RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
15 January 2001
(01-0174)
Sub-Committee on Least Developed countries
Twenty-second Session
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 6 DECEMBER 2000
Chair: Ambassador Benedikt Jónsson (Iceland)
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1. The Sub-Committee adopted the proposed agenda contained in document WTO/AIR/1437.
B. REQUEST FOR OBSERVERSHIP
2. The Chairman recalled that Members had agreed at the 25th Session of the Committee on
Trade and Development (CTD) to invite ad hoc observers from intergovernmental organisations,
listed in document WT/COMTD/W/22/Rev.5, to observe meetings of the CTD and the Sub-
Committee on a meeting-by-meeting basis.  He pr oposed that, the Sub-Committee, following recent
practice, should decide to invite the intergovernmental organisation  to participate at this 22nd Session
and at the next meeting.
3. It was so decided.
C. FOLLOW-UP TO THE HIGH LEVEL MEETING ON LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
4. The Chairman that since the 6 July Joint Statement by Heads of Agency, Members had
numerous opportunities, at both formal meetings of the Sub-Committee and informal consultations, to
seek clarifications on the new arrangements for strengthening the IF.  The Chairman believed that the
WTO Secretariat and other core Agencies had made strenuous efforts to respond to requests by
Members.  It was his strong sense that it was time either to move forward, by translating the language
of the Joint Statement into action, or to re-think the feasibility of the IF.  It was time to move the IFfrom the platform of the Sub-Committee, out of co ntinuous discussions, begin with its real and
practical implementation, and apply it as an in strument of dialogue among LDC governments,
multilateral and bilateral donors in the field, with a view to identifying priority areas of trade for
funding within existing development architecture .  He, therefore, asked Members to comment
constructively by making practical proposals.
5. The Chairman then invited the Secretariat to  report to Members on the results of the 22
nd
meeting of the Inter-Agency Working Group, which had been held on 1-2 December, at the WTO,
including the meeting amongst Agencies, WTO Members of the Development Assistance Committee
(DAC), and LDCs.
6. Mr. Osakwe, Special Coordinator for LDCs, in his report, focused on the essential decisions
that had been taken by the IAWG at its twenty second session.  First, Agencies had reaffirmed their
complete commitment to improve the effectiveness of the IF and had agreed to work closely with
donor Members in doing so.  Second, Agencies had reaffirmed the earlier decision on the absoluteWT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 2
necessity of mainstreaming the IF into the over all development policies of LDCs and into their
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers.  This re-affirmation had been based on the consideration of the
Agencies that one of the reasons for the limited achievements of the IF had been that it had been
pursued on a stand alone basis.
7. Third, in reaffirming the decision on mainstreaming, Agencies had explicitly agreed to
discourage LDCs from undertaking stand alone trade sector Round Tables because of their limited
value.  In the light of the objective of effectively improving the IF and in the light of the experience of
the past three years, it would be better to mainst ream the IF and all IF activities into the overall
development priorities of LDCs and into existing development architecture, such as World Bank
Consultative Group meetings and PRSPs.  Agencies had agreed that a mainstreamed IF would yield
greater dividends and increase the value of the IF process for LDCs.  In taking this decision to
discourage stand alone round tables, Agencies had recognised that they were interacting withsovereign LDCs, and that in some cases, an LDC might decide, for whatever reason, to proceed with a
stand alone Round Table.  If this were to be the case, the core Agencies would not participate
collectively as the IAWG of the IF, but that Agen cies, individually, would decide on how to respond,
as appropriate, within their resources and within their institutional mandates. He underlined that there
should be no misinterpretation of the Agencies' d ecision on mainstreaming.  The decision had simply
meant to improve the value and the dividends that would accrue to LDCs as a result of the Joint
Statement and the new arrangements for a more effective IF.
8. Fourth, Mr. Osakwe said that Agencies had decided to expand the donor community in the IF
Steering Committee, to now include not only contributing donors, but also bilateral donors with
significant contributions to LDCs' trade-related technical assistance.  This decision effectivelymodified the original terms of reference on the composition of the IF Steering Committee.
9. Fifth,  it had been decided, in response to concerns by Members on the need to mainstream IF
bureaucracy, that the IAWG would meet in different capacities, as the IAWG, qua the IAWG, which
the WTO chaired, and also as a Board of Trustees for the proposed IF Trust Fund, to be chaired by
UNDP.  This decision had been taken by Agency officials to respond to Members' concerns  that thebureaucracy of the new arrangements might be heavy and that there should be some streamlining.
Sixth, Agencies had re-affirmed their decision at the 21
st Session of the IAWG to jointly co-sponsor a
seminar on, "The Policy-Relevance of Mainstreaming Trade Into Country Development Strategies –
Perspective of LDCs", 29-30 January 2001. The WTO had submitted a draft programme to other
Agencies for comments.  The revised draft program w ould be circulated shortly.  As this would be the
first time that the Agencies, the trade, development,  and finance communities would be plumbing the
depths of the subject.  This seminar on main streaming would be an expert-based seminar with
participants, being invited based on country experiences.  The results of the seminar would be one of
the contributions that the Agencies would make to the Third UN Conference for LDCs (LDC-III).
10. Beyond the above six decisions, Mr. Osakwe reported on other pertinent developments.  He
informed the Sub-Committee that for the first time , all the Agencies had submitted inputs on specific
projects that each of the six core Agencies could deliver under the three Window configuration in thedraft terms of reference for the proposed IF Trust Fund  Based on the Agency inputs, the IAWG  had
been able to put together project modules under the three Windows.  The draft modules could be in
circulation as early as the following week.  The Agencies were of the same understanding that the
Windows needed to function in logical coherence in order to be meaningful.
11. The Sub-Committee was informed that the Agencies had agreed, based on a proposal by the
International Trade Center, to collectively participate in a seminar on a Business Sector Round Table
at the forthcoming LDC-III.  Agencies had commented on the draft by the ITC, and the revised draft
would be in circulation for Members as soon as possible.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 3
12. Finally, Mr. Osakwe reported on the meetin g amongst WTO DAC Members, LDCs and the
core Agencies on 1 December 2000.  At that meeting, Agency representatives had responded to
concerns expressed by Members, and had provided clarification on issues raised by them.  Those
Members that had taken the floor had expressed their positions on issues raised.  Agencies had
considered that they had taken decisions and had made proposals that they believed would strengthenthe IF, and assist the effective implementation of the IF and the integration of LDCs into the
multilateral trading system and the global economy.  The Agencies believed that it was now up to
Members to reach a common  position, and to respond as appropriate to support the efforts of the
Agencies to improve the implementation of the IF.
13. The Chairman thanked Mr. Osakwe for his report regarding the IF.
14. The representative of the United States listed her concerns regarding the implementation of
the IF, in light of the meetings with the IAWG as well as with so me donor countries and some LDCs.
She noted that there were still some fundamental problems which had not been addressed.  While the
United States was committed to the IF and improving its performance, it was opposed to the IF Trust
Fund that had been recommended.  The idea of a dedicated Trust Fund was found to be logically
inconsistent with the universally endorsed principle of mainstreaming trade into overall development
assistance and therefore should be eliminated.  On the other hand, the United States supported theestablishment of an IF Steering Committee and the work of the IAWG. Moreover, the United States
could not reconcile the original design and purpose of the IF with its current directions.  If  the IF was
headed towards a new bureaucracy equipped  with a Steering Committee, the IAWG and a Trust Fund
with a Board, then this new structure would go beyond the mandate that had been established in 1997.
While the United States recognised that there had been a mandate to conduct a review and make someadjustments to the IF, there should have been some kind of approval from Members.
15. The United States had considered suggestions by some LDCs  and some bilateral donors that
perhaps they should be more constructive and draft proposals in response to the Agencies.  The
representative stated that her country was ready to do so, and would welcome any suggestions to draft
the terms of reference for the IF Steering Committee and the IAWG.
16. The United States was strongly committed to the delivery of trade-related technical
assistance.  She noted that the United States had strengthened its involvement in the IF, and had used
its resources to participate in and support some of the Round Tables that were imminent, including the
involvement in projects.  For instance, the United  States was active on the forthcoming Zambia Round
Table.  Since her country had recognised that there  was a cost to preparatory activities, it had
contributed funds to the preparation of the Zambia Round Table.
17. The representative recalled the questions that had been addressed at the meeting with the
IAWG and Members on 1 December 2000, to the representatives of the IAWG, particularly to the
World Bank, concerning the costs and the justification of the proposals for funding of mainstreaming.
In the view of the United States, the responses had been far too general and not precise enough.  The
United States could not endorse the proposed IF Trust Fund, without  more specific details as to what
ends the funds would be put.  Furthermore, she reca lled that the original idea about the IF Trust Fund
had stated that the bulk of the funding would be  expended on mainstreaming.  In the view of the
United States, there seemed a conflict of views on how to define mainstreaming or on what
mainstreaming meant.  For the United States, ma instreaming simply meant coordinating the existing
programmes.  She reiterated the United States's position on the Trust Fund, however, stated that her
delegation was disposed to seeing how they could be helpful with specific funding requirements butoutside the establishment of a Trust Fund.
18. She reiterated that the United States was ready to consult with LDCs and other Members to
make the adjustments to the draft terms of reference for the IF Steering Committee and the IAWG, inWT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 4
order to avoid the establishment of new bureaucracies.  The United States was also prepared to
consult on funding requirements for the IF.  Moreover, she added that the United States had been at
the forefront of the recent successful efforts of the World Bank to make trade an integral part of their
pronouncements and activities.  However, her delegation found it difficult to see how these initiatives
and recent pronouncements were coherent  with the specifics of the IF.  The United States urged theWorld Bank to be persuasive in its interaction with finance ministers, for example, in order to assist
LDCs' trade representatives to integrate trade into the  country's development agenda and to identify
its trade priorities as an instrument for poverty alleviation.  The ultimate goal in the WTO was to see
LDCs integrated into the multilateral trading system so  that they would be able not only to meet their
WTO commitments but also to derive the benefits of those commitments.  The representative believed
that the World Bank in particular had an enormous amount of expertise that could help reconcile these
two goals.
19. The representative of Lesotho welcomed the recognition by the IAWG that there was a need
to enhance the role of bilateral donors in the curr ent process.  Lesotho shared the view expressed by
the US that by calling for a more increased participation of bilateral donors in the IF, they did not
want to minimise the role of the IAWG.  The participation of bilateral donors should be seen as
complimentary to the Agencies' role.  Moreover, he noted that there appeared to be a generalagreement on the proposed amendments to the IF as a result of the review, and the he only remaining
problem was the funding mechanism.  He therefore proposed to the Chairman that informal
consultations be held, as soon as possible, on that issue in order to explore other funding possibilities
with a view to ensuring the continuation of the IF.  He noted that without any agreement to a funding
mechanism, the IF would not be able to function.  He hoped that informal consultations could identify
an arrangement that would satisfy all the stake holders, bilateral donors as well as the Agencies
coordinating the implementation of the IF.
20. Lesotho agreed with the United Stated on the position that the World Bank had a great role to
play in assisting and guiding LDC governments in  their mainstreaming activities, by using their
influence to ensure that trade policy issues were not sidelined relative to other policy areas.  Tradepolicy had a significant role to play in achieving the priority objectives of LDCs.  Such role of the
World Bank could also be applied to the UNDP, that had an extensive network in LDCs and
considerable influence on LDC governments.  The two agencies could considerably contribute to the
effective implementation of the IF and ensure that the necessary political commitments were
expressed by the recipient country.
21. The representative of the European Communities emphasised the need to move the process
forward and expressed his delegation's full commitment to the process.  The EC was most interested
in the practical steps that needed to be taken to  make progress.   The representative some questions
regarding the project modules, asking whether those modules were based on the Round Tables that
had taken place or whether they were actual projects or a group of  projects.  He noted that it would be
better to proceed on a pilot or case-study basis to understand how it could work.  Another question he
raised was how much Window I could cost.  It wa s important and necessary to "put figures on the
table" in order to give decision-makers who controlled budget lines an  idea of the amount of money
needed.  He stressed  that all windows should be defi ned as clearly as possible and that an justification
had to be provided to each estimate.
22. He recognised that if the World Bank and UNDP needed to convince LDCs that a trade
chapter should be included in their PRSPs, mainst reaming would cost money.  Mainstreaming would
therefore involved outlining the benefits by undertaking such a study, drafting a trade chapter, and
making the case as to how it could support their other development priories such as education and
health.  He emphasised that it was essential for the IAWG to explain its approach, decisions and
proposal, if they wanted to convin ce Members of the utility of Window I.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 5
23. Finally, the representative asked the US representative what "approval of the proposed IF
Trust Fund" she had meant in her statement   He wondered whether she had meant the United States
considered that a full consensus decision was required for setting up a Trust Fund or the United States
would not pay if the Trust Fund was set up?  The representative stated that he would like receive an
answer in order to better understand how the process could be moved forward, including on the
decisions which might have to be taken.
24. Mr Osakwe, in response to the questions raised by the EU representative, said that there had
been no criteria for the Agencies to make inputs on the projects that they could deliver under
Windows I, II and III.  Nonetheless, the Agencies had taken into account of the past experience from
the previous Round Tables and of the integrated responses that the Agencies had provided in response
to the needs assessments submitted by LDCs since 1997. In response to the second question as to
whether they were specific projects, he responded that at that point, they were projects in aprogrammatic form, or grouped projects.  He added that they would become specific projects once
particular individual LDCs were identified, th ereby providing the framework for the definition of
country by country projects.
25. In response to the question on costing, Mr Osakwe said that the Agencies had been hesitant to
provide any further financial estimates based on the reaction by Members to the funding objectivesestablished by Heads of Agency in July 2000.  The Agencies considered that it would be better to
approach , at this time, by setting out the project modules, as had been done, under the three
Windows, and then on the basis of interactive participation with Members and of disposable
resources, a decision could be jointly taken on costing.  With regard to the cost of mainstreaming, he
agreed with the statement made by the representative of the United States in which she had recognisedthat mainstreaming entailed a cost.  He reiterated th at cost specifics were better taken up interactively
with Members.
26. Mr. Osakwe responded to issues raised by the United States and Lesotho on the role of the
World Bank and UNDP on mainstreaming.  The 6 July statement had been clear on the primary
responsibility of the World Bank for mainstreamin g under the arrangements for the IF.  All the other
Agencies were confident that the Bank was pursuing this responsibility with diligence, within its
competence, and within its resources.
27. He stated that the Agencies were also dealing with the policy inertia from the old IF.  For
instance, there was the momentum in already established Round Tables, such as for Zambia.  In this
regard, USAID was providing significant  resources and consultants who were currently in Zambia to
assist with its Round Table.  The consultants had al so recently met with the core Agencies in Geneva,
to try and conclude the arrangements for the Zambia Round Table.  Notwithstanding the fact that thearrangements for a Round Table in Zambia were on-going, as part of the old IF,  the agencies still
hoped that they could steer it into a PRSP and eventually into Consultative Group meeting scheduled
for mid-2001.  The important objective for the Agencies was to ensure that trade priority areas of
action became integral to the country's development objectives.  The agencies were currently waiting
for the second set of report from USAID on the assistance they were currently providing to Zambiafor the preparation of the Round Table.
28. The representative of the United States, in response to the EC's question, said that her
delegation did not consider that mainstreaming and the proposed Trust Fund were complementary.  In
the view of the US, mainstreaming meant the coordination of existing programs with a view to
achieving coherence in the delivery of technical assi stance to LDCs within the context of the IF.  The
United States, however,  recognised that there were some costs to preparation, and therefore her
country was absorbing some of these costs, as in the case of Zambia. She underscored the importance
of improving coordination on existing programmes of the six Agencies, as well as of ensuring that
those coordinated agency programmes were linked with on-going programmes of bilateral donors.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 6
The coordination of multilateral and bilateral agency efforts, within the demand-driven technical
assistance process, would significantly contribute to the integration of LDCs into the multilateral
trading system and also benefit from such integration.  Although current discussions focused on trade,
and on how trade could be integrated into LD Cs' overall development and poverty reduction
objectives, it should not be forgotten that, in addition, the United States had major funding programsfor natural disasters,  wars, etc.  She repeated that the United States did not support the creation of the
IF Trust Fund as it considered that the answers prov ided in response to questions on the details of the
proposed trust fund had general and imprecise. Nonetheless, she welcomed the seminar to be held in
2001 on mainstreaming which would help better understanding of the concept of mainstreaming.
29. She clarified that the opposition of the United States to the proposed IF Trust Fund did not
mean that other Members who supported the idea coul d not proceed with it.  However, her immediate
concern was that the draft terms of reference seemed to suggest that if one did not contribute to theproposed Trust Fund, then the role of active, but non-contributing bilateral donors would not be
recognised in the IF Steering Committee that would make decisions on the IF.  The United States was
active, as indicated by Mr Osakwe, on specific Round Tables, and it intended to remain active on
Round Tables and on in-country activities.  She therefore felt odd that a country,  that was a
bilaterally active participant in the IF would suddenly be left out of the decision-making process, if itwas supportive of the IF Trust Fund.
30. The representative recalled the position of LDCs that the IF should not stop holding of Round
Tables and that follow-up, after the Round Tables, was extremely important.  In this connection, the
United States was supportive of bilateral efforts to follow up.  She reiterated that the United States
would continue to stress the importance of a more significant role for bilateral donors in the IF, and
there was no intention that such role for bilateral donors would replace the significant role played by
the six Agencies.
31. The representative of Tanzania noted that not much progress had been made on the IF 3 years
and that political commitment was essential on the IF for progress to be made.  She noted that, as far
as resources were concerned, most LDCs had written their needs assessment and expected theinternational community to provide the resources in  order to implement their projects and integrate
better into the multilateral trading system. For LDCs, it was essential the resources were made
available for effective implementation.  Tanzania  welcomed the efforts and commitments by the
bilateral donors, but urged that such donations should be geared towards strengthening what was
already on the ground.
32. She associated her delegation with those who had underscored the importance of a more
active role for the World Bank in mainstreaming.  Signficant progress could not be made without theactive engagement of the World Bank since LDCs could not meaningfully integrate a trade agenda
into their development plans,  "if their budgets were controlled" by the World Bank.  The World Bank
often determined country's budgetary priorities, and thus it could dictate the prioritising of trade in the
budget.  Therefore, the role of the World Bank was decisive for the successful and effective
functioning of the IF.  She expressed frustration with the slow progress made on the IF and appealedfor the help of the international community to ensure that the IF was successfully implemented.
33. The representative of Norway welcomed the willingness on the part of the Agencies to take
account of the role of the bilaterals in the IF Steering Committee.  Norway supported earlier
comments on the role of the World Bank on mainstreaming.  Moreover, Norway expressed its
willingness to look at the IF Trust Fund if a cl ear understanding on the details of the Trust Fund was
established.  The representative welcomed a paper to be submitted on project modules for the IF,
which his delegation would study carefully.  Finally, Norway was interested in participating in any
consultations with a view to moving the process forward.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 7
34. The representative of Sudan (Observer) stated that the accession to the WTO was the most
importance issue for his country, as well as for other LDCs, such as Nepal and Yemen.  The accession
process was particularly complex for LDCs, despite of their willingness to integrate institutionally
into the WTO.  To this end, it was very important  for acceding LDCs to receive substantial assistance
which would enable them to integrate into the WTO.  He recalled that Sudan had identified accessionas one of its priorities in the needs assessment three years ago.  Sudan had been spending a large
amount of money on the accession process, including on training staff and travelling to Geneva for the
initiation of accession negotiations.  Therefore, Sudan hoped that the IF Trust Fund would provide
funds to LDCs in the accession process, by prov iding assistance to strengthen their capacity to
negotiate.
35. Mr Osakwe, in response to the comments made by Tanzania, said that the World Bank was as
committed as every other agency in supporting the efforts of LDCs, including through mainstreaming
within its existing resources. Nonetheless, he said  that he would convey the views expressed to the
World Bank representatives.
36. In response to the comments made by Sudan, Mr Osakwe said that the project modules
submitted by the WTO to the IAWG had included projects on accession under Windows I and II.
Accession was one of the priority areas for WTO technical assistance to LDCs.  He recalled that theWTO Secretariat had recently sent a team to Sudan and had provided accession support to Sudanese
officials.
37. The Chairman thanked delegations for the useful comments and suggestions that had been
made.  He said that he was particularly encouraged by  those positive comments that had expressed
willingness to move forward with the IF.  He added, however, that there were obviously still somegaps that had to be closed.  Moreover, there was still scope on reaching a common understanding on
how the IF would be implemented.  He hoped that th ese gaps could be closed as much as possible in
the coming weeks.  He also noted the support by Members of the  of the Sub-Committee to proceed
with the joint seminar on mainstreaming, as the first step in the implementation of the IF.  Following a
suggestion by Lesotho, the Chairman said he would conduct informal consultations as suggested, inorder to reach a common understanding on the implementation of the IF.
38. The representative from Lesotho thanked the Chairman for accepting to conduct informal
consultations.  He said that it would also be crucial to set a timeframe within which Members would
conclude the consultations so that the outcomes of the consultations could be submitted to the next
meeting of the IAWG for consideration.  He hoped that by the time of the next Sub-Committee
meeting in the following year, there would be und erstanding on the funding mechanism amongst the
stake holders.  If this were not the case, he doubted that any significant progress could be made on theIF.
39. The Chairman agreed to consider Lesotho's suggestion of a time-frame on the consultations
and that the Secretariat would be in touch with Members in this regard.
40. The representative of the United States said that, as indicated earlier, her country would
support consultations that had been suggested by  Lesotho.  She wondered when the IAWG would
meet again and whether the IAWG intended to reach an understanding on some of the  issues raised,
and whether the group would provide some more details.
41. Mr Osakwe responded that the core Agencies would be receptive to inputs from Members.
Regarding the expected date for the next meeting of  the IAWG, it had been left as an open question
because the Agencies were awaiting a response from Members.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 8
D. THIRD UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON LEAST -DEVELOPED COUNTRIES : P OSSIBLE
CONTRIBUTION BY THE SUB-COMMITTEE
42. The Chairman stated that Members already had sufficient background to the forthcoming
LDC-III Conference, to be held in  Brussels,  14-20 May 2001, and that they now needed to decide on
what contributions the Sub-Committee could make to the Conference.   He recalled that at theinformal session held on 17 November 2000, Member s had suggested possible areas of contributions,
which had included accession, market access, services, trade-related technical assistance and capacity-
building, and the implementation of the revamped Integrated Framework, including mainstreaming.
After consulting with the Secretariat, and considering the various discussions that had been taken
place in the Sub-Committee on the Integrated Framework, he believed that impediments to the
integration of LDCs into the multilateral trading system and global economy needed to be addressed
on two fronts, namely, market access, and trade-related technical assistance.
43. The provision of appropriate trade-related technical assistance was essential for LDCs to reap
the maximum benefits that market access opportunities offered.  Therefore, the Chairman believed
that an important opportunity for the improvement  and the effective implementation of the Integrated
Framework could not be missed.  He urged those Members who could become pro-active on the IF, to
support it and to ensure that it would deliver technical assistance to LDCs.  Similarly, he appealed tothose Members who could not act in support of the IF, not to block positive action by those who
wanted to move forward.
44. On market access, the Secretariat had already started to compile factual information on the
current market access conditions for products originating from LDCs.  This factual compilation and
the improving market access opportunities for LDCs would be taken up in the  next item of theagenda.
45. On trade-related technical assistance, which was the IF in the LDC context, the Chairman
thought that it would be useful to have an in-depth  study of mainstreaming.  This study would address
the  role that trade could play in addressing LD Cs' development priorities, such as poverty reduction,
infrastructure development, debt relief, attraction of foreign direct investment, etc.  One of the mainreasons  that the IF had not functioned as effectively as it should have  was that trade policy was still
not linked to other development priorities in LDCs'  poverty reduction strategies.  The Global
Economic Prospects, published by the World Bank in December 2000 had also highlighted this  "trade
problem", namely, that "weaknesses in trade-relate d policies continued to impede growth in many of
the poorest countries".
46. Given that the majority of Members had supported the concept of mainstreaming in the new
arrangement that had been proposed  for the IF, the Chairman believed that a study on mainstreaming,defining the role of trade in LDCs' poverty reduction and development strategies, would be the best
possible contribution that the Sub-Committee could make to LDC-III, along with a study on market
access.  The study could be based on the outcome of the joint IF seminar which was scheduled for the
end of January, 2001.  The Chairman, therefore, sought the views of Members on the possible
contributions by the Sub-Committee to LDC-III in the areas as follows, (i) concrete support by
Members for the effective implementation of the Integrated Framework, which would provide the
basis for a report to LDC-III; ( ii) a factual study on current market access opportunities for LDCs; ( iii)
a study on mainstreaming, based on the joint IF core Agency seminar to be held in January 2001; and,
(iv) a status report on LDCs' accession to the WTO.
47. The Chairman believed that these were areas where the WTO could put together a meaningful
package for addressing the impediments facing LDCs, in order to facilitate their integration into the
multilateral trading system and the global economy.  He said that Members should feel free to expand
the scope of his suggestions.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 9
48. The  representative of Lesotho stated that Lesotho shared the same views as those expressed
by the Chairman with regard to the possible inpu ts of the Sub-Committee into the preparations for
LDC-III.  He underlined two critical issues in ensuring for the success of the Conference.  First, it was
important to have a strong and coordinated particip ation by the civil society in the Conference, such
as the private sector, on trade issues.  One of the areas in which Lesotho believed there was room forwork to be done was on market access.  While much time had been spent on seeking for
improvements  in market access for exports from LDCs, a corresponding effort had not been made to
educate the private sector on the market access opportunities that existed and those to be achieved.
The Conference could therefore be a great opportunity to engage the private sector and to educate
them existing market access opportunities, and on the conditions, if any, for taking advantage of them.
Agencies should prepare modules that would respond to the needs of the private sector, particularly
on the use of market access opportunities.  This was important because the impact of market accessopportunities would be ultimately judged by how much LDCs were able to take advantage of them.
49. Second,  Lesotho considered that the IF was the best coordinating  mechanism and platform
for trade-related technical assistance, and believed that essential issues needed to be highlighted at
LDC-III.  In particular, it was important for the Ag encies and the bilateral donors to coordinate their
efforts and to ensure that there was no duplication of their assistance programs.  Such unity could onlybe achieved they agreed on  the priorities  and  the message they wished to convey  to the Conference.
Reaching a common understanding between the Agencies and bilateral donors could be sought in the
context of the Sub-Committee.
50. The representative emphasised that the issue of accession would also be paramount  at LDC-
III, and therefore, that the Sub-Committee had to be seen to be fully committed and supportive ofthose acceding LDCs.  The Sub-Committee had to  take concrete steps to address some of the
concerns that Members had raised in regard to the accession process, which would be the issues for
the Sub-Committee to discuss and then present as part of its contributions to the Conference.
51. The  representative of the European Communities said that the Conference was an important
event and that the Sub-Committee needed to reflect carefully on what  its inputs should be.  The role
of the WTO at this Conference was to make use of its trade expertise in the contributions.  The EC
noted that a draft Global Plan of Action for the Conference had been circulated, and requested for a
short overview and initial reactions from the WTO Secretariat as to whether the approach taken in the
Plan of Action was in line with the views of the organisation.  The EC would also like to know
whether the WTO  had commented on the draft Global Plan of Action.
52. The representative noted that WTO had undertaken  a lot of work, such as market access, the
IF and the mainstreaming seminar, and that the EC fully support their work.    He also suggested thatthe proposed study on market access could take account of all markets, including those market access
conditions prevailing in developing country market s.  Another important issue for the EC was the
implementation of the WTO agreements, which the delegation considered as part of the general
debate on integrating LDCs into the multilateral  trading system.   Implementation was linked to the
provision of effective technical assistance.  He also supported the emphasis by several LDCs forpriority to be accorded to the  issue of accession, by highlighting the fact that since the WTO had been
established, no LDC had  acceded to the WTO.  This showed that the problem had to be addressed in
an expeditious manner.  Finally, he raised the issue on regionalism, ing what benefits would be there
for LDCs.   He suggested that the WTO as the competent organisation could provide some input on
the benefits and problems of regionalism for LDCs.
53. Mr. Osakwe said that, in response to the EC's question regarding the draft Global Plan of
Action, the WTO had received the draft from UNCTAD and that the WTO was one  of several
agencies  from which UNCTAD had requested reactions  on the draft.  He said that the Director-
General of the WTO had asked Mr. Osakwe to coordinate consultations within the Secretariat on theWT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 10
draft that had not been concluded.  Therefore, he was not in a position to provide the reaction of the
WTO Secretariat to the draft.
54. On market access, Mr Osakwe said that based on earlier studies and experiences of the
Secretariat, the data to be used in the proposed  study would  essentially be from the Integrated
Database (IDB) that contained data submitted by WTO Members. He added that in the study, theSecretariat would point to recent developments on market access that had been announced by several
Members, including the proposal by the European  Commission, New Zealand, Canada and the United
States on the African Growth and Opportunity Act.  On the range of countries that would be involved,
Mr Osakwe said that, all countries involved in trade with LDCs, as reported in the IDB, would be
included in the factual study, based on the tariff lines used, and the value of traded products by
importing countries from LDCs.  In an initial exploration of the data, the Secretariat had identified
approximately 34 countries which were involved in trade with LDCs. The market access situationappeared to have improved since the last study conducted by the Secretariat.
55. On implementation, Mr. Osakwe noted that no proposals had been made either by the
Chairman or by Members for the Sub-Committee to contribute to LDC-III on the subject.
Implementation was being treated within a very specific context in the WTO. Mr Osakwe  noted the
point raised by the EC that no LDC had acceded to the WTO since the coming into existence of theOrganization.  He further noted the statements that had been made in support for a factual status
report on LDCs' accession as one of the Sub-Committee's contributions proposed by the Chairman.
Finally, he said that the subject regionalism  fell within the remit of the Committee on Regional
Trading Agreements, and that he would convey the issue raised by the EC to the Development
Division.
56. The representative of Haiti said that his country was supportive of the approach suggested by
the Chairman with regard to WTO contributions to LDC-III, as the points underscored by the
Chairman properly reflected Haiti's concerns. He emphasised that it was imperative to prepare for the
Conference with concrete contributions that the WTO had already begun to deliver.  Haiti considered
that the  Chairman's approach was practical and would demonstrate  that the WTO was bearing themain burden of integrating the LDCs into the multilateral trading system and the global economy.  He
added that the Conference should support the WTO in areas where it did not have resources, such as
in the area of strengthening the productive capacity of  LDCs, in order to make use of their  of their
market access opportunities. Lack of resources were impeding efforts to address the supply-side
impediments of LDCs.   Moreover, he welcomed th e seminar that the core IF Agencies would hold on
the subject of the Integrated Framework, and whose results would serve as useful inputs to LDC-III.
57. The representative stated that his delegation was delighted at the WTO/UNCTAD
collaboration in preparing for the draft Global Plan of Action.  This demonstrated the coherence that
needed to be achieved, for instance, through the IF .  He hoped that this collaboration between the two
sister organisations could provide a model of coordination among various agencies, to assist LDCs in
integrating at all levels.  Haiti emphasised that while LDC-III took a broader approach encompassing
more than the WTO, the WTO should demonstrate its full participation at LDC III by makingconcrete contributions.
58. The representative of the United States expressed the support of her country for the efforts
underway in contributing to the success of  LDC-I II.  In the view of the US, the Conference was an
opportunity for the WTO to demonstrate the benefits of further trade liberalisation in a rule-based
system to LDCs.  Furthermore, the Conference would  provide an opportunity to discuss theimportance of mainstreaming trade into country development strategies.  It would also be an occasion
to  demonstrate  the contributions of donors and agencies  in support of LDCs.  The US hoped that the
contributions to be provided by the Sub-Committee would reflect the ongoing efforts to expand
market access, to provide technical assistance and increase trade-related capacity building for LDCs.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 11
The United States agreed with the view expressed by Haiti that there should be an effective
presentation of what the WTO had already begun in its efforts at integrating LDCs.  She hoped that
contributions by the Sub-Committee would fully reflect the already identified areas.  Moreover, she
added that any consultations held on the IF should be able to produce a ready made package  for the
Conference, including case examples of successful Round Tables and projects underway in the IF.
59. The representative of Uganda recalled that he had had the opportunity to attend both LDC-I
and LDC-II.  At these two previous conferences, the  emphasis  had been to request LDCs to
liberalise, to carry out macroeconomic reforms and to take advantage of an open trading system.  The
record was clear that LDCs had made substantial progress  in reforming and  restructuring to meet the
targets that had been expected of them.  Uganda was looking forward to the contributions on how the
WTO would promote a conducive international environment for the integration of LDCs in the
multilateral trading system.  He hoped the Sub-Committee to indicate the efforts that the WTO hadmade and the needs of LDCs that had to be met.
60. The representative noted that LDCs expected some deliverables from the Conference,
hopefully, including the implementation of the IF.  Although the IF had acquired a high profile, it
appeared that the more it was discussed, the more it became an anti climax.  He hoped that by the
Conference, there would be an indication that those problems had been fixed, and that it was beingtaken seriously by donors and the Agencies.  He was grateful to those market access opportunities that
had been offered, although there were problems, such as technical. barriers to trade,  inhibiting the
enjoyment of those opportunities.  All these issues were  linked  to the IF, and he hoped that these
problems would be solved in time for the Conferen ce.  Moreover, he was interested in the question
raised by the EC regarding regional arrangements and possible benefits that those agreements offeredto LDCs.  On the issue of LDCs' accession to the WTO, he expressed the disappointment that no
LDCs had acceded to the WTO since the establishment of the institution.
61. The representative of Nepal (Observer) endorsed the views expressed by Uganda, Lesotho,
Haiti, Sudan and Tanzania.  As Sudan had pointed out, the priority need of non-member LDCs was
WTO accession.  Nepal found that the accession process was inconvenient as some Membersdemanded "WTO plus" in the accession negotiations  Recalling that no LDC had been successful in
acceding to the WTO in recent years, he urged  Members to respect the Enabling Clause (Decision of
28 November 1979 on Differential and More Favourable Treatment, Reciprocity and Fuller
Participation of Developing Countries) when they conducted bilateral market access negotiations with
the LDCs.  Currently, acceding LDCs were  subjected to "confusion and discomfort" by Members
with whom they were negotiating accession.  Therefore, his delegation considered that in preparing
WTO's contributions to LDC-III, it was essential to take account of the Enabling Clause, theComprehensive New Plan of Action of Sun City, S outh Africa, and the proposals in favour of LDCs
that had been submitted in the preparatory process for the Seattle Ministerial Conference.
62. The representative of Tanzania supported the Chairman's proposals for possible contributions
by the WTO to LDC-III.  She  concurred with the statements made by Haiti, Lesotho, Nepal, and
Uganda.  Moreover, Tanzania  welcomed the announcements made on market access, and emphasisedthe need to address supply side constraints of LDCs in order to take advantage of existing market
access.
63. The Chairman thanked delegations for their comments and contributions.  He was encouraged
by the endorsement by Members of the proposals he had made.  In the absence of any objections, he
considered his proposals as agreed, and would ask the Secretariat to begin working on the agreedproposals, while taking into account the comments and suggestions made by the delegations.  He
hoped there would be an update on the work underway at the next meeting of the Sub-Committee.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 12
E. MARKET ACCESS FOR LDC S
64. The Chairman stated that the situation regarding to market access for LDCs was improving
significantly and, in his view, favourably.  Since the last Sub-Committee, positive announcements and
notifications had been made by the Governme nts of New Zealand and Canada.  The European
Commission was also continuing to pursue its proposal for duty-free, quota-free market access for allLDCs exports, except arms)   The United States had elaborated on its African Growth and
Opportunity Act, which offered concrete and significant opportunities for African countries, 33 of
whom were LDCs.  He invited those Members who had not made their announcement formally at the
Sub-Committee to do so.  Moreover, several Members had made notifications to the Secretariat
concerning their existing or proposed market access improvements in favour of LDCs, in response to
the Director-General's letter requesting information on market access conditions.
65. The representative of New Zealand reiterated the recent announcement made by the Prime
Minister of New Zealand of the provision of duty-free and quota-free market access for all products
from LDCs, effective July 2001.   She said that there would be no phasing, no exceptions and no
conditionalities for the initiative.  As a result, New Zealand's duty free access would be increased to
100%, as opposed to the current 97%. The current value of imports from LDCs into New Zealand
totalled 21.3 million New Zealand Dollars.  Although the value of trade involved might not be large,she urged all other Members, particularly those countries which had the largest markets for the
exports of LDCs' products, to join New Zealand in its initiative for duty-free and quota-free access for
all products.
66. The representative of Haiti thanked New Zealand for having made the effort to implement the
decision that had already been taken in favour of LDCs at the meeting in South Africa to give duty-
free and quota-free access, without any conditionalities.  The EU had also made a similar proposal,
and Haiti hoped that other Members would follow suit.
67. The representative of Uganda also thanked New Zealand for having responded to the
decisions taken by LDCs in the Sun City declaration.  He hoped that existing market access
opportunities would be highlighted at LDC-III,  since such opportunities were often unknown to
beneficiary LDCs.  There was a need to publicise those market access improvements, particularly  for
the business community, as had been previously mentioned by Lesotho.  The main challenge therefore
was how to assist LDCs in taking advantage of the opportunities.  Uganda had, in previous meetings,
expressed their gratitude to the US and the EC which were their largest markets.
68. The representative of the European Communities welcomed New Zealand's announcement
and emphasised that market access for LDCs was also an issue for all non-LDC WTO Members.
69. The  representative of Zambia thanked New Zealand and emphasised the need for publicising
New Zealand's offer to all LDCs.
70. The representative of Hong Kong, China welcomed New Zealand's announcement.  He
reminded Members that Hong Kong, China also provided duty-free and quota- free access for all
LDCs' exports, and called upon other Members to enhance market access for LDCs.
71. The  representative from Lesotho thanked the New Zealand for its announcement of improved
and unconditional market access for LDCs' exports.  He also expressed appreciation to Hong Kong,
China for its duty-free and quota-free access for all LD Cs' exports.  He said that it was important for
the product scope of market access initiatives and improvements to be as extensive as possible.
Therefore, Lesotho was encouraged to hear that New Zealand's initiative covered all products.
Furthermore, he added that there should be guidelines for the use of some trade instruments, such asrules of origin, that could influence how much LDCs could take advantage of market accessWT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 13
opportunities.  One of Lesotho's main export products was textiles where it experienced some
problems arising from the ambiguity in the application of rules of origin by country.
72. The representative of Tanzania thanked New Zealand, the EC and Hong Kong, China for their
market access initiatives.  At LDC-III, Tanzania hoped to see other Members joining and expanding
their initiatives.
73. The representative of New Zealand thanked those who had expressed appreciation  for the
announcement by New Zealand, and assured that New Zealand had done its best to publicise the
announcement through its overseas posts, in particular to those LDCs with whom New Zealand had
established a trading relationship.  She added that New Zealand would continue to provide technical
assistance in the area of market access and would work on ways to ensure that LDCs could make the
most of the opportunities provided.
74. The Chairman thanked Members for their contributions and statements made.  He also
encouraged those Members who had not made notifications to the Secretariat to do so before the next
meeting of the Sub-Committee, at which occasion he would revert to this item with a view to
establishing the factual status of market access opportunities in favour of LDCs.
F. DRAFT WORK PROGRAMME FOR 2001
75. The Chairman reminded Members that the activities of the Sub-Committee in 2000 were
reported in document WT/COMTD/28, which had been discussed at the last session of the Committee
on Trade and Development.  The Sub-Committee's activities were reported in Section III, from
paragraph 33 to 38, of the document.  The Sub-Committee had spent much of its efforts in the follow-
up to the 1997 High Level Meeting, focusing, in pa rticular, on  the Integrated Framework for Trade-
Related Technical Assistance to LDCs.  Under the draft Work Programme for 2001, the Chairmannoted that the Secretariat  had incorporated the suggestions made by several Members at the informal
consultations held on 17 November 2000.  He then invited Mr. Osakwe to introduce the draft Work
Programme for the Sub-Committee for 2001.
76. Mr Osakwe stated that the Secretariat had taken account of all the views that had been
expressed, including those from the last informal consultation of the Sub-Committee.  He highlighted
several points as follows: (i) five formal meetings  were now proposed instead of the previous four, in
the light of the necessary preparatory activities fo r LDC-III; (ii) the Secretariat had proposed two
regional seminars for LDCs, which would focus on Customs Valuation and TRIPS, in response to
LDCs' implementation concerns; (iii) the scheduling of meetings for the Sub-Committee had now
taken account of other activities that would bring LDCs' representatives to Geneva, as having
suggested by Canada, such as Geneva Week and the Short Trade Policy Course for LDCs.
77. The Chairman invited Members to approve th e draft, with sufficient flexibility, as
appropriate, to allow for any changes that might be required in 2001, and at the time of
implementation of each activity.
78. The  representative of Haiti said that in addition to the programme which was consistent with
the needs of his delegation, priority should also be  accorded to LDCs' trade policy reviews,  since this
would be consistent with the recommendation made by the IF review.  The Secretariat shouldhighlight the trade policy review mechanism, with special reference to LDCs, before the Sub
Committee.
79. The Chairman said that the work programme was adopted
.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 14
80. The WTO Secretariat confirmed that it would take account of Haiti's comment.  He added that
some Members, for example, Germany, had expressed willingness to donate funds to assist in trade
policy reviews of LDCs.
G. WTO P ROGRAMME FOR TECHNICAL COOPERATION .
81. The Chairman said that the background document for this item was contained in document
WT/COMTD/W/79/Rev.1, which was also WT/LDC /SWG/IF/7/Rev.1.  The document had been
prepared in accordance with the Guidelines for WTO Technical Cooperation, adopted by the
Committee on Trade and Development on 15 October 1996, which had required the submission of a
Three-Year plan to the Committee on Trade and Development.  The circulated document contained
WTO technical assistance programmes for both developing and least developed countries.  The
priorities for technical assistance to LDCs were contained in Annex 3.  The programme for technical
assistance for LDCs in 2001 consisted of the followin g: (i) an identified set of priorities for LDCs'
multi-year programme; (ii) a list of ten Regional Integration Seminar Series for LDCs, including the
annual Short Trade Policy Course; (iii)outstanding activities related to the commitments of the WTO
in respect of the Integrated Framework; (iv) trade related technical assistance for individual LDCs;
and, (v) activities planned in the context of the JITAP.
82. The Chairman noted that at the last session of the CTD, Members had commented extensively
on  the background document, particularly on technical assistance programmes for developing
countries.  He invited Members of the Sub-Committee to comment on the proposed WTO Programme
for Technical Cooperation for Least Developed Count ries, as contained in Annex 3 of the document.
83. The Secretariat said that in the discussions at the last CTD, several Members, including
Canada and Norway, had already given their co mments, including on the LDCs' section of the
document.  The Secretariat would therefore be grateful to receive further comments since the
document was still work in progress.  One of the comments that had been raised by Norway at the
CTD was that in preparing the program for technical cooperation, both for developing countries and
for LDCs, the Secretariat should proceed on the basis of a plan, not just simply a compilation of
activities.  Mr. Osakwe assured the representative of Norway that the programme of activities forLDCs' technical assistance was an actual "plan" and not simply a compilation of activities.
84. The representative of New Zealand said that concerning the list of regional seminars for
LDCs, as contained in Annex III of the document, she would like to know as to which region the
seminars would take place.
85. The representative of Haiti urged all Members to support the Director-General's project to
integrate the funding for WTO technical assistan ce, including for LDCs, into the WTO's regular
budget.  He stressed that in order for technical assistance to be set on a firm and predictable footing,sufficient funds were required.
86. The  representative of Uganda asked how much funds had already been secured and how
much could be implemented within next y ear's WTO budget.  Regarding the Trade Policy
Mechanism, he said that concerns of a TPR had so far been on the economic performance of a
country.  Instead, the TPR mechanism should be used in a way that could identify gaps that LDCsfaced, and that a TPR could also focus on how the WTO and the other IF Agencies could assist in
addressing those identified problems.
87. The representative of the European Communities recalled that the  main point for technical
assistance was to ensure that there was a strategy and the prioritisation of a coherent approach to
technical assistance.WT/COMTD/LDC/M/22
Page 15
88. The Chairman reiterated that comments had already been made at the CTD on the LDCs'
section of the WTO Programme for Technical Cooperation.  Any additional comments by Members
could communicated to the Secretariat.  He thanked the delegates for their comments and said that the
Secretariat had fully noted their comments and su ggestions, which would be taken into account in
planning technical assistance  for LDCs the period 2001-2003.
H. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
89. The Chairman proposed that the next formal meeting, the 23rd Session of the Sub-Committee,
would be convened for 12 February 2001.  In the absence of any objection, it was so agreed.
90. In the absence of any other business, the meeting was adjourned.
_______________