WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATION
RESTRICTED
WT/COMTD/SE/M/14
7 June 2006
(06-2714)
Committee on Trade and Development
Fourteenth Dedicated Session
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 26 APRIL 2006
Chairman: Mr. Faizel Ismail (South Africa)
A.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA ........................................................................................................ 1
B.
COMMUNICATION FROM ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA, BARBADOS, BOLIVIA, CUBA,
DOMINICA, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, EL SALVADOR, FIJI, GRENADA, GUATEMALA,
HONDURAS, JAMAICA, MAURITIUS, MONGOLIA, NICARAGUA, PAPUA NEW GUINEA,
PARAGUAY, SOLOMON ISLANDS, ST. KITTS AND NEVIS, ST. LUCIA, ST. VINCENT AND
THE GRENADINES AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ENTITLED "WORK PROGRAMME ON
SMALL ECONOMIES: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE PROGRESS TO DATE"
(WT/COMTD/SE/W/20) ............................................................................................................ 1
C.
PROPOSALS FROM ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA, BARBADOS, CUBA, DOMINICA, FIJI,
GRENADA, JAMAICA, MAURITIUS, PAPUA NEW GUINEA, SOLOMON ISLANDS, ST.
KITTS AND NEVIS, ST. VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES ON DESIGNATION OF
REGIONAL BODIES FOR TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE, SANITARY AND
PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES AND TRADE-RELATED ASPECTS OF INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY RIGHTS (WT/COMTD/SE/W/15/REV.1, WT/COMTD/SE/W/16/REV.1
AND WT/COMTD/SE/W/18/REV.1) ........................................................................................... 4
D.
PARAGRAPH 41 OF THE HONG KONG MINISTERIAL DECLARATION: MONITORING
PROGRESS OF THE SMALL ECONOMIES' PROPOSALS IN THE NEGOTIATING AND OTHER
BODIES ........................................................................................................................................ 9
A.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1.
The Chairman recalled that the draft agenda for the meeting was contained in
Airgram WTO/AIR/2800, issued on 12 April 2006.
2.
The agenda was adopted.
B.
COMMUNICATION FROM ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA, BARBADOS, BOLIVIA, CUBA, DOMINICA,
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, EL SALVADOR, FIJI, GRENADA, GUATEMALA, HONDURAS, JAMAICA,
MAURITIUS, MONGOLIA, NICARAGUA, PAPUA NEW GUINEA, PARAGUAY, SOLOMON
ISLANDS, ST. KITTS AND NEVIS, ST. LUCIA, ST. VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES AND
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO ENTITLED "WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES: AN
ASSESSMENT OF THE PROGRESS TO DATE" (WT/COMTD/SE/W/20)
3.
The Chairman noted that at the February and April informal meetings of the Dedicated
Session there had already been some discussion of this paper. However, he said the paper had not yet
been discussed at a formal meeting and asked if any of the delegations which had co-sponsored
document WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 would like to take the floor to introduce it.
WT/COMTD/SE/M/14
Page 2
4.
The representative of Barbados said the objective of the paper was to give a general overview
of the negotiations. He noted that two new proposals had been introduced in the Services and Rules
negotiating groups and that proposals were now included in the new document
WT/COMTD/SE/W/21 which he hoped could provide a basis for monitoring the proposals made to
date by the proponents of small economies in the negotiating and other bodies.
5.
The representative of Mauritius said the mandate in paragraph 35 of the Doha Ministerial
Declaration recognized the problems small economies have with integrating into the multilateral
trading system. This situation stemmed from the particular characteristics of small economies. He
said document WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 represented an assessment of the activities under the work
programme on small economies and was intended to facilitate the work of the Dedicated Session in
carrying out its monitoring and reporting functions. He drew the attention of Members to a recent
submission by the small economies to the Working Group on Domestic Regulation which showed that
small economies were willing to engage constructively in the negotiations. He noted that the special
consideration being sought by the small economies in no way signified an attempt to minimize the
flow of special and differential treatment to developing countries. This was in line with paragraph 44
of the Doha Ministerial Declaration which sought to make all S&D provisions more precise, effective
and operational. He said a successful Doha Round would bring economic benefits to all Members and
that it was inconceivable that some Members would gain at the expense of others since this should be
a win-win situation for all. He said the concerns of small economies should be addressed to ensure
that the work programme on small economies was fully implemented and its objectives realized.
6.
