Embed
Email

WORLD TRADE

Document Sample
WORLD TRADE
Shared by: HC111125033039
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
11/24/2011
language:
English
pages:
12
RESTRICTED

WORLD TRADE WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

16 July 2004

ORGANIZATION

(04-3049)



Committee on Trade and Development

Seventh Dedicated Session







NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 12 MAY 2004



Chairman: H. E. Mr. Trevor Clarke (Barbados)



Subjects discussed:



A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA ........................................................................................................ 1

B. WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES ............................................................................. 1

(i) Submission by Bolivia, Mongolia and Paraguay (WT/COMTD/SE/W/10) ................................ 1

(ii) Submission by Barbados, Fiji, Mauritius, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and

Trinidad and Tobago (WT/COMTD/SE/W/11) ........................................................................... 3





A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA



1. The draft agenda for the meeting as contained in Airgram WTO/AIR/2303/REV.1 of

6 May 2004 was adopted.



B. WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES



2. The Chairman said this item was discussed at the last meeting of the Dedicated Session on

17 October 2003. He said since then two new submissions had been received. He asked the

representative of Paraguay to introduce his proposal in document WT/COMTD/SE/W/10 on behalf of

Bolivia, Mongolia and Paraguay.



(i) Submission by Bolivia, Mongolia and Paraguay (WT/COMTD/SE/W/10)



3. The representative of Paraguay said his country, Bolivia and Mongolia had submitted a

document which sets out proposals that have emerged in the course of various discussions held among

land-locked developing countries in the WTO. The proposal is designed to contribute to the debate

and to fulfill the mandate in paragraph 35 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, namely to prepare a

WTO Work Programme on Small Economies. He explained that he did not wish to repeat what his

delegation had said on past occasions regarding the terms of the Almaty Ministerial Declaration and

the statement made in Cancún by the Ministers of land-locked developing countries concerning the

need to address in the WTO the particular difficulties facing land-locked developing countries. He

referred to the latest high-level meeting of the United Nations Economic and Social Council on

26 April 2004 and quoted from the report as follows: "At key multilateral forums in the last 12

months, the international community has emphasized the political will that is required for the rapid

implementation of actions agreed to in the [Monterrey] Consensus... in this regard, the

marginalization of the least-developed countries, land-locked countries and small economies in world

trade underscores the importance of addressing their particular needs". He said land-locked

developing countries wished to make the following specific proposals for inclusion in the Programme

on Small Economies. On market access, it was necessary to provide tariff-free and quota-free access

for all exports of goods and services originating from small economies. The vital importance of

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 2





market access has been amply recognized as a sine qua non condition for a country's development. In

the United Nations framework, 16 of the 31 land-locked developing countries are least-developed

countries and almost all of the remainder are close to that threshold. He said all of them stand on the

sidelines of the multilateral trading system and that poverty affects more than 50 per cent of their

respective populations. Furthermore, 10 per cent of the overall population of developing countries,

i.e. 350 million people, lived in land-locked countries, and that the implementation of this proposal

would be of unquestionable benefit for these millions of individuals. Facilitating imports of products

from small economies, and in particular from those without seaports, is an obligation that has been

emphasized, directly or indirectly, at a number of international forums. The Almaty Ministerial

Declaration, the Millennium Summit, the Monterrey Consensus and UNCTAD meetings have

expressly referred to this issue. He added that leading trade partners in the WTO have also stressed

the point on various occasions in referring to the aspects of special and differential treatment, which is

included in the Doha Development Agenda.



4. He remarked that the submission proposes granting tariff-free and quota-free access for all

products from small economies to all developed and developing country markets. This is a measure

aimed at integrating small economies into global trade as a key prerequisite for their development and

a primary objective for the achievement of world peace. He explained that since many small

economy WTO Members are still dependent on exports of a narrow range of primary commodities, it

is also necessary to adopt measures that will help them escape from that dependent situation, which is

synonymous with high vulnerability. The adoption of the WTO Programme for Small Economies

provides the opportunity to do so. The proposal calls for reserving for small economies a minimum

percentage of the product tariff quotas on the schedules of WTO Members, and that according to the

WTO documents, 37 Members have scheduled commitments in respect of a total of 1,371 tariff

quotas. He added that the land-locked developing countries, as well as many small economies, do not

participate in this mode of trade in the WTO. Paraguay and others believed that reserving a minimum

percentage so as to enable developing countries with small economies to participate in trade under a

specific heading will not only facilitate diversification of their export markets but will also boost

investment and create new opportunities for more effective integration in the multilateral trading

system, which is one of the fundamental objectives of the WTO. A series of simple disciplines for

quota administration that would be manageable for these countries will also complement the

endeavours of WTO Members to extend the benefits of tariff quotas to smaller economies. He added

that the increasingly rapid expansion of trade as a result of market liberalization measures has yielded

genuine benefits in terms of global economic growth. According to a World Bank study, opening up

to foreign trade leads to greater income for poorer countries and raises their gross domestic product.

