RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/GC/M/25
4 February 1998
(98-0389)
General Council
10 December 1997
MINUTES OF MEETING
Held in the Centre William Rappard
on 10 December 1997
Chairman:  Mr. C. Lafer (Brazil)
Subjects discussed: Page
1. Observer status for international intergovernmental organizations ........................ 2
2. Committee on Balance-of-Pay ments Restrictions ................................................... 2
- Notes on the meetings of 9 October and 10 November .............................. 2
3. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration ............................................... 3
- Report of th e Committee ............................................................................ 3
4. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement ................................................. 5
- EC/France - Trading Arrang ements with Morocco .................................... 5
- Request for extens ion of waiver .................................................... 5
5. Agreements between the WTO and the IMF and World Bank ............................... 6
- Report by the Director-General on the Implementation of the Agreements 6
6. Preparations for the 1998 Ministerial Conference and the commemoration of the 50th
anniversary of the multilat eral trading system ........................................................ 9
7. Action pursuant to Article X: 9 of the WTO Agreement ......................................... 11
(a) Deletion of the International Dairy Agreement from Annex 4 of the WTO
Agreement .................................................................................................. 11
(b) Deletion of the International Bovine Meat Agreement from Annex 4 of the
WTO Agreement ........................................................................................ 12
8. Agreement on Preshipment Inspection - Review under Article 6 of the Agreement 12
- Report of the Wo rking Party ...................................................................... 12
9. Review of WTO activities ....................................................................................... 13
Reports of: ............................................................................................................... 13
(a) General Council, Dispute Settleme nt Body, Trade Policy Review Body,
Sectoral Councils, Committees on Trade and Development, Balance-of-Payments Restrictions, Budget, Finance and Administration, and Regional
Trade Agreements ...................................................................................... 13WT/GC/M/25
Page 2
(b) Committee on Trade and Environment ...................................................... 13
(c) Working Groups on the Relationship between Trade and Investment, the
Interaction between Trade and Competition Policy, and Transparency in
Government Procurement .......................................................................... 13
(d) Councils and Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements ......... 13
10. Annual overview of developments in inte rnational trade and the trading system .. 13
11. Secretariat efforts to improve transparency and general contact with the public .... 32
12. Institutional reform and restru cturing of the Secretariat ......................................... 33
13. Daily Bull etin .......................................................................................................... 34
14. Frequency of meetings of WTO bodies .................................................................. 34
15. Accession of Andorra .............................................................................................. 35
- Chairmanship and terms of refe rence of the Wo rking Party ...................... 35
1. Observer status for international intergovernmental organizations (WT/GC/W/51/Rev.4)
The Chairman recalled that at its meeting on 22 October, he had informed the General
Council of consultations he had been pursuing on observer status for international intergovernmental
organizations, and had indicated his intention to reactivate broad consultations with interested
delegations as soon as possible.  He had since held further consultations on this matter.  In the light of
the views expressed in the consultations, it was clear that a decision could not yet be taken on therequests for observer status from organizations pending consideration in the General Council.  Further
consultations on this matter would therefore be held early in 1998.  In the meantime, there was broad
agreement that the status of the International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO as a joint subsidiary
organ of the WTO and UNCTAD should not require it to formally submit a request for observer status
in the various WTO bodies, and that the ITC should be invited, as appropriate, to attend meetings ofthose WTO bodies it wished to attend.  He proposed therefore that the General Council agree that the
ITC be invited to meetings of WTO bodies on this basis.
The General Council took note of the statement and agreed
 to the Chairman's proposal
regarding the ITC.
2. Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions
- Notes on the meetings of 9 October and 10 November (WT/BOP/R/36,
WT/BOP/R/38)
Mr. Jenkins (United Kingdom), Chairman of the Committee on Balance-of-Payments
Restrictions, said that at its meeting on 9 October, the Committee had held consultations with the
Slovak Republic, and had decided to suspend the consultations until 17 December and to dispense
with interim conclusions.  At its meeting on 10 November, the Committee had held consultations with
Pakistan.  The report on this consultation had recently  been circulated, and would be considered at the
next General Council meeting.  He then drew attention to other matters that had been discussed by the
Committee at its meetings on 9 October and 10 November.
The General Council took note of the statement and of the information contained in
WT/BOP/R/36 and WT/BOP/R/38.WT/GC/M/25
Page 3
3. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration
- Report of the Committee (WT/BFA/33)
Mr. Morjane (Tunisia), Chairman of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration,
introducing the Committee's report on its meetings of 21 and 27 November (WT/BFA/33), said that
the Committee had examined the question of the utilization of the 1996 surplus and had agreed to
recommend to the General Council the use of this surplus as set out in paragraph 6 of its report.Regarding the utilization of the balance referred to in sub-paragraph 6(v), the Committee would
examine this matter early in 1998.
On possible measures in favour of least-developed countries, the Committee had agreed that
measures to encourage these countries to participate more in WTO activities should be identified.  A
fund financed by voluntary contributions would help least-developed countries in arrears to bring their
situation into line.  Furthermore, in the course of the review of the functioning of the system regarding
the basis for assessment of contributions to the WTO budget, the Committee would examine in 1998the possibility of assessing contributions based more closely on Members' trade shares, as well as the
level of the minimum contribution.
As to the ITC's budgetary arrangement with regard to the WTO and the United Nations, the
Committee was of the view that this question should  be taken up between the governing bodies of the
two organizations.  He intended to contact the Chairpersons of the Fifth Committee and the AdvisoryCommittee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions at  the United Nations.  In this regard, it was
important to coordinate Members' positions in both Geneva and New York on this issue.  In
concluding, he referred to the need for the Committee to have a general policy discussion from time to
time to ensure better coordination with bodies whose decisions had budgetary repercussions.  He also
referred to a view shared by most Committee members that WTO activities that were part of theprogrammes adopted by the Members should in principle be financed through the regular budget.
The representative of Egypt requested a clarification regarding the second sentence of
paragraph 7 of the Committee's report, which he said had been included after the initial agreed text of
the report had been circulated to Committee members.  His delegation had not previously been aware
of this modification, and suggested that the text in question be deleted from the Committee's report tothe General Council.
The representative of Jamaica, referring to the mention of general policy discussions by the
Committee Chairman, recalled that in 1996, the Director-General had circulated a paper for a
discussion on the general policy objectives of the Secretariat.  He believed that this paper should be
revived and considered again.  He recalled in this connection that in introducing the 1998 budgetestimate, a Deputy Director-General had indicated th at it was a transitional budget, and that as a result
of burgeoning WTO activities a subsequent budget might be more substantial.  This matter should be
seen in the context of conditions of service and the call for cost-neutrality, as well as the use of budget
surpluses.  All these issues required that Members, not exclusively in the Budget Committee but
rather in the General Council, return to the subject of the general orientation of the WTO budget, the
direction of WTO activities and how they were financed.  In this context, Members should look again
at the resources being directed to strengthenin g the institutional capacity of those Members that
wished to be part of the strengthened trading system but which lacked these resources, and at the
utilization of funds placed at the disposal of the WTO as Trust Funds.  For these reasons, the Director-
General should be requested to prepare another general policy objectives paper for discussion in the
General Council.
The Chairman of the Committee, referring to Egypt's request for clarification, drew attention
to sub-paragraph 6(v)(e) and said that the sentence added to paragraph 7 was a response to the wish of
several delegations present at the Committee's discussions to have a detailed mention of all the issues.WT/GC/M/25
Page 4
This formulation had been found in an attempt to satisfy everyone and to obtain a consensus on the
use of the remaining surplus amount.  The sentence in question stated more explicitly what had been
said in sub-paragraph 6(v)(e), and had been added for this reason.
The representative of Egypt  expressed concern that the report had been added to after it had
been circulated to Committee members at the meeting as an agreed text.  Since the sentence in
question was covered by what was stated in sub-paragraph 6(v)(e), he reiterated his delegation'ssuggestion that it be deleted from the report.
The Chairman of the Committee said that contrary to Egypt's indication, the whole report had
not been discussed in detail at the Committee's meeting due to time constraints, and had been sent to
delegations for comments.  In view of the explanations he had given earlier, he did not understand
where exactly the problem lay regarding the sentence in question.
The Chairman said that the Chairman of the Committee had drawn attention to the difficulties
encountered in crafting a report.  He asked if in light of the explanations that had been provided,
Egypt could agree to the report as it stood.
The representative of Egypt said that Committee members had agreed on a text that had not
included the sentence in question, and he would ask simply that they adhere to what had been agreed.
Any additions to the text should have been made known to delegations.
The Chairman said that in view of the discussion, he would propose that the General Council
return to this item at the end of the meeting in the hope that the problem could be resolved by then.
The General Council so agreed.
Upon resumption of the discussion on this item, the representative of Egypt said his
delegation maintained its request that the sentence in question be deleted from the Committee's report
to the General Council.
The representative of Germany said that his delegation's original proposal had been that a
considerable amount of the 1996 surplus should be used as an income against the budget.  Since this
was reflected in the last sentence of paragraph 5 and also in sub-paragraph 6(v)(e), his delegation
would be agreeable to the deletion of the sentence in question from paragraph 7 of the Committee's
report if his statement were reflected in the record.  He reserved his delegation's rights to revert to thisissue when discussion on the use of the surplus was held.
The Chairman asked if the deletion of the sentence would be acceptable on the clear
understanding that Germany's statement would be reflected in the record of the meeting.
The representative of Canada said that while the General Council clearly had the authority to
take up any matter that the Budget Committee had deal t with and to change it, he wondered if it had
the authority to alter a report of the Budget Committee.  He was not aware that the General Council
was adopting this report, and was therefore unclear as to why it would want to alter it.
The representative of India said that in his delegation's view, any document circulated to
Members as an agreed document should not subs equently be changed, in conformity with the
established practices of the Organization.  Any doc ument, once agreed to, should not be amended or
altered without informing Members of the proposed changes and obtaining their concurrence.WT/GC/M/25
Page 5
The Chairman, referring to Canada's statement, said that the General Council had the
responsibility to approve the recommendations of  the Budget Committee and to adopt its report.
The Chairman of the Committee reiterated that the initial draft report had not been discussed
in full in the Committee.  The report had been sent to delegations for comments, and modifications
suggested by two delegations, one of which had been by Egypt on another issue, had beenincorporated therein.  Because of time constraints, it had not been possible to forward the report to
members once again for their approval.  He had not considered the sentence in question to be a matter
of substance since it only explained further sub-paragraph 6(v)(e) and reflected, in his opinion, the
spirit of the discussions in the Committee.  As Chairman of the Committee, he could not but accept
the compromise that was now being proposed, if this were acceptable to all the Committee's members,since only paragraph 6 of the report required to be approved by the General Council.  He hoped that
when such difficulties arose in future, the chairman of the body concerned would be informed in
advance so as to give him reasonable time to seek a solution.
The representative of Egypt  said he wished to clarify that his delegation had not been
consulted on this modification, and would have made its concerns known if it had been.
The General Council took note of the statements and of the wish of Budget Committee
members that the text in the second sentence of paragraph 7 be considered deleted from the
Committee's report before the Genera l Council in document WT/BFA/33.1
The General Council then approved the Budget Committee's specific recommendation in
paragraph 6 of its report in WT/BFA/33, and adopted the report as amended.
4. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement
- EC/France - Trading Arrangements with Morocco
- Request for extension of waiver (G/L/196, G/C/W/96)
The Chairman drew attention to the request by  EC/France (G/L/196) for an extension of the
waiver previously granted for France's trading arrangements with Morocco, and to the related draft
decision (G/C/W/96).
Mr. Johannessen (Norway), Chairman of the C ouncil for Trade in Goods, reporting on the
Council's consideration of this request, said that the Council had approved the request and agreed to
forward the draft decision in G/C/W/96 to the General Council for adoption.
The representative of Australia recalled that this waiver had initially been granted in
November 1960, and had been extended for one year in October 1996 by the General Council.  He
noted with concern that the present request for extension until 31 December 1997 did not rule out afurther extension before the end of 1998, and wished to hear from the Community on the likely
termination of the waiver and the action being taken to achieve this.
The representative of the European Communities noted that this waiver was among those
which originally had had an unlimited validity, and that it had been extended for one year in 1996 at
the Community's request, pursuant to paragraph 2 of the Understanding in respect of Waivers of
Obligations under GATT 1994.  The Community had requested the one-year extension in 1996 in the
expectation that during this period the need for th e waiver would lapse through the entry into force of
                                                     
1A corrigendum to the Committee's report was subsequently circulated as WT/BFA/33/Corr.1.WT/GC/M/25
Page 6
the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement with Morocco.  This Agreement required ratification by both the
Community and its member States.  Seven member States had thus far completed ratification of the
Agreement, and the remainder were expected to do so in the course of 1998.  For this reason, the
Community had requested extension of this waiver for one more year.
The General Council took note of the statements and, in accordance with the Decision-
Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement (WT/L/93), adopted the draft
decision (WT/L/250).
5. Agreements between the WTO and the IMF and World Bank
- Report by the Director-General on the Implementation of the Agreements
(WT/GC/W/68)
The Chairman recalled that the General Counc il's Decision on the Agreements between the
WTO and the IMF and the World Bank (WT/L/194) provided that the Director-General should, inter
alia, hold consultations with Members under the auspices of the Chairman of the General Council on
matters relating to the implementation of the Agreements.  Such consultations had been held on
2 December, in the course of which the Director-General's report on the implementation of the
Agreements (WT/GC/W/68) had been considered.  The consultations had fulfilled the requirement
under the Decision of the General Council.  It had been agreed in the consultations that further
consideration might be given early in the following year to possible issues that might warrant furtherdiscussion in connection with the implementation of these Agreements.