The representative of the United States said the summaries presented in document
WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 provided a useful overview of the proposals introduced in the various
negotiating and other bodies. She said she was concerned that it still remained unclear how one
defines the potential beneficiaries of the flexibilities being sought in the proposals. She said the
question remained open about who benefits from what and in which negotiating group. She was of
the view that this issue needed to be approached differently. The issue of who would benefit from any
flexibilities accorded would be critical when it came to cooperating and coordinating work related to
the small economies' proposals.
7.
The representative of Switzerland also raised the issue of who would benefit and noted that
there were many differences among the proponents. She cautioned that the issue of who would be
included as a beneficiary should not be underestimated and it deserved the attention of the Dedicated
Session and the negotiating groups.
8.
The representative of the Maldives said that as non-resident delegation he wondered how the
Dedicated Session was dealing with the problems of the non-resident small economies.
9.
The Chairman said that this was an important issue and that the Dedicated Session had to be
mindful of the problems of the non residents to ensure representativeness in its work.
10.
The representative of El Salvador said that with respect to the issue of who would be
considered one of the beneficiaries, the problems suffered by the small economies were sometimes
very different. Some faced problems regarding the diversification of exports; others had problems in
having access to the sea. He emphasized that it was the combination and intensity of these problems
that constituted the vulnerability of the small economies. What the small economies needed to
achieve their development was to generate more growth through trade and this was why proposals
were being made in the different negotiating bodies.
11.
The representative of Barbados said that the proponents were seriously addressing the issue of
who would be considered a beneficiary. Given the pace of the negotiations he did not know whether
this issue could be discussed in the Dedicated Session before engaging in consultations in the
WT/COMTD/SE/M/14
Page 3
negotiating groups. He said that small economies were not a homogeneous group and the
membership of the WTO was also not homogeneous. All Members had different problems and
conditions. The small economies had put forward proposals that recognized the situation of the group
in general and were not limited to the proponents but also embraced other countries that shared the
same trade-related characteristics. He said the idea was to find solutions to the trade-related
problems. He thought that Members were closer to finding a solution, but that it would not be easy
finding this solution because of the lack of homogeneity. He thought the treatment issue would be
easier to address once the issue of who would benefit was resolved. He said there were no criteria
that would not include some countries which some Members felt should not be included nor would
there be any criteria that would exclude some countries that some Members thought should not be
included.
12.
The representative of Mongolia said all groups in the WTO were diverse and that the situation
with respect to each Member could change. The small economies were united by a common
characteristic which was their small share of world trade. He also said that it was not possible to use
the same formula and coefficients for tariff reduction for all WTO Members as this reduction would
have a greater affect on small economies.
13.
The representative of the United States said that in regard to the beneficiaries of small
economies and possible solutions, different negotiating groups were looking at different sets of
beneficiaries.
14.
The representative of Sri Lanka said Members of the WTO were not a homogeneous group.
He added that developing countries were also not a homogeneous group, the only criteria being
self-denomination. He added that if Switzerland, however, were to declare itself a developing
country, no Member would take it seriously, because there were certain unwritten criteria. He said
that when the issue of who was a small economy was discussed, it was a similar situation - there were
no written criteria. Developing and developed countries in the WTO all had different problems and
issues. This was the reason why small economies were asking for certain flexibilities. He thought
that it was important to keep in mind that any flexibilities accorded to small economies should not
discriminate between countries in a similar situation. The flexibilities decided should be implemented
in an objective manner. Following his earlier example, he said that if Switzerland were to say it
wanted to take advantage of the flexibilities accorded to small economies, no one would take it
seriously. He said that is why any criteria decided for determining who would benefit from a
particular flexibility should be objective and not discriminate between countries in a similar situation.
15.
The representative of the Dominican Republic said the small economies had been working in
a constructive manner. When the problems of a small group of countries were addressed, this
demonstrated that the WTO worked for all its Members. He said that it was important that work on
modalities in the agriculture and NAMA negotiations should also address the problems of small
economies.
16.
The representative of Surinam supported the statements that had been made by the proponents
of the work programme on small economies.
17.
The representative of Belize said that her delegation would also like to be associated with the
documents that were presented by the small economies. The delegation of Belize would like to be
considered as a proponent of those documents.
18.