On the other hand, countries with increased exports of manufactured goods are faced with non-tariff

barriers, primarily sanitary and phytosanitary measures and technical barriers to trade. He explained

that it was difficult for developing countries to overcome such barriers and that in the case of small

economies, the obstacles were almost insurmountable. This is why in many cases the allocation of

quotas or the granting of duty exemptions fails to generate any trade flow, precisely because small

economies lack the technical capacity to meet the SPS and TBT requirements.



5. He said the proposal is aimed at ensuring that small economies receive the technical

assistance required for them to attain the level of knowledge and build up the technical infrastructure

they need to benefit from any trade opportunities that may open up for them. On the basis of this

proposal, Members could help small economies in need of technical and financial assistance to

conduct trade operations. He emphasized that in a globalized world where everything is measured

according to the level of productivity and competitiveness in international markets, it is indispensable

to provide small economies with the tools required to increase the efficiency of their production

systems. Although there are other international bodies directly responsible for such matters, the

support that small economies can receive in the WTO will have a crucial impact when it comes to

channelling existing resources. He added that the small economies value the Integrated Framework

for least-developed countries, and he hoped that a similar framework would be established to address

the specific needs of small economies and that consideration would be given, at the appropriate time,

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 3





to warrant an extension of the Integrated Framework for least-developed countries for other

economies as well. In the area of accessions, he reiterated the recommendation made by Ministers in

Doha to adopt simplified procedures to facilitate and speed up the accession of small economies

(several of which are land-locked). He explained that he tried to summarize the reasons and basis for

the document that is now before the CTD and there are certainly other reasons and arguments, but that

some Members may perhaps raise objections to the proposals. These would be given careful

consideration, but he asked Members to bear in mind that however high the cost of trade may be for

them, various technical studies have shown the cost to land-locked countries is at least 20 per cent –

and in some cases as much as 60 per cent – higher. This is a legitimate reason for requesting

differential treatment.



(ii) Submission by Barbados, Fiji, Mauritius, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and

Trinidad and Tobago (WT/COMTD/SE/W/11)



6. The representative of Mauritius said the proposal introduced by Paraguay contains seven

elements which are not new but which serve as complements to those set out already in document

WT/COMTD/SE/W/3. The latter was tabled on 28 June 2002 and was discussed a few days later on

1 July. He viewed the contribution from Paraguay and other small, vulnerable and land-locked

countries as a further refinement of past proposals and hoped the Dedicated Session would take note

of these elaborations.



7. The proposal WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 – a joint proposal by Barbados, Fiji, Mauritius,

Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Trinidad and Tobago – was in response to the last meeting

of the Dedicated Session when the proponents were asked to elaborate on past proposals. The paper

does not attempt to refine all the past seven proposals at once but focuses on three proposals in

particular. The others will be examined during future meetings of the Dedicated Session.



8. The proposal focuses on preferences, subsidies and market access. He explained that the

section on preferences had been divided into two categories: the first was trade preferences and the

second concerned investment preferences. Trade preferences are recognized as an established

mechanism for promoting development. Small and vulnerable economies have a limited range of

exports and do not distort international trade in any way because their share of trade is so

insignificant. Furthermore, small economies have always depended on these existing market access

arrangements for their stability, growth, export earnings and food security. The elimination of these

preferences will bring uncertainty for market access and will increase existing vulnerabilities. He

added that this is not the purpose of the WTO and that with the disappearance of these preferential

access arrangements and corresponding waivers vulnerabilities will be compounded. Since waivers

do not provide stability and predictability, preferences should be grandfathered. The African Group

had already made such a proposal in the Negotiating Group on Agriculture and his Government and

others were fully aware of the efforts undertaken by the Bretton Woods Institutions to provide

assistance. Their efforts should be seen as complementary solutions to what is going to be decided in

the WTO. A trade issue needs a trade solution. Therefore, the proponents welcomed the IMF and

World Bank offers to grant small and vulnerable developing economies concessionary financing

within the time-frame of the Doha Round and especially the Trade Integration Mechanism (TIM)

which the IMF hopes to deliver in due course. In regard to investment preferences, he said investment

flows do not accrue to small and vulnerable economies because of their small markets. Therefore, the

Committee should come up with measures to facilitate investment flows into the small economies

through, for example, long term preferential investment facilities. This should be developed with the

help of the CTD and appropriate regional or multilateral financial institutions. He suggested that

WTO Members create the appropriate incentives and flexibilities for investment in small and

vulnerable economies. The proposal WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 concerns the subject of subsidies already

addressed in WT/COMTD/SE/W/3. He added that it is widely recognized that subsidies can play an

important role in the economic development programmes of developing country Members. While the

Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures contains some flexibilities for developing

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 4





countries, such flexibilities do not cater to the needs of small, and vulnerable economies and they do

not help to address the inherent cost disadvantages and resource constraints. Since current WTO rules

which provide some fiscal incentives are going to be phased out, he said the proposal under the

chapter "Exemption from Export Subsidies" states that paragraph 3.1(a) of Article III of the

Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures should not apply to small economies. It is

proposed that Annex VII should be revisited to include small and vulnerable countries like Barbados,

Fiji, Mauritius, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Trinidad and Tobago and others. He said the

Annex should include small and vulnerable economies so that they can benefit.



