this review, she drew attention to a communication from China recently circulated in WT/GC/99, which prov ided information required under Sections I and III 
of Annex 1A of the Protocol of Accession.  Th e reports of the subsidiary bodies on their respective 
reviews of China's implementation of the WTO Ag reement and of the related provisions of the 
Protocol of Accession were contained in docum ents WT/GC/99, G/L/764, S/C/25, IP/C/39 and 
WT/BOP/R/80. 
3. The representative of China
 said that from 19 September 2005, China had undergone 
transitional reviews by 17 WTO bodies within the latte r's mandates.  His Government had devoted its 
personnel, time and various resources on an enormous scale to this process.  Roughly 
30 governmental institutions had been involved, and dozens of experts from capital had come to 
Geneva to participate in the reviews.  With a pr oactive and cooperative attitude, China had provided 
information before the review meetings, as requi red by paragraph 18 of its Accession Protocol, and 
had engaged in constructive dialogue with Members in various WTO bodies.  He was grateful to his 
colleagues from capital for their serious attitude to wards this work.  During the four years since 
China's accession, his country had faithfully fulfilled its commitments.   China had phased out all its 
non-tariff measures.  Its average tariff had been reduced  to 9.9 per cent, of which the average tariff on 
industrial products had been reduced to 9 per cent a nd that on agricultural products to 15.3 per cent.  
Controls on trading rights had been removed comp letely.  Implementation periods enjoyed by sectors 
such as banking, insurance and distribution would come to an end gradually.  The remaining restrictions on some service sectors would continue  to be lifted in accordan ce with China's accession 
commitments.  Domestic laws and regulations had been improved in conformity with WTO rules.  WT/GC/M/100 
Page 4  
 
  China's economic and trade policies now enjoyed a high level of transparency to the public and 
outside world.  By continuously carrying forwar d its reform policy and expanding its domestic 
demand, China had become an important driving fo rce for the sustainable and sound development of 
the world economy, which had been recognized by the United Nations, the World Bank, the WTO and 
many other international organizations.  China, as a new WTO Member, had substantially increased 
its imports of goods and services over the past few years.  Since its accession to the WTO, China's 
imports had been increasing rapidly, which had provided the world with enormous export and job 
opportunities.  The facts had proved that China' s economic development not only benefited the 
Chinese people, but also provided the whole world w ith an ever bigger market and more investment 
opportunities.  Since joining the WTO, China had al together provided additio nal annual market access 
of more than US$100 billion for four consecutive years.   According to some experts' prediction, by 
the year 2010, China's annual total imports woul d exceed US$1 trillion.  He wondered whether any 
Member in WTO history had ever opened its market on such a scale.  China would certainly make even greater contributions in real terms to world trade in the future. 
4. While China was working very hard to meet th e challenges and enormous task of domestic 
adjustment to fulfil its WTO acc ession obligations, what had happe ned in textile trade in 2005 had 
unfortunately not been helpful to the process.  It  had made very difficult his Government's job of 
explaining to its constituencies why the fundamental  principles of WTO were applied in a totally 
different manner, why some of the founding Member s of the multilateral trading organization – who 
had always been the cheerleaders for trade liberalization and globalization – should do exactly the 
opposite when they themselves faced challenges of domestic adjustment in certain sectors, and why 
they had re-imposed quotas on China's textiles at a tim e when China was trying very hard to open its 
own market.  These were some of the unanswered que stions, and his Government did not know where 
to find the proper answers.  China hoped th at the founding Members of the GATT and the WTO 
would set good examples for all other Members – in cluding the newly acceded ones – to follow, so as 
to maintain the credibility of the WTO and the multi lateral trading system it represented, and make it 
easier for the Chinese Government to convince the gene ral public in China to maintain a high level of 
support and enthusiasm for this organization and the trading system.  China attached great importance 
to, and had been constructively  engaged in, the ongoing Doha r ound negotiations.  It was committed 
to making constant efforts with other Members fo r a successful Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong 
and an early conclusion of the Round, hopefully by the end of 2006, for the benefit of strengthening 
the multilateral trading system and the orderly deve lopment of the world economy, and particularly 
developing-country economies.  The 2005 transitional review was drawi ng to an end.  He wished to 
thank Members for their cooperation and to expre ss his delegation's appreciation to the General 
Council Chair and the chairpersons of all the relevant WTO bodies, as well as the staff of the 
Secretariat, for the work they had done in the review. 
5. The representative of the United States
 said that as Members concluded work under China's 
2005 Transitional Review Mechanism (TRM), his dele gation wished to share its observations on how 
this review had gone, both from a procedural and a s ubstantive standpoint.  First, however, he wished 
to thank the representative of China and the many Chinese officials in Beijing who had worked hard 
to provide responses to the numerous questions rai sed by Members.  The United States recognized the 
enormous amount of time and effort the TRM required, particularly on the part of China's Ministry of 
Commerce, which oversaw China's efforts.  Rega rding the continuing usefulness of the TRM, he 
recalled that it had been created largely because China had been admitted to the WTO before it had 
revised all of its trade-related laws and regulations to make them WTO-compatible, and because  
China had been allowed a variety of transition period s before taking on certain WTO obligations.  As 
2005 had shown, the TRM remained an important and useful mechanism, serving the interests of both China and other WTO Members.  The TRM continue d to provide Members with the opportunity to 
seek clarifications regarding China's policies and pr actices.  It also provided a forum for Members to 
convey to China their views, expectations and concer ns regarding China's efforts to comply with its  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 5 
 
 
  WTO obligations.  China, in turn, had the opportunity  to clarify its approaches and actions, with the 
goal of preventing misunderstandings th at could lead to trade frictions. 
6. Looking back on the transitional reviews conduc ted by the various committees and councils 
in 2005, it was the United States' view that many important questions had been raised, and that many of the reviews had generated productive exchanges.  China had clearly put a lot of time and effort in 
Beijing in reviewing and considering Members' questi ons and in preparing responses.  However, there 
were still areas in which China could improve.  As in  prior years, the exchanges had been especially 
useful in some committees, while the results had been  uneven in others.  It would also be helpful if 
China could bring experts from capital to more of th e reviews.  In some cases, the absence of experts 
from capital had prevented productive exchanges either dur ing or in the margins of the reviews.  As it 
looked ahead to 2006, his delegation looked forward to working with China and other delegations to 
improve this important exercise.  Since its accessi on to the WTO in 2001, China had worked very 
hard to implement the specific commitments in the schedule set forth in its Protocol of Accession.  
Indeed, China had made significant efforts to reform  its economy in order to comply not only with 
those specific commitments, but also to adhere to the every-day obligations of a WTO Member.  Over 
the past year, China had smoothly implemented its  important trading rights commitment.  It had 
continued to pursue an extensive action plan intende d to ensure that it deve loped and implemented an 
effective system for intellectual property rights enfo rcement, as required by the TRIPS Agreement.  
China had also agreed to dialogues to address c oncerns that had arisen in the insurance and 
telecommunications sectors.  Nevertheless, at present China's implementation work was still 
incomplete.  While China had taken many steps to implement its phased-in commitments over the 
past four
 years, there were still problems with China's implementation efforts in some areas, including 
important ones like distribution rights.  In addition,  enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR) 
in China continued to be ineffective.  Members had had a full discussion of this issue at the TRIPS 
Council TRM meeting.  He would not repeat those concerns now, except to say that the problems were enormous and required the ser ious attention of China and othe r Members.  The United States 
welcomed the steps China had been taking to address the many problems in this area over the past two 
years, but much more work needed to be done.  Progress would not be achie ved until one began to see 
significant reductions in IPR infringement levels  in China, and that had not yet happened. 
7. Finally, government agencies continued to inte rvene selectively in the market in ways that 
could undermine WTO implementation.  As ha d been seen in 2005, opportunities for selective 
intervention by Chinese Government officials in the market were still readily available.  Examples 
included the following:  the issuance of regulations  on auto parts tariffs that aimed to prolong 
prohibited local content requirements for motor ve hicles;  the telecommunications regulator's 
continuing interference in commercia l negotiations over royalty payments to IPR holders in the area 
of 3G standard;  the Government's continuing purs uit of unique national standards in many areas of 
high technology;  a new steel industrial policy that called for the state's management of nearly every 
major aspect of China's steel industry;  China's continuing use of quotas to control the export of 
coking coal, a key steel input;  the issuance of measures that made it more difficult for foreign 
construction and engineering firms to provide services in China;  the ongoing use of unnecessary quarantine inspection permit procedures that could de lay or limit the size of shipments of agricultural 
products into China;  and finally, extensive gove rnment subsidization that benefited a range of 
domestic industries in China.  The United States understood that further progress toward market 
mechanisms, fairness, transparency  and predictability was sometimes difficult for China in the face of 
substantial continuing challenges, including the need to  confront a host of dislocations inherent in its 
transition from a planned economy to a more mark et-oriented economy.  It also recognized the 
important contribution China's ec onomic progress was making to global growth and development.  
However, as the United States had made clear on prior occasions, the true measure of China's progress 
as a WTO Member had to focus on the extent to which China's trade regime had institutionalized 
market reforms and made improvements in transparen cy, fairness and predictability.  Complying with 
all of its WTO notification obligations, particularly with respect to subsidies, would be an important WT/GC/M/100 
Page 6  
 
  step in that direction.  As his delegation looked ahead to 2006, it appreciated the efforts China had 
made in participating in the current year's TRM, and looked forward to an improved TRM in 2006.  It 
also looked forward to substantial improvements in China's trade regime.  The United States was 
committed to working with China and other Member s in these important undertakings, both in 2006 
and beyond. 
8. The representative of European Communities
 said he had listened carefully to the statement 
by China and wished to thank the Chinese dele gation, both its capital-based and Geneva-based 
members, for participating actively in this TRM exerci se.  His delegation realized that this was a time-
consuming and burdensome process, and wished to stress that it too attached great importance to the TRM process.  Regarding the current year's TR M exercise, he wished first to stress that 
transparency was an essential element of WTO member ship.  It applied to all Members.  While the 
TRM was a specific provision in China's Protocol of  Accession, it was no diff erent in nature to the 
trade policy reviews to which every Member was subject.  As such, it should not be seen as a 
discriminatory exercise.  China was now a major tr ading partner for all and had a key stake in the 
proper functionin g of the institution.  It had reaped en ormous benefits from its access to the liberal 
and transparent trade environment provided by th e WTO.  In the Community 's view, China should 
show leadership in setting an example of prov iding detailed answers to Members' legitimate 
concerns.  This could only reinforce its credibility as a trading partner, and would contribute to mutual trust and dispel concerns about, for ex ample, the enactment of industrial policies that 
appeared to feature elements that were not compa tible with WTO commitments.  To ensure maximum 
effectiveness of the current exercise, the EC ha d focused its submissions on a limited number of 
priorities and had raised only issues already discu ssed a number of times in the respective WTO 
committees or in bilateral meetings and therefor e well-known to China.  The EC's objective was to 
have, in each committee or council, a focused discu ssion and to obtain detailed replies from China, 
thus avoiding general statements to the maximum ex tent possible.  However, the EC's assessment of 
the 2005 TRM exercise was rather mixed.  Although th ere had been some useful clarifications on 
several matters of concern, the overall impression was that China's replies still lacked specificity in 
most cases.  This was paradoxical, since it did not allow China to properly publicize its overall 
positive efforts in implementing its WTO commitments, and tended to create a perception of a lack of 
commitment to the proper functioning of WTO mechanisms. 
9. In the area of more specific comments – and while the EC wished to stress that it believed 
China had made substantial ove rall progress in implementing its WTO commitments, which his 
delegation welcomed – the EC still had serious concerns.  These had been described in detail in its 
written submissions to the various committees and councils involved in the TRM.  He would not 
repeat them, but wished to point to  at least four of these specific con cerns.  First, the setting up of 
industrial policies in some areas had a negative impact on the activity of foreign firms.  For 
example, in the automobile sector, despite the EC repeatedly raising its strong concerns about new, 
potentially damaging legislation on the tariff reclassification of automobile parts, the legislation had 
come into force in April 2005.  Several WTO Memb ers had stressed similar concerns in the current 
year's TRM.  Such a policy raised serious dou bts about compliance with  WTO rules, and China 
would consolidate its standing in WTO by seriously addressing such an issue without further delay.  
Second, the EC was concerned about the introduc tion of restrictions not foreseen under China's 
Protocol of Accession and which limited the access of foreign companies to a number of key sectors.  
This was notably the case in the services sector, where banking, telecommunications, and construction 
sectors were of major importance to the EC.  Third, export restrictions on raw materials should be brought into line with WTO rules or abolished.  Fourth, on horizontal issues such as IPR enforcement, the EC recognized th e importance of the effort to be  undertaken to achieve effective 
results.  However, it wished to maintain and stre ss that despite those efforts, it still had serious 
concerns.  In conclusion, he stressed that the lis t of WTO implementation issues raised by the EC 
during the 2005 TRM exercise were priority issues  for EC industry.  The EC would continue to 
pursue them throughout 2006, both in the contex t of the regular activities of the WTO and in the  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 7 
 
 
  bilateral meetings with Chinese authorities, and l ooked forward to substantial improvement and an 
improved TRM in 2006. 
10. The representative of Djibouti  thanked the representative of China for his statement and the 
Chinese delegation from capital for having come to Geneva to explain China's implementation of 
WTO rules.  WTO Members were part of a family, and in a family, the youngest member was given 
time to be able to stand on his own two feet.  An y country acceding to the WTO needed to be given 
time to adapt to the multilateral rules, which was a complicated and difficult process for all.  Time 
was needed to adapt to and understand the rules, as this was a new system for the acceding country.  
All Members were doing all they could to understa nd and adapt to this system, particularly newly-
acceded ones.  One could not tell the latter that they had to apply all the rules immediately.  Time had 
to be allowed for this.  Every year new countri es were acceding to the WTO, which showed their 
desire to understand the rules.  China was a very  great nation, and one the WTO needed.  Members 
would need to be able to count on China, who – by the presence and the size of the Chinese delegation 
– was here to make itself heard.  Not just China,  but other newly-acceded Members had to be assisted 
and helped to understand the rules, a nd given the necessary time to adjust.  
11. The representative of Japan  said his delegation appreciated China's enormous efforts in the 
2005 TRM.  Japan recognized that China's TRM w as an important process in promoting mutual 
understanding on the implementation of China's co mmitments since its accession, and on how China 
was addressing the current trade-related problems and difficulties.  Japan had submitted a number of 
written questions to China in each of the relevant  WTO councils and committees.  He would not touch 
on the details, but wished to say that some of Ch ina's answers had been insufficient or lacking in 
specificity and relevant explanations regarding the implementation of its commitments.  Most of the 
issues raised in Japan's questions were concerns sh ared by other Members.  Japan appreciated China's 
endeavours and devotion for the TRM and sincerely hoped that China would continue to be cooperative in this process, including regardi ng the submission of written answers and clear 
information.  As from 2006, the TRM review would en ter into the latter part of the period covered by 
this mechanism.  In this period, Japan hoped that China would further endeavour to promote 
legislation and to strengthen transparency and the coherence of laws and regulations in accordance 
with its WTO accession commitments. 
12. The representative of Chile
 congratulated China for the whole process of its accession to the 
WTO and for the work it had done under the transitional review.  This review was very similar to the 
WTO's trade policy reviews, but there was more depth to the review under the TRM, and more 
specific features.  In fact, every major market count ry in the WTO should be subject to this type of 
review.  China's TRM review was very specific, a nd there was no similar case in the WTO's history, 
given China's size, the far-reaching nature of its obligations and the speed of its implementation efforts.  One could always see a glass as being half  empty or half full.  Chile saw it as half full, and 
felt that in general China had tended to comply with  all of its WTO commitments.  While there were 
some reservations in some areas, the glass was more  full than empty.  China was not only complying 
with WTO rules and disciplines, but was also con tinuing with its market-opening process, proof of 
which was that two weeks earlier, Chile and China had signed a comprehensive free-trade agreement that included all the disciplines of the multilateral system and even more exacting disciplines at the 
bilateral level.  Chile would notif y this agreement to the WTO at the proper time in conformity with 
Article XXIV. 
13. The representative of China
 thanked the Members who had spoken.  Some of the comments 
made were very constructive, and his delegation had taken note of the concerns raised, which would 
be conveyed to his capital.  China too looked forwar d to more bilateral exchanges with interested 
Members in the future. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 8  
 
  14. The General Council took note
 of the statements and of the reports submitted by the 
subsidiary bodies on the conduct of their respective reviews, and agreed  that the fourth review by the 
General Council  of China's implem entation of the WTO Agreement and the provisions of its Protocol 
of Accession had been concluded. 
2. Implementation of paragraph 11 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, IP/C/41, JOB(05)/319 and Corr.1, JOB(05)/320) 
15. The Chairman  said that in connection with Members'  discussion of this item, and as one 
coming from a continent that had been most affected  by, and continued to suffer from, the HIV/AIDS 
epidemic, she wished to note that this was World Aids Day.  She thought it fitting that Members were 
meeting in the General Council on this occasion to c onsider a permanent response that would allow so 
many countries in the developing world to take a dvantage with greater certainty of the flexibilities 
provided under the TRIPS Agreement and allow them  to alleviate more effectively the enormous 
suffering that hundreds of thousands of people aff ected by this disease faced each day.  She hoped 
that, on this important day, all Members could come  together again, as they had done in August 2003, 
and agree to reinforce their ongoing efforts a nd reach an agreement as soon as possible on an 
amendment to the TRIPS Agreement, as a gesture of solidarity with those who were less fortunate and 
had been robbed by this disease of what most people took for granted – human dignity. 
16. She 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 11 of that Decision provided that the D ecision, including the waivers granted in it, shall 
terminate for each Member on the date on which an  amendment to the TRIPS Agreement replacing its 
provisions takes effect for that Member.  The Decisi on instructed the TRIPS Council to initiate, by the 
end of 2003, work on the preparation of such an amendment with a view to its adoption within six 
months, on the understanding that the amendment would be based, where appropriate, on that 
Decision, and on the further understanding that it would not be part of the negotiations referred to in 
paragraph 45 of the Doha Ministerial Declara tion.  The Chairman of the TRIPS Council had 
periodically reported on the status of this work.  Sh e then invited the Chairman of the TRIPS Council 
to report further on developments in the TRIPS Council's work in this regard. 
17. Mr. Choi (Korea), Chairman of the TRIPS Council , recalled that he had most recently 
updated the General Council on this matter at its m eeting on 19 October, indicating that the TRIPS 
Council would revert to it at its meeting on 25-26 Oc tober.  At the latter meeting, the TRIPS Council 
had decided to suspend the meeting on this agenda item so as to allow more time for consultations.  
At the TRIPS Council's reconvened meeting on 29 N ovember, he had reported that there had recently 
been some developments that would justify furt her efforts being made over the coming days.  The 
TRIPS Council had decided once more to suspend its meeting so as to permit further consultations on 
this matter.  A series of consultations were taking place that day, and it continued to be his hope and 
aim that progress would be made before delegations  left for the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference.  
A further update on this item would be ma de to the General Council very soon. 
18. The Chairman  proposed that, in view of the ongoing consultations on this matter, Members 
revert to this item after the TRIPS Coun cil Chair had completed his consultations. 
19. The General Council took note  of the statements and so agreed . 
20. The following day, the Chairman  said that as delegations we re aware, the TRIPS Council 
Chair had convened a meeting at Heads-of-Delegati on level for 5 p.m. that day, or immediately 
following the meeting of the General Council, in orde r to discuss an approach on an amendment to the 
TRIPS Agreement to replace the provisions of the August 2003 Decision.  She therefore proposed that  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 9 
 
 
  the General Council suspend its consideration of this  item and be ready to reconvene at short notice 
with a view to taking action on the basis of any recommendations that might be forthcoming from the 
TRIPS Council regarding such an amendment.  She would reconvene the General Council to 
reconsider this item not later than on 5 December .  However, she would do this only if the TRIPS 
Council Chair reported to her that there was progress that would enable the General Council to take 
the necessary action.  It would be understood that  if the General Council was not reconvened by 
5 December, the discussion on this Agenda item at the present meeting would be considered closed. 
21. The General Council took note  of the statement and so agreed . 
22. At the reconvened meeting of the Ge neral Council on 6 December, the Chairman  recalled that 
on 2 December, the General Council had agreed to  suspend consideration of this item and to 
reconvene at short notice in the light of advice from the TRIPS Council Chair, but in any event not 
later than 5 December, with a view to taking acti on on the basis of recommendations that might be 
forthcoming from the TRIPS Council regarding an amendment to replace the August 2003 Decision 
on TRIPS and Public Health.  In light of request s from delegations for more time to obtain approval 
from capitals for the proposal th at was under consideration, delega tions had agreed in informal 
consultations that the General Council be rec onvened a day later than originally planned. 
23. She said she was very pleased that, as a result of the further consultations held by the 
Chairman of the TRIPS Council, and the cooperati on, goodwill and hard work over the past few days 
by all involved, the TRIPS Council had just agreed  by consensus to forward to the General Council a 
proposal for a Decision on an amendment to the TR IPS Agreement to implement paragraph 11 of the 
General Council Decision of 30 August 2003 on the implementation of para graph 6 of the Doha 
Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public H ealth.  The TRIPS Council had also agreed to 
forward two statements to be read out by the Gene ral Council Chair prior to the adoption of the draft 
Decision by the General Council.  She drew attenti on to the proposed draft Decision, which had been 
circulated in document IP/C/41, and invited the Chairman of the TRIPS Council to introduce the 
Council's proposal. 
24. Mr. Choi (Korea), Chairman of the TRIPS Council , said he was pleased to inform Members 
that, following an intensive process of consulta tions, the Council for TRIPS had approved the 
proposal for a Decision on an amendment to the TRIPS Agreement contained in document IP/C/41, and had agreed to forward, along with it, to the Ge neral Council the text of a statement, contained in 
document JOB(05)/319 and Corr.1, to be read out by the Chairman of the General Council prior to the 
adoption of the Decision by the General Counc il, as well as another statement, concerning 
paragraph 4 of Article 31 bis of the proposed amendment to the TR IPS Agreement, also to be read out 
by the Chairman of the General Council prior to  the adoption of the Decision, and contained in 
document JOB(05)/320.  Furthermore, a number of delegations had informed him that it was their 
intention to make statements in regard to paragraph 1(b) of the proposed Annex to the 
TRIPS Agreement.  Finally, some delegations had as ked him to state that, while they supported the 
amendment, they had concerns about the scope for th eir countries to take advantage of paragraph 3 of 
Article 31 bis of the proposed amendment.  If requested  by these delegations, the Council for TRIPS 
would discuss this matter.  He wished to take this  opportunity to express his deep appreciation for the 
constructive and cooperative spirit shown by all de legations, the leadership role played by the 
Chairman of the General Council and for all the hard  work by the Secretariat which had enabled him 
to be in a position to put this proposal to the General Council on behalf of the Council for TRIPS. 
25. The Chairman
 said that she wished, on behalf of all Members, to pay tribute to the Chairman 
of the TRIPS Council for his leadership and efforts over the past few days to ensure that Members 
were able to come to the conclusion they we re about to endorse.  In accordance with the 
understanding reached on the procedure to be follow ed at the present meeting with regard to the 
adoption of the Decision on the amendment to th e TRIPS Agreement, she invited those Members WT/GC/M/100 
Page 10  
 
  wishing to make statements in regard to paragraph 1(b) of the proposed Annex to the 
TRIPS Agreement to do so. 
26. In response to a procedural clarification request ed from the floor, she said there was a clear 
understanding on how Members should proceed regarding the content of the statements to be made by 
the Members concerned in regard to paragraph 1(b)  of the proposed Annex, and that the minutes of 
the present meeting would reflect only the statements regarding the opt-out that those Members would 
be reasserting, and nothing else. 
27. The representatives of Mexico
;  Korea ;  Turkey ;  Singapore ;  Macao, China ;  the Separate 
Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu ;  Israel ;  and Hong Kong, China , 
reaffirming their positions on this matter as expre ssed at the meeting of the General Council on 
30 August 2003 (WT/GC/M/82, item 3), reiterated that they would use the system set out in the 
Amendment as an importer only in situations of  national emergency or other circumstances of 
extreme urgency. 
28. The Chairman  then made the following statement for th e record, which had been forwarded to 
her by the TRIPS Council in document JOB(05)/ 320:  "It is understood that paragraph 4 of 
Article 31 bis in the proposed amendment is without prejudice to the overall question of the 
applicability of subparagraphs 1( b) and 1(c) of Article XXIII of  GATT 1994 to the TRIPS Agreement 
and to the different positions of Members on this subject." 
29. She then read out for the record the Chairman 's Statement forwarded to her by the TRIPS 
Council in document JOB(05)/319 and Corr.1: 
  "Pursuant to paragraph 11 of the Gene ral Council Decision of 30 August 2003, the 
General Council has been presented with a draf t Decision containing a proposed amendment 
to the TRIPS Agreement to implement para graph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the 
TRIPS Agreement and Public Health.  This am endment is part of the wider national and 
international action to address problems as recogni zed in paragraph 1 of the Declaration.  
Before adopting this Decision, I would like to place on the record this Statement which 
represents several key  shared understandings of Members regarding the amendment to be 
submitted for acceptance and the way in which it will be interpreted and implemented.  I 
would like to emphasize that this Statement is lim ited in its implications to paragraph 6 of the 
Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health. 
   " F i r s t
, Members recognize that the system th at will be established by the amendment 
should be used in good faith to protect public health and, without prejudice to paragraph 3 of 
the Article 31 bis of the amendment, not be an instru ment to pursue industrial or commercial 
policy objectives. 
   "Second
, Members recognize that the purpose of the amendment would be defeated if 
products supplied under this amendment are diverted from the markets for which they are 
intended.  Therefore, all reasonable measures s hould be taken to prevent such diversion in 
accordance with the relevant paragraphs of the amendment.  In this regard, the provisions of 
paragraph 2(b)(ii) of the Annex to the TRIPS Agreement in the amendment apply not only to 
formulated pharmaceuticals produced and supp lied under the system but also to active 
ingredients produced and supplied under the system and to finished products produced using 
such active ingredients.  It is the understanding of Members that in general special packaging 
and/or special colouring or shaping should not have a significant impact on the price of 
pharmaceuticals. 
  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 11 
 
 
    "In the past, companies have developed pr ocedures to prevent diversion of products 
that are, for example, provided through donor  programmes.  "Best practices" guidelines that 
draw upon the experiences of companies are a ttached to this statement for illustrative 
purposes.1  Members and producers are encouraged to draw from and use these practices, and 
to share information on their experiences in preventing diversion. 
 
  " T h i r d , it is important that Members seek to  resolve any issues arising from the use 
and implementation of the amendm ent expeditiously and amicably: 
   - "To promote transparency and avoid controversy, notifications under 
paragraph 2(a)(ii) of the Annex to the TRIPS Agreement in the amendment 
would include information on how the Member in question had established, in accordance with the Appendix to th e Annex to the TRIPS Agreement in 
the amendment, that it has insuffici ent or no manufacturing capacities in the 
pharmaceutical sector. 
 
  - "In accordance with the normal practice of the TRIPS Council, notifications 
made under the system shall be brought to  the attention of its next meeting. 
   - "Any Member may bring any matte r related to the interpretation or 
implementation of the amendment, incl uding issues related to diversion, to 
the TRIPS Council for expeditious review , with a view to taking appropriate 
action. 
   - "If any Member has concerns that th e terms of the amendment have not been 
fully complied with, the Member may also utilize the good offices of the 
Director-General or Chair of the TRIPS Council, with a view to finding a 
mutually acceptable solution. 
   "Fourth
, all information gathered on the implementation of the amendment shall be 
brought to the attention of the TRIPS Council in its annual review as set out in paragraph 7 of 
the Annex to the TRIPS Agreement in the amendment. 
 
  "In addition, as stated in footnote 3 to paragraph 1(b) of the Annex to the 
TRIPS Agreement in the amendment, the followi ng Members have agreed to opt out of using 
the system as importers: Australia, Canada, the European Communities with, for the purposes 
of Article 31 bis and this Annex, its member States, Iceland, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, 
Switzerland and the United States. 
   "As we have heard today, and as the S ecretariat has been informed in certain 
communications, some other Members have agreed  that they would only use the system as 
importers in situations of na tional emergency or other circumstances of extreme urgency.  
These are the following:  Hong Kong, China;  Israel;  Korea;  Kuwait;  Macao, China;  
Mexico;  Qatar;  Singapore;  the Separate Cu stoms Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and 
Matsu;  Turkey and the United Arab Emirates." 
 30. The Chairman
 drew the attention of the General Council to certain corrections in respect of 
footnote 3 on page 6 of document IP/C/41 in the French version of the text.2 
                                                      
1 Reproduced as Annex I. 
2 Issued as IP/C/41/Corr.1 (in French only). WT/GC/M/100 
Page 12  
 
  31. The Chairman
 then proposed that the General Council ta ke note of the statements and, in the 
light of the Chairman's Statement just read out, adopt the draft Decision contained in document IP/C/41. 
32. The General Council so agreed
.3 
33. The Chairman  then said that Members had asked her to state, on their behalf, that they 
reaffirmed the statements they had made afte r the adoption of the General Council Decision of 
30 August 2003.  She proposed that th e General Council consider this done. 
34. The General Council so agreed . 
3. Non-recognition of rights under Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994 
– Communication from Honduras and Guat emala (WT/GC/85, WT/GC/90 and Corr.1, 
WT/GC/100) – Statement by the Chairman 
35. The Chairman  recalled that this matter had first been  raised by the delegations of Honduras 
and Guatemala at the Council meeting in December  2004, and had again been considered by the 
General Council at its meetings in February, May, July and October.  In the light of the views 
expressed at these meetings, and the requests for cons ultations made by Honduras and Guatemala, her 
predecessor and she had both held consultations on th is matter in order to assist in finding a way 
forward.  At the October Council meeting, she had encouraged further discussion among the 
interested parties with a view to reaching a mutua lly satisfactory resolution of the concerns that had 
been referred to the General Counc il, and had urged all Members to continue to reflect on how they 
might move this matter forward.  In view of the views expressed at that meeting, she had proposed 
that she hold further consultations on this matte r before the present meeting.  Accordingly, on 
29 November she had held further consultations to provide another opportunity for the Members 
concerned to seek clarifications, to the extent possibl e, and to see if she, as Chair, could facilitate a 
satisfactory resolution to the concerns that had been  expressed regarding this matter.  She had invited 
to those consultations all the delegations who had sp oken on this issue at previous meetings of the 
Council, and had made clear that the consultations  were without prejudice to any Member's rights 
under the WTO. 
36. The consultations had shown that although th e discussions since December 2004 had helped 
to clarify the issues and the positions taken by th e delegations concerned, there was no meeting of 
minds as yet on the claims of substantial inter est submitted by Honduras and Guatemala in connection 
with the EC's enlargement negotiations as well as the modification of its Schedule under 
Article XXVIII as regards bananas.  Honduras and Guatemala believed they had provided valid 
claims of substantial interest.  Beyond the larg e trade interests involved for their economies, they 
believed there was also an important systemic issue, touching in this particular case on the non-recognition of rights and interests of smaller,  vulnerable economies under existing WTO rules and 
guidelines, which had been made more difficult, in  their view, through insufficient discussion and 
consultation aimed at finding a solution acceptable to a ll interested parties.  Several delegations had 
also emphasized, once again, that the claims by Guatemala and Honduras were related to their rights 
to participate in the Article XXIV process following EC enlargement, and not to the establishment of 
the single tariff on bananas.  They reiterated that these were two entirely separate processes, although 
there had been some confusion because both matter s involved bananas.  In this context, some 
delegations had reiterated concer ns about the unsatisfactory operation of their own Article XXIV:6 
and Article XXVIII processes with the Community – including the question of compensatory 
adjustment – which they believed were relevant to the overall question of non-recognition of rights 
raised by Honduras and Guatemala under this item.  One delegation had urged a ll parties to negotiate 
                                                     
 
3 The Decision was subsequently circulated in document WT/L/641.   WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 13 
 
 
  on the substantive issues, and believed that this, and not unilateral decisions by parties, would be the 
best way to arrive at a satisfactory solution.  Two delegations also indicated that in the absence of a 
satisfactory solution, they would explore recourse to other WTO provisions. 
37. The EC, for its part, continued to believe it had acted in keeping with agreed rules and 
longstanding practice in accepting and rejecting claims of interest in this case.  The EC had also 
indicated at the consultations that it had submitte d to the Secretariat for circulation a communication 
(WT/GC/100) responding to Honduras's justification of  its supplying interest claim in relation to 
bananas.  Regarding the Article XXIV:6 negotiatio ns with other delegations, the EC had indicated 
that while there was still clearly much work to be done, it was pursuing this matter and hoped to continue to make progress in the near future.  Fi nally, the EC said it viewed the question of rights 
under Articles XXIV and XXVIII for small exporting Members with a high dependency on specific 
products as an important systemic question that d eserved serious discussion, but believed this had to 
be addressed in the appropriate forum, and not in an ad hoc manner.  Both the EC and the other 
interested delegations had also indicated that th ere had been some informal contacts among them the 
previous week.  All sides remained keen to find a satisfactory resolution soon, ideally before Hong 
Kong, although time was now very short.  She w as counting on the goodwill of all Members to help 
resolve this matter satisfactorily as early as possible. 
38. The representative of Honduras
 expressed his delegation's appreciation for the Chairman's 
efforts to seek a solution to this matter, which now had been before the Council for a year.  As his 
delegation had reiterated at each meeting of the Council in 2005, Honduras reserved its rights under 
Articles XXIV:6 and XXVIII, since it had already demonstrated that it had such rights.  His 
delegation had taken note of th e communication from the EC in WT/GC/100.  Honduras welcomed 
the fact that all had had the opportunity to see that  document, since its conten t illustrated and proved, 
unequivocally and conclusively, that the EC was co ntinuing to fail to observe WTO rules.  Although 
Honduras was not obliged at this point to respond to that document, he nevertheless wished to refer to 
certain arguments in it.  First, under Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994, the figures for the period 
2000-2002 quoted by the EC with regard to Honduras' share of the EC market had no legal relevance, 
since (i) the EC knew well that during that period there were MFN and ACP quantitative restrictions;  
and (ii) although the restrictions in force betwee n 2000 and 2002 were slightly different from the EC's 
quantitative restrictions that had been condemned in  the third dispute settlement case on bananas, they 
were also incompatible with the provisions of Article XIII of the GATT 1994 and had been declared 
to be so in the proceedings that had taken pl ace under Articles 21.5 and 22 of the DSU in 1999 and 
2000.  As had been clearly stated in Article XXVI II of GATT 1994, substant ial interest should be 
calculated on the basis of the levels of trade that w ould have existed in a market free of discriminatory 
quantitative restrictions. 
39. The EC had raised the question as to why Honduras had chosen the years 1989-1991 to 
calculate its market share.  These reasons shoul d be obvious.  It was the 1993 regime that had 
extended discrimination to the whole of the EC.  In the third banana case, the years 1989-1991 had 
been used as the previous representative period, in order to show that discrimination was present in 
the EC market since 1993.  Honduras had simply u sed the period before 1993 which that dispute 
settlement panel had selected.  The EC had also ask ed why Honduras had not used the volumes of the 
EC-12 in its calculations.  Honduras's explanation was that it had not used them for the simple reason 
that the EC no longer had only 12 members.  It was obvious that the information relating to 
12 countries of the EC would not represent the market share the EC would represent at the present 
time if discrimination did not exist.  Honduras had used the most representative information available 
with regard to the EC for the period 1989-1991, i.e.  the statistics published by Eurostat for the EC of 
15 member States.  Unfortunately, information on th e imports of the ten countries that had recently 
joined the EC was not publicly available for the period in question. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 14  
 
