RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/GC/M/53
15 March 2000
(00-1046)
General Council
7 and 8 February 2000
MINUTES OF MEETING
Held in the Centre William Rappard
on 7 and 8 February 2000
Chairman:  Mr. Ali Mchumo (Tanzania)
Subjects discussed: Page
1. Five-year review of the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT
1994 ........................................................................................................................... .................1
2. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration .............................................................3
(a) Report of the Committee .................................................................................................... ........3
3. Negotiations on agriculture and services under Article 20 of the Agreement on
Agriculture and Article XIX of the General Agreement on Trade in Services...................4
4. Follow-up to the Seattle Ministerial Conference....................................................................9
5. Other aspects of th e WTO Work Programme .......................................................................9
6. Appointment of office rs to WTO bodies...............................................................................27
7. Election of Chairperson...................................................................................................... ....28
Prior to adoption of the agenda, representatives rose and observed a minute of silence in
memory of Mr. Georgiy V. Gabounia, First Deputy-Minister of Trade of the Russian Federation andHead of the Russian Delegation for negotiations in the WTO, who had passed away on 22 January.
Also prior to adoption of the agenda, the Chairman said that the 17 December 1999 meeting
of the General Council that had been adjourned in order to allow for further consultations on the
"Follow-up to the Seattle Ministerial Conference" should be considered closed, as that item would betaken up at the present meeting.
1. Five-year review of the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994
1. The Chairman recalled that the exemption under paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994 provided in
sub-paragraph 3(b) for a five-year review after the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement in
order to examine whether the conditions which had created the need for the exemption still
prevailed.  The exemption would thereafter be reviewed every two years for as long as it was in
force.  The General Council had considered this matter at its meetings on 6 October and
3-4 November 1999, and at the latter meeting had agreed to revert to it at the present meeting.
2. The representative of Japan recalled that at the meeting of the General Council on
6 October 1999, his delegation had submitted a communication in document WT/GC/W/344 which
contained questions on this matter.  Japan hoped that the United States would reply to these
questions in writing.  Prior to the present meeting,  the United States had indicated its willingness to
provide written replies to these questions, and his delegation welcomed this initiative.  However, if
these replies were not satisfactory or if further clarification was required, Japan reserved its right toWT/GC/M/53
Page 2
revert to this matter at a later date.  His delegation hoped that the United States would provide further
information on this matter at the present meeting.
3. The representative of the European Communities said it was his understanding that prior to
the present meeting, the United States had provided some written replies to several Members'
questions on this exemption.  Since these replies still had to be examined, the item should remain onthe General Council's agenda.  He noted that on the basis of the US responses made available in
January 2000
1 one could conclude that the US shipbuilding industry was in vigorous health.
Deliveries of vessels had increased between the period 1990-1994 and the period 1994-1998, both in
numbers and tonnage.  Furthermore, the order book s had strengthened.  The industry had expanded
its market share world-wide from less than 1 per cent in 1994 to around 2 per cent at the present
time.  It was therefore necessary to examine the most recent replies from the United States in order to
consider what should be done in this case, sin ce the industry seemed to be in good health.  He
reiterated that the item should remain on the General Council's agenda.
4. The representative of Australia said that like the Community, his delegation also considered
that this item should remain on the General Council's agenda.  He was aware that some responses
had recently been provided by the United States to the questions asked.  He underlined that
paragraph 3(b) of the GATT 1994 required a proper review of the exemption after five years, as wellas subsequently every two years.  Australia was concerned that in the absence of such a review, it
could be questioned whether the exemption und er consideration should continue to apply.
Therefore, a proper review was essential to the continuation of the exemption.
5. The representative of the United States said that her country had submitted its responses to
the questions raised by Panama, Japan and the Community and would make them available to other
delegations if they so wished.  Paragraph 3(b) of the GATT 1994 required the Ministerial
Conference to review the exemption not later than five years after the entry into force of the WTO.
She recalled that the review had started at the General Council meeting in July 1999 and had
continued in October 1999.  In September 1999 the United States had organized consultations on the
operation of this exemption, in which a number of Members had participated.  In July 1999 herdelegation had become aware that some delegations were not completely familiar with the
background to the exemption and that many were also not acquainted with the annual statistical
reports submitted by the United States in connection with it.  As she had previously explained, the
exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994 was not a waiver but an important part of
the GATT 1994 which had its origin in paragraph 1(b) of the Protocol of Provisional Application of
the GATT 1947.  That paragraph provided that Part II of the GATT 1947 applied to contracting
parties "to the fullest extent not inconsistent with  existing legislation".  Since the WTO Agreement
was not applied by its Members provisionally and the GATT 1994 had no counterpart to the GATT
1947 Protocol of Provisional Application, the exemption provided under paragraph 3 of the GATT
1994 was necessary to deal with non-conforming provisions of domestic legislation of a non-
discretionary character in the specific area addressed by the exemption.  On 20 December 1994 the
United States had invoked the provisions of paragraph 3(a) with respect to specific legislation thatmet the requirements of that paragraph.  The US invocation of this exemption had been
acknowledged by the Director-General on the same day.  The invocation of the exemption carried
with it an obligation to provide Members with annual statistical reports pursuant to the requirements
of paragraph 3(c) of the GATT 1994.  The United States had fully abided by this reporting
requirement by submitting reports for 1995 in WT/L/112, for 1996 in WT/L/201, for 1997 inWT/L/257 and for 1998 in WT/L/293.  The only purpo se of the review provided for in paragraph
3(b) was to "examine whether the conditions which created the need for the exemption still prevail"
– in other words, whether the legislation continued to be in force and had not been amended in a way
which would disqualify it from coverage under the exemption.  The conditions that had created the
                                                     
1 Subsequently circulated to Members in WT/GC/W/397.WT/GC/M/53
Page 3
need for this exemption still existed.  Since the invocation of this exemption in 1994, there had been
no amendments, legislative changes, or measures adopted by the United States that would alter its
position in conforming to coverage by the exempti on.  In fulfilling the terms of the exemption, the
United States had provided detailed annual reporting of vessel orders and deliveries from US
shipyards as required by paragraph 3(c) of the GATT 1994.  During the consultations held in 1999,the United States had provided some analysis to participants on the scope of the exemption, and
would make it available to Members who had not pa rticipated in those consultations who wished to
receive this information.  At the meeting of the General Council on 6 October 1999 she had cited
some figures from the most recent statistical report (WT/L/293) and would therefore not reiterate
them at the present meeting.  The United States  believed that the General Council, acting for the
Ministerial Conference, should conclude its examination by noting that the conditions that had
created the need for this exemption still existed.
6. The representative of Panama said that the questions Panama had submitted to the United
States2 were available outside the room in English and Spanish, and thanked the United States for its
replies to the questions.  Since his delegation had just received these replies, it was not in a position
to comment on them.  The United States had stated that the exemption was an integral part of the
GATT 1994.  Even though an exemption might be integrated into the GATT 1994, it could stillexpire if the conditions for the exemption no longer prevailed, or it might not be extended because
the legislation did not comply with the requirements.  Since there was no WTO decision on the
legislation notified by the United States, it was not clear whether such an exemption existed under
paragraph 3(a).  It was not enough simply to invoke the exemption.  It was necessary to review
whether the notified legislation complied with the requirements for the application of the exemption.
Once a determination was made, one could consider if any modifications to the legislation were in
line with the WTO Agreement.  Panama also considered that the item should remain on the General
Council's agenda.  His country would carefully examine the US replies and hoped that in the very
near future a further dialogue on this matter would be possible with a view to finding a solution.
7. The representative of Hong Kong, China said that his delegation welcomed the statement by
the United States and noted its position on the type of review that was necessary on this matter.
However, his delegation took a difference positi on.  He understood that the United States had stated
that it had replied to questions raised by the Community and Japan, but that it had done so on an
individual Member-to-Member basis, and that these replies could be made available to other
delegations.  Hong Kong, China would be interested  in receiving these replies, and urged the United
States to make them available to the wider membership.  His delegation noted with interest Panama's
questions and would examine them carefully, and would be interested to have the replies to thosequestions had they been furnished.  Hong Kong, China fully agreed with the Community, Australia
and Panama that this item should remain on the General Council's agenda while the matter was being
further considered.
8. The General Council took note of the statements and agreed
 to revert to this matter at its next
meeting.
2. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration
(a) Report of the Committee (WT/BFA/45)
9. The Chairman recalled that at its meeting on 17 December 1999, the General Council had
adopted a series of recommendations of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration
concerning the budget of the WTO for 2000 (WT/BFA/44), and that the full report of the Committee
                                                     
2 Subsequently circulated to Members in WT/GC/32.WT/GC/M/53
Page 4
would be presented as early as possible this year.  That report was now before the General Council in
WT/BFA/45.
10. Mrs. Dubois-Destrizais (France), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance and
Administration, recalled that on 17 December 1999 she had submitted a series of recommendations
of the Committee (WT/BFA/44) but no report.  This had been due to the fact that a consensus on the
budget of the WTO for 2000 had been reached at a very late stage and the full report had not been
ready.  At the present meeting she was submitting the report of the Committee's meetings on
27 September, 4, 12 and 29 October, and 14 Decembe r 1999 (WT/BFA/45).  She drew attention to
the Committee's decision in favour of the least-developed Members in the form of a reduction by
half of the minimum contribution to the budget.  The Committee had arrived at a consensus on this
matter after having examined it for several years.  She recalled that in 1999 the Budget Committee
and the Committee on Trade and Development had held a joint meeting which had enabled them toexamine the global situation of the WTO's technical assistance, and expressed the hope that this
practice of joint meetings would be continued in 2000.
11. The General Council took note of the statement and adopted
 the report of the Committee on
Budget, Finance and Administration (WT/BFA/45).
3. Negotiations on agriculture and services under Article 20 of the Agreement on
Agriculture and Article XIX of the General Agreement on Trade in Services
12. The Chairman recalled that under Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture, Members had
agreed that negotiations for continuing the reform process would be initiated one year before the end
of the implementation period, i.e. 1 January 2000.  Since that date had passed, those mandated
negotiations were now on.  However, a number of procedural matters remained to be settled before thework could start in practice.  In this regard, and in the light of wide and intensive consultations with
and among Members on the structure of the negotiations, he proposed that the negotiations be
conducted in the Committee on Agriculture meeting in Special Sessions.  Progress in the negotiations
would be reported directly to the General Council on a regular basis.  The first Special Session of the
Committee on Agriculture would be scheduled back-t o-back with the next regular meeting of the
Committee, to be held on 23-24 March 2000.  He also proposed that the Chair of the Agriculture
Committee chair the Special Sessions, and that exceptionally a Vice-Chair of the Committee be
appointed to conduct the regular work of the Committee.
13. As far as the negotiations on services were concerned, the General Council was aware that
they too had officially started on 1 January, as required by Article XIX.  Following the consultations
that had been held, he proposed that the services negotiations be conducted in Special Sessions of the
Council for Trade in Services.  The Services Coun cil would report on a regular basis to the General
Council.  The first Special Session of the Services Council would be held in the week beginning
21 February, back-to-back with the regular meeting of  the Services Council. He further proposed that
the Chair of the Services Council chair the Specia l Sessions, and that the Services Council consider
whether any further procedural questions needed to be addressed including the possible appointment
of a Vice-Chairman.