9. Concerning the re-activation of non-actionable subsidies, the proponents suggested that the

provisions of Part IV of the Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Agreement should be reactivated

and that sub-paragraph 8.1 be included in favour of small economies. He said it could read as

follows: "Subsidies which are specific within the meaning of Article II and which meet all the

conditions provided for in paragraph 2(a), 2(b) or 2(c) and applied by the following Members:

Barbados, Fiji, Mauritius, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Trinidad and Tobago".



10. In regard to the current negotiations on agriculture and non-agricultural market access, he

recalled that the proponents had already submitted specific proposals. He said contributions that the

proponents will have to make in the areas of agriculture and non-agricultural market access will have

to be commensurate with their capacity. This capacity is limited by inherent constraints and

vulnerabilities. The latest proposal was a response to the Committee to elaborate on the proposals

already tabled in June and July 2002. He added that the proponents would come back with further

elaborations on other issues already tabled.



11. The representative of Bolivia recalled that in November 2001, Ministers had agreed on a

Work Programme incorporating the interests of all Members on issues related to implementation, the

negotiating areas making up the "single undertaking" and a special paragraph, namely on "small

economies". He said two decades had passed since Bolivia undertook a programme of liberalization

measures and opened its borders to trade while eliminating non-tariff barriers and embarking on an

open and integrated regionalism based on multilateral provisions. These measures resulted in high

social costs but have not reduced the incidence of poverty which, according to 2002 statistics, affects

64 per cent of the population.



12. He said Bolivia has not seen an increase in its exports which currently represent barely one

per cent of the total for South America.1 Exports previously consisted solely of mineral products, but

now include soya bean by-products, as the main manufactured products, and primary products, which

still account for a large share of national income. Bolivia has a chronic trade deficit and he explained

that applied tariff levels are low and the tariff reductions have affected the annual fiscal revenue.



13. He explained that a country's export capacity basically depended on its productive

development. In the case of Bolivia, in spite of its trade reforms, the country has not succeeded in

developing a competitive export supply which would enable it to gain access to new markets and, in

many cases, to position itself to achieve sustained growth in its traditional export markets.



14. Developing countries with no direct access to a sea coast from which to transport their limited

production are even more vulnerable. He said that any tariff reductions and/or elimination from

which Bolivia could benefit turns out to be an artificial advantage in percentage terms, compared with

the high costs of transport from the production area to the nearest sea port.



15. Numerous studies have shown a correlation between the lack of sovereign access to the sea,

export levels and growth and show that, in the case of Bolivia, its land-locked status means an

additional cost of 40 to 60 per cent in the transported value of the goods, which is reflected in both



1

Andean Development Corporation (CAF) Annual Report 2002.

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 5





their end price and the delivery time. Because of such a trade handicap, countries like Bolivia deserve

to have recourse to differential treatment in order to be able to compete on an equal footing.



16. This unfortunate geographic reality had prompted the development of concrete suggestions

designed to strengthen and reinforce the "work programme" in areas which are crucial to increasing

participation in international trade. The vulnerability of small economies is the result of a number of

adverse factors, which often give rise to situations beyond the reach of political will and the very

management of the national economy. In the WTO, major trading partners are now more aware of the

specific circumstances and needs of small, land-locked economies. Furthermore, he referred to a

recent Appellate Body ruling in the case European Communities - Conditions for the granting of tariff

preferences to developing countries - set a precedent in jurisprudence by interpreting that developing

countries may mean less than all developing countries.



17. He said that since the participation of small economies in world trade is insignificant, granting

all their exports of goods and services tariff-free and quota-free access would prove an effective way

of applying the principle of differential treatment. At the same time, and in the full knowledge that

trade liberalization may involve several stages, he considered that the administration of existing tariff

quotas should afford real market access opportunities to exports from small economies, which may

also necessitate working together to implement the appropriate technical assistance. These and other

measures would contribute to the development of production chains, thereby boosting trade and

reducing the levels of vulnerability and poverty currently suffered by Bolivia.