  40. The point the EC was apparently making when it asserted that Honduras could not be 
regarded as a "substantial supplier"  on the grounds that in the reference period 1989-1991, its market 
share had varied from 10.3 per cent to 7 per cent, was totally unfounded, and Honduras rejected it for 
the following reason.  According to Article XXVIII , a period of three years was generally used to 
calculate market share, precisel y because market volumes and shares differed from year to year, 
particularly in the case of a highly perishable ag ricultural product such as bananas.  In any case, 
according to the third banana case, for a country to be  considered to be a substantial supplier, it was 
not necessary for it to have a market share of 10  per cent, especially when the exporting Member was 
a small developing country that was highly dependant  on exports of the product in question.  This 
applied exactly to Honduras, which was a small deve loping country that depended on its exports of 
bananas.  Furthermore, in the two disputes on ba nanas considered under the GATT 1994, it had been 
clearly stated that during those years, Honduras had in deed been one of the major banana suppliers.  If 
the dispute settlement panels invol ved had been convinced that this was the case, the EC should not 
call it into question. 
41. For the time being, his delegation had nothing more to say regarding the document circulated 
by the EC, but wished to emphasize that Honduras ha d always defended its rights, and it could not be 
assumed that merely because it was a small developi ng country – and, furthermore, because it set out 
its arguments in a way that was respectful, mode rate and reasonable – his country was willing to 
remain silent and abandon the defence of its in terests.  It was for these reasons – and because 
Honduras was convinced that one could not negotiate  or discuss with oneself – that as long as 
Honduras was unable to prevent this issue from going around in circles, which only caused more time 
to be lost, it had requested that part of this age nda item be discussed at the Hong Kong Ministerial.  In 
that way, the vicious cycle would be broken and th is matter could be raised before the eyes of the 
whole world, so that all could witness the fact  that the EC was refusing to fulfil its WTO 
commitments.  The voice of Honduras, a small de veloping country, would be heard in Hong Kong, 
and if the EC continued to refuse to recognize Honduras's rights, it would have to bear the historic 
burden of continuing to call into question the credib ility of the multilateral trading system at a time 
when Members were carrying on negotiations in  a Round that had been called the "Development 
Round".  With this new appeal to the EC, Honduras w as asking that delegation to enter into real and 
genuine negotiations that would fi nally allow for these differences to be settled.  He hoped that his 
words and the information he had provided in the course of the past months – including the information provided in the present statement – would lead to a change of heart on the part of the EC, 
and that without delay it would take the decision to recognize the rights of Honduras. 
42. The representative of Guatemala
 said his delegation had initia lly intended to make a brief 
statement, since it seemed that Guatemala's complain t had already been sufficiently substantiated to 
the Council and since his country believed that a ll that was required to settle this matter was a 
generous dose of good faith on the part of the Eu ropean Communities.  However, after examining the 
EC's written response to Honduras, Guatemala felt obliged to provide a preliminary response to 
various aspects that affected its interests.  Guat emala was aware that the EC's response was intended 
to reply to specific claims by Honduras.  Howe ver, there were two aspects that concerned his 
delegation.  First, in paragraph 7 of its response in WT/GC/100, the EC noted that the banana import 
regime which had been found to be  inconsistent with Article XIII  of GATT 1994 was not in place 
during the reference period 2000-2002.  On this basis, the EC asserted that paragraph 7 of the 
Interpretative Note to Article XXVIII:1 was not applicable to the present case.  Guatemala, like 
Honduras, had based its legal claims on this rule, a nd the EC's interpretation of this paragraph was 
unacceptable to Guatemala.  While it might be th e case that the regime declared incompatible per se  
was not in force during the period 2000-2002, this did not conceal the fact that the banana import 
regime during that period did, in fact, contain quantit ative restrictions and discriminatory elements.  In 
addition, those elements still exis ted.  Furthermore, pa ragraph 7 did not require – nor did it impose the 
requirement – that a regime had to be declared in compatible by the WTO in order for that paragraph 
to be applicable.  Paragraph 7 was conditional on the mere existen ce of quantitative restrictions.   WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 15 
 
 
  Thus, the mere existence of quantitative and discr iminatory restrictions in the European banana 
import regime warranted the applica tion of paragraph 7 of the Interpre tative Note.  In addition, it was 
important to note that during that period the EC had requested a waiver from Article XIII, which 
showed that those measures were intrinsically discrim inatory.  All of this also led Guatemala to the 
view that negotiating rights could not be determ ined on the basis of a period when quantitative 
restrictions were in force, nor was it possible to use as the basis, as stated in paragraph 3 of the 
Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXIV, trade that was not on an MFN basis. 
43. The second aspect which concerned his delegation was the penultimate pa ragraph of the EC's 
response, which was contradictory.  The EC began by stressing the importance it attached to the small 
economies and, paradoxically, concluded the paragra ph by obstructing the opportunities available to 
those countries.  In that paragraph the EC expr essed its full willingness to address the difficulties 
faced by a small country such as Honduras, but then sought refuge in legal niceties in order, finally, 
not to address that situation.  The EC refused to recognize the right of  Honduras to participate in these 
negotiations, asserting that Honduras was not claiming a principal supplier interest on the basis of paragraph 1 of the Understanding on th e Interpretation of Article XXVIII. 
44. This made his delegation wonder what it had been doing during the whole of the past year.  
For over a year, Honduras and Guatemala had been at pains to state and to demonstrate the 
importance bananas represented for their exports.  In so doing, they had demonstrated – beyond any 
reasonable doubt – that they qualified as principal suppliers.  Almost the entire WTO membership, with the exception of the EC, shar ed this view.  He asked whether these objective factors were not 
sufficient to induce the Community to recognize th ese countries' negotiating rights.  The rules on 
which Honduras and Guatemala based their case we re designed to guarantee a redistribution of 
negotiating rights in favour of small exporting countr ies.  These rules provided excellent opportunities 
and were windows that the WTO ag reements opened for small countries.  The European Communities 
had to allow these countries to enter by this wind ow.  In so doing, the EC would in no way be 
deviating from the multilateral rules.  Rather, it woul d be doing the very oppos ite, as it would be truly 
complying with the letter and spirit of the WTO rul es.  In addition, it would be acting in a manner 
consistent with the political willingness, to which it made claims, to address the specific problems of 
small economies.  Contrary to what the EC had pr eviously asserted, these were not special solutions 
to benefit two countries.  Article XXVIII by its ve ry nature and renegotiations by their very essence 
implied, by definition, that the recognition of ri ghts should be addressed and dealt with on a case-by-
case basis.  In concluding, he said that these count ries were not asking for rules to be invented or 
special procedures to be designed for them.  They we re simply asking that the rules contained in the 
WTO agreements be applied for the purpose for which they had been created – to secure an 
appropriate redistribution of negotiating right s in favour of small exporting countries. 
45. The representative of Brazil
 thanked the Chairman for her re port on the steps she had taken to 
find a satisfactory solution to this longstanding i ssue on the Council's agenda.  He also wished to 
thank the EC for finally coming up with some figur es to substantiate the assertions it had made over 
the past few months.  He did not wish to discuss those figures, but merely to highlight a number of points in the EC's document.  In the third-to-last pa ragraph, the EC pointed out that the market share 
of Ecuador, which had not participated in the Bananas Framework Agreement, had increased after 
1994.  This was somewhat misleading, because the issue was what Guatemala's and Honduras's share 
of the market would have been in the absence of th e framework agreement.  The implication in this 
statement seemed to be that the framework agreemen t did not impede or did not affect the distribution 
of market share in the EC market, an objective th at would certainly have run counter to everything 
that had been done.  In fact, the purpose of the ba nana framework agreement was to affect market 
share distribution.  This statement provided inform ation only about Ecuador.  It did not say anything 
about what would have happened to the share of  the market of Honduras and Guatemala in the 
absence of the restrictions which had been in force for over ten years. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 16  
 
  46. In the penultimate paragraph of the document,  the EC also stated  that Honduras was not 
claiming a principal supplier interest on the b asis of paragraph 1 of the Understanding on the 
Interpretation of Article XXVIII, i.e. that it had the highest ratio of exports affected by the concession 
to its total exports.  This argument begged the ques tion.  It assumed the conclusion, in order to prove 
the conclusion itself.  This went back to the i ssue of what Honduras's and Guatemala's share of the 
market would have been in the absence of the restri ctions.  Since one did not know exactly what that 
would have been, it would seem to be unfair to exp ect Honduras and Guatemala to prove that they had 
a principal supplying interest on this basis.  Finally , in the last paragraph, the EC again expressed its 
readiness to discuss the matter further with Honduras,  which was a positive element.  However, Brazil 
had no doubt about the EC's genero sity and its continued willingness to  cooperate and to look into the 
problems of Honduras and Guatemala, as it had always done in the past.  The problem was that this 
issue could not depend just on the unilateral ge nerosity of the EC.  Article XXVIII involved the 
principle of proportionality – proportionality between the harm, or the loss of advantage, that was 
accruing to exporters, and the compensation that shoul d be provided in that regard.  Regarding the 
horizontal issue the EC had raised, one might ha ve to look again into Article XXVIII and its 
provisions.  The EC had excellent legal experts,  and Brazil was sure they could find a way to 
transform a simple unilateral manifestation of g oodwill, which had happened in the past but which 
had not often materialized in concrete  terms, in order to find a soluti on in the shortest possible time to 
the legitimate claims of Honduras and Guatemala. 
47. The representative of Uruguay
 expressed his country's interest  in a speedy solution to this 
controversy which seriously affected the foreign tr ade of two Latin American countries whose exports 
of this product had special significance to their exporting profile and their overall exports.  Uruguay's 
interest in this matter was based not just on solidar ity, but on the proper functioning of the system.  
His delegation was therefore grateful to the Chai rman for her efforts and hoped for a speedy solution 
to this problem. 
48. The representative of Nicaragua  said the rights claimed by Honduras and Guatemala pointed 
to systemic aspects that were of essential interest to small developing countries.  In addition to this 
systemic interest, which had been clearly stated by Brazil, Nicaragua had specific interests in bananas, 
as it was a banana-producing country with significant exports to the EC in the period prior to the establishment of the present regime, and therefore f ound itself in a situation very similar to that 
described by Honduras.  In endorsing the statements  by Guatemala and Honduras, Nicaragua formally 
asked to be associated with the consultations to  be held on this item prior to the Hong Kong 
Ministerial. 
49. The representative of Panama
 said his delegation wished again to endorse the statements by 
Guatemala and Honduras on this important matter.  Panama had been recognized by the EC as a 
principal supplier of bananas.  However, it found it self in a situation similar to that of Honduras and 
Guatemala, because it had not been able to obtain a compensatory adjustment that was appropriate, 
given the changes introduced by the EC.  In the fina l analysis, the result was the same, whether or not 
Panama's right to assistance as a developing-country  Member was recognized.  There had been no real 
negotiation, or any real desire to do so.  Panama had invited the EC to discussions in Brussels and in 
Geneva.  It had invited the EC to negotiate on th is matter the way Members negotiated in the WTO, 
i.e. not imposing measures and notifying them, but rather  on the basis of a real intention to negotiate.  
His delegation again appealed to the EC on this v itally important matter, on which there was still time 
to achieve satisfactory results. 
50. The representative of Ecuador  endorsed the statements by Honduras and Guatemala, as his 
delegation had done on several previ ous occasions, asking the EC to grant these countries their rights 
under the relevant GATT Articles.  As regards the re ference to Ecuador in the third-to-last paragraph 
of the EC's communication in WT/GC/100, Ecuador wished to point out that there was a faulty 
interpretation of the data contained therein.  As stated by Brazil – a statement which his delegation  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 17 
 
 
  also endorsed – the issue was what Guatemala's a nd Honduras's share of the market would have been 
in the absence of the framework agreement.  Ec uador also wished to express, as it had on many 
previous occasions, that the request by Hondur as and Guatemala should not be linked to the 
arbitration process involving Ecuador a nd other Latin American countries. 
51. The representative of El Salvador  said that, as his delegation had stated on previous 
occasions, it hoped for a speedy solution to the systemic  issue raised by Honduras and Guatemala.  If 
a solution to this issue was not found, it might set a negative precedent for the organization.  
El Salvador wished to pay tribute to the Chair's ef forts in this matter and trusted that the process of 
consultations would continue with a view to finding a speedy solution. 
52. The representative of Paraguay  thanked the Chairman for he r efforts to resolve this 
longstanding dispute.  Paraguay reiterated its support for the legitimate claims of Honduras and 
Guatemala, and appealed to the EC to recognize the validity of the arguments expressed by these 
countries and, in addition, to recognize the systemic importance of a solution to this dispute, in order 
to avoid setting a bad precedent that might provok e similar situations in the future.  Paraguay 
encouraged the EC to be consistent vis-à-vis  the interests of the weaker and the smaller Members, 
which frequently went unrecognized. 
53. The representative of Colombia  thanked the Chairman for her efforts to find a solution to this 
issue, and deplored the fact that it had not been reso lved yet.  It wished also to thank the EC for the 
response it had finally given to the claims that Hondur as had made more than a year earlier.  The EC's 
communication in WT/GC/100 would not only be questioned orally, but would certainly give rise to written responses, given that Honduras – as well as Guatemala, Brazil, Ecuador and others – had 
found that they were not totally in agreement with the EC's description of the economic realities of the 
complainants, either in the figures presented or the arguments made.  Colombia's attention was 
particularly drawn to the penultimate paragraph in WT/GC/100, suggesting that Honduras was being 
offered, as a possible solution to its future and not its past problems, the negotiations taking place in 
regard to small and vulnerable economies in the WT O.  Colombia was concerned at this, because any 
such offer had to come from the WTO membership, and not from the EC.  He r delegation would have 
difficulty with the solution of a small economy's problem in this way, as it had said on several occasions.  The subject of the recognition of rights of Honduras and Guatemala was of concern to Colombia, and on prior occasions her delegation had raised its systemic concerns, because this matter 
had to do with the difficulty of access to the market s of the European Union, which was an extremely 
important player in the multilateral sphere.  Howeve r, Colombia had also stated its position that the 
banana dispute, or any discussion about bananas that had to do with the entry into force of the single 
tariff, was not the same as issues relating to EU enla rgement.  The latter would be taken up as the next 
item on the present meeting's Agenda , and her delegation would address it then as it was not the same 
as the single tariff issue.  As to the present item, Colombia was concerned because it did not consider 
the EC's answer in WT/GC/100 to be satisfactory. 
54. The representative of Costa Rica
 said his delegation again wished to endorse the requests by 
Honduras and Guatemala that had been the subject of  consultations under the auspices of the General 
Council.  Costa Rica thanked the Chairman for her effo rts in this regard and was confident that this 
effort and the goodwill of delegations would enab le Members to reach a speedy solution.  The 
European Communities had once again answered "no" to the well-founded requests by these two 
countries.  This was extremely serious.  These two delegations were onl y trying to obtain the 
recognition and application of their rights.  When the EC's banana import re gime had been extended 
to the ten new member States, the prior regime ha d been condemned by a dispute settlement panel.  
The current regime had also been condemned by another panel.  Recently, the proposed new regime 
which would enter into force on 1 January 2006 had been considered by two WTO arbitration 
processes and found incompatible w ith the EC's WTO commitments.  This was extremely serious and WT/GC/M/100 
Page 18  
 
  very symptomatic of what was occurring in the area of  bananas, as demonstrated by the claims of the 
two delegations concerned at the present meeting.   
55. The fundamental basis of this difficult situa tion was a profoundly discriminatory regime for 
MFN banana exporters vis-à-vis  banana exporters under the Cot onou Agreement.  This situation 
seemed to have special significance at the present time, when Members had read in the morning 
papers that the EU would not accept tariff reductions  that would limit the current preferential access 
for the Caribbean and Africa.  This was extremel y serious, at a time when Members were trying to 
reach a consensus – and were engaged in a round of  negotiations – to limit trade distortions, the most 
serious of which were exceptions to the MFN prin ciple.  This announcement by the EU would greatly 
impede progress in the negotiations.  He drew atte ntion to the significance of the fact that two 
developing countries – Honduras and Guatemala – were once again claiming their rights under the 
WTO, and the European Union was once again sayin g "no", and these were Latin American countries 
with levels of development comparable to some  ACP countries.  Honduras had a per capita income 
that was much lower than some countries receiving  preferential treatment from the EC.  For this 
reason, his delegation considered that more effort should be made to resolve this issue and respond to 
these two countries' requests, and thus save a situ ation that was high risk, not only for the normal 
functioning of the General Council, but al so for the current round of negotiations. 
56. The representative of European Communities
 said that, as it had already stated at the General 
Council meeting in July 2005 and on previous occ asions, the EC continued to contend that it had 
based itself on WTO law and well-established practi ce when recognizing and rejecting claims for 
negotiation rights.  It had examined closely the paper circulated by Honduras prior to the May 2005 
General Council meeting (WT/GC/90).  It had provi ded a reaction in writing to the points made by 
Honduras, and had circulated the communication in document WT/GC/100.  In doing so, it wished to share with a wider group some of the basic in formation and elements of reasoning that had 
underpinned its decision not to recognize the claims  by Honduras, since Honduras had already shared 
some its own perspectives on this matter.  While it  might be unfortunate, it was certainly the case that 
the information provided to the EC by Honduras did not allow his delegation to conclude that 
Honduras had a "substantial supplying interest" under Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994.  The 
reasons for this had been set out in detail in the EC 's communication, and he would not repeat them.   
57. The EC had also given further explanations to  Guatemala regarding the examination of its 
claims and had shared further detailed informati on bilaterally with Guatemala on the precise tariff 
lines where Guatemala considered it did have negotia ting rights.  The EC remained ready to discuss 
this issue further with Honduras and Guatemala an d to examine any additional documentation they 
might wish to present in support of their claims.  He  recalled that the EC had indicated its continued 
readiness to seek a mutually agreed  solution on the EC banana import regime with all interested 
parties, including Honduras and Guatemala and othe rs who might not have negotiating rights in a 
formal sense, after the introduction of the new EC  import regime on 1 January 2006.  On the more 
systemic issue of the treatment of small suppliers , the EC continued to consider that it could not 
unilaterally change or add to the longstanding multilateral rules and prac tices that had been agreed in 
the GATT and the WTO for establishing and according supplying rights.  The EC had nonetheless 
always given due consideration in negotiations to the situation of small and vulnerable economies and 
smaller suppliers – for example, according rights to a developing-country Member where the largest share of its exports was affected.  The Community had said before in the Council, and was happy to 
repeat it again, that it would be ready to engage in a collective exercise in the appropriate WTO forum 
to review the relevant GATT/WTO rules and procedures and to discuss any changes and improvements that should be made.  His delegation wished to thank th e Chairman for her assistance in 
trying to resolve this matter through consultations.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 19 
 
 
  58. The representative of Honduras  said that his delegation would respond to the EC's recent 
communication in WT/GC/100 and that this response w ould support the consideration of this item at 
the Hong Kong Ministerial. 
59. The General Council took note  of the statements and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting, and that the Chair would hold further consultations in the m eantime with the aim of moving 
this matter forward. 
4. Enlargement of the European Union – Communication from the European 
Communities (WT/GC/98) 
60. The Chairman  drew attention to the communication from the EC in WT/GC/98, which 
concerned the accession to the European Union on 1 May 2004 of Cyprus, the Czech Republic, 
Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Pola nd, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia.  In that 
communication, the EC had indicated that it w ould not assert that Members who had submitted a 
claim pursuant to Article XXIV:6 of GATT 1994 we re precluded from withdrawing substantially 
equivalent concessions under Article XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994 because this withdrawal occurred later 
than six months after the EC's withdrawal of concessions, provided that the claiming WTO Member 
withdrew concessions no later than 27 months af ter the EC's modification of concessions.   
61. She recalled that the General Council had on th ree earlier occasions, on the basis of similar 
communications from the EC, extended the deadline for withdrawal of concessions referred to in 
Article XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994, namely, at its meet ings in October 2004, a nd March and June 2005.  
Under the provisions of Article XXVIII:3 – and follo wing the most recent extension of the deadline as 
agreed at the June meeting of the General Co uncil – Members could withdraw substantially 
equivalent concessions no later than 21 months af ter the EC's withdrawal and modification of 
concessions, in other words, no later than 1 Febr uary 2006.  Furthermore, these Members had to 
provide at least 30 days' notification of their intent  to withdraw substantially  equivalent concessions – 
in other words, no later than 1 January 2006.  In the light of these impending deadlines under 
Article XXVIII:3, and the ongoing negotiations under Ar ticle XXIV:6, the EC had proposed that this 
deadline be extended a further six months for a tota l of 27 months following the EC's modification of 
concessions, in other words until 1 August 2006.  If this extension were agreed, Members would had 
to provide notification of intention to withdraw s ubstantially equivalent conc essions by no later than 
2 July 2006. 
62. The representative of the European Communities  said that, as the Chairman had noted, this 
was not the first time the Community had been in the situation it was faced with at present.  The 
current timetable for negotiations and for the possibi lity for trading partners to withdraw concessions 
ran until 1 February 2006.  This meant that negotia ting partners who wished to withdraw concessions 
would have to announce their intentions at the e nd of 2005.  Unfortunately, the EC would not have 
concluded the negotiating process or the subsequent  ratification and approval processes by then.  
Thus, it felt it was appropriate to extend the peri od further for another six months beyond February 
through to 1 August 2006, and the communication it had submitted explained this situation and the 
EC's intention that, in the light of this situati on, it would not assert that Members were precluded from 
withdrawing concessions until a further six months afte r the period currently foreseen.  This situation 
was consequent to the situation Members were in in the negotiations, and the EC would of course 
continue to work actively to bring those negotiations  to an end on a mutually satisfactory basis with 
the partners it was engaged with. 
63. The representative of the United States  thanked the Chairman and the Members for the 
opportunity to review this matter.  As Members we re aware, the EC had notified in January 2004 its 
intention to modify concessions in connection w ith the accession to the European Union of the 
10 new member States on 1 May 2004.  The United States had rights, pursuant to Articles XXIV:6 WT/GC/M/100 
Page 20  
 
  and XXVIII, in many of the tariff lines subject to modification.  Therefore, like a number of other 
Members, the United States had been working with  the EC to reach an adequate compensation 
agreement.  In a communication dated 21 November  2005, the EC had notified the General Council 
that it agreed to an extension, for an additional six months, of the deadline for Members with a claim 
for compensation pursuant to Articles XXIV:6 and XXVIII to withdraw subs tantially equivalent 
concessions.  His delegation welcomed the EC's no tification and proposed that the General Council 
take note of it and agree to the extension of the Ar ticle XXVIII deadline by an additional six months.  
This time was necessary so that compensation negotia tions could be concluded, approval could be 
secured of the bilateral agreements in Member countries and in the European Union, and these 
agreements could be implemented.  The Unite d States had very recently concluded its tariff 
negotiations and was in the process of initialling an exchange of letters.  This package, however, 
would require approval by the European Council, a process that could take several months.  
Therefore, full implementation of the compensati on concessions might not occur until several months 
after the expiration of the previous extension. 
64. The representative of Japan
 said that under the circumstances where the compensation 
negotiations had not yet been completed, it welcomed  the EC's decision to extend further the period 
for Members to withdraw their concessions in accordance with Article XXVIII.  However, Japan 
wished to stress that this negotiation under Artic le XXIV:6 should have been completed before the 
enlargement of the European Union on 1 May 2 005.  His delegation understood that the European 
Union would undergo a further enlargement with Bulg aria and Romania in January 2007.  The current 
long delay in the negotiation should not be repeated .  Japan therefore request ed that the EC make 
further efforts so that negotiations with the Memb ers concerned would be finished in a mutually 
satisfactory manner before the next enlargement. 
65. The representative of Colombia  said her delegation first wished to ask why this item had been 
placed on the General Council's agenda.  She recalled that the last time this matter had been considered in the General Council in June, the Chairman had encouraged all Members – and the 
United States, Canada and Colombia in particular – to take greater account of the decision-making 
competencies of the different WTO bodies as provided in the WTO Agreement, and had noted that the Council for Trade in Goods had responsibility for ove rseeing the functioning of the Multilateral Trade 
Agreements on trade in goods in Annex 1A of the WTO Agreement and not the General Council.  
This did not appear to be terribly coherent or in  line with the inclusion of this item on the present 
agenda.  That being said, Colombia would join in any consensus on the EC's request.  However, it was 
doing so with a feeling of frustration.  The EC had had 21 months to negotiate compensation with the 
Members who had declared an interest as principal suppliers.  However, with  respect to Colombia, 
whose rights as a principal supplier had been recognized, the Community had shown no desire to negotiate.  The EC had recognized that the withdr awal of concessions following its enlargement by 
10 new member States had caused injury to Colombia.  However, despite the fact that Colombia had 
repeatedly requested, in writing and orally, compen sation for the injury caused, the EC had shown no 
interest in this matter. 
66. At the same time, and as the Chairman had noted under the preceding agenda item, Colombia 
wished to repeat that the process of re-binding the banana tariff was different and independent from 
the negotiations on the European Union's enlargemen t.  In the case of bananas, Colombia had gone 
from being able to export freely to the markets of  the 10 new member States to having to follow a 
regime of restrictions and a substantive increase in the tariff for bananas in those 10 new member 
States.  Since the EC was one of the most influen tial Members in the organization, Colombia believed 
it had a greater responsibility in meeting its commitmen ts.  Non-respect of commitments or dilution of 
commitments by using procedural manoeuvres detrac ted from the credibility of the organization and 
showed a lack of respect for the current round of negotiations.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 21 
 
 
  67. The Chairman  said she believed that as General Council Chair it was her duty, as she had 
done at the Council meeting in June, to encourage dele gations to do their best to respect the decision-
making competencies of the different WTO bodies as provided in the WTO Agreement.  However, under Rule 3 of the General Council's Rules of Procedure (WT/L/161), it was the right of any Member to suggest items for incl usion in the General Council's age nda, and she had no option but to 
place such items on the agenda. 
68. The representative of Ecuador
 said that his delegation had not been prepared for the inclusion 
of this item on the General Council's agenda, as it felt that this should be dealt with in the Council for 
Trade in Goods.  Ecuador had examined the EC's  request for the new extension and shared the 
frustration expressed by Colombia regarding the EC 's respect for WTO rules.  Ecuador had held 
negotiations with respect to the enlargement that  had finished a year earlier.  Basically, the 
Community had offered no compensation and no recognitio n of the fact that Ecuador was affected by 
the enlargement by 10 new member States.  His delegation continued to hope that the Community would carry out further consultations under this ne w extension.  Ecuador had been recognized as an 
affected country.  He noted that the EC had negotia ted with the United States and Japan.  However, it 
would appear there was a lack of respect for smal ler countries, particularly with respect to those 
products where there had been a repeated condemna tion of the EC by the WTO.  Ecuador did not 
object per se  to an extension of the negotiation period, but asked that the EC examine the need to take 
account of the interests and economies of all countries that had been affected by the enlargement.  
Ecuador also shared the view that negotiations under Articles XXVIII and XXIV:6 were separate.  
The Community could not claim that it could deal w ith two entirely different situations, which had 
entirely different effects, under one sole item. 
69. The representative of Costa Rica
 expressed his delegation's hope that during this new 
extended period, it would be able to  conclude negotiations and reach an agreement with the European 
Communities on compensation.  This had not been done thus far. 
70. The representative of Panama  said his delegation wished to join the appeal for true 
negotiations.  Panama had been affected by th e EC's enlargement and had not received suitable 
compensation for this.  Like Ecuador, Panama noted  that while there were negotiations and processes 
under way with other Members, it appeared that fo r small delegations such as Panama there was no 
possibility of negotiating, and no possibility of enga ging in a dialogue on the trade situation that had 
resulted from this enlargement.  However, as his delegation had said under the previous agenda item, 
it once again invited the European Communities to start negotiations, as was done every day in the 
WTO, not by taking or imposing decisions, but rather by entering into a process of dialogue that 
would lead to a result for all parties involved. 
71. The General Council took note  of the statements and of the communication from the EC in 
WT/GC/98, and agreed  on the extension of the deadline for the withdrawal of concessions referred to 
in Article XXVIII.3 of GATT 1994 from six months  to 27 months, i.e. until 1 August 2006. 
5. Review of the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of GATT 1994 (WT/L/600, 
WT/GC/W/558) 
72. The Chairman  recalled that paragraph 3(a) of GATT 1994 provided an exemption from Part II 
of GATT 1994 for measures under specific mandatory le gislation – enacted by a Member before it 
became a contracting party to GATT 1947 – which prohi bited the use, sale or lease of foreign-built or 
foreign-reconstructed vessels in commercial applicat ions between points in na tional waters or waters 
of an exclusive economic zone.  On 20 December  1994, the United States had invoked the provisions 
of paragraph 3(a) with respect to specific legislation that met the requirements of that paragraph.  Paragraph 3(b) of GATT 1994 called for a review of th is exemption five years after the date of entry 
into force of the WTO Agreement, and thereafter every two years for as long as the exemption was in WT/GC/M/100 
Page 22  
 
  force, in order to examine whether the conditions which had created the need for the exemption still 
prevailed.   
73. The General Council had last considered this ma tter at its meeting in February 2005, at which 
time it had been agreed that for the purposes of the conduct of the review in 2005, Members would 
proceed in a manner similar to that in 2003, when the last review under the two-yearly cycle had been 
taken up.  Accordingly, at the February Council, the Chair had invited all interested delegations to 
speak for the record with regard to  the review under the current cycle.  He had also invited interested 
delegations to submit comments and questions to the United States regarding the operation of the 
legislation under the exemption, to which the US ha d been invited to respond.  It was agreed that 
these statements, questions and responses, together with the annual report provided by the US under 
paragraph 3(c) of GATT 1994 (WT/L/600), would form the basis for the current year's review.  It was 
further agreed that for the purposes of the review, this matter would be on th e Agenda of subsequent 
General Council meetings in the course of 2005 as the Chairman deemed appropri ate, or at the request 
of any Member.  The General Council had also agreed that it would consider this matter again at its 
last meeting of the year, at which it would take note of  the discussions held in the course of the review 
until then, and take any other action it might agree on.  The Council would also take note that the 
subsequent review would normally be held in 2007.  She invited Members to note that, as provided in 
paragraph 3(e) of GATT 1994, the exemption was without prejudice to solutions concerning specific aspects of the legislation covered by the exemption ne gotiated in sectoral agreements or in other fora.  
She also drew attention to a questionnaire subm itted to the United States by Japan regarding the 
exemption (WT/GC/W/558), and invited delegations wishing to address this item to take the floor. 
74. The representative of the United States
 said his delegation welcomed the opportunity to 
participate in a review of the exemption under paragraph 3 of GATT 1994.  This was the fourth 
review of that exemption.  The United Stat es had continued to provide Members with annual 
statistical reports pursuant to the requirements of pa ragraph 3(c) of the exemption, including the most 
recent one that was before Members at the pr esent meeting (WT/L/600).  These reports provided 
detailed annual reporting of vessel orders and deliveries from US shi pyards as required by 
paragraph 3(c) of GATT 1994.  Recognizing that th ere were differing views on the nature of this 
review, his delegation wished to inform the C ouncil that the United States had held informal 
consultations in September, at which time inte rested delegations had asked questions and had 
participated in a discussion of the issues, without  prejudice to their national positions.  All Members 
who had expressed an interest in this issue had be en invited, and the discussion had been lively and 
useful.  The United States had also responded to qu estions that had been put to it on a more formal 
basis.  It had just received questions from Japan, and took note of them. 
75. The representative of Japan  said his delegation appreciated the submission by the United 
States in February of the annual statistical report pursuant to paragraph 3(c) of GATT 1994 
(WT/L/600), and also appreciated the US initiative in  providing interested Members with information 
and explanations by experts in the informal c onsultation held in September 2005.  However, the 
United States' explanation basically highlighted the point that there were no changes in the situation 
surrounding the Jones Act.  Such a factual expl anation was insufficient in addressing Members' 
concerns, particularly as to the necessity of the exem ption.  Japan was of the view that relevant and 
substantial explanation was needed from the Unite d States on issues such as the annual sales date of 
relevant vessels, which was required in paragraph 3(c) GATT 1994, and clarification of the concrete 
linkage between the US industry's capability of pr oducing ships and national security.  Japan had 
therefore decided to submit a questionnaire again in order to seek further clarification.  Japan believed 
that a proper response from the US would contribute to the substantial review of this exemption. 
76. The representative of Norway  said this was an important issue for Norway, as the exemption 
in essence made it impossible to sell ships to th e United States.  His delegation had therefore 
participated actively in the review of the exempti on and intended to continue to do so.  Norway had  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 23 
 
 
  reviewed the statistical report in WT/L/600 and had participated in the consultations that had taken 
place the past autumn.  However, it wished to not e that a number of questions had been posed by 
Members in 2005 as well as in previous years to the United States, concerning both the previous 
notifications and the effects of the legislation.  The answers provided had not been satisfactory, in 
particular regarding the continued need for the wa iver.  The review should focus on the salient point 
of paragraph 3(b), which was examination of whethe r the conditions that had created the need for the 
exemption still prevailed.  Members needed to m ove beyond discussing only statistical information 
submitted under paragraph 3(c) and address also th e conditions for the exemption.  Depending on the 
content of the next submission by the United Stat es in 2006, Norway reserved its right to present 
further questions to the United States and to c onsult, as appropriate, in the General Council or 
elsewhere.  Regarding the next practical steps in  this process, Norway co uld go along with the 
procedure suggested by the Chairman. 
77. The representative of Australia  thanked the United States for its statement.  Nevertheless, as 
Members came to the final stages of this fourth re view, many of the concerns raised over many years 
in this process remained largely unanswered.  Con tinuing different perceptions of the nature of the 
review were at the heart of this problem.  He reite rated Australia's firmly held view that what was 
required was a substantive review of the need for the exemption provided for the Jones Act 
legislation.  His delegation appreciated the US effo rts to meet informally on this issue and to bring 
experts to Geneva for informal discussions.  Techni cal exchanges could always be helpful, but given 
the fundamentally different views Members had about the purpose of the review process, they would need to reflect further on whether the current format  being used to review the Jones Act was the best 
one to follow.  Australia's primary driving force in  this matter, as his delegation had said many times, 
was commercial in nature.  All access of vessel s for commercial operations was effectively 
constrained through Jones Act restrictions on me rchandise and passenger transport vessels as well as 
restrictions on documentation.  These effectively lim ited imports to personal vessels, while the areas 
where Australia had significant commercial interest s, such as cruise vessels and fast ferries, were 
effectively excluded.  Australia maintained a strong interest in this issue a nd hoped that the concerns 
it had expressed at the present meeting would be taken fully into account in the next review process. 
78. The representative of the European Communities
 thanked the United States for the 
information it had circulated in the context of the review and for providing opportunities for informal 
consultations on this subject.  However, the factua l information provided by the United States did not 
answer the EC's questions.  In fact, the EC had put  specific questions to the United States on paper, 
both on shipbuilding and services associated with mar itime transport.  Howeve r, so far it had not 
received precise and complete answers to those ques tions.  In this situation, the EC did not have 
sufficient information to convince it that a substantiv e basis for the US exemption still existed.  Thus, 
as far as the goods aspect was concerned, the EC need ed to continue the same review that had been 
going on for years, in order to examine whether th e conditions that justified the maintenance of the 
exemption still prevailed.  On services, the EC ca lled on the United States to initiate the procedures 
necessary to obtain the waivers it needed to put th e US services aspects of the Jones Act into WTO 
conformity. 
79. The representative of Hong Kong, China  said his delegation's interest in this matter stemmed 
from its recognition of the exemption as a major derogation from fundamental WTO principles.  The 
continuation of the exemption ten years after the establishment of the WTO remained a systemic 
concern to Hong Kong, China.  As in the past, his delegation had participated actively in the current 
year’s review.  It appreciated the presence of experts from Washington and recognized that the questions Hong Kong, China and ot her delegations had put forwar d had been addressed, although 
more fully in some instances than in others.  Ov erall, however, his delegation felt that the review 
should have moved considerably mo re substantially into addressing whether the legislation covered 
by the exemption still served the objectives original ly intended, and whether the conditions for the 
retention of the measures still prevailed.  As in th e past, his delegation continued to look forward to a WT/GC/M/100 
Page 24  
 
  meaningful and substantive review of  this matter in the future, which inter alia  would hopefully also 
address seriously the issue he had mentioned. 
80. The representative of Korea
 said his delegation shared the concerns expressed by the previous 
speakers, and wished to register its interest in c ontinuing to participate in consultations under the 
review in future. 
81. The General Council took note  of the statements made in the course of the review in 2005, 
and also that the subsequent review under the tw o-yearly cycle provided in paragraph 3(b) of GATT 
1994 would normally be held in 2007. 
6. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement 
(a) Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 changes into WTO Schedules of tariff concessions 
– Draft Decision (G/C/W/533) 
82. The Chairman  drew attention to the draft Decisi on in document G/C/W/533 which provided 
for a waiver from the provisions of Article II of GATT 1994 until 31 December 2006 for a number of 
Members to enable them to implement the HS 2002 changes into their Schedules of Concessions, subject to certain conditions.   
83. Mr. Himanen (Finland), Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods
, said that at its meeting 
on 10 November 2005, the Council for Trade in Goods had approved the draft Decision in G/C/W/533 which had been made in connection with the intr oduction of HS2002 changes into WTO schedules of 
tariff concessions, and had agreed to forward the draft Decision to the General Council for adoption. 
84. The Chairman
 proposed that, in accordance with the Decision-Making Procedures under 
Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement ag reed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), the General 
Council adopt the draft decision in G/C/W/533. 
85. The General Council took note  of the statement and so agreed .4 
(b) Introduction of Harmonized System 1996 changes into WTO schedules of tariff concessions – 
Request for waiver by Israel (G/L/744, G/C/W/528) 
86. The Chairman  drew attention to the request for a waiver from Israel in G/L/744 and to the 
draft Decision in G/C/W/528, which proposed a waiver from the provisions of Article II of 
GATT 1994 until 31 October 2006 to enable Israel to implement the HS 1996 changes into its 
Schedule of concessions, subject to certain conditions.   
87. Mr. Himanen (Finland), Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods , said that at its meeting 
on 10 November 2005, the Council for Trade in Goods had approved the draft Decision in 
G/C/W/528, which concerned Israel's request for a waiver in connection with the introduction of 
HS96 changes into its WTO schedule, and had agreed  to forward the draft Decision to the General 
Council for adoption. 
88. The Chairman  proposed that, in accordance with the Decision-Making Procedures under 
Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement ag reed in November 1995 (WT/L/93), the General 
Council adopt the draft Decision in G/C/W/528. 
 