The representative of Colombia noted that document WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 was produced in
February and covered eight proposals that had been made in the negotiating and other groups. Since
then, two new proposals had been introduced in services and subsidies. The document was very
useful in assisting the Dedicated Session to asses the tasks under its mandate given in the Doha and
WT/COMTD/SE/M/14
Page 4
Hong Kong Ministerial Declarations. She proposed a methodology for carrying out the monitoring
task given to the Dedicated Session. First, she believed that the Dedicated Session should evaluate
the introduction and the section that contains the reasoning for the proposals. Second, the Dedicated
Session should look at the proposals themselves. She referred to the characteristics pertaining to
small economies cited in document WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 and said that Colombia, although it did
not consider itself to be a small economy, fulfilled 16 out of the 17 characteristics on the list. She
added that Colombia suffered from another characteristic that made it a very vulnerable economy, and
that this was violence and drug trafficking. Therefore, she had trouble seeing why the small
economies needed special flexibilities when Colombia shared most of their characteristics.
19.
She said her delegation had problems with the proposal that had been introduced by the small
economies in the NAMA negotiations. She noted that almost all of the proponents had bound
100 per cent of industrial products at very high levels, sometimes even at 500 per cent above the
applied rates. Even if the bound tariffs were reduced by 15 per cent this would still not affect the
level of the applied tariffs. She said that a good contribution by these Members would be to bind the
remaining unbound tariffs. She said that among the proponents three of them had only bound
5 per cent of their industrial goods. Regarding the small economies' proposal on rules and fisheries
subsidies, she cautioned against introducing new subsidies which would cause distortions.
20.
Regarding the proposals on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Technical Barriers to Trade
and Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, she wondered why it would be necessary
to designate a regional body to receive technical assistance. She also questioned how this could affect
the WTO's technical assistance budget. She said that if the negotiations were to be successful and
world trade would be further liberalized, then all Members had to make an effort and a proportionate
contribution.
21.
The representative of St. Kitts and Nevis said his delegation was pleased with the recent
progress made in the Dedicated Session. He thanked the Chairman for having held informal
consultations on the three proposals concerning the use of regional bodies for notifications to the SPS
and TBT Committees and the TRIPS Council. He said the consultations were useful in helping to
clarify the issues concerning the use of regional bodies in those areas. He also understood that some
delegations still had uncertainties pertaining to who was a small economy. Small economies were not
a homogeneous group and solutions to their different problems were being sought in different WTO
bodies. Therefore, it was difficult to come up with a characteristic that would apply in all areas. He
thought that the solutions to the problems of small economies could only come from a dialogue
between the Members and urged the Members to provide their input to help find creative solutions to
the problems of small economies. He said that the more advanced Members believed that free trade
was the way to move forward because they were more competitive. However, he said there were
some Members that were less developed and needed to reach a higher level of development to
embrace all aspects of trade liberalization in a way that benefited their economies. He said that
St. Kitts and Nevis, as a small economy, would continue to have problems related to exogenous
shocks. He said the work programme on small economies was the main issue of interest to St. Kitts
and Nevis in the negotiations and he looked forward to more progress in this area.
C.
PROPOSALS FROM ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA, BARBADOS, CUBA, DOMINICA, FIJI, GRENADA,
JAMAICA, MAURITIUS, PAPUA NEW GUINEA, SOLOMON ISLANDS, ST. KITTS AND NEVIS, ST.
VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES ON DESIGNATION OF REGIONAL BODIES FOR TECHNICAL
BARRIERS TO TRADE, SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES AND TRADE-RELATED
ASPECTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (WT/COMTD/SE/W/15/REV.1,
WT/COMTD/SE/W/16/REV.1 AND WT/COMTD/SE/W/18/REV.1)
22.
The Chairman said that agenda item C concerned the proposals by a group of small
economies on the designation of regional bodies for notifications concerning the Agreements on
WT/COMTD/SE/M/14
Page 5
Technical Barriers to Trade, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights. The revised versions of these proposals had been circulated in
WT/COMTD/SE/W/15/Rev.1, WT/COMTD/SE/W/16/Rev.1 and WT/COMTD/SE/W/18/Rev.1. He
recalled that the Dedicated Session had discussed these proposals at previous formal and informal
meetings. As a result, the proponents revised the language in the proposals concerning technical
assistance.
23.