18. The representative of Mongolia said the land-locked countries had come up with the paper

WT/COMTD/SE/W/10 to raise awareness of the difficulties for certain Members. Being land-locked

represents a permanent cost disadvantage and that is why he was asking for an elimination of tariffs

and was requesting quota-free privileges. He welcomed the recent proposal announced by the

European Communities which would help the weakest and the poorest Members or the

least-developed countries and encouraged other Members to do the same. He stated that land-locked

countries never graduated but least-developed countries could. He referred to the Maldives and the

discussion of its graduation from LDC status as being a new situation for the WTO. As the

representative from the Maldives explained, a transitional period would be needed for the Maldives

after graduation. He said that WTO Members would have to clarify what to do with those countries

that graduate from LDC status and that the work programme on small economies could also look at

some of these aspects. In regard to land-locked countries, the focus should be on small economies

like Mongolia and not large land-locked countries. In addition to tariffs, land-locked countries face

other problems linked to a dependency on the transit countries. They have to negotiate with

neighbours to have access to transit facilities. They also have the associated infrastructure costs. He

said the proposal made by Mauritius on behalf of a number of small economies is in line with

proposals made by a few land-locked developing countries. Positions of both have to be considered

when moving ahead with the negotiations.



19. As one of the co-sponsors of COMTD/SE/WT/W/11, the representative of Barbados

supported the statement made by Mauritius. She said the proposals contained in

WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 were an elaboration of some of the key proposals raised in

WT/COMTD/SE/W/3. She hoped they would help move discussions closer to the objective of

framing and adopting concrete measures to facilitate the full and beneficial integration of small and

vulnerable economies into the multilateral trading system and to fulfilling the mandate on small

economies of the Doha Ministerial Declaration. She welcomed the proposals contained in the new

submission and said they should be considered in the context of the parameters of the Doha

Ministerial Declaration's mandate contained in paragraph 35. These proposals must be seen as being

applicable to countries which share attributes of being small in economic size and which have

inherent vulnerabilities because of their "smallness".

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 6





20. The representative of Guyana welcomed the two proposals presented by Paraguay and

Mauritius. Trade preferences are of great importance to Guyana and he wished to urge Members to

examine the proposals in WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 and eventually incorporate them into the multilateral

trading system.



21. The representative of Jamaica supported WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 as an elaboration of the

proposals submitted to the CTD in 2002. The refinement and clarification of several concerns

provided Members with a better understanding of the specific difficulties faced by small and

vulnerable economies and the possible means and measures which can be implemented to address

these situations. She also welcomed the new proposal WT/COMTD/SE/W/10.



22. The representative of Zimbabwe said that as a land-locked country, she supported the

proposal contained in WT/COMTD/SE/W/10 and those in the proposal WT/COMTD/SE/W/11

presented by Mauritius. Land-locked countries require special attention and also special and

differential treatment.



23. The representative of the Solomon Islands said there are serious challenges facing small

economies. There is a lot that the WTO Membership can and should do to assist with meeting the

challenges which are not of their own making. He supported the paper by Mauritius which identified

some of these challenges.



24. The representative of Suriname said she supported the proposal contained in

WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 on small economies and urged that the Work Programme on small economies

should continue to focus on specific issues of concern. She also welcomed the paper

WT/COMTD/SE/W/10.



25. The representative of Fiji also expressed support for the proposals contained in

WT/COMTD/SE/W/11. While the full list of issues has not been addressed yet in the proposal, the

proposal does contain elements which represent priority items for the proponents. She also supported

proposal WT/COMTD/SE/W/10 from Paraguay. The two proposals emphasize the vulnerabilities and

identify the challenges faced by land-locked and sea-locked countries.



26. The representative of Grenada thanked Paraguay for its proposal and said it helped to address

some of the vulnerabilities Paraguay and other countries face. He said the issues raised were also

reflected in other proposals and concerns already stated by Grenada and CARICOM. He thanked the

authors of WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 and said his delegation would like to make some additions which

would help with the general interpretation of the proposal. Grenada was particularly interested in

investment incentives especially since as a member of CARICOM, such incentives will be part of the

CARICOM single market on 1 January 2005. He asked other Members for their support with the

measures to help them overcome structural disadvantages. He said his delegation viewed subsidies

similarly and that fiscal incentives have been used throughout the region to stimulate non-agricultural

and agricultural manufacturing. They are export incentive measures and he said he was pleased to see

that they formed part of the submission. Market access questions and further concessions in this area

on the basis of less than full reciprocity should also be taken into account as stated in previous

proposals.



27. The representatives of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Malawi welcomed the proposals.



28. The representative of Sri Lanka said that while he understood and even shared the concerns of

small developing countries, the process of providing concessions for one group of countries should

not by any means further marginalize another group of small developing countries. Sri Lanka is one

of those small countries which has been left out of enhanced preferential arrangements to smaller

developing countries by major markets. Furthermore, Sri Lanka depends on textiles and clothing for

more than 50 per cent of its export earnings. Unlike many of its competitors, Sri Lanka does not

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 7





receive any preferential market access in its main markets. Even where there is preferential access,

the utilization rate is extremely limited because of strict rules of origin requirements. It is difficult for

Sri Lanka to justify the preservation of tariff preferences only for the present beneficiaries. He said if

it is agreed to preserve such preferences, that would mean that these products would not be subject to

any tariff reduction negotiations. If that happens, negotiations in such areas as non-agricultural

market access would become meaningless because 50 per cent of Sri Lanka's exports which presently

face peak tariffs would be excluded. Therefore, the concerns of all small, developing countries should

be taken into account.