                                                      
4 The Decision was subsequently circulated in document WT/L/638.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 25 
 
 
  89. The General Council took note  of the statement and so agreed .5 
(c) Review of waivers pursuant to Ar ticle IX:4 of the WTO Agreement 
(i) United States – Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, granted on 15 November 1995 
until 31 December 2005 (WT/L/104, WT/L/633) 
(ii) Canada – Caribcan, granted on 14 Octob er 1996 until 31 December 2006 (WT/L/185, 
WT/L/634) 
(iii) United States – Former Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, granted on 14 October 1996 
until 31 December 2006 (WT/L/183, WT/L/632) 
(iv) EC – Autonomous preferential treatment to th e countries of the Western Balkans, granted on 
8 December 2000 until 31 December 2006 (WT/L/380, WT/L/635) 
(v) EC – Transitional regime for the EC autonomou s tariff rate quotas on imports of bananas, 
granted on 14 November 2001 until 31 December 2005 (WT/L/437) 
(vi) EC – The ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, granted on 14 November 2001 until 
31 December 2007 (WT/L/436, WT/L/636) 
(vii) Cuba – Article XV:6 of GATT 1994, Granted on 20 December 2001 until 31 December 2006 
(WT/L/440, WT/L/630) 
90. The Chairman  recalled that, in accordance with para graph 4 of Article IX of the WTO 
Agreement, "[a]ny waiver granted for a period of more than one year shall be reviewed by the 
Ministerial Conference not later than one year afte r it was granted, and thereafter annually until the 
waiver terminates."  Seven waivers were before th e General Council for review.  The Decisions on the 
waivers for Canada, Cuba and the United States, a nd on two of the waivers for the EC, provided that 
an annual report should be submitted by these Memb ers on the operation or implementation of the 
respective waivers, with a view to facilitating their annual review by the General Council under 
paragraph 4 of Article IX.  The reports from these Members on the relevant waivers had been 
circulated in documents WT/L/630 and WT/L/632 through 636. 
91. The representative of Cuba  said her delegation wished to present the report in WT/L/630 so as 
to facilitate the annual review provided for in Article  IX:4 of the WTO Agreement.  Given that this 
report had been circulated on 21 November 2005, C uba merely wished to point out some of the 
aspects it felt were relevant to the review of th e waiver.  Cuba considered that the exceptional 
circumstances that justified the waiv er and the need to prolong it still existed.  It was well known that 
the Cuban economy had been seriously affected fo r 45 years by the unfair economic financial and 
trade blockage imposed by the United States.  In  2004 the US Government had adopted a package of 
measures that had even further increased its hostile policy against Cuba.  These measures 
strengthened restrictions already imposed on tour ism and investment in Cuba and further impeded 
financial flows and scientific and cultural exchang es with the objective of creating conditions that 
would favour a change in Cuba's political and ec onomic systems as a consequence of these actions 
and to counter the negative impact of these measures.   Cuba had had to take diverse measures in the 
financial area, which had not ha d any negative impact on any Member –  which had been fully 
demonstrated by the understanding shown by Cuba's  principal economic and social partners.  There 
had been no complaints so far by investors in C uba, which showed there was no contradiction with 
the principles of GATT 1994.  Cuba continued to so lve strategic problems in its development, which 
                                                      
5 The Decision was subsequently circulated in document WT/L/639. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 26  
 
  the report referred to.  Cuba had demonstrated that it respected its commitment to respect the 
objectives of the GATT and not to undermine the rights of other Members, and would continue to comply with this commitment in the future. 
92. The General Council took note
 of the statement and of the reports in documents WT/L/630 
and WT/L/632 through 636. 
7. 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/37) 
93. The Chairman  recalled that on 30 August 2003 the General 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 the Council Decision provi ded that 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 shall annually report on its ope ration to the General Council.  The Decision also provided that the 
review by the TRIPS Council shall be  deemed to fulfil the review requirements of Article IX.4 of the 
WTO Agreement.  The report by the TRIPS Council on its review under paragr aph 8 of the General 
Council Decision was before Members in IP/C/37.   
94. Mr. Choi (Korea), Chairman of the TRIPS Council , said that at its meeting of 
25-26 October 2005, the TRIPS Council had taken up the annual review pursuant to paragraph 8 of 
the Decision on the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement 
and Public Health.  The TRIPS Council's report to the General Council had been circulated in 
IP/C/37, the cover note of which set out factual information regarding the implementation of the 
Decision and the work pursuant to its paragraph 11 on the amendment to the TRIPS Agreement.  The 
record of the discussion that had taken place under that agenda item was attached to IP/C/37. 
95. The General Council took note  of the report of the TRIPS Council and of the statement. 
8. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration 
(a) Report of the Committee on its meeti ng of 29 September 2005 (WT/BFA/80) 
96. The Chairman  drew attention to the report of the Budget Committee in WT/BFA/80. 
97. Mr. Postma (Netherlands), Chairman of the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration , said that at its meeting, the Committe e had been presented with the usual 
administrative updates with respect to the cash situ ation, outstanding contributions from Members and 
Observers, human resources, the Security Enhan cement Programme as well as the new WTO Annexe.  
The Committee had also examined the Director General's Budgetary and Financial Report for 2004 
and Report of the External Auditor thereon and Report on Extra-Budgetary Funds for 2004.  The 
Committee had taken note of these reports, and had recommended to the General Council the transfers 
between budgetary sections as outlined in paragra phs 37 and 41 of WT/BFA/W/128.  The Committee 
had further recommended that the General Counc il approve the audited accounts for 2002 and convey 
to the external auditor its thanks for the valuab le assistance provided in the audit of these accounts.  
With regard to the Director General's Conditions of Service, the Committee had taken note of the 
current package of the Director-G eneral and had recommended to th e General Council that the base 
salary be adjusted annually on 1 September based on the increase, if any, in the Geneva Consumer 
Price Index for the year preceding the adjustment.  The Committee had further recommended that this 
annual adjustment function until a ne w Director-General was named.   WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 27 
 
 
  98. The General Council took note  of the statement, approved  the specific recommendations in 
paragraphs 16 and 18 of the Committee 's report  in WT/BFA/80, and adopted  the report. 
(b) Recommendations of the Committee following its meetings of October and November 2005 
(WT/BFA/82) 
99. The Chairman  drew attention to the recommendations of the Budget Committee in 
WT/BFA/82. 
100. Mr. Postma (Netherlands), Chairman of the Committee , said that the matters taken up at the 
October and November meetings of the Comm ittee were contained in WTO/AIR//2691.  The 
Committee had made the following recommendations to the General Council:  Regarding the Global 
Trust Fund, pursuant to paragra ph 40 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, the Committee had set the 
target level of resources for the Doha Developm ent Agenda Global Trust Fund at 24 million Swiss 
francs for 2006.  Following the accession of Saudi  Arabia, the Committee had recommended that a 
pro rata contribution to the 2005 budget amounting to Sw F 68,961 be assessed on the Kingdom of 
Saudi Arabia.  Furthermore, on the basis of the le vel of the Working Capital Fund of Sw F 9,189,223, 
the Committee had recommended to the General Council to assess an amount of Sw F 65,795 on 
Saudi Arabia as an advance to the Fund. 
101. After examining the budget proposals of the International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO for 
the biennium 2006-2007, the Comm ittee had formulated the recommendations in paragraphs 6 and 7 
of WT/BFA/82.  The Committee had examined th e Director-General's budget proposals for the 
biennium 2006-2007 (WT/BFA/SPEC/134) and, in fo rmulating its recommendation to the General 
Council on the revised proposals, noted in particular  the following:  (a) that  the Director-General 
would undertake a critical review of the structur e of the Secretariat in 2006 with the aim of 
streamlining its structure;  (b) that the restructur ing plan to be implemented in the course of the 
biennium was expected to result in future savings, but that in the short term, financial resources were 
expected to be needed to bridge a liquidity gap;  (c) that for that purpose, a specific allotment of 
Sw F 500,000 would be included in the 2006 budget,  followed by an additional allotment of 
Sw F 500,000 in the 2007 budget;  (d) that the Co mmittee would be regularly consulted on all aspects 
concerning the formulation and implementation of the restructuring plan;  (e) that the Committee 
would similarly be kept regularly informed of  developments concerning the formulation and 
implementation of the human resources reform pr ogramme;  (f) that for the training and media 
facility, additional human resources would not be requ ested;  and (g) that the consolidation of long-
term positions funded from the temporary assist ance budget marked the final stage in the 
implementation of the new policy with respect to the management of temporary assistance, and that 
the procedures that had thus been put in place en sure there would be no recurrence of the problems 
that had given rise to the need to review the pract ice in that regard.  The Committee submitted to the 
General Council for consideration and approval the draft resolution on page 4 of WT/BFA/82 on the 
expenditure of the WTO in 2006 and the ways and means to meet such expenditure.  Regarding the 
2007 budget, the Committee, bearing in mind the guidelines on biennial budgeting approved by the 
General Council (WT/BFA/W/105/Rev.1), including th e reference to revisions to the second year of 
the biennium, recommended to the General Counc il for consideration and approval the draft 
resolution on page 5 of document WT/BFA/82 on th e expenditure of the WTO in 2007 and the ways 
and means to meet such expenditure.   
102. With regard to Item D of the Committee's age nda for its meetings in October and November, 
concerning Members in arrears, he recalled th at he had reported to the General Council on 
26 May 2005 that the Committee had agreed that as Chairman of the Committee on Budget, Finance 
and Administration, he would undertake bilateral contacts with Members in Category IV of the 
administrative measures, with a view to encourag ing payment of arrears.  His contacts had brought 
some results in the form of payments, but there were still Members with outstanding – and in some WT/GC/M/100 
Page 28  
 
  cases long outstanding – contributions.  The Committee had noted that he would continue his efforts 
in this regard and, in this context, would examine the administrative measures in 2006 and assess 
whether they were adequate to address the problem of Members in arrears, or whether some further 
measures might be considered.  He recalled that the WTO Financial Regulations stated that "In 
accordance with Article VII:4 of the Marrake sh Agreement Establishing the World Trade 
Organization, Members have the obligation to cont ribute promptly to the WTO their share in the 
expenses of the WTO." 
103. On behalf of the Committee, he wished to recall that Members under any category of the 
administrative measures were precluded from being nominated to preside over WTO bodies.  This was particularly important for both the process of selecting chairpersons of WTO bodies in 2006, as 
well as for the upcoming Ministerial Conference, where a Vice-Chair was from a Member falling 
under these administrative measures.  He urged the Ge neral Council, through the Chairman, to ensure 
that this rule of the WTO was respected. 
104. The General Council took note
 of the statement and approved  the Budget Committee's 
specific recommendations contained in paragraphs 1,  2, 6, 7, 9 and 10  of document WT/BFA/82, 
including the draft Resolutions referred to in para graphs 9 and 10.  The General Council then adopted  
the draft Resolutions on the Revised Expenditures of the WTO in 2006 and 2007, and the Ways and 
Means to Meet Such Expenditures, contained in  paragraphs 9 and 10 of  document WT/BFA/82. 
105. On 6 December, Mr. Deelen  (Netherlands), on the request and behalf of the Chairman of the 
Committee on Budget Finance and Administration, said that further to the Committee Chairman's statement on 1 December (in paragr aph 103 above), he was pleased to confirm that the Member that 
had been nominated to serve as Vice-Chair at th e upcoming Ministerial Conference, and which thus 
far had been ineligible under the terms of the admi nistrative measures, had now fully paid its arrears 
and was no longer precluded from taking up that position. 
106. The Chairman
 thanked Mr. Deelen for his statemen t updating Members on the situation of 
Members in arrears.  She also wished to thank Nige ria for the successful efforts it had made internally 
within its Government to resolve its WTO arrears si tuation, and hoped this would be a good example 
for others to follow in the new year. 
107. The General Council took note  of the statements. 
9. WTO Pension Plan 
(a) Annual report of the Management Board for 2004 (WT/L/628) 
(b) Amendments to the Regulations and Administrative Rules of the Pension Plan 
(WT/GC/W/552) 
108. The Chairman  drew attention to the Annual Report of the Management Board for 2004 
contained in WT/L/628, which was submitted to the General Council in accordance with Article 5(d) 
of the Regulations of the Pension Plan.  This was the sixth report of the Management Board since the 
establishment of the Pension Plan on 1 January 1999.  With regard to the Regulations and 
Administrative Rules of the WTO Pension Plan, sh e recalled that these had been adopted by the 
General Council in October 1998.  The Manageme nt Board of the Pension Plan had recently 
completed a review of the procedures governing the treatment of requests for determination of total 
and partial disability, on the basis of which it had made certain recommendations for amendments to 
the Regulations and Administrative Rules of the Pension Plan.  These amendments were set out in Annexes 1 and 2, respectively, of WT/GC/W/522.    WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 29 
 
 
  109. Mr. Niggli  (Switzerland), on behalf of the Chairman  of the Management Board of the WTO 
Pension Plan, noted that the Pension Plan was now  in its seventh year, and 2004 had seen a further 
growth in participants, beneficiaries and assets.  The value of the assets stood at approximately 
Sw F 223 million at the end of 2004, and the real rate  of return on investments over the year had been 
just over 3 per cent.  He was pleased to report th at the upward trend in investment performance in 
2004 had continued in 2005.  The Management Board had devoted much of its time during the year to 
the review and modification of the Plan's investme nt strategy.  A number of changes had been made, 
including the introduction of new asset classes, name ly, emerging market equities and real estate, and 
the selection of new fund managers.  The new strategy was now fully in place.  As noted by the Management Board Chair in the preface to the Annua l Report, the Board was confident that the Plan 
had a robust investment strategy to protect the assets of the Plan in the future.  In 2004, the 
Management Board had also revised the transfer  agreement with the United Nations Joint Staff 
Pension Fund, and the new agreement had come into effect on 1 January 2005. 
110. The procedure for consideration of disability cases  had been referred to a working group of 
Board members in 2004, and the group's recommenda tions had subsequently been approved by the 
Board in the course of 2005.  As a consequence of that review, certain amendments had been made to 
the Administrative Rules of the Pl an, as set out in WT/GC/W/552, together with an amendment to 
Article 28 of the Plan Regulations, which was bei ng submitted to the Genera l Council for approval.  
The purpose of the amendment was to provide for the case where a partially disabled participant in the 
Plan might be assigned to part-time work as a resu lt of the disability.  Hitherto, the Regulations had 
provided only for assignment to work at a lower grade. 
111. The General Council took note 
of the statement and of the Annual Report of the Management 
Board for 2004 in WT/L/628.  The General Council then adopted  the draft amendments to the Pension 
Plan Regulations and took note  of the amendments to the Administrative Rules, as set out in 
Annexes 1 and 2  of WT/GC/W/552. 
10. Appointment of Officers to WTO bodies – A nnouncement by the Chairman pursuant to 
paragraph 7.1(a) of the Guidelines (WT/L/510) 
112. The Chairman  recalled that Guidelines for the Ap pointment of Officers to WTO bodies 
(WT/L/510) provided that the outgoing Chair of th e General Council would conduct consultations on 
the appointment of chairpersons to the WTO bodies ou tlined in Groups 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the Annex to 
the Guidelines.  The Guidelines al so provided, 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, she wished to inform the General 
Council that she would be starting the selection process for the appointment of chairpersons to the bodies outlined in Groups 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the A nnex to the Guidelines.  In accordance with 
paragraph 7.1(b) of the Guidelines, she would be assisted in the selection process by the serving Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, Mr. Glenne  (Norway).  In keeping with paragraph 7.1(d), 
Mr. Glenne and she would communicate, as early as possible, a specified time-period in which they 
would be available to hear the views and suggestions , if any, of Members, individually and/or in 
groups.  Further, as provided for in paragraph 7.1(c) of the Guidelines, she requested the Secretariat to 
distribute to delegations in the meeting Room a list of  past Chairs of major bodies, in order to provide 
some structure for Members' subsequent deliberatio ns on the possible distribution of chairs based on 
past practice and the need for balance.  Finally, she noted that, in accordance with paragraph 2.1 of 
the Guidelines, representatives of Members in fina ncial arrears for over one full year could not be 
considered for appointment. 
113. Before concluding, she wished also to raise the question of Chairman ships of the bodies under 
the TNC.  At its first meeting in 2002, the TNC had established a number of bodies to undertake work 
on the various elements of the DDA under its supe rvision.  The TNC had also endorsed certain WT/GC/M/100 
Page 30  
 
  principles and practices to guide its work, including that the Chairman of the General Council would 
consult on the chairmanships of the bodies, and th at the Chairs of these bodies would be appointed to 
serve up to the Fifth Ministerial Conference, at wh ich time all the appointments would be reviewed.  
Chairpersons to these bodies had subsequently been appointed by the General Council at its meeting 
in February 2002, following consultations undertaken  by the Council Chairman.  In August 2003, just 
prior to the Fifth Ministerial Conference, the General Council had agreed that although these 
appointments were to be reviewed at the time of  that Ministerial Conference, given the heavy 
workload in connection with the Conference, Members would be better placed to conduct this review 
after the Conference.  In October 2003, the Genera l Council had agreed to revert to the review of 
these Chairmanships in February  2004, once the outcome of follow-up work from the Cancún 
Conference was clear.  The question of these appoi ntments had subsequently been taken up by the 
General Council Chairman as part of consultations  concerning the appointment of officers to WTO 
bodies for 2004. 
114. At the February 2004 Council meeting, on th e basis of these consultations, Members had 
taken note of a consensus on a slate of names for these appointments and had invited the Chairs to 
serve until the Sixth Session of the Ministerial Confer ence.  A similar term of office had been agreed 
for the Chair of the Negotiating Group on Trade F acilitation established in the August 2004 Decision 
of the General Council.  Since the term of office of  these Chairpersons would come to an end after the 
Hong Kong Ministerial, she proposed that Mr. Gle nne and she also take up the question of these 
appointments in their consultations prior to the Fe bruary 2006 General Council.  In the meantime, and 
keeping in mind the need for maintaining cont inuity in the process, she proposed that the 
Chairpersons of these bodies be requested to con tinue in office until the February General Council 
meeting. 
115. The General Council took note
 of the statement. 
11. Review of WTO activities 
 Reports of: 
 
 (a) General Council (WT/GC/W/554), Dis pute Settlement Body (WT/COMTD/39 and 
Add.1), Trade Policy Review Body (WT/TPR/173) 
  (b) Sectoral Councils (G/L/763, S/C/24 and IP/C/38 and Add.1)  
 (c) Committees on Trade and Development (WT/COMTD/55), Trade and Environment 
(WT/CTE/12), Balance-of-Payments Restri ctions (WT/BOP/R/81), Budget, Finance 
and Administration (WT/BFA/81), and Re gional Trade Agreements (WT/REG/15) 
  (d) Working Groups on Trade, Debt a nd Finance (WT/WGTDF/4), and Trade and 
Transfer of Technology (WT/WGTTT/7) 
  (e) Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements (GPA/85, WT/L/629)  116. The Chairman
 recalled that the reports from the WTO bodies concerned under this Agenda 
item had been drawn up in pursuance of the Decisi on concerning procedures for an annual overview 
of WTO activities and for reporting under the WTO (WT/L/105).  On a number of these reports, 
delegations had already had a substantive discussion in the respective bodies.  She therefore suggested 
that delegations not repeat those discussions in the General Council, and that they take the floor only 
if they felt they had to draw particular attention to any aspect of the work reported on, to add to a 
previously expressed position, or to seek specific clarif ication.  In addition, many of the reports from 
the various committees and councils had a bearing on the elements of the draft Ministerial text which  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 31 
 
 
  the Director-General and she had submitted for cons ideration on 26 November.  This being so, she 
suggested that delegations reserve their comments on the elements of the draft Ministerial text 
covered by each report until they considered that draft text as a whole under Item 12(d) of the 
meeting's Agenda.  She hoped that, in the interests of maintaining the efficiency of their work, delegations would keep these thoughts in mind in requ esting to speak under the reports they would be 
considering. 
117. All reports from the respective bodies and from th e Director-General would be forwarded to 
the Ministerial Conference and would be available for the consideration of Ministers.  In the interests 
of moving the meeting along in a smooth and efficient way, she proposed that the Chairs of the various bodies not introduce their respective reports at  the present meeting.  She would, of course, 
invite any Chairpersons who wished to draw partic ular attention to some aspect of the work carried 
out in their bodies or to add anything to their reports to take the floor. 
118. The representative of India
 noted that the TRIPS Council had circulated an addendum to its 
report in IP/C/38 the previous day, which th e General Council should also take note of. 
119. The General Council took note  of the statement, adopted  the report of the Committee on 
Trade and Development (WT/COMTD/55), and took note  of the reports of the other WTO bodies, 
including the reports of the Committees under the Pl urilateral Trade Agreements, as follows:  Dispute 
Settlement Body (WT/COMTD/39 and Add.1), Trad e Policy Review Body (WT/TPR/173), Council 
for Trade in Goods (G/L/763), Council for Trade in Services (S/C/24), Council for TRIPS (IP/C/38 
and Add.1), Committee on Trade and Environm ent (WT/CTE/12), Committee on Balance-of-
Payments Restrictions (WT/BOP/R/81), Comm ittee on Budget, Finance and Administration 
(WT/BFA/81), and Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (WT/REG/15), Working Group on 
Trade, Debt and Finance (WT/WGTDF/4), Work ing Group on Trade and Transfer of Technology 
(WT/WGTTT/7), Committee on Government Procurement (GPA/85), and Committee on Trade in Civil Aircraft (WT/L/629).  Th e General Council also took note
 that these reports would be forwarded 
to the Ministerial Conference. 
120. The General Council then adopted  the draft report of the General Council contained in 
WT/GC/W/554, on the understanding that the Secret ariat would make the necessary adjustments to 
that draft report so as to include matters that had been considered at the present meeting, and took 
note that this report would also be forwarded to the Ministerial Conference.6 
12. Preparations for the Sixth Session of the Ministerial Conference 
(a) Request for Observer Status by the PLO on behalf of the Palestinian Authority (WT/L/631) 
121. The Chairman  drew attention to the request from the PLO on behalf of the Palestinian 
Authority for observer status at the Sixth Ministerial Conference (WT/L/631).  As indicated in that communication, the Palestinian Authority had su bmitted its request with a view to having an 
opportunity to be exposed to the dynamics of the multilateral trading system and as a contribution to 
its ongoing efforts in formulating a comprehensive tr ade policy for Palestine.  She proposed that the 
General Council agree to grant this request. 
122. The General Council so agreed
. 
                                                      
6 The annual report of the General Council was subsequently circulated in document WT/GC/101 and 
forwarded to the Ministerial Conference. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 32  
 
  (b) Requests for Observer Status by Internat ional Intergovernmental Organizations: 
(i) Technical Centre for Agricultural a nd Rural Cooperation ACP-EC (CTA) 
(ii) Basel Convention 
(iii) Council of Europe Development Bank 
(iv) African Development Bank 
(v) Andean development Corporation 
123. The Chairman
 said that before taking up the requests under this sub-item, she wished to 
inform delegations that following the statement by Egypt on behalf of the Arab Group at the October 
Council meeting (WT/GC/M/98, Item 2(c)), she had held consultations on 31  October regarding the 
overall question of observership for IGOs in WTO bodi es.  She had invited to those consultations all 
delegations that had spoken in previous Council discussions on this matter.  She had noted that 
notwithstanding the Guidelines for granting observer status to IGOs contained in Annex 3 of the 
General Council's Rules of Procedure (WT/L/161) – which provided for a case-by-case consideration 
by each WTO body to which a request was addressed,  on the basis of certain criteria – Members had 
been blocked for some time in their efforts to agre e to many pending observership requests.  This had 
arisen mainly because certain regional organizations applying for observer status were considered by 
some Members to be more political than economic in nature.  Also, linkages had arisen between 
approval of different organizations' requests.  Th is longstanding impasse on IGO observer status in 
the General Council and other bodi es merited greater reflection a nd political consideration among 
Members.  At the consultations, she had urged delegations, as a start, to try to reach an 
accommodation regarding pending requests for observer status at Ministerial Conferences, and had 
expressed the hope this could be done by the time of the present meeting.  For her part, she remained 
willing to continue to assist delegations in findin g a way forward, although it was clear that unless 
there was a change in current positions, and the linka ges that had arisen between approval of different 
organizations' requests, further c onsultations would not help to unbl ock the overall observership issue. 
124. With regard to the requests received from th e Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural 
Cooperation ACP-EC (CTA), Basel Convention, Council of Europe Development Bank, African 
Development Bank and the Andean Development Corpor ation (CAF), she recalled that at the October 
Council meeting she had informed Members of th ese requests and had invited those wishing to 
consult the communications sent by these organizations  to contact the External Relations Division of 
the Secretariat.  She had proposed that in regard  to these requests, the General Council proceed in 
exactly the same way it had in the past with rega rd to requests from IGOs for observer status at 
Ministerial Conferences who were neither observers in the General Council nor in other WTO bodies.  
Accordingly, she had proposed that unless any objection was received by the Secretariat from any 
Member by 5 November, these four organizations be granted observer status.  She had also indicated that, as in the past, she would inform the General Council at its next meeting of the situation with 
regard to these requests, and that delegations would had an opportunity at that meeting to engage in a 
discussion on these requests if any objection had been received.  Sh e informed delegations that a 
reservation on behalf of a group of Members had been  received by the Secretariat within the proposed 
deadline, and there was therefore no consensus at the present stage to grant the requests from these 
four organizations.  In the interests of transparency  of the process, she requested the delegations that 
had expressed reservations on these requests to indicate this to the membership. 
125. The representative of Egypt
 said that for the sake of transpar ency, he wished to confirm that 
the Arab Group was not in a position to consider these requests at the present stage.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 33 
 
 
  126. The General Council took note  of the statements. 
127. The Chairman  then informed delegations that since the most recent Council meeting, the 
Secretariat had received a request for observer status at the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference from the Andean Development Corporation (CAF), whic h currently did not had observer status in any 
WTO body.  Members wishing to consult the co mmunication received from this organization were 
invited to contact the External Relations Division of the Secretariat.  She prop osed, in regard to this 
request, that Members proceed in exactly the same wa y as they had in the past with regard to requests 
from other IGOs for observer status at Ministerial Conferences who were neither observers in the General Council nor in other WTO bodies.  Accordingly, she proposed that, unless an objection was received by the Secretariat from any Member by 7 December, this organization be granted observer 
status at the Hong Kong Ministerial.  This was an expedited deadline, and she trusted delegations 
would understand the need to had an early response in view of the closeness of the Ministerial 
Conference.  Regrettably, Members would not had an occasion to revert to this request in the General 
Council prior to the Ministerial, so she would info rm delegations in a written communication as to the 
situation regarding this request after the deadline of 7 December.
7 
128. The General Council so agreed . 
(c) Administrative arrangements – Statement by the Chairman 
129. The Chairman  said that since this was the last meeting of the General Council before the 
Ministerial Conference, she wished to advise delega tions about arrangements for the meetings at the 
Conference as they were known at the present stage.   She knew that this would be useful to all 
delegations in briefing their Ministers as well as ot her members of their delegations in preparation for 
the Conference.  Her statement8, together with the statement made by  Secretary Tsang just prior to the 
consideration of this Agenda item9, as well as the Proposed Order of Business for the formal Plenary 
meetings at Hong Kong circulated the previous day (WT/MIN(05)/3), would give delegations an 
overall view of the organization of work at Hong Ko ng, both in the formal meetings and the informal 
consultative process that would be chaired by Secretary Tsang.   
130. Regarding arrangements for plenary meetings, sh e noted that the Proposed Order of Business 
for the formal Plenary meetings at Hong Kong – ci rculated the previous day in WT/MIN(05)/3 – 
provided delegations with an outline of how work  in the plenary meetings was proposed to be 
organized.  The Ministerial Conference would be gin on the afternoon of 13 December with an 
inaugural session at the Hong Kong Convention Centre that would last from 3 p.m. to approximately 
5 p.m.  The Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the Honourable 
Donald Tsang, would be the first speaker to address Ministers at this inaugural session.  He would be 
followed by the Chairman of the Ministerial C onference, the WTO Director-General, herself as 
General Council Chair, and the Secretary-General of  the United Nations or his representative.  The 
Ministerial Conference would then move to the opening of the business session of the Conference, 
where it would adopt its agenda and agree on the organization of work. 
131. The Ministerial Conference would then resume on the morning of 14 December at 10 a.m. to 
hear general statements by Ministers under Item 1 of the Agenda, namely, the Overview of WTO 
Activities.  In accordance with the practice at pr evious Ministerial Conferences, statements by 
                                                      
7 On 7 December 2005, the Chairm an informed Members in documen t WT/GC/104 that a reservation 
having been received by the Secretariat from a group of Members, there was therefore no consensus at that stage 
to grant this request. 
8 The full text of the statement by  the Chairman was subsequently ci rculated in document JOB(05)/313. 
9 The full text of Secretary Tsan g's statement, which was circulated in document JOB(05)/317, is 
reproduced in Annex III. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 34  
 
  Ministers were expected to be limited to not more than five minutes – which corresponded to two 
typed pages in single spacing.  Facilities would be available for circulating longer presentations in 
writing.  An Information Note regarding the delivery of statements and the distribution of the texts of 
statements had been circulated by the Secretariat in WT/MIN(05)/INF/11.  Plenary meetings of the 
Ministerial Conference to hear general statements  under Item 1 of the Agenda would be organized 
from 14 to 18 December on a schedule as follows:  morning meetings from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. and 
afternoon meetings from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m.  This  schedule was based on a speaking time-limit of 
five minutes for each speaker.  In the evening of 14 December starting at 8 p.m., the Ministerial Conference would take up Item 2 of its Agenda, wher e it would first consider the Sectoral Initiative in 
Favour of Cotton that had been proposed by Beni n on behalf of the four co-proponents of this 
Initiative.  This would be followed by the item on EC Compliance with all MFN Rights and Interests 
on Bananas proposed by Honduras.  In the eveni ng of 15 December starting at 6.10 p.m., the 
Ministerial Conference would meet in plenary session to take up Item 3 of its Agenda, under which 
Ministers would conclude formally the accession process of Tonga, as well as review ongoing accession processes and welcome others that had recen tly been completed.  Finally, the afternoon of 
18 December would be devoted to the remaining items on the Agenda, which would include taking 
action on a Ministerial text.  This informa tion was contained in document WT/MIN(05)/3. 
132. Regarding arrangements for informal consulta tive meetings, as Members knew, informal 
consultations might be organized as necessary th roughout the conference by the Chairman of the 
Ministerial Conference.  Secretary Tsang had already advised delegations at the present meeting regarding the designation of a number of Ministers to  assist him as Facilitators in the conduct of the 
substantive proceedings, and their areas of responsibility.
10  He had indicated to her his intention to 
advise all delegations about the overall organizatio n of the informal process as early as possible.  
However, in broad terms, she could inform delega tions now that the informal consultative process at 
Hong Kong would mirror the Geneva preparatory process – in order to ensure both transparency and a 
sense of continuity – and would be centred on ope n-ended informal meetings of all Heads-of-
Delegations.  She knew that Secretary Tsang was fully briefed about Members' continuing 
commitment to ensuring the fullest  possible transparency and inclus iveness in their decision-making 
processes, and the practices they had developed ove r the past several years, including those endorsed 
at the first meeting of the Trade Negotiations Committee in January 2002. 
133. The informal process at Hong Kong would pro ceed in parallel with the formal plenary 
sessions, and would be open to all WTO Members and other participants in the negotiations.  The 
principal objective of this process would be to fac ilitate consensus-building in  a fully transparent and 
inclusive manner, while maintaini ng the flexibility built in to the Geneva process.  The informal 
HODs meetings would be chaired by Secretary T sang and would be convened as necessary, but at 
least once each day.  Delegations would be kept  informed of these meetings through every means 
possible at the Conference centre.  Secretary Tsa ng had indicated that, as in the Geneva process, he 
would be calling on other Ministers to assist him as Facilitators with consulta tions on specific issues 
and to report back to the HODs meetings on th eir progress.  All Facilitators would also keep 
transparency in their work uppermost in their minds, and would set aside times to allow all 
delegations an opportunity to make their views know n.  Clearly, all understood that decisions could 
only be taken by the membership as a whole, and this was the purpose of the open-ended HODs 
meetings.  A final informal HODs meeting would be organized just prior to the concluding plenary 
session of the Conference, in order that delegations mi ght collectively review the results of work in all 
areas.  Building on the practice at the Doha and Cancún Ministerials, on each day of the Conference an hour in the morning and an hour in the afte rnoon would be set aside during which no informal 
meetings would be scheduled.  The purpose of this was to allow delegations the time they required to 
consult among themselves and in regional groupings as necessary.  As she had said earlier, Secretary 
                                                     
 
10 See Annex III.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 35 
 
 
  Tsang would provide greater details  subsequently on the scheduling a nd organization of all meetings 
in this informal process.   
134. She did not intend to invite a discussion on her statement, since the documents on the 
organization of the plenary meetings had been ci rculated by the Secretariat (WT/MIN(05)/INF/11, 
WT/MIN(05)/3) and since further, more specific in formation on the organization of the informal 
meetings would subsequently be  announced by Secretary Tsang. 
135. The General Council took note  of the statement. 
(d) Reports 
(i) Work Programme on Small Economies - Report by the Chairman of the Dedicated Session of 
the Committee on Trade and Development (WT/COMTD/SE/4) 
136. The Chairman  recalled that at its meeting in Febr uary and March 2002, the General Council 
had taken note of a framework and procedures fo r the conduct of the Work Programme on Small 
Economies, under which this Work Programme sh all be a standing item on the General Council's 
agenda.  The framework and procedures also pr ovided that the Committee on Trade and Development 
shall report regularly to the General Council on the pr ogress of work in its Dedicated Sessions on this 
subject.   
137. Mr. Senadhira (Sri Lanka), Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the Committee on Trade 
and Development , said that the CTD Dedicated Session had held its thirteenth meeting on 
16 November 2005.  This meeting had benefited from the attendance of participants from 27 of the 
31 Members and Observers without missions in Gene va who were participating in the eleventh 
"Geneva Week" event.  He was very pleased to repor t that this meeting had adopted the report before 
the General Council in WT/COMTD/SE/4.  This re port contained a summary of work done by the 
Dedicated Session since its last wr itten report to the General Council in  July 2003.  Most importantly, 
the report set out the future work of the Dedicated Session and contained proposals to the General Council for recommendations to be adopted at the Sixth Ministerial Conference.  The report asked 
that Ministers instruct the CTD to continue its work in Dedicated Sessions  in accordance with the 
mandate in the Doha Declaration, the 1 August 2004 Decision and the framework and procedures of 
the Work Programme on Small Economies.  The repor t also recommended that Ministers instruct the 
Dedicated Session to consider past and future proposals and then make recommendations to the 
General Council, with the latter referring any propo sal, as appropriate, to the relevant negotiating and 
other WTO bodies to frame responses for urgent ac tion, and reporting back through the Dedicated 
Session.  It was recommended that the Dedicated Session monitor this work and ensure that responses 
were found in the negotiating and other bodies to a ddress the trade-related issues identified for the 
fuller integration of SVEs into the multilateral trad ing system.  During the discussions on the report 
and on the paragraph for the draft Ministerial text, it had become clear that, although some differences 
remained, there was a certain degree of convergence among Members on how to address the mandate 
of the Dedicated Session and find solutions to the trade-related problems of SVEs.  This gave him 
renewed hope that the Dedicated Session would be able to achieve its mandate. 
138. The representative of Barbados
, on behalf of the small, vulnerable economies , thanked the 
Chairman of the CTD Dedicated Session for his report and for the dedicated and fair manner in which he had continued to approach his chairmanship.  The small and vulnerable economies (SVEs) wished 
to mention specifically his navigation of the difficult waters of preparing and delivering an agreed text 
to the General Council and for providing agreed langu age on SVEs for the Ministerial text.  His report 
was a reasonable reflection of the fact that progress had indeed been achieved over the past two years, 
due to a number of factors.  Much of this progr ess could be attributed to the increasing recognition by 
the majority of Members of the special structural characteristics and problems of SVEs and the shared WT/GC/M/100 
Page 36  
 
  view that paragraph 35 of the Doha Declaration ha d to be respected.  The deliberations in the CTD 
Dedicated Session, as reflected in the report and in the draft Ministerial text, had shown the importance of SVEs' involvement in the different  negotiating processes.  There was now a deeper 
understanding that a two-track process would be the most practical and progressive manner in which 
to obtain effective results.  This two-track pro cess entailed maintaining the mandate of the CTD 
Dedicated Session as a forum to discuss and make recommendations on issues of an administrative 
and general nature and reinforcing its monitori ng role, on the one hand, and on the other, the 
submission by proponents of specific proposals in  the negotiating and other bodies.  Given that 
understanding, some SVEs had tabl ed negotiating proposals in NAMA, agriculture and rules.  The 
reports of the Chairs of the Agriculture Special Session and the NAMA Negotiating Group had 
reflected small-economy issues to some extent.  
139. The SVEs would have preferred to see fu rther progress in the negotiating groups, but 
recognized that the Chairs' factual reports had sought a balance with regard to the state of play of the 
negotiations that he considered fair.  The report of  the Chair of the Special Session of the Services 
Council also reflected language introduced in th e Special Session by SVEs and modified in 
negotiating sessions.  The small-economy proponents were  very concerned that as Members engaged 
in the process of identifying issues on which the SVEs hoped Ministers would take decisions at Hong Kong, Members should also ensure that any eventual  decisions did not foreclose related proposals that 
were of key developmental interest  to SVEs.  Small economies, with their insignificant share of world 
trade – who were yet willing to make a contributio n to the Round – could achieve some benefit only 
if flexibilities appropriate to their situation we re built into the calibration in 2006 following the 
recalibration in 2005.  It was the expectation of  the small-economy proponents that the road map 
formulated by Ministers to direct deliberations  on all negotiations in the post-Hong Kong phase 
would include clear instructions that Members addr ess the specific needs of SVEs in the negotiating 
bodies, in order to advance the Work Programme a nd deliver meaningful results by the end of the 
Round. 
140. The representatives of El Salvador
, Guatemala , Dominican Republic , Honduras , Nicaragua , 
Paraguay , Jamaica , Antigua and Barbuda also for Dominica , Grenada, St. Kitts and Nevis, and 
St. Vincent and the Grenadines , Trinidad and Tobago  thanked the Chair of the CTD Dedicated 
Session for his report and for the work carried out  under the Work Programme on Small Economies, 
and supported the statement by Barb ados on behalf of the SVEs . 
141. The representative of El Salvador  said his delegation wished to reiterate the importance 
El Salvador attached to the Work Programme as  a means of stimulating development through the 
search for concrete solutions that would allow greater  integration into the multilateral trading system.  
As Members approached the Sixth Ministerial Conf erence, El Salvador also wished to express its 
satisfaction at the consensus reached in the drafting of the Ministerial text on small economies, which provided a boost for these countries' work in the subsequent phase by setting out two lines of 
approach:  first, through the submission of concrete  proposals in the various negotiating groups;  and 
second, through the monitoring work of the CTD in Dedicated Session.  El Salvador reiterated its full determination to continue worki ng hard and constructively in orde r to advance the Work Programme, 
with a view to promoting development in small economies such as El Salvador, as mandated by the 
Ministerial Conference in Doha. 
142. The representative of Guatemala
 said that, as shown in the report, Members had achieved 
much progress that would lead to finding solutions  for the problems that plagued SVEs.  The two-
track approach for the continuation of this work – a role for the CTD and a role for the negotiating 
and other regular WTO bodies – was the correct one , because it would allow SVEs to obtain results 
from the initiatives and proposals they had presented.   A small economy such as Guatemala had high 
expectations regarding the benefits that might em erge from these negotiations, and therefore believed 
that the Doha Development Round had to establis h and implement measures geared to increasing  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 37 
 