The representative of the European Communities said that it was unavoidable that the needs
of small economies would have to be addressed and that this was made clear in the mandates from
Doha and Hong Kong. Documents WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 and WT/COMTD/SE/W/21 were very
useful compilations of the different proposals that had been made and allowed to better follow the
different bodies where the proponents were pursuing their interests. He believed that it would be
difficult to identify ex ante the beneficiaries of particular provisions. This had already been tried in
the Dedicated Session with no success, leading to the conclusion that it was better to try to do this by
focussing on the specific problems and issues. He believed that for most of the problems identified,
the solution would take the form of a description of the circumstances that the provision addressed,
and the response that had been found through negotiations. The question of who would benefit from
the provisions should not be settled through self denomination or a closed list of countries but rather
by compliance with the set of circumstances that the provision is meant to address, so the answers
given in each forum may be different. He said that what was needed is a reassurance, through
dialogue between the Members, that the work programme was going in the direction set out by
Ministers in Doha and Hong Kong. He also said that it was clear that a success in the work program
on small economies was a prerequisite for a successful conclusion of the Doha Development Agenda.
24.
The representative of Guyana said that more work was needed on the methodology for
determining who was a small economy. There should be a variable geometry to some extent on who
was a small economy. Otherwise some small economies would fall into a new category of
"structurally and permanently impoverished economies".
25.
The representative of Vanuatu said that minimal progress had been made in the work
programme on small economies so far. He added that he was hopeful that the Dedicated Session
would now be able to make more progress in the future.
26.
The representative of Papua New Guinea expressed support for the statement and efforts
made by Barbados on behalf of the small economies.
27.
The representative of El Salvador said that countries were not small and vulnerable
economies by choice and that this was a reality that some countries had to face. El Salvador had been
making considerable efforts to help its people. In reply to the comments made by the delegate of
Colombia, he recalled that the negotiations in the WTO concerned bound rates and not applied rates.
He could also not agree that the application of a 15 per cent coefficient formula for tariff reduction
would have little or no incidence on El Salvador's sensitivities. He also pointed out that his country
was committed to engaging constructively in the negotiations while respecting its own realities. He
invited the delegate of Colombia to engage in consultations to clarify any doubts arising from the
small economies' proposals.
28.
The representative of Venezuela said that looking at some of the tables in
WT/COMTD/SE/W/20 he noted that the share of world trade of the proponents of small economies
did not exceed 0.5 per cent. Therefore, it should not affect the interests of the bigger countries in the
WTO to grant the flexibilities that were being requested by the small economies.
29.
The representative of Barbados said that regarding the small economies proposals for regional
bodies in the areas of SPS, TBT and TRIPS he considered that the Dedicated Session had exhausted
WT/COMTD/SE/M/14
Page 6
the discussions on this matter. He felt the Dedicated Session should move on to drafting a
recommendation to the General Council. He said that if there were any more questions from
Members he would be happy to answer them.
30.
The representative of Antigua and Barbuda expressed support for the proposals and the
comments of Barbados.
31.
The representative of Fiji said that a one size fits all solution in the negotiations was not
workable as all Members were not on equal footing, so he urged Members to work together to find a
solution to the problems of small economies. He also expressed support for the small economies
proposals on regional bodies.
32.
The representative of the United States said her delegation supported the thrust of the
proposals. She noted that there were many examples of successful regional collaboration among
smaller WTO Members on these issues and that her delegation was willing to work constructively to
find ways to facilitate further regional collaboration. She said that at the previous meetings of the
Dedicated Session, Members were able to gain a better understanding of the proponents' views and
expectations. The proponents had clarified that they did not intend to "bind" Members to provide
technical assistance, nor were they seeking to be represented as a region, rather than individual
Members, at the WTO or elsewhere. She understood that the proponents were seeking ways that
regional bodies could assist in practice, for example with cooperation in terms of laboratory facilities.
She said nothing in the agreements on TBT, SPS or TRIPS precluded Members from cooperating on a
regional basis in such practical and prudent ways. She said that pending agreement by the Members
of the SPS and TBT Committees and the TRIPS Council, the United States would support the
proponents' quest to seek formal recognition by the General Council that the SPS, TBT and TRIPS
agreements allow the use of regional bodies to help them meet their WTO obligations, such as
notifications, assessments, etc., while each Member would remain entirely responsible for
compliance. Such recognition would also raise awareness that regional bodies can be a cost-effective
avenue for technical assistance, without necessarily entitling any regional group to specific amounts
of assistance.
33.
The representative of Japan said that the instructions he had received from his capital on the
proposals for regional bodies were very positive. He said the concerns he had raised at previous
meetings regarding the provisions of technical assistance had been addressed.
34.
The representative of the European Communities said he appreciated the clarifications that
had been provided on the issue of technical assistance and that this issue had been addressed in the
revised proposals. He also agreed with the United States that regional bodies could be a pragmatic
way of dealing with the challenges of meeting obligations and exercising rights. The EC and its
member states already worked with some of the proponents on just these sorts of regional capacity
building initiatives.