The representative of Jamaica said that the Director-General's report did not do justice to the
efforts at coherence between developments in financial markets and their impact on trade.  These
concerns could usefully be discussed in the General Council and the appropriate conclusions drawn.
The Director-General had concluded in his report that the implementation of the Agreements hadstarted on the right track.  However, this had not involved the Members of the WTO, but rather the
staff and the secretariats of the three organizations.  He asked if the implementation of these
Agreements would continue to evolve along this track, which he believed would not lead necessarily
to the appropriate conclusions that might contribute, say, to an improvement in the functioning of the
WTO Balance-of-Payments Committee.  He believed the Agreements should contribute to thefunctioning of the BOP Committee, and had not seen anything yet to suggest that they had made such
a contribution.  He hoped that a future discussion in the General Council would go beyond the areas
of participation in meetings, exchange of views and information, and technical cooperation that the
Director-General had touched on.  In concluding, he said that the recent High-Level Meeting on
least-developed countries organized by the WTO with the participation of five otherintergovernmental agencies, including the IMF and World Bank, could be considered to have been a
success;  to the extent that the Agreements with the IMF and World Bank had intensified the spirit of
collaboration between the three organizations in this manner, they should be seen as a positive result.
The representative of Pakistan underlined the importance of policy coherence in the trade,
finance and development fields.  Noting that the IMF had a useful and important role to play in some
WTO bodies, such as the BOP Committee, he asked to what extent the WTO had a reciprocal role in
the structuring of the IMF's adjustment programmes,  for example with regard to the possible impact
of these programmes in the trade field.  Regarding the broader macroeconomic issues involved,
cooperation between the secretariats was not a sufficient condition for the promotion of the policycoherence that all supported.  It was clear that a greater, more in-depth policy debate was required in
the WTO on policy coherence and the linkages between trade, finance and development.  Many
developing countries had accepted the consequences of liberalization in various fields, and were
feeling the pain of liberalization as they adjusted to competition.  At the same time, the mutuality of
benefits that was an integral part of the single undertaking, and the impact of the financial and otherWT/GC/M/25
Page 7
fields, had not thus far been taken into account by developing countries' trading partners, resulting in a
situation of inequality.  The world community's ob jective was to promote liberal policies relating to
trade, finance and development that were mutually  reinforcing and that fostered trade expansion,
economic growth as well as socio-economic developm ent.  He suggested that early in the following
year, a process be initiated with the cooperation of other agencies concerned on a possible
undertaking for the governance of globalization, in order to promote policy coherence, mutuality ofbenefits, and balanced development.
The representative of the United States, referring to the coherence mandate reported on by the
Director-General, said that coherence meant that  the three agencies should follow mutually-supportive
policies and avoid dispensing inconsistent advice to governments.  With this in mind, theUnited States wished to express concern at reports that the World Bank had been advising officials of
certain developing countries in the process of accession that they should introduce across-the-board
flat tariffs.  This was a real example of the problem of coherence at the institutional level.  Such
advice by the Bank to countries in the process of accession introduced considerable complications
into the market-access negotiations, and was not the Bank's job.  In the Director-General's ongoingdiscussions with the Bank, this was a problem of coherence which he should raise at the highest level.
The representative of India, referring to paragraph 11 of the Director-General's report, said
that his delegation had not yet fully grasped the implications of the proposed change being considered
to the IMF's Articles of Agreement, and was glad to note that the WTO Secretariat's involvement in
this matter was ongoing and that the General Council Chairman had been kept fully informed.  In
order to help delegations understand the various is sues that might have an interlinkage with the
Article on capital account liberalization being contemplated in the IMF, he asked if the Secretariat
could compile all the references in the WTO Agr eements to the IMF or its Articles of Agreement.
The Chairman said that the compilation referred to by India would be useful to all delegations
and he would request the Secretariat to prepare it.  In order to reassure delegations, he wished to recall
the statement in paragraph 11 of the report that the WTO Secretariat, in its communications with the
IMF's General Counsel, had stressed that only the General Council interpreted the WTO Agreements.
As this made clear, there would be no direct effect or automatic incorporation in the WTO of anydecision taken within the IMF, and the WTO would be able to examine the issue on its own merits in
accordance with its own decision-making procedures.
The representative of Argentina said his government attached importance to the issue of
coherence as regards the conditionality linked to measures implemented by countries members of the
IMF and their WTO obligations.  Given the circumstances in which agreements were negotiated with
the IMF, it was not possible to raise the issue of coherence at the national level.  This matter required
greater analysis within the decision-making bodies of the IMF and WTO.  The United States had also
given a good example of the need for coherence at the institutional level in order that the three
organizations followed mutually-supportive policies.  Regarding the contributions made by Bank andFund staff to the work of WTO bodies, he said that paragraph 14 of the report had not mentioned the
frequent and valuable contributions made to the work of the Committee on Agriculture in the course
of its discussion on the follow-up to the Ministerial Decision regarding net food-importing countries.
The representative of Korea  said that the emphasis in the report on maximizing coherence
and coordination among the three institutions was appropriate and timely.  Given the role the IMF had
come to play in times of severe financial difficulties such as those now faced in certain Asian
countries, it was important to assess the impact on trade of the IMF's interventions.  In the present
crisis, for example, the governments concerned would inevitably have to adjust their trade regimes
and policies in order to fulfil IMF-imposed conditions, thereby affecting world trade.  In concluding,WT/GC/M/25
Page 8
he said that the establishment of an informal common framework on coherence, mentioned in
paragraph 17 of the report, should be facilitated.
The representative of Norway said he wished to put on record his delegation's appreciation for
this work and the direction it had taken.  The three organizations constituted a vital part of the totality
that was responsible for friction-free international cooperation in the fields of trade, finance and
development, and consequently political, economic a nd social stability.  He wished the organizations
all possible success in their future work based on these agreements.
The representative of Hong Kong, China said that the Director-General's report raised the
question of the link that undoubtedly existed between the recent developments in financial markets
and measures related to those developments, and trade.  He suggested that it might be useful for the
Secretariat to prepare, perhaps after informal contacts with other institutions, a general assessment on
the basis of which Members could consider whether informal or formal discussions should be held.
The representative of Morocco said that, as its title made clear, the Director-General's report
was a report on the implementation of the Agreements between the WTO and the IMF and World
Bank, and one should not expect more than was said in it.  When Members had begun to examine the
subject of coherence since Marrakesh, they had made a distinction between coordination at the level
of the secretariats of the three institutions, and policy coherence, which they had wanted to address
later because of its complexity.  It was perhaps time now to start thinking about this issue.  However,Members should first identify the issues and see which direction they wished to take them in before
asking the Secretariat to do anything.  This had clearly become an important issue now because of the
recent developments, and he welcomed the suggestions that perhaps in January Members should hold
informal discussions to chart a course on this matter.
The Director-General said he fully agreed on the need for a larger debate on the issues that
had been raised, and that a meeting organized for this purpose would be in the interests of all.  One
was at the beginning of a very important collaboration with the IMF and World Bank, and at this stage
not all the points on the agenda had been covered in the same way.  He had noted all the concerns that
had been raised on the question of coherence, including the US concern at World Bank advice
regarding tariffs, to which he would certainly draw the Bank's attention. It had to be kept in mind,however, that when one talked of coherence in the fields of trade, finance and development policy,
one went very much beyond what was possible for the secretariats of the institutions concerned to
tackle, and was talking instead of better global governance in general.  The more one made progress
in liberalizing trade and in adding to the interr elationships between the developed and developing
countries, the bigger the problem of improving global coherence of international institutions andinternational politics became.  In the recent crisis, for example, the problem had not been caused by
trade, but rather by the functioning of the international monetary system, although there would be
repercussions on trade.  A discussion on these issu es would therefore be useful.  However, he would
urge Members to note that on the question of relations with the IMF and World Bank, one was
looking at two giants in comparison with the WTO in terms of staff resources that could be devoted to
this issue.  The WTO would do what it could, but Members would have to keep in mind the
disproportion in resources that was an inherent result of the WTO's constitution.  The WTO was andshould remain a contractual body.
The Chairman proposed that the General Council take note of the statements and of the
Director-General's report, and agree that the idea of broad discussions early the following year on the
matters raised by Members be pursued.  He also proposed that the Secretariat be asked to compile the
references in the WTO Agreements to the IMF and its Articles of Agreement.
The General Council so agreed.WT/GC/M/25
Page 9
6. Preparations for the 1998 Ministerial Conference and the commemoration of the 50th
anniversary of the multilateral trading system
The Chairman recalled that at its meeting on 22 October, the General Council had invited the
Director-General to prepare a paper on the or ganization of the commemoration of the 50th
anniversary of the multilateral trading system.  The paper had subsequently been circulated as
document no. 6410, and discussed at an informal meeting on 2 December.  It was his intention tocontinue these consultations early the following year with a view to seeking agreement on a broad
range of issues relating to this event.  Also, in formal consultations at the level of the Secretariat
should be held with regard to national events being planned to commemorate the 50th anniversary.  In
the meantime, following a suggestion in the Direct or-General's paper, there seemed to be broad
agreement that the General Council establish a target date of 31 January 1998 by which it would be
desirable and important for Members to indicate to the Secretariat the level of their representation at
the commemoration of the 50th anniversary, in or der to allow sufficient time for the preparation of
that event.
Regarding the 1998 Ministerial Conference and th e report to be made by the General Council
to the Ministerial Conference, he noted that there was a five-month interval between the present
meeting, at which the end-of-year review of WTO activities would be conducted,
2 and the 1998
Ministerial Conference.  It seemed to him that the presentation of further full reports from all WTObodies to the Ministerial Conference would amount to unnecessary duplication of the work
undertaken for the present meeting.  He was therefore inclined to propose that the General Council
submit to the Ministerial Conference a brief update report describing developments since the present
meeting.  That report would have to be adopted at the final General Council meeting before the
Ministerial Conference.  At that meeting, the Ch airpersons of subsidiary bodies might present oral
reports concerning developments in their respective areas since December 1997, if they considered
there was enough substance to report on.  The discussion at that meeting, including the information
submitted in the oral reports of Chairpersons of subsidiary bodies, would be reflected in an update of
the General Council's report to be prepared by the Secretariat after the meeting.  The Ministerial
Conference would therefore have before it, as the report of the General Council, a compilation of the
1997 Annual Reports together with a brief update report of the General Council concerning
developments in the first months of 1998.
On this basis, he proposed that the General Council agree as follows:  (i) that it would be
desirable and important for Members to indicate to the Secretariat, by a target date of
31 January 1998, the level of their representation at the commemoration of the 50th anniversary inorder to allow sufficient time for the preparation of that event;  and (ii) that the report of the General
Council to the 1998 Ministerial Conference consist of the 1997 Annual Reports of the General
Council and its subsidiary bodies together with a brief update report of the General Council
concerning developments in the first months of 1998, and that Chairpersons of subsidiary bodies be
invited to report orally to the General Council on work done since December 1997.
The representative of Argentina said that while he agreed fully with the Chairman's proposals,
he would suggest that the supplementary reports on developments since the present meeting also
include an analysis of the progress made in the implementation of Decisions taken at the
December 1996 Ministerial Conference.
The representative of Jamaica said he wished to propose for consideration a tentative agenda
for the Ministerial Conference to elicit responses and to have Members begin to prepare themselves
for the Conference.  The first item on the agenda would be the opening and general statements.  It wasnot yet clear, however, whether the opening plenary would include general statements by each head-
                                                     
2See items 9 and 10.WT/GC/M/25
Page 10
of-delegation, and it would be useful to begin thinking about how this item might be structured.  The
second item would be the adoption of the agenda and organization of work.  The questions here were
the following:  (i) should there be a plenary fo r all items, or should a committee of the whole be
established to consider sub-items and report to the plenary?  (ii) would the plenary take up the report
of the High-Level Meeting on the least-developed countries?  (iii) would the plenary also review the
decisions of the Singapore Ministerial Conference which were not dealt with in the report of theGeneral Council to the Ministerial Conference, such as core labour standards, role of WTO, and
marginalization? and  (iv) if a committee of the whole were to be established, should there be an
election for the chair of the committee, or should it be chaired by the General Council Chairman or
the Director-General?  The sub-items to be considered by a committee of the whole would be the
following:  the WTO annual report;  the General Council report;  institutional arrangements, i.e.,
follow-up to the Singapore Ministerial Conference;  and the committee's report to the plenary giving
broad directions for the next Ministerial Conference in 2000.  It would also be useful to reflect onwhether the formal meetings should be held from 9 a.m. to 12 noon and 2.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. so that
consultations or informal meetings could be scheduled after these hours.  The third item on the agenda
would be the report of the General Council, to wh ich the Chairman had already alluded.  The fourth
item would be the 50th anniversary of the multilateral trading system and Members would need to
reflect on how this might be incorporated into the Ministerial Conference, and whether it should beleft entirely as a separate commemorative event.
There was also the question of whether the report of the General Council should not highlight
a selective and balanced list of issues for appropriate action which Ministers might wish to note or
give particular impetus to.  The issues might include:  accessions and the status of the negotiations
thereon;  the Marrakesh Ministerial Decisions that had not yet been adequately implemented, such asthe Decision concerning net food-importing developing  countries;  the implications of the Agreements
with the IMF and World Bank, and how they contributed to coherence between financial
developments and trade in goods and services;  a discussion on what might be the appropriate way
forward for comprehensive and balanced negotiations;  the Dispute Settlement Understanding and its
upcoming review in 1998;  and the outstanding issues, namely, technical barriers to trade;  theSanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement;  Agreement on Textiles and Clothing, and first stage of the
integration process;  renegotiation of the Agreement on Government Procurement;  review of
provisions in the TRIPS and Subsidies Agreements;  and the technical cooperation programme
referred to in paragraph 22 of the Singapore Ministerial Declaration.