14. He also noted that Members had indicated the importance they attached to other elements of
the Built-in Agenda, including the mandated reviews and the negotiations foreseen under the TRIPS
Council in respect of geographical indications.  Some Members had also indicated that the mandated
reviews should address the impact of the agreements concerned on the trade and development
prospects of developing countries.  While these reviews and negotiations might not pose the sameimmediate practical questions as the services and agriculture negotiations, insofar as they were subject
to existing procedures, this did not in any way detract from the need to make serious progress on them.WT/GC/M/53
Page 5
15. The representative of Pakistan said that while the Chairman's statement largely reflected the
product of the informal discussions as regards the mandated negotiations, it had not done so as regards
the mandated reviews of WTO agreements.  In his delegation's understanding, there was no opposition
to the notion that the mandated reviews should take into account developmental aspects of the
agreements concerned.  It was therefore not a question of some Members indicating this view, as inthe Chairman's statement, but rather of the Genera l Council taking a decision that these reviews should
address such developmental aspects.  Such agreement of the membership should be reflected at the
present meeting, since this matter was vital for Pakistan and many other developing countries.
16. The representatives of Argentina for Mercosur Members, Australia
, Bangladesh , Bolivia ,
Colombia, Cuba , Dominican Republic , Egypt , India , Malaysia , Mauritius , Mexico , Morocco for the
African Group, Panama , Poland for CEFTA Members and Turkey , the Philippines , Sri Lanka ,
Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago , Uganda  and the United States  agreed with Pakistan that the
importance Members placed on developmental aspects in the mandated reviews should not be
qualified, and that the collective recognition and commitment that the mandated reviews should
address the impact of the agreements concerned on the trade and development prospects of developing
countries should be reflected at the present meeting.
17. The representative of the Philippines, also on behalf of Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia,
Malaysia, Myanmar and Thailand, expressed full support for the Chairman's statement.  Moving
forward with the mandated negotiations that had legally started on 1 January 2000 was the best signal
that the WTO was back in business.  The Chairman's proposals affirmed their preference for
undertaking the negotiations in the existing bodies, and for these bodies to report to the General
Council with the aim of achieving an overall balance in the outcome.  It was necessary to benchmarkthe first meetings of these bodies, and at some point it would also be necessary to set a deadline for the
conclusion of the negotiations.  The chairmanship of the negotiations on agriculture needed an urgent
decision, and it would be essential for the incoming General Council Chairman to hold further
consultations on this.  While all the issues and modalities might not be decided immediately, Members
had to deal with them in the near future so as to seize this opportunity to demonstrate concretely thatthe WTO was indeed back in business.
18. The representative of Australia said that the Chairman's statement had captured the consensus
reached in the consultations in all but one important respect, as referred to by Pakistan.
19. The representative of Bolivia said that since Seattle it had become clear that Members had to
get down to work on a new basis, despite their disappointment at not having achieved the results they
had hoped for.  It was encouraging that Members had already been able to agree on the structures and
modalities for the agriculture and services negotiations.  Given the sensitive nature of thesenegotiations and the detail they would require, the chairpersons of the negotiating sessions should be
Geneva-based and have a high level of expertise.  The negotiations should also not be delayed in any
way.  Furthermore, it was important that no service sector be excluded, and particular attention should
be given to sectors of interest to developing countries.  Her delegation welcomed the Chairman's
reference to the importance of developmental aspects in the mandated reviews.
20. The representative of India said that the agriculture and services negotiations should begin as
quickly as possible, and agreed to the Chairman's proposals regarding the organizational arrangements.
It was equally important that progress be made also in the TRIPS negotiations on geographical
indications, which had already begun.  Any mandated reviews of WTO agreements should take into
account the experience gained in their implementation, and the impact on the trade and developmentprospects of developing countries was an important element of this experience.  As this should happen
in any review, there should be no objection to Pakistan's suggestion.  As regards vice-chairs, his
delegation had indicated in informal discussions that it would be appropriate to have vice-chairs for all
bodies that would have the responsibility of undertaking mandated reviews.  As suggested by theWT/GC/M/53
Page 6
Chairman in respect of the Services Council, the possibility of appointing vice-chairs should be
available also to other bodies dealing with mandated reviews in case the workload justified it.  The
division of responsibility between the chair and the vice-chair should be decided in the respective
bodies.
21. The representative of Cuba said that the agriculture and services negotiations were being held
in an environment characterized by the increasing polarization of countries between the very rich and
the very poor, and the increased vulnerability of developing countries in financial and economic crises.
It was therefore imperative to address development priorities as an integral part of the negotiating
process on the issues agreed for negotiations.  Market access for developing-country products in
developed-country markets would continue to be an important issue for all, and the negotiations
should be established on this basis.  His delegation believed that until there was multilateral agreement
on negotiating guidelines, the actual negotiating phase itself could not be considered as having started.The guidelines should be commensurate with solutions found for the problems of implementation of
existing agreements, which were of vital importance to Cuba.  In agriculture, developing-country
exports were still being hampered by tariff peaks and tariff escalation, and by difficulties in the
application of quota systems.  Concessions agreed to by developed countries in the Uruguay Round
had in fact left certain maximum duties intact that were still being applied and which constitutedexcessive barriers to developing-country exports.  Furthermore, developed countries had not to date
fully implemented agreed reductions.  The continuation of the agricultural reform programme should
take account of food security concerns and the specific problems of net food-importing countries, as
well as the social repercussions of agricultural trade liberalization.  While negotiations should focus on
the integration of agricultural trade into the WTO system, they should at the same time guaranteeadequate flexibility to developing countries to enable them to tackle the issues he had raised.
22. Given the increasing importance of trade in services and the export possibilities for certain
developing countries, Members should ensure that the overall architecture of the GATS remained
intact.  The GATS not only offered developing countries flexibility as to the calendar and the selection
of sectors to be opened up, but also enabled them to establish certain conditions relating to access totheir markets in achieving the goals set out in its Ar ticle IV.  It also recognized that the increasing
participation of developing countries in services trade should be further facilitated through specific
commitments and through better access to new technologies and information networks.  It was
essential at the same time to continue working to im prove services trade data, as well as the analytical
and rule-making framework in the process of the liberalization of this sector.  In light of the
imbalances in the process of integration of the world economy, effective application of Article IV of
the GATS should be a priority in the negotiations.  The services trade of developing countries wasbeing held back because of restrictions on the movement of natural persons, as well as other barriers.
Commitments relating to the mode of supply and the movement of natural persons should be specified
for sectors and categories.  Mutual recognition agreements between developed countries as to
professional qualifications, and any other arrangements that facilitated the movement of natural
persons between these countries, should be extended to developing countries as well.  His delegationwould work hard to ensure that developing countr ies' needs, interests and requirements were fully
taken into account and that real special and differential treatment was developed and applied to them.
23. The representative of Morocco, on behalf of the African Group
, underlined the importance
these countries attached to the other elements of th e built-in agenda in addition to the agriculture and
services negotiations, including the mandated reviews and the negotiations foreseen in the TRIPSCouncil on geographical indications.  The fact that these other issues were not being discussed at the
present meeting did not mean that one did not need to make quick progress on them as well.
24. The representative of Japan said that although the Chairman's proposed institutional
arrangements for the agriculture and services negotiations were not exactly what Japan favoured most,
the important task was to show to the outside world that the WTO had overcome the shock of SeattleWT/GC/M/53
Page 7
and was back in business.  In the light of that objective, and given that many delegations seemed to
favour the Chairman's proposals, Japan was prepared to go along with them, keeping open the
possibility of a review of these arrangements at a later date if necessary.  It would be much easier to
produce substantive results in the agriculture and services negotiations if they were conducted in the
framework of a sufficiently comprehensive round of negotiations.  Members should therefore not losesight of the need to continue to make necessary preparations for an early launch of such a round.  It
was also necessary for the WTO to continue to pay attention to the questions of internal and external
transparency in order to promote the agriculture and services negotiations.
25. The representative of Malaysia said that Malaysia was committed to the agriculture and
services negotiations as well as to the built-in reviews of agreements, and agreed to the Chairman's
proposed modalities for the negotiations which, as the latter had stated, had legally begun on 1 January
2000.  Parity among the mandated negotiations was important.
26. The representative of Panama endorsed the suggestion by India concerning the possibility of
appointing vice-chairs to other WTO bodies.
27. The representative of Mexico stated his delegation's interest in having the chairs of various
bodies − and in particular of the Agriculture Committee and the Services Council and its subsidiary
bodies − be Geneva-based so that delegations could inte ract with them at any time.  He also endorsed
the view that the mandated reviews and other mandated negotiations that were also part of the built-in
agenda were as important as the agriculture and services negotiations.
28. The representative of Mauritius said that while his delegation had a strong preference for the
agriculture and services negotiations being conducted in existing bodies that could meet in special
session, it was flexible on this issue and would go al ong with any consensus that emerged.  He stressed
that the negotiating process should be transparent and inclusive so as to enable the participation of all
Members, big and small, at every stage.  In addition, the other mandated negotiations and the reviews
that were also part of the built-in agenda would also have to be taken on board.
29. The representative of Uganda said that his delegation agreed with the Chairman's proposals
regarding the agriculture and services negotiations.  In the agriculture area in particular, and also in
regard to the other mandated negotiations and reviews, his delegation would be looking closely at the
provisions relating to least-developed countries.
30. The representative of Egypt said that her delegation welcomed the outcome of the
consultations on the organizational arrangements for the agriculture and services negotiations, and
could go along with the Chairman's proposals.
31. The representative of the Dominican Republic expressed support for the statements by
Bolivia, Cuba, Egypt, India, Malaysia, Mexico and Pakistan.  His delegation joined in the consensus
regarding the content of the built-in agenda for negotiations under the Uruguay Round Agreements
and the mandated reviews.  The same criteria for the initiation of the agriculture and services
negotiations should also be observed for the mandated reviews, and for decisions taken on objectives,guidelines and time-frames.  His delegation also agreed that the agriculture and services negotiations
should be conducted in the existing bodies, although in the case of services the distinction between
regular work and negotiations was less clear and the question of how the negotiations would be
conducted should be left open.  He expressed his willingness to contribute to the success of the process
that was being launched at the present meeting, and hoped that all would participate with the necessaryenthusiasm in these important negotiations, which should be conducted on the basis of parity.
32. The representative of Singapore emphasized the importance of the agriculture and services
negotiations, which had commenced on 1 January.  It was important to move constructively in theseWT/GC/M/53
Page 8
important areas, and her delegation agreed to the Chairman's proposals.  She noted that further
consultations would be held on some of the modalities for these negotiations.  Whatever modalities
were adopted, it was important that they help Members move substantively to achieve the objectives
of the negotiations and to avoid linkages between the different elements.  Benchmarks for the different
phases of the negotiations were important, and at some point it would also be necessary to set adeadline for their conclusion.  She recalled that negotiations on maritime transport were also
scheduled to recommence in 2000.
33. The representative of Bangladesh expressed support for the Chairman's statement, and said
that India's suggestion of vice-chairs where justified for the bodies conducting the mandated reviews
also merited positive consideration.