35.
The representative of Switzerland supported the statements made by the delegate of the
United States and encouraged the Dedicated Session to come forward with a recommendation to the
General Council.
36.
The representative of Mongolia expressed support for the proposals although his delegation
was not one of the sponsors.
37.
The representative of Canada said he saw the benefit in seeking input by the TBT and SPS
Committees and the TRIPS Council. However, he said his delegation was broadly supportive of the
proposals. He also wanted some clarification that there would not be any binding commitments to
provide technical assistance by the WTO or Members to the newly created regional bodies.
WT/COMTD/SE/M/14
Page 7
38.
The Chairman said that the issue of technical assistance had already been addressed by the
proponents in the revised proposals and it had been made clear that there was no obligation to provide
technical assistance.
39.
The representative of India said that his delegation broadly supported the proposals. His
delegation was also aware of the shortage of capacity to provide technical assistance on TRIPS by the
WTO Secretariat. For this reason, the WTO signed an agreement with WIPO on the provision of
technical assistance. He suggested that at the next meeting of the TRIPS Council where WIPO is to
provide a report on its technical assistance activities, the small economies should explain their
difficulties so that Members could understand why the current arrangements for technical assistance
were not meeting their concerns.
40.
The representative of the Solomon Islands said he supported the statements made by the small
economies on document WT/COMTD/SE/W/20. He also expressed his full support for the proposals
on regional bodies in the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS.
41.
The representative of Mexico suggested that the proposals on the use of regional bodies for
TBT, SPS and TRIPS notifications could also be discussed in the respective technical bodies. With
regard to the SPS proposal she said that interesting results could be achieved if the proposal was
linked to Article 6 of the SPS Agreement. This would avoid duplication with the work done by other
international organizations. Regarding the TBT proposals, she was of the view that this issue could
be dealt with in the context of the triennial review on the TBT Agreement currently being conducted
in the TBT committee.
42.
The Chairman recalled that at the last informal meeting of the Dedicated Session it was
agreed that the Chairmen of the Committees on TBT, SPS and TRIPS Council would consult within
those bodies on the proposals by the small economies and report back to the Dedicated Session with
their feedback.
43.
The representative of Brazil said that his delegation was ready to support the proposals on
regional bodies in the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS on two conditions. First, that it be made clear
that the responsibility for implementation of the agreements remained with the individual Members.
Second, that the proposals do not lead to an amendment of the Agreements concerned. He also noted
that the World Bank in a recent report recognized the effectiveness of the technical cooperation
delivered through regional bodies.
44.
The representative of Papua New Guinea expressed support for the proposals on regional
bodies in the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS.
45.
The representative of Argentina said his delegation agreed conceptually with the proposals.
However, he said that the technical debate on their implementation should be done in the respective
technical bodies.
46.
The representative of China said that in his view nothing in the Agreements concerned
prevented a regional approach to their implementation as was being suggested by the small
economies. Nevertheless, he said that for the sake of legal certainty, positive consideration should be
given to the proposals. He also looked forward to the feedback that was going to be provided by the
technical bodies. He suggested inviting the WTO's Institute for Technical Cooperation and Training
to brief the Dedicated Session on the success and lessons learned on regional technical assistance so
that Members would know how to better operationalize the proposals.
47.
The representative of Costa Rica said he recognized the concerns of small economies.
However, any solutions to address their concerns should not affect other developing countries. The
WT/COMTD/SE/M/14
Page 8
Dedicated Session and the negotiating bodies to which small economies proposals had been submitted
should focus on which countries would benefit from any agreed flexibilities. Regarding document
WT/COMTD/SE/W/20, he said that Costa Rica could also be identified with sharing the
characteristics listed in the paper. However, Costa Rica saw special and differential treatment from an
offensive point of view and as something to be used to obtain access to markets and the elimination of
trade distortions. This was the best way to integrate into the multilateral trading system. Special and
differential treatment was not just a means to obtain exceptions from liberalization. He shared the
comments made by the delegate of Colombia on the small economies issues in the NAMA
negotiations and added that the concerns of small economies should be covered by paragraph 8 of the
Annex on NAMA in the 1 August 2004 Decision of the General Council. Regarding the comments
by the delegate of El Salvador on applied rates, he said it was clear from the current state of the
negotiations that applied rates would also be affected. Regarding the proposals on regional bodies in
the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS he said there had already been some experiences on this matter and
that he had some doubts about the scope of the proposals and looked forward to participating in any
informal consultations where these issues could be clarified. He also agreed with those Members that
said the proposals should also be discussed in their respective technical bodies.
48.
The representative of Guyana wished also to be considered a sponsor of the proposals on
regional bodies in the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS. He said the WTO could draw from the
experience of agencies such as WIPO and the FAO on assisting countries to discharge their
obligations under the agreements concerned.
49.
The representative of Mauritius expressed support for the comments made by El Salvador and
Guyana. He said small economies were seeking solutions to their trade-related concerns which were
not the product of human actions, as were violence and civil war. He said small economies were
willing to make a contribution to the negotiations which was consistent with their level of
development.
50.
The representative of St. Kitts and Nevis thanked those Members who had made constructive
comments in support of the three proposals. He also agreed with the mechanism that had been set up
at the previous informal meeting on having the relevant bodies consult on these issues and report back
to the Dedicated Session. He said most of the concerns that had been expressed had already been
addressed and that it was time to move forward with the proposals.
51.
The representative of Suriname said that her delegation would like to be included in the list of
sponsors for the proposals on regional bodies in the areas of TBT, SPS and TRIPS.
52.
The Chairman said that there had been a very fruitful exchange of views and he was happy
that most, if not all, of the concerns had been addressed by the proponents in the revisions. It was
clear that Members were close to a convergence on their understanding of these proposals. He also
noted that the technical bodies would be meeting to discuss these proposals. He said the Committee
on TBT would be meeting on 7 June 2006, the Committee on SPS would meet informally on
24 May 2006 and formally on 28 June 2006, and the TRIPS Council on 14-15 June 2006. He hoped
that some of the issues that had been raised could be further discussed in these bodies and that their
respective Chairs could report back to the Dedicated Session.
53.
The Chairman suggested that the Dedicated Session discuss at its next formal meeting the
reports which had been requested from the Chairs of the SPS and TBT Committees and the TRIPS
Council. As a parallel process, the Dedicated Session could begin work on drafting a
recommendation to the General Council which would recognize the rights of Members to designate
regional bodies in the three areas of SPS, TBT and TRIPS. Any recommendations resulting from the
consultations in the technical bodies could then be incorporated into a draft recommendation.
WT/COMTD/SE/M/14
Page 9
54.
It was so agreed.
D.
PARAGRAPH 41 OF THE HONG KONG MINISTERIAL DECLARATION: MONITORING PROGRESS
OF THE SMALL ECONOMIES' PROPOSALS IN THE NEGOTIATING AND OTHER BODIES
55.
The Chairman recalled that the monitoring role of the Dedicated Session was part of the two
track approach on small economies stated in paragraph 41 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration.
He noted that on this issue, the proponents had submitted a new document titled "Small Economies
Work Programme: The Monitoring Role of the Committee on Trade and Development in Dedicated
Session" (WT/COMTD/SE/W/21). He then asked the proponents of this document if they would like
to introduce it to the Dedicated Session.
56.
The representative of Barbados said that from his perspective there were two different aspects
of the monitoring role of the Dedicated Session. One was monitoring the progress of the small
economies' proposals that had been made in the negotiating and other bodies. The other was that the
Chairman could request any Member to engage with the Chairs of the negotiating and other bodies to
discuss the progress on the proposals made by small economies. On the former, the proponents had
tabled this new document which gave a brief history of what was achieved in Hong Kong and
replicated the precise proposals for decisions and recommendations tabled in the negotiating and in
other bodies. This had been presented not for any decision to be taken on these matters but for
acknowledgement, discussion and clarification if necessary.
57.
The representative of the United States said that on the question of monitoring, what
Barbados had pointed out were two of the forms in which the Dedicated Session could exercise its
monitoring role. She said the Chairman's reports to the General Council were also part of the
monitoring process as well as the reports to the Dedicated Session on activities carried out in the
negotiating and other bodies on the proposals in those bodies submitted by small economies. She
asked if the Secretariat could periodically update the compilation documents such as
WT/COMTD/SE/W/21.
58.
The Chairman proposed that that the compilation document - WT/COMTD/SE/W/21 - should
serve as the basis for future work in monitoring progress of the small economies' proposals. This
document could be further supplemented by reports received from the Chairs of the negotiating and
other bodies and through inputs by the Secretariat.
59.
It was so agreed.
60.
The meeting was adjourned.
__________