29. The representative of the Dominican Republic said his economy has all the characteristics

which are described in WT/COMTD/SE/W/3. External factors such as the recent financial crisis have

increased the Dominican Republic's vulnerability and caused decreases in the national budget and in

gross domestic product. More institutional strengthening is now required.



30. The representative of Saint Kitts and Nevis supported the two new proposals

WT/COMTD/SE/W/10 and WT/COMTD/SE/W/11, and agreed with the statement made by Grenada

about the concerns expressed on investment. The proposals can do much to address the

vulnerabilities of small economies.



31. The representative of Saint Lucia said WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 and WT/COMTD/SE/W/10

was a further step towards elaborating proposals for the full integration of small economies into the

multilateral trading system. His delegation also shared the views expressed by Grenada.



32. The representative of Papua New Guinea said issues contained in WT/COMTD/SE/W/10 and

WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 were not the only ones affecting small economies and that others would be

submitted soon. She requested that other trading partners support her delegation's request so that

Papua New Guinea could be an effective partner in the trading system. She explained that the

Dedicated Session provided a unique forum to discuss issues related to small economies.



33. The representative of Belize also supported WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 and was particularly

interested in hearing reactions to the proposals contained therein.



34. The representative of Sao Tome and Principe expressed support for the two new proposals

presented by Mauritius and Paraguay and encouraged more fruitful discussion which would lead to

concrete measures for small economies.



35. The representative of Canada said she had extensive comments on each of the proposals but

that she would summarize these into general comments. Canada is fully supportive of the efforts of

small economies to address their specific concerns. Most of the proposals discussed provided more

definition to proposals put forth in WT/COMTD/SE/3 several years ago. However, the two proposals

effectively serve to request the creation of a sub-category of WTO Members and this is not consistent

with paragraph 35 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration in that the paragraph explicitly states the

intention of not creating a sub-category of WTO Members. She said that while Canada does not

support the creation of a separate category of small economies, her Government believes there are a

wide range of existing provisions which can address the particular needs of small economies. In the

various negotiating areas, Canada and others are cognizant of the different capacities, constraints and

challenges faced by countries participating in these negotiations. These differences will be considered

in the negotiations. She said market access issues are addressed in the proposal

WT/COMTD/SE/W/10. She added that the WTO only recognizes that the least-developed countries

constitute a distinct category but does not provide this distinction to small economies. In regard to

WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 and its paragraph "C", Canada could accept the last sentence which states:

"The contribution to be made by the small economies in the area of market access in Agriculture and

NAMA will be commensurate with their capacity which is limited by their inherent constraints and

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 8





vulnerabilities". Canada recognized the need for flexibility in its expectations of the developing

countries in the DDA Round.



36. As regards WT/COMTD/SE/W/10, there were many references to increased technical

assistance and to using technical assistance to assist small, land-locked economies. Canada fully

supports using the WTO Global Trust Fund to benefit small economies and endorses using such funds

for small economies. As regards the market access negotiations, she said Canada would like to have

these discussions take place in the NAMA and agricultural context rather than in this Dedicated

Session of the CTD. Concerning accessions, WTO Members already take into account the situation

and characteristics of each acceding state or customs territory. In addition to comments made on the

WT/COMTD/SE/W/11, the representative of Canada said that as far as preferences and

grandfathering, Canada presumes that the existing arrangements would in Canada's case include the

GPT (General Tariff Preferences), the "CARIBCAN" and the LDC tariffs. She explained that Canada

did not see the need to go beyond the existing waivers for these tariffs and does not support

grandfathering. However, Canada has extended its GPT and LDC schemes for an additional 10 years,

until 30 June 2014. Mongolia has been added to the Canada's GPT scheme as a beneficiary.



37. With regard to trade preference erosion, Canada maintained that this is not specific to small

economies. Solutions to this issue should be sought in other negotiating fora. Canada is grateful for

international agency assistance such as the International Monetary Fund which is looking seriously at

this issue and has supported and encouraged such assistance. As concerns investment preferences,

she asked what the proponents of the paper see as examples of incentives and flexibilities for

investment in small economies. She thought it would be helpful if examples were put forward to

further the discussion. She also asked proponents to comment on the prospective role of policy

instruments, including investment protection and other treaties. As concerns the two proposals on

subsidies, she explained that the Doha Ministerial Declaration indicates that pursuant to

paragraph 12(b), commitments related to the provisions on the Agreement on Subsidies and

Countervailing Measures are to be dealt with in the Negotiating Group on Rules. And pursuant to

paragraph 51, Canada thinks it useful to identify and debate development aspects of the subsidies

negotiations in the CTD to convey messages to the rules negotiating group. Pursuant to paragraph 35,

Canada maintains its stance of not wishing to create a sub-category of WTO Members.