34. The representative of Poland, on behalf of the CEFTA Members , expressed full agreement
with the Chairman's statement on the organization of the agriculture and services negotiations, and
noted the flexibility regarding the vice-chairmanship  for the Services Council, which their delegations
believed should be addressed by that Council itself.  A number of CEFTA Members attached
particular importance to the organizational simultaneity of the negotiations on agriculture, services and
geographical indications.
35. The representative of Argentina, on behalf of the Mercosur Members , expressed satisfaction
that a large part of the suggestions made by them in informal meetings had been taken into account in
the Chairman's statement.  It was important for the WTO to get back to business, and particularly
important for their countries that the agriculture and services negotiations be effectively launched and
conducted with adequate balance and parallelism.
36. The representative of Switzerland expressed agreement with the Chairman's proposals on the
agriculture and services negotiations.  He also stressed that there should be parity among the
negotiations on agriculture and services and other mandated negotiations, i.e. on geographical
indications and rules of origin, which were important for Switzerland as well as other countries.
37. The representative of Sri Lanka expressed his delegation's agreement with the Chairman's
proposals on the agriculture and services negotiations.
38. The Chairman thanked delegations for their constructive participation.  He expressed
satisfaction at the consensus on his proposal on the organizational aspects of the agriculture and
services negotiations.  On the mandated reviews, it was clear from the discussion that Pakistan's
suggestion was fully supported, and the action at the present meeting should  reflect the collective
recognition and commitment that these reviews should address the impact of the agreements
concerned on the trade and development prospects of developing countries.  He understood that
Members also wished to keep in mind the possibility of appointing vice-chairs where appropriate forthese mandated reviews.
39. The General Council took note of the Chairman's statements and of other statements, and
agreed to the proposals by the Chairman.  The General Council also agreed  that the mandated reviews
should address the impact of the agreements concerned on the trade and development prospects of
developing countries.WT/GC/M/53
Page 9
4. Follow-up to the Seattle Ministerial Conference
and
5. Other aspects of the WTO Work Programme
40. The Chairman proposed that items 4 and 5 be taken up together, and invited the Director-
General to report on the consultations he had been holding in regard to the other aspects of the WTO
work programme.
41. The Director-General said that since the beginning of the year, he had had a wide range of
contacts with WTO Members both in Geneva and in capitals, beginning with New Delhi and
including Brussels and Washington.  He had also met with the heads of other institutions, such as the
Secretary-General of the UN, the President of the World Bank, and the Secretary-General of the
ACP Group, who had all been very supportive.  In his contacts with Members, which he hadundertaken in close co-operation with the Chairman and with the assistance of his deputies, he had
sought to get a sense of the immediate priorities for attention beyond the mandated negotiations.
These consultations had shown considerable conv ergence on several points which were widely seen
as immediate priorities.  These of course did not exclude any further action that Members might
decide to take in due course on other areas of interest and concern.  In his contacts with a largenumber of Members, nearly all had stressed the importance of ensuring that the proposals discussed
as part of the preparation for Seattle with respect to measures in favour of least-developed countries,
which encompassed both market access and capacity-building, should be taken up as a matter of
priority.  These proposals were never to be seen as a trade-off or leverage to gain agreement on a
new round of negotiations.  Supporters of these meas ures had assured him of their continued support,
and he would be working closely with the Chairman to bring about agreement on a set of measures.
He would aim to report back progress before the Easter break.  He saw this as an important
confidence-building exercise and a clear signal of the WTO's resolve to help improve the conditions
of its poorest Members.
42. A second element that, disappointingly, Members had not achieved in Seattle – although
they had come very close in pre-Seattle discussions – was agreement on an increase in the regular
budget for technical cooperation.  He would not repeat the gross imbalance between the core funds
currently available for technical cooperation and the needs of Members.  There was an ever-growing
demand for technical cooperation which was difficult to meet when there was great uncertainty about
its funding.  The WTO had a rolling three-year plan of technical cooperation activities which was
updated and reviewed every year by the Committee on Trade and Development.  This showed
Members where the technical cooperation efforts were going and the types of projects undertakensubject to the availability of funds.  Members had the opportunity to comment on this in the CTD,
and their remarks were taken into account in planning activities for the future.  The text produced in
the course of discussions for Seattle encompassed principles for reinforced technical cooperation,
improvement of the Integrated Framework, evalua tion and regular review of technical cooperation,
and a provision for additional funding through the regular budget of the amount of Sw F 10 millionover a three-year period.  He hoped that early agreement in principle could be reached on this second
confidence-building measure and, in close co-operation with the Chairman, he would be consulting
extensively on this in the weeks to follow.
43. At the meeting of the General Council on 17 December 1999, the Chairman had stated that
delegations should exercise restraint in respect of the expiry of transition periods.  Both prior to andsince that meeting, a number of Members had tendered written requests concerned with transition
period extensions.  He had been consulting with Members as to their attitude to these requests and to
the transition period issue in general, and was pleased to report that Members had told him they were
all prepared to adopt a reasonable and constructive attitude to crafting practical solutions to
individual Members' transition problems within th e multilateral framework.  He was encouraged by
this and had every reason to expect that all would be able to work together to achieve the requiredWT/GC/M/53
Page 10
consensus decisions in respect of these requests.  It was also encouraging that Members had shown
sensitivity in their approach to these problems, and he hoped this would continue while all worked
towards a definitive solution.  He saw this issue as a priority for further consultations which he
planned to continue in close co-operation with the Chairman.  The aim would be to report back to the
next meeting of the General Council.  Members needed also to bear in mind that while the transitionperiod issue was the most immediately pressing problem before them, they would need to revert to
other implementation-related issues in due course.  This was a major continuing concern for a good
number of Members, as they had made clear in his consultations.  They had recalled, for example,
that the proposals for Seattle envisaged the establishment of a special implementation review
mechanism under the General Council composed of representatives of all Members.  This was an
area some had suggested might also be revisited in further consultations.
44. At Seattle, and since that meeting, many Members and other commentators had expressed
the view that the WTO's consultative procedures among Members needed to be reviewed.  The
general thrust of the comments made seemed to be  that the WTO needed to find ways to improve
internal transparency and guarantee effective participation to all its Members, while at the same time
operating in an efficient manner.  Members had also rightly stressed that the principle of consensus
was not negotiable.  While he believed most would agree that major issues of substance had played agreater role than process in preventing agreement in Seattle, getting the process right was important.
He was personally committed to working on this problem, and since he knew a number of Members
had already been working in capitals on proposals in this area, he believed one should start by
inviting contributions from delegations which could then be used as the basis for further
consultations that could begin later that month after those who were going to UNCTAD X returnedfrom Bangkok.  Clearly, these consultations should themselves be conducted in a transparent and
open way, and he would be discussing with the Chairman the best ways to ensure this.  One
possibility that had been suggested was to devote an Informal Heads-of-Delegation meeting, and
possibly a Special Session of the General Council, to the issue.  He had already received a number of
thoughtful and detailed suggestions from delegations about the questions he had covered and howthey should be addressed.  He was sure delegations would understand that it had not been possible to
reflect all these suggestions in his report, which wa s not intended as a text for negotiation in its own
right.  However, he could assure delegations that as far as he was concerned the suggestions that had
already been made on the basis of this report would be valued inputs into the consultations that he
would continue with them.
45. The Chairman said that the Director-General's report had been made under his own
responsibility.  Delegations were free to express their views on the issues covered by it, which would
of course be part of the written record of the meeting and taken into account in the further
consultations to be held.
46. The representative of Bangladesh said that in the latest version of the text that was under
discussion at Seattle on action in favour of LDCs, the entire paragraph on market access had been
missing.  This was despite the fact that the LDCs had presented to the Secretariat language approvedby their Ministers and transmitted in a formal letter from the Commerce Minister of Bangladesh.
The LDCs, representing 12 per cent of the global population, had presented the sum total of their
aspirations in a set of proposals known as the Comprehensive New Plan of Action (CNPA).  The
CNPA was the only way they could be integrated into the global trading system in a manner
beneficial to them, and was designed to supplant the plethora of existing plans and programmes andbring them within a single framework.  The first proposal concerned bound, duty-free and quota-free
market access for all LDC products.  The others related to the extension of transitional periods in
various agreements, implementation of the Integrated Framework, acceleration of the LDC accession
process, and establishment of a high-level mechanism within the WTO Secretariat to regularly
monitor the implementation of the CNPA in cooperation with other agencies.  The CNPA proposalactually predated Seattle, having been presented by his delegation on behalf of the LDCs in JulyWT/GC/M/53
Page 11
1999 (WT/GC/W/251).  It had been the result of the evolution of the thoughts and work of LDCs
since the Singapore Ministerial Conference and through the High-Level Meeting of October 1998,
and therefore did not require the stamp of approval from Seattle for the WTO to be engaged.  The
Integrated Framework deserved particular immediat e attention.  Following the decisions taken at the
High-Level Meeting, round tables had been held in five countries:  Haiti, the Gambia, Uganda,Tanzania and Bangladesh.  The results confirmed that it was time to conduct a serious assessment,
and the LDCs needed to be part of this exercise.  Among the six core agencies, UNCTAD should be
invited to play a significant role, given its experience in the field.  There was also an ethical and
moral mandate for the WTO to undertake action immediately in favour of LDCs.  The LDCs had
excellent relations with key trading partners, and were receiving positive signals from them.  Thus,
apart from the danger of the LDCs being marginalized vis-à-vis  the WTO, there was an equal danger
that the WTO might become marginalized vis-à-vis  the LDCs.  There was a risk of wasting a unique
opportunity, and the Chairman and the membership should focus on this question urgently.  The
Director-General should be actively involved to jump-start the process, and should report to the
General Council on progress at the next meeting.  Pledges by both Members and the Secretariat
should be turned into policies and thereafter into practice, by beginning substantive efforts.
47. The representative of the Dominican Republic regretted that decisions necessary for the
confidence-building measures outlined in the Director-General's report would not be taken at the
present meeting.  While the report was balanced, it had been presented strictly under the Director-
General's own responsibility, and should not prej udge Members' positions in any way.  Continuity
was necessary with regard to Ministers' instructions in paragraphs 8 and 9(a)(i) of the Geneva
Ministerial Declaration concerning the resolution of the implementation problems identified byMembers during the preparatory process for the third Ministerial Conference.  This continuity should
take the form of an extension of the transition periods for developing countries in the Agreements on
TRIPS, TRIMs, Customs Valuation and Subsidies, on a multilateral basis and for a reasonable period
of time.  For other implementation issues, the continuity the Dominican Republic sought should be
achieved through a special mechanism under the General Council, as it had proposed with Hondurasand Pakistan in mid-1999.  It was only by following th ese instructions, the most recent that Ministers
had given, that investors in developing countries could hope for minimum conditions of legal
security for their investments and market access for their products.  Furthermore, it would be
necessary to solve the problem of internal transparency in the WTO.  This problem had been amply
emphasized in the closing statements of the Chairp erson and the Director-General at the Ministerial
Conference.  The delegations that had been permanent members of the Green Room had stated that
what was not broken should not be fixed and that one had to be cautious in reforming the WTO.Nevertheless, during the preparations for the present meeting, delegations had been asked to
contribute to the creation of a climate of harmony.  This harmony could in no way consist of passive
acceptance of solutions that left to one side the fundamental problems which had paralysed decision-
making in this organization − in other words, the practices of exclusion and lack of impartiality.  For
this reason, resolution of the internal transparency problem could not be postponed further, and it
was already necessary to take account of this in the selection of the Chairpersons of the WTO bodies.