 
  SVEs' participation in international trade.  As had been pointed out, the small economies had 
introduced important proposals in the various negotia ting groups, in respect of which they would do 
their utmost to ensure that Ministers in Hong Kong charted a clear course towards concrete and 
positive results in the current negotiations. 
143. The representative of Dominican Republic  supported the statements by El Salvador and 
Guatemala.  The report of the Chair of the CT D Dedicated Session reflected the intensive work 
Members had been carrying out to find concrete solu tions to the trade-related problems of SVEs.  As 
Barbados had said, the best way of continuing th is work was the two-track approach.  She drew 
attention to the different proposals already tabl ed in the Negotiating Groups on Agriculture, NAMA 
and Rules, particularly regarding fisheries subsid ies.  Her delegation hoped that in Hong Kong, 
Ministers would provide the necessar y impetus to enable Members to continue this work in such a 
way as to achieve concrete results as soon as possible. 
144. The representative of Honduras  said that in the context of future work in the CTD Dedicated 
Session and in the various negotiating groups, Honduras hoped to pursue its efforts to ensure that the 
future negotiating modalities took into account the difficulties and problems Honduras and other 
delegations had been raisi ng throughout this process. 
145. The representative of Nicaragua  said that his delegation echoed the points made by previous 
speakers, in particular Barbados, regarding th e implementation of paragraph 35 of the Doha 
Declaration.  Nicaragua would join its efforts with those of other count ries in seeking special 
treatment for small economies. 
146. The representative of Paraguay  highlighted the importance of the measures to be adopted for 
SVEs such as Paraguay, which was a small land- locked country depending on cotton production and 
other basic commodities.  Paraguay's main interest was to ensure market acc ess and trade facilitation 
measures to alleviate its lack of access to the sea.  It therefore hoped to work after Hong Kong on 
identifying measures that would ensure a better in tegration of its economy into the world trading 
system. 
147. The representative of Jamaica  thanked the Chair of the CTD Dedicated Session for his report.  
Jamaica shared the latter's assessment that progress had been achieved over the past two years on the 
issue of small economies, and wished to underscore th e fact that this was due in no small measure to 
the energy and dedication the Chair of the CTD Dedicated Session had brought to pursuing the interests of all small economies.  His delegation w ould have further comments to make on this issue 
in the context of consideration of the draft Ministerial text. 
148. The representative of Antigua and Barbuda
, speaking also on behalf of Dominica, Grenada, 
St. Kitts and Nevis, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines , said that the two-track approach was the way 
ahead for them, and they saw Hong Kong as a launchi ng pad for SVEs to have their issues addressed 
in a more operational way during 2006. 
149. The representative of Trinidad and Tobago  underscored the importance his country attached 
to the work being done in the CTD Dedicated Session. 
150. The representative of the European Communities  said that the Community too welcomed the 
progress that had been made on the issue of SVEs .  All knew from his delegation's statements on 
previous occasions the position the EC had taken.  Indeed, earlier in 2005 his delegation had offered a 
definition of such economies in order to help take this  issue forward.  He was glad this work had been 
done, and that it now had the correct focus. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 38  
 
  151. The General Council took note
 of the statements and of the report in WT/COMTD/SE/4, 
which would be forwarded to the Ministerial Conference. 
(ii) Work Programme on Special and Differential Treatment 
 - Report by the Chairman of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and 
Development 
 
 - Reports by Chairpersons of other WTO bodies to which special and differential 
treatment proposals have been referred 
 152. The Chairman
 recalled that in Section 1(d) of its Decision of July 2004 on the Doha Work 
Programme (WT/L/579), the General Council had instructed the Special Session of the Committee on 
Trade and Development to expeditiously complete  the review of all the outstanding Agreement-
specific proposals on S&D treatment and to re port to the General Council, with clear 
recommendations for  a decision, by July 2005.  The General Council had also instructed all WTO bodies to which S&D treatment proposals had been  referred in 2003 – the so-called Category II 
proposals – to expeditiously complete the consider ation of these proposals and report to the General 
Council, with clear recommendations for a decision, as soon as possible and no later than July 2005.  At its meeting in July 2005, the General Council, in considering the report of the CTD in Special 
Session, had agreed to the action proposed by the Ch air of the Special Session regarding future work, 
namely that the Special Session would need to:  (i) continue work on the remaining Agreement-
specific proposals and report to the General Council with clear recommendations for a decision by the 
Hong Kong Ministerial;  (ii) continue to monitor and coordinate its efforts with that of the negotiating 
groups and other WTO bodies to which Category II pr oposals had been referred;  and (iii) continue, 
within the parameters of the Doha mandate, to address all other outstanding work and report, as 
appropriate, to the General Council.  With regard to the Category II proposals, at the General Council 
meeting in July, following the reports from the Chairs  of these bodies, she had noted that, as part of its 
future work, the CTD in Special Session would need to  continue to monitor a nd coordinate the efforts 
of the Special Session with that of the negotiating groups and other WTO bodies to which these proposals had been referred. 
153. She proposed first to invite the Chairman of  the Special Session of the CTD to make his 
report, followed by the Chairs of the negotiati ng groups and other bodies to which S&D treatment 
proposals had been referred in 2003.  In order to assi st delegations in their work, the statements made 
by the Chairs under this Agenda item would be circulated as a Gene ral Council document and, as with 
other reports on the Agenda, forwarded to the Ministerial Conference.
 11 
154. Mr. Ismail (South Africa), Chairman of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and 
Development , said that as Members were aware, he had already submitted his de tailed report on the 
work of the Special Session since July to the TNC at its meeting on 30 November.  However, for the 
benefit of Members not present at that meeting, he wished to briefly highlight  the main points.  His 
report in TN/CTD/14 highlighted the work carried out  in the Special Session si nce July 2005.  During 
this period, the Special Session had focused main ly on the five remaining LDC Agreement-specific 
proposals, and while Members had been able to make some progress on narrowing their differences 
on these proposals, divergences still remained on cer tain key areas.  These divergences were now 
reflected in the draft Ministerial text (Annex F of  JOB(05)/298/Rev.1).  It remained his hope that 
these remaining differences could be resolved in H ong Kong.  He also wished to mention that some 
developing-country Members had continued to ra ise concerns about the lack of progress on the 
Category II proposals which had been referred to other WTO bodies and negotiating groups.  As a 
                                                      
11 The statements by the Chairpersons under this  Agenda item were subsequently circulated in 
document WT/GC/102, and forwarded to the Ministerial Conference.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 39 
 
 
  result, he had convened a meeting with the vari ous Chairpersons of these bodies on 24 October, in 
order to obtain feedback on the current status of the work on the proposals and how that work could 
be expedited.  He had reported in  detail to Members in the CTD Special Session on the reports he had 
received from the Chairpersons of the various bodies to which the Category II proposals had been sent.  He wished to thank Members for their active participation in the negotiations, and in particular, 
the Secretariat team who had worked tirelessly with  him to advance these negotiations.  As he handed 
over this responsibility, he wished to record his view that a successful resolution of these five LDC 
proposals had to remain one of Members' prioriti es in Hong Kong, as it was a crucial component of 
the development content of the Round. 
155. Mr. Falconer (New Zealand), Chairman of the Special Session of the Committee on 
Agriculture , said that the relevant proposals were containe d in a document circulated by the African 
Group on 17 July 2002 (TN/CTD/W/3/Rev.2).  As Members were aware, a progress report on the discussion on these proposals had been made at the Ju ly 2005 meeting of the General Council, which 
he would not repeat.  Since then, he had held a numb er of consultations in fo rmal and informal mode 
with  Members – and also with smaller representa tive groups – on those proposals and on the matters 
covered by them.  Many of those consultations had been devoted to  or included the subject of S&D 
treatment, including the specific matters covered in the proposals from the African Group.  Some 
specific elements of those proposals had been addr essed or clarified by the 1 August 2004 Decision of 
the General Council (WT/L/579).  On the other elemen ts, since July 2004 there had been some degree 
of convergence on some of them, but clearly, full convergence and agreement had eluded Members.  
He drew attention to a number of proposals that were concretely on the table, such as the proposals 
from the G-33 on Special Products and the Special Safeguard Mechanism which – among other things 
Members had before them – did address fairly dir ectly the concerns that underlay a number of the 
original proposals from the African Group.  These pr oposals of course remained on the table as part of 
Members' work.  His own report to the TNC on the situation of the agriculture negotiations (TN/AG/21) was the best he could do to lay out in  detail his current understanding of the state-of-
play.  He would not repeat now the elements related to S&D treatment issues in that report.  He would 
say, briefly, that he saw some  real movement, although by no me ans sufficient, certainly not 
comprehensive and in no way conclusive.  It was fair ly clear that Members had a lot of work to do on 
these as well as other issues, and this was the only way Members could effectively resolve the 
proposals before them and the context in which they had been placed. 
156. Mr. Haeberli (Switzerland), Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture
, said that his report as 
Chairman of the regular meetings of the Comm ittee on Agriculture related to the Committee's 
consideration of a proposal by the African Gr oup in the context of the implementation of the 
Marrakesh Decision on Measures Concerning the Possible Negative Effects of the Reform 
Programme on Least-Developed and Net Food-Impo rting Developing Countries.  The Committee's 
discussion had focussed on the proposal to establis h a Revolving Fund in the framework of the 
Marrakesh Decision.  That submission also containe d certain food aid-related proposals.  However, as 
some Members considered that food aid issues shoul d be addressed in the agriculture negotiations or 
by the Food Aid Convention, these aspects had not  been further pursued.  The Revolving Fund 
proposal, which had originally been submitted by a group of Net Food-Importing Developing 
Countries, had been the subject of discussions since 2001.  He recalled that at the Doha Ministerial 
Conference, it had been agreed that a panel of e xperts would be established to examine the proposal.  
Experts from the IMF, World Bank, FAO, UNCT AD and the International Grains Council had 
submitted their report with recommendations in 20 02 (G/AG/13).  The sponsors of the proposal had 
subsequently tabled a modified version of the Revolving Fund proposal, which had been discussed in a roundtable with the participation of Members.  Howe ver, in the end, this proposal had not attracted 
consensus among Members.  The proposal by the African Group had been on the agenda of each 
meeting of the Committee on Agriculture since J une 2003.  The Committee's deliberations on the 
proposal were set out more fully in the report subm itted by his predecessor in July 2005 (G/AG/20).  
The general conclusion remained that the discu ssion of the African Group proposal as it currently WT/GC/M/100 
Page 40  
 
  stood had reached an impasse, and that the African Gr oup might wish to consider revising it.  Indeed, 
a member of the African Group had indicated ear lier in 2005 that a follow-up proposal was under 
preparation.  In response, a number of donor Me mbers had signalled their readiness to engage in 
discussions once the proposal was submitted.  As Chairman, he could confirm that the Committee on Agriculture stood ready to examine expeditiously any follow-up proposal that might be tabled by the 
African Group. 
157. Mr. Valles Galmés (Uruguay), Chairm an of the Negotiating Group on Rules
, said that, as 
indicated in his July 2005 report (TN/RL/14), the proposals referred to the Rules Negotiating Group 
related to Article 15 of the Agreement on Anti-Du mping and Articles 3 and 27 of the Agreement on 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.  He recal led that, as he had reported earlier, these proposals 
had figured on the agenda of a number of meeti ngs of the Negotiating Group in 2003 and 2004, but 
that except in respect of one of the proposals, the sponsors had been unable to attend these meetings 
or had not been in a position to introduce the proposal s.  Since his report in July 2005, the Negotiating 
Group had held three series of meetings, during the weeks of 26 September, 24 October and the 
current week, and no participant had sought to pur sue any of these proposals during these meetings.  
He had had a series of contacts with, and provided  briefings to, the sponsors of these proposals – the 
African Group and the LDC Group – and, as always, re mained available for further dialogue.  More 
generally, developing-country Members remained ve ry actively involved in all aspects of the rules 
mandate, including in respect of S&D issues. 
158. Mr. de Mateo (Mexico), Chairman of the Special Session of the Council for Trade in 
Services , said that as indicated in his report in Ju ly 2005 (TN/S/21), the consideration of GATS-
specific proposals on S&D treatment had been on the agenda of the Special Session of the Council for 
Trade in Services since its last meeting in 200 4.  In February 2005, the proponents of the S&D 
proposals had indicated they were preparing a wr itten submission on which they would pursue further 
discussions.  Subsequent consulta tions had given delegations the opportunity to pose questions and 
seek clarifications, in particular on two proposals put forward by the African Group.  Although the 
consultations on these proposals had in itially remained at a general a nd exploratory level, the African 
Group had since then informed the Special Sessi on that text-based discussions had taken place in 
small groups.  He understood there had been some  measured progress in these small group meetings 
and that the proponents would be willing to ava il themselves of his good offices to pursue these 
discussions.  As Chair, he assured Members that th e Special Session of the CTS would make every 
effort to fulfil the mandate the General Council ha d given it in Section 1(d) of its Decision of 
1 August 2004 (WT/L/579). 
159. Mr. Choi (Korea), Chairman of the Council for TRIPS , said that since his most recent report 
on this matter to the General Council, the TRI PS Council had taken up the Category II proposals 
referred to it at its meeting in October.  The TR IPS Council had authorized him to report that the 
situation remained as described in his written repo rt to the General Council's July 2005 meeting 
(IP/C/36).  As indicated in that report, at its Ju ly meeting the TRIPS Council had agreed to authorize 
him to report to the General Council that it reite rated its recommendation concerning a text it had 
forwarded in August 2003 to the General Council Chair fo r appropriate action.  This text reflected an 
agreement among participants on a solution to a pr oposal by the African Group concerning exclusive 
marketing rights.  The aforementioned report had al so provided a brief factual report on what had 
happened with regard to the other proposals referred  to the TRIPS Council.  It continued to be the 
case that, since the General Council Decision of 1 August 2004 (WT/L/579), no delegation had taken 
up these other proposals. 
160. Mrs. Novik (Chile), Chairman  of the Committee on Safeguards , recalled that in July 2003, the 
Safeguards Committee had reported in detail to the General Council concerning the proposals referred 
to it (G/SG/64).  The report's conclusion had been th at informal consultations indicated there was no 
consensus in the Committee on th ese proposals.  In November 2004, the Safeguards Committee had  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 41 
 
 
  held a meeting dedicated to further discussions on the proposals, but the meeting had been very short, 
with Members confirming that the situation remain ed unchanged.  Thus, the Committee had not been 
able to suggest a course of action on this issue due  to lack of consensus.  This report had been 
presented to the General Council in G/SG/78.  More  recently, in late October 2005, she had personally 
contacted the proponents of the proposals.  Howe ver, nothing new had evolved as a result of this 
contact. 
161. Mr. Badral (Mongolia), Chairman of the Committee on TRIMS , said that two S&D proposals 
in Category II had been referred to the TRIMS Committee by the General Council.  Both proposals 
had been submitted by the African Group, and relate d to Articles 4 and 5.3 of the TRIMS Agreement, 
respectively.  Pursuant to the Decision a dopted by the General Council on 1 August 2004 
(WT/L/579), under the Chairmanship of his predece ssor, the TRIMs Committee had held a number of 
formal meetings and informal consultations to c onsider these proposals.  In May 2005, the Committee 
had discussed a revised version of the proposals submitted by Kenya, on behalf of the African Group, which sought to address more specifically the con cerns of this particular group of countries.  
Notwithstanding the efforts made to reconcile di vergent positions, the Committee had been unable to 
arrive at a solution that would enable it to agr ee on the proposals.  Certain fundamental questions 
remained unresolved with respect to the country scope and time horizon for the application of these 
proposals.  This situation had been reflected in th e report of his predecessor to the General Council in 
July 2005 (G/L/742).  On 10 Oct ober he had convened a formal meeting of the TRIMS Committee to 
consider inter alia  the S&D proposals.  No new developments in Members' positions had been 
registered at that meeting.  He stood ready to  continue work in the TRIMS Committee on the S&D 
proposals should the General Council, and subseque ntly Ministers in Hong Kong, deem it useful. 
162. The Chairman
, in the absence of the Chairperson of the DSB Special Session and on the 
latter's request and behalf, read out his statement as follows:  "In my last written report to the General 
Council, dated 26 July 2005 (TN/DS/13), I indicated th at further work would be required in respect of 
the nine Category II proposals referred to the Special  Session of the DSB.  Since then, the Category II 
proposals referred to the DSB Special Session were placed on the agenda of our last meeting on 
24 October.  At the request of the proponents, it w as agreed that these proposals would be reverted to 
later.  I therefore expect that these issues would be considered further afte r the Hong Kong Ministerial 
Conference." 
163. With regard to the Committee on SPS Measur es, whose Chair was unable to attend the 
present meeting, she noted that a report had been circulated in G/SPS/39.   
164. She expressed her gratitude to all the Chairs for their reports.  As  she had said earlier, in order 
to assist delegations in their work, the statements  made by the Chairpersons under this Agenda item 
would be circulated as a General Council documen t and, as with other reports on the Agenda, 
forwarded to the Ministerial Conference.12 
165. The representative of Tanzania  thanked the Chairman of the CTD Special Session and the 
Chairs of the other bodies that had been dealing with Category II proposals.  His delegation looked 
forward to receiving the written reports for more detaile d study.  He wished, in particular, to reflect on 
the statement by the Chair of the CTD Special Session that had been dealing with the LDC 
Agreement-specific proposals.  He had taken note of  that Chair's report that some progress had been 
made, but that divergences still remained, and of that Chair's hope that the divergences might be 
resolved by Ministers in Hong Kong.  His delega tion shared that optimism, but also hoped Members 
would have a realistic estimate of the extent to which Ministers in Hong Kong could engage 
substantively on those proposals, so that the out come would be balanced and one which the LDCs 
would feel happy to associate with.  He underst ood Members would be coming back to this issue 
                                                      
12 See previous footnote. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 42  
 
  under Agenda item 12(d)(vi), in the context of examin ing the draft Ministerial text, and would revert 
to this matter then, in order to make more specific comments. 
166. The representative of Kenya
 thanked the various Chairs fo r their reports on Category II S&D 
proposals.  As had been said, in some reports it was clear there was no consensus, while in others, 
efforts were still being made to fulfil the mandate.  Kenya hoped these efforts w ould be translated into 
something concrete soon.  On other proposals, issues  were being negotiated in  the relevant negotiating 
groups.  On these, his delegation was surprised th at some of the issues were being referred to 
proposals that had been made in the current nego tiations.  Looking at the mandate on S&D, one saw 
that the two issues were different, because that ma ndate was to address existing provisions, not what 
was likely to come up in the future.  Thus, Kenya hoped that at some point there would be 
clarification of this in those ne gotiating groups, so that these groups could separate the two issues.  In 
other reports, Members had heard that the situation was as it had been in July 2005, and that there was 
not much hope.  This reminded his delegation of what it had said in July 2005 – that it, and especially 
the African Group, had problems stretching themselves to attend meetings of all those groups in order 
to follow-up on the deliberations in those bodies.  Th ese delegations had sought assistance, so that this 
work could return to the CTD in Special Session,  but this had not been something other Members 
were willing to entertain. 
167. Thus, the question was whether Members continue d with the current situation –  in which 
they knew that when they met, probably in Februa ry or March, the same report would be made, and 
the relevant Chairs would say that as they had reported in December 2005, the situation had not 
changed and that consensus had not been possible,  in spite of their having made every effort.  
However, this was the Doha Round, and Members we re supposed to have completed this work in 
July 2002.  Perhaps the time ha d come when Members should seek further guidance from Ministers, 
because his delegation saw these S&D issues taking the same route as implementation issues, for 
which Members had taken the same kind of appro ach but did not seem to be getting any results.  
Kenya wished to register its disappointment, and hoped that when Members started to address the 
draft Ministerial text, its disappointment could be regi stered in that draft text so that this, along with 
the reports, could be forwarded to Hong Kong for Ministers' perusal. 
168. The Chairman  said she wished to assure the delegation of Kenya that consultations on the 
proposal made at the July General Council meeti ng that all Category II proposals should be brought 
back to the CTD Special Session were ongoing. 
169. The representative of Cuba  said her delegation viewed w ith much concern the current 
deadlock on these issues which should be at the cen tre of the negotiations.  It was even more 
concerned about the absence of a clear, forward-lookin g approach to resolving this situation in the 
reports presented.  To reaffirm the mandates without any criticism by Ministers of the present deadlock and without setting an early deadline for concluding the review of the 88 proposals 
submitted by the developing countries, would only c ast further doubt on the objectives of this Round 
in the eyes of the international community and would lead to a repeat of this situation after Hong 
Kong.  Cuba therefore welcomed the drafting sugge stion for the draft Ministerial text submitted by 
the African Group on 23 November 2005 (JOB(05)/305) and, in particular, the initiative to bring the 
Category II proposals before the CTD in Special Sessi on, given that there had been no progress in the 
subsidiary bodies to which they had been refe rred.  This was the only way the proposals would 
receive the attention and political priority necessary to  ensure that progress was made on these issues.  
Cuba would revert to this matter later in the meeting. 
170. The representative of Zambia
, speaking on behalf of the LDCs , thanked the Chairman, the 
Director-General and the Chairs of the negotiatin g groups and the Secretariat for the revised draft 
Ministerial text.  The efforts being made by all of the latter to address Members' concerns were a true 
reflection of their commitment to making the Hong Kong Ministerial a success.  He asked that the  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 43 
 
 
  statement made by Nepal on behalf of the LDCs at  the TNC meeting on 30 November be included in 
the records of the present meeting.13  However, he wished to add to that statement, by briefly 
highlighting issues pertaining to S&D treatment, and in particular the five LDC Agreement-specific 
proposals contained in Annex F of the draft Minister ial text that would be presented to Ministers in 
Hong Kong.  The LDCs appreciated the efforts that were being by made by all Members to ensure 
that the most vulnerable among the membership dr ew maximum benefits from this Round, in order 
for them to be meaningfully and effectively integrated into the multilateral trading system and to reduce their further marginalization.  The LDCs  were certainly cognizant that other developing 
countries had interests as well that needed to be  safeguarded, and concerns that needed to be 
addressed.  However, the LDCs were equally convin ced that some Members had greater needs than 
others.  In this context, the LDCs wished to hi ghlight the importance of an enhanced Integrated 
Framework that would help them deal with the ma ny obstacles they were faced with.  The LDCs had 
also taken positive note of th e Aid for Trade Concept and expected more precision and 
commitment to operationalize this initiative.  Regarding the five proposals, with additional efforts by all, Members could continue to engage constructively.  Need less to say, both the developed and 
developing-country Members had worked with th e LDCs throughout the informal consultative 
process under the able leadership of the Chairman  of the CTD Special S ession, who had worked 
tirelessly to try to make these five proposals precise,  effective and operative, as mandated by the Doha 
Declaration.  He wished to pay tribute to the latte r for his dedication to his work, which had not been 
easy.  At the heart of the discussions had been the need for duty-free, quota-free market access for all 
LDCs, for all products and for th is duty-free and quota-free market acces s to be bound so that it was 
secure, predictable and sustainable.  The LDCs had noted the concerns raised by some developed 
and developing countries and had made attempts to take some of these aspects on board in 
alternate proposals.  However, this had also not been accepted.  There was no doubt that the 
development dimension of this Round would be gauged by the degree of integration of the 
weaker Members into the multilateral trading system, and one yard-stick was arriving at a 
positive and meaningful solution to the LDC propos als.  This would definitely reflect a new 
momentum from Members, in terms of demonstrating real commitment to the Doha Development Round. 
171. The representative of Djibouti
 said his delegation fully subscribed to the statement by Zambia 
on behalf of the LDCs.  Trade facilitation, for ex ample, was an important area for Djibouti, but it 
would have preferred that instead of all the aid it had thus far received, and all the aid foreseen for 
2006, the objectives of integrating LDCs into world tr ade had been realized.  There had been various 
types of aid for development, but Djibouti would have  preferred to have furthe r clarification regarding 
the package that was being offered the LDCs.  He as ked what the future held.  One had to foresee the 
future.  This was a matter of great concern.  LD Cs were told that the outcome of work on S&D 
treatment would be linked to the outcome in all ar eas, but that was not possible.  One had to be 
honest.  One had to move step by step, taking one s ubject after another, and draw up a list of priorities 
in the negotiations, taking up two or three subjects at a time rather than tabling everything in one 
negotiation and trying to find solutions for all of them.  The reports by the various Chairs on S&D issues would be submitted to Ministers in Hong Kong, but Ministers were not going to agree to talk 
about everything at once.  He reiterated that Memb ers should move stage by stage, step by step, 
priority by priority, and should look at a few areas that were priority areas, taking  two or three issues 
of importance within the framework of the nego tiations.  This would enable Members to move 
forward. 
                                                     
 
13 The statement by Nepal on behalf of the LDCs at the TNC meeting on 30 November, which is 
reflected in the records of that meet ing in document TN/C/M/22 (para. 133), is incorporated by reference into 
the present records. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 44  
 
  172. The General Council took note
 of the statements and that the statements by the Chairpersons 
under this item would be circulated as a General Council document and forwarded to the Ministerial 
Conference.14 
(iii) Work Programme on Electronic Commerce – State of play and reports by the Chairpersons of 
the Committee on Trade and Development and th e Dedicated Discussions on cross-cutting 
issues under the auspices of the General Council (WT/GC/W/555) 
173. The Chairman  recalled that in paragraph 34 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, Ministers 
had agreed to continue the Work Programme on El ectronic Commerce, and had instructed the General 
Council to consider the most appropriate in stitutional arrangements for handling the Work 
Programme and to report on further progress to the Fifth Session.  Ministers had also declared that 
Members would maintain their current practice of not imposing customs duties on electronic 
transmissions until the Fifth Session.  At its mee ting in October 2002, the General Council had agreed 
to maintain, for the duration of th e work until the Fifth Session, the current institutional arrangements 
for handling the Work Programme, i. e. that the Councils for Trade in  Services, Trade in Goods and 
TRIPS, and the Committee on Trade and Development would examine and report on aspects of 
electronic commerce relevant to their respective ar eas of competence, and that the General Council 
would play a central role in the entire process, would keep the Work Programme under continuous 
review and would consider any tr ade-related issue of a cross-cutting nature.  Subsequently, in its 
July 2004 Decision, the General Council had agreed that it and other relevant bodies would report in 
line with their Doha mandates to the Sixth Session of the Ministerial Conference. 
174. She wished to note that pursuan t to the institutional arrangement s agreed in 2002, the General 
Council's examination of cross-cutting issues under the Work Programme had been carried out in 
Dedicated Discussions held under the auspices of th e General Council for this purpose.  Before she 
requested the Chairs of the Committee on Trade a nd Development and of the Dedicated Discussions 
on cross-cutting issues under the auspices of the Gene ral Council, she wished to give a brief overview 
of the state of play of the e-commerce discussions in the three sectoral Councils, namely, the Councils 
for Goods, Services and TRIPS.   
175. The chairpersons of these bodies had indicated  to her that since the Cancún Ministerial 
Conference, there had been no requests from any Members that the Work Programme on Electronic 
Commerce be included on the agenda of the meet ings of these bodies.  She understood that these 
bodies stood ready to revert to discussion of issues relating to the Work Programme at the request of any Member.  It was also her understanding that, with regard to the state of play of the discussions in 
these bodies, the progress reports submitted by them  in documents G/L/635, S/L/74 and IP/C/29, 
respectively, remained an accurate reflection of th e thinking of the Members in the areas of work 
concerned. 
176. Mr. Senadhira (Sri Lanka), Chairman of  the Committee on Trade and Development
, said he 
wished to present the work on el ectronic commerce that had taken place in the CTD since July 2003.  
He noted that a report of the work on electroni c commerce in the CTD from the time of the Doha 
Ministerial Conference until the 45th Session of the CTD in J une 2003 was contained in 
WT/COMTD/47.  Even though electronic commerce ha d been a standing item on the CTD's agenda at 
its 46th and 47th Sessions held in 2003 after the Cancún Ministerial Conference, Members had made 
no interventions on this item.  At the 48th Session of the CTD in February 2004, Members had 
discussed at some length how they wished to continue with this item.  At the 49th Session in 
May 2004, Pakistan had made a lengthy statement and had outlined some possible points for 
discussion by the Committee.  The latter had raised  a number of questions on various e-commerce 
related issues, including those relating to globa l governance, control of the Internet, access to 
                                                      
14 See footnote 11.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 45 
 
 
  technology, taxation, classification issues, issues relating to policy flexibility and capacity building 
and the role of SMEs.  Pakistan believed that these were issues on which Members needed to reflect further. 
177. Based on a suggestion by Tunisia, the Committee at its 50
th Session in September 2004 had 
decided to invite the Secretariat of the Interna tional Telecommunications Union (ITU) to brief the 
CTD on the latest developments in the prepara tion of the second phase of the World Summit of the 
Information Society that was to take place in T unisia in November 2005.  The expert from the ITU 
had been unavailable for the 51st and 52nd Sessions of the CTD, but had been able to make his 
presentation, which explored the role of in formation and communications technologies in 
development, at the 53rd Session held in May 2005.  The Committee had taken note of the 
presentation.  It had been agreed to revert to this agenda item in future only if requested to do so by 
Members. 
178. Mr. Singh, Deputy Director-General , said that the sixth Dedicated Discussion on cross-cutting 
issues under the auspices of the General Council on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce 
had been held on 7 and 21 November.  Under the age nda for this meeting, participants had discussed a 
written submission from the United States entitled "P reparations for the 2005 Ministerial Conference 
– Work Programme on Electronic Commerce" (WT/GC /W/551) and also two informal papers from 
that delegation supporting this subm ission.  Members had also consid ered and approved the report of 
the Dedicated Discussion to the General Council in  WT/GC/W/555 and, on the basis of paragraph 14 
of that report, had agreed on a text to be forw arded to the General Council Chair as the input on e-
commerce to the draft Ministerial text for Hong Kong.   
179. All delegations had agreed that work under the Work Programme, including the development 
aspects, should be reinvigorated in 2006.  Generally, Members had supported extending the 
moratorium on the imposition of customs duties on electronic transmissions until the next Session and were willing to discuss further in 2006 the proposal to make the moratorium permanent and binding.  
However, one delegation had not b een in favour of this extension,  and another had said there were 
systemic concerns regarding the extension of the moratorium, and that it was not, at the time, in a 
position to agree to it.  The other issue related to  trade treatment of software.  Participants had 
recognized the importance of software trade fo r development and economic performance, and the 
positive impact of liberalized trade in software.  There had been support for initial discussions, under 
the Work Programme in 2006, on the issue raised by  the United States, without linkage to negotiating 
areas and without prejudice to Members' positions in other areas.  It had also been stated that any 
approach to the liberalization of the treatment of software had to incorporate the development 
dimension, fully respect non-discrimination, and that any consideration of software should not prejudice any Member's position on whether electronic deliverables were a good or a service.  Further, some Members had stated that the discussion s hould cover not only software, but all IT goods and 
services facilitating e-commerce.  Lastly, on the i ssue of recommendations for consideration by the 
General Council, participants had di scussed this matter at some length but had been unable to reach a 
consensus, mainly in view of the differences he had just mentioned.  As a result, the entirety of the 
text relating to recommendations in paragraph 14  of the report remained in square brackets. 
180. The Chairman
 said that, in order to assist delegations in their work, the statements made by 
the Chairpersons under this Agenda item would be circulated as a General Council document and, as 
with other reports on the Agenda, forwarded to the Ministerial Conference.15 
181. The representative of Cuba  said Cuba supported the decision to reinvigorate discussions on all 
components of the Work Programme on Electro nic Commerce as proposed by the Dedicated 
                                                      
15 The statements by the Chairpersons under this  Agenda item were subsequently circulated in 
document WT/GC/103, and forwarded to the Ministerial Conference. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 46  
 
  Discussion under the auspices of the General Council, bearing in mind the work being undertaken in 
other international fora, such as WIPO, UNCTAD,  UNCITRAL, OECD and ITU.  Her delegation 
noted that since the Cancún Ministerial Confer ence, no progress had been made in technical 
discussions on any of the topics contained in th e Work Programme, including development-related 
topics.  Cuba therefore opposed having Ministers adopt decisions at the Sixth Ministerial Conference 
that prejudged Members' positions on either the t opics agreed under the Work  Programme or their 
interests in new topics, in the absence of a con sensus-based decision.  Cuba was aware that all 
Members were entitled to have their interests ta ken into account and discussed, and that decisions 
taken in this organization had to be in the interest s of all.  Cuba therefore wished to be actively 
involved in discussions on the relevance of incorpora ting the issue of extension of the moratorium on 
customs duties on electronic transmissions into the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce at a 
later stage, after Hong Kong.  No substantive wo rk had as yet been undertaken that would support 
such a decision, and it had not been possible to determine the economic implications of such a 
moratorium, in particular for those developing countries that depended the most on tariff revenues. 
182. Cuba wished to recall that in the Ministeria l Declaration on Electronic Commerce adopted in 
May 1998, the decision to continue the practice  of not imposing customs duties on electronic 
transmissions was taken "without prejudice to the outcome of the work programme or the rights and 
obligations of Members under the WTO Agreements."  The sovereign right of States to regulate was essential for them to be able to implement their development policies and develop their domestic industries that were based on the deployment of  information and communi cation-technology services 
and products.  Therefore, developing countries had to have the flexibility and the room to establish tax 
policies they deemed appropriate for electronic tran smissions in general.  Cuba was aware of the 
potential of electronic commerce in terms of oppor tunities and encouraging the participation of 
industries in the international market.  However,  for developing countries, the liberalization of 
electronic commerce did not automatically equate with  greater use of such technology or to greater 
benefits, because of the obstacles they faced – lim itations with respect to internet access and the 
necessary infrastructure – such as fax, telephon es, computer programmes and computers – low 
telecommunications capacity, concentration of techno logical resources in a few international firms, 
monopoly of payment systems, the problems of human resources training, the high cost of technologies for electronic payment and delivery of products.  Future work on electronic commerce should not appear to stand apart from the general objectives of the Doha Development Agenda, and 
the development dimension had to be a cross-cutti ng objective of the work on electronic commerce in 
the WTO.  Consequently, future discussions had to  focus on the implications any decision would have 
for developing-country Members, and take into account the obstacles preventing them from taking full advantage of the potential opportunities of elect ronic commerce.  Cuba reiterated the importance 
of eliminating, on an equal footing, all forms of  trade restrictions and technological restrictions 
imposed for various non-trade reasons, including rest rictions affecting the acquisition and free use of 
codification technology and equipment available on the market, which limited the development of 
global electronic commerce and the full incorporati on of all developing countries.  This was an 
indispensable condition for achieving a multinational agreement or decision on unimpeded electronic commerce within the WTO framework. 
183. The General Council took note
 of the statements and of the report in document 
WT/GC/W/555, which would be forwarded to the Mini sterial Conference.  The General Council also 
took note  that the statements by the Chairpersons unde r this item would be circulated as a General 
Council document and also forwarded to the Ministerial Conference.16 
                                                      
