. /.WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/MIN(03)/ST/130
11 September 2003
(03-4909)
MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE
Fifth Session
Cancún, 10 - 14 September 2003Original:  English
SAINT LUCIA
Statement by the Honourable Calixte George
Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
I bring you greetings from the micro-states of the Caribbean.
Let me extend my deepest appreciation for the warmth of the reception, the excellent
arrangements and the generous hospitality of the Government and people of the United States of
Mexico.
Our sympathies are extended to the families of those who perished in the 9/11 tragedy in the
United States of America two years ago.
We also extend condolences to the Government and people of the Kingdom of Sweden on the
sudden and tragic death of the Minister for Foreign Affairs.
This Ministerial review of the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) is to assess the progress
which has been made in advancing the aims and objectives to which we jointly committed ourselves
two years ago and to provide political direction on the way forward.  There is little evidence of thenegotiations having come up with concrete and adequate measures to advance the economic
development of the less-advantaged Members although this was a stated central aim of the DDA.
Nonetheless I still believe that Ministers were sinc ere in their intentions when they met at Doha.
Should the negotiations not advance the position of the poorest and the most vulnerable but entrench
the existing tendency for the stronger and more comp etitive trading nations to continue to grow and
expand at the expense of and to the disadvantage of the weak then the talk of "development" would be
nothing more than empty, cynical and misleading platitudes.
The fundamental legitimacy of the WTO is predi cated on its capacity to advance the interests
of all of its Members, including and in particular those of the disadvantaged or less advantaged.  Itspurpose should not be to help those which are already strong to secure new or expanded markets when
that is at the expense of the weak and vulnerable.
Advancing the development of those countries most in need is not easy.  Choices sometimes
have to be made between adherence to WTO conventions, the objectives of liberalization andnon-discrimination on the one hand and the attainment of trade and development goals of the less
advantaged on the other.  For instance, it is critically important for the weakest and most vulnerable
Members, such as Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and LDCs to receive trade preferences
which enable them to export successfully or specif ic effective safeguards to allow them to maintain
and develop their domestic production capacity.WT/MIN(03)/ST/130
Page 2
In that regard, the elaboration of Special and Differential Treatment in our context is dear to
us.
We recognize that support for development comes at a cost.  WTO Members must be
prepared to look realistically and sincerely  at the predicament of developing countries and their
varying needs and to seek to find and pursue solutions - even where these solutions carry a cost or
extend beyond the bounds of normal WTO conventions.
We all appreciate and must be encouraged by the general acceptance that strict adherence to
the TRIPS Agreement had to be overridden in order to address the treatment needs of the millions of
sufferers in poor countries of AIDS, malaria and other such major diseases.  Similarly we need to
muster the political will and creativity to ensure that disadvantaged nations can produce andparticipate fully in the global trading system.  However, this cannot be so if our farmers are denied the
opportunity to continue to export their traditional commodities, such as cotton, bananas and sugar, on
a viable basis.  In the specific case of bananas, a way must be found to preserve the trade preferences
which micro-states like those of the Windward Islands and other Members of the ACP Group
absolutely need in order to sell their bananas in th eir traditional European market.  Indeed, it would be
perverse if, as a consequence of inappropriate application of WTO rules, that EU enlargement next
year were to create market conditions that lead to a collapse in market prices and consequently to
severe long-term damage to our banana industry.
Micro-states like mine find ourselves being expected to participate in a multilateral trading
system that is inherently stacked against us.  The structural and capacity constraints which we face are
tantamount to being permanently disabled.
Yet we are expected to participate in a system and to adhere to and abide by rules designed
for those much better endowed.
It is like a one-legged man being asked to run a race with Olympic sprinters.  He obviously
does not stand a chance, without special measures to take account of his disability.  As in the world of
athletics, disabled micro-states like ours need a Special Olympics in this world trading environment.
We, as Ministers, need to show foresight and courage and the preparedness to take innovative
and original decisions.  There has been an unacceptable imbalance in international trade with justsome countries benefiting from trade liberalization whilst others like mine have paid a
disproportionate price.  My assessment of the work of our negotiators is that they have not gone
anywhere far enough in providing for equity in the system.  Development is not just about technical
assistance or passing to the Bretton Woods institutions, the task of dealing with the adverse
consequences of trade liberalization and its problems.  These can only genuinely be accommodatedthrough trade rather than aid remedies.
Our interests as the smallest Members have so far not been adequately or systematically
addressed in the negotiations.  However, they are nonetheless valid and have as much claim and
justification as those of any other Member.
__________