RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/WGTGP/M/12
18 June 2001
(01-3026)
Working Group on Transparency
in Government Procurement
REPORT ON THE MEETING OF 4 MAY 2001
Note by the Secretariat
1. The Working Group on Transparency in Government Procurement held its twelfth meeting on
4 May 2001 under the chairmanship of Ambassador Ronald Saborío Soto (Costa Rica).
2. The agenda for this meeting consisted of:  (i) transparency-related provisions in existing
international instruments on government procurement and national procedures and practices;(ii) transparency-related provisions in regional agreements on government procurement and national
experiences;  (iii) observer status of international intergovernmental organizations;  and (iv) date of
the next meeting.
I. TRANSPARENCY-RELATED PROVISIONS IN EXISTING INTERNATIONAL
INSTRUMENTS ON GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT AND NATIONALPROCEDURES AND PRACTICES
3. For its discussion of this agenda item, the Working Group had before it the report of the
meeting held on 25 September 2001 (WT/WGTGP/M/11);  the informal note by the Chair "List of the
Issues Raised and Points Made" (JOB(99)/6782), last revised in November 1999;  the informal note
by the Secretariat "List of Proposals on Items II-VII of the Checklist" (JOB(00)/3276), last revised inJune 2000;  and a note by the Secretariat on Concessions and BOT Contracts (JOB(00)/5657),
circulated in September 2000.  The Group also had available to it a submission by the delegation of
Tunisia, which described its government procurement regime (WT/WGTGP/W/30).
4. By way of general comments under this agenda item, the representative of India stated that
the problems faced by developing countries regarding the implementation of the existing WTO
agreements showed the necessity for WTO Members, especially developing country Members, to be
fully aware of the issues involved in new areas under discussion in the WTO, including the issue oftransparency in government procurement, in order to enable them to take decisions on new obligations
with full knowledge of what they were being re quired to undertake.  India considered that the
Working Group had not reached an advanced stage in its examination of the issues, especially from
the perspective of developing countries.  Hence, the Working Group should continue with the study
process for a longer period, before it could reach conclusions, based upon which, elements, ifconsidered necessary, could be drawn up as per the Singapore Ministerial mandate.  Unlike other
issues covered by the existing WTO agreements, the issue of transparency in government
procurement was not the sole responsibility of one or two central government departments, even if
obligations fell on central or federal government entities.  There were numerous government
departments, both big and small, which dealt with technical and non-technical issues when makingpurchases on behalf of governments.  They were all accountable to the public at large in the country
concerned since their purchases were subject to overall audit.  However, in terms of the practical
application of any WTO rules, it would be too tall an order for developing countries to ensure proper
and efficient coordination among procuring entities.  Reiterating India's position that had been stated
in the previous meetings of the Working Group, he said that the scope of the exercise should belimited only to procurement of goods by central or federal government departments to the exclusion
of other governmental entities involved in the procurement process.  There was no need to includeWT/WGTGP/M/12
Page 2
services procurement in the study process and such procurement was best left to be discussed in the
Working Party on GATS Rules.  The transparency exercise should only deal with procurement that
was open to foreign suppliers and the domestic price/purchase preference should continue to be
available.  Procurement methods were not part of the transparency exercise and the choice of method
should be left to the discretion of procuring entities.  Developing countries should also have theflexibility to continue with social and other development programmes through the procurement
process.  Domestic review procedures and linkage to the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding
were outside the scope of the Working Group's exercise and, hence, should be removed from the
List of Issues.  Finally, the current exercise should deal only with the issue of transparency and its
extension to market access issues was unacceptable to India.
5. The representatives of Malaysia, Pakistan
 and Egypt  supported the statement made by the
representative of India.  The representative of Egypt said that the discussion that had taken place so
far on the basis of the Chairman's "List of Issues" had disclosed a divergence of views among
Members on the subject and did not lay any basis for negotiations on a multilateral agreement on
transparency in government procurement.