The representative of Korea said that while his delegation could agree to the Chairman's
proposals, for domestic political reasons it would have some difficulty in meeting the deadline of
31 January for notifying the level of participation at the 50th anniversary commemoration, and wished
to know if any flexibility could be provided.
The Chairman said that 31 January was a target date and not a deadline, and that this language
had been chosen specifically to provide the necessa ry flexibility to Members, so that they could
comply with it to the extent possible.
The representative of Hong Kong, China said that his delegation could also agree to the
Chairman's proposals.  He added that Jamaica's statement emphasized the desirability of open-ended
and wide-ranging consultations, at the appropriate time, on the matters to be discussed at the
Ministerial Conference.
The representative of Paraguay welcomed Hong Kong, China's statement and said that all
delegations should be able to participate in discussions on the issues to be raised at the Ministerial
Conference.WT/GC/M/25
Page 11
The representative of Pakistan said that his delegation had no difficulty in endorsing the
Chairman's proposals.  However, he wished to underline his delegation's understanding that the main
purpose of the Ministerial Conference would be an evaluation of the full and timely implementation
of the Uruguay Round Agreements.  In this context, his delegation had noted with interest Jamaica's
statement regarding the various issues that would require consideration and would very much
welcome informal consultations at the appropriate time.  Regarding the proposal that the reports fromthe various WTO bodies the following year would be in the form of a brief update, he said that some
bodies had not been successful in completing their work this year, and would therefore have to do
much greater work in order to be able to present to the General Council in 1998 a fuller, fair and
objective evaluation of the implementation of the various agreements for which they had
responsibility for oversight and supervision.
The Chairman said that the extent and the substance of the update reports that would be
presented in 1998 would of course remain in the hands of Members either in the General Council or in
the subsidiary bodies.  As regards Jamaica's statement on organizational matters, he would wish to
have it made available to delegations.  He stressed that no consultations on the organization of the
Ministerial Conference or the commemoration of the 50th anniversary had been held that were not of
public knowledge, and that he had continuously kept the General Council informed on the open-ended
consultations he had held.  Other issues relating to these two events were still pending, and he wouldhold further consultations at the appropriate time in the following year.
The representative of Argentina said it was his understanding that in their reports to the
Ministerial Conference, the General Council and its subsidiary bodies would include developments in
the implementation of agreements reached at the 1996 Ministerial Conference.
The Chairman said that Argentina's views would be taken into account in the process leading
up to the forthcoming Ministerial Conference.  He proposed that the General Council take note of the
statements, also take note that further consultations would be resumed at an appropriate time in the
following year, and agree to the proposals he had made towards the end of his opening statement.
The General Council so agreed.
7. Action pursuant to Article X:9 of the WTO Agreement
(a) Deletion of the International Dairy Agreement from Annex 4 of the WTO Agreement
(WT/GC/W/70)
The Chairman recalled that on 30 September the International Dairy Council had decided to
terminate the International Dairy Agreement "as of 1 January 1998" (IDA/8), and had requested that
the Ministerial Conference delete the Agreement from Annex 4 of the WTO Agreement upon itstermination, in accordance with Article X:9 of the WTO Agreement.  Accordingly, he proposed that
the draft decision to this effect in document WT/GC/W/70 be adopted.
The representative of Korea noted that the proposed dates of termination of the two
Agreements that were under consideration in this sub-item and the next were different.  Since this
might have ramifications for future discussions in other areas, he asked if the two dates could be
aligned.
The Chairman said that the termination dates proposed in the draft decisions under
consideration merely reflected the different wording in the Decisions that had been adopted by the
International Dairy Council (IDA/8) and the International Meat Council (IMA/8).WT/GC/M/25
Page 12
The General Council took note of the statements and adopted  the draft decision on the
deletion of the International Dairy Agreement (WT/L/251).
(b) Deletion of the International Bovine Meat Agreement from Annex 4 of the WTO
Agreement (WT/GC/W/71)
The Chairman recalled that on 30 September the International Meat Council had decided to
terminate the International Bovine Meat Agreement "at the end of 1997" (IMA/8), and had requested
that the Ministerial Conference delete the Agreement from Annex 4 of the WTO Agreement upon its
termination, in accordance with Article X:9 of the WTO Agreement.  Accordingly, he proposed that
the draft decision to this effect in document WT/GC/W/71 be adopted.
The General Council so agreed (WT/L/252).
8. Agreement on Preshipment Inspection - Review under Article 6 of the Agreement
- Report of the Working Party (G/L/214)
The Chairman recalled that at its meeting on 7, 8 and 13 November 1996, the General
Council, on the basis of a recommendation by the Council for Trade in Goods, had established a
working party under the Goods Council to conduct the review provided for under Article 6 of the
Agreement on Preshipment Inspection, and to report to the General Council in December 1997
through the Goods Council.  The report of the Working Party was before the General Council in
document G/L/214.
Mr. Osakwe (Nigeria), Chairman of the Working Party, introducing the report, said that the
Working Party had agreed to conduct the review on the basis of the following four-track process:
(i) informal consultations conducted by him with Members;  (ii) submissions of national experiences
with preshipment inspection and with the Agreement on Preshipment Inspection;  (iii) a data-based
survey/questionnaire;  and (iv) exchanges of views on an identified checklist of issues.  The four
tracks had fed into the review, the results of which were reflected in Part B of the report.  The reviewprocess had enhanced the understanding of the functioning of preshipment inspection and of the
implementation, or lack thereof, of the WTO Agreement on Preshipment Inspection.  The
9 recommendations agreed to by the Working Party had sought to build on this new-found
understanding by clarifying certain provisions and strengthening implementation of the Agreement.
He wished to draw the General Council's attention in particular to the eighth recommendation, which
laid out a list of issues that the Working Party considered were in need of further exchange of views.
These included elaborating a Code of Conduct/Practice for PSI entities as well as a standardinspection format;  the issue of selective examination of shipments by PSI entities;  auditing of PSI
entities;  the promotion of competition among PSI entities;  fee structures for PSI entities;  and the
use, to user Members, of building price data bases.  Given these issues, as well as the ninth
recommendation calling on the Working Party to co nduct an assessment of technical assistance
activities in accordance with Article 3 of the Agreement, the Working Party had proposed that itsmandate be extended for one year.  The report represented a solid and thorough body of work
conducted in a spirit of cooperation.  The aim had been to enlighten all Members, both user Members
and non-user exporter Members, of the difficulties and problems associated with the conduct of
preshipment inspection activities, while taking into account the importance attached to, and the
benefits gained from, preshipment inspection, as expressed by several user Members in the WorkingParty.
The representative of Jamaica said it was his understanding that the Agreement on
Preshipment Inspection did not add any rights nor imposed any obligations on Members, and was
merely an Agreement entered into in the context of the results of the Uruguay Round.  That being
said, he believed that the Working Party's recommendations for future action might be somewhatWT/GC/M/25
Page 13
deficient.  Referring to the Annex to the Working Party's report, which set out the World Bank's
views, he noted that the World Bank "included conditions regarding the use or administration of PSI
in the terms of its loans to a wide range of countries", that it was concerned primarily about the
implications of the trade regime for economic efficiency, and that this led Bank staff typically "to
recommend low and uniform tariffs and elimination of non-tariff barriers", and further that "Bank
support for PSI would be as a means to achieve such a trade regime".  The World Bank was thereforerecommending to countries conditions which could affect the rights and obligations of WTO
Members.  The Secretariat should bring this matte r to the World Bank's attention and report to the
General Council on the implications for the rights and obligations of developing countries of these
unilateral actions of the Bank.
The Chairman of the Working Party said he would not comment on Jamaica's understanding
regarding the implications of the Agreement on Preshipment Inspection for the balance of rights and
obligations of Members.  Regarding the views expressed by the Bank, he said that the Working Partyhad had discussions on several national experiences that had focused on the benefits of preshipment
inspection services, and had addressed the question of revenue targets established for several
countries by the World Bank.  It was in this context that the views of the Bank and the IMF on
revenue-collection targets for countries had been solicited.  These views had been noted by the
Working Party and had been annexed to its report.  He believed that there were no substantiveimplications with regard to coherence as regards the work of the Working Party itself, although there
was a larger question of coherence as had been demonstrated by the discussion under item 5, but
which the Working Party had not itself taken up, given its mandate.
The General Council took note of the statements, approved
 the recommendations of the
Working Party in paragraphs 1 - 9 of Section B of its report in G/L/214, and adopted the report.  The
General Council further agreed that the life of the Working Party be extended for one year for the
purposes described in paragraph 8 of Section B of the report in G/L/214.
9. Review of WTO activities
Reports of:
(a) General Council (WT/GC/W/67), Dispute Settlement Body  (WT/DSB/10), Trade
Policy Review Body (WT/TPR/41 and Corr.1), Sectoral Councils  (G/L/213 and
Corr.1, S/C/5, IP/C/12 and Corr.1), Committees on Trade and Development, Balance-
of-Payments Restrictions, Budget, Finance and Administration, and Regional Trade
Agreements (WT/COMTD/13, WT/B OP/R/37, WT/BFA/34, WT/REG/3)
(b) Committee on Trade and Environment (WT/CTE/2)
(c) Working Groups on the Relationship between Trade and Investment
(WT/WGTI/Rev.1), the Interaction between Trade and Competition Policy
(WT/WGTCP/1), and Transparency in Government Procurement (WT/WGTGP/1)
(d) Councils and Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements (WT/L/247,
GPA/19, WT/L/246, WT/L/237)
and
10. Annual overview of developments in in ternational trade and the trading system
(WT/TPR/OV/3 and Corr.1)
The Chairman noted that under these items the General Council would be conducting a
review of WTO activities in pursuance of the Decision concerning procedures for an annual overview
of WTO activities and for reporting under the WTO (WT/L/105), as well as an overview of
developments in international trade and the trading system as required under Section G of the TradePolicy Review Mechanism.  In order to rationalize the process, and in keeping with the establishedWT/GC/M/25
Page 14
practice under the WTO, the overview in item 10 w ould be carried out in conjunction with the review
of WTO activities in item 9.  For this purpose, the General Council would be considered to be
meeting also in its capacity as the Trade Policy Review Body.  He proposed that Members therefore
address both Agenda items together in their statements.  However, before the reviews under items
9 and 10 were conducted, he suggested that the General Council first take action as necessary on the
reports before it in item 9.
Mr. Armstrong (New Zealand), Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, introducing the
report in WT/DSB/10 and Corr.1, said that the repor t was factual in nature and contained in its Annex
an overview of the state-of-play of disputes in the WTO from 1 January 1995 to 31 October 1997.  In
1997, the role of the DSB in managing the settlement  of disputes within the WTO had continued to be
positive.  The DSB's work reflected the fact that  Members had continued to show confidence in the
new dispute settlement mechanism whose proper func tioning clearly contributed to the strengthening
and consolidation of the WTO and the multilateral trading system.  As point 13 of the reportindicated, at the DSB meeting on 18 November, he had made a short statement on the review of the
Dispute Settlement Understanding provided for in the relevant Marrakesh Ministerial Decision, and
had suggested, inter alia , that it would be timely to initiate consideration of procedural aspects of the
review process before embarking in 1998 on the substance of the review.
Mr. Akram (Pakistan), Chairman of the Trade Policy Review Body, introducing the report in
WT/TPR/41, said that the report had reviewed th e following:  the manner in which the TPRB had
fulfilled its objectives in 1997;  the perceived utility of the TPR exercise to Members;  the principal
themes emerging from the 1997 reviews;  the coverage of least-developed countries;  the balance of
demands and resources of the Secretariat;  and the question of enhancing awareness of the TPRM.