38. The representative of Australia welcomed the elaboration of the two new proposals but that

she shared a number of the concerns similar to those expressed by Canada, in particular in regard to

the creation of a new sub-category of WTO Members. She emphasized that it was also important to

avoid duplication of existing work and that issues should be dealt with in a manner that is consistent

with the Doha Ministerial Declaration, for example the subsidies proposal mentioned by Canada in

the WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 proposal. Australia continues to reflect on a number of proposals that

have been presented. There are many different views on such issues as preferences and there are also

various actors involved in dealing with these issues. Australia is also not supportive of the

grandfathering provisions. In the broader negotiating context, there are now new proposals on the

table which are the subject of high level discussions, and these may have some interface with the

issues being discussed. Australia is interested in further discussion of these issues in the Dedicated

Session and other appropriate fora. Her delegation was looking forward to the elaboration of other

issues in due course.



39. The representative of Japan said his delegation acknowledged the difficulties small economies

face with fully integrating into the multilateral trading system. He recalled that in 2003 there was

intensive discussion to identify what the specific difficulties were for small economies and what could

be done to deal with the difficulties. Even though no conclusion had been reached, the discussion had

been constructive. While his delegation was ready to continue working on small economies, Japan

was somewhat cautious about taking up new elements. He asked whether or not the proposal

presented by Paraguay, Bolivia and Mongolia described elements which are unique to land-locked

countries or whether these proposals can be applied to small economies as a whole. He explained that

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 9





Japan was not in a position at this stage to examine the details of the proposal but sought some

clarification on WT/COMTD/SE/W/10. He was aware of the difficulties facing the land-locked

countries and that Japan was ready to provide assistance on a bilateral basis. But Japan questioned the

inclusion in the proposal of paragraph 5 which he thought deals with supply-side constraints. He

stated that this cannot be dealt with in the WTO and he wondered how this issue will be handled in

the WTO. With regard to WT/COMTD/SE/W/11, his delegation was still examining the proposal.

He questioned why the proposals put forward were specifically relevant to small economies. He said

his delegation was ready to continue the work but wanted to do so in a more focused way.



40. The representatives of the European Communities said his delegation was still examining the

proposals but that the EC was strongly committed to the mandate of paragraph 35 of the

Doha Ministerial Declaration and to finding responses to the particular needs of small and vulnerable

economies and to support their integration into the multilateral trading system. In regard to

WT/COMTD/SE/W/10, his delegation, like Japan, questioned whether the proposals were meant to

address issues of concern to all small economies or only to those which are land-locked. He asked

whether being land-locked automatically constituted vulnerability or whether it constituted

"smallness" or whether there are other factors beyond the geographic factors which need to be taken

into account. In regard to the specific proposals in WT/COMTD/SE/W/10, he asked about market

access and the coverage of services. He could understand the concept of duty-free, tariff-free and

quota-free for goods, something which the EC had proposed in the various negotiating groups in

relation to imports from least-developed countries, but wondered how this might pertain to services.

On points 2, 4 and 5 – all of which involve aspects of technical assistance, he asked whether these

were specific questions for small economies or developing economies as well, because they too face

similar problems in terms of diversification or compliance with Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures

and Technical Barriers to Trade. He asked where the constraints were on small economies and now

these proposals were intended to address them and about the existing instruments in terms of

developmental support – not only WTO support but also the support of bilateral donors and other

agencies. He wondered where such instruments are failing to find an appropriate response to these

needs. In regard to the supply-side issue mentioned by Japan, he thought that this is not something

that the WTO technical assistance programme is well placed to address. He referred to point six of

WT/COMTD/SE/W/10 on the Integrated Framework, which states that the vast majority of small

economies are at stages of development identical to those of current beneficiaries of the Integrated

Framework. His delegation would like further elaboration especially since the "IF" is a programme

for the least-developed countries. It does not cover all of them, only some of them, but the LDCs are

all eligible. With regard to what the proposal mentions on accession matters, he shared the views of