6. Commenting on the question of scope and coverage, the representative of Malaysia stated that
any future agreement should cover procurement undertaken at the sub-federal levels of government,
with the exception of state-owned enterprises, as well as at the federal government level.
7. The representative of the Philippines stated that there was a need for further understanding in
relation to certain issues, for example the applicati on of the DSU to a possible agreement.  While the
Working Group had discussed the various technical issues, the underlying issue as to why an
agreement on transparency in government procurement would be beneficial to all Members had notbeen discussed.  The proponents should help to sell the idea of transparency in government
procurement to Members' domestic constituencies.  They needed to identify what benefits developing
countries would derive from such an agreement.  The relevance of an agreement on transparency in
government procurement in the context of a trade organization would also need to be explained.  The
Philippines would continue to participate constr uctively in the Working Group.  The proponents of an
agreement on transparency in government procurement were now aware of the areas in relation to
which the Philippines remained unconvinced.
8. The representative of Morocco said that Morocco's legislation of 1976 was, to a great extent,
compliant with standards contained in existing inte rnational instruments.  Therefore, in principle,
Morocco's adherence to a multilateral agreement would not give rise to any difficulties.  However,
such an agreement should be limited to principles on transparency and competition.  The agreement
should not get bogged down in details and should not attempt to cover every situation that might arise.What was important was the recognition of the usefulness of the principles of transparency that could
be applied between Members.  Finally, such a transparency agreement should take into account
existing domestic practices, for instance national preferences.  It should also include a time-frame for
application of measures in light of the fact that Members were at different levels in terms of the
implementation of rules on transparency and competition.
9. The representative of Tunisia noted that Tunisia had compared Tunisian legislation with
possible elements that could be included in an agreement on transparency in government
procurement.  The conclusion drawn from that comparison was that the main principles and
procedures contained in the present WTO Agreement on Government Procurement or in a future
possible agreement on transparency would not give rise to any difficulties as far as Tunisia wasconcerned.  However, it was necessary to specify that all countries used government procurement as a
special economic and social development tool.  Like all other developing countries, Tunisian
regulations included a whole series of measures that supported the domestic economy.  Therefore, in
order to maintain such practices, it was necessary to include a reference to special and differential
treatment for developing countries in the negotiation of an agreement on government procurement.WT/WGTGP/M/12
Page 3
Developing countries would then be able to accept such an agreement without having to ensure that
all of their regulations were in conformity with the agreement at the very outset.  For instance,
measures could be included in the agreement which would encourage the development of local
production by allowing sub-contracting between foreign and local companies, thus providing the
opportunity for developing country suppliers to bid together with developed country suppliers.
10. Taking up the sub-item "Other Matters Related to Transparency", the representative of Chile
gave information on the electronic government procurement system in Chile and the government
procurement system in general.  He said that, historically, the public procurement system had been
administered in Chile in such a way that no answ ers had been found to the following questions:  Who
buys?  Who is responsible for making procurement decisions in the different sectors?  From whom
does the government procure?  Who are the suppliers?  Which goods and services are being procured
by the government?  What is the value and volume of government procurement?  When did thegovernment procure?  Where did the government procure?  In terms of efficient allocation of
resources, the main concern of the government had been the control of and the justification for
government expenditure.  Today in Chile, information was available on where government resources
had been allocated but information on how those resources had been distributed as between physical
goods and services was not yet sufficiently detailed to ensure that the procurement system wasadequately administered.  Describing the current procurement system in Chile, he said that there were
three modes of procurement:  (i) open tendering;  (ii) private purchasing, where calls for tenders were
limited to a given number of potential suppliers;  and (iii) direct purchasing, which was limited to
specific situations or cases.  Bids could be received through public calls for tenders or price-quotation
procedures.  From the government's perspective, information on both public tendering and the pricequotation procedures had to be available at one single enquiry point.  That was achieved through the
creation of entities, which acted as intermediaries between suppliers and buyers.  This structure
facilitated the collection, gathering and dissemination of information relating to the various processes.