16 See previous footnote.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 47 
 
 
  (iv) Follow-up to the July 2004 General Counc il Decision on the Doha Work Programme – 
Report by the Director-General on the developmen t assistance aspects of cotton (WT/GC/97 
and Add.1) 
184. The Chairman  recalled that in Paragraph 1.b of its  1 August 2004 Decision on the Doha Work 
Programme (WT/L/579), the General Council, inter alia , had taken note of the bilateral, multilateral, 
and regional efforts to make progress on the devel opment assistance 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  international organizati ons, including the Bretton 
Woods Institutions, the Food and Agriculture Orga nization and the International Trade Centre, to 
direct effectively existing programmes and any additional resources towards development of the 
economies where cotton had vital importance.  A re port on this matter under the July 2004 General 
Council Decision had been submitted by the Director-G eneral in December 2004, and a further report 
had recently been submitted in document WT/GC/97 and Add.1.  
185. The Director-General  said that the cotton dossier in th e Doha Development Agenda had two 
main pillars.  First, the trade negotiations pilla r, where cotton was being "specifically" addressed 
within the context of the agriculture negotiati ons, and where Members had agreed to address it 
"ambitiously" and "expeditiously."  Second, the de velopment assistance pillar, where the July 2004 
Framework had instructed the Secretariat to work  with the development community on cotton;  had 
instructed the Director General to consult rele vant organizations, including the Bretton Woods 
institutions, the FAO and the ITC;  and had inst ructed Members to work on development issues 
multilaterally and bilaterally.  The July 2004 Framework had also asked  all Members to engage.  With 
respect to the first pillar, Members of course knew th at all trade-distorting policies in the cotton sector 
had to be addressed, whether they had to do with e xport subsidies, domestic support or market access.  
It was imperative that Members kept their level of  ambition high in these negotiations and maintained 
the specificity of cotton.  A successful outcome on the cotton dossier would be one of the indisputable 
steps towards fulfilling the development objectives of the Doha Round. 
186. With respect to the second pillar – which w as the pillar on which his report focused – he 
believed there was good news to report.  Resources at the international and bilateral levels had 
certainly been mobilized to address the probl ems which many low-income countries had been 
experiencing as a result of the fall of world cotton pr ices.  At present, the total value of development 
assistance commitments made to 14 beneficiary Afri can countries on cotton stood at US$976 million.  
Commitments on cotton development assistance focu sing on the "Cotton 4" – Benin, Burkina Faso, 
Chad and Mali – now stood at US$437 million, wh ile commitments for the individual Cotton 4 
countries were now in the double-digits.  He was also pleased that a number of international 
organizations had announced the launch of new programmes in favour  of cotton.  He had presented 
these programmes in his report and had urged the development community to assist all those countries 
in need.  He was not a specialist on developmen t aid, but knew enough to measure the distance 
between commitments and disbursements, the weight  of various conditionalities and the difficulty of 
translating development money into reform and poverty alleviation.  This development assistance 
would of course need to be used judiciously by its recipients, in order to ensure that it did contribute to genuine poverty allevi ation and to long-term cotton sector reform.  He encouraged the donor 
community to continue to coordina te its development assistance efforts, in order to avoid any harmful 
duplication or waste of resources. 
187. Similarly, he urged the donor community to st ep-up the overall level of assistance provided.  
He also encouraged greater transparency in repor ting.  Timely reporting of the assistance that was 
provided would enable both donors and recipients to plan better.  He wished to mention, in this 
context, the Joint WTO/OECD Trade Capacity Building Database, which now contained a Cotton 
Box.  For that Cotton Box to be effective, donors would need to supply information faster and more WT/GC/M/100 
Page 48  
 
  accurately.  Finally, he said he would be remiss not  to mention the importance of fully implementing 
the results of recent Panel and Appellate Body rulin gs in the cotton dispute.  These rulings were an 
important component of the overall contribution the WTO, as a rules-based system, could make to improving the situation of cotton- dependent developing and least-d eveloped countries.  He stood 
ready to keep spending some of the capital of tr ust Members had lent him on this issue, as he had  
already done on several occasions. 
188. All representatives who spoke thanked the Director-General for his report and for his efforts 
on this matter. 
189. The representative of Benin
, on behalf of the 33 African countries that were net exporting and 
producing countries of cotton, and in particular on behalf of the four proponents of the Cotton 
Initiative , thanked the Director-General for his initiative on this matter since taking up his post in the 
WTO.  The latter had taken up his shepherd's hook in order to ensure that all the assistance, technical 
and financial, was forthcoming in order to assist these cotton-producing countries.  All Members no doubt recognized that since the adoption of the Ju ly 2004 framework, all had received a mandate to 
deal with the cotton issue in an  ambitious, specific and rapid manner.  This was because, since 
Cancún in 2003, countries expected that this i ssue would be resolved, but in fact nothing had 
happened.  In the field, the situation had simply deteriorated further, and this was why now, a few 
days before the Hong Kong Ministerial, the cotton- producing countries no longer wished to be held 
hostage by the major powers, and asked that whatev er the results reached concerning agriculture, the 
cotton issue be dealt with definitively in Hong Kong  – independent of the results achieved elsewhere 
at that Ministerial.  The July 2004 package mandate d dealing with and settling this issue definitively.  
This had to do with the trade aspect.  Regarding the development aspect, as the Director-General of 
the WTO had just said, many pledges had been ma de, but up to about a month earlier, the reports 
from the receiving countries regarding assistance provided indicated that nothing had ha ppened in 
concrete terms.  No doubt, all of the aid that had been announced was still in the pipeline.  He was not 
speaking merely about the C-4 countries, but the 33 cotton producing and net exporting countries 
affected by the current situation.  All of these c ountries should be taken into consideration, because 
whatever multilateral or bilateral aid was being pr ovided, the losses in thes e countries were greater, 
resulting in a net deficit.  Therefore, whatever the assistance or aid that might be forthcoming, the solution lay on the trade side.  These countries did not want merely a social solution, they wanted the 
elimination of subsidies.  This was the only true solution to achieve a definitive settlement of this 
issue.  He reiterated that these countries expected political will to be demonstrated at Hong Kong and 
called on their partners to ensure this was the cas e.  He again thanked the Director-General for 
everything he had done, and congratulated all dele gations that had provided their support in this 
matter.  This issue had entered a critical phase in which cotton farmers who were dying of hunger 
called on all Members to give their full support to  ensure that the cott on issue was successfully 
resolved in Hong Kong. 
190. The representative of the United States
 said that under this agenda item, Members were 
dealing with the development assistance aspect of co tton, but as the trade aspect had been mentioned, 
he wished to say that the United States remained committed to addressing this issue in full conformity 
with the DDA and the understandings reached in  the July 2004 framework.  Regarding the 
development aspects, his delegation appreciated the Director-General's report and the efforts of the 
Secretariat to pull this information together.  The United States had made extensive efforts in this 
area, some of which were reflected in the report, while others were more recent.  The 
Director-General had noted that he felt there was some good news in terms of the assistance that had 
been committed.  The news was perhaps even be tter.  Since reporting for the Director-General's 
report, Burkina Faso had on 10 November 2005 jo ined 11 other sub-Saharan African countries – 
including fellow West African cotton producers, Beni n, Mali and Senegal – as eligible for assistance 
through the US Millennium Challenge Corporati on (MCC).  Benin's current MCC proposal stood at 
nearly US$300 million in grant aid.  Mali and Se negal were working with the MCC on similarly large  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 49 
 
 
  proposals for MCC assistance.  This was a wonderfu l opportunity for Burkina Faso to address the 
cotton issue if it so chose.  He noted that it was up to the recipients of these funds to choose their 
priorities for its use.  The United States also wi shed to announce the launch of the West African 
Cotton Improvement Programme aimed at the cotton sectors of Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali and Senegal.  This was another step, along with its num erous other initiatives outlined in the Secretariat's 
report, in the United States' work with these countri es.  The US Trade Representative and Secretary of 
Agriculture had had a very constructive visit to Burkina Faso to meet with their West African 
counterparts and to see conditions on the ground.  Th e United States looked forward to continuing to 
work constructively with its African colleagues in the coming weeks on the trade and development 
aspects of cotton. 
191. The representative of Paraguay
 supported the statement by Benin.  Paraguay was a cotton-
producing country.  Its rural communities depended on this export, although Paraguay also produced 
soya and beef.  As far as the agri culture sector was concerned, cotton was the main source of revenue 
for rural families, and was therefore an extremely important aspect of the welfare of the population.  
Therefore, everything should be done to ensure better treatment for this basic commodity, most 
important of which was to bring a better price for its producers. 
192. The representative of Tanzania  supported the statement by Benin.  It went without saying that 
the development assistance package was a response to a situation created by what had happened on 
the trade-related side of the cotton issue.  That assistance addressed the symptoms and not their cause.  
It was important to address the cause of the problem as a matter of first priority, without forgetting that it was not limited to the four countries who had sponsored the Cotton Initiative, but was a 
problem that afflicted all cotton-producing countries in  Africa and elsewhere.  This issue had to be 
dealt with at the most fundamental level, rather  than dealing with only partial aspects of it. 
193. The representative of Uganda
 supported the statement by Benin.  As Tanzania had said, 
cotton was also a product in which Uganda and other African countries had great interest.  Therefore, 
any  support or assistance should not be limited only to those countries that were the principal 
proponents of the Cotton Initiative.  Uganda agreed with Tanzania that this assistance had actually 
addressed the symptoms, but the whole question had to  be addressed – the question of elimination of 
subsidies that were the source of the problem.  Uganda hoped that this would be addressed 
expeditiously, specifically and ambitiously, and that it could thus be put on a  fast track. 
194. The representative of Zimbabwe  endorsed Benin's statement.  The WTO was about fair trade.  
Zimbabwe had no interest in short-term developmen tal aspects which, in any case, were riddled with 
conditionalities that the recipient countries could do  without.  Zimbabwe in sisted that those who 
distorted trade in cotton should stop, and that the WTO's Appellate Body decisions had to be abided 
by. 
195. The General Council took note  of the statements and of the Director-General's report in 
WT/GC/97 and Add.1, which would be forw arded to the Ministerial Conference. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 50  
 
  (v) Report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations Committee 
and 
 
(vi) Draft Ministerial Text – Statement by the Chairman 
196. The Chairman
 proposed that, in order to rationalize the discussion, the General Council take 
up these two items together so that delegations  could address these related issues in a single 
intervention.  She wished to begin by inviting the Director-General, as Chairman of the TNC, to make 
a brief report.  She would then introduce the draf t Ministerial text that had resulted from Members' 
work over the past week, following which she would invite delegations wishing to speak to do so. 
197. The Director-General, Chairman of the TNC , said that since the October meeting of the 
General Council, the TNC had held one formal  meeting on 30 November 2005.  He had also 
convened two informal meetings, on 3 and 10 November, to review th e state of play in the Doha 
Round and to discuss how Members' work could be taken forward across the board.  He had also convened two informal Heads of Delegation meeti ngs on 26 November and 28 November.  At the 
meeting on 26 November, the first draft Minister ial text (JOB(05)/298) had been introduced.  
Delegations had then had a first opp ortunity to have a comprehensive exchange of views on that draft 
at the meeting on 28 November.  For the sake of tr ansparency, he had also briefed delegations on the 
initial consultations on some parts of the first dr aft text which he had held with a number of 
delegations, as had been foreseen at the HODs meeting on 28 November. 
198. The TNC meeting on 30 November had been an  opportunity for delegations to hear the 
reports of each of the negotiating group Chairs on work  in their respective areas before a revised draft 
text was submitted to the General C ouncil for consideration.  It had also been the first opportunity for 
delegations to place their views and comments on the record following the informal HODs meetings.  
A large number of delegations had made comments on th e first draft text in a very substantive and, in 
general, positive manner, both at the TNC on 30 N ovember and at the informal HODs meeting on 
28 November.  A considerable numbe r of delegations had expressed appr eciation to the Chairs of the 
negotiating groups for the hard work they had done  in guiding the process and for producing reports.  
A wide range of concerns and issues had been e xpressed, including specific suggestions for revision 
of certain paragraphs in "draft text" form.  Comments had also been  made on the different approaches 
used in preparing the text.  A large number of de legations had expressed appr eciation for the "bottom-
up" approach and the principle of no surprises, which had been guiding this work from the very start.  
In line with these principles and the need for transp arency and inclusiveness, the aim had been for all 
delegations to feel ownership of the draft text. 
199. From the consultations the General Council Chai r and he had carried out, there was a sense of 
emerging convergence that the most difficult issu es – agriculture, NAMA and S&D – should continue 
to focus the attention of the me mbership, since there remained wide divergences on them.  Some 
delegations had also made the point that in the areas of agriculture and NAMA, key questions or 
issues should be identified for negotiations by Ministers in Hong Kong.  At both the HODs on 
28 November and also at the TN C on 30 November, he had expressed  his sincere hope that Members 
at the present General Council would be able to agr ee on the text that would go to Ministers.  He 
wished to stress this because, in his conversati ons with Ministers over the past week, and more 
recently at the ACP Minister's meeting in Brussels, he had received a clear and unambiguous message that they expected to receive a workable basis for their future deliberations at Hong Kong, which was 
11 days later.  He had informed delegations that he was convinced that delegations had a collective 
responsibility to do their utmost to ensure that Mini sters could arrive in Hong Kong with a clear idea 
of where they needed to focus th eir work.  He stressed that it was important to keep in mind that, 
although Members might have recalibrated the speci fic level of ambition for the meeting in Hong 
Kong, it nonetheless had to provide the launching pad for finishing the Round in 2006.  He had also  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 51 
 
 
  informed delegations that the overall text mirrored, and would continue to mirror, the reality of the 
situation prevailing, once again in line  with the "no-surprises" principle. 
200. As delegations were aware, in the past few da ys the consultative process had been intensified, 
with the aim of collectively improving the situati on and the quality of the work to be presented to 
Ministers in Hong Kong.  He wished to thank all de legations, and particularly  the smaller delegations, 
for their commitment, hard work and cooperation in this process.  As a result of this consultative 
processes, a revised version of the text had been ci rculated  the previous day in JOB(05)/298/Rev.1.  
This draft text incorporated amendments made in  light of the views expressed by Members in the 
consultations and in the recent HODs and TNC meeti ngs.  Again, this was a no-surprise draft and one 
that had fully taken into account the bottom-up appro ach that had been strictly followed – it had tried 
to capture in a better way the current situation in the negotiations, without trying in any way to push 
the envelope.  In fact, however, there was one sma ll surprise in the text, which was that the brackets 
relating to the completion of the accession negotia tions by Tonga could now  be dropped, and the 
number of outstanding accession processes could be redu ced to 29.  The WTO family continued to 
grow, with two new Members in less than a month.  Tonga would be the fourth Pacific Island State to 
join the WTO, and he hoped that soon, more countri es could be welcomed into the world trade family. 
201. Regarding the revised draft text, he wished first to outline what had not been done in 
producing it.  The text had not taken on board the to tality of the suggestions for amendments made in 
meetings over the past few days.  This was because,  in keeping with the principles on which Members 
had been operating, one could not include something th at reflected one side of a controversial issue, 
or seek to force a top-down convergence where none existed.  Many of the issues on which 
suggestions for amendments had been proposed we re ones which had been extensively discussed in 
the negotiating groups and the WTO bodies, but which so far remain unresolved.  It was not through a 
text like this that Members would resolve these issu es, but by continuing to  address them in a bottom-
up manner.  The aim had been to carry issues needi ng political attention to the political level in as 
user-friendly a form as possible.  Thus, the text w as not an encyclopaedia of positions.  On the other 
hand, it did not pretend, either, to be definitive or agreed.  It did not prejudice any Member's position, 
and of course left Ministers in Hong Kong full fr eedom to raise or add any issues they wished. 
202. Turning to the changes that had been made to th e initial draft text, he said that first, a number 
of specific drafting suggestions had been taken on  board where these appeared non-controversial and 
went in the direction of a more useful text for Mi nisters, e.g. adding a reference to JITAP in the 
section on Technical Cooperation.  A few elements had been included which not only enjoyed wide 
support from Members, but also reflected the reality of  their work.  This was the case, for example, of 
the new paragraph 38 on the TRIPS Council's work  under paragraph 19 of the Doha Ministerial 
Declaration.  However, the main focus of work to  improve the draft had been on agriculture, including 
cotton, and on NAMA and development issues, beca use this was where Members' main focus had 
been.  Intensive consultations had been held involvi ng a broad range of the membership, with the aim 
of producing texts to put before the Council that would better equip Ministers to make progress in 
Hong Kong on these key areas.  Concerning specific development-related issu es, they had consulted 
on ways to make Annex F on S&D proposals for LDCs more manageable – not to decide right now on 
the issues it contained, but to help Ministers decide in Hong Kong.  It had not been possible to find more straightforward text in all points of Annex F,  but what was there now was certainly easier for 
Ministers to come to grips with.  In agricultu re and NAMA, their efforts had focused on seeking 
convergence on wording that would add to the draf t text a fair and concise account of the real 
progress made since July 2004.  This was the text in  paragraphs 4 to 9 and 12 to 18.  The Cotton text 
in paragraphs 10 and 11 reflected divergences as we ll as progress, but this was the reality, and he 
hoped it would also transmits a sense of urgency.  In these areas also, they had consulted on the 
formulation of a number of basic questions that mi ght be useful to Ministers in Hong Kong.  These 
were not included in the text, since they were simply  a device to assist debate rather than an element WT/GC/M/100 
Page 52  
 
  for debate in their own right.  The list of issues to  be addressed in light of the Doha mandate and the 
July 2004 Framework was as follows: 
 Agriculture
 
1. What are the elements of the formul ae for the reduction commitments in trade-
distorting domestic support?  And what are the disciplines that should complement 
the reduction commitments? 
2. What are the elements of the formula for tariff reduction commitments and other 
elements to support it?  And what are the flexibilities that should accompany the tariff 
reduction commitments? 
3. What agreement is needed regarding paralle lism in order to determine an end-date for 
elimination of all forms of export subsidies?  
4. What are the elements necessary to deal  with cotton ambitiously, expeditiously and 
specifically in all three pillars? 
5. What are the elements of S& D necessary in all three pillars? 
 
 NAMA  
  1. Can Ministers agree on all the elements  needed to finalize the formula and other 
elements that support it? 
2. Can Ministers resolve remain ing differences about flexibilities? 
3. On unbound tariffs, can Ministers agree that a mark up is the way forward? 
 
 These questions were available in written form outside the meeting room.  Their intention was to convey them to the Chairman of the Ministeria l Conference for use as approp riate to assist his work 
on these important issues.  The questions would be co nveyed to him as part of a letter they intended to 
send early the following week – with a copy to all Members – along with the draft Ministerial text.  
This letter would also include the key points from the cover page to the revised draft text, which 
responded to the concerns raised by a number of de legations about the status of the annexes.  The 
letter would clearly state that the texts in all annexes – with the exception of the Annex on trade facilitation, that had been agreed by that Nego tiating Group – were presented on the responsibility of 
the respective Chairs.  They would also make it clear that significant differences persisted among 
Members in various areas, differences that this dr aft text did not gloss over, but rather sought to 
reflect honestly.  He assured delegations that the situation Members had reached in Geneva would be 
represented objectively and fairly.  For Minister s as well, the motto was "no surprises".  The 
membership could feel some satisfaction at th e work done collectively.  The result was not a 
particularly symmetrical or elegant construction,  but he believed it was robust enough to serve 
Ministers as a platform from which to launch a successful concluding year for the DDA.  More 
importantly, he hoped it would show the family spirit in which Members had tried to work in the past 
weeks.  Delegations might not be proud of the pr ogress made in the negotiations, but they could be 
proud that the draft text was a fair and honest mirror of the situation.  203. Regarding his work on implementation, he recalle d that in line with the mandate given to the 
Director-General in the July 2004 Decision, wh ich had been renewed by the General Council in 
July 2005, he had been undertaking consultations on the paragraph 12(b) implementation issues in his 
capacity as Director-General, including on issues related to the extension of the protection of geographical indications (GIs) provided for in Artic le 23 of the TRIPS Agreement to products other 
than wines and spirits.  In accord ance with that Decision, the pr ocess he had undertaken had been  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 53 
 
 
  without prejudice to the positions of Members on any of the outstanding implementation issues.  At 
the 30 November TNC meeting, he had reported in detail on my consultative processes.  He would not 
repeat that report in full at the present meeting, but wished to highlight some elements.  He had been 
assisted by a number of the Chairpersons of rele vant WTO bodies acting as his Friends and by two of 
his Deputies – Mrs. Rugwabiza had taken up the TR IMs issues and Mr. Yerxa had been consulting on 
the issues of GIs and the relationship between  the TRIPS Agreement and  the Convention on 
Biological Diversity.  Overall, he regretted that the situation had clearly not evolved significantly 
since his predecessor had reported to the General Council  in July 2005.  Therefore, with the aim of 
ensuring that Members could fulfil the commitment th ey undertook at Doha, paragraph 33 of the draft 
Ministerial text proposed continuing this process a nd reiterated the instructions  given in July 2004 to 
all relevant bodies to find appropria te solutions as a priority.  However, as he had already stressed at 
the TNC meeting, both flexibility and creativity would be needed in Members' approaches in order to 
respect their mandate. 
204. He wished to say one last word to all delega tions who were now fina lizing preparations for 
the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference.  In just a few days, Ministers would be gathering in the Hong 
Kong Convention Centre and would be called to decide on a variety of far-reaching issues contained 
in almost 40 pages of draft Declaration.  It was delegations' collective responsibility to provide 
Ministers with an objective, balanced, lucid an d tranquil evaluation of the current situation of 
negotiations that would allow them to take well-inform ed decisions.  He therefore appealed to all to 
make the best of this unique opportunity to help achieve a strengthene d, improved and fairer 
multilateral trading system. 
205. The Chairman  thanked the Director-General for his statement and, more importantly, for his 
tireless efforts in ensuring that th e draft revised text before Members reflected as much as possible the 
situation on the ground. 
206. All representatives who spoke thanked the Chai rman and the Director-General for their 
efforts in preparing the revised draft text.  They also congratulated Tonga on the completion of its 
accession negotiations. 
207. The representative of Brazil , on behalf of the G-20 , said these countries wished to restate the 
importance of the bottom-up approach to ensure inclusiveness and transpar ency, including at the 
Hong Kong Ministerial Conference.  The lack of political will by some key Members, and not the bottom-up approach, had prevented further progre ss.  The G-20 welcomed the factual summary 
prepared by the Chairman of the Special Session on Trade in Agriculture.  As the latter had profound 
knowledge of the issues at stake, he should be deeply involved in the Hong Kong process.  The G-20 
also welcomed the new language on agriculture in the revised draft text.  Although it constituted an 
improvement on the previous version, and despite in tensive discussions, substantive elements in this 
text were minimal, reflecting the lack of convergence.   The G-20 considered that the questions to be 
sent to Ministers, which drew upon the G-20's inputs, took into account the main issues to be tackled 
in Hong Kong, in particular special and differen tial treatment for developing countries.  It was 
important to note that cotton, a fundamental issue in the negotiations, was now included in 
agriculture, in addition to the development contex t.  Irrespective of the efforts made, negotiations 
would not advance without substantial movement on agriculture by the EC and the United States.  
Process alone would not be able to conceal the core divergences that s till remained to be bridged.  In 
order to achieve progress in agriculture, th e G-20 had presented balanced and middle-ground 
proposals in all three pillars.  These encompassed o ffensive and defensive interests, and therefore 
provided an appropriate basis for convergences.  Th e G-20 proposals remained on the table, and the 
G-20 remained committed to them.  They were fi rmly of the view that both domestic support and 
market access had to be resolved in tandem.  While  it was of great importance to achieve real cuts in 
domestic support and to strengthen disciplines, in  particular in the Blue Box, the Group was 
concerned that market access continued to be the least advanced pillar, and emphasized that its WT/GC/M/100 
Page 54  
 
  proposal had been broadly recognized as a genuine middle ground.  As such, it should remain the 
basis for the negotiations.  That proposal fully conf ormed to the mandate of substantial improvements 
in market access and special and differential treatme nt for developing countries.  Needless to say, a 
balance consistent with the mandate also had to  be found across all three pillars.  On export 
competition – in which there was an agreement to eliminate of all forms of export subsidies – 
determining an end date and dealing with parallelism would provide impetus for progress. 
208. At the present juncture, he recalled the G-20 pr oposals submitted so far in the three pillars, 
which had in mind the need for proportionality of commitments.  At the heart of all these proposals was the imperative of securing substantial reductions  in trade-distorting domestic support, elimination 
of all forms of export subsidies, substantial impr ovements in market access, and at the same time 
securing for developing countries the necessary policy space in accordance with the mandate.  These 
objectives were captured in the following G-20 propo sals:  market access;  sensitive products;  
tropical products;  domestic support;  product-sp ecific caps in AMS;  blue box;  green box;  
monitoring and surveillance;  export competition;  exporting STEs in deve loping countries;  export 
prohibitions and restrictions;  and flexibilities for developing RAMS.  The G-20 would make further 
contributions as required by the negotiations.  The G- 20 reaffirmed its commitment to intensify work 
with the G-33 and other interested groups of deve loping countries, in order to render effective and 
operational the instruments of Special Products and Special Safeguard Mechanism, as well as 
developing modalities for cotton.  In the light of the present state of affairs, it was important that Hong Kong constituted a successful negotiating Confer ence, in order to achieve maximum progress 
with a pro-development focus on substantive matte rs.  A clear work program for post-Hong Kong 
should be achieved with a view to agreeing on modalities, at the latest, by early April 2006, 
preserving the bottom-up approach, with no uncalled-for su rprises in the course of that process.  The 
G-20 remained fully committed to the negotiations. 
209. Speaking on behalf of Brazil
, he said that his delegation had taken note of the statement by 
the Minister of Benin on behalf of the co-spons ors of the sectoral initiative on cotton.  Brazil 
supported a specific outcome that would ensure that  the concerns of the co-sponsors of the cotton 
initiative were harvested in Hong Kong.  As stress ed by the Brazilian Minister in Arusha, Brazil 
supported the efforts in favour of the more positive integration of LDCs in the multilateral trading 
system, and was prepared to make a contribution in this context, especially in terms of preferential 
access to the Brazilian market.  Regarding the re vised draft text, he had several amendments to 
propose, but in view of the language in the cover not e to that text, would refrain from presenting them 
at the present meeting.  Nevertheless, his delegati on believed that adoption of the revised draft text– 
an outcome Brazil favoured – would be facilitated if th e paragraphs in the text that referred to the 
annexes, especially paragraph 21 on services, reflected more clearly the status of the annexes as documents that were under the responsibility of the Ch airs of the respective bodies.  With this change, 
he believed that all coul d approve the draft text.  This would provide Ministers in Hong Kong with a 
sounder basis to work on, and thereby enable them to  produce a better platform for Members' work in 
2006.  It would also show that in spite of Members'  differences, they were able to work together.  
Finally, he wished to thank Secretary Tsang and the Director-General for the arrangements for the 
Sixth Ministerial Conference. 
210. The representative of Japan
 said his delegation had a number of points to make on the draft 
text but would refrain from doing so for three reasons .  First, the nature of the annexes was clearly 
stated in the cover note.  Second, although insu fficient, as a result of being based on the bottom-up 
approach, the text would serve as a basis for Minist erial negotiations in Hong Kong.  Third, at the 
present juncture, it would be the most efficient use of Members' time to concentrate on making a last-minute effort so that they would not have to go to Hong Kong empty-handed.  This was Members' collective responsibility.  Japan urged Members not to  make points on the draft, as even one point per 
delegation would mean 148 points.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 55 
 
 
  211. The representative of Paraguay , on behalf of the Informal Group of Developing Countries ,  
said the Group had met to discuss expectations regarding the outcome of the DDA and to analyse progress in the negotiations on issues of interest to them.  Although the Informal Group represented rather diverse interests, and it would be difficult to say that developing countries had a common position on specific issues, the Group had found that its members shared many anxieties and, in 
general terms, some dissatisfaction at the lack of progress in areas regarded as being of key interest.  
He wished to share with other Members the Group's expectations and concerns in the context of the 
negotiating process in which Members were engaged.   When the round had been launched in Doha, it 
had been given the grandiose name of the "Doha Development Agenda", and Ministers in the Doha 
Declaration had stated in paragraph 2 that "Interna tional trade can play a major role in the promotion 
of economic development and the a lleviation of poverty.  We recogni ze the need for all our peoples to 
benefit from the increased opportunities and welfar e gains that the multilateral trading system 
generates.  The majority of WTO Members are developing countries.  We seek to place their needs and interests at the heart of the Work Programme adopted in this Declaration." 
212. There should be no doubt that it was with this  promise in mind that developing countries had 
decided to embark on a new round of negotiations, despite the bitter aftertaste still left by the 
imbalances created in the Uruguay Round.  Since the beginning of the so-called Doha Development 
Agenda, developing countries had seen that discussi on on development issues had been insufficient, 
had lacked depth and had been short on initiativ es.  Consequently, developing countries were 
beginning to doubt whether all Members were gi ving the text of paragraph 2 the importance it 
deserved.  It had been stressed that the developm ent dimension of the DDA would be reflected in the 
work and in the achievements of each of the nego tiating groups.  However, the Informal Group did 
not see how the work undertaken so far could lead to concrete and tangible results on the development 
front.  In fact, what it saw in each of the proposal s tabled by the developed countries was simply a 
wish to exchange advantages in market access that took little account of the basic principles of the 
GATT, such as the principle of non-reciprocity – a pr inciple that was, moreover, explicitly recognized 
in paragraph 50 of the Doha Declaration.  Notwith standing this explicit recognition, it was difficult 
for the Group to understand how it had been reflected in the work of each of the negotiating groups 
and, in particular, in the areas of agriculture and NAMA. 
213. The importance of agriculture for developing coun tries was no secret to anyone.  Despite its 
enormous importance, once again the Informal Group could not but observe that negotiations in this 
area were at a standstill owing to the resistance of  some Members to introduce reforms to their 
agricultural policies that would represent significan t improvement in market access for developing 
countries.  This lack of progress and, in particular, the lack of interesting offers that would improve the conditions of market access for developing count ries showed the current lack of interest in 
fulfilling the development objectives set out in the Doha Declaration.  In the area of agriculture, it was 
also important for developing countries to see an e xpeditious, effective and ambitious solution on the 
Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton.  The Group h oped therefore that this issue would be resolved 
before the conclusion of the work on the DDA. 
214. Regarding NAMA, there was no doubt that  developed countries had considerable 
comparative and competitive advantages, so that their supply of goods for export was much greater 
than that of developing countries.  However, desp ite that advantageous position, the Group continued 
to observe an imbalance between what was as ked of developing countri es and what developed 
countries offered to alleviate developing country problems.  Thus, the Group had seen no progress by 
developed countries in the elimination of certain pr actices, such as the use of tariff peaks and tariff 
escalation, that had a negative impact on developing countries' possibility of diversifying their exports 
and producing goods with greater added value.  At  the same time, he wished to make clear that 
developing countries had entered these negotiations pr epared to make an effective contribution that 
would expand access to their markets, provided that  such concessions were in keeping with their 
levels of development. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 56  
 
  215. Another issue of extreme importance for deve loping countries was the liberalization of 
temporary movement of natural persons in the field of services.  Once again, this was an issue whose 
discussion had been constantly avoided or postponed by developed countries, and in which there had 
been no significant progress.  This was particularly regrettable in view of the potential this area of 
negotiations had to improve directly the welfare of people in developing countries, at the same time as 
it promoted the growth of the economies of deve loped countries.  Although Members had made little 
progress on most issues that developing countries regarded as key in these negotiations, not 
everything was bad.  The Informal Group was enco uraged by the initiative la unched recently on Aid 
for Trade.  A high level of ambition in the creation of this programme would be an important factor 
that would not only facilitate the application of the commitments made as a result of the Round, but 
would also help developing countries to obtain maximum benefit from the advantages obtained as a 
result of the negotiations.  However, that being said,  it had to be made clear that the Aid for Trade 
programme could in no way replace the commitments  developed-country Members had to make to 
improve market access for developing countries.  As the Director-General had said at a meeting of a group of Ministers in November, it had become  obvious that it was necessary to "recalibrate" 
expectations regarding the progress that might be  achieved in the negotia tions during the Sixth 
Ministerial Conference.  The Informal Group agreed with that statement.  However, it also agreed 
with the statement by the Directo r-General that this in no way represented a reduction in the level of 
ambition in the Doha Development Agenda.  It was of the greatest importance to maintain these levels 
of ambition if Members wished to achieve the objec tives set out in the Doha Declaration on the full 
integration of developing countries into the multilateral trading system. 
216. The representative of Canada
 thanked the Director General and the Chairs of all the 
negotiating groups for their hard work over the past hours, days, weeks and months.  Herding 
148 Members was a nearly impossible job, but they had managed to do it with just the right mix of determination and diplomacy.  All Members had had the opportunity to review the revised draft text 
circulated late the previous day.  As promised, there had been no surprises.  Members now had to ask 
themselves two questions.  First, was the revised text seaworthy enough to sail them from Geneva to 
Hong Kong?  In Canada's view, the answer was yes,  barely.  If the boat was any smaller or weaker, 
Members would almost certainly drown somewhere in  the South China Sea.  Second, was the text 
strong enough to carry Members on to the next port  after Hong Kong?  Clearly, the answer was no.  
Ministers would need to perform some major altera tions at Hong Kong Harbour.  The agriculture and 
NAMA sails remained small, tattered and torn.  Deve lopment, the central mast of the boat, needed 
reinforcement.  Despite the heroic efforts of all three Chairs, Members had left a lot of work for 
Ministers at Hong Kong.  Every Minister would need to come to the Ministerial ready to negotiate and compromise.  Not one of them would get everyt hing they wanted.  In contrast, services and rules 
were, on the whole, well balanced and in much better condition.  Thanks were due the Chairs of those 
respective bodies for their courage and creativity in  putting these texts together.  Of course, every 
Member had problems with those texts, but all shou ld acknowledge that attempts to re-stitch them at 
Hong Kong would only weaken the fabric and produce da ngerously large tears.  Trade facilitation was 
in even better shape.  As the Director-General said, the Chair of the Negotiating Group on Trade 
Facilitation won the prize for most productive Chair of 2005.  In other parts of the text, there were 
small holes here and there that needed to be plugged.   As to whether Ministers could get all that work 
done in one week, in Canada's view it was certain ly possible, as long as Members prioritized and 
focused on fixing only those things that really we re broken.  If the necessary alterations were not 
made at this Conference, all knew what the ramifications would be.  Members had already "recalibrated" their expectations for Hong Kong.  If they failed to meet even their minimal 
expectations for this Conference, and did not set  a clear course for full modalities in early 2006 and 
conclusion of the Round by the end of 2006, there w ould not be another boat big enough for years to 
come.  Canada remained hopeful that Members coul d still find what they were looking for in Hong 
Kong.    WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 57 
 
 
  217. The representative of India  said his delegation appreciated the commitment the Director-
General and the Secretariat had demonstrated to Members' common objectives at the forthcoming Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong.  If the revised draft text proposed for transmission to Ministers 
fell well short of India's hopes, it was not for lack of effort on their part.  India recognized the difficult 
predicament at the current stage in the negotiations.  The draft Ministerial text reflected realistically 
the limited convergence achieved by the membership so far.  Its lack of balance and unevenness had 
also been commented upon.  For all these shortcomi ngs, the draft text closely approximated the best 
Members had been able to achieve at the present stag e.  It provided a reasonable basis for Ministers to 
negotiate at Hong Kong towards cr edible and substantial results.  India remained optimistic about 
achieving rapid progress in early 2006 and, of course, about timely and successful completion of the 
Round by the end of 2006.  Ministers would have a hard er task in the areas of the text that were less 
developed in content and convergence th an others.  This was inevitable. 
218. The Hong Kong Ministerial would have to re ach for the maximum possible convergence in 
all areas of negotiations.  Any a priori prioritization of the agenda by delegations in Geneva might 
limit Ministers' flexibility and freedom, which was so  necessary to achieve overall progress.  All areas 
of negotiations, including agriculture, NAMA, services,  development, and rules remained on the table 
for Hong Kong.  Close attention to the concerns  of the developing countries in all areas of 
negotiations remained an essential condition for the success of the negotiations.  Ministers had to 
provide the necessary guidance to advance the negotia tions towards conclusion in 2006.  A political 
direction on the following issues would go a long way in enhancing the confidence of developing countries like India in the post-Hong Kong phase:  (i) in agriculture, effective S&D and flexibility for 
developing countries, based on proportionality, policy space to address livelihood and food security 
issues through Special Products, and an effective and operational Special Sa feguard Mechanism;  
(ii) in NAMA, an unambiguous acceptance by all of the stand-alone flexibilities in paragraph 8, and 
agreement on the numbers in brackets;  in the struct ure of the formula, full realization of the mandate 
of less-than-full reciprocity in reduction commitment s;  (iii) in services, a clear direction for the 
negotiations to move forward, while preserving the flexibility mandated under the GATS for 
developing countries;  the current draft text re presented a delicate inter-modal balance which would 
facilitate Ministers' task at Hong Kong;  (iv) in the non-market access areas, the Hong Kong Ministerial had to achieve concrete results fo r the least-developed Members, including duty- and 
quota-free access in developed-country markets, re invigoration of negotiations on the remaining S&D 
proposals, concrete gains on the mandate on cotton,  finding a way forward to address the concerns 
over preference erosion, and a clear go-ahead to launch negotiations on the relationship between the 
Convention on Biodiversity and the TRIPS Agreement.   India was sure that constructive commitment 
on the part of all would help achieve substantial progress at Hong Kong, in a manner that addressed 
the needs and concerns of different constituencies in the membership.  It bore repetition that an 
overwhelming majority of the Memb ers were developing countries.  India reaffirmed its support for 
the statement by Brazil on behalf of the G-20. It also welcomed the completion of Tonga's WTO 
accession negotiations. 
219. The representative of the European Communities
 said the revised draft text reflected 
accurately and in a fair way the work done.  He thanked the Director-General, the Chairman, the 
Secretariat and the Chairs of the negotiating gro ups for their hard work.  Members could have done 
better, but they also could have done worse.  The re vised draft text did not unravel the initial text, but 
consolidated some of the progress and put a number of political questions, notably on development-
related issues, in a more manageable way.  As such it constituted a working basis for Ministers in 
Hong Kong.  Of course, the revised text had the sam e flaws as the previous text.  It was uneven in 
quality, specificity and ambition.  However, it did not prejudge Members' positions.  It was now up to 
Ministers to bring things forward in Hong Kong.  In itself, that went without saying.  Ministers were 
Members' ultimate trade negotiators.  That was what they were paid for.  Moreover, all Ministers had 
pledged time and again that they wished to make  a success of Hong Kong and that they remained 
committed to an ambitious outcome of the Round not  later than 2006.  However, it was frankly still a WT/GC/M/100 
Page 58  
 
  tall order.  The European Communities would do what it took to live up to that challenge before Hong 
Kong and at the Conference itself.  His delegation had taken note of the questions the Director-General had read out on agriculture and NAMA.   These should open the way for substantive 
discussions on all outstanding questions in agriculture , in all three pillars and related issues.  Progress 
made in agriculture should be ma tched by similar progress in NAMA. 
220. The Community certainly accepted that agricultu re and NAMA needed particular attention by 
Ministers.  This was even more the case for deve lopment-related issues, including cotton, for which 
Members had taken on commitments in the July 2004  framework.  The same was true for services and 
rules.  Progress should be made across the board – that was the very concept of the single undertaking.  As he had stated several days earlier,  a single-issue Ministerial Conference was destined 
to fail.  He fully agreed with India that across-the-board progress in Hong Kong was the only way to 
ensure a successful outcome.  Like Brazil, his delegation would refrain from proposing amendments 
to the revised draft text.  The disclaimers in that text's covering letter constituted sufficient 
clarification for the status of that document, whic h was to provide a working basis for Ministers in 
Hong Kong, while the annexes – with the excepti on of the one on trade facilitation – had been 
presented under responsibility of the respective chairs.  This had been clearly stipulated in the text on 
agriculture and NAMA, where reference was made to  the respective reports to the TNC which were 
contained for reference purposes in Annexes A and B.  The Community would not see a problem if 
paragraph 21 contained the same precision th at Annex C as well was established under the 
responsibility of the Chair, as Brazil had proposed.  Much was at stake.  This was not just another 
Ministerial Conference – it was a crucial stepping  stone for sustainable trade liberalization and 
development, and was paramount for the world trading system as a whole. 
221. The representative of Argentina
 said that Argentina's views on the revised draft text had been 
broadly reflected in the statement by Brazil on behalf of the G-20, and also by the statement by Paraguay on behalf of the Informal Group of Devel oping Countries.  His delegation wished to make a 
few brief comments and to ask the Secretariat to take note of one particular point that it wished to be 
included specifically in the records of the meeting.   First, in the light of the statement by the 
Director-General, Argentina had no problem with the draft text before Members.  His delegation 
could accept some minor changes, if some delegations  wanted these.  However, Argentina did have a 
reservation in substance with respect to the Spanish version of the text in Annex C, paragraph 1, on 
services.  In Argentina's view, the Spanish version of that text was not in line with the English 
version.  His delegation had explained this to the Secretariat, and wished to make clear that, for 
Argentina, the only valid version was the English version of Annex C on services.  As regards the 
organizational arrangements for the Hong Kong Minister ial, his delegation welc omed the statements  
by the Chairman and by Secretary Tsang.  Argen tina noted the importance attached to the bottom-up 
approach as the basis for continued work.  Some  of the decisions in Hong Kong would be highly 
political in nature, and these had to be tackled in an  organized way, particularly regarding cotton, as 
had been highlighted by various delegations.  Th e level of ambition on agriculture would determine 
the level of ambition for the entire Round.  In Hong Kong, Members had to get sufficiently clear guidance on the future steps to be taken, in order to conclude the negotiations by the end of 2006. 
222. The representative of Egypt
, on behalf of the African Group , said that, in order to avoid 
repeating the detailed concerns previously expressed, his delegation wished to have its statement on 
behalf of the African Group at the TNC meeting of 30 November considered as an integral part of its 
statement under the present item.17  The Group welcomed the current improved version of the draft 
Ministerial text.  However, there was still significan t room for further improvement.  In this context, 
the African Group remained concerne d with the structure of the revised draft text, particularly in 
                                                      
17 The statement by Egypt on beha lf of the African Group at the TNC meeting on 30 November, which 
is reflected in the records of that m eeting in document TN/C/M/22 (para. 107), is incorporated by reference into 
the present records.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 59 
 
 
  relation to the attachment of the Annexes to it.  The reports in these Annex es, with their non-agreed 
texts, should be treated as background documents.  Ministers could then decide whether or not they wished to fully or partiall y annex any of these reports to the final Declaration. 
223. Furthermore, the African Group wished to express its continuing disappointment with many 
areas of the revised draft.  The language used to reflect the main demands and concerns of 
developing-country Members, particularly in the S&D-related provisions, was insufficient.  For 
example, and to highlight only a few concerns, in the agriculture and NAMA sections, the newly 
introduced language on S&D remained vague and was not treated at the same level of specificity.  
This was a clear manifestation of the African Gr oup's major concern that there was a tendency to 
leave S&D behind as Members tried to move forward.   In addition, the African Group re-emphasized 
its strong position, which was shared by the major ity of developing countries, on the fact that the 
provisions on trade in services, namely paragraph 21 , did not reflect any degree of consensus.  The 
Group wondered why the revised draft text was silent on that and did not clearly reflect the non-consensual nature of those provisions, particular ly Annex C.  The African Group could not overstate 
the importance of this issue for it.  Based on preced ents, and given the current status of the text, it 
might be beneficial to continue to utilize the common practice of submitting the draft Ministerial text 
to Ministers on the responsibility of the General C ouncil and TNC Chairs.  In view of the current 
status of the text, the African Group was confiden t that the text presented a platform for further 
deliberation in Hong Kong.  Nonetheless, to mainta in the credibility of this developmental round, the 
Group had to reiterate its expectation that negotia tions at Hong Kong would be inclusive of the 
interests of the whole membership and would address the issues in a fair and balanced manner, while 
pursuing the fundamental requirements of achieving th e developmental aspirations of the developing 
and least-developed Members.  The Group hoped that at Hong Kong, the necessary political will would be displayed, so as to guarantee a successful outcome of the Ministerial Conference. 
224. The representative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
 said his delegation shared and 
supported the observation that the revised draft Mi nisterial text "does not purport to represent 
agreement overall, and it is without prejudice to any delegation's position on any issue".  Accordingly, 
as the introductory note to the revised text clearly stated, the draft text reflected a low level of 
convergence.  Consequently, there did not seem to be  any legal basis for the annexes, which had not 
been agreed by consensus.  Furthermore, the introducto ry note correctly stated that the texts of all the 
annexes attached to the revised text, with the ex ception of Annex E on trade facilitation, had not been 
agreed and were presented "on the responsibility of the respective chairs".  It was in the light of this 
introductory note that his delegation was suggesting th e following improvements to the draft text so as 
to provide a clearer and more feasible text for consideration by Ministers. 
225. As the introductory note to the revised text emph asized, the texts of the annexes had not been 
agreed and were presented on the responsibility of  the respective chairs.  Consequently, it was 
misleading and illogical to give the impression, in the main part of the text, that Ministers had agreed 
on the annexes.  Furthermore, despite the common st atus of the annexes which, except for Annex E, 
were not agreed texts and were "without prejudice to any delegation's position on any issue", the draft 
text treated the annexes unequally.  With regard to the section on agriculture, paragraph 4 of the draft 
text simply "take[s] note of the report by the Chairman of the Special Session on his own 
responsibility", from which Venezuela concluded that  it lacked legal relevance and did not establish 
commitment levels.  Unfortunately, in other para graphs relating to the negotiations on NAMA, the 
wording that was used wrongly transformed these a nnexes to the individual reports of the Chairmen 
into an agreed collective basis fo r the negotiations.  With regard to NAMA, paragraph 13 of the draft 
text took a  specific observation made in the Chairman's report, which was a non-negotiated text, and 
sought to make it operational.  Not only was this inconsistent, but it serious ly prejudiced the position 
of many Members who had expressed disagreement. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 60  
 
  226. With regard to services, many delegations, in cluding his own, had repeatedly objected to 
Annex C.  They had said that paragraph 1 of A nnex C on objectives relating to the four Modes of 
supply was too mandatory and detailed.  They had also pointed out that paragraph 7 of Annex C on 
plurilateral negotiations obliged Members to partic ipate in such negotiations.  These proposals, as 
many delegations had pointed out, were inconsistent with the GATS and the negotiating principles, as 
well as infringing the flexibilities contained therein.   Consequently, many delegations had supported 
proposals to redraft these paragraphs.  However, th is had not taken place, and therefore Annex C was 
not an agreed basis for negotiations and should thus not be included as such.  Th is had to be explained 
to Ministers as clearly as possible.  Accordingly,  the following improvements should be made to the 
draft text.  Paragraph 21 of the draft Ministerial Declaration should read:  "We are determined to 
continue the negotiations in accordance with the a bove principles.  We take note of the objectives, 
approaches and timelines proposed by the Chairman in the Dedicated Session of the Council for Trade 
in Services, under his own responsibility, in Annex C to this document.  In this regard, particular 
attention will be given to sectors a nd modes of supply of export interest  to developing countries."  An 
alternative would be to place square brackets around the references to Annex C.  In addition, with 
regard to NAMA, similar wording should be used, or the references to A nnex B should be placed in 
square brackets.  Paragraph 13 of th e draft text should be deleted, si nce it did not reflect the range of 
the discussions and the various proposals discussed thus far by the negotiating group.  On the 
assumption that there was agreement to rework this paragraph, it should be reworded in the following 
way:  "On the formula we instruct the negotia ting group to pursue discussions with a view to 
finalizing its structure and details from among the vari ous existing alternatives, as well as the issues of 
unbound tariffs and flexibilities, as early as possible,  without excluding other alternative proposals." 
227. Apart from these proposals on the structure of the document, his delegation wished to 
comment on its substance.  Rather than setting time- limits for the negotiation of such complex issues 
as the risk to which the economies of developing co untries would be exposed as a result of a clearly 
unbalanced process, Members should establish prior ities on a real, genuine and transparent agenda 
regarding the development needs of the developing countries and the importance for such needs to be 
reflected in the agreements to be reached.  Venezu ela reaffirmed the importance of the principles on 
S&D treatment and less than full reciprocity as an integral and central part  of the negotiations, and 
their independence vis-à-vis  the other issues involved in the nego tiations.  Similarly, his delegation 
wished to reiterate that the flexibilities contained in  paragraph 8 were not sufficient to exempt sectors 
that were sensitive and/or strategi c for the developing countries.  It  was worth noting that in Annex D 
of the draft Ministerial text of 26 November 2005, two texts of paragraph 4 were proposed, suggesting 
that they were alternatives.  However, subsequently, in the fi nal version of that document of 
1 December, both were included, with the result that  the scope and extent of the discipline of rules 
were increased in full knowledge of the difficulti es faced by the developing countries and LDCs in 
complying with them.  Venezuela supported the statement by Indonesia on behalf of the G-33, in 
particular with regard to the central importance of development in the current Round, since these 
negotiations should be directed towards helping to  strengthen an internati onal economic order based 
on equity, the sovereign equality of states, compleme ntarity, cooperation and the general interest of 
the Members, whatever their economic and social  systems, so as to correct the inequalities and 
remedy the injustices between the developed co untries and the developing and least-developed 
countries, and to ensure for present and future ge nerations peace, justice and economic and social 
development that would increase at a steady pace.  In this connection, it was appropriate to emphasize 
the advisability of incorporating into the text of the Ministerial declaration a paragraph that would 
give effect to the obligation of Members, and of the WTO itself as an international organization 
subject to the public international order, to resp ect their obligations under international human rights 
law and to apply effective mechanisms to ensure  there was no contradiction between the WTO trade 
agreements and such law. 
228. He wished to explain Venezuela's position on the main aspects of the proposed draft 
Ministerial declaration.  With regard to agricultu re, in a constructive spirit and in the interests of  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 61 
 
 
  ensuring the operationality of the text, bearing in  mind that it should respect the positions of all 
Members, Venezuela considered it essential to engage immediately in simultaneous negotiations on the three interrelated pillars, giving practical conc rete guarantees to the cross-cutting nature of S&D 
treatment.  In this same spirit, his delegation reject ed the notion of setting a date for the conclusion of 
the negotiations, since the negotiations would conc lude when everything had been duly agreed.  
Venezuela questioned the supposed "convergences" w ith regard to the reductions in the Final Bound 
Total Aggregate Measure of Support (AMS) and the ge neral cut in trade-distorting domestic support.  
There was even less convergence on the de minimis  reductions, which led hi s delegation to believe 
that there was really no convergence on domestic support.  Furthermore, his delegation considered 
that the negotiations on the timetable for disman tling export subsidies should go on simultaneously 
with the negotiations on market access.  It found th e reference to S&D treatment in this paragraph to 
be offensive, insofar as the repeated observations on  this issue by the deve loping and least-developed 
countries were considered to be insufficiently specifi c.  With regard to the "bottom-up" approach to 
the negotiations, the discussion of the issues should be balanced and proceed at the same pace.  Thus, 
his delegation would be alert to any initiative to achieve an "early harvest" on issues where there was 
some degree of convergence, since this would undermine both the principle of the "single 
undertaking" and the "bottom-up" approach itself.  In  conclusion, his delegation wished to reaffirm, in 
each and every one of its parts, Venezuela' s statement at the meeting of the TNC on 
30 November 2005, and asked that this statement be  reflected in the records of the present meeting.
18 
229. The representative of Switzerland  said that given the course the discussion had taken, he 
wished to say a few words.  Th e revised draft text before Members made him think about the 
situations in Seattle and Cancún, which had been two traumas in the life of the organization.  Seattle 
had been a disaster because Members had adopted an outdated and self-defeating approach with a document of more than 100 pages and hundreds of br ackets.  He hoped that Members had learned the 
lesson of that Conference.  Then in Cancún, Me mbers had unfortunately taken a top-down approach 
to the draft Ministerial text – an approach whic h had been forced on the negotiating group Chairs as 
well as on the Director-General and had led to failure .  Members had, it seemed, at least learned from 
past mistakes.  The process so far had been characterized by a strong bottom-up approach, by 
transparency and by inclusiveness, and already on th e level of process, the quality of the most recent 
exercise was much higher than previous exercise s, as was the quality of the draft text before 
Members.  That text reflected the progress achieve d thus far, which should not be underestimated.  
The text also redressed some blatant imbalances in the earlier text, thanks to the annexes on services, 
trade facilitation and rules.  These issues had cl early been lagging behind NAMA and agriculture in 
the first draft text.  Rebalancing at this stage w as indispensable if Members wished to guarantee some 
success in the overall outcome in Hong Kong.  The draft text contained a number of very positive 
elements.  In agriculture, for example, there wa s the idea of a number of bands for the reduction 
formula in domestic support.  There were also a number of bands for the tariff-reduction formula in 
market access.  On export subsidi es, there was a good statement on the necessity to ensure parallelism 
of commitments on all forms of export subsidies.   In NAMA, there was apparently convergence on 
the use of the Swiss formula.  Th ere was agreement to convert non ad  valorem into ad valorem duties, 
according to the methodology discussed in the negotia ting group, and progress had been made on the 
identification, examination and categorization of  non-tariff barriers.  Switzerland welcomed the 
overall direction provided by the annex on services, a nd wished to thank especi ally the Chair of the 
services negotiations for his efforts.  This made up for the lack of progress on services in the 
July 2004 package, and represented an indispensable b asis for future work in this area.  The balance 
and the approach proposed by the Chair of the servi ces negotiations and later by the Director-General 
was crucial, given the specific nature of servi ce negotiations compared to the other market-access 
areas.  The services annex struck a delicate ba lance between the interests of all Members. 
                                                     
 
18 The statement by the Bolivarian Republic of Ven ezuela at the TNC meeting on 30 November, which 
is reflected in the records of that m eeting in document TN/C/M/22 (para. 147), is incorporated by reference into 
the present records. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 62  
 
  230. On rules, the annex provided a roadmap for te xt-based negotiations - which had been missing 
for so long – and his delegation hoped that these ne gotiations would begin in earnest in 2006.  The 
draft text enumerated the main elements on which Members should focus, without closing the door on 
other issues.  Unfortunately, it did not yet contain a precise deadline for submission of a consolidated text on the Anti-dumping and Subsidies Agreements.  On trade facilitation, Members owed thanks to 
the Chair of this group for having made up the delay in this area, and the annex would allow 
negotiations to focus on real issu es in a structured fashion.  On development, Members should not 
forget that the development dimension was already pa rt and parcel of all areas under negotiation, and 
that this would confer a more operational status on S&D treatment.  Members should also not forget 
that there was already broad agreement on special tr eatment in the negotiations for the LDCs in terms 
of non-reciprocity.  More serious work was need ed in these areas.  Switzerland attached high 
importance to the question of cotton, but not, of c ourse, exclusively to that.  His delegation agreed 
with what had been said by Brazil and the EC that  the revised draft text was one that would be 
forwarded as such to Ministers in Hong Kong.  This text, as some delegations had put it, already 
constituted a safety net for the Ministerial Conference.   In addition, if complemented with a strong 
political commitment, the draft text would provide a new impetus to the negotiations.  The objective 
should be to finalize modalities in the first half of 2006.  Whatever individual frustrations might be, 
this text was the best basis Members had.  They should be careful enough and responsible enough not 
to unravel years of work and the concrete progress that had been made. 
231. The representative of Chinese Taipei
 said he wished to express his delegation's admiration for 
the Chairman's and the Director-G eneral's mental creativity in trying to accommodate all the diverse 
concerns of Members in a revised draft text in such  a short period of time.  To a large extent, they 
seemed to have succeeded.  However, he wished  to make a few observations and comments on the 
text.  First, the revised paragraphs on agriculture  and NAMA – specifically, paragraphs 4 to 18 – were 
quite fair, and seemed to capture most of the progress that had been made in these two important areas.  However, on NAMA, his delegation wished to  see highlighted the fact that some good progress 
had also been made on sectoral liberalization initia tives to reduce tariff and non-tariff barriers.  It 
therefore recommended that this progress be duly reflected in the text.  On services, his delegation believed that the text struck a delicate balan ce and provided a very good general foundation and 
structure for the services packag e overall.  Members should thus preserve the convergence that had 
been built up so far.  Second, it  was evident that there was still so me way to go to reach a consensus 
on full modalities for negotiations in agriculture and NAM A.  With this in mind, if Members were to 
have any chance of achieving a successful outcome to  the Round by the end of 2006, they had to 
redouble their efforts to narrow the gaps on the key i ssues.  In doing so, however , it was essential that 
an equal level of ambition was maintained across the three pillars of market ac cess, and in agriculture, 
NAMA and services.  Finally, the results of negoti ations in market access and rules were equally 
important and should be mutually supportive.  This  was because the possibility always existed for 
market-access liberalization to be negated by ina ppropriate trade-remedy measures.  Members should 
therefore be careful to ensure that there was a balance between market access issues and rules issues , 
and should try to maintain equilibrium  in the level of ambition across these areas as well.  With this in 
mind, his delegation wished to see paragraph 22 of the revised text further strengthened accordingly.  
In conclusion, Chinese Taipei wished to congratulat e the Chairman and the Director-General on a job 
well done, while at the same time ask ing them to give further consideration to the points he had just 
raised, which his delegation hoped would be duly re flected in what was presented to Ministers. 
232. The representative of Mauritius
, on behalf of the ACP Group , said that the Group recognized 
that the Chairman and the Director-General were pu tting in a lot of effort to provide delegations and 
Ministers with a workable basis for the Ministerial Conference.  It also appreciated the effort being 
made towards ensuring greater transparency of the process.  The ACP Group had already made a 
statement at the TNC meeting on 30 November 2005, a nd asked that this statement be included in the  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 63 
 
 
  records of the present meeting.19  The Group wished to underline that the development dimension 
should remain the central focus of the Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong, and looked forward  to a 
meaningful outcome on all issues of vital interest to the ACP.  The Group had raised its concerns on these issues in the respective negotiating bodies.  At the most recent TNC meeting, it had also drawn 
attention to the shortcoming in the draft text in addressing their vital concerns.  Unfortunately, none of 
these comments had found their way into the revised  text.  The ACP Group was concerned about this, 
and hoped that the discussion in H ong Kong would effectively encapsula te issues that were of critical 
interest to it.  The Group would not repeat its we ll-known positions, but he wished to highlight certain 
key aspects.  On agriculture, it was essential to incorporate in the text  the notion of balance.  The ACP 
Group was seeking a balanced outcome on the S&D issu es, in particular on the issue of preferences, 
on which the Group was calling for concrete trade-rela ted solutions.  It noted that the draft text on 
agriculture did not give any explicit indication regardi ng the fate of this issue.  In addition, the text 
should be equally balanced in terms of the reduction formula, the issue of proportionality, thresholds 
for the bands, selection and treatment of sen sitive products, special products, special support 
mechanism and issues relating to NFIDCS and LDCs. 
233. On NAMA, the Group wished to underline the importance of having a tariff reduction 
approach and an appropriate level of flexibilities, which was in line with the range of development 
realities of the ACP Group States.  The Group hoped that this dimension would be fully taken on 
board in Hong Kong.  The Group was also seeki ng a trade-related solution to the fundamental 
problem of preference erosion in the NAMA area.  Un fortunately, however, the draft text did not give 
any explicit indication of how this issue was to be  dealt with.  On services, the Group was concerned 
about the status of Annex C.  While it was spelle d out in the case of agriculture and NAMA that the 
Chairs' reports were under their own responsibility,  this was not the case for the services annex.  
Although the cover note said that the annexes, ex cept for the one on trade facilitation, were not yet 
agreed, paragraph 21 implicitly conferred a sort of  acceptance status to Annex C.  This should be 
clarified.  If not, the ACP requested that paragr aph 21 be bracketed.  On cotton, the ACP deeply 
regretted that no solution had yet been found on th is crucial and critical issue.  It stressed the 
importance of cotton for ACP countries and the need to achieve concrete results at the Ministerial 
Conference.  The Group noted that a cover note had been included with fundamental provisos regarding the status of the draft text and its annexes.  The ACP Group trusted that these provisos 
would remain until there was a consensual agreement on the text. 
234. The representative of Bolivia
 said his delegation wished to thank the Chairman and the 
Director-General for their effort s to ensure the success of the H ong Kong Ministerial Conference.  
Bolivia's general views on the revised draft text, in  respect of both its substantive and procedural 
aspects, were the same as those expressed by Brazil on behalf of the G-20.  However, he wished to 
voice his Government's disappointment at the prospect  of meagre results in Hong Kong.  Such results 
had not been bargained for, and fe ll far short of expectations and the agreed level of ambition.  
Bolivia had opened its markets more than two decades  earlier.  It had invariably maintained its trade 
policies, albeit at a high social cost.  It had no co astline, which made trade difficult. It believed in 
multilateralism and open trade.  However, these policies had not been enough to overcome the 
country's poverty problems, which had even begun to undermine democratic stability.  There were 
players within this organization who, in approachin g the issues at hand, failed to practice what they 
preached, or had no difficulty recalibrating the process.  On the contrary, Members should recover 
their resolve to seek better results in Hong Kong a nd thus maintain the credibility of the system.  
Proposals had been put forward to establish a pack age in favour of the least-developed and poor 
countries.  He wished to point out that there we re poor developing countries on several continents.  
Members had before them the revised draft Ministeria l text which, as had been said earlier, reflected 
                                                      
19 The statement by Mauritius on behalf of the ACP Group at the TNC meeting on 30 November, 
which is reflected in the records of that meeting in  document TN/C/M/22 (para. 127), is incorporated by 
reference into the present records. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 64  
 
  the current state of play in the negotiations, the pr ogress of which had been poor.  Bolivia trusted that 
the Hong Kong Ministerial would be  a genuine negotiating forum in which it would be possible to 
enhance this text with greater specificity and to  establish a course of action or a realistic work 
programme that prioritized key negotiating issues for the first few months of 2006 and that was balanced, so as to accommodate the interests of all Members.  At the TNC meeting on 30 November, 
Bolivia had mentioned the issues of interest to it fo r an early harvest.  In this respect, his delegation 
noted that the revised draft text incorporated some  of the elements requested, such as the mention of 
paragraph 19 of the Doha Declarati on, but many improvements and clarifications were still needed in 
order to revitalize the content of the text.  He w ould not re-enumerate Bolivia's interests, but simply 
wished to add that the new issue be ing incorporated into the future multilateral agenda on aid for trade 
had to cover the needs of a developing country like Bolivia in order to improve its limited 
participation in world trade. 
235. The representative of Moldova
 said his delegation had noted so me important improvements in 
the revised draft text.  The most valuable impr ovement for Moldova was a new paragraph 52 that 
recognized the special situation of recently-acceded  Members (RAMs) who had undertaken extensive 
market access commitments at the time of their acce ssion.  That paragraph also stipulated that "this 
situation will be taken into account in the negotiatio ns".  While his delegation was not satisfied with 
this new paragraph – which contained only an uni dentified and open-ended promise and did not go 
beyond what had already been mentioned on RAMs in the Doha Declaration and the July 2004 
framework – Moldova nevertheless considered paragr aph 52 to be a first timid step in the right 
direction.  It was possible and indispensable to impr ove this paragraph further in the time left before 
the Hong Kong Ministerial.  First, Moldova wi shed to see more binding language in the second 
sentence of that paragraph by replacing "will" with "shall".  Second, the para graph should also reflect 
the reality that RAMs had undertaken extensive commitments and obligations not only in market 
access areas, but also on domestic support and export subsidies in agriculture, in rules and in areas 
across the board.  Third, this paragraph should al so mention specific problems and challenges faced 
by the small low-income economies in transition, which were objectively identical to those of low-
income developing countries and LDCs, and hence re quired similar approaches in terms of granting 
specific flexibilities and necessary brea thing space.  With regard to paragraph 51 on Aid for Trade, his 
delegation considered that this paragraph was vita l to strengthen the development-oriented component 
of the Doha Round as the Development Round.  Moldova proposed that small low-income economies 
in transition should also be included as direct bene ficiaries of such supplementary measures.  His 
delegation wished to request the Chairman and othe r Members to agree now to consider the concerns 
and proposals of small low-income economies in transition in a positive and unbiased spirit, and to 
reflect their content properly in the draft Minister ial text, in paragraphs 51 and 52, along the lines just 
suggested.  He asked that Mold ova's statement on behalf of the small low-income economies in 
transition at the 28 November informal HODs me eting be included in the records of the present 
meeting.20 
236. The representative of the United States  said that in addition to thanking the Chairman and the 
Director-General for their tireless e fforts in working with Members to  develop the revised draft text, 
all owed a debt of gratitude to the Secretariat fo r work that was often done out of sight and deserved 
recognition.  Turning to the draft text, he said that, as for other delegations, there was much in the text 
that the United States wished was different.  In fact, the revised text was in many ways identical to the 
original text, and he would thus not repeat the sp ecific points his delegation had raised in the TNC and 
the informal HODs meetings.  The revised text was a reasonable reflection of where things stood, and 
provided a good basis for Ministers' work.  While it w as tempting to try to perfect the text, it was clear 
that the membership had different visions of what  constituted perfection.  What was important now 
was to put a document in Ministers' hands so they could prepare for the task at hand.  The Chairman 
and the Director-General had been true to their wo rd that they would not attempt to impose solutions, 
                                                      
20 The statement is reproduced in Annex IV of the present records.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 65 
 
 
  but rather build up the text on the basis of c onsensus among Members – the bottom-up approach.  
Thus, the good news was that Members' worst fears had not been realized, but the bad news was that 
their highest aspirations had not been realized either.  However, rather than dwell on the disappointment that the negotiations were not further along, Members had to seize the opportunity provided by Hong Kong to overcome this.  They had to build a solid basis with meaningful 
substantive guidance that would lead  them to a successful conclusion of the negotiations by the end of 
2006.  The United States continued to believe that th e surest path to building the momentum needed 
for the Round as a whole in the five days available to Ministers was to bring new energy and direction 
to the negotiations on agriculture and NAMA.  It continued to believe that ambitious results on 
agriculture, including cotton, and NAMA as well as se rvices, held the greatest potential of anything 
that could be done in the Round to advance deve lopment.  In this connection, his delegation 
welcomed the questions posed by the Director-Gen eral with respect to agriculture and NAMA as a 
means of focussing work in Hong Kong.  The Unite d States stood ready to work with other Members 
to advance work on other development-related issu es in the negotiations.  As many delegations had 
spoken on the services text, he wished to say that th e United States welcomed the text in Annex C as 
an important contribution on which to build in Hong Kong.  His delegation would not support any 
substantive changes in this part of the text or in any other, because to  do so would lead to a process of 
unravelling, would use up all the time available in Geneva, and would perhaps interfere with getting a 
text to Hong Kong.  However, the United States coul d support language that would make clearer that 
Annex C was being submitted on the res ponsibility of the respective Chairman. 
237. The representative of Indonesia
, on behalf of the G-33 , said this Group shared the 
disappointment of Members that, despite intensive e fforts, it had not been possible to inject much 
substance into the draft text, including on agriculture  and development issues, in view of the lack of 
convergence on most elements of the negotiations .  The G-33 supported and believed it was urgent 
and crucial that a package of measures be decided by Ministers in Hong Kong that would deliver an 
early harvest, particularly on the development dime nsion of the Round.  This was fundamental to 
fulfilling the DDA and would build confidence and pr ovide a more conducive c limate of negotiations 
for a successful conclusion of the Round.  In th is context, the G-33 strongly believed that in 
agriculture, special products (SPs) and the special safeguard mechanism (SSM) were directly linked 
to the pursuit of development objectives, and were issues which the organization had the full competence to address.  Thus, it was imperative that any development package resulting from Hong 
Kong, whether in the agriculture context or as a whole, deliver positive and meaningful progress on 
SPs and SSM.  In this regard, the G-33 wished to  underscore that it had made comprehensive and 
technically robust proposals on modalities on both these fundamental issues, translating into operative 
language the concerns on food security, livelihood secu rity and rural development of its millions of 
farmers and rural poor.  That proposal was still on the table.  These were specific issues on which Members had a clear mandate to deliver.  The G-33 would feel much more reassured by a positive 
decision on SPs and SSM than by promises of loans to address adjustment cuts in the future.  As 
negotiations in Hong Kong unfolded, the G-33 would be vigilant to ensure that balanced progress was 
made across the various pillars of the agreem ent and that elements of S&D treatment and 
development, of paramount importance to the Gr oup, were addressed in a satisfactory manner. 
238. As the G-33 had indicated at the TNC on 30 November, there was a minimum package on 
S&D treatment which it cons idered merited urgent attention by Ministers for a resolution in Hong 
Kong, including the adoption of a solid basis for intensified negotiations on these issues as a matter of 
priority after the Ministerial Conference, if this was needed.  These issues included:  (i) provisions on 
SPs related to both designation and treatment, which needed to be addressed in tandem;  
(ii) provisions on the SSM reflecting that the mech anism would be effective and responsive to the 
needs of developing countries, build on existing instruments, and allow developing countries to 
address situations of increased imports and falling prices;  (iii) guarantees that the structure of the 
tiered formula for tariff reduction had in-built the appropriate S&D elements  through, among other 
things, different higher thresholds for developing countries and adequate proportionality in the level WT/GC/M/100 
Page 66  
 
  of reduction commitments;  and (iv) exemption of developing countries from commitments to reduce 
de minimis support, either on a stand-alone basis or as part of reduction of overall trade-distorting 
support.  The success of the Ministerial Conferen ce would depend on a combination of factors, 
including the way the deliberations were organi zed and consensus built.  The G-33 stood ready to 
cooperate in making the Ministerial Conference a success through its active participation in what it 
hoped would be a very inclusiv e and open consultative process. 
239. Speaking for Indonesia
, he said he had refrained from making a long statement, because the 
status of the Annexes in the draft text, exceptin g on trade facilitation, was clearly stated in the 
covering note to the text.  His delegation also wished to compliment the Chairman of the Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation as the most efficient Chair. 
240. The representative of Cuba
 said her delegation had noted w ith satisfaction that certain 
changes had been introduced in the revised text that met some of the points raised earlier.  To avoid 
repetition, she asked that Cuba's statement at the 28 November informal HODs meeting and at the 
30 November meeting of the TNC be reflected in the records of the present meeting.21  Cuba also 
supported the statement by Brazil for the G-20, by Paraguay for the Informal Group of Developing 
Countries and by Mauritius for the ACP.  Cuba could also take on board the st atements by India and, 
in particular, Egypt for the African Group.  Her de legation hoped that the language used in the draft 
text would give an important thrust to other de veloping countries awaiting the conclusion of their 
accession processes to enjoy the same pleasure Tonga was now feeling. 
241. At the risk of repeating itself, her delegation wi shed to take up some of the aspects raised at 
the present meeting regarding the structure of th e draft Ministerial text, as the African Group had 
done.  Cuba was grateful for the cover note to the te xt but, like others, was c oncerned by paragraph 21 
on services and the references being made to the NAM A Chair's report.  Notwithstanding the efforts 
made on this draft text, there conti nued to be an imbalance, and as other had indicated, what had been 
achieved in the text in terms of development was in adequate.  Using Canada's  metaphor, on a ship, all 
elements had to be duly balanced and finished.  Nevertheless, the helm played a major role in 
reaching safe harbour.  In the present case, the compone nt that needed strengthening – so the ship did 
not sink – was the development dimension. 
242. The representative of the Philippines  said that at the 30 November TNC, his delegation had 
emphasized the need for inclusiveness and transparency, and it wished to reiterate this.  As this was 
the last General Council meeting before Hong Kong, his delegation wished to underscore its most 
fundamental concerns, for the record and for the consideration of Members.  On the whole, the 
Philippines was seriously concerned that the revised text continued to be pr oblematic, notwithstanding 
the intensive consultations that had been held and th e many concerns that had already been raised at 
the informal HODs and the TNC meetings.  On agri culture, the Philippines associated itself with the 
statements Brazil for the G-20 and by  Indonesia for the G-33.  It wished  to state its firm expectation 
that the major players would not underestimate the need  to ensure the availab ility of Special Products 
and the Special Safeguard Mechanism.  The G-33 ha d tabled concrete proposals on these two issues in 
order to move the discussion forward, and hoped th at the discussions from the present critical juncture 
would be carried out in a constructive spirit.  As  the Philippines had emphasized several times, this 
issue was of fundamental importance not only to it but  to many developing countries, for reasons of 
food security, livelihood security and rural developm ent needs.  Neither trade liberalization for the 
sake of trade liberalization, nor the raw pursuit of commercial interests could be allowed to undermine 
these development goals.  The pursuit by some of th eir narrow commercial interests, even if done in 
the name of their development objectives, could not be  justified, if this was at the expense of the 
                                                      
21 The statement by Cuba at the 28 November informal HODs meeting is reproduced in Annex V of the 
present records.  The statement by Cuba at the TNC m eeting on 30 November, which is  reflected in the records 
of that meeting in document TN/C/M/22 (para. 408), is incorporated by reference into the present records.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 67 
 
 
  development of the vast majority of developing countries.  Furthermore, his delegation did not 
perceive SPs and SSM as issues linked only to the agriculture negotiations.  More important, these 
were concrete development issues which the Philippi nes hoped would be seriously considered in any 
movement or early harvest in the developm ent package in Hong Kong and the DDA overall. 
243. On NAMA, the Philippines agr eed that the negotiating group should pursue discussions with 
a view to finalizing the structure and details  of the non-linear formula based on the working 
hypothesis of a Swiss formula.  Howe ver, it wished to stress that, cons istent with the principle of less 
than full reciprocity and S&D treatment, the paragr aph 8 flexibilities agreed to in Annex B of the 
July 2004 framework should be fully recognized a nd achieved without conditio nalities.  Paragraph 8 
was a stand-alone provision, and should not be li nked to the formula or the treatment of unbound 
tariffs.  The Philippines reiterated its expectation th at the negotiations would provide, in the words of 
the Negotiating Group Chair's report, a pragmatic solution for those unbound lines with low applied 
rates.  On services, while his delegation agr eed that Members should intensify the services 
negotiations, both in market access and rules, it wished  to emphasize that such an agreement could not 
erode developing-country flexibilities or negate the policy space so carefully negotiated in the 
Uruguay Round.  He recalled that the GATS structure, particularly of full flexibility, was critical to 
making the GATS acceptable to developing countri es – one observer country had even called it a 
precondition.  Article XIX:1 of the GATS had to be  viewed in its totality, emphasizing not only its 
objective of achieving a progressively higher level of liberalization, but also that the process would take place with a view to promoti ng the interests of all participants on a mutually advantageous basis 
and to securing an overall balance of rights and obli gations.  Paragraph 2 of that Article was even 
more instructive, indicating that the process of lib eralization shall take place with due respect for 
national policy objectives and the level of developm ent of individual Members, both overall and in 
individual sectors.  This was the delicate and sensiti ve structure that was the GATS.  His delegation 
had consistently maintained that the negotiations were not only about broadening liberalization across 
Members, sectors and modes – which was a legitimat e objective – but that they equally had to be 
informed by the equally legitimate need to respect  the flexibility currently enjoyed by developing 
countries.  Having said this, Annex C continued to be  a source of deep concern for his delegation.  
While some parts of the Annex were useful, not on ly was there imbalance in the level of detail and 
specificity of this text, but many of the issu es were more properly addressed in the request/offer 
negotiations, which all had agreed would be the ma in method of the services negotiations.  The issue 
of prescriptiveness, which had been raised by many developing countries,  had also not been 
adequately addressed.  Annex C was not a consensu s document, and its paragraph 2, in footnote 
number 1, also referred to another controversial, non-consensus document.  In view of these concerns, 
the Philippines continued to urge the Chairman and th e Director-General, as TNC Chair, to strike the 
appropriate balance between efficiency in process and inclusiveness of consultations.  His delegation 
could not accept any surprises in the lead-up to and at Hong Kong. 
244. The representative of Kenya
 said his delegation had stated its position on the first draft text, 
which the Chairman and the Director-General had put a lot of effort in trying to revise.  However, 
Kenya found that in spite of the changes made, ther e were still some areas th at appeared not to be 
balanced.  On the positive side, however, the cover note said it all, and his delegation urged Members 
to approach this revised draft text in a constructiv e spirit and with respect for the positions of others.  
The problem was that the text did not contain all positions, and his delegation did not know how 
Members would respect those positions that had not been included.  For example, on NAMA and 
agriculture there was no mention of preferences.  It was not known how Members would respect positions on this issue.  Thus, Kenya hoped that at so me point it would be brought into the picture, so 
that while it was respecting others' positions, they co uld respect Kenya's as well.  On paragraph 1 of 
the revised text, Paraguay had made an important statement regarding development.  Kenya noted that 
there had been an attempt to split the original para graph in the earlier draft text into two, but still 
nothing had been added to incorporate development.   Perhaps some of the points raised by Paraguay 
could be included in paragraph 1.  For example, after the word "them", one could add "while placing WT/GC/M/100 
Page 68  
 
  the needs and the interests of developing and least-developed countries at the heart of the 
negotiations".  That would provide some comfort that Members were still development conscious and 
committed to the DDA.  On agriculture, the text pronounced that there had been progress, but when 
one looked at issues of interest to Kenya, his delegation had some problem  understanding the progress 
made.  While it welcomed the progress in the wo rk of the Special Session of the Committee on 
Agriculture since 2004 and recorded in Annex A, when it looked at that Annex and related it to 
paragraph 8, it was left confused, because paragr aph 8 went back to the July 2004 framework and 
picked up just on S&D treatment, leaving aside all ot her issues.  However, Members had been talking 
about development since 2004.  These were the issu es Kenya was saying were not being handled at 
the same level of specificity, and his delegation hoped that at some point, this would be brought up to 
date.  Kenya did not want Ministers to start on this note, because if his Minister took the floor and 
started talking about paragraph 8, he would be starting from July 2004, while others would be starting 
probably from Annex A.  His delegation hoped this anomaly would be corrected.  Similarly, in 
paragraph 9 there was an anomaly, because Member s were resolving to establish modalities no later 
than some date in the future, but the Doha Minist erial Declaration, in particular in paragraph 44, 
contained a phrase that was important to developi ng countries like Kenya.  This phrase included 
provisions for S&D after modalities, and this should not be lost, because Kenya did not want to start 
arguing in the future over whether this was part of th e package.  It was better to clarify this now, as 
Members moved on towards Hong Kong. 
245. Regarding NAMA, the same progress was indicated, but when his delegation looked at 
paragraph 14, it could not relate that progress to S&D treatment.  Some of these development-related 
issues would need to be brought up to date with other issues mentioned in the NAMA text.  Again, 
here Kenya found that preferences were being left ou t for reasons it did not understand.  Kenya never 
thought that this would be left out and hoped it c ould be taken into consid eration. Regarding S&D 
treatment, paragraphs 30 and 31 contradicted each othe r.  Paragraph 30 instructed the CTD in Special 
Session to expeditiously complete the review of a ll the outstanding agreement-specific proposals, and 
paragraph 31 expressed concern at lack of progress on Category II proposals and instructed the bodies 
concerned to expeditiously complete their consid eration of these proposals and report periodically to 
the General Council – not even through the CTD in Special Session.  This was a contradiction because one could not ask the CTD in Special S ession to handle all the outstanding-agreement 
specific proposals and at the same time ask the relevant bodies dealing with Category II issues to 
continue their work and to report to the General Council.  That contradic tion could be removed by 
deleting paragraph 31. 
246. He would not comment on all the paragraphs in  the text, but was picking only those Kenya 
felt were crucial at the present time.  Regardi ng JITAP, Kenya supported Djibouti's statement, 
because the way JITAP was dealt with in paragraph 47 was not clear.  This was one programme that 
had proved to be successful, and this should be reflected  in paragraph 47.  It should also at least be 
mentioned what was expected of JITAP in the fu ture, and some additional funds solicited so that 
many other African countries could benefit from th is programme which had been very successful.  
Also, the three agencies involved had done a remark able job and should be praised. In some other 
areas, Ministers might need to work not on the langua ge but rather on the concept – for example, on 
Aid for Trade.  The text still did not reflect the proposal that it include language resulting from the 
meeting of African trade Ministers in Arusha.  What was being suggested was that the General 
Council be invited to convene a meeting for July  2006.  However, it was possible that Members 
would come up with full modalities by the first quarter of 2006, in order to be able to complete the 
negotiations successfully by the end of 2006.  Thus , July was simply too fa r in the future.  The 
paragraph could be improved – as the issue was still at  the conceptual stage – in order to give a sense 
of what the recipients expected from Aid for Trade,  so that it reflected the kind of ownership that 
would make it possible, when this package was prese nted to Ministers, for them to clearly understand 
the concept and that all Members had participated , and thus to avoid the need to negotiate the 
language.  As the text stood, there was still room  for improvement, and Kenya hoped this could be  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 69 
 
 
  done.  His delegation associated itself closely with th e statements by Egypt for the African Group, by 
Mauritius for the ACP, and by Indonesia for the G-33, of which Kenya was a member. 
247. The representative of Thailand  said her delegation understood from the Director-General's 
remarks that the revised draft text did not purport to  be an agreed text – in particular the annexes 
presented on the Chairs' responsibility – and was wit hout prejudice to the position of any Member.  
The draft text unfortunately reflected a low level of convergences in the areas of agriculture, NAMA 
and development. Members had to strive to move  the negotiations forward as much as possible in 
Hong Kong.  In doing so, it was imperative that th ey continue to respect the bottom-up approach and 
to share a collective responsibility in narrowing down remaining differences, so as to ensure that the 
Hong Kong Ministerial Conference provided a balan ced and meaningful platform for a successful 
conclusion of the Round by the end of 2006.  Her dele gation wished to highlight some of the priorities 
on which it expected substantial progress in Hong Kong.  On agriculture, Thailand supported the 
statement by Brazil for the G-20.  It welcomed th e new version of the text on agriculture, which 
captured well the progress made thus far.  Howeve r, the text also reflected the large divergences 
among Members, with market access being the least-d eveloped pillar in the negotiations.  Therefore, 
positive contributions and political will from key play ers were needed to unlock this impasse and 
move the negotiations forward.  On NAMA, Memb ers should agree in Hong Kong on the structure of 
the tariff reduction formula, flexibilities for deve loping countries and treatment of unbound tariff 
lines.  In this regard, the importance of S&D treat ment and less than full reciprocity in reduction 
commitments for developing countries needed to be  adequately recognized.  In addition, on both 
agriculture and NAMA, it was also vital that Mini sters define a concrete work plan for post-Hong 
Kong, in order to ensure the successful conclusi on of the Round by 2006.  On services, Thailand 
continued to support the concept of flexible paramete rs or guidance to ensure certain level of quality 
of negotiated market-access commitments.  At the same time, Thailand agreed to intensify discussions 
on important issues such as rules, especially emergency safeguard measures, subsidies, and domestic regulations, to buttress market access.  On services, her delegation could not help but observe that 
although the bottom-up approach implied that a c onsultative process should be open, transparent and 
inclusive, this approach could bring less value if  the interests and sensitivities of all Members were 
not taken into account.  In this regard, minor cha nges to the draft text would help raise Members' 
comfort level, and it was hoped that due considerati on would be given this be fore finalizing the text. 
248. On rules, Thailand aimed to clarify and improve  WTO rules in order to secure benefits in 
market access and ensure clearer and more predicta ble trade disciplines.  To attain a meaningful 
outcome of this negotiation in H ong Kong, there were areas in the text that Members could improve, 
in order to underscore the importance of the nego tiations, capture the progress made so far and set 
clear objectives and a work plan for post-Hong Kong, and in order to make this part of the text 
equitable with the text in other areas.  On development, since the main purpose of the DDA 
negotiations was to assist all developing countries to better integrate and benefit from a rules-based 
multilateral trading system, Thailand again joined ot hers in stressing the need to ensure that all 
negotiated agreements resulting fro m this Round faithfully reflected  the development dimension and 
contained an in-built mechanism that ensured clear,  effective, and operational S&D treatment for all 
developing countries.  In this c onnection, Thailand would welcome a clean text on most development-
related paragraphs, although these were largely texts on non-negotiating areas, such as the Integrated 
Framework, technical cooperation and Aid for Tr ade.  On the paragraph on LDCs, Thailand was 
pleased that the language on developed and develo ping-countries' commitment to offer duty-free, 
quota-free market access to LDCs had been amended to be consistent with the proposed language in 
paragraph 36 of Annex F.  Thaila nd also noted with pleasure that the sentence on the decision by the 
TRIPS Council to extend the transition period under Article 66.1 of the TRIPS Agreement had been 
taken out of square brackets.  Her delegation viewed the revised text as an improvement on the 
previous version, particularly in the areas of agriculture and NAMA, and felt it could be sent to 
Ministers for further negotiation, in order to get a meaningful outcome and clear direction on the way WT/GC/M/100 
Page 70  
 
  forward post-Hong Kong, and thus enable Members to complete the Round fruitfully by the target 
deadline of 2006. 
249. The representative of Rwanda
 endorsed and fully associated his delegation with the 
statements by Mauritius for the ACP and by Egypt for the African Group.  Rwanda had received and 
considered the revised draft text, and wished to no te that this was an improvement over the previous 
text and attempted to address some of the concerns  raised by Members in previous meetings.  The 
Director-General and the Chairman had been tr ue to their word in maintaining the bottom-up 
approach and in trying to avoi d surprises in the text, and this was appreciated.  Rwanda also 
appreciated the surprise the Direct or-General had presented earlier in  the meeting regarding Tonga's 
accession.  Some parts of the draft revised text needed to be improved before Members moved to 
Hong Kong.  His delegation was still  unclear about the status of the Annexes, given the imbalance 
viewed in them.  These Annexes had not been ag reed, with the exception of the one on trade 
facilitation.  In particular, Rwanda agreed with the views that the current paragraph 21 on services 
gave the impression that it was an agreed text, and provided a direct reference to the relevant Annex 
as a basis for intensifying negotiations.  That Anne x was not an agreed text, and while it might be 
negotiated in Hong Kong and agreem ent reached, in the meantime paragraph 21 would need to be 
reformulated.  This would merely be a factua l adjustment.  The African and G-90 Groups had 
expressed this concern both to the Chairman and th e Director-General, and Rwanda had no doubt that 
the necessary adjustment would be made before the final text was submitted. 
250. Although Rwanda was disappointed that there had been hardly any progress on development 
issues, and noted that this was a true reflection on the status of the negotiations, his delegation was 
still committed to making this a true Development R ound.  To enable Ministers to provide direction, 
there was a need to provide more in formation in this area.  For example, the references to special and 
differential treatment in paragraph 8 on agricultu re and paragraph 14 on NAMA needed to be 
elaborated, with more information on what elements were being discussed and what their status was.  
Currently, these texts were general and vague, a nd would not help Ministers make adequate 
intervention or provide direction.  Members might perhaps even point out the elements they wished 
Ministers to focus on, with a view to prioritiz ing development.  Specifically, on LDC agreement-
specific proposals, Rwanda regretted that there had hardly been any progress despite intensive 
consultations.  In this regard, Rwanda wished  to thank the CTD Special Session Chair for his 
commitment and hard work.  His delegation also not ed that some Members had serious concerns on 
some elements of the LDC proposals.  Rwanda urged these Members to try to exercise more 
flexibility in order to give LDCs a meaningful  package.  The proposals as they stood would 
unfortunately not achieve this objec tive.  Failure to deliver in this area – where LDCs would gain 
more and relief would be provided for the most marg inalized countries – was an undesirable situation.  
Members needed to keep in mind that the LDCs' share in world tr ade was not significant, and their 
enhanced trade would not significantly affect gl obal transactions.  Rwanda welcomed the improved 
draft text on cotton and hoped the desired results would be achieved at Hong Kong.  His delegation 
was still committed to working to achieve  further convergence on this text. 
251. The representative of Jamaica  said his delegation had made st atements at the 30 November 
meeting of the TNC on the earlier version of the draf t Ministerial text and had also spoken at the 
informal HODs on 28 November 2005.  Those statemen ts expressed Jamaica's views on some of the 
substantive issues in this document and conveyed some  of the concerns it had with the initial draft.  
Jamaica would submit those statements for the record, so that it could be briefer at the present 
meeting.22  His delegation was pleased to see that some of the comments it had made had been 
                                                      
22 The statement by Jamaica at the TNC meeting on 30  November, which is reflected in the records of 
that meeting in document TN/C/M/22 (para. 250), is inco rporated by reference into the present records.  The 
statement by Jamaica at the informal HODs meeting on 28 November is reproduced in Annex VI of the present 
records.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 71 
 
 
  accommodated in this revised text and appreciated th is.  Overall, his delegation considered that the 
revised text, though unchanged in its  fundamental aspects, reflected some improvement, and this was 
a good thing.  However, Jamaica continued to have  some concerns.  First, while he hesitated to 
quibble about the cover note, it did seem that the fourth paragraph fell somewhat short of total 
frankness.  The last sentence of that paragraph stated  that the texts in the annexes other than on trade 
facilitation did not "purport" to be agreed texts.   Jamaica did not believe this was a matter of 
purporting this to be so.  All Members knew that these were not agreed texts, and the cover note 
should state this unequivocally.  The second point w as more fundamental.  Paragraph 21 was quite 
incomprehensible in light of the fact that the cove r note stated that the annexes, other than on trade 
facilitation, were not agreed.  It had to be abun dantly clear that whatever had prevented some 
Members from supporting or agreeing to Annex C, would also prevent them from agreeing to 
paragraph 21 in its present form.  This issu e had to be addressed.  Jamaica did not support 
paragraph 21 and fully supported the statement by Mauritius for the ACP that this paragraph should 
be put in square brackets. 
252. A second concern was the imbalance in the text relating to development issues.  Jamaica 
understood in some measure why this was so.  Both  in the work of the CTD Special Session and as a 
cross-cutting issue, the development dimension – whic h, he recalled, was at the heart of the Round – 
was far below expectations.  It shou ld be made clear in transmitting this text to Ministers that this 
imbalance had been recognized, and that an objective in Hong Kong had to be to ensure that the final 
product of the Ministerial Conference reflected a higher level of achievement in respect of the 
development dimension, which would be in accordance,  of course, with the Doha mandate.  This had 
to be drawn to the attention of Ministers so that they would focus on this deficiency in Hong Kong.  
Thus, Ministers had to provide results-oriented politi cal guidance and/or concrete decisions on matters 
such as special products, special safeguard mechan ism, less than full reci procity, flexibilities, 
preferences, agreement-specific S&D proposals, Aid for Trade and implementation issues and – 
critically, for his delegation – small economies.  These were some of the important development 
issues for Jamaica and, no doubt, for many othe r developing countries.  There should be no 
misunderstanding that what was contained in the revised text represented the level of expectation 
Jamaica had for an outcome on development issues at Hong Kong.  What the text contained was a 
mere floor on which Jamaica expected Ministers to build in regard to the development aspects of the 
DDA.  His delegation believed this  could be done, even though its  expectations for Hong Kong 
generally had been lowered and did not now in clude full modalities in agriculture and NAMA.  
Jamaica would not be able to suppor t the transmission of this text to  Ministers by the General Council 
if Annex C and paragraph 21 were not  satisfactorily clarified.  As the Director-General himself had 
repeatedly reminded Members, the revised text c ontained no surprises.  Jamaica was quite prepared 
and hopeful that Members would be surprised, a nd pleasantly so, at Hong Kong, through meaningful 
progress on development issues and in perhaps some other areas. 
253. The representative of Tanzania  associated his delegation with the statements by Egypt for the 
African Group, by Mauritius for the ACP, and by Zamb ia for the LDCs, as well as by coordinators of 
other groups to which his country belonged.  The revised draft Ministerial text was a reasonable basis upon which Members could engage in Hong Kong, pr ovided that the various shortcomings mentioned 
by various delegations were addressed.  Tanzania acknow ledged, in particular, the effort that had been 
made to take on board the many issues of interest to  LDCs, in spite of the recalibration of expectations 
for Hong Kong in light of the realities in the negot iations.  His delegation hoped that Ministers in 
Hong Kong would be able to genera te further convergence on key issues in the negotiations that could 
add up to significant progress. 
254. In light of the statements by the coordinato rs of the various groups to which Tanzania 
belonged, he would refrain from going into specifi cs on many areas of the draft text.  However, 
following up on his preliminary remarks during the discussion under item 12(d)(ii) at the present 
meeting regarding S&D treatment, he  wished to underline the need to  adopt a well-measured sense of WT/GC/M/100 
Page 72  
 
  optimism on the ability of Ministers to resolve the outstanding divergences on the LDC agreement-
specific proposals which had been highlighted by the Chairman of the CTD Special Session.  In the 
light of the limited time-frame of the Ministerial C onference, and the need to achieve this objective in 
a manner that not only met the objectives of the D oha mandate to make the provisions more precise, 
effective and operational, but also represented conc rete value additions for the LDCs, his delegation 
had taken note of the Director-General's optimistic assessment of Annex F as being amenable to early 
resolution by Ministers.  Tanzania hoped that this would be the case, but if it were not, his delegation counted on the membership to adopt a positive attitude  that would allow for work to continue on these 
proposals even after Hong Kong, within the broader context of paragraph 30, until this matter was 
brought to its logical and satisfactory conclusion.  Tanzania was keen to have some early harvests on 
development at Hong Kong, but was even more keen that any package on S&D treatment should 
meaningfully contribute to efforts to  build up the LDCs' trade capacities. 
255. The representative of Nigeria said his delegati on wished to make some brief comments on 
both the process and substance of the preparatory process for the Sixth Ministerial Conference.  On process, his delegation wished to restate the im portance of transparency , inclusiveness and the 
bottom-up approach.  Nigeria hoped that these values and principles would be sustained so that the 
entire membership would be involved and claim ownership of the process and its outcome.  His 
delegation also hoped that the useful and construc tive comments made by Members would be fully 
taken on board in the final draft text sent to Minister s.  On substance, his delegation was of the view 
that since the Doha Round was a development Round, its development aspects should feature 
prominently in the text.  The eventual outcome of th e negotiations should also be pro-development.  It 
was also important that balance be achieved betw een the different areas of the text, even though 
Nigeria was aware that the final balance could only be achieved at the end of the negotiations.  His 
delegation wished to note in particular, that the main springs of what c onstituted development should 
be based on how Members saw it as developing countri es, rather than on the basis of definitions and 
prescriptions from elsewhere.  He associated his delegation with the comments in some of the key 
areas mentioned by Kenya and Jamaica, and would not elaborate more on these points.  It was highly 
important to have a common understanding on the re ports made by the various Chairmen on their own 
responsibility, since most of these reports had not be en agreed.  This would prevent any dispute on the 
interpretations or status of such reports in the futu re.  He was saying this because he also wished to 
commend the Chairman and the Director-General on th eir management of the preparatory process in a 
manner that had avoided the ranc our and uproar that had preceded  Seattle and other previous 
Conferences.  Like the Director-General, his delega tion also wished to live with experience.  He 
recalled that in order to accommodate all interest s, delegations had accepted the balanced text in 
Singapore, and Members had spent several years deci ding on whether some issues were part of the 
single undertaking or outside it.  In this regard, notwithstanding the cover note to the revised draft 
text, his delegation urged that the treatment given Annexes A and B be extended to Annex C, and that 
paragraph 21 of the text therefore be revised to refl ect this.  Nigeria did not wish to spend time and 
energy in the immediate post-Hong Kong phase tryi ng to understand the tricks that Members had 
played on his country by the ingenious amongst the membership. 
256. On the substance of the text, Nigeria rec ognized the importance of all issues in the 
negotiations being treated equally.  Nigeria undersco red the place of agriculture as an engine of the 
Round.  Since Hong Kong would be a negotiating conference, his delegation wished to see 
meaningful and substantial progress in this area,  including progress towards the establishment of 
modalities and conclusion of the Round  in 2006.  Nigeria fully associat ed with the statement by Brazil 
for the G-20 and by Indonesia for the G-33.  His de legation also supported and was in total agreement 
with the statements by Egypt for the African Gr oup and by Mauritius for the ACP.  His delegation 
welcomed the statement by the Chairman of th e Hong Kong Ministerial Conference, and hoped the 
Conference would produce a successful outcome in wh ich all Members could partake.  Nigeria looked 
forward to assisting in that task.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 73 
 
 
  257. The representative of Ecuador  expressed his delegation's appreciation for the statements by 
the Chairman and Secretary Tsang regarding the procedures for the Hong Kong Ministerial 
Conference.  His delegation supported the statemen t by the Conference Chai rman that the meeting 
should serve as a platform for dealing with the main issues of these negotiations, in which there should be substantive progress, principally in th e agricultural area – where there was a compromise 
pending which should be given due effect.  The revised  draft text partially incorporated the views of 
some delegations.  The Hong Kong Ministerial woul d provide a favourable opportunity to agree on a 
balanced package for the benefit of all Members' inter ests.  An important aspect of this draft text was 
the development dimension, which included those poin ts relating to market access, the formulation of 
rules, and specific development-related issues.  Wi th regard to market access, after analysing the 
advances in the revised text on agriculture, his dele gation found that there was still a considerable 
deficit in the three pillars of the negotiations.  Ec uador hoped that Ministers w ould be able to establish 
the numerical bases for the implementation of the mo dalities to be negotiated in 2006.  As a result of 
this situation, other areas of the negotiations had also failed to show  any substantial progress, as in the 
case of NAMA, where there had even been some regression.  The second aspect of the development 
dimension, involving the formulation of rules, had also shown few advances, with a gradual 
weakening of the principles which guided this or ganization, such as the MFN principle and the 
process of trade liberalization as a whole.  This ha d been due to the recent submission of proposals 
which, with a view to achieving supposed benefits  for the developed-country Members, had sought to 
justify their lack of future commitment and thei r own sensitivities.  This could only increase 
uncertainty about the commitments  Members wished to achieve in Hong Kong, and divided the 
developing countries, which the Round was supposed to benefit.  His delegation would have liked to 
see the retention in the text of the second senten ce of the paragraph on coherence – the present 
paragraph 50 – since multilateral trade liberalizati on had to be based on rules that complemented 
international financial initiatives.  Ecuador was pl eased that the development package would include 
initiatives that would benefit the LDCs, such as the Cotton Initiative and the extension of the 
transition period for the application of TRIPS.  Despite these comments, Ecuador viewed with 
expectation the issue of Aid for Trade, which s hould be discussed and approved in the WTO, on the 
understanding that it would bene fit all developing countries. 
258. The representative of Uganda
 fully associated his delegation with the statements by Zambia 
for the LDCs, by Egypt for the African Group, and by Mauritius for the ACP.  In order to avoid 
duplication, his delegation asked that its statemen t at the 30 November TNC meeting be included in 
the records of the present meeting.23  However, he wished to comm ent on one issue, which was the 
flexibilities for LDCs in paragraph 8 of the NAM A framework, referred to in paragraph 10 of 
Annex B in the revised draft text.  While his dele gation appreciated that the LDCs had been granted 
flexibilities, it wished to observe that they were not  given the full flexibility to determine the level of 
bindings they would make.  The language in Annex B appeared to provide benchmarks, and Uganda 
therefore considered that this would work to un dermine and greatly compromise LDCs' flexibilities.  
It was therefore important that the LDCs were  granted full flexibilities, and this was why his 
delegation felt that in spite of the great improvements in the text, further balance could be achieved in 
this area. 
259. The representative of Benin  congratulated the Chairman, the Director-General, the Chairs of 
the negotiating groups and the Secretariat for their unceasing efforts to come up with a revised draft 
text for Hong Kong.  If this text did not contain the substance Members exp ected, it was not the fault 
of these individuals, to the extent that it was the Members who should put the substance forward.  He 
wished to take up a problem dear to his country's h eart.  In Benin, it was said that when one suffered 
from an ill, one had to speak to all of one's peers until one came up with a solution, in the hope that 
the umpteenth time the point was raised, a solution would be found.  On behalf of the four co-
                                                      
23 The statement by Uganda at the TNC meeting on 30  November, which is reflected in the records of 
that meeting in document TN/C/M/22 (para. 350), is incorporated by reference into the present records. WT/GC/M/100 
Page 74  
 
  sponsors of the Cotton Initiative and other African  cotton-producing countries, he recalled that the 
cotton issue had been raised again and again.  He  wished to recall several important points.  In 
May 2003, for the first time Members had welcomed a head of state, the President of Burkina Faso, 
who had come to speak to Members in the General Council.  This indicated the seriousness of this 
problem.  President Compaoré had made clear th at Africa was not begging for alms, but merely 
asking that the rules Members had set be respected.  The 33 African cotton-producing countries were 
asking that the WTO rules be respected.  Were t hose rules being respected, these countries would not 
be in the present situation.  These countries' hopes had rested on Cancún, and all knew what had 
happened there.  The hopes of the 33 African cott on-producing countries had been shattered simply 
because the major trading partners had not wished to  speak of agriculture, and his delegation had the 
same impression that these same Members did not wi sh to speak of agriculture seriously in Hong 
Kong.  If these Members did not wish to speak of ag riculture and wished to link the cotton file to 
agriculture, this meant that cotton would be put off forever, and would never be  settled.  This was why 
Benin called on all to remember that they had a mandate.  This was important, because one had a 
tendency to forget the July 2004 package, which stated that the cotton issue would be addressed 
ambitiously, expeditiously, and specifically, within the agriculture negotiations.  "Specifically" meant 
that the problem of cotton had to be dealt with unlinked to anything else.  "Expeditiously" meant as fast as possible, and since Members had missed the boat in Cancún, the most rapid means of transportation was the Hong Kong boat,  and Benin hoped that this probl em would be solved there.  
"Ambitiously" of course  meant within the modalities, and that was why the proponents' proposals on 
cotton tried to ensure that all export subsidies woul d be eliminated by the end of 2006, and that all 
other domestic support and other forms would be eliminated at the latest by 2009.  This was what was 
meant by expeditious, ambitious, and specific treatme nt, and this was what the cotton farmers were 
hoping for.  At present, these farmers were backed  up against the wall and dying of hunger.  They 
hoped that this  problem would be solved, so that th ey could smile again, rather than weep.  This was 
the dramatic side of this problem.   
260. He reiterated that the 33 African cotton-produc ing countries had the support of the ACP, the 
LDCs and the African Group, and that all delega tions supported the cotton issue, because they had 
heard so much said about it.  They had heard so mu ch said of the ravages caused.  The time had come 
for all to support finding a solution to this problem in Hong Kong.  At present, subsidies cost Chad, 
Burkina Faso, Mali and Benin US$450 million in losses.   These countries were LDCs, and this was a 
great deal of money.  Cotton was these countries' only product, which was why he was speaking at 
such length about it.  This was the issue for wh ich these countries had joined the WTO.  If this 
problem was not solved, it meant that Members did not want to have these countries included in the 
WTO.  The consequences of this problem were th at schools closed, health centres lacked medication 
and people died from minor illnesses.  This was a sad fact of life and, unfort unately, in developing 
countries it was the little girls who were the first vict ims – they did not go to school in Benin because 
they were far more useful than the young boys, and when problems arose, parents called on their 
daughters.  All of the international organizations  and agencies were talking about the Millennium 
Conference.  There had just been a mid-term review of year five leading up to the Millennium Conference, and it had been said that by 2015 at the latest, poverty had to be eradicated and all children should be able to go to school.  At th e same time, Members were applying policies that 
prevented children from going to school and that ag gravated poverty.  There was an incoherence in 
this, and he urged all to ensure that coherence wa s restored.  The current round of negotiations had 
been baptised the Development Round.  No one had forced Members to call it that.  However, 
Members could not have a Development Round in whic h they applied policies that were devastating 
to developing countries and that  ran counter to development. 
261. His delegation appealed to all Members to ma ke this round truly a Development Round.  His 
delegation knew that all Members had a heart.  The 33 African cotton-producing countries were 
waiting, and hoped there would be a reaction.  Only ten days remained before the Hong Kong 
Ministerial, and Benin hoped there would be a politi cal leap, that there would be the political will to  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 75 
 
 
  settle this problem, and that on the evening of 18 December in Hong Kong, Members could all 
celebrate by saying they had understood that ther e were problems in 33 African countries, and that 
they had come up with the appropriate solution.  He  had been in Chad ten days earlier and had been 
told that the marketing period for cotton had always b een a period of rejoicing.  At present, it was a 
period of mourning, because when the farmer went to  weigh his cotton, he discovered that he owed a 
lot of money for his inputs, and that he was evermore  in debt.  Over the past six years, these countries 
had been in a constant cycle of indebtedness.  Hi s delegation urged Members to put an end to this.  
His delegation echoed the statements by Egypt for the African Group, by Zambia for the LDCs, and 
by Mauritius for the ACP.  Benin thanked all who had supported the cotton issue and would continue 
to do so in Hong Kong, so that Members could find a solution. 
262. The representative of Zimbabwe  said his delegation committed its elf to cooperating with the 
Chairman, the Director-General and others to produce the result all Members were looking for, 
especially regarding development, which was the raison  d'être of this Round.  The draft text, while not 
pleasing everyone, was a useful platform from which Members could build the desired edifice.  He 
wished to illustrate what his delegation perceived to  be some of the deficiencies in the text, which 
could be improved upon.  Some Members had frank ly been offended by the consensus implied in 
paragraph 21.  Zimbabwe trusted that corrective actio n would be taken so that it became acceptable to 
as many as possible.  Regarding paragraph 11 on cott on, domestic reform efforts were being carried 
out by only some – and he wished to underlin e "some" – African countries.  The preponderant 
majority of African cotton producers had not em barked on such reforms, largely because of the 
misrepresentation of the level of dependence on co tton among African countries.  More importantly, 
if Members went by the WTO's Appellate Body Decision, it was not the African cotton-producing 
Members who should be reforming, but others .  This was why his delegation saw a false 
complementarity in a cause-and-effect relationship.  This was an example of how fair-trade distortion 
was the perversion of WTO fair-trade policy.  Th e consequential development assistance now being 
sought merely sought to repair the damage wrought by the impermissible subsidies for cotton.  This 
false complementarity should be corrected.  Zimbabwe hoped there would be no more false 
statements whose intent was to give false comf ort – that enough development assistance had been 
harnessed to give comfort to all African cotton pro ducers.  Moreover, as had been noted earlier, the 
promised development assistance to reform the cotton sector in Africa was not being realized on the ground, certainly not in sufficient magnitude to make any difference to the suffering cotton-producing 
peasant farmers.  His delegation associated itself with  the statements by Egypt for the African Group, 
by Mauritius for the ACP, by Indonesia fo r the G-33, and by Brazil for the G-20. 
263. The representative of Urugua
y said it would be ill-considered to speak at length at the present 
time.  Regarding the substance of the draft text, he  merely wished to say that Uruguay supported the 
statement by Brazil for the G-20, and was convinced that progress on agricultural market access would serve as a trigger for similar advances elsewher e.  For that reason, the Hong Kong Ministerial – 
as had often been said by the Director-General – ha d to be a true negotiating forum.  Regarding 
procedure, Uruguay echoed what Brazil and a lengt hy list of delegations had said indicating their 
conformity with the intelligent and clear manner in  which the Chairman and the Director-General had 
met the concerns expressed regarding the status of the annexes and the reference thereto in the draft 
text.  His delegation was one of those concerned, bu t the cover page indicating that the text did not 
purport to be agreed and was without prejudice to the position of any Member dissipated these 
concerns and any misunderstanding Ministers might ha ve, and clarified this issue throughout the draft 
text. 
264. The representative of Nepal
 said that at the outset, he wished to associate his delegation with 
the statement by Zambia for the LDCs.  Nepal ha d had seen a number of issues of importance to it 
reflected in the revised draft text.  Although his de legation would have liked to see a better reflection 
of its concerns, it appreciated the efforts made to accommodate some of them in the text.  Nepal was 
therefore willing to take the process forward with this text.  His delegation looked forward to a WT/GC/M/100 
Page 76  
 
  meaningful development outcome from the Doha R ound and a substantial indication of that at the 
Hong Kong Ministerial, because this was an important  gateway to the Doha Round.  For Nepal, this 
would be a true measure of success.  Urgency was so metimes lost in repeating the facts, but it might 
be worthwhile for Members to remind themselves of t hose facts so that they did not loose their overall 
perspective while focussing on deta ils.  LDCs represented 750 million people in about 50 countries, 
but their share of world trade had decreased from th ree per cent in the 1970s to around 0.65 per cent at 
present.  Marginalization was therefore a major i ssue for them.  The development dimension was, 
naturally, an issue of paramount importance to them.  Their concerns and exp ectations were not that 
great, but they were vital and critical to pursue th eir trade and development objectives.  Duty-free and 
quota-free market access for LDCs, reduction of NTBs, and flexible rules of origin were fundamental 
market-access tools for LDCs that  should be ensured on a secure and predictable basis.  He stressed 
that even if LDCs were granted those facilities, th ey needed to have the productive capacity to make 
use of them.  Because of their vulnerabilities, lo w level of development a nd productivity, the LDCs 
faced many supply-side constraints.  For this r eason, the LDCs were looking for a clear understanding 
of their concerns both for market-access issues and supply-side constraints, and effective measures to 
deal with them in a meaningful manner.  Nepal sought a clear direction in Hong Kong towards these 
objectives.  Hence, it wished to see an enhanced IF as an effective instrument for LDCs and, similarly, 
a clear commitment on Aid for Trade and the necessary modalities to help expand their trade.  Finally, Nepal wished to see the H ong Kong Ministerial be a success.  This would be possible only 
when Ministers in Hong Kong prep ared a solid groundwo rk for concluding the Doha Round with a 
clear development outcome for all, including the most marginalized count ries, in an effective 
manner. 
265. The representative of the Solomon Islands
 said his delegation wished to join others in 
welcoming the two surprises the Director-General ha d presented in paragraph 35 of the revised text.  
On behalf of Tonga, he wished to thank the Chairm an of the Working Party on Tonga's accession, the 
Members of the Working Party, the Secretaria t and all other Members for facilitating Tonga's 
accession to the WTO.  The process had taken some  ten years and some tough negotiations.  The 
Solomon Islands was pleased that Tonga's accession  process had concluded and that Tonga, after 
Saudi Arabia, was on its way to becoming the 150th Member of the WTO and the fourth Pacific Island 
country to join the WTO ranks.  This was indeed a nother historic event for the WTO, the Pacific and, 
of course Tonga, as it paved the way for a stronger multilateral trading system and a stronger Pacific 
Island representation in the WTO.  Tonga would certa inly be in Hong Kong to thank all Members for 
the early harvest his delegation hoped could also be extended to the issue of cotton. 
266. The representative of Nicaragua  endorsed the statement by Pa raguay for the Informal Group 
of Developing Countries.  She wished merely to a dd one element to the conc erns her delegation had 
raised at the 30 November meeting of the TNC with respect to development issues, and asked that that 
statement be included in the records of the present meeting.24  This related to the press release issued 
following the meeting in Brussels between the EC Trade Commissioner and the G-90, in particular 
the European Commissioner's statement that "we have not and will not agree to cuts that will 
eliminate the preferential access we  offer to African and Caribbean countries".  Her delegation wished 
to stress that, according to studies conducted by the S ecretariat, more than 70 per cent of Nicaragua's 
exports to the European Union consisted of produc ts for which the Community had been asked that 
preferential access be protected.  In the light of th at statement, Nicaragua wondered whether it could 
remain confident that Hong Kong and the Round in ge neral would provide it with  the effective market 
access it needed for its development.  Her delegatio n's concern was also fuelled by the Community's 
decision to introduce, as from 1 January 2006, a ne w regime for bananas which, however one looked 
at it, would reduce access for Latin American banana s, and which consequently violated the mandate 
in the Annex to the waiver approved in Doha (W T/L/436).  Her delegation could only hope that the 
                                                      
24 The statement by Nicaragua at the TNC meeting on  30 November, which is reflected in the records 
of that meeting in document TN/C/M/22 (para. 438), is incorporated by reference into the present records.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 77 
 
 
  informal meeting to be held later that morning between the Latin American banana producers and the 
Commission would lead to the initiation of true negotiations, and that bananas would not become 
another point of discord at Hong Kong.  Finally,  Nicaragua sympathized with Bolivia and supported 
its request that Aid for Trade should cover the ne eds of the lower-income countries with a smaller 
share in world trade. 
267. The representative of Pakistan  welcomed the revised draft text and the beefing up of the texts 
on NAMA and agriculture in particular.  These im provements were a positive development in the 
right direction, indicating a trend of increasing c onvergence.  However, since these areas covered only 
a limited number of issues, Pakistan appreciated the in clusion of the Chairmen's texts in annexes.  In 
order to make progress, Members needed to identify priority areas, which Pakistan felt should be 
strengthened substantially.  As rightly mentioned by  Brazil, these priorities included enhanced market 
access in agriculture.  According to a recent World Ba nk study, over 90 per cent of gains in the Doha 
Round would come from enhanced market access.  S hould the key players be sincere in delivering on 
development, this was where they could make a diffe rence.  Agriculture was a matter of survival for a 
vast majority of the world's population and needed the attention of a few major players in the best 
interests of economic justice.  Introducing innova tive barriers in trade negotiations, holding one's 
cards close to one's chest until the last minute, rais ing high walls of unrealistic preferential protection, 
lobbying support from one block or the other or on one  pretext or the other, subsidizing a few at the 
cost of the rest, and arguing hard for non-economic solutions to economic sufferings might provide 
short-term relief to some developing countries, bu t would definitely derail their genuine process of 
long-term development. 
268. The other key area where Pakistan thought Memb ers had agreed in the July 2004 package was 
the flexibility in paragraph 8 on NAMA.  It was unfortunate, however, that the draft agreed in 
July 2004, through a supposedly bottom-up approach, was being subject to re-interpretation by some key players, despite the fact that this creative inte rpretation was in no way consistent with the rest of 
the text.  Pakistan was willing to accept ambiti ous results in NAMA, as long as there was some 
consideration of the realities on the ground, existin g bound tariff rates in any final structure of a 
formula, and adequate flexibilities available to developing countries.  A stronger commitment on 
market access, along with an e xpeditious and ambitious solution for cotton would be a welcome 
achievement in Hong Kong.  Pakistan welcom ed the Annexes relating to services and trade 
facilitation.  On rules, Pakistan would have liked  a more committed draft with a clearer roadmap, 
capable of sailing Members – as Canada had sai d – on a well-guided voyage from Hong Kong 
harbour to the final port of disembarkation by the e nd of 2006.  Pakistan was sa tisfied with the revised 
draft text as an initial outline for the Ministeria l negotiations.  It hoped that Hong Kong would turn 
out to be a successful milestone, with a win-win package for all those who played as well as those 
who had opted to watch, on the basis of a well- understood but recalibrated text based on a bottom-up 
approach and no-surprises. 
269. The representative of Zambia,
 on behalf of the LDCs , said that these countries had full 
confidence that the Chairman and the Director-G eneral – who had no doubt taken into account the 
suggestions made by delegations at the present meeti ng – would produce a text that raised the level of 
comfort for all Members regarding how the draft text  would be conveyed to Ministers in Hong Kong.  
The LDCs hoped to have a text in Hong Kong that  was focused, would allow Ministers to engage 
constructively, and would provide  appropriate guidance for Members' work programme beyond Hong 
Kong, in order to ensure that the level of am bition Members had set out for ourselves in this 
Development Round would be maintained. 
270. The representative of Kenya  said that in his earlier intervention he had overlooked 
commenting on the services text.  Like other dele gations, Kenya was concerned with the implicit 
references in paragraph 21 that Annex C was an ag reed text.  While Kenya did recognize that the 
elements of Annex C had been the subject of discussions in the Special Session of the Services WT/GC/M/100 
Page 78  
 
  Council, there had been no consensus on these elemen ts.  It should therefore be made clear in the 
main text that the content of this Annex had been  presented by the Chairman of the Special Session on 
his own responsibility, as had been done for the Annexes on agriculture and NAMA. 
271. The representative of Singapore
 asked that his delegation's statement at the TNC meeting on 
30 November be reflected in the records of the present meeting.25 
272. The Chairman  thanked all delegations fo r their constructive and thoughtful interventions.  It 
was very encouraging to her and to the Director-G eneral that their commitm ent to transparency and 
inclusiveness –  which they had sought to respec t at every step – had been appreciated by the 
membership.  The bottom-up process they had followed had certainly resulted in a text that was less 
advanced than all might have wished, but it was one that was grounded in reality, and all had noted 
that.  She was certain that the current text would help Ministers at Hong Kong to provide the 
momentum and direction needed to conclude th e Round.  She had sensed from the discussion that 
delegations generally felt this text had been taken as far as it could in Geneva.  She did not think it 
would make Ministers' task any easier if Member s sought to re-open that text now.  All had the 
assurance of the Director-General and herself that they would faithfully convey the substance of the 
present cover note to the Chairman of the Conference,  along with the draft text.  There was, however, 
one change that seemed necessary to make at the pres ent stage, and this was to harmonize the status of 
the services annex, as clarified in the cover note, w ith the relevant wording in paragraph 21 of the 
text.  There appeared to be broad convergence am ong Members to do so.  In concrete terms, this 
would mean putting square brackets in the first sen tence of paragraph 21 ar ound the words, "and the 
Objectives, Approaches and Timelines set out in Annex C to this document".  If this was acceptable, 
this modification would be made in the text before it was sent to Hong Kong. 
273. The representative of the European Communities  said his delegation agreed in principle with 
the approach just outlined by th e Chairman, even though it felt this was an unsatisfactory result, 
because it agreed that this was ne cessary.  However, the Community  believed that the brackets should 
not be placed just around "and the Objectives, Appr oaches and Timelines set out in Annex C to this 
document", because this singled out the annex as bein g the problem in this paragraph.  His delegation 
would prefer starting the brackets before the wo rds "in accordance with the above principles" and 
continuing to "and the Objectives, Approaches and Timelines set out in Annex C to this document". 
274. The representative of Chinese Taipei  said his delegation did not like the idea of bracketing a 
part of paragraph 21, and considered that the servi ces text already struck a delicate balance, as had 
been indicated earlier.  However, in the interest of completing Members' task of preparing the draft 
text for Ministers, his delegation, like the EC, could accept the Chairman's proposal in principle.  
Chinese Taipei supported the EC's suggestion that th e bracketed text begin with "in accordance with 
the above principles", in order to have a more balance result. 
275. The Chairman  appealed to Members not to re-open the proposal she had made, because this 
would necessitate a longer discussion than had been inte nded at this late hour.  She appealed to the EC 
and to Chinese Taipei to accept the proposal she had put forward in the interests of maintaining the 
consensus and the convergence that Members seemed to have at the present moment. 
276. The representative of the European Communities  said that in a spirit of compromise, his 
delegation would not prolong this discussion unnecessarily .  The Community did not wish to have the 
brackets placed where the Chairman had propo sed because, essentially, there was a balance in 
paragraph 21 that would be affected if one singled out  only one part of the paragraph.  Therefore, in a 
                                                      
25 The statement by Singapore at the TNC meeting on  30 November, which is reflected in the records 
of that meeting in document TN/C/M/22 (para. 259), is incorporated by reference into the present records.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 79 
 
 
  spirit of compromise, rather than singling out Annex C as being the problem, his delegation would 
propose putting the whole paragraph in square brackets. 
277. The Director-General  said he hoped to be able to convince delegations of the reason why the 
brackets were better placed where the Chairman ha d suggested.  The two prev ious paragraphs, 19 and 
20, set – on the basis of the GATS, the Doha ma ndate and what was stated in the July 2004 
framework – a number of principles which were dear  to a number of Members who basically wanted 
S&D treatment and flexibilities to be reflected carefu lly in the enunciation of these principles.  This 
was why, to address what the vast majority of the membership had said about paragraph 21, the Chairman and he had proposed to align the status of  Annex C.  This was the purpose of what had been 
proposed.  It had not been proposed to delete the langua ge, but rather to put it in square brackets.  In 
order to properly reflect the preparatory work and discussions, it would not be fair to bracket the 
words "in accordance with the above principles" in paragraph 21, because there had been no 
disagreement on the principles, and these principles lo cked in – for a number of developing countries 
who wanted S&D treatment – something that was im portant for the future of the negotiations.  If 
Members wished to move the services negotiations further along, they would not do this without the 
principles set out in paragraphs 19 and 20.  This  was the rationale behind the compromise suggested, 
and he urged the European Communities to have a careful look at it. 
278. The Chairman
 said that the European Communities had just indicated that it could agree to 
placing the brackets where she had proposed. 
279. The representative of Chinese Taipei  said the reason his delegation had proposed moving the 
initial bracket was that it remembered well that, when Members had discussed paragraphs 19, 20 and 
21, these had been an integral part of the whole discussion.  Therefore, if Members had to bracket the 
"Objectives, Approaches and Timelines" set out in Annex C, they should also bracket the "above 
principles".  However, in the interests of co ncluding this work, Chinese Taipei could accept the 
Chairman's proposal, but hoped Members that could agreed on the contents of Annex C in Hong 
Kong or at the earliest possible date, so that these brackets could be removed. 
280. The Chairman  thanked the European Communities and Chinese Taipei for th e flexibility they 
had shown, and also thanked the Director-General for his explanation. 
281. The representative of Korea  associated his delegation with the position stated by Chinese 
Taipei. 
282. The Chairman  thanked delegations for their statements.  She wished to clarify that she was 
not proposing the draft Ministerial text in Job( 05)/298/Rev.1 for adoption by the General Council.  
The future evolution of that draft text would be for Ministers to decide.  She was proposing instead 
that the General Council agree to transmit this draft text to Ministers for their consideration, bearing 
in mind its duty to provide Ministers with a basis for their negotiations.  She hoped it was clear that in doing so, this would in no way prejudice delega tions' positions on any of the issues covered in the 
draft text, or on any other issue.  By agreeing to  transmit the draft text to Hong Kong, the General 
Council would effectively be transferring the situa tion as it existed in Geneva at the present time to 
the Hong Kong Ministerial, where all hoped that so me concentrated political attention would produce 
solid progress.  The hard work all delegations had pu t in over the past few weeks meant that they were 
putting Ministers in a better position to focus their ef forts than had seemed likely a short while earlier.  
On behalf of all delegations, she wished to thank the Director-General and his staff for their untiring 
efforts.  She wished also to thank the Chairs of  all the WTO bodies who had contributed so much to 
this product, and to express the General Council's appreciation  to the interpreters for the hard work 
they had put in at the present meeting.  She then  invited the General Council to take note of the 
statements that had been made and to agree to transmit the draft Ministerial text in document WT/GC/M/100 
Page 80  
 
  JOB(05)/298/Rev.1, with the amendment she had propo sed to paragraph 21, for consideration by the 
Sixth Session of the Ministerial Conference. 
283. The General Council so agreed
. 
284. On 6 December, the Chairman  advised delegations of a modification that was proposed to be 
made to paragraph 34 of the draft Ministerial text in JOB(05)/298/Rev.1 – relating to TRIPS and 
Public Health – in order to reflect the Decision th e General Council had taken a short while earlier on 
this matter under Item 2 of the Agenda.  The current  text in paragraph 34 cons isted of two sentences.  
The proposal was to modify the second sentence to read as follows: 
 "In this regard, Members welcome the work that has taken place in the Council for TRIPS 
and the Decision of the General Council of 6 December 2005 on an Amendment of the TRIPS 
Agreement." 
 285. The rest of the paragraph would remain unchanged.  She proposed that, if this were agreeable 
to Members, the Director-General and she would include this amendment in the draft Ministerial text that the General Council had agreed on 2 December to transmit for consideration by Ministers in 
Hong Kong. 
286. The General Council took note
 of the statement and so agreed . 
13. Chairmanship of the Working Party on the Accession of Afghanistan 
287. The Chairman , speaking under "Other Business", informed Members that following 
consultations with Members of the Working Party and the authorities of Afghanistan, and in keeping 
with usual WTO practice, it had been agreed that  Mr. Ian De Jong (Netherlands) would serve as the 
Chairman of this Working Party. 
288. The General Council  took note  of this information.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 81 
 
 
  ANNEX I 
Implementation of paragraph 11 of the D ecision on the Implementation of paragraph 6  
of the Doha Declaration on the TR IPS Agreement and Public Health  (Agenda Item 2) 
 
Attachment to the General Council Chairman's Statement  
 
"Best Practices" Guidelines  
 
 "Companies had often used special labelling, colo uring, shaping, sizing, etc. to differentiate 
products supplied through donor or discounted pric ing programmes from products supplied to other 
markets.  Examples of such measures include the following: 
 
• Bristol Myers Squibb used different markings /imprints on capsules supplied to sub-Saharan 
Africa. 
 
• Novartis had used different trademark nam es, one (Riamet®) for an anti-malarial drug 
provided to developed countries, the other (C oartem®) for the same products supplied to 
developing countries.  Novartis further diffe rentiated the products through distinctive 
packaging. 
 
• GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) used different outer  packaging for its HIV/AIDS medications 
Combivir, Epivir and Trizivir supplied to de veloping countries.  GSK further differentiated 
the products by embossing the tablets with a different number than tablets supplied to 
developed countries, and plans to further di fferentiate the produc ts by using different 
colours. 
 
• Merck differentiated its HIV/AIDS antiretr oviral medicine CRIXIVAN through special 
packaging and labelling, i.e., gold-ink printi ng on the capsule, dark green bottle cap and a 
bottle label with a light-green background. 
 
• Pfizer used different colouring and shaping for Diflucan pills supplied to South Africa. 
  Producers had further minimized diversion by entering into contractual arrangements with 
importers/distributors to ensure delivery of products to the intended markets. 
  To help ensure use of the most effective anti-diversion measures, Members may share their 
experiences and practices in preventing diversion either  informally or through the TRIPS Council.  It 
would be beneficial for Members and industry to work together to further refine anti-diversion 
practices and enhance the sharing of information related to identifying, remedying or preventing 
specific occurrences of diversion."  
 WT/GC/M/100 
Page 82  
 
  ANNEX II 
Statement by HE Mrs Massiyatou Latoundji-Lauriano, 
 
Minister of Industry, Commerce and Promotion of Employment of Benin  
 
 "First of all, I should like to associate myself w ith the statements that have just been made by 
the African Group, the Group of Least-Developed Countries and the ACP Group on all of the issues 
under negotiation.  I should also like to express my fu ll appreciation and that of the four cosponsors of 
the Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton for th e efforts that you have made, Madam Chairman, 
together with the Director-General of the WTO a nd the chairmen of the negotiating groups in the 
course of the preparatory process for the Sixth WTO Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong. 
 
 "I have come to Geneva to follow with you the work of the present session of the WTO 
General Council, which is being held at a decisive moment, since it is from this session that we shall 
take to Hong Kong the outcome of four years of intense work and unremitting negotiations.  The four 
countries co-sponsoring the Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton have taken note of the draft 
declaration of the Hong Kong conference and of its re vised version issued today.  Consequently, they 
would like, through me, to express to you their concer ns with regard to the issue of cotton.  Thus, 
while it may be the case that the issu e is included in the structure of the text of the Draft Declaration, 
we note that in actual fact the text has failed to give the desperate situation which prevails on the 
ground in the cotton-producing and exporting countri es in Africa all the attention it requires and it 
does not provide the foundations for an ambitious, expeditious and specific settlement of the cotton 
issue for which the WTO General Council had given us a mandate at the end of July 2004, that is to 
say over a year ago.  That is a cause for concern in view of the continuing sluggish economic activity 
in our countries, which obtain most of their income from the production and marketing of cotton, which contributes about 12 per cent of the gross domestic product (GDP), 40 per cent of total export 
earnings and 70 per cent of agricultural earnings. 
 
"By way of an illustration, we should like to  point out that during the 2004-2005 cotton 
seasons the expenditure by our four  countries, namely Benin, Burkin a Faso, Chad and Mali, to deal 
with the deficits resulting from the fall in the price of cotton on the international market is estimated 
at $400 million.  You will understand therefore that  small, poor countries like ours with vulnerable 
economies and limited resources cannot continue to liv e with this financial haemorrhage.  Such 
deficits have serious consequen ces on the populations of our countr ies who see their living conditions 
declining from day-to-day, which is reflected in th eir inability to meet thei r basic needs, such as a 
balanced diet, decent housing, appropriate educa tion and primary health care.  These populations are 
now all the more desperate since they have realized  that the decline in thei r living conditions results 
from the fall in the price of cotton on the intern ational market caused by the subsidies granted by 
certain developed countries to a small number of cott on producers.  It is for this reason that we wish 
to call the attention of all the WTO Members to the ur gent need to take a clear decision on the issue of 
cotton at the Hong Kong conference at the latest.  It  is essential that comprehensive, concrete and 
operational modalities are adopted on this issue following the "early harvest"  principle, 
independently of  the results that might be obtained in the field of agriculture .   This was requested 
by the cosponsors of the Sector al Initiative in Favour of Cotton in Ouagadougou in Burkina Faso and 
in N'Djaména, Chad on 10 and 16 November 2005 respectively, and the African Ministers of Trade 
confirmed it on 24 November 2005 in Arusha, Tanzania. 
  "I arrived yesterday evening from Brussels, where the ACP Group held its ministerial session 
over the past three days.  The message that this en larged group of WTO Members has also sent to it 
on the cotton issue is the same:  it is an urgent and reasonable message and a call for fairness in the 
international trade in a product which constitutes the backbone of the economy of our countries.  It 
also strongly recommends the adoption by Hong Kong of the following modalities:   WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 83 
 
 
   - the total elimination of cotton export subsidies by 31 December 2005; 
  - a substantial reduction in domestic su pport, which causes serious prejudice to the 
trade in cotton, in accordance with the following timetable of implementation: 
 
  - 80 per cent by 31 December 2006; 
   - the following 10 per cent by 1 January 2008, and     - the remaining 10 per cent by 1 January 2009; 
 
 - the elaboration of disciplines forbidding and monitoring the conversion of non-
authorized support into authorized support; 
  - the establishment of a transitional emergenc y fund in order to offset the deficits 
resulting from the fall in cotton prices on the international market; 
  - the mobilization of technical and fina ncial assistance for the development of the 
cotton sector in Africa. 
 
"The adoption of these modalities in Hong K ong will send out a strong signal from the 
Members of the WTO to the whole world that would show our determination to reduce poverty in a 
number of developing countries.  We have the oppo rtunity to obtain concrete results on cotton as a 
result of the mandate given to us in the Framew ork Agreement of July 2004 to address the cotton 
issue ambitiously, expeditiously and specifically.  We  remain convinced that together we can reach a 
consensual decision on the cotton issue that w ill no doubt contribute to making the Doha Round a 
genuine development round." 
 WT/GC/M/100 
Page 84  
 
  ANNEX III 
Statement by Mr. John Tsang
 
Secretary for Commerce, Industry and Technology of Hong Kong, China  
and Chairman of the Sixth Session of the Ministerial Conference26 
 
 "Let me start by saying how pleased I am to be here.  I realize that the last couple of weeks 
have been a period of intense activity preparing the draft Declaration for the Sixth Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong.  My thanks to you all.  It  is not a secret that many of us would have liked 
to see agreement on full modalities in Hong Kong, but I am not going to agonize over that now.  
Multilateral negotiations have a life and a rhythm of their own.  As with baking, you cannot force the 
pace without risk of spoiling the cake.  From Hong K ong, China’s point of view, what is important is 
that we add value to the process. The Ministeria l Conference in Hong Kong will not be just an 
occasion for stocktaking.  We will be fully engaged in serious negotiations.  We will aim to ratchet up 
the extent and quality of our convergence, and set th e platform for the next stage of our preparation 
towards the conclusion of the Round by the end of 2006.  Pascal is fond of aeronautical metaphors.  
So let me say that our aim is to emerge from the Ministerial meeting refue lled, re-charged and re-
focused with an unambiguous flight-plan for the fina l leg of the journey.  To my mind, that has 
always meant that we must concentrate collea gues' minds on key issues in each area and secure 
decisions, which clear the way for the fina l stage of negotiations here in Geneva. 
  "In that context, allow me to say a few wo rds about how we plan to run the meeting in 
Hong Kong.  The strategy for the preparatory work was a bottom-up process with no surprises. That is 
exactly how I intend to run the Hong Kong meeting:  bottom-up and no surprises.  We want to have, 
indeed, we need to have, an open, transparent and inclusive process, with nothing new or novel, 
nothing untried, nothing untested or nothing unf amiliar.  I fully understand that communication 
amongst delegations and groups of delegations is a ke y ingredient for an effective ministerial meeting.  
We will, therefore, be adhering to past practi ce in having two daily one-hour slots, morning and 
afternoon, to facilitate this sort of coordination.  I will also ask the coordina tors and spokespersons of 
various groupings to assist me in disseminating in formation on the latest developments to their 
respective constituencies to ensure th at everyone is up to date on the state of the discussion and that 
the process remains as tr ansparent as possible. 
 
 "Madam Chair, I understand that you intend to say  a few words later about the organization of 
work, and I have no wish to duplicate this now.  Howe ver, let me just emphasize that after the formal 
opening of the Conference on the afternoon of Tu esday 13 December, we will move quickly to the 
business session of the conference at which we w ould need to adopt an agenda and agree on the 
organization of work. I have been in close touch w ith the Director General on this over the last few 
weeks, and I will communicate with delegations more formally on detailed arrangements shortly. 
Allow me today simply to say that the info rmal process in Hong Kong will essentially mirror the 
process you are familiar with here in Geneva.  Ther e will be regular informal Heads-of-Delegations 
meetings, at least once a day.  As part of this , I believe that, like my predecessors, I will need the 
assistance of a number of colleagues to facilitate the process in Hong Kong. I have, therefore, approached a number of them to ensure, initially, that they are both willing – you will understand me 
when I say that there are few volunteers for this sort of work – and that they are available.  I am happy 
to say that I have secured the services of six courageous colleagues. They are:   Minister Humayun Khan (Pakistan) who will deal with NAMA; 
 
 Minister Mukhisa Kituyi (Kenya) who will deal with Agriculture;  and  
                                                     
 
26 The full text of Secretary Tsang's statement was circulated subsequently in document JOB(05)/317.  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 85 
 
 
   Minister Clement Rohee (Guyana) who will d eal with specific development-related issues. 
  For Services, Rules and other issues, I have secured the assistance of three other colleagues 
who will serve as facilitators at large.  They are: 
  Minister Hyun Chong Kim (Korea);  
 Minister Jonas Støre (Norway);  and 
  Minister Ignacio Walker (Chile).   "So there it is, my slate of facilitators who will assist me in Hong Kong.  In choosing them I have borne in mind the five core areas of work, which Members have pursued since the beginning of 
this year, and the need to be even-handed. I also  had in mind the need for some flexibility in the 
organization of work as negotiations evolve during the conference.  I will be giving further thought to 
this in the time remaining between now and our mee ting in Hong Kong, but I thought it best to share 
my broad thinking with you at this earliest possible moment.  I can assure Members that all facilitators will provide opportunities for every dele gation to make its resp ective views known, and 
will keep transparency and incl usiveness close to their hearts. 
  "Preparations for the Hong Kong Ministerial ar e complete. Logistically, everything that can 
be done to facilitate a successful meeting of Mi nisters has been done.  Hong Kong, China, looks 
forward to welcoming you all and to making every aspect of your stay with us as comfortable and enjoyable an experience as possible.  What we cannot do is guarantee success;  we cannot do your 
work for you. Success is something for which Members have a collec tive responsibility.  We are all 
fond of repeating that the WTO is a Member-driven or ganization:  the agenda is Member-driven;  the 
process is Member-driven;  and so success must also  by definition be Member-driven.  Hong Kong, 
China is delighted that we have been given the opportunity to host the coming conference.  We hope 
that it will move negotiations forward, but a successfu l conclusion of this Round depends on you, the 
Members, having the global vision and the individual courage necessary to drive determinedly 
through the Ministerial and on to the final stage. For sure, colleagues, the world will be watching. 
  "In conclusion, let me say how pleased I am to have had the opportunity of being with you all 
at this meeting of the General Council this morning.  It has been immensely valuable in helping me 
think through my final preparations for the task ahead. Thank you for taking the process this far; I 
look forward to seeing you all in Hong Kong and wo rking with you all collectively towards a 
successful conclusion of the Doha Development Round."    
 
  WT/GC/M/100 
Page 86  
 
  ANNEX IV 
 
Statement by Moldova at the Informal HODs meeting on 28 November 2005
 
  
 "As other delegations, we would like to thank you for the Draft Ministerial Text.  In this 
overall context, Madam Chair:   "First, we have noted that in the main part of  the draft (pages 1-8), the special situation of the 
Recently Acceded Members (RAMs) h as been recognized only with regard to Services.  That is not 
acceptable to us and, moreover, that is also not in line with the paragraph 9 of the Doha Ministerial 
Declaration, where extensive market-access commitme nts in all areas already made by these countries 
on accession were fully recognized, as the fact th at these accessions had greatly strengthen the 
multilateral trading system.  
 "Second, therefore, we would like to draw your attention once more to the very substantive 
concerns of small low-income countries in transitio n, which are also Recently Acceded Members, as 
highlighted in their three formal proposals subm itted to the Special Session of the Committee on 
Agriculture and the Negotiating Group on NAMA, as well as more recently to the Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation.  Those proposals are based on these countries' real, factual and objective situations both with regard to their already substantial and largely unmatched input into the 
multilateral trading system and their level of deve lopment, which remains quite low comparable to 
that of many Least Developed Countries.  These three proposals are based on the provisions of paragraph 38 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration,  paragraph l.d and other relevant sections of the 
General Council's Decision of 1 August 2004, wh ich underline the difficulties faced by small low-
income economies in transition in their efforts to  implement economic and trade policy reforms.  
Thus, we firmly consider that small low-income countries in transition, whose tariffs are bound at 
very low rates across the board, sh ould remain exempt from any kind of further reductions in the 
medium-term, in view of the still high tariff levels of other Members, as well as international market 
distortions caused by agricultural export subsidi es and domestic support measures exercised mostly 
by developed country Members.  The same, if not ev en more, applies to Services liberalization.  On 
Trade Facilitation, we have requested that small low-income economies in transition be also granted 
special flexibilities with regard to trade facilita tion and be provided with technical assistance and 
capacity building in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3, 5 and 6 of Annex D of the General Council's 
Decision of 1 August 2004.   "Third, I would also underscore that, fo r known historical reasons, small low-income 
countries in transition had joined the multilateral trading system very recently by accepting an 
unprecedentedly high level of obligations and commit ments as a result of their accession to the WTO.  
Equally important is to understa nd that these countries, for the same historical reasons, had entered 
the international scene also quite recently and t hus had very limited opportunities for obtaining 
international recognition of their actual developm ent levels in accordance with the established 
political realities, which had been formed without par ticipation of these countries.  In particular, in the 
WTO, the Multilateral Trade Agreements as well as th e Doha Ministerial Declaration did not stipulate 
any specific flexibilities for these countries, although their level of development would warrant that 
kind of approach.  We had a rather positive initial response to our proposals from other Members.  
However, this has not materialized yet in any specific provisions or counter proposals.  Moreover, in their reports to the TNC, the Chairpersons of the respective negotiating bodies have scarcely 
mentioned our positions, in particular in agriculture, which is a crucial area for our countries and also 
for the Round as a whole.   "Finally, with regard to any "Aid for Tr ade" package as a possible Hong Kong outcome, we 
consider that such package is vital to strengthe n the development oriented component of the Doha  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 87 
 
 
  Round as the Development Round.  Small low income countries in transition should also be viewed as 
a major and direct beneficiary of such supplemen tary measures.  Madam Chair, we would like to 
convey to you our high expectations  that our proposals will be eventually considered in a positive and 
unbiased spirit, but, for Hong Kong, we urge that, at  least, their content will be fully and properly 
reflected in the Ministerial Text, like positions of other Members." 
 
  WT/GC/M/100 
Page 88  
 
  ANNEX V 
 
Statement by Cuba at the Informal HODs meeting on 28 November 2005
 
 
 
 "We thank the Chairperson of the General Council, the Director-General and the WTO 
Secretariat for presenting this draft ministerial text.   "At this advanced stage of the discussions, ther e is little new that we could add to what has 
already been said.  We consider it important, howe ver, to underline some of the points that have 
already been made by other delegations. 
  "We fully endorse the statements made by Braz il on behalf of the G-20, and by Indonesia as 
coordinator of the G-33.  In the latter case, we associate ourselves with that group's call for the 
provisions on Special Products and on the Special Sa feguard to be incorporated into the section on 
agriculture in the Ministerial Declaration.  We also support China's statement, in essence regarding 
the inclusion of a specific paragraph setting out the concerns and interests of recently acceded Members.  We further support the statement by th e Ambassador of Benin, underlining the need to 
incorporate full modalities that will address the cotton initiative tabled by several African countries, in 
an expeditious, specific and ambitious manner.  
 "We echo the sentiment already expressed by other delegations to the effect that we have 
some difficulty with the inclusion of the annexes and their respective references in the ministerial text, 
for in the cases of NAMA and Agriculture for example,  which are of particular importance to most 
developing countries, they are reports submitted on the Chair's own responsibility, and are not texts 
agreed by Members. 
 
 "Like others, we underline the absence of any reference to Doha paragraph 19, on which our 
colleagues from India and Peru have already elaborated.   "As other delegations have pointed out, it is necessary to guarantee due fulfilment of the 
development objectives set at Doha, which are not duly reflected in the proposed text. 
 
 "As pertains to coherence and aid for trad e, we endorse the comments made by Bangladesh 
and Nigeria, and with specific reference to the la tter, we confirm the need for a clear description of 
the implications and the concept of aid for trade in  the ministerial text.  Like Peru, we consider it 
necessary to include UNCTAD in th e paragraphs under reference. 
 
 "With respect to Services, we share the concerns voiced by other developing countries 
regarding the excessive restrictiveness built into the text, as well as the failure to mention that it is not 
a text that was agreed on as part of the Ministerial Declaration.  In that connection, we attach the 
greatest importance to Ecuador's statement that the framework for this topic derives from the General 
Agreement on Trade in Services, paragraph 15 of the Doha Declaration and Annex C of the July 
Package. 
  "Like the Ambassador of Jamaica, we believe that it would be a meaningful step to harmonize the various aspects of the ministerial text.  Accordi ngly, my delegation would be  grateful if the texts 
on Agriculture and NAMA could include fulfilment of  the objectives set in th e July Package, as has 
already been done for those laid out in the Doha Declaration. 
  "I should like to repeat that these comments are preliminary, and our delegation reserves the 
right to take up these matters again in forthcoming consultations or meetings."  WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 89 
 
 
  ANNEX VI 
 
Statement by Jamaica at the Informal HODs meeting on 28 November 2005  
 
 
 "Jamaica wishes to thank you as Chairperson of the General Council, and the Director-
General, for producing this first draft of the Minist erial text for Hong Kong for the consideration of 
Members.  We note that this is a first draft and that it provides a basis for intensifying the discussions on what should be presented to Ministers at Hong Kong.  Jamaica wishes to make brief comments on 
the structure and nature of the draft text as well as on a couple of substantive issues which we feel 
should be addressed between now and the Ministerial conference. 
  "With respect to the cover note for the draft te xt, Jamaica notes that it correctly reflects that 
the text does not purport to represent agreement overall and that divergences still exist among the 
membership.  It is stated in th e last sentence of the second paragraph of the cover note that "in some 
areas where important, substantive differences persist" the draft attaches a report by the relevant 
Chair, prepared on his own responsibility, setting out the present situation as he sees it".  It is not clear 
to us which of the reports this sentence relates to .  In this context we are particularly concerned 
regarding the case of the services text.  Paragra ph 9 of the draft Ministerial text makes a cross-
reference to Annex C, which is the services text, and serves to give the impression that this text is 
agreed.  This in our view is not the case as dive rgences still exist among the membership on some of 
the elements contained in Annex C.  It is on this  basis that Jamaica wishes to emphasize the need for 
greater clarity in establishing the nature of the attach ed reports.  We are of the view that a distinction 
needs to be made between those reports made by  Chairpersons on their own responsibility and those 
reports which are being submitted by the respective negotiating groups such as the report by the 
Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation where ther e is general acceptance by the membership. 
 
 "We feel that the substantive elements of the draft text represent a good effort in general but 
we have concerns regarding the content in certain areas.  We think the text is weak in a number of areas as it does not provide a basis for Ministers to  consider specific issues and recommendations with 
a view to making clear decisions and providing direction for the negotiations that must take place after Hong Kong.  While we do recognize that in some  instances this may be a natural consequence of 
the state of play in some areas, we think more need s to be done to provide Ministers with a clear idea 
of the issues which they are being requested to  address and on which their guidance needs to be 
provided.  We believe this is necessary if, shor t of full modalities we are to narrow differences and 
importantly also at the political level, creat e better understanding of Me mbers positions and the 
potential for movement or otherwise.  It is vital th at such efforts to assist Ministers focus in Hong 
Kong and provide guidance be characterized by balance,  and that the issues with respect to which they 
are being asked to provide guidance are comprehensiv e and inclusive.  We know that there is a view 
that some issues will fall into place after Hong Kong, but we think this is risky and believe that all 
issues of importance to a significant or to a large num ber of Members, deserve Ministerial attention so 
as to ensure that they do in fact fall into place.  We hope it will be possible to arrive at a balanced and 
inclusive list of issues for Ministers.  This will be  particularly important for those Ministers who do 
not participate in meetings such as those which have taken place in London and Zurich and such 
places and for whom Hong Kong might be the only oppor tunity to let their Ministerial colleagues 
know their views on issues of importance to them and their countries before the end of the Doha Round.  
 "Turning to another issue, Jamaica is of the vi ew that sufficient attention has not been paid to 
development components of the negotiations.  We ar e of the view that the text lacks sufficient 
direction in the areas of Special and Differential Treatment and implementation-related issues.  There is urgent need to make more progress on implementation and on the agreement-specific proposals on S&D.  With regard to S&D it is  regrettable that since the Round was launched in 2001, no meaningful WT/GC/M/100 
Page 90  
 
  progress has been reached on making S&D more precise, effective and operational.  We therefore 
believe that the development component of the Rou nd cannot be satisfied without concrete progress at 
Hong Kong on S&D, including the LDC a nd other Agreement-specific proposals. 
  "We welcome the section on Aid for Trade contai ned in paragraph 37.  However, we think it 
should be made as operational as possible in the circum stances.  We also believe that the paragraph 
can be improved in certain ways.  In this paragraph,  we have references to an ambitious conclusion of 
the Round and a further reference to a successful and ambitious conclusion.  Jamaica supports a 
successful conclusion of the Doha Round and a conclusi on that is in keeping with the Doha Mandate.  
We are not sure however that all Members are agre ed on precisely what an ambitious conclusion is 
and we think that therefore it is safe to refer only to a successful conclusion.  We would wish to see 
the paragraph very clearly indicate that Aid for Tr ade can help some Members take advantage of the 
potential opportunities resulting from the DDA and specifically among the purposes of Aid for Trade 
is facilitating adjustment to trade liberaliza tion including the fact of preference erosion. 
 
 "We fully support the points made by the delega tion of Bangladesh in regard to the first two 
sentences of the section on coherence.  We think that there is an approach to coherence and to 
conditionality in these two paragra phs which we cannot support. 
  "Turning to Services, we have concerns with this draft text.  As indicated earlier the relationship between paragraph 9 an d Annex C would suggest that that Services text is an agreed 
document.  But we continue to have strong reservati ons about certain elements contained in Annex C.  
We have already raised those con cerns in an informal session of th e Council for Trade in Services in 
Special Session.  I will not repeat our concerns th is afternoon, except to indicate our reservations 
about, inter alia , paragraphs 1 and 7 of Anne x C.  We note with satisfaction that the reference to 
numerical targets and indicators has been deleted.  However, in paragraph 7 of the draft Ministerial 
text, we see that there is a reference at the end of the first end sentence to "due respect for the right of 
Members to regulate".  We would recall that the Se rvices Agreement specifically also draws attention 
to the importance of due respect for national policy ob jectives.  We believe that  this concept should be 
included as well in paragraph 7 of the Ministerial text itself.  That we think will serve to protect the interests of many Members.  
 "On NAMA, we have a concern regarding the range  of coefficients specifically referred to in 
the report submitted on his own responsibility by th e Chairman of the Negotiating Group.  When 
linked to the suggestion that Ministers seek to narr ow the range of coefficients at Hong Kong, our 
concern is greatly heightened.  In regard to the direction in paragraph 34 and 35 of the Chairman's 
report, we believe that there are other important issues relating for example to Special and Differential 
Treatment, including the question of less than full reciprocity and also relating to aspects of 
flexibility, other than those identified in pa ragraph 8 of the NAMA Framework which require 
ministerial attention if there is to be balance in the discussions and negotiations and if there is to be 
comfort to a large number of Members, and, furthermor e, if there is to be adherence to the letter and 
spirit of the Doha Mandate and the July 2004 Fram ework text.  This returns my delegation to the 
question of balance and inclusiveness in the provision of any guidelines to Ministers in regard to the 
issues on which they should focus so as to move  our process forward ultimately towards full 
modalities.   "Lastly Madam Chair, on an editorial point, which we are sure you will address, we note from the draft texts that there are different refere nces, some to the General Council Decision of 
1 August 2004, others to the July 2004 Framework Text.  We think that these should be streamlined 
so there should be one consistent reference to help those outside th is organization in understanding the 
text that is before us.   WT/GC/M/100 
 Page 91 
 
 
   "These are some of the preliminary comments that  Jamaica has.  The draft is being reviewed 
in our capital and we will have further comments to  make within the course of this week.  We 
conclude by thanking the Chairs of the differe nt negotiating groups and Committees for their hard 
work and effort in providing their inputs for th e draft text.  Jamaica underscores its willingness to 
work with all Members in an effort to achieve fu rther convergence on the text  in the time remaining 
before the Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong and particularly towards providing all Ministers with 
more clear-cut guidance in so far as that is possi ble to focus the discussions and negotiations to take 
place in Hong Kong."   
__________