Canada in so far as accessions to the WTO essentially follow a course that is specific to the candidate

country and that the process and course of negotiations tend to reflect the specific situation of a given

applicant country. He supported the guidelines for LDC accessions but that this proposal as drafted

covers not only LDCs but also small and vulnerable economies, land-locked countries and transit

countries, which is quite a broad group of potential countries. He thought that this may be slightly

outside of the context of the framework for the Dedicated Session which is to focus on the particular

needs of the small and vulnerable economies. In regard to WT/COMTD/SE/W/11, the EC had

participated actively in a series of informal consultations over the past months with some of the

proponents for actions on small economies. It was a useful and helpful process for deepening

understanding of what the particular constraints are that the proposals are intended to address. His

delegation welcomed the new paper and the further elaboration provided to three areas and awaited

other proposals. On the question of preferences, he thought this was a matter under negotiation in the

negotiating groups on agriculture and on non-agricultural market access. But there may be other

horizontal questions which his delegation might want to consider in light of the evolution of work in

these other two contexts. He wondered what was envisaged by the term "grandfathered" and

questioned whether this was a purely legal device which would essentially equate to an open-ended

waiver for preferential arrangements which are in place or whether it is also intended to cover

grandfathering the margins of preference which would have implications for MFN liberalization on

some products subject to preferences. He thought that preference erosion was an important issue and

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 10





that some of the Bretton Woods institutions are making efforts in this area. The IMF, for example,

had begun its Trade Integration Mechanism (TIM), a recent initiative from the Fund. As concerned

the subsidy element of WT/COMTD/SE/W/11, this was an issue which had already been addressed

earlier in proposal WT/COMTD/SE/W/3. Some of the same elements which were part of the

discussions then remain relevant. In regard to market access issues mentioned in paragraph 10 in

proposal WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 - mainly that liberalization commitments made by small and

vulnerable economies should in fact be commensurate with their capacity and ability to engage - he

said European Communities officials had made a recent announcement in a letter in this regard. The

letter and its ideas will be under discussion and remains an important political context for the WTO

work and the contribution of the Communities to this particular exercise in the Dedicated Session.



41. The representative of Chile thanked the proponents of the two new proposals for their

submissions and said her delegation understood the problems related to small economies and in

particular to land-locked countries. However, her delegation was concerned about the creation of a

sub-category of countries, something which paragraph 35 says should be avoided. She asked about

the proposal WT/COMTD/SE/W/10 and wondered about those proposals which require technical

assistance in areas which go beyond the WTO's scope. In regard to proposal WT/COMTD/SE/W/11

and investment preferences, she asked what was meant by the development of long-term preferential

investment facilities. Her delegation wondered what exactly is being requested. With regard to

subsidies, this issue was dealt with in the negotiations on rules. Her delegation was not clear on what

was meant by the re-activation of non-actionable subsidies. She said the way the proposal is written,

it appears that what is being requested is the re-activation of these subsidies. She asked if these

subsidies were automatically re-activated, would that then apply to these countries backing the

proposal. This proposal went beyond the mere re-activation of non-actionable subsidies and she

asked if the proponents were looking for something more specific.



42. The representative of Costa Rica said in regard to WT/COMTD/SE/W/10, that Costa Rica

shared the views expressed by the representative of Chile. In regard to WT/COMTD/SE/W/11, his

delegation was concerned about the initiatives to perpetuate preferences. He questioned whether the

proponents of the proposal had looked at paragraph 3 of the Enabling Clause which states that tariff

preferences should not constitute a barrier to the principle of most favoured nation treatment.

Costa Rica is a beneficiary of these preferences but thought it was not appropriate to perpetuate these

preferences, much less compensate one Member in the course of multilateral trade liberalization.

Questions raised by the European Communities concerning preferential treatment and grandfathering

were relevant and his delegation would like to know whether this is to cover trade preference erosion

and what implications the liberalization of markets would have for the disadvantaged. Costa Rica

firmly believes that the principle of the Enabling Clause must be respected. There should also be a

focus on the process of liberalization. Preference erosion should be looked at from the perspective of

the Bretton Woods institutions as the EC had mentioned in regard to the IMF's TIM programme. For

Costa Rica, tariff preferences hide a development problem that has yet to be resolved. These

proposals would contribute to a further perpetuation.



43. The representative of the United States said in regard to the proposals contained in

WT/COMTD/SE/W/10 that her delegation shared the views of others who spoke before. She noted

that it would be helpful to understand the distinction, if any, being made in WT/COMTD/SE/W/10

between land-locked, small economies and the notion of small economies that are not land-locked.

She would also be interested in knowing more about the distinction between land-locked small

economies and land-locked LDCs. Her delegation believed that land-locked Members are

overlooking some potential areas that might serve their interests such as customs and border issues

and trade facilitation. The United States agreed with those delegations which refer to paragraph 35 of

the Doha Ministerial Declaration about not creating a sub-category of Members. She questioned

whether the notion of land-locked was a sub, sub-category being offered and looked forward to any

response that the proponents of WT/COMTD/SE/W/10 could put forward to further the discussion.

The Secretariat could prepare a short list of recent research on the situation of land-locked countries.

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 11





In regard to WT/COMTD/SE/W/11, she welcomed the further refinements of past proposals as a way

to further discussion and looked forward to focusing the discussion and framing pragmatic responses.