The TPRB had thus far conducted reviews of 61 Members, counting the European Community as one.However, there were still some 56 Members that remained to be reviewed, including 16 least-
developed countries.  The membership of the WTO continued to grow and the TPRM would have to
keep pace.  During 1997, eight reviews had been held.  A number of the reviews originally included in
the 1997 programme had unfortunately been rescheduled for 1998 for various reasons, and the 1998
programme was therefore heavier than it should have been.  The quality of the review meetings heldduring the year had been satisfactory.  An increasing number of pertinent questions had been posed in
advance by Members, and discussants and delegations from capitals had contributed substantially to
the process.  The report had focused on four broad themes that had featured in most reviews:  the
economic context for trade policies and the direction of economic and trade reforms;  the balance
between autonomous, bilateral, regional and multilateral aspects of trade policy, and the systemicconcerns these had raised;  the implementation of WTO Agreements;  and sectoral aspects of policy,
including inter-sectoral and structural effects.  In 1997, the TPRM had been requested to give
increased attention to the integration of least-developed economies.  An initial evaluation would
become available during 1998, when six LDCs would be reviewed.  Additional requests for reviews
of LDCs had been made, but these would, unfortunately, only be met in 1999.  As requested, the
TPRB had also been attempting to group a number of reviews of developing and least-developed
countries.  Requests for trade policy reviews had been increasing, and the programme for 1998 -- evenallowing for rescheduling -- marked an increase over that for 1997.  There was a continuing challenge
to maintain the quality of the reports and of the review process while using resources effectively.  The
reviews had been recognized, both by Members and by external commentators, as making a
contribution of high quality to the surveillance of trade policy in the WTO.  The main purpose of the
TPRM was transparency;  in turn, transparency in trade policy-making was an important buildingblock in creating confidence in the multilateral trading system.  Moreover, the TPRM had an
important additional element of assistance to Members in trade policy formulation and evaluation.  He
believed these two objectives had been well fulfilled.  Finally, the report had noted the Secretariat's
ongoing efforts to enhance awareness of the TPRM outside Geneva.  While progress had been made
in this field, more needed to be done, particularly in making review publications available ataffordable cost in developing countries, where they would be of considerable utility.WT/GC/M/25
Page 15
Mr. Johannessen (Norway), Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods, introducing the
report in G/L/213, said that the Council had focused on the following issues in particular in 1997:
trade facilitation;  rectifications and modifications to schedules of tariff concessions and their
certification;  and the major review of the implementation of the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing
(ATC) during the first stage of the integration process, pursuant to Article 8:11 of the ATC.  Trade
facilitation had been on the Council's agenda following the directive of Ministers at Singapore inparagraph 21 of the Ministerial Declaration that the Council:  "undertake exploratory and analytical
work, drawing on the work of other international organizations, on the simplification of trade
procedures in order to assess the scope for WTO rules in this area".  At its 8 December meeting, the
Council had agreed to hold a symposium on trade facilitation early in 1988 with the aim of helping to
identify the main areas where traders faced obstacles when moving goods across borders.  On
rectifications and modifications to schedules of tariff concessions and their certification, short-term
and long-term issues had been defined.  Substantial progress had been made on the short-termelements, while there remained a need for more discussion and exchange of views on the long-term
issues.  The major review of the ATC had been conducted in a series of six meetings between
6 October and 8 December, and the record of these discussions had been set out in the minutes
(G/C/M/23-28).  At these meetings, Members had stated their views regarding the progress in the
implementation of the ATC in the first stage, focu sing on the integration process, the transitional
safeguard mechanism, the application of GATT 1994 rules and disciplines as defined in Articles 2, 3,
6 and 7 of the ATC, and other relevant topics.  Following these meetings, in an effort to bring the
review to a conclusion, he had held a series of informal meetings and consultations with a large
number of delegations.  In spite of determined efforts by many, it had not been possible to arrive at
sufficient common ground for him to propose to the Council an analytical summary of the discussionsand a set of conclusions to the review which would attract consensus.  Accordingly, the outcome of
the review process as it stood had been reported to the General Council.
Regarding the composition of the Textiles Monitoring Body, he noted that the current TMB
composition had been set for the period 1 January 1995 - 31 December 1997, and that it was therefore
necessary to set the composition for the coming period.  On 8 December, he had reported to theCouncil that he had been conducting consultations on this matter and was close to a conclusion.  It
had been agreed, therefore, that he would continue these efforts and report on their outcome to the
General Council.  Based on his consultations, he was in a position to propose for adoption by the
General Council that the ten seats on the TMB be allocated for a period of four years, i.e. from
1 January 1998 - 31 December 2001, following the structure as it currently stood, but with certainchanges, as set out in document WT/L/249.
The General Council agreed to the composition of the TMB as proposed by the Chairman of
the Goods Council (WT/L/253).
The Director-General said that since the current period of chairmanship of the TMB expired
on 31 December 1997, he had asked the Deputy Direct or-General, Dr. Kim, to conduct consultations
with delegations on his behalf regarding the appointment of a Chairman for the next period.  On the
basis of these consultations, he proposed that the present Chairman, Mr. András Szepesi, bereappointed for a period of three years, beginning 1 January 1998.
The General Council agreed that the present TMB Chairman, Mr. Szepesi, be reappointed for
a further period of three years as of 1 January 1998.
Mr. Sun (Korea), Chairman of the Council fo r Trade in Services, introducing the report in
S/C/5, said that in 1997 the Council had begun th e implementation of its work programme approved
by Ministers in Singapore, which consisted of three elements:  a programme for the exchange of
information on services regulations;  the development of new disciplines on domestic regulation
pursuant to Article VI:4 of the GATS;  and esta blishing guidelines and procedures for future
negotiations.  While discussions had taken place on the three elements, more attention had beenWT/GC/M/25
Page 16
focused on the exchange of information programme. Other activities of the Council in 1997 included
the adoption of guidelines for mutual recognition agreements in accountancy, the conclusion of
negotiations on basic telecommunications, and the adoption of a Decision to extend the deadline for
the negotiations on emergency safeguard measures pursuant to Article X of the GATS.  Annexed to
the Council's report were the reports of its four subsidiary bodies:  the Committee on Financial
Services (S/FIN/3), the Committee on Specific Commitments (S/CSC/2), the Working Party on
GATS Rules (S/WPGR/2) and the Working Party on Professional Services (S/WPPS/2).  In
concluding, he noted that the Council would hold a special meeting on 12 December to address
matters relating to the conclusion of the ongoing negotiations on financial services, and another on
18 December to address the question of entry into force of the Fourth Protocol concerning basic
telecommunications.
Mrs. Guarda (Chile), Chairperson of the Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property Rights (TRIPS), introducing the report in  IP/C/12, said that the Council had continued its
review of national implementing legislation, taking up the areas of patents, layout-designs of
integrated circuits, undisclosed information and the control of anti-competitive practices in
contractual licences and enforcement.  The review process had proved to be an important vehicle for
the Council to carry out its task of monitoring the operation of the Agreement and Members'
compliance with its provisions.  Many misunderstandings had been cleared up and, in some cases,Members had been willing to accept that they still had work to do to make their laws conform fully
with the TRIPS Agreement.  A second aspect of the Council's work in 1997 related to technical
cooperation.  The Council had ensured an expanded and updated information base on technical and
financial cooperation possibilities made available by developed-country Members in order to facilitate
implementation of the Agreement, pursuant to the requirements of Article 67.  She expressedgratitude to the WIPO for its activities under  the WTO/WIPO cooperation agreement, for co-
organizing with the WTO a second joint workshop on a specific aspect of technical cooperation, and
for its very extensive activities in helping developing countries put in place legislation and practices in
conformity with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.  Finally, on the basis of the relevant
paragraphs of the Council's report to the Singapore Ministerial Conference, the Council had initiatedan information-gathering activity in relation to the work to be undertaken on issues relevant to the
negotiations specified in Article 23.4 of the Agreement.  As regards the review of the application of
the provisions of the Section on geographical indications under Article 24.2, she had begun informal
consultations, in particular on the purpose of, and the procedures for, the review foreseen.  These
informal consultations would be continued with a view to proposing a decision at the Council meetingscheduled for May 1998.
Mr. Baichoo (Mauritius), Chairman of the Committee on Trade and Development,
introducing the report in WT/COMTD/13, said that the work of the Committee in 1997 in the area of
technical cooperation and training activities as they related to developing countries had focused on
three areas:  adoption of implementation modalities for the provision of technical assistance;  adoption
of a Manual on technical cooperation and training, which drew on the guidelines for technical
cooperation adopted in 1996 and described the WTO's technical cooperation and training activities;finalization of the three-year plan for technical cooperation for 1997-1999, and beginning of
discussions on the three-year plan for 1998-2000.  The Committee had also held discussions on the
participation of developing-country Members in world trade on the basis of a Secretariat note, and had
agreed that this item should become a regular feature of its agenda and that there would be a follow-
up in the various areas.  In addition, the review of the application of special provisions in themultilateral trading agreements and related Ministerial decisions in favour of developing-country
Members, in particular least-developed country Members, had been singled out as a priority task for
future work.  The Committee had held a first discussion on this item at its fall session and would
continue its review on the basis of a comprehensive document to be prepared by the Secretariat for its
meeting in March of the following year, in preparation for the Ministerial Conference in May.Finally, he recalled the High-Level Meeting on integrated initiatives for least-developed countries'
trade development that had been held in October.  Under the guidance of the Committee, theWT/GC/M/25
Page 17
Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries under its energetic Chairperson had monitored
progress in the preparation for this important event.  At the High-Level Meeting, announcements had
been made regarding new or additional preferential market access measures for least-developed
countries, and the Meeting had endorsed the integrated framework for trade-related technical
assistance, which set out a structure to coordinate the provision of such assistance to least-developed
countries by six different intergovernmental organizations, namely IMF, ITC, UNCTAD, UNDP, theWorld Bank and the WTO.  Follow-up activities to the High-Level Meeting had been foreseen and
were already taking place.
Mr. Jenkins (United Kingdom), Chairman of the Committee on Balance-of-Payments
Restrictions, introducing the report in WT/BOP/R/37, said that the Committee had held consultations
with eight Members, namely, India, Nigeria, Pa kistan, Bangladesh, Tunisia, the Czech Republic,
Bulgaria and the Slovak Republic, and its report summarized the outcomes of each of these
consultations and any recommendations that the Committee had decided to make to the GeneralCouncil.  The nature of the process was such that few generalizations could be made, and each case
was different.  However, he had become conscious of serious differences among Members on the
interpretation of some aspects of the relevant provisions of the GATT 1994 and the Balance-of-
Payments Understanding.  He had wondered if th ere would be merit in trying to resolve these
differences and striving for a common understanding, and had concluded that addressing thesedifferences pragmatically and case by case would be more realistic and therefore preferable.  In
concluding, he said that the prospect for 1998 was relatively quiet, with perhaps no more that four or
five Members consulting in the Committee.
Mr. Morjane (Tunisia), Chairman of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration,
introducing the report in WT/BFA/34, said that the Committee had met seven times during the year to
pursue its regular monitoring of the financial and budgetary situation of the WTO.  The Committee
had, inter alia , examined the final position of the 1996 Budget, the Director-General's Financial
Report on the 1996 accounts and the report of the External Auditor, the Director-General's budget
proposals for 1998, and the question of the 1996 surplus.  The Committee had also examined and
approved the conclusions of the discussions of two meetings that the working group on the applicationof the Headquarters Agreement had held with the Swiss authorities.  A report on this matter had been
circulated to delegations as WT/BFA/SPEC/12.  No further meetings on this matter had been
scheduled, although discussions could clearly be held at any time if the need arose.  The Committee
had also discussed at length measures in favour of least-developed countries, and had recommended
to the General Council that least-developed Member countries should be exempted from theapplication of the administrative measure whereby inactive Members would be denied access to
training or technical assistance.  The Committee had also recommended to the General Council that
the requirement for a 13 per cent overhead for the sp ecial Fund to finance the High-Level Meeting for
least-developed countries should be waived.  The Committee had also been looking at the question of
least-developed countries' arrears, and hoped to finalize its discussions on this matter in the following
year.
Mr. Weekes (Canada), Chairman of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements, said that
the Committee's report in WT/REG/3 gave a factual account of its activities in 1997.  Since the
adoption of its report, the Committee had completed the factual part of an additional examination,namely that of the enlargement of the European  Communities in so far as the goods aspects were
concerned.  The number of examinations that had now reached the stage where the Committee could
begin articulating conclusions thus came to 27.  The Committee had begun using its three-pronged
approach to the analysis of systemic issues, as spelled out in the report, and was finding that this
organized approach facilitated an in-depth exchange of views.  The Committee had also made
additional progress towards drafting recommendations on how to operationalize the reporting
obligations of the various types of regional trade agreements.  A new version of an informal note wasbeing revised, and he was optimistic that this could be concluded early the following year.  The
Committee had made substantial progress in all areas of its terms of reference.  For the future, theWT/GC/M/25
Page 18
Committee was thus is in a position to concentrate on its work of examining regional trade
agreements and considering the systemic issues surrounding those agreements.
Mr. Ekblom (Finland), Chairman of the Committee on Trade and Environment, introducing
the report in WT/CTE/2, said that as directed by the Singapore Ministerial Declaration, the
Committee had  continued to work with the mandate and terms of reference contained in theMarrakesh Ministerial Decision on Trade and Environment.  The Committee had held three meetings
in 1997, the agenda of which was contained in the Annex to its report.  All items of the work
programme set out in the Decision on Trade and Environment were on the Committee's agenda in
accordance with the recommendations contained in the Committee's 1996 report.  Discussion of the
work programme was structured around the themes of market access and the linkages between themultilateral environment and trade agendas.  The general objectives for the Committee's work in 1997
were:  (i) to broaden and deepen the analysis of all items of its work programme;  (ii) to broaden
participation in support of this analysis;  and (iii) to produce a brief factual report to the General
Council.  The Committee had met these objectives, and its work had widened Members' perspectives
and deepened the understanding of the issues on the Committee's agenda.  For the purposes ofbroadening the participation and support of its analysis, an information session with Secretariats of
multilateral environmental agreements and multilateral financial mechanisms had been held at the
Committee's September meeting.  This had proved to be a valuable experience which could usefully
be repeated.  Another form of outreach which had helped to broaden the Committee's perspective was
an NGO Symposium held in May at the Secretariat's initiative, with a wide array of environmental,
developmental, consumer and business NGOs.  This too had been regarded as a very valuable
experience worth repeating.  Throughout the year, he had been impressed by the constructiveatmosphere of cooperation and willingness to move ahead and understand the complex issues
involved in the linkages between trade and environm ent.  He strongly believed that the Committee's
work was important not only for trade and the environment, but for the multilateral trading system as
a whole.  Public scrutiny of the WTO and the Committee's work would continue.  He had the utmost
confidence that the spirit of cooperation which helped to facilitate the work this year, would prevailthe following year as Members continued to advance the Committee's challenging work programme.