In the light of the reception extended to the WTO by civil society at recent events, it would also be
necessary to rethink external transparency, since this would seem to favour certain Members who
thought the WTO agenda was already wide enoug h and should not be expanded.  Any decision
concerning implementation or internal transparency would only be acceptable to his delegation if
these points were taken into account.  The present meeting could at least result in an understanding
that a Special Session of the General Council w ould be convened to address these issues, which
would be the only course of action acceptable to all Members, and would represent multilateralism.
48. The representative of Brazil said that while the issue of transition periods was urgent,
Members should also proceed with a discussion on broader implementation-related issues.  With
regard to transition periods, the Director-General's report mentioned the idea of adopting practical
solutions to individual Members' problems within the multilateral framework, and this raised a veryWT/GC/M/53
Page 12
important point, particularly with regard to TRIMs,  to the extent that solutions to some Members'
problems might cause problems for other Members.  From the start, Brazil had emphasized the
importance of a level playing field among developing countries in this area.  His delegation hoped
that the consultations would offer the opportunity for Members to express their views and submit
proposals for solutions that were equitable and truly multilateral.  In the meantime, if plurilateralconsultations took place in relation to individual requests, Brazil would wish to be included.
Contrary to what was frequently assumed, TRIMs did not exclusively concern investors and
recipients, but might also have a profound impact on third parties.
49. The representative of Bolivia said that while there had been problems in the area of
transparency in the preparatory process for the Ministerial Conference and at the conference itself,
this did not merit structural reform of the organization, but rather adjustments.  It was important to
work towards improvement of internal transparency through better participation of all Members.With regard to implementation and transition periods, it was necessary to work seriously with the
aim of reaching results beneficial to all Members, independent of any interpretation given to the
solutions found.  On technical cooperation, her delegation appreciated the distinction made between
technical cooperation for developing countries and the integrated programme for least-developed
countries.  Bolivia would participate fully in the consultations on these issues.
50. The representative of India said that finding suitable solutions to the problems of
implementation was critical.  In the preparatory process for the Ministerial Conference, no delegation
had expressed reservations on the proposal to mandate the General Council to review
implementation problems and suggest remedial measures within a finite time period.  In fact, at
Seattle Members had been very close to a package on implementation, which even though notentirely satisfactory, would have provided at least a partial solution to some of the existing
imbalances and inequities in implementation, and would also have set in place a special mechanism
to address remaining concerns. Expeditious redressal of these problems would go a long way in
confidence building and enhancing the WTO's credibility by demonstrating to the outside world that
it had the capacity and willingness to make appropriate adjustments to existing agreements, based onthe experience gained during their implementation.  Within the overall context of redressal of
implementation problems, the question of extension of transition periods was extremely important,
since it would provide developing countries much-needed time to adjust to some of their
commitments.  However, transition periods in themselves constituted only a small part of the
problems which developing countries had been highlighting for the previous year and a half.
Members would therefore need to address both issues urgently in order to generate the requisite
confidence.  His delegation appreciated the fact that the Director-General had recognised in hisreport the need to revert to other implementation-related issues, and had noted that the proposals
under consideration at Seattle had included the establishment of a special implementation review
mechanism under the General Council.  India woul d have preferred the General Council to have
taken a decision to constitute this special mechanism at the present meeting. However, since this did
not appear to be possible because of time constraints, his delegation suggested that the subject ofimplementation be included for appropriate decision on the agenda of the next General Council
meeting, on the basis of the consultations that would be undertaken.  Moreover, in order to ensure
constructive engagement in this area, Members should review the progress on implementation issues
at the last General Council meeting of the year.
51. With regard to transition periods, his delegation favoured a multilateral solution and was
concerned by the approach of some Members that requests for extension could only be considered on
a case-by-case basis.  Such an approach, where Members were expected to hold bilateral
consultations, lacked transparency and predictability and was likely to make the requesting Member
susceptible to unnecessary and unfair demands.  His delegation therefore noted with satisfaction that
the Director-General had stressed the need for finding practical solutions to individual Members'transition problems within the multilateral framework.  It was also important to finalise quickly aWT/GC/M/53
Page 13
package for LDCs that would include technical assistance and capacity-building measures, and India
agreed that proposals relating to LDCs were never to be seen as a trade-off or leverage to gain
agreement on a new round of negotiations.  He hoped the same principle would be applied to the
redressal of implementation problems.  On transparency, ensuring increased involvement and
participation of the entire membership in the decision-making process was important.  However, theSeattle Ministerial Conference did not fail because of shortcomings in the process, but rather because
of differences on major substantive issues.  Moreover, the whole issue related to internal
transparency within the organisation.  Hence, it was the membership which was well placed to deal
with this subject.  In this context, his delegation welcomed the suggestion of inviting contributions
from Members and subsequently discussing the various contributions in the General Council.  His
delegation did not believe that outside persons, however eminent, could be of assistance to Members
in dealing with internal transparency issues.  In concluding, he said that the Director-General's reporthad been prepared on the basis of bilateral and plurilateral consultations, but prior to the informal
meetings of the General Council held the previous week.  While he did not wish to negotiate the text
of the Director-General's report, there should be a common understanding that the forthcoming
consultations would allow all delegations the opportunity to express their views on all the issues, and
that the report, as the Chairman had acknowledged, was not to be viewed as limiting the scope of theconsultations or the opportunity for delegations to highlight their concerns or make proposals.  He
noted that all Members had been constructive and had not linked procedural decisions on
implementation issues to the procedural decisions on the mandated negotiations and reviews.
However, this should not be misinterpreted as a dilution of his delegation's interest in finding
solutions to the implementation issues and concerns it had raised along with others.  The WTO wasan integral whole, and what it did or did not do in one area of work would be viewed against the
backdrop of what it did or did not do in other areas.  It was therefore essential for all to ensure that
meaningful progress was made in all areas, so that  the final outcome was satisfactory to the entire
membership.  The political linkages that were inevitab ly made in such situations were a reality, and
it was important to be sensitive to this.  One had to be conscious not only of the need for paritybetween the agriculture and services negotiations, but also between implementation, the mandated
negotiations and the mandated reviews, not in the na rrow procedural sense but in the larger political
sense.
52. The representative of Morocco, on behalf of the African Group
, expressed these Members'
appreciation for the references in the Director-General's report to measures for LDCs and technical
cooperation and capacity building.  Undertaking initiatives in these areas was the only way in which
the WTO would become an organization for all Me mbers, whether big or small, powerful or not.
Bangladesh had made a comprehensive statement with regard to the LDCs, and he wished to recall
that 33 out of the 48 LDCs were in Africa.  It was necessary to ensure the real participation of these
countries and avoid their marginalization.  The Afri can Group sought a rapid materialisation of the
measures included in the package, and Members should be ambitious in this area.  Work in the areas
of technical cooperation and capacity building was also necessary if the developing countries were toderive benefits from and participate in the multilateral trading system.  One of the top priorities for
the African Group was implementation, and he urged the Chairman and the Director-General to
pursue their consultations actively with the aim of reaching adequate solutions.  Technical
cooperation and capacity building should also be developed to adapt to these solutions.  On transition
periods, he agreed with others that solutions should be found in the multilateral forum, but that theseshould not exclude being pragmatic and practical.  The approach should allow the Secretariat to help
developing countries, because some Members in Africa, for example, could not identify why they
were unable to implement some of their obligations .  A systemic approach was needed to allow these
countries to address these problems, which shou ld be top-down, with General Council Special
Sessions finding solutions and giving direction to subsidiary bodies, such as the Committee on Tradeand Development.  The approach would also contain a bottom-up element, since the subsidiary
bodies would carry out the work of categorising the issues and solutions.  With regard to
implementation, a special review mechanism should be established, and a multilateral approach wasWT/GC/M/53
Page 14
needed to the problem to avoid conditionalities being imposed.  Extensions of transition periods
should be accorded on the understanding that they woul d be used to ensure that at the end of the new
period, Members would be in a position to comply  with their commitments, and this implied the
provision of technical cooperation.  The African Group appreciated the restraint in this area that had
been shown by Members thus far, and counted on it continuing, to allow the consultations to takeplace in a spirit of compromise.  Finally, while much need to be done on external transparency, the
first duty was to address internal transparency.  Wide reforms were not necessary, but rather some
adjustments taking into account recent experience.  This could easily be done within the WTO, as it
was the Members themselves who knew best how to improve the situation.  The African Group
would make practical suggestions on this matter, but a meeting of the General Council should be
held to allow all Members to express their views, and to allow transparency in this work.
53. The representative of Egypt said that the elem ents contained in the Director-General's report
constituted a realistic basis for agreement.  The problems and difficulties related to the extension of
transition periods under some agreements, especially TRIPS and TRIMs, were only one part of the
issues under implementation.  Egypt and others had repeatedly stressed that they had serious
concerns with regard to these issues, and these concerns had been included in paragraphs 20 and 21
of the 19 October draft Ministerial text for the Seattle Ministerial Conference.  These issues neededto be addressed to allow progress to be made.  A positive attitude to this was being shown by a
number of Members, and Egypt was looking for concrete actions and practical solutions.  While the
Director-General's report had been made on his own responsibility, action on transition periods
should have been referred to in the broader context of implementation issues, of which transition
periods were only one part.  This would have been a fairer reflection of the discussions in theinformal meetings on this issue.  Egypt expected that implementation would be placed on the agenda
of the next General Council meeting.  Egypt supported increased market access for least-developed
countries, and appreciated the Director-General's emphasis that this issue was not part of a trade-off.
Technical assistance should be oriented towards building capacity and should be in accordance with
the needs and priorities of developing countries.  Like others, Egypt believed that transparency in theWTO's decision-making process needed to be improved, including the selection of chairpersons of
WTO bodies.  Efforts to improve internal transparency should be kept fully internal, since Members
understood the problems best and should be capable of addressing them without outside help.
54. The representative of Singapore said that the areas identified by the Director-General were
the more immediate issues for the work programme, and a successful outcome of the present meeting
would provide a firm basis to build on.  This was an evolving process, and starting in a modest way
would contribute to the confidence-building process.   Members should work constructively in the
near term and avoid linkages between the different elements.  Also, the process should not preclude
the inclusion of other issues in the medium and longer term;  in particular, the core business of the
WTO, market access and progressive liberalisation, should not be forgotten.  Industrial tariffs and
e-commerce, for example, should be included in the future work programme.  On implementation, a
solution to the transition problems was the more immediate issue.  Since different Members faceddifferent problems regarding transition periods, a blanket approach might not be feasible.  Members
should adopt a reasonable and constructive approach and work towards practical solutions within the
multilateral framework.  Her delegation also shared Brazil's concern that bilateral solutions that
might resolve the transition problem of one Member could impact on third countries, and this should
be borne in mind in the consultations.  The broader implementation problems raised by Membersshould also constitute an important aspect of the work programme.  Since these were varied and
highly technical, the review of these problems  should be undertaken by the existing subsidiary
bodies.  The General Council could maintain an oversight of the review process, and there was no
need to establish a new mechanism.  On internal transparency, the WTO structure was not in need of
major repair because the organization was generally working well, but her delegation would beprepared to discuss fine-tuning or adjustments.  However, her delegation cautioned againstWT/GC/M/53
Page 15
over-playing or over-exaggerating the problem, or even engaging in long debates that would divert
the WTO's attention from its core business of trade liberalisation.