Where small economies can articulate their unique challenges, she thought a more productive

discussion could take place. Her delegation will study the proposals in more detail. In some

preliminary remarks on the paper, she noted that the proposal touched on topics that have been raised

before, such as preferences and subsidies as well as issues of operational costs for a limited range of

exports due to preferential arrangements and the challenge of maintaining competitiveness. She

welcomed the fact that the paper further elaborated concepts that the proponents have identified in

WT/COMTD/W/3. The Dedicated Session should – as a way forward - work with the rules

negotiating group and with other WTO bodies in order to deepen discussion of the proposals, for

example in the area of subsidies. She appreciated the effort that went into the paper and her

delegation is now reviewing the proposal.



44. The representative of Thailand thanked the proponents for their proposals and said her

delegation sympathized with their problems. Thailand was still examining the proposals and she

explained that it might be helpful if these proposals were discussed in the relevant forum. She

recalled the mandate of the Doha Ministerial Declaration and that the work on small economies

should not create a new sub-category of Members.



45. The representative of Malaysia also welcomed the new proposals. She said her delegation

shared the sentiments expressed by Thailand and that her Government was still examining the

proposals. Her Government recognized the serious problems and vulnerabilities of small economies

but was concerned about having sub-categories in the WTO. She said work should follow according

to the mandate.



46. The representative of India said his delegation also welcomed the proposals. However, more

time was needed to examine and review the proposals and that he would like to discuss them in more

detail in subsequent meetings. His delegation concurred with others in that the Dedicated Session had

to operate under paragraph 35 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration.



47. The representative of Korea welcomed the proposals and said he understood the concerns of

the proponents. However, paragraph 35 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration states that it is not the

aim to create a sub-category of WTO Members. It was still not clear whether some proposals are

targeted at all land-locked developing countries or small economies or some other developing

countries. Some proposals would be better addressed in other WTO fora, as already stated by Japan

and the European Communities. He explained that some of the proposals run the risk of going

beyond work taking place in other negotiating groups and that attention should be paid to trade

preferences which are granted voluntarily.



48. The representative of China welcomed the two new proposals. As a developing country,

China attached great importance to the vulnerability of small economies. He said the mandate

provides that the concerns of small economies should be addressed effectively but without creating a

sub-category of WTO Members. Given the complexity of the subsidy issue, his delegation agreed

with Canada that this should be discussed in the negotiating group on rules. He thought the Dedicated

Session should examine the developmental aspects, for example, of some horizontal issues.



49. The representative of Mauritius thanked the delegations for their comments and said that

concerns and requests for clarification in regard to proposal WT/COMTD/SE/W/11 had been noted.

He wanted to reassure all delegations that it was not the intention of the proposal to create any

sub-category of Members and that the proponents will keep to what is mandated in paragraph 35. As

a possible way forward, the Chairman could organize a series of informal consultations where

Members can clarify elements of what has been discussed so far.

WT/COMTD/SE/M/7

Page 12





50. The representative of Paraguay said the proposals made by the land-locked countries do not

just address the case of these specific countries, but are also a contribution to the discussion on how to

implement paragraph 35 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration. Land-locked countries are generally

small economies. Furthermore, work on land-locked countries is not only being carried out at the

WTO but at other fora as well, for example as in the Almaty Plan of Action where Ministers met to

discuss difficulties faced by land-locked countries. One important aspect deals with trade and with

transportation services to reach seaports and international destinations. In regard to technical

assistance, his delegation believed that not all matters of technical assistance had to be covered by the

WTO. But a statement from the WTO on this matter would be of great help in attracting more

technical assistance resources from other organizations. Land-locked countries are particularly

vulnerable and that only six out of 31 land-locked countries have an annual per capita income above

$1,000. Another 20 have incomes of less than $500 per capita and are least-developed countries, and

only one of them has an income of $3,000 per annum. All of them are small economies with scarce

resources. The request for technical assistance programmes in favour of LDCs could be extended to

certain countries in specific cases. He wanted to emphasize that his delegation did not wish to create

a sub-category of WTO Members and that he agreed with the mandate. However, in order to

implement the Doha Ministerial Declaration mandate, a degree of flexibility was needed to address

the vulnerabilities of some countries, including some of the land-locked countries.



51. The Chairman said he would reflect on what was said during the Dedicated Session in his

report to the General Council. He urged the proponents to continue refining their proposals and called

on Mauritius and others to come forward with the elaboration of other areas. In spite of the

considerable efforts already made in the Dedicated Session since 2002, delegations are still talking

about consultations, refinements and clarifications. He said the way ahead will still require more

patience but that he would continue with his consultations to help the process move forward.



52. The meeting was adjourned.





__________


Related docs
Other docs by HC111125033039
HIRED
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Board of Pharmaceutical Specialties
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
Choosing appropriate summative tests.
Views: 12  |  Downloads: 0
Alden NewsletterMay
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
618XX
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
Marriage Is Honorable�
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Basic
Views: 4  |  Downloads: 0
020131e
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
MATspced 2004 06
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!