Mr. Jirapaet (Thailand), Chairman of the Working Group on the Relationship between Trade
and Investment, introducing the report in WT/WGTI/1/Rev.1, said that the Working Group had
organized its work on the basis of a Chairman's checklist of issues raised by Members in written and
oral contributions to the first meeting held in June.  This checklist was annexed to the report.  At its
meetings in October and December, the Group had examined the first three items of this checklist:  (i)
the implications of the relationship between trade and investment for development and economic
growth;  (ii) the economic relationship between tr ade and investment;  and (iii) stocktaking and
analysis of existing international instruments and activities regarding trade and investment.  At itsmeeting in December, the Group had agreed to begin its examination of certain aspects of item (iv) of
the checklist at its next meeting, scheduled to be held on 30-31 March 1998.  Some delegations had
contributed to the work of the Group by making written submissions, and he believed that over the
next year it would be important to receive such submissions from a larger number of delegations.
Finally, as provided for in the Singapore Ministerial Declaration, the Group had drawn on the work ofother intergovernmental organizations with experience in this area.  In this respect, he wished to
mention the useful contributions by UNCTAD, the OECD, IMF, World Bank and UNIDO to the
Group's work under the first item of the checklist.
The Chairman, on behalf of the Chairman of the Working Group on the Interaction between
Trade and Competition Policy, introduced its report in WT/WGTCP/1.  Under the terms of the
Singapore Ministerial Declaration, the focus of the work of the Working Group was to be on issues to
be raised by Members regarding the interaction between trade and competition policy.  Accordingly,
the Group had organized its work on the basis of a Chairman's checklist of issues raised by MembersWT/GC/M/25
Page 19
in their written and oral contributions to the first meeting held in July.  The focus of the two
subsequent meetings of the Group, in September and November, had been on the examination of the
relationship between the objectives, principles, concepts, scope and instruments of trade and
competition policy, as well as their relationship to development and economic growth, and on a
stocktaking of existing instruments and activities in this area, including national, WTO, and bilateral,
regional, plurilateral and other multilateral instruments, agreements and initiatives.  Beginning at thenext meeting of the Group, to be held in March 1998, the principal focus of the Group would shift to
specific issues concerning the interaction between trade and competition policy.  In its work to date,
the Group had benefited from a large number of written contributions and oral statements by
Members.  This was a positive sign of interest in the Group's mandate and work.  Over the next year,
it would be important that the quantity and quality of written and oral contributions by Members be
sustained.  Taking into account the Singapore Ministerial Declaration, the Group had drawn on the
work of other intergovernmental organizations with experience in this area.  Useful inputs had beenreceived from UNCTAD, the World Bank and the OECD.  He wished also to mention a recent
Symposium on competition policy, economic development and international trade, jointly sponsored
by the Secretariats of the WTO, UNCTAD and the World Bank, aimed at further exploring the
development dimension of the interaction of trade and competition policy.  The Working Group, in
pursuit of the educational mandate given to it, had made a good start in increasing understanding ofthe interaction between trade and competition policy.  It was working towards completing its mandate
by the end of 1998 so as to be in a position to make a substantive report to the General Council.
Mr. Plaza (Venezuela), on behalf of the Chairman of the Working Group on Transparency in
Government Procurement, introduced its report in WT/WTTGP/1.  In the three meetings held in 1997,
the Working Group had proceeded as follows:  the Group had heard presentations by the
representatives of the UNCITRAL (the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law) and
the World Bank on the relevant instruments and activities relating to government procurement in their
organizations;  factual contributions had been presented by Members describing their national
procedures and practices relating to transparency in government procurement;  the Group had
considered a Secretariat note synthesizing the information on national procedures and practicesrelating to transparency in various sources available to the Group and in the submissions by Members
together with the information on the transparency -related provisions in existing international
instruments;  and written and oral submissions ha d been made by Members expressing their views on
elements of transparency in government procuremen t.  At its third meeting held in November, the
Group had discussed the issues before it by taking up in turn a list of items based on the sections ofthe Secretariat's synthesis note.  At the next meeting to be held in February 1998, the Group would
revert to these items.  To facilitate that discussion the Chairman would draw up, with the assistance of
the Secretariat, a list of the issues raised and the points made on these issues, under each of the items
that the Group had discussed.  The IMF, the World Bank and the United Nations represented by
UNCITRAL had observer status in the Working Group.
The Chairman, introducing the report of the General Council in WT/GC/W/67, said that one
of the General Council's main priorities in 1997 had been to take the necessary action to ensure,
within its responsibilities, the follow-up to the Singa pore Ministerial Conference.  In this context, the
General Council had appointed early in the year the Chairpersons of the Working Groups establishedin Singapore on the relationship between trade and investment, the interaction between trade and
competition policy, and transparency in government procurement practices in order to enable these
groups to start their work as soon as possible.  Later in the year, the General Council had made
arrangements for convening the High-Level Meeting on integrated initiatives for least-developed
countries' trade development.  Clearly, the General Council would have to attach particular attention
to the follow-up of the High-Level Meeting to be carried out by the WTO in coordination with other
international organizations.  Another important is sue in the General Council's work was the 1998
Ministerial Conference and the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the multilateral tradingWT/GC/M/25
Page 20
system to be held on 18-20 May 1998.  Members had had several exchanges of views on this issue
and the General Council had taken some decisions on logistical arrangements for these events.  As
had been agreed by Members, at an appropriate time next year the General Council would have to
start the substantive preparations for the two even ts.  During the period under review, the General
Council had initiated procedures for accession of two States.  It had had also granted a number of
waivers and conducted a review of waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement.Consultations with Members had been pursued on pending requests for observer status from
international intergovernmental organizations and w ould be resumed the following year.  The General
Council had also agreed to accept Singapore's offer to  transfer to the WTO for its use the logo of the
1996 Ministerial Conference together with the copyrigh t thereon.  In the light of the first two years of
operation of the WTO Secretariat, the General Council had decided to consider how its functioning
and operational efficiency might be enhanced to meet the challenges facing the Organization.
Following the decision taken by the General Council on WTO staff and senior management structure,the Director-General had circulated in the fall his report on this matter which was now subject to
consultations.  As all were aware, the General Council had continued to attach priority attention to the
question of conditions of service of WTO staff.  Cons ultations were still continuing on this matter and
the General Council would revert to this issue as soon as possible.  In 1997 the General Council had
also devoted attention to a number of aspects of work that were relevant to the proper and smoothfunctioning of the organization.  It had considered issues such as possible procedures for accreditation
of Permanent Representatives to the WTO and frequency of WTO meetings.  The General Council
had also agreed to the issuance, on a trial basis, of a WTO daily bulletin, which appeared to be a
useful way to assist delegations in following WTO meetings.  Further efforts had been made to ensure
the necessary transparency in the work of the General Council through intensive contacts andinformal consultations with delegations.  He believed that the question of working methods and
practices in the WTO should continue to be a permanent concern of the General Council.
The General Council took note of the introductory statements by the chairpersons of the
respective WTO bodies, adopted the report of the Committee on Trade and Development, and took
note of the reports of the other WTO bodies, including the reports from the bodies under the
Plurilateral Trade Agreements.  The General Council then adopted its report, on the understanding
that the Secretariat would make the necessary adjustments to the text to include the matters considered
at the present meeting as well as at the meeting of 14 November, which remained to be concluded.3
The representative of Ecuador referred to the corrigendum to the report of the Dispute
Settlement Body regarding the European Communities' regime on bananas (WT/DSB/10/Corr.1), and
said that it had identified precisely the reason for which Ecuador and other countries had requested
arbitration in this case.  In Ecuador's view, the European Communities had indeed not informed the
DSB of their intention to comply with the DSB' s recommendations on this matter.  In addition, he
believed that the DSB's report was incorrect in indi cating that the complainants in this case had not
raised any objection during consultations with the Communities on this matter as to the period for
implementation proposed by the Communities (WT/DSB/10, page 13, eighth paragraph).  Ecuador
and the other countries concerned had expressed serious objections to the period for implementation
proposed by the Communities.
The Chairman said that the annual reports were factual reports, and that the points of view
that had been expressed by any delegation, such as in the DSB, had to be reflected in the report as the
delegation had expressed them.
The representative of Colombia, speaking on behalf of the countries members of the
International Textiles and Clothing Bureau (ITCB), said that the textiles sector was very important to
                                                     
3The annual report was subsequently circulated as WT/GC/10.WT/GC/M/25
Page 21
the textiles-exporting developing countries because of the earnings it generated and its impact on
employment.  This explained the interest and the seriousness with which they had approached the first
stock-taking of the implementation of the ATC.  The ITCB exporting countries had contributed
appropriate technical information and documents for the review, and had demonstrated the grounds
for their concern and dissatisfaction with the insignificant progress towards achieving the objectives
of liberalizing this sector and progressively integrating it into WTO disciplines.  However, despite theenormous work done by the delegations participatin g in the review and the Goods Council Chairman's
efforts, the review could not be concluded.  Given the lack of consensus for adopting conclusions,
recommendations and possibly decisions as provided  for in Article 8 of the ATC, the Goods Council
had not yet completed the task entrusted to it.  Much of the review had been carried out, but it
remained incomplete, and there was no reason to believe that the unity of the review exercise could be
broken down simply by taking note of some segments of the process.  Members were now in an
awkward situation, since the ATC did not contain any specific provisions signposting the path to befollowed, and there were no precedents in this respect.  In the circumstances, it would seem
appropriate for the General Council to consider the situation and, if possible, establish guidelines for
completing the major review process.
The representative of Bolivia referred to the report of the Working Group on the Relationship
between Trade and Investment, and recalled a statement by her delegation to the Group on the need to
ensure that the basic documentation used at meetings was also made available in Spanish.  This
statement had received the support of several delegations.  Although the Group's report had not
contained any reference to the importance of the need for translation of documents, Bolivia had
agreed to its adoption in order not to hold up the process.  However, she wished to reiterate for the
record that it was imperative that the balance between the three WTO working languages be fullyrespected.  Given the importance that developing countries attached to such a sensitive issue as
investment, her delegation intended to follow carefully the developments in the Working Group and,
for this reason, would seek to ensure that the th ree working languages were put on an equal footing.
The representative of Brunei Darussalam, speaking on behalf of the ASEAN Members
,
regretted that the Goods Council had been unable to come up with conclusions or decisions on the
major review of the ATC.  The Council had the distinct responsibility and obligation to undertake this
review as well as to oversee the functioning of the ATC.  However, if the Council failed to fulfil its
obligations under the ATC and the Marrakesh Agreemen t to complete the major review of the ATC, it
would be an unprecedented outcome detrimental to the integrity of the multilateral trading system.
The Council's inability to undertake this review calle d into question the effecting functioning of the
WTO.  The situation was serious, and was a crisis of confidence in the system.  Through the technical
analyses and observations presented by various exporting developing countries during the major
review, the problems encountered by these Members since the ATC's entry into force had been clearly
recognized, particularly concerning the lack of any meaningful liberalization in the textiles and
clothing sector and the continued introduction of new restrictions in various forms.  It had been
logical to expect, on the basis of such facts, that the Council would at least ensure that the
implementation of the ATC was put back on track  -- meaning the restoring of effective liberalizationof trade in this sector -- and that the balance of rights and obligations embodied in the ATC was not
being impaired.  There could be no doubt that the failure to complete the major review would directly
impair the rights and obligations embodied in the ATC.  It would be regrettable for Members to allow
this event to go down in history as unfinished business, given the clear mandate for all to fulfil this
important obligation.  All knew that an important issu e such as this took time and effort.  The ASEAN
Members believed that the process had run aground simply because time had run out.  Members had
time and again demonstrated their ability to bridge differences in order to uphold the integrity of the
system.  Bearing this in mind, it was only appropriate that further efforts should be made on this issue.
The ATC was an integral part of the so-called "single undertaking" under the WTO Agreement.  As in
any integrated structure, if one part of the structure was undermined, the rest of the structure was putat risk, with unpredictable consequences.  Similarly, the WTO was part of the global economicWT/GC/M/25
Page 22
system.  In today's world of economic interdependence, only the credible and effective
implementation of the system held the key to everyone 's viable future.  In order to restore confidence
in the WTO's overseeing function and to prevent any non-fulfilment or impairment arising from the
inability of the Goods Council to complete the major review, the ASEAN Members proposed that the
major review process be resumed for completion under the auspices and guidance of the General
Council, taking into account the importance of sm oothly conducting the commemoration of the 50th
Anniversary and the 1998 Ministerial Conference.
The representative of Egypt  endorsed Colombia's statement.  Members were faced today with
the unpleasant situation of having to come to the General Council to report uncompleted work,
particularly after all the efforts made by most of the Members and the Goods Council Chairman.
Members had failed to reach any conclusions and had even failed to reach any common understanding
on the factual part of a report.  Egypt's position ha d been recorded clearly in the minutes of the
meetings of the Goods Council, and did not need repeating.  However, his delegation wished to
propose that the Goods Council resume its work on this matter as soon as possible to conclude its
obligation and fulfil the review process, and report on the results to the General Council.
The representative of Hong Kong, China full y endorsed Colombia's statement.  While the
Goods Council had certainly initiated the first major review of the ATC in earnest, not only could the
review not be concluded, but there was not even any consensus on the basis on which the reviewshould be conducted.  His delegation had expressed its views on the reasons for this failure at the
8 December Council meeting, and would not repeat them.  The situation now was that, despite the
Goods Council's extensive endeavours, there was no  agreed outcome to its work on the review.
Consequently, the review, although started, had not been completed.  Furthermore, the Council had
thus been prevented from fulfilling an equally, if not more, important part of its mandate, i.e., to takesuch decisions as it deemed appropriate to ensure that the balance of rights and obligations in the ATC
was not being impaired.  In the global economic system, of which the WTO was an integral part,
confidence in the regulation of the system was a key factor.  The Goods Council had been given
responsibility for overseeing the functioning of , inter alia ,  the ATC in order to provide such
regulation and to sustain confidence in the WTO.  Without proper regulation there could be noconfidence in the multilateral trading system.  As th e highest standing authority in the WTO, it was
now incumbent on the General Council  to accept the challenges, first, to restore confidence in the
WTO oversight system by redressing the failure of  the Goods Council to c onduct the major review on
time and, second, to effect this redress bearing in mind that it was of paramount importance that the
commemoration of the 50th Anniversary and 1998 Ministerial Conference should be conductedsmoothly.  These were no small challenges and required serious consideration by the General Council
before decisions were taken on how to meet them.
The representative of India endorsed Colombia's statement and expressed support for Egypt's
proposal.  He wished also to place on record his delegation's appreciation for the untiring efforts of
the Goods Council Chairman to try to enable all to conclude the major review.  India did not wish to
repeat the statements it had made at the Goods Council's meetings.  However, it wished to reiterate
that the Goods Council had the responsibility to conduc t this major review in order to ensure that the
delicate balance of rights and obligations, both under the ATC and the single undertaking of the WTO
Agreement, was not impaired.  The ATC categorically stipulated that the major review had to be
conducted before the end of 1997, and the Council had clearly been unable to meet this deadline.
Some had said that the very fact that Members ha d been able to exchange detailed views during the
meetings of the Council on the ATC should be considered to be the major review of the ATC.  Suchan interpretation of "major review" could not be accepted by India, and nor should it be acceptable to
the WTO membership.  The major review had to be an integrated document, containing not only the
observations but also the recommendations and decisions of the Goods Council on the basis of the
views exchanged among Members.  The Goods Council had already endorsed another major review,
the First Triennial Review of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade.  A look at the format ofWT/GC/M/25
Page 23
that review would reveal that India had been asking for no less than that format in the major review of
the ATC.  The TBT triennial review recalled the provisions of the Agreement, and contained a series
of observations, recommendations and decisions of the Committee on the basis of views exchanged
among Members.  The major reviews conducted under the purview of the Goods Council, whether of
the TBT or the ATC, should be consistent at leas t in their formats.  Members had devoted so much
time to this issue because the WTO had been projected, especially after the conclusion of the UruguayRound, as the engine of global trade liberalization that was expected to raise the standards of living of
their populations.  Much publicity had been given to this aspect of the WTO's functioning, particularly
when the negotiations on basic telecommunications or information technology had been concluded.
However, if the WTO was unable even to complete a major review of the implementation of the ATC,
which sought to liberalize trade in a sector in which in India alone over 40 million workers were
employed, it would be a sad reflection of the WTO's image as a credible votary of trade liberalization.
It would be unfortunate if Members were to treat the major review of the ATC, which was part of theWTO Agreements, as casually as had been proposed by some, since such a casual approach could
very well spill over to other important reviews due to be conducted in the WTO in the near future.
The representative of Pakistan said it was clear that what had happened in the Goods Council
was a matter of serious concern to many Members, and particularly the textiles exporting countries.
The confidence of a large number of developing countries had been seriously shaken in the sincerityof the major partners within the system.  The long exercise conducted in the Goods Council had added
to their sense of concern over whether their partners intended to fully and faithfully implement the
ATC, and whether they would in fact phase out the MFA restrictions when they become due.
Developing countries had serious doubts because of the actions that had been taken by some countries
and this last exercise in the Goods Council when, for the first time, a major council of the WTO hadfailed to fulfil its responsibilities.  The provisions of the ATC were very clear, and he wished
particularly to draw attention to Article 8:12, which re ferred to two things.  First, it referred to the
question of the balance of rights and obligations embodied in the Agreement, a balance that was was
important in the context of the single undertaking.  It should be very clear that if countries that formed
a major part of the WTO membership felt they had not benefited from the areas of their exportadvantage, they would have little incentive to continue to make concessions in areas in which they
knew they would not gain advantage at least for the coming few years.  This, in the context of the
Ministerial Conference to be held in 1998, and the important negotiations that were to be concluded
the following week, was an important matter that should not be brushed aside because it emanated
from a group of developing countries.  Second, Article 8:12 also referred in its last sentence to theultimate recourse -- the dispute settlement mechanis m.  If the Goods Council were unable to fulfil its
responsibilities, the dispute settlement mechanism w ould have to be the last resort for the exporting
countries.  They would not wish to have that last recourse, because they believed that the ATC could
and should be implemented faithfully and that the G oods Council could help in this process.  But the
Goods Council had to address this with sincerity, a nd not as a means of diverting the responsibilities
and the conclusions that flowed clearly from the facts, from the actions that had been taken or not
taken, and even from the report of the TMB.  Therefore, as a first step, Pakistan would endorse theproposal by the ASEAN Members and others that the Goods Council should continue to make efforts
in the coming year to conclude this exercise and to reach a consensus on the actions that were
required for the major review of the ATC.
The representative of the United States said that the real reason that there had been no result
from this first-stage review was the wide gap between the positions of the exporting and importing
countries.  The same countries that had been unhappy with the text of the ATC in the Uruguay Round
remained unhappy with it now.  The United Stat es had listened in the review to a number of
interpretations of the ATC that it could not share.  The obligations of the ATC were clear.  The United
States had fulfilled, and would continue to fulfil, its obligations under the ATC.  What it would not do
was open the text of the ATC to accommodate interpretations it would not have accepted in thenegotiations thereon.  Most of the deficiencies that countries had found in the United States'WT/GC/M/25
Page 24
application of the ATC had not been raised with it in consultations, let alone brought to the TMB.
The conclusion was that the countries advancing thes e interpretations had no confidence in the legal
basis of their claims, and hoped to accomplish in the Goods Council what would not be possible in the
mechanisms established in the WTO for such purposes.  Article 8:11 of the ATC directed that the
Goods Council conduct a first-stage review of the ATC.  There had been six formal meetings and
dozens of informal meetings of the Goods Council in  the conduct of this review.  Every aspect of the
ATC had been open for examination.  Article 8:11 did not, however, mandate any particular outcome
of this review.  A reasonable expectation would have been that the review would at least produce a
summary of the deliberations.  However, this summary had been blocked by exporting countries
determined to get a series of conclusions and recommendations that could not be justified based on
the deep divisions existing between exporters and importers on this issue.  Article 8:12 of the ATC
provided for the opportunity, but not the necessity, of producing conclusions and recommendations.
The United States had been in a position to agree to a number of recommendations that would havereaffirmed all of the provisions of the ATC, to de al with issues involving integration of products as
well as to facilitate the TMB's work.  Regrettably, this useful result had been undermined by the
efforts of those that had insisted on an unbalanced set of conclusions and recommendations.  Despite
this lack of result, the first-stage review had been completed.  The United States would resist all
efforts to keep this sector under review.  Given th e crushing workload all faced in the coming year,
her delegation could not justify expending further resources on an area so unlikely to produce
meaningful results.
The representative of the European Communities said that in his delegation's view, the Goods
Council had manifestly conducted the major review provided for in Article 8:11 of the ATC.  It had
been a wide ranging and difficult debate in a sensitive area for both the exporting and importingcountries.  What had not been achieved was a consensus on the terms of the report and possible
conclusions.  This was a matter of regret and disappointment.  The Community's interests in the
course of the debate had been dismissed.  It believed that the debate had not allowed serious and
strongly expressed concerns to be addressed.  The Community, he noted, was also a major exporter of
textiles and clothing, and had a major interest in improved market access in other countries.  It hadplayed a full part in the whole of the debate.  The question had arisen towards the conclusion of the
debate as to whether it should be continued.  The Community's judgement was that although they had
been close, the gap between positions was probably just that little too wide to be bridged, and that the
necessary further investment of time and resources could therefore not be justified at this stage.
The representative of Canada said his delegation did not share the view that the Goods
Council had failed to conduct the review as call ed for in the ATC.  While Members might not have
been able to achieve complete consensus on the review, in particular on conclusions, they had had a
full and frank exchange of views reflecting the importance of the textiles and clothing sector for many
Members.  The implementation of the first stage of integration had been discussed intensively during
the last six formal meetings of the Goods Council.  Canada had participated fully and constructively
in these formal meetings, as well as in the many informal meetings that had also been held.  The
discussion had covered in great detail all aspects of implementation of the ATC.  All had had the fullopportunity to express their views and concerns, and al l the discussions had been fully recorded in the
minutes of the meetings.  Canada believed that this recorded discussion provided a transparent,
complete and valuable review of the implementation of the first stage of integration under the ATC.
The discussion had also increased the awareness of the views and concerns of all Members.
The representative of Norway said that like a number of Members that had expressed an
opinion, Norway would have liked to see a concrete a nd tangible result of this exercise in the form of
"such decisions" as referred to in Article 8:12 of the ATC.  Conclusions could have added an
important element to the review.  That being sai d, Norway noted with surprise and concern the view
of some Members that the Goods Council had failed to carry out its mandate to conduct a review as
stipulated under Article 8:11 of the ATC.  Norw ay would submit that there was little basis inWT/GC/M/25
Page 25
Article 8:11 and 8:12 for drawing such a conclusi on.  Article 8:12 stated that the Goods Council
"...shall by consensus take such decisions as it deems appropriate".  It could not share the view that
Article 8:12 obliged the Goods Council to take an y decision or decisions.  One should distinguish
between what was desirable for part of the membership and what was possible for the whole
membership, i.e., for the Council as such.  The emphasis in Article 8:12 could not be put entirely on
the world "shall", thereby disregarding the word s "by consensus" and "as it deems appropriate".
Some Members, even if they were a large majority , clearly could not oblige the rest to join in a
consensus and/or to consider as appropriate, decisions that they didn't agree with.  Norway feared that
the WTO would be doing itself a disservice if it interpreted a failure to reach decisions as tantamount
to failing to perform the required review in a proper manner.  Such a position minimized the
importance of a process which had been of significant value.  Norway believed it important to recall
that implementation of the ATC had been the subject of more attention than any other Agreement
under the WTO, both in the run-up to the Singapore Ministerial Conference and this autumn, and thatat both these instances no Member had indicate d anything other than full commitment to the
implementation of the ATC in its entirety.  Regardless of any disappointment that a number of
Members might feel with regard to implementation to date, and the review that had been held, this
restated commitment to full implementation of the ATC should not be allowed to be overshadowed.
The representative of Pakistan said that whether or not the issues raised in the Goods Council
had been raised bilaterally with the importing countries was a moot point.  Certain issues had indeed
been raised.  There were some issues, however, that were of a systemic nature and had to be addressed
multilaterally because they affected the entire multi lateral trading system.  As for the argument that
the review had been completed because the debates and meetings had been held, there had been no
consensus, and all the views had been recorded in  the minutes, he said there would be a different
perspective if the issue were seen from the point of view of the balance of rights and obligations under
the WTO Agreements.  If there were clear divisions amongst Members on whether or not an
Agreement as central and fundamental to the single undertaking as the ATC was being faithfully
implemented, he believed it would have a ripple effect on the implementation of the rest of the
Agreements and the rest of the single undertaking.  This should be of concern to those on both sidesof this argument and should not be brushed aside ea sily.  The review of the ATC was supposed to lead
to the decisions mentioned in Article 8:12, and those decisions had to be taken by consensus.
Members were required to pursue that consensus, and that was the purpose of the proposals by the
ASEAN Members and Hong Kong, China, among ot hers, which Pakistan had supported.  He had
listened with some concern that the continuation of this review would be resisted by a major partner.He believed that position was not consistent with the requirement for all to reach consensus on the
issues relating to implementation of the single undertaking.  He suggested that the General Council
Chairman be entrusted to conduct consultations with a view to reaching a consensus on the earliest
possible resumption of the review in the Goods Co uncil.  In case that was not possible, Pakistan
would reserve the right to raise this issue in the Ge neral Council itself.  In the meantime, as an act of
confidence, Pakistan hoped that even at the present meeting, the General Council would be able to
conclude the discussion on this item with a reaffirmation of Article 9 of the ATC, particularly in thelight of the statements by the United States and Norway.
The representative of India said that his delegation had consciously not dealt with the
substance of the implementation of the ATC in its earlier intervention.  The facts regarding the
implementation of the ATC were available in the notifications on this issue circulated to WTO
Members, and clearly established that trade liberalization in the textiles and clothing sector had not
taken place.  In the conduct of the major review, importing Members had blocked consensus, whileexporting Members had participated with concrete drafting proposals.  Indeed, while these proposals
had been circulated with full transparency to all Members, the importing Members had not even
presented their proposals, and had sought refuge in opaqueness and ambivalence.  Reference had been
made to the time that had been devoted to the discussion on the textiles issue before the SingaporeWT/GC/M/25
Page 26
Ministerial Conference.  He wished to recall that at the Singapore Ministerial Conference, one
compromise paragraph referring to the ATC had been adopted as part of the Ministerial Declaration
and that there had been nothing in it on the issue of implementation of the ATC.  The issue before the
General Council concerned the role and responsibi lity of the Goods Council to conduct the major
review mandated by the ATC.  The Chairman of th e Goods Council had not said that the review had
been completed, and India therefore supported the proposals by Egypt and Pakistan for the GeneralCouncil to ask the Goods Council to complete its work and fulfil its role.
The representative of Hong Kong, China noted th at reference had been made to the relevance
and availability of bilateral consultations and supervision by the TMB.  His delegation had been
trying to make the point throughout this exercise that the major review was really above these levels,
and represented truly multilateral surveillance.  Multilateral rules must contain what could be agreed
bilaterally.  If a measure was not challenged bilaterally, or was endorsed in a bilateral agreement, it
did not follow that the measure was consistent with multilateral disciplines.  Conversely, a major
review concerned only with issues where bilateral disagreement had been registered would becompletely redundant.  To supervise compliance with  specific obligations was certainly in the first
instance the function of the TMB.  However, the Goods Council clearly had a duty to address issues
that the TMB had been unable to resolve.  In this particular case, the Goods Council itself had been
prevented from reaching any conclusions in the context of the major review.  However, the fact that a
WTO body was unable to complete a task did not detract from its responsibility to fulfil that task.Similarly, the provision in Article 8:12 that the Goods Council shall "by consensus" take such
decisions as it deemed appropriate did not detract from the fact that decisions by consensus were
envisaged.  In other words, the inability to arrive at a consensus did not absolve the Goods Council
from its obligations.  There was a definitive obligation in Article 8:12 to ensure the continued balance
of rights and obligations.  His delegation therefore agreed with Pakistan and India that furtherconsideration had to be given to this very serious matter.
The representative of Colombia said that some specific suggestions had been made by
delegations in this discussion, and requested that the Chairman give some indication as to his
intentions in this regard.
The Chairman said that he had listened carefully  to the statements regarding the review of the
ATC.  He wished to note that Article 8:11 of the ATC provided that the Goods Council should
oversee the implementation of the Agreement, and conduct the major review before the end of each
stage of the integration process.  It was therefore the responsibility of the Goods Council to submit to
the General Council any recommendations for action or decision on this matter.  Consequently, anyfollow-up action at the level of the General Council,  such as those that had been suggested in the
present discussion, should be submitted to the General Council through the Goods Council.  As a
result, the proposals for further work in this area that had been made should be considered by the
Goods Council so that the appropriate recommenda tions could be made to the General Council.
Alternatively, this matter could be placed on th e Agenda of the General Council by any Member, due
time being allowed for the purposes of analysis and consideration.
The representative of Mexico, addressing another matter, referred to the statement in item
14(f)(v) of the DSB's report (WT/DSB/10) that "i n the Communities' understanding the complainants
had not raised any objection during the consultations held on this matter as to the period for
implementation proposed by the Communities".  He wished to make clear that this understanding on
the Communities' part was incorrect for two reason s.  First, as had been shown by the change
indicated in the corrigendum to the report (WT/DSB/10/Corr.1), the Communities had neverrecognized an intention to implement the DSB's recommendations.  Rather, they had indicated that
they were prepared to respect their international obligations.  Second, as provided in Article 21:3 of
the DSU, in order to have a "reasonable period of time", the intention must be to comply with theWT/GC/M/25
Page 27
recommendations and rulings of the DSB.  If there was no formal recognition by the Communities of
their intention to comply with the recommendations , then the "reasonable period of time" was zero.
The Communities should be under no illusion that their understanding was shared by Mexico.
The representative of the European Communities said that factual statements made in the
course of any debate should be a matter for the record, and each delegation was entitled to expect that
the points they wished to place on record would be reflected accurately.  In the particular matterreferred to by Mexico and Ecuador, the Community had confirmed that it would meet its obligations
under the WTO Agreement, and had gone on record to state its acceptance of the verdict of the panel
and the Appellate Body.  Since then, the Community had held several consultations with the exporting
countries concerned in an attempt to explain the nature of the difficulties it faced.  It had not been
possible to reach a common understanding acceptable to all the parties regarding the reasonable
period of time for implementation.  This had now been referred to arbitration, and in that respect the
matter remained for the moment sub judice .
The representative of Ecuador reiterated that Ecuador, Mexico and others had requested
arbitration because they did not agree in any way with the Community on this issue.
The General Council took note of the statements.
Mr. Akram (Pakistan), Chairman of the Trade Policy Review Body, introducing item 10 of
the agenda, said that this overview came at someth ing of a turning point in the world trading system.
Until mid-year, economic prospects for most areas of the world had appeared positive, and most
projections had been for a recovery of trade and economic growth in 1998.  Since the summer,
however, things had changed.  The financial turmoil in many markets and developing countries, fed
by uncertainty and speculation, had spread a contagion through the world economy.  Projections of
growth for 1998 were being reduced, and it was evident that the coming year was likely to be moredifficult.  A slow-down in world economic growth might have several undesirable effects, and have
serious consequences for the global economy in general, and the developing countries in particular.  A
combination of slow growth, rising unemployment and increased trade imbalances could strengthen
protectionist pressures and limit the prospects for East Asian economies, in particular, to export their
way back to higher growth.  Moreover, a generalized rise in interest rates and the appreciation ofcertain key currencies could compromise the ability of developing countries to continue as a major
source of global demand expansion, since these countries were extremely susceptible to reversal of
capital flows.
It was therefore heartening that during the year there had been further advances on some
fronts in the trading system.  It was hoped that the financial services negotiations would result in a
positive outcome for all participants.  Despite the impact of the recent financial turbulence, many
developing as well as developed and transition countries had made substantial offers, which would
hopefully be a basis for a positive agreement.  However, as has been repeatedly affirmed, the
multilateral trading system must ensure that countries had the opportunity to participate in it and that
there was a mutuality of benefits for all.  In this c ontext, there were some continuing dark areas.  First
was the issue of timely and faithful implementation of the Uruguay Round Agreements, particularly
those of interest to developing countries.  Similarly, developing countries had been disappointed withthe implementation of the different provisions for special and differential treatment.  There was,
overall, a question of the adequate participation of  developing countries within the WTO.  The TPR
meetings held during the year, ranging from Benin and Fiji to the European Union, had shown the
process of liberalization to be continuing in many countries.  This was taking place at three levels:
unilateral, regional and multilateral.  In some TPR meetings, reasons had been heard for priority beinggiven to regional -- as distinct from multilateral -- liberalization.  Some of the reasons related to the
greater speed and ease of the process at the regional level, as opposed to the slow progress made inWT/GC/M/25
Page 28
multilateral negotiations.  Regionalism had certainly become the fashion.  Consequently, there was an
even greater need to ensure that regionalism and multilateralism complemented each other and moved
in the same direction.
The Director-General's annual report on developments in international trade and the trading
system (WT/TPR/OV/3), made reference to the least-developed countries, and the steps taken to
reduce their marginalization in the multilateral trad ing system.  This emphasis, and the efforts made
through the High-Level Meeting to encourage better market access and technical cooperation, was
welcome.  Finally, the utility of this annual overvi ew of developments in the international trading
environment was the opportunity it provided for all to put the developments during the year into
proper perspective, to identify the positive and the negative elements of these developments, and to
indicate the possible challenges in the coming year.  It had been his endeavour as Chairman of the
TPRB, and as provided in the Marrakesh Agreement, that the TPRB should undertake a separate
annual overview of developments in the internationa l trading environment that were having an impact
on the multilateral trading system.  While the TPRB  had been unable to conduct this overview during
this year, it was his hope that this provision of the Marrakesh Agreement would be realized in 1998.
Dr. Kim, Deputy Direct or-General, presenting the annual report on the overview of
developments in the international trading system (WT/TPR/OV/3) on behalf of the Director-General,
said that over the past eight years the Trade Policy Review Mechanism had become an effectiveforum for promoting constructive dialogue among Members and for exploring the full range of trade
policies in an atmosphere distinct from the more legally-oriented work of the WTO.  It had also
served as a valuable input into the trade policy- making process in various Member countries.  It
could, for example, illuminate areas of WTO obligations that might have received insufficient
attention.  Furthermore, for developing countries, it could make an effective contribution to technicalassistance efforts.  In the past year, the TPRM had reviewed trading entities ranging in size from the
European Community to Benin, and had investigated  the impact of these trading entities on the
multilateral system and of the system on them.  The principal themes emerging from reviews had been
summarized in the report of the Chairman of the TPRB.  However, the interest taken by Members in
the process and, in particular, the increasing precision and focus of advance questions submitted in thecourse of the recent reviews, showed how greatly the Mechanism was valued.  Turning to the report in
WT/TPR/OV/3, he said that, overall, 1997 had been a good year for trade.  As the report showed, not
only were world trade and output expected to have accelerated, but there had been a narrowing of
regional differences in economic growth.  He wished particularly to underline that Africa's growth
was continuing to surpass the levels seen for many years up until 1996.  Of course, the financialturbulence in Asia and its effects elsewhere in the world would have an impact on trade and growth.
One could not yet be certain what those effects would be, but it seemed probably that there will be
some contraction of economic activity.  It was also too early to forecast what the impact would be on
trade.  In any event, it was not only essential to avoid any temptation to introduce policy measures
that would reverse the liberalizing trend, but also -- especially for countries that had experienced a
significant currency devaluation -- important to promote further liberalization of domestic markets.  In
fact, on the evidence of the past year, as shown in the WTO Annual Report and in WT/TPR/OV/3, thespirit of trade openness observed in the past few years continued to predominate at the global level.  It
was strongly supported at various levels of international commitment, both regional and multilateral,
which were covering ever wider areas of trade.
The past year has been one of great achievements in the multilateral system, and deserved to
be crowned with a successful conclusion to the financial services negotiations that all were workinghard to achieve.  Since the success of the first Ministerial Conference in Singapore, the WTO's
achievements had included:  (i) the Agreement on Basic Telecommunications Services reached in
February, among countries accounting for more than 90 per cent of the basic telecom market
worldwide;  (ii) the Information Technology Agr eement, eliminating tariffs on those key building
blocks of the economy of the future.  Although this was a plurilateral agreement, the concessions hadWT/GC/M/25
Page 29
been made on an m.f.n. basis.  Together, these tw o agreements covered a volume of trade equivalent
to that in agriculture, automobiles and textiles combined, and symbolized the rapid advance of the
borderless technologies that were blurring distinctions among economies and sectors;  (iii) a
successful high-level conference aimed at improving the integration of least-developed countries into
the trading system.  This had produced concrete results by way of improved market access, an
integrated approach to technical assistance, and new departures in the use of modern technology toimprove the access of these countries to the most important raw material of the next century -
- knowledge;  (iv) an increasing access to the WTO dispute settlement system, which had received
108 cases in less than three years of existence.  This pace of some 40 disputes a year represented a
vote of confidence by Members in the improved dispute settlement mechanism of the WTO.  The
GATT, he recalled, had dealt in all with some 300 disputes, or about six disputes a year.  However,
the value of the system was not just in reaching j udgements in high-profile cases, but in the many
cases it helped to resolve in "out-of-court" settlements before the procedure had run its course -- i.e. inabout 20 per cent of the cases thus far.  Another noteworthy feature was the increasing use of the
system by developing countries;  of the seven adopted reports, five had involved complaints by
developing countries.
The agenda before the WTO at present was equally impressive.  Clearly, the most immediate
single priority was the negotiations on financial services, due to be concluded in two days' time.These negotiations, the third in financial services in only five years, had produced a very impressive
harvest.  Already, 46 offers of improved market access had been made, covering over 60 individual
countries.  Other offers were expected soon.  In all, over 100 countries -- representing all the
industrialized economies, and more than 70 developing and transition economies -- would have made
commitments in this critically important sector.  No one could predict at this stage what all theelements of the imminent conclusion would be.  But it was hard to imagine -- in this final phase -- that
all of the achievements thus far would be allowed to slip away.  Looking to the coming year,
Members had the task of preparing for the second Ministerial Conference in May, and ensuring that
the 50th anniversary of the multilateral system was commemorated in a way that used to the full this
unique opportunity to make the value of the system better known to the world it benefited.  TheDirector-General encouraged all to work together to make the Geneva event a high-level one in every
way, and to do everything they could to promote national events aimed at raising public awareness of
the system's meaning for people everywhere.  Further ahead, one could see a number of challenges
and opportunities.  The WTO had to:  carry on ensuring that existing commitments were fully
implemented, and to fulfil the "built-in agenda", to which Singapore had added additional work;maintain the momentum of trade liberalization and respect for WTO rights and obligations;  ensure
that the level of ambition and political commitment invested in the multilateral system remained at
least equal to that in regional initiatives;  make the WTO a truly world organization by expediting the
accession negotiations of the 31 applicants, without of course compromising the system's basic rules,
rights and obligations.  In conclusion, he said that if the current financial turbulence taught anything,
it was that economic interdependence was now an unden iable global reality.  In this context, the value
of a sound and credible multilateral system, with rules and disciplines that were consensus-based andenforceable, was clearer than ever before.  The Director-General's report showed that the system was
working well, and that its strength was a powerful  stabilizing force in the storms that the world
economy must inevitably go through from time to time.  However, there was always the possibility of
making it better, and the Director-General looked fo rward to working with all over the coming year to
ensure that the second half-century of the trading system was even more productive and beneficial tothe global community than the first.
The representative of Brunei Darussalam, speaking on behalf of the ASEAN Members
,
addressing paragraph 23 of the Director-General's report in WT/TPR/OV/3, said that while both this
paragraph and paragraph 20 of the Singapore Mini sterial Declaration (WT/MIN(96)/DEC) regarding
the Working Groups on investment and competition stated that there should be a consensus decisionamong Members as to whether the work should proceed further into negotiations, the nuance in theWT/GC/M/25
Page 30
paragraph in the Director-General's report on the ongoing educational work was that it was a prelude
to negotiations, while in the Singapore Declaration Ministers had clearly stipulated that the ongoing
work would not prejudge whether negotiations would be initiated.  In other words, the work was
independent of whether or not it would lead to negotiations.  In addition, paragraph 23, line 7 of the
Director-General's report stated that the General Council was to decide "within two years of the
Singapore Conference on how work in these areas should proceed," although the provision in theMinisterial Declaration was that the General Council "will determine after two years how the work of
each body should proceed."  In order to avoid any mi sinterpretations, he urged that the wording of the
Singapore Ministerial Declaration be used in the Director-General's report.
4
The General Council took note of the statements.
The General Council then heard the following general statements:
Mr. Ian Wilkinson WT/GC(97)/ST/2
Minister, Deputy Permanent RepresentativeEuropean Communities
H.E. Mr. Juan Sanchez Arnau WT/GC(97)/ST/3
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
Argentina
H.E. Mr. Ted Delofski WT/GC(97)/ST/4
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
Australia
Mr. Carlos Antonio da Ro cha Paranhos WT/GC(97)/ST/5
Minister Counsellor, Deputy Permanent Representative
Brazil
H.E. Mr. John Weekes WT/GC(97)/ST/6
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
Canada
Mr. Stuart Harbinson WT/GC(97)/ST/7
Permanent RepresentativeHong Kong Special Adminisrative Region of China
Mr. Wilhelm Meier WT/GC(97)/ST/8 and Corr.1
Minister, Deputy Permanent Representative
Switzerland
H.E. Mr. Nestor Osorio Londoño WT/GC(97)/ST/9
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
Colombia
H.E. Mr. Srinivasan Narayanan WT/GC(97)/ST/10
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
India
                                                     
4A corrigendum to the Director-General's report reflecting these suggestions was subsequently
circulated as WT/TPR/OV/3/Corr.1.WT/GC/M/25
Page 31
H.E. Mr. Wade Armstrong WT/GC(97)/ST/11
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
New Zealand
In their general statements, delegations made the following procedural suggestions for
improvements to the end-of-year review exercise in the WTO.
The representative of Colombia expressed frustration that a topic as important as the overview
of WTO activities and of developments in the trading system had been taken up at the very close of
the meeting with very limited attendance.  The speakers preceding him had made very important
comments which, like the Director-General's report, deserved attention and due consideration.  It was
inconceivable that an institution responsible for managing the multilateral trading system should
undertake an analysis of recent developments in inte rnational trade, the activities of the WTO and the
role it should play in future, in a superficial ma nner and with barely a score of its Members present.
He therefore suggested that a special meeting of the General Council be convened in early 1998 atwhich a thorough analysis of the trends and prospects of international trade and the impact and
influence of the WTO Agreements could be conducted.
The representative of India fully endorsed and shared Colombia's statement regarding the
importance of this agenda item and of the need to ensure that this subject was discussed purposefully.
Colombia was clearly pointing to the importance of this overview and the need to ensure greaterparticipation of the WTO membership in this important debate.  The Chairman of the TPRB, at the
end of his introductory remarks on this agenda item, had also referred to this aspect.  One had to
ensure that the relevant documents were circulated  well in advance and that there was sufficient time
allocated for delegations to participate in this exercise in a meaningful manner.  This annual overview
exercise was perhaps one occasion where one could make conscious efforts not to miss the forest forthe trees, and therefore any effort to broaden and deepen this exercise would be worthwhile.  He
suggested that early in 1998 the Chairman hold info rmal consultations for determining the modalities
to make this exercise more effective.
The representative of New Zealand agreed with Colombia that there was much in the
Director-General's report that delegations might wish to come back to at a later date.
The representative of Canada strongly endorsed Colombia's and India's statements.  This was
perhaps the only occasion in the year in the WTO when Members could engage in a general,
wide-ranging discussion on matters of this nature.  Members should, early in the coming year, give
consideration to how this discussion might be made more effective and more meaningful.
The Chairman said that Members clearly felt the need for a broader discussion on the themes
that had been addressed.  He believed it would be useful for the General Council to hold an informal
policy discussion on issues such as the ones examined under these agenda items at the present
meeting.  He proposed that he consult with delegations on the possibility of convening early the
following year an informal meeting of the Ge neral Council for the purpose of holding a policy
discussion.
The General Council took note of the statements and agreed  that the overview of WTO
activities and the overview of developments in international trade and the trading system for 1997 had
been conducted.  The General Council further agreed that the Chairman would consult with
delegations on the possibility of convening an informal meeting early the following year for thepurposes of holding a policy discussion to deal with the matters raised by delegations relating to the
conduct of the end-of-year reviews in the General Council.WT/GC/M/25
Page 32
11. Secretariat efforts to improve transparency and general contact with the public
The Director-General, speaking under "Other Business", said he wished to take the
opportunity of the end-of-year General Council meeting to keep Members informed of the
Secretariat's efforts at fulfilling the mandate given at the General Council in July 1996 to improve
transparency through enhanced distribution of WTO documents and information.  Improved
distribution of information could take many forms, from helping to keep Members better informedabout WTO meetings, to publishing reports on the activities of the WTO, and to briefing the press.  It
could also encompass the organization of issue-related symposia.  The Secretariat had worked hard to
establish informal contacts with civil society.  Twice this year, it had organized symposia for
nongovernmental organizations:  in May, a session on trade, environment and sustainable
development, and in September a symposium on trade and the least-developed countries.  These
events had followed the successful dialogue with NGOs at the Singapore Ministerial Conference, and
were in addition to the regular contacts that he and many other members of the Secretariat hadestablished with NGO officials.  Since the July  1996 General Council meetin g, the Secretariat had
been charged with the dissemination of all unrestricted and derestricted documents.  In following the
agreed procedures, the Secretariat had embarked on the ambitious task of releasing some
30,000 documents to the public in the three working languages.  Once these documents were
derestricted, they appeared immediately on the WTO web site, a cyber destination that had becomeincreasingly attractive to the public.
In November, the total number of individuals accessing the site rose to 32,234, representing a
ten-fold increase over the average monthly usage a year earlier.  It was even more impressive that the
equivalent of roughly 5 million pages of WTO text had been downloaded by users.  This meant that
the web site was more than just a place in cyber space where users browsed and moved on -- it was asource of information considered so vital that information was captured and stored by students,
business leaders, non-governmental organizations, journalists and lawyers.  It was perhaps no surprise
that the single biggest location for users of the WTO web site was the United States.  However, the
United States and other advanced economies were by no means the only countries that were home to
users of the site.  There had been visitors from 134 countries this fall, including from a large numberof sub-Saharan African countries.  For the first time this fall, users had visited the site from Benin,
Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Kenya, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia
and Zimbabwe.  The most sought-after data in No vember concerned dispute settlement reports, which
comprised 22 per cent of pages downloaded, the interactive WTO Guide -- 22 per cent of downloaded
pages -- and the documents in the Documents Dissemination Facility -- 12.5 per cent of downloadedpages.  The site had also enabled the WTO to extend to journalists around the world the same
privileged access that the local Geneva correspondents had traditionally enjoyed.  Over
500 journalists, a great many of them from developing countries, had registered to use the special
"Newsroom" feature of the site, which held speeches by Secretariat officials, press releases and
documents released under embargo.
The Secretariat was confident that the success of the web site would be matched by its newly
launched joint site with the World Bank.  This site, entitled the "Trade and Development Centre", wasdesigned to assist in the informing and training of government officials and business leaders in the
developing world.  The demand from Members for this service had been impressive.  To meet the
demands, the Secretariat had gone beyond just the establishment of the on-line development training
information centre and was engaged in a process of connecting many of the world's developing
countries to the Internet so that they could access this information.  Four countries had alreadyreceived equipment and on-site training from the Secretariat.  Interest in the site had been enhanced
by the Cyber-Cafe constructed for demonstration purposes during the High-Level Meeting for least-
developed countries in October.  During these demonstrations, delegates had been able to see first-
hand how electronic flow of information could enha nce their participation in the WTO.  Documents
that might have taken days or weeks to retrieve were now available in seconds via the Internet.  BothWT/GC/M/25
Page 33
of these sites would eventually be home to a library of information contained in eight interactive
guides.  Two of these guides had already been completed, namely the basic Guide to the WTO and the
Guide to the WTO and Developing Countries.  The other six were expected to be completed by
mid-1998.
While the new technologies had been a vital addition to the Secretariat's information
distribution system, the more conventional forms had not been neglected.  In addition to the AnnualReport, the Trade Policy Reviews and the Analytical Index, the Secretariat would produce in January
an updated laymen's guide to the World Trade Organization, called "Trading Into the Future".  The
circulation of the monthly newsletter, Focus, ha d grown from about 8,000 two years earlier to 13,500
today.  The Secretariat had also sought to broaden the reach of its information dissemination through
private sector partnerships -- partnerships which pr ovided the opportunity to reach millions of homes
and offices.  A partnership with the Financial Times Information had begun in earnest in November
with the electronic release and distribution of the Trade Policy Review of the European Union.Another partnership with Kluwer Academic would result in the spring publication of the official
WTO guide to the Uruguay Round and companion volume, which provided background to the
Uruguay Round negotiations.  The Secretariat would continue its efforts to more forward in its
contacts with the general public along these lines.
The representative of the United States expressed appreciation to the Director-General for his
report and for his and the Secretariat's efforts to increase transparency.  Increasing transparency
remained a major objective of the United States with respect to the WTO, as regards the dispute
settlement process as well as in other contexts.  Only when the public, including interested NGOs,
were fully and accurately informed of the WTO process and of important developments in the WTO
system, could they be expected to give the WTO their support.  The United States would be aiming toensure that the restriction of documents was limited to those for which it was absolutely necessary,
and no others.  While a great deal had already been done, more remained to be done in this area.  The
United States would be looking forward to more c oncrete ideas in this area in the coming year.
The representative of Switzerland urged that the WTO web site be kept user-friendly, and that
it remain quick to access.  He expressed concern that with the greater numbers of people accessing the
web site, it was becoming slower to use.  As regards the newsroom facility, he urged that a policy
decision be taken to allow Member delegations also to have access to the information at this site.
The representative of Pakistan said it was encouraging that the WTO web site had been
visited by so many people from developing countries.  This showed both that the popularity of the
WTO was growing and that electronic usage was spreading to the poorest among the developingcountries.  However, it was important to keep things in perspective.  Statistics showed that of all the
computer users in the world, only 1 per cent were in the developing countries.  Therefore, while the
WTO web site was an important way to spread information about the WTO, it should not be the only
medium.  Until there was greater parity in the use of electronic communications in the world, it was
important for the developing countries that information be transmitted also on hard copy, a facility
that might even be susidized through any savings that might be realized from the use of more
advanced information dissemination facilities by the WTO.
The General Council took note of the statements.
12. Institutional reform and restructuring of the Secretariat
The Chairman, speaking under "Other Business", recalled that in April 1997, the General
Council had adopted a Decision on the WTO Secr etariat and senior management structure
(WT/L/207) in which it requested the Director-General to submit a report with his recommendationsWT/GC/M/25
Page 34
on this matter as soon as possible but not later than October 1997.  The report had been circulated to
delegations recently as document no. 5553,5 and discussed briefly at informal consultations held on 2
December.  At the consultations, he had invited delegations to give careful consideration to this
report, and had indicated his intention to hold further consultations early in the following year.
The General Council took note of this information.
13. Daily Bulletin
The Chairman, speaking under "Other Business", recalled that in July, the General Council
had agreed that the Secretariat should issue a Daily Bulletin, in English only, for a trial period of three
months beginning in September.  The General Council had also agreed that the issuance of the
Bulletin would be reviewed in the light of experience and financial implications if any.  In the light of
the generally positive experience thus far with the issuance of the Daily Bulletin, he proposed that the
General Council agree that the Bulletin continue to be issued for a further trial period of three months
in English only, since its issuance in French and Spanish would have financial implications that wouldhave to be examined by the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration.  The issuance of the
Bulletin would be reviewed again in the light of experience.
The General Council took note of the statement and so agreed
.
14. Frequency of meetings of WTO bodies
The Chairman, speaking under "Other Business", said that following the concern expressed
by Egypt at the 22 October meeting of the General Council regarding the frequency of meetings of
WTO bodies, he had held consultations with interested delegations.  Although there was evidence
from statistics compiled by the Secretariat that the number of WTO meetings had been declining in
1997, this was a matter that should be kept continuo usly under review.  He would therefore urge the
Chairpersons of all WTO bodies to do their utmost to adhere to the guidelines on the scheduling ofmeetings agreed by the General Council in November 1995 (WT/L/106), and to avoid, to the extent
possible, the cancellation and rescheduling of meetings.  In this connection, he noted that the tentative
schedule of WTO meetings for 1998 (WT/GC/9) did not provide for more than two simultaneous
formal meetings on any given day, as required by the guidelines.  He hoped that with the continued
cooperation of all, the number of meetings in 1998 and beyond could be kept to a manageable level,although it was clear that one could not hope to reduce the scope of the work of the Organization as it
now stood.  It had also been mentioned in informal consultations that it might be useful to improve the
efficiency of managing meetings by making a particular effort to start meetings not later than
15 minutes after the scheduled time.  Also, in order to help delegations keep the matter under
continuous review, the Secretariat would report periodically on the number of meetings held.
The General Council took note of this information.
                                                     
5Subsequently recirculated as WT/GC/W/74.WT/GC/M/25
Page 35
15. Accession of Andorra
- Chairmanship and terms of reference of the Working Party
The Chairman, speaking under "Other Business ", informed the General Council that in
consultations he had held it had been agreed that the Working Party would carry out its work under
standard terms of reference as follows:  "To examin e the application of the Government of Andorra to
accede to the WTO Agreement under Article XII, and to submit to the General Councilrecommendations which may include a draft Protocol of Accession", and that Mr. B. Jonsson
(Iceland) had agreed to Chair the Working Party.
The General Council took note of this information.
__________