55. The representative of the European Communities said he had set out in the informal meeting
the reasons why all Members, especially developing-country Members, should support the objective
of the present meeting, which was to move forward and to tell the world that the WTO was movingforward, however slight the movement might be.  He agreed with the Director-General's proposed
programme of further consultations.  Since this was an exercise in confidence-building, the
indications of timing given should be respected and as much as possible should be accomplished
before the end of March.  It was no use launching the exercise only to see it become a long process.
He also agreed with Japan that one should not lose sight of the long-term objective of relaunching a
new round of negotiations on a broad, balanced basis.  This was perhaps the only element missing
from the Director-General's report.  In this respect, he quoted President Zedillo of Mexico, who hadstated at the meeting of the World Economic Forum at Davos:  "I am fully convinced that
notwithstanding what happened in Seattle – inside and outside the conference room – serious efforts
to further liberalize trade and investment should not faint.  Truly progressive minds sincerely
committed to the advancement of the poor people in developing countries should, by virtue of
persuasion, be converted into firm allies in this endeavour".  On the functioning of the organization,some aspects could be addressed in the long term, but others should be addressed in a relatively short
period, such as the preparation and organization of Ministerial Conferences, ensuring developing-
country participation in negotiations through technical assistance, and improving external
transparency.
56. The representative of Indonesia said that, like many other developing countries, Indonesia
attached importance to the question of implementation.  Many Members had expressed the need to
establish a special mechanism under the General Council to address these issues, and Indonesia
supported any attempt to ensure that problems related to implementation issues were seriously
addressed and resolved.  Indonesia thus supported suggestions that the subject of implementation
should be placed on the agenda of the next General Council meeting.  On transition periods, thisissue should be approached in a logical and practical manner.  Requests for extensions should be
considered on the basis of the specific needs and objectives of the requesting country.  It would be
illogical to address the issue across the board, since each requesting country had different problems
and needs. Also, such requests should be considered by the committee concerned, based on the
particular difficulties faced by individual requesting Members.  In order to facilitate the
deliberations, the requesting country might have bilateral consultations with other Members.
However, final decision and approval should be taken by the entire membership in order to ensuretransparency.  However, this approach should not be used by other Members to acquire additional
commitments from requesting Members.  Like others, her delegation saw a need to continue
discussion with respect to measures in favour of LDCs, including efforts to enhance capacity
building to ensure their ability to implement thei r commitments and obligations as well as maximize
market opportunities created by trade liberalisation.  Enhancing capacity building should not belimited only to the LDCs, since many developing -country Members, including Indonesia, needed
technical assistance for the same objectives.  It was also important to ensure that technical
cooperation and capacity-building measures were effectively and efficiently implemented.  In this
regard, her delegation supported the suggestion that the WTO should undertake an evaluation of
technical cooperation as soon as possible.  In the light of the growing need for funding for technicalcooperation activities and for certainty, and to ensure the continuity of the technical assistance
programme, her delegation hoped that developed-country Members would accord favorable and
consistent contributions to ensure the availability of continuous funding.  Other Members in a
position to provide contributions should be expected to do so only on a voluntary basis,
commensurate with their level of development.  Indonesia agreed that the existing WTO decision-making process needed to be improved, and this was one of the most crucial issues needing
immediate attention if Members wanted to move forward.  The increase in the developing-countryWT/GC/M/53
Page 16
membership of the WTO was a clear indication of these countries' keen interest to participate fully in
a fairer, more open multilateral trading system.  Full participation entailed giving these countries
equal opportunity to participate in any decision-making process, especially on matters of vital
interest to them.  Therefore, it was time for the WTO to develop an improved process of negotiation
which was more inclusive, according full transparency while not forsaking efficiency.  Indonesiahoped that Members would embark on serious consultations on this important issue.
57. The representative of Pakistan said there was no doubt that rapid action was needed on the
programme for LDCs, and his delegation would support this.  Pakistan had been disappointed that
the agenda for the present meeting had not included an item relating to implementation.  Every
Ministerial Declaration since Marrakesh had underlined the importance and priority of
implementation.  With regard to the issue of transition periods, a multilateral solution should be
sought as far as possible.  It was encouraging that all Members had displayed sensitivity in this areaand had agreed to act in accordance with the understanding reached at the 17 December meeting of
the General Council until a definitive solution was reached.  This understanding should be reflected
in the Chairman's concluding remarks at the present meeting.  His delegation did not agree that
requests for extension of transition periods should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, as such an
approach would leave too much space for selectivity and even, possibly, discrimination.  With regardto implementation issues, paragraph 9 of the Geneva Ministerial Declaration read "in the light of
paragraphs 1-8 above, we decide that a process will be established under the direction of the General
Council to ensure full and faithful implementation of  existing agreements, and to prepare for the Third
Session of the Ministerial Conference."  Thus, th e process of undertaking work on implementation
issues had been assigned to the General Council by Ministers at Geneva, and that mandate had not been
rescinded by any subsequent decision.  The Gene ral Council was thus still bound to undertake further
work in this area, and it should take a clear decisi on, perhaps at the present meeting, to do so.  He noted
that proposals had been made on this issue in th e preparations for the Seattle Conference.  His
delegation trusted that the General Council would ag ree to establish a special mechanism that would
address and resolve the implementation problems that  had been identified.  He hoped that this too
would be reflected in the Chairman's concluding re marks.  On the issue of transparency, the problem
Members faced was to improve the participation of developing countries in particular in the WTO's
work.  This objective involved three dimensions:  first, fuller participation for all Members in the
decision-making process, which meant participation in  consultations and adoption of decisions through
a fair and open process;  second, rationalization of the pace and rhythm of meetings to enable smaller
delegations to participate and benefit from the work ;  and third, an increase in the capacity of the
Secretariat to address new trade and development issu es in the various areas of the agreements, another
aspect of which was the need for a balanced repres entation of developing countries in the Secretariat.
The General Council should devote time to consider all aspects of this issue.
58. The representative of Korea said that the first and foremost task was to build confidence
among Members and the general public by agreeing on a realistic work programme for the
immediate future.  It should be possible to agree on a package for technical cooperation and capacitybuilding for developing countries as soon as possible, since sufficient groundwork had already been
done in this respect.  Korea  hoped that major Members would also reach agreement on market
access for LDC products, following which Korea would be willing to make its own contribution.
His delegation welcomed the fact that Members were ready to address the issue of deadlines and
transition periods in a pragmatic manner, and hoped that consideration of other implementationissues would proceed in the same constructive atmosphere so as to contribute to building confidence.
Similarly, his delegation agreed with others that reform of the WTO process should be approached
with utmost care so that it did not become another difficult and divisive issue.  Korea joined the
consensus at the present meeting on the understanding that Members would remain open to the
possibility of adding other elements to the work programme in due course.  A broad and balancedwork programme for further trade liberalization and development of WTO rules should continue toWT/GC/M/53
Page 17
be a priority, and Korea hoped that the negotiations and consultations in the following months would
succeed in building confidence to that end.
59. The representative of Uganda said that the challenge before the WTO was how to address
the problems facing the LDCs so that they could benefit from the multilateral trading system.  The
share in world trade of these countries had dropped from around 0.6 per cent in the 1970s to about0.4 per cent at present.  Since they represented 12 per cent of the global population, the task they
were facing to reverse this marginalization was clear if they were to share fully in the benefits of the
trading system.  Uganda had therefore welcomed the initiative proposed by the Community during
the preparations for the Seattle Conference for improved market access for substantially all products
originating from LDCs, and hoped it would still be possible to undertake this commitment.  Studies
by both the WTO and UNCTAD of the impact this might have on sensitive products could help to
improve public opinion in developed countries, and put to rest the fears advanced for not grantingthis access.  In terms of market share, this improved access would not cause much of a problem.
With regard to the transition periods, a systemic rather than a case-by-case solution was needed.  The
view that LDCs should be exempt from implementing agreements as long as they remained LDCs
had been expressed in the proposals submitted by them  prior to Seattle.  The issue of implementation
should have pride of place in the work programme, and his delegation agreed with the statement byIndia in this respect.  On transparency and participation, his delegation had been among those which
had pointed to the marginalization of LDCs, and particularly African countries, in the consultation
process in the lead-up to and at the Seattle Conference.  They had felt that much as they had talked,
nobody had been listening, and Bangladesh had earlier noted how a paragraph they had proposed had
vanished from the text on action in favour of LDCs.  Furthermore, these countries had expressedtheir points of view in one of the working sessions at Seattle, but these had not been reflected in the
Chairperson's summing-up and, despite written proposals by Uganda and Bangladesh, the final paper
had not included them.  Uganda agreed to the consideration of the issue of transparency, but this
should begin with internal transparency.  It should not be taken for granted that these countries
would accept whatever was ordained, despite having put forward their points of view.  The questionwas how to involve meaningfully all Members in the decision-making process.
60. The representative of Mexico said that Mexico continued to seek the launch of a new round
of broad-based multilateral trade negotiations under a single undertaking.  A new round was the best
way to cover the interests of all Members, and it should be launched as soon as possible.
Nevertheless, Mexico agreed with others that the WTO could not withstand another failure in this
type of undertaking.  Thus, before trying to launch a round at Ministerial level, it was important that
all Members agree beforehand on what would be included.  Mexico was in favour of negotiations onall issues leading to trade and investment liberalization, and against the introduction into the WTO of
non-trade issues.  The Director-General's report covered a series of elements on which he had
undertaken consultations with a view to allowing  the General Council to decide on how to continue
the work programme in the immediate future.  Al though this report had been presented under the
Director-General's own responsibility and did not commit any Member, he wished to clarify certainpoints.  Mexico could accept that consultations be undertaken on measures in favour of LDCs, which
as the Director-General had stated, was not an i ssue linked to a new round.  Mexico agreed also on
consultations on technical assistance and capacity building, with the aim of defining the amounts and
modalities to be applied to contributions.  This should bring fresh resources to this area and not
simply be a means of sharing across all Members what had been previously given voluntarily by afew.  On transition periods, consultations should be undertaken with a view to finding creative
solutions within a multilateral framework.  In the case of the TRIMs Agreement, there was no legal
need for consensus on the decisions to be taken under Article 5.3 on the requests for extension
submitted, including by Mexico.  Mexico hoped that the restraint discussed at the 17 December
General Council meeting would continue to be valid, since it was in the interest of all Members.  Onbroader implementation issues, Mexico supported continuing consultations with the aim of fulfilling
the commitments agreed at the Geneva Ministerial Conference, and also that this item be on theWT/GC/M/53
Page 18
agenda for the next meeting of the General Council.  On transparency and effective participation of
Members in decision-making, only Members' comments should be taken into account.  Mexico was
concerned that, although the Director-General's report clearly addressed internal transparency, this
work might open the door to contributions dealing with more than internal transparency, and that
these contributions might be used as a basis for consultations.  The only consultations to whichMexico could agree were those carried out with the aim of improving internal transparency and
effective participation of Members.  In these consultations it should be clearly established that it was
a strictly internal exercise.  If this were not possible, Mexico would prefer not to agree to anything.
There should be no ambiguity that would allow so me Members to think that the discussion would
also cover proposals made on other occasions and which went further than a strictly internal
exercise. Mexico could not join any consensus on consultations going further than internal
transparency, or any interpretation that would requ ire consensus for the Council for Trade in Goods
to authorize the extension of transition periods under the TRIMs Agreement when the measure
concerned had been notified and the extension requested in conformity with the Agreement.
61. The representative of Jamaica said that his delegation saw three lessons from Seattle.  First,
failure at Seattle had been predictable.  This was important to acknowledge, since events that could
be foreseen were usually open to intervention and prevention.  Second, scope, substance and processwere at the core of the deadlock – not one or the other, but all three.  The third lesson was related to
the first, inasmuch as Seattle had not been an aberration, nor a single, unique event, but rather part of
a process in train for several years.  This process had been characterized by an institutional
unwillingness or inability to adjust to an increasing and diverse membership, the growing
involvement of all Members and the fact that an increasingly complex calculus of costs and benefitswas now associated with each decision and agreement.  It was in this sense that Seattle had been
predictable.  It had merely been the place where the world had been able to see what most people on
the inside might have recognized since at least the time of the Uruguay Round, and certainly since
then – that there was a fundamental incompatibility between substance and process in the
organization.  This was an inconsistency between the issues Members wished to decide, thedecisions they had to take and how in practice they had to set about making those decisions in a
multilateral organization that had a profound impact on policy prescriptions and therefore on the
economic possibilities of its Members.  Jamaica was prepared to play its part in seeking to ensure
that Seattle's lessons would prove to be valuable, from the standpoint of a small developing economy
with a high share of trade to GDP.  It had sometim es been told that size did not matter in the new
global economy, but there was a growing number of mega-mergers in many sectors, and those
producing and selling goods and services seemed to have no doubt that size did matter.  Theincreasingly complex calculus of costs and benefits mentioned earlier demanded that the
organization be more responsive to the particular concerns and needs of different groups of
countries, including the small economies, and provide scope for their effective participation.
Ultimately, such an unambiguous tilt towards inclusiveness and accommodation would strengthen
the WTO, even if this might entail a slower pace in some areas of work and would require increasedacceptance of the need for policy flexibility.  This might also require a less expansive vision of the
organization's core business.
62. An improvement in transparency seemed to be supported by all Members.  The question was
how to achieve this objective.  Significant changes were necessary, not in respect of legally binding
elements such as consensus, nor necessarily in inst itutional structure, but in culture, procedures and
willingness to implement creative ways of ensuring that all Members had access to and could
participate effectively in negotiations of interest to them.  Jamaica hoped to be in a position to make
a contribution on this.  The starting-point should be the recognition by all that trade negotiations
could not take place successfully if a significant number of Members believed themselves to be
alienated from the negotiating process itself.  It was important to deal with internal transparency, but
relations with NGOs and other elements of civil society should also be examined.  There should be
improved channels of communication, increased contact and interaction.  However, it should beWT/GC/M/53
Page 19
recognized that those who alleged the supra-nationalism of the WTO and wished to directly
determine the agenda and decisions of this intergovernmental body perhaps themselves harboured
supra-national ambitions.  The soundest course was for the WTO to be responsive to its membership
as a whole, which had not been the case in the past.  On the Director-General's report, Jamaica
understood that the elements he had outlined were intended to build confidence and credibilitythrough initial steps, but the restoration of confidence would require that a range of issues be
addressed expeditiously.  Implementation issues, particularly those related to perceived imbalances
in the Uruguay Round Agreements, should be addressed and be on the agenda of the next General
Council meeting.  Jamaica welcomed the willingness indicated by some important Members to
engage constructively on these issues and believed that this augured well for confidence building.
On technical cooperation and capacity building, a Mini ster of an EU member State had referred in a
recent speech to World Bank estimates that implementing agreements relating to sanitary measures,patents and customs reform would cost developing countries an average of US$130 million per
country.  This was a sharp reminder of the scope and cost of the work remaining to be done.  For this
reason there was a great need for assistance, both financial and technical, across a wide range of
developing countries.  On transition periods, there was recognition from many Members that this
issue should be addressed expeditiously.  The solution should impart clarity and predictability to thesituation to the greatest extent possible, because the agreements, deadlines and time-frames involved
had direct implications for, and direct impact on, the productive sectors and livelihood of peoples in
the developing countries.  Furthermore, certain other non-controversial issues, such as the work
programme for small economies, should also be part of an early phase of confidence building, since
this would serve to assure a significant number of Members of the WTO's preparedness to respond totheir needs.  Finally, Jamaica supported improved market access for LDCs.
63. The representative of Ecuador said that Seattle had provided some valuable lessons which
should not be underestimated or ignored, and which the General Council had to examine critically
with the aim of identifying a common direction for the development of  constructive and efficient
initiatives for the benefit of all.  Such direction should be clearly reflected in the work programme,and if improvements were not made to fundamental aspects such as transparency and decision-
making, a major lesson from Seattle would be lost.  Outside interest in the WTO was not just
focussed on what it did or did not do, but also on the manner in which it did it.  Future work should
thus be based on credibility and should take on a new energy and a true spirit of openness and
transparency.  This implied seeking more points of convergence and being more equitable and
balanced.  Taking account of developing-country views was imperative, along with paying attention
to their needs in the areas of implementation, technical assistance and real and effective participation.These Members were looking to participate actively in all decisions affecting their development
policies and demanded better representation in the Secretariat.  Ecuador agreed to the consultations
outlined, and to the possibility of widening their scope to include issues of vital interest to
developing countries, such as a study on the relationship between external debt and trade.  Ecuador
supported the initiative in favour of market access for LDCs and the effort to provide technicalcooperation and capacity building, which should be widened in scope.  The General Council should
adopt a decision on transition periods within an equitable framework as soon as possible.  Ecuador
had not requested any extensions in this respect, bu t believed that the situation should be clarified
and the problems facing developing countries resolved.
64. The representative of Poland, on behalf of the CEFTA Members and Turkey
, said that the
WTO now needed a pragmatic and realistic work programme, matching consistency and resolve in
the execution of the already-established objectives with awareness and willingness to resolve urgent
current issues.  The final aim should be the la unching of an ambitious, broad-based new round.
While attention should clearly focus first on the different elements of the built-in agenda, there were
a number of other important and urgent issues.  A reasonable and realistic solution should be foundto the problem of transition periods on a case-by-case basis.  Consultations on the other issues related
to implementation should continue.  The pressing issues for LDCs of market access, technicalWT/GC/M/53
Page 20
assistance and capacity building should also be urgently addressed, with the aim of finding a solution
reflecting the solidarity of all Members.  The time that had elapsed since Seattle had enabled a
calmer assessment of the factors that had led to the unsuccessful result, and the failure could not be
attributed to the process itself.  A number of factors had played a part, the first being the deep
discrepancy in Members' positions on substance.  However, the present debate should focus on theinternal transparency of the WTO.  These countrie s agreed with the Director-General's statement that
the basic principle of consensus was not negotiable, and believed that consultations on this topic
should be a first step towards a wider, confidence-building, incremental dialogue among all
Members.  It was essential to start with modesty and self-restraint, and to avoid any temptation to
exaggerate the effects of the demonstrations in Seattle.  A gradual accumulation of positive actions
was needed before a more measured step towards wider objectives was taken.  Finally, a strong and
unequivocal message to the outside world that the WTO was solidly on the track of normal workwould be important.
65. The representative of Madagascar said that it was important now to send a clear message to
re-establish confidence among Members and the outside world.  This confidence could only be
restored through better transparency and participation of all Members in the decision-making
process.  The time had come for the General Council to take up its work in a constructive andpositive spirit, and implementation should be the first priority.  Many developing-country Members,
including Madagascar, had clearly stated the problems they faced in implementing WTO
agreements.  On the issue of extension of transition periods, Madagascar agreed with others that the
solution should be multilateral and not case-by-case.  The General Council should also take
immediate measures in favour of the LDCs, in cluding duty-free, quota-free, bound market access
and full implementation of the Integrated Framework.  Furthermore, a commitment should be made
for financing technical assistance through sufficient, predictable and permanent budgetary resources,
without excluding voluntary contributions.  Fina lly, the future work programme should be more
limited in scope than it was prior to Seattle.  It  would be difficult for many Members, including
Madagascar, to undertake new commitments while facing difficulties in implementation of existingagreements.
66. The representative of Malaysia said that his delegation placed great importance on finding
solutions to all the implementation issues that had been  raised prior to Seattle.  These issues were not
confined merely to the extension of transition periods.  All the issues should be addressed, through
either a special review mechanism established under the General Council or dedicated special
sessions.  They could not be relegated to the respective subsidiary bodies, since discussions at the
technical level would not result in meaningful conclusions.  Although some highly technical
questions might best be dealt with in these bodies, the focus of the discussions should be in the
General Council.  Malaysia supported the sugges tion that implementation should be a permanent
agenda item for meetings of the General Council.  The issue of extension of transition periods should
be dealt with in the General Council, or in the respective Councils in the case where a consensus was
reached in this respect.  While these extensions could be addressed case-by-case, it should be on thebasis of a multilateral determination and not subject to bilateral conditionalities.  Malaysia also
supported the initiatives for the LDCs, especially on capacity building and technical cooperation.
The areas of work outlined in the Director-General's report constituted a moderate but realistic
package to allow Members to continue the reform and liberalization process.  These initiatives
represented a fairly broad and comprehensive agenda for all Members.  While internal transparencyand the decision-making process was an important area that necessitated urgent action, its
importance should not be overplayed.  Malaysia did not agree that the failure at Seattle was due to
process.  While the process, including the logistical arrangements, had been flawed, the failure could
not be entirely attributed to process or the lack of transparency in decision-making.  Overloading of
the agenda with unrealistic ambitions had been the primary cause, and even the most perfect processwould not have led to a successful outcome.  The decision-making process remained essentially
intact, and decision-making through consensus should be retained and was non-negotiable.  WhatWT/GC/M/53
Page 21
was needed was greater transparency in the Green Room process and in the subsequent process
leading to decisions in a multilateral forum.
67. The representative of the United States said that her delegation sought a practical approach
to the issue of expiry of transition periods, drawing on the flexibility that was inherent in the WTO
system.  The goal of her delegation was to ensure that the WTO Agreements were fully functioning,and she believed that this was also a common goal.  Each Member's rights would be fully protected
in this regard.  Her delegation was ready to explore expeditiously some of the suggestions made,
with the aim of finding practical solutions to the unique and differing difficulties faced by some
Members, to help them meet their commitments within an agreed period of time.  A practical
framework would be useful and would be without pr ejudice to any Member's rights.  On technical
cooperation, her delegation agreed with the suggestion by Bangladesh for a review of the Integrated
Framework.  Some of the other suggestions made in this area had been along the same lines as a
proposal the United States and others had submitted in the preparatory process for Seattle, and these
suggestions would need to be examined in the consultations.
68. The representative of Chile said that it was important to send a clear message that
multilateralism was alive and well and that free trade was necessary.  Work should progress both on
the built-in agenda and on other issues, as outlined in the Director-General's report.  The principle ofmultilateralism should also be strengthened.  At present there was an outbreak of free-trade
agreements across the world, not all of which were based on the integrity and detail required by the
WTO.  The Committee on Regional Trade Agreements should carry out its work and all Members
should participate with the aim of reducing the dispersion in standards, rules of origin and
disciplines.  A joint effort should be made to send a clear signal that the liberalization process wasunder the effective control and supervision of the WTO.  On measures in favour of LDCs, Chile
agreed that there was a need for clear decisions, including on improved market access and capacity
building.  The developed countries were the best placed to join the market access initiative rapidly,
but some developing countries could also join on a voluntary basis in the short to medium term.
Chile would be prepared to join this initiative, and hoped others would do so.  Chile was also willingto join a consensus on inclusion of the financing of technical cooperation in the regular WTO budget.
On implementation issues, many delegations had stat ed that resolving the problems in this area was
their top priority.  The issue of transition periods was only one issue among many in this area, and it
should be resolved through negotiation, although this should not entail writing a blank cheque for
exemption from fulfilling existing commitments.  Fi nally, consultations should be started on internal
transparency.  Various ideas had been put forward and should be examined, particularly that of
interest groups independent of region or level of development.  Many such groups already existed,and others could be created for different subject areas.
69. The representative of Japan said that his delegation intended to contribute to the
consultations on the decision-making process.  These consultations could address issues such as the
role of the Director-General at Ministerial Conferences, further derestriction of documents and the
suggestion for an advisory group composed of eminent persons from business, consumer,environmental or academic circles.  The aim should be to improve internal and external transparency.
On implementation, Japan was fully aware of the difficulties developing countries faced in this area,
and was willing to provide as much assistance as possible.  It was on this basis that it had announced
at Seattle that it would receive 2,500 people from developing countries over 5 years for training on
implementation and utilization of the WTO Agreements.  It was particularly important to provideassistance to LDCs, and cooperation in this area was crucial.  Japan had thus announced together
with the Community at Seattle its willingness to ma ke an effort to improve the market access of LDC
products and to provide more trade-related technical assistance.  Japan hoped that such initiatives
would be integrated into the work of the WTO a nd encouraged the participation of other developed
countries.  On transition periods, it was important to solve the problems rapidly, with the cooperationand support of the countries concerned and the Secretariat.  For this, agreement was needed on a setWT/GC/M/53
Page 22
of procedures and criteria under which individual requests for extension could be examined.  In this
way every Member could be confident that the examination of their request would be conducted
under fixed criteria and not be subject to discretion.
70. The representative of Canada said that before it would be possible to embark on any process
to launch a new round, a healing process was ne eded both on some very divisive and complex
matters and also on relations between some Members, and the Director-General had clearly
attempted to begin that process.  Bangladesh had clearly identified some of the genuine issues and
aspirations of LDCs.  Equally genuine were the difficulties and practical complexities of arriving at
solutions to some of the issues raised.  Those issues had not been easy in the preparations for and at
Seattle.  Goodwill on all sides would be needed to overcome the challenges inherent in these issues.
On the issue of transparency, many Members had used the word caution, meaning that an
incremental approach should be used in this area as on the substantive issues.  Work on transparencyshould be undertaken in a measured way rather than trying to revolutionise the process, which would
risk putting back the substantive agenda.  Some Members were not prepared to work on internal
transparency if work was also undertaken on the external side.  Canada did not agree with this
approach, because in the long run Members might not have the luxury to do one without the other.
The WTO could do a better job in helping Member governments on external transparency.  Thedemonstrations at Seattle had not been aimed at the WTO as an institution, but rather at globalization
itself.  For this reason, Canada had supported work on coherence, because the WTO could be part of
the solution and increase its outreach together with other organizations.  The objective would be to
reassure supporters of globalization.
71. The representative of Switzerland said that his delegation agreed with the four priority issues
outlined in the Director-General's report sin ce they would be part of a broad-based round of
negotiations, which must remain the objective in the medium term.  Measures in favour of LDCs and
improvements in technical cooperation for capacity building should be undertaken as soon as
possible.  This package of measures was important, as was the time-frame, which should be credible
and respected.  The first priority was to bring the funding of technical cooperation into the regularWTO budget.  On transition periods, the problems differed across Members and agreements.  A
uniform approach was thus not possible, and an approach involving individual waivers would avoid
undermining the agreements themselves.  The broader issue of implementation was very complex
and was perceived differently among different Members.  Consultations should be carried out taking
into account that the meaning of implementation had evolved since the conclusion of the Uruguay
Round.  Finally, many Members had called for caution in the work on the decision-making process.
The need for caution should not be underestimated, especially so soon after Seattle.  It was necessaryto proceed step by step, and carefully analyze the situation collectively, first by defining the need for
reform, then identifying deficiencies in the ex isting mechanisms, and finally looking for the
solutions.
72. The representative of Cuba said that for the WTO to be truly global and reach its goals, the
fundamental interests of all Members should be at the center of its activities.  There was a need for
concrete, effective action on implementation problems, of which the issue of transition periods was
only one.  Implementation should be the focus of the next General Council meeting.  Suggestions
had been made on different occasions regarding issues such as the impact of external debt and the
effect of globalization on trade and development, and it would not be possible to discuss coherence
in international macroeconomic policy and the role of the WTO without addressing these and otherissues.  The issue of the trade and development prospects of developing countries was of particular
importance.  Developing-country issues concerned the majority of Members and should be
addressed.  There was also a clear link between the organization's activities and problems of
transparency.  The WTO was what its Members wanted it to be, and its methods were supposedly as
democratic as any organization could have.  Each  Member was supposed to have one vote, and
decisions were to be taken by consensus.  However, in practice this was not the case, although thisWT/GC/M/53
Page 23
was a tradition which stemmed from the time of the GATT.  Members themselves, without outside
interference, needed to find mechanisms to make a reality of the foundations of the decision-making
process contained in the Marrakesh Agreement, or the WTO would not be viable.  Without
transparency within the organization, includin g in the appointment of officers, it would be
impossible for the organization to take advantage of external transparency and confidence.Agreement on the other measures outlined by the Director-General should not de delayed, in
particular the measures in favour of LDCs.  This issue should not be linked to any negotiations, since
it was a question of justice aimed at giving these countries a minimum level of equality to allow
them to trade.
73. The representative of Panama agreed with the Director-General's assessment of the situation
in his report, and noted that he had not excluded proposals being made by Members.  Panama
believed that the scope of the work programme should be moderated at present, but that did notexclude adding other issues in the future if they fell under the core responsibilities of the
organization.  One such issue would be a review of the Dispute Settlement Understanding.  High
priority should be given to making the work of the organization and any negotiations inclusive, so
that all Members were involved and covered by the results.  All Members should be able to represent
their own interests when necessary.  While it was im portant to achieve results, efficiency should not
determine the methodology used.  If an inclusive system did not result in agreement on a particular
issue, it should be considered that the issue was not yet ripe for negotiation.  The aim of the WTO
was to establish a sustainable trading system to the benefit of all, and not to attempt to achieve short-
term benefits alone.  While much was indeed not broken and therefore did not need fixing, this
aspect of existing procedures was unsatisfactory, and required immediate attention.
74. The representative of Thailand agreed with others that although internal transparency had
been cited as one of the shortcomings in Seattle, the outcome had been due to substantive
differences, and that time and resource constraints had prevented the much-needed interactive
dialogue among Members.  From this perspective, Members needed to be cautious on the issue of
WTO reform and not over-react.  The question was whether there was a need to change the existingsystem or simply to fine-tune it to improve communication between the various levels of the
decision-making process, so that there was maximum transparency and inclusiveness for all
delegations in the process.  These questions should be addressed within the organization with the aim
of finding a practical solution.
75. The representative of Trinidad and Tobago associated her delegation with Jamaica's
statement.  Several issues being addressed at the present meeting were of critical importance for
Trinidad and Tobago and other countries of the Caribbean sub-region.  Many of them were notrepresented at the present meeting, but most had been present in Seattle and had had a first-hand
view of the deficiencies of the decision-making process and the lack of internal transparency in the
functioning of the WTO, and how little weight their concerns, problems and proposals carried in the
organization’s deliberations.  For these countries the issue of internal transparency was critically
important because its absence affected their ability to be full and active participants in the WTO.Her delegation was unable to join with others who suddenly found that the organization was just fine
and needed only a little fine-tuning.  While a revolutionary overhaul of the internal transparency of
the organization might not be required, after Seattle it seemed glaringly obvious that ways had to be
found to improve internal transparency and guarantee effective participation of all Members.  This
was a matter of priority, as mentioned by the Director-General in his report.  The system might notbe totally damaged but it certainly was broken and did require some fixing.  These countries had not
forgotten their experience in Seattle and their Ministers who had been present in Seattle had not
forgotten it either.  In their view, the process as well as substantive issues were equally responsible
for the failure of Seattle.  Improvement in internal transparency should begin with the selection of
chairpersons of the various WTO bodies.  On external transparency, Members need not be tooconcerned about this, since the media had already reported on the outcome and decisions adopted atWT/GC/M/53
Page 24
the present meeting while it was still in session.  It therefore seemed that external transparency was
functioning even better than internal transparency, which should make all Members take stock.
Implementation was also an important issue for her country and other countries in the Caribbean
region, for it concerned not only their ability to live up to the obligations they had undertaken
voluntarily in the Uruguay Round, but also affected their ability to develop the capacity to participatefully and take advantage of the benefits of the international trading system.  It was for this reason
that they supported the proposal for the establishm ent of a special review mechanism in the General
Council on implementation and the convening of a Special Session to allow them to air their
concerns, problems and aspirations and to agree on possible solutions.
76. Like India, her delegation believed that expeditious resolution of implementation issues
would go a long way towards establishing the credibility of the system and building confidence.  Her
delegation also shared the view that the issue of transition periods, which was the most pressing issuefacing the organization, should be dealt with quickly but within the multilateral framework, and that
the result should be one of equity.  The best way forward for the organization and its membership
was not to pursue bold and ambitious objectives but rather an incremental approach, beginning with
the mandated negotiations and reviews.  Her delegation was pleased to join the consensus that
seemed to be emerging for action to be taken as early as possible to assist LDCs, which were themost marginalized Members.  A decision of this nature had nothing to do with negotiations or trade-
offs, but had everything to do with ethics.  It was not acceptable that 12 per cent of the world’s
population should account for only 0.4 per cent of world trade.  On the subject of marginalization,
her delegation would continue to raise the issue of the treatment in WTO of small-economy
Members and the need to take into account the specific constraints and vulnerabilities of thesecountries and the problems they faced in integrating into the world economy.  Integration into the
system had been their goal for decades, even before the WTO had come into being, and was
precisely why they had repeatedly stated that their special circumstances should be taken into
account.  While these countries already had very open economies, openness was not a guarantee of
positive results when there were constraints linked to trade processes, technology transfer, domesticmarket size, diseconomies of scale, investment and international finance.  If their concerns were not
taken into account they ran the real risk of losing everything they had struggled and sacrificed so
much to gain.  If no attention was paid to their concerns and difficulties, they might well become the
LDCs of the future.
77. The representative of Costa Rica expressed support for the initiatives in favour of LDCs, in
particular on market access, which the developing countries should join on a voluntary basis.
Capacity building for developing countries was also important.  His delegation hoped that solutionscould be found to the most urgent problems in the area of transition periods, and would participate in
consultations on this and other implementation issues with the understanding that the process would
evolve towards addressing other issues in the near future.  On transparency, only the internal aspects
should be addressed, and Costa Rica agreed with others that this should be reflected in the
Chairman's concluding remarks.  In the work in this area, no attempt should be made to restructurethe organization.  The WTO was functioning well and further work should focus only on fine-tuning
the existing consultation mechanisms to ensure th at information was made available to all Members.
This fine-tuning, together with efforts towards capacity building for developing countries, would
contribute to better participation by all Members.
78. The representative of Burundi said that the Director-General's report was a commitment to
make the WTO an organization for all Members, rich or poor.  His delegation supported statements
by others on the urgent need to analyse implementation problems, and agreed that there was a need
to link future negotiations to the development dimension.  On transparency, he recalled that in
addition to the countries awaiting accession, there were also organizations such as regional economic
organizations which had submitted requests for observer status, and these needed to be considered.Any reform of the WTO should allow analysis of ways to integrate developing-country nationals intoWT/GC/M/53
Page 25
the Secretariat, as suggested by Pakistan.  His delegation also appealed for a positive reaction to calls
for a rapid decision on the financing of technical cooperation, because the linkage between
development and future negotiations could only be made effective through technical cooperation.
79. The representative of Barbados expressed support for the statements by Jamaica and
Trinidad and Tobago.  Implementation issues, and particularly the expiry of transition periods, were
major concerns for Barbados, and discussions on these issues should take place rapidly with a view
to reaching positive and meaningful solutions.  To this end, the establishment of a special review
mechanism was necessary.  Early action was also needed on the proposals made before Seattle for
immediate decisions aimed at the further integration of developing countries into the multilateral
trading system.  Specifically, early progress should be made on:  (i) measures for LDCs;  (ii) a
package on technical cooperation for all developing countries;  and (iii) a work programme on small
economies.  On internal transparency, serious improvement was needed in this area to ensure that allMembers, regardless of size or trade share, could effectively participate in the WTO decision-making
process.  The views of even the smallest delegations should be taken into account and given equal
consideration.
80. The representative of Israel said that his delegation recognized the importance of a
constructive, reasonable and practical approach in dealing with the issues outlined by the Director-
General, in order to rebuild confidence among Members and send a positive signal to the public.  His
delegation welcomed the initiatives in favor of LDCs on market access and capacity building, which
should not serve as trade-offs for a new round.  A similarly constructive approach should be adopted
with respect to other issues, such as market access and electronic commerce, which should be
included in the future work programme.  There was also a need to address implementation issues in amanner satisfactory to all Members.  On extension of transition periods, a constructive and practical
approach should be adopted bearing in mind the multilateral nature of the WTO system.  His
delegation recognized the importance of both external and internal transparency, but believed that the
need to improve internal transparency was of greater urgency.  A review of the whole structure was
not necessary, but it was important to ensure the effective participation of all Members while, at thesame time, ensuring efficient operation.  In this regard, his delegation supported the view that the
principle of consensus was not negotiable.
81. The representative of Mauritius supported the statements by Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago
and Barbados, and agreed that other non-controversial issues should be part of an early phase of
confidence building, such as the work programme on small economies.  On implementation, his
delegation attached great importance to the issues outlined in the Director-General's report, and
believed that the issue of extension of transition periods was only one element of this work.  Likeothers, his delegation had noted the willingness of the Community and the United States to approach
this issue with an open mind so as to achieve a concrete solution.  Mauritius had long supported
improved measures in favour of LDCs and had provided market access to some products originating
from LDCs where possible.  His delegation hoped that a solution to the satisfaction of all could be
found, and believed that capacity-building measures should be extended to all developing countries.On transparency, his delegation agreed that it was not a question of large-scale reforms but rather
internal adjustment to enable the full and effective participation of all countries, large and small, in
all stages of the decision-making process.  His delegation had noted the Director-General's statement
that the principle of consensus was non-negotiable and believed that no attempt should be made to
dilute this principle.
82. The representative of Venezuela recalled that a working group on the institutional image of
the WTO had been set up at the suggestion of Venezuela, and in the light of what had taken place in
Seattle there was now an opportunity to make progress in this area.  The image of the work of the
WTO had been distorted, and despite whatever internal differences might exist, this image had to be
strengthened to allow work to progress on the main task of trade liberalization.  Progress should alsoWT/GC/M/53
Page 26
be made on measures in favour of LDCs, as well as on strengthening technical cooperation.  The
latter was a necessity for least-developed as well as developing countries so as to ensure their
participation in the organization and their ability to meet their obligations.  Like others, his
delegation believed that flexibility regarding the extension of transition periods would be an
important message for the General Council to send out.  A solution on a multilateral and not case-by-case basis would show that Members were making an effort to understand the difficulties faced by
many countries in implementing existing agreements.  On other implementation issues, it was
important to re-launch efforts to find solutions.
83. The representative of Argentina said that the procedure proposed for the continuation of  the
work was acceptable, and his delegation hoped that the consultations would be held in a spirit of
cooperation to ensure substantive progress on all the issues that were important to Members.  His
delegation agreed on the importance of addressing both implementation and internal transparency,and had confidence in the Director-General and the General Council Chairman to undertake
consultations on these issues in an effective way.
84. The representative of Saint Lucia said that Seattle was memorable for some Members for all
the wrong reasons, since their disappointment stemmed not only from the absence of sufficient
political will to seriously address the concerns of developing countries, but also from the processitself.  Many Members had agreed with the statement by Uganda on the marginalization in this
process, and this was particularly the case of the small economies.  Members were now in a
confidence-building mode, and this was important as the WTO had acquired a bad reputation in
many of these countries.  It was important to address the marginalization of small economies and the
unfulfilled promises of the Uruguay Round, which had raised serious implementation problems.Undertaking a serious review of transition periods in  order to be sensitive to the needs of developing
countries was important.  Capacity-building measures and technical assistance, particularly for LDCs
and small economies, were also important.  Her delegation agreed with Jamaica's statement that
certain non-controversial issues such as the work programme for small economies should also be
part of an early phase of confidence building.  Sh e wondered how it would be possible to fulfill the
collective mandate of the WTO in launching new negotiations without addressing the failure of the
Uruguay Round Agreements to deliver promised benefi ts, raise standards of living and promote trade
in a manner consistent with the needs and concerns of Members at different levels of economic
development.  On transparency, she recalled that when asked once whether St. Lucia would be as
concerned about the decision-making process if it could be assured of a satisfactory and fair outcome
without being at the table, her response had been that she did not know how a country could protect
its interests without having its chosen representative at the table.  The new world order appeared farless benevolent to some Members than to others.  Her delegation agreed with Barbados and Trinidad
and Tobago that there was a clear need for improvemen ts in internal transparency so as to ensure that
all Members had an opportunity to contribute to the process and even the smallest delegation's input
was recognized.  In this regard, her delegation was appreciative of the Director-General's efforts to
facilitate the greater participation of Members without permanent representation in Geneva.
85. The representative of Honduras said that although the issue of transition periods was the
focus of discussion at the present meeting, it was only a starting point for continuing work on other
implementation issues which had been raised during the preparations for Seattle.  On transparency,
work on this issue would receive the support of his delegation if it concerned only internal
transparency.  His delegation supported the statements by the Dominican Republic, Egypt, India andPakistan.
86. The representative of the Côte d'Ivoire agreed with others that despite the difficulties that
had afflicted the WTO, there was still hope.  Her delegation was pleased by the wide interest shown
by other Members in ensuring the full integration of the weakest countries into the trading system.
With regard to transparency, the improvements sought by Members were a wise approach and herWT/GC/M/53
Page 27
delegation welcomed this initiative.  It also agreed with Morocco and others that renewed confidence
in the WTO was necessary.
87. The representative of Hungary said that the events at Seattle had resulted in distrust among
Members and further work should therefore start with appropriate confidence-building measures.  It
was important to achieve an ambitious package providing improved market access for LDCs as soonas possible, and failing to do so would risk losing credibility.  It was also necessary to find a realistic
workable solution to the problem of transition periods.  The issue of internal transparency should
also be addressed.  The failure in Seattle had been caused by substantive differences in negotiating
positions and not by systemic deficiencies of the WTO.  Therefore, it was important to be cautious in
this area, so as to avoid a situation in which the process of further trade liberalization might be
delayed or blocked by sterile procedural debate.
88. The Chairman said that the discussion had been very positive and constructive, and it was
clear that all Members agreed on the need to build confidence among themselves.  The discussion
had been a significant step in that process.  Working together on a series of realistic and achievable
measures was the way in which substance would be given to this renewed confidence.  In this
respect, he noted that the issues identified by the Director-General in his report – measures in favour
of LDCs;  technical co-operation;  transition periods and other implementation issues;  internaltransparency and effective participation of all Members – had been widely considered to be priorities
for further consultation.  He also noted the high importance Members had placed on addressing the
range of implementation issues in an effective way, and suggested that implementation should be an
item on the agenda of the next General Council.  In this light, and bearing in mind all the additional
points that had been made by delegations, he proposed that further consultations be held by theChairman of the General Council and the Director-General.
89. The General Council took note of the Director-G eneral's statement and of other statements,
and agreed to the Chairman's proposals.
6. Appointment of officers to WTO bodies
90. The Chairman said that in accordance with the guidelines for appointment of officers to
WTO bodies approved by the General Council in January 1995 (WT/L/31), he had held informal
consultations on this matter.  On the basis of these consultations, he considered that there was a
consensus on the following slate of names:
General Council Mr. Kåre Bryn (Norway)
Dispute Settlement Body Mr. Stuart Harbinson (Hong Kong, China)
Trade Policy Review Body Mr. Ifte khar Ahmed Chowdhury (Bangladesh)
Council for Trade in Goods Mr. Carl os Pérez del Castillo (Uruguay)
Council for Trade in Services Mr. Sergio Marchi (Canada)
Committee on Trade and Environment Mrs. Yolande Biké (Gabon)
Committee on Trade and Development Mr. Ransford Smith (Jamaica)Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions Mr. Milan Hovorka (Czech Republic)
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Mr. Edsel T. Custodio (Philippines)
Committee on Budget, Finance and
AdministrationMr. Hakki Akil (Turkey)WT/GC/M/53
Page 28
Working Group on the Relationship between
Trade and InvestmentMr. Man Soon Chang (Korea)
Working Group on the Interaction between Trade
and Competition PolicyMr. Frederic Jenny (France)
Working Group on Transparency in Government
ProcurementMr. Ronald Saborío Soto (Costa Rica)
91. He further said that the Chairmanship for the Council on TRIPS would be decided pending
further consultations and taking into account the ov erall balance of the remaining Chairmanships to be
decided by the Council for Trade in Goods for its Subsidiary Bodies.
92. The General Council took note of the statement and of the consensus on the above slate of
names.
7. Election of Chairperson
93. As the outgoing presiding officer of the General Council, the Chairman made a statement
(WT/GC(00)/ST/1).
94. The General Council then unanimously elected Mr. Kåre Bryn (Norway) to the Chair.
__________