The solution that Chile had adopted was available to the public free of charge on the Internet at the
website www.g2b.cl.  That website aimed to ensure the maximum amount of transparency possible inall procurement processes and that non-discriminatory access was available to all potential suppliers.
The system respected the existing practice in Chile of decentralized government purchasing.  The
website www.g2b.cl also contained a link  to the www.chilecompra.cl website
1, which was the main
website for public procurement in Chile.  Regarding obligations imposed on entities with respect to
the site, it was obligatory to supply certain information in cases of public tendering.  In cases of
private tendering or price quotation, the information to be provided included quantity, price and the
selected supplier.  Information also had to be provided on all contract awards, including the varioussuppliers that had taken part in the tendering process, details of their bids and the reason why the
contract was awarded to the selected supplier.  In all cases, it was necessary to clearly state whether or
not, upon completion of a contract, the contract terms had been complied with fully, the time-period
for completion and the costs involved.  The site itself contained information on tenders including a
description of the procuring entity's requirements, the identity of the procuring entity, the date ofpublication of the call for tenders, the closure date fo r tenders, the date of award of the contract if that
had already occurred and a description of the wi nning bid.  The government was exploring ways in
which it could centralize information regarding expert services and certain public services in order to
optimize the use of services in terms of negotiation, advisory services and training of public officials.
The site also sought to consolidate demand since that would result in savings on overall costs andexpenditure.  In addition to listing procuring public entities, the site identified suppliers by providing
access to their home pages.  This facilitated the exchange of information and the transaction process
between potential suppliers in the private sector and the public sector.  In order to be registered on the
system, suppliers were required to provide certification that they had complied with certain legal
requirements.  Such a certificate was then made available automatically to interested procuring
entities.  Registration was free of charge.  When registering, the supplier was required to declare in
which sector he wished to participate.  He then  automatically received information every time the
                                                     
1 Link available on the government procurement page on the WTO website.WT/WGTGP/M/12
Page 4
relevant public service called for a tender.  This was an important transparency element.  Altogether,
there were four market-place sites where private operators could publish prices and receive price
offers from public sector procuring entities.  It was believed that an incentive was needed to
encourage use of the site given that cultural barriers, rather than technological or financial ones, were
likely to be the main limitation in relation to usage.  If the pattern of usage was not given adequateattention, the system would not be successful in the long run.  In designing the technical operation of
the system, the first consideration was that the system had to be as simple as possible.  That ensured
certain advantages in terms of training operators and in terms of the overall operating costs.  The
system also performed a supervisory role for the public entity using it, for those responsible for the
system as a whole and also for the central monitoring or control system of Chile, that is, the general
auditing system.
11. In response to a question by the representative of the United States as to Chile's evaluation of
the costs and benefits associated with its el ectronic procurement as compared with the more
traditional systems involving, for example, paper publication, the representative of Chile stated that
the initial development of the system (including study and preparation) cost $300,000.  Thereafter,$200,000 had been invested in actually building the system which included the hardware and licence
of the software.  The system had been developed by the private sector on the basis of an invitation totender by the Chilean Government.  The Government did not incur costs in relation to the operation of
the system given that the basic statistical information was free of charge for all public entities as well
as for private suppliers.  On the other hand, the private operator of the system had the possibility of
obtaining income through the provision of more sophisticated statistical information.  Regarding
operating costs, savings of the order of 10-15 per cent were possible through the establishment anduse of databases.  Such databases enabled potential suppliers throughout the world to have access to
invitations to tender.
12. The representative of Brazil noted that Brazil had adopted a similar system to the one that had
been adopted by Chile.  From Brazil's point of view, the gains from the system did not derive
principally from operational savings since, in Brazil, there was still an obligation to publish tenders in
paper form.  Therefore, effectively, there was a "double cost".  The concurrent existence of the
electronic and paper systems responded to the fact that not every supplier was, as yet, capable of using
the electronic alternative.  However, the greatest cost savings appeared to come from the centralized
way in which the system operated.  This enhanced transparency and generated savings both for the
government and for suppliers.  In relation to suppliers, the main savings came from the fact that once
they had registered on the system, they were issued yearly with a certificate stating that they were
up-to-date with their tax payments and social security payments etc. and that, therefore, they wereeligible for government contracts.  They accrued savings from not having to prepare that
documentation for every tender in which they wished to participate.  From the government's point of
view, savings accrued from information available from the system such as the minimum prices paid
by each government entity for specific products.  Specifically, when an entity planned to make a
purchase, it could see what had been the lowest price paid for the good in question.  The use ofelectronic system had undeniable benefits both in terms of transparency and in terms of efficiency of
allocation of government resources.
13. The representative of Malaysia stated that many aspects of government procurement in
Malaysia were increasingly electronically based.  However, there was a large number of developing
countries and least-developed countries that were not in a position to implement electronicprocurement methods.
14. The representative of Mexico said that, an electronic government procurement system, called
Compranet, had existed for some years in Mexico.  Not only was it one of the pillars for ensuring
transparency in Mexico, it had also been very useful in making the entire procurement process more
efficient and agile.  The system allowed broad dissemination of information on procurementprocedures, which enabled both purchasers and suppliers to participate adequately.  The site also setWT/WGTGP/M/12
Page 5
out the legal framework that applied in respect of  procurements and contained information regarding
the award of contracts, the results of any bid challenge that might have taken place with regard to
specific contracts and also information on the various regional agreements that Mexico had signed in
the area of government procurement.
15. The representative of the United States commented that the benefits of using electronic
systems were being increasingly recognized and utilised in a wide range of countries.  In addition, it
was important to recognize that the use of electronic communications may not be the only way to
achieve transparency and that there were alternative means of achieving transparency that were more
appropriate in certain circumstances.  In fact, in the United States, there were still government
jurisdictions that used either both electronic and paper communications or just paper communications
and still achieved a high level of transparency in that way.  The United States agreed that it would be
advantageous to use electronic systems but it should not be obligatory nor was it necessary to usethose types of systems to achieve a high level of transparency.
II. TRANSPARENCY-RELATED PROVISIONS IN REGIONAL AGREEMENTS ON
GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT AND NATIONAL EXPERIENCES
16. The representative of the United States commented that, in light of the progress that had been
made in the Working Group so far, it would also be useful to take stock of the progress that had been
made elsewhere in the world recently on the issue of government procurement.  Reporting on the
developments in the FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas) negotiations, he said that at a summit
of leaders of 34 countries in South, Central, and North America held in December 1994, it had been
agreed to establish a free trade area in which barriers to trade would progressively be eliminated.  The
FTAA represented a major contribution to the strengthening and expansion of the internationalrules-based trading system.  In 1998, leaders approved the structure and the general principles and
objectives for the FTAA process and formally launched negotiations which would include the
progressive removal of barriers to trade in government procurement markets in the free trade area.  At
the end of 1999, trade ministers instructed negotiating groups to begin the drafting of negotiating texts
for each chapter of the FTAA.  Those texts, includ ing a draft chapter on government procurement, had
been submitted to Ministers in April 2001.  The United States believed that negotiations on
government procurement were particularly significant in the FTAA process.  First, a large number of
countries had agreed to move forward in this area .  Secondly, the free trade area involved a diverse
group of countries, both in terms of the size and structure of their respective economies.  It had
become clear that transparency was considered a key element amongst all countries that had made
submissions for the inclusion of government procurem ent in the FTAA process.  At the same time, the
United States had been participating in some frui tful work within the APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation) Forum.  The APEC  GPEG (Government Procurement Experts Group) had previously
submitted to the WTO Working Group the APEC non-binding principles that reflected consensus
within that region on the elements of transp arency that all APEC economies had agreed were
important to the government procurement pro cess.  Recently, APEC member economies had
exchanged reports on how the non-binding principles were being addressed and implemented in eachof their individual systems.  The United States was encouraged by its experiences in those regional
fora which it believed represented and reflected the progress made in the area of government
procurement around the world.  The work in those fora also reflected the widespread recognition and
interest in achieving transparency in procurement and had also greatly contributed to many countries'
familiarity with substantive issues.  In that context, the United States believed that the time was ripefor the WTO to move forward in this area, given the great deal of constructive work that had been
done within the Working Group.  The United States would be interested in moving forward on the
issue as it continued its preparations for developing a future agenda for the WTO.
17. Sharing Switzerland's experience on how transparency was being dealt outside the WTO in
the context of regional efforts involving different Members, the representative of Switzerland stated
that an agreement on government procurement was part of the bilateral agreements that had beenWT/WGTGP/M/12
Page 6
concluded with the European Community in December 1998.  The agreement had been approved by
the Swiss Parliament in October 1999 and was expected to come into effect in 2002 after its
ratification by the European Union Member States.  The government procurement agreement was
quite ambitious in terms of market access since, for example, it expanded the application of the rules
of the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement to purchases by communes.  It was alsoambitious in terms of transparency, because beside s commitments to inform parties about all future
modifications to legislation, the agreement provided for the creation of national, regional and local
contact points from which all relevant legislative information was to be provided.  Another interesting
feature of the agreement was the establishment of cooperation mechanism that allowed for access to
all relevant government databases by taking advantage of new information technologies.  Switzerland
had played an active role in the development of the SIMAP (Système d'Information pour les Marchés
Publics) project with the European Community.  Turning to the recent regional trade agreements
between the EFTA members and other countries, he said that the EFTA-Mexico Free Trade
Agreement, which had been concluded in November 2000, included a chapter on government
procurement.  In addition to providing detailed rules concerning procurement methods and
procedures, the EFTA Members and Mexico had reciprocally agreed to open up procurement in
goods, services and construction at the national level and in certain specific sectors.  Other mandatoryprovisions related to the availability of domestic review procedures for unsuccessful tenderers;  the
provision of information on national legislation and procedures;  the establishment of enquiry points;
and the annual exchange of statistical information on procurement.  The experience showed that
creative solutions could be found between partners that had agreed to make their procurement regimes
more transparent, despite the fact that there could be some sizeable differences among nationalsystems.  The few mentioned examples of provisions of regional trade agreements suggested the
importance of transparency in the context of trade and, particularly, in the context of government
procurement.  Finally, he reiterated Switzerland's support for the negotiation of a WTO agreement on
transparency in the area of government procurement based on the principle of non-discrimination.
Switzerland also believed that the time was ripe for constructively engaging in discussions in the leadup to the Qatar Ministerial Conference.
18. Commenting on Chile's experience of its participation in the FTAA negotiations, the
representative of Chile said that three key of elements of discussion had been identified by the FTAA
Negotiating Group on Government Procurement.  The first was development of electronicprocurement, which Chile considered would assist in producing a text that contained fewer procedural
details.  The second was statistical reporting.  The standardization of procedures in collecting
information would facilitate development of electronic procurement within countries in the regionalgrouping.  The third was the principle of special and differential treatment which was a cross-cutting
issue throughout the FTAA negotiations given the difference in the levels and phases of development
amongst participating countries as well as in the size and the importance of their trade.  In the area of
government procurement, the principle of special and differential treatment could be reflected in the
negotiating text by means of exception clauses or a gradual phasing in period for certain obligationsas well as through technical cooperation.  A chapter on government procurement had also been
negotiated as part of the free trade agreement that Chile had recently signed with five Central
American countries, namely, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador and Costa Rica.  This was
the first binding international agreement that Chile had entered into on the subject of government
procurement and it contained provisions on market access as well on transparency.  Parties to theagreement had undertaken commitments to ensure that  their entities would provide information to the
private sector and to all interested parties relating to the characteristics of the respective government
procurement systems, business opportunities and the outcome of procurement processes.  Parties also
agreed to ensure that the award procedures would faithfully comply with and take into account the
criteria that had previously been set out in the texts.  Other obligations related to the exchange ofrelevant legislation, the provision of information on any modification to that legislation and the
promotion of the use of information technology, particularly in relation to dissemination of
information regarding business opportunities.  In view  of the fact that the contracting parties to the
agreement were all developing countries, an interesting innovation in the area was that the parties toWT/WGTGP/M/12
Page 7
the agreement had agreed to implement an electronic system that would provide information on the
procurement markets in their countries.  Chile was also in the process of negotiating chapters on
government procurement in proposed free trade agreements with the United States, the European
Union and Korea.  Negotiations with EFTA would be initiated in the near future.  In the furtherance
of the free trade agreement between Chile and Mexico, negotiations had commenced on a chapter ongovernment procurement.  Article 20 of the Economic Cooperation Agreement with Peru also
established an obligation to initiate negotiations in the area of government procurement.  Finally,
Chile was participating in the APEC GPEG which had recently discussed the principle of
transparency in accordance with its work programme.
19. The representative of Australia said that Australia was also a participant in the APEC GPEG.
Moreover, Australia had a government procurement agreement with New Zealand, which dealt with
government procurement issues between New Zealand, Australia and each of the States in Australia.Australia was currently cooperating with Thailand with a view to developing Thailand's government
procurement system.  Finally, negotiations were under way between Australia and Singapore on the
development of a free trade agreement which would include a chapter on government procurement.
20. The representative of India said that the regional initiatives such as APEC and FTAA were
separate from the WTO process.  The rules on procurement in the regional agreements went beyond
transparency issues.  In the context of the Working Group, it was important for all the developing
countries, including least-developed countries, to come to grips with all the issues relevant to the
WTO context.  India did not share the view expressed by the United States that the time was ripe for
the WTO to move forward in the current process.   India strongly opposed any suggestion for moving
ahead simply because preparations for the fourth Ministerial Conference had commenced.  The studyprocess had to be completed.  It was necessary to analyse all the problems and implications for all
developing country Members before drawing up the elements of transparency.  Regional initiatives
were limited to a few countries and could not be imposed upon the entire membership.  Not many
developing Members were able to speak up in the WTO and their silence could not be taken as
acceptance of the interest expressed by some delegations to abandon the study process.  Any processfor negotiations should be taken up by the full membership only after a consensus between Members
existed upon completion of a study and only after the problems and needs of developing countries had
been fully taken into account.  For India, the effective and comprehensive resolution of
implementation problems with regard to the existing WTO agreements was of utmost priority.
21. The representative of Mexico said that Mexico participated in the FTAA and APEC
negotiating processes as well as in a number of regional agreements in this area.  Both involved
provisions on government procurement, including provisions related to transparency.  For the mostpart, the provisions on transparency required the pub lication of rules, regulations and laws relating to
government procurement, exchange of statistical information between the parties involved as well as
the establishment of contact points for exchange of procurement information obtained from suppliers
or procuring entities.  Mexico attached great importance to disciplines relating to transparency since it
believed that it was an appropriate way of guaranteeing integrity and efficiency in the conduct ofgovernment procurement, not only at the internationa l level but also at the domestic level.  This was
one of the reasons why Mexico had decided to take part in those types of regional agreements and
initiatives.  Conducting government procurem ent according to clear standards ensured the
accountability of the process and ensured that the procurement procedures were as efficient as
possible in the distribution of the countries' resources.  This was beneficial for all parties concerned –the suppliers who participated, the procuring authorities, as well as society as a whole.  Mexico
merely wanted to share its experience in this area which had been very positive but did not claim that
its regional initiatives or arrangements could be easily transposed to other countries.
22. The representative of Malaysia stated that it was possible to be transparent and accountable to
one's own government and people and not necessarily to the world community.  The priority was to beWT/WGTGP/M/12
Page 8
accountable to one's own people.  It was possible to be accountable also to the world community
without being a party to an agreement on transparency in government procurement.
23. The representative of Canada stated that Canada was also a participant in the FTAA
Negotiating Group on Government Procurement and in the APEC GPEG.  One of the objectives of
the FTAA Negotiating Group was to achieve a framework that would ensure transparency ofgovernment procurement processes.  Canada had made proposals to the FTAA Negotiating Group
relating to certain elements of transparency and fully supported the full range of transparency
measures in that context.  Canada was pleased to note the wide and extensive use of transparency
measures in APEC countries.  Canada continued to support the work in the Working Group towards
the achievement of a WTO agreement on transparency in government procurement.
24. The representative of the European Communitie s noted that the Community also participated
in a number of regional and bilateral agreements.  The Community had a government procurement
regime, which had been adopted centrally at the Community level and which had been implemented
by the member States.  As a result of a number of years of experience, the European Community was
currently in the process of reviewing directives in the area of government procurement.  The existing
Community regime had three separate sets of legislation for procurement relating, respectively, to the
procurement of goods, services and construction services (or "works").  In evaluating the directives, ithad been noted that the procurement rules, in particular the rules that related to transparency, were
virtually identical for all three types of procurement.  Therefore, the European Community was
currently consolidating the three sets of legislation into one single piece of legislation.  This would
make it a much easier instrument both for procuring entities and for businesses to use.  The other two
main elements of the revision exercise were, firstly, to simplify and clarify the directives with the aim
of making them more transparent and more user-friendly and, secondly, to adapt the European
Community's procurement regime that had, to date, been a paper-based regime, to take account of
modern administrative needs and in recognition of the fact that, in the European Community and
elsewhere, more and more people had access to the Internet and were conducting their business using
electronic means.  As regards simplification, as well as consolidating the three legislative texts, theEC was also setting out the new text in a manner that reflected the normal order of an award
procedure, so that it covered first the publication of the tender, then the submission of the bids, and
then the award of the contract.  This made the text much easier to understand for procuring entities
and business users.  With regard to the work of the Working Group, she said that it was important to
continue the process that had been embarked upon following the Singapore Ministerial Conference.
There was a huge body of work that was available to the Working Group as a result of that process.
The European Community would be looking at cont inuing and building on that work in the coming
months.  Referring to the view that the Working Group should continue the study phase, she noted
that during the past eighteen months, although nominally the Group had been in a study phase, there
had been no new elements brought to the Group's work, particularly by those delegations who had
advocated continuation of the study phase.  It was difficult to know how to carry on a study phase
when there was no contribution as to how that should be done.
25. The representative of Malaysia noted that Ma laysia also participated in the APEC GPEG.
The experiences that had been referred to were regional and had nothing to do with the mandate of the
Working Group per se.  In any event, the APEC principles on government procurement were
non-binding.  As regards the preparatory process for Qatar Ministerial Conference, Malaysia was
unable to agree to anything on government procurement in the Qatar negotiating agenda.  The need toaddress the implementation-related issues was of importance to Malaysia.  There needed to be
consensus on any additional work programme in the WTO.  If there was no consensus emerging on
transparency in government procurement, that issue should be put aside.  Malaysia had not heard any
additional new arguments, on the part of the proponents of such an agreement, that could assuage
Malaysia's fears regarding an agreement on transpar ency in government procurement.  The elements
that posed problems for Malaysia and for large number of developing countries were scope,
definition, coverage, domestic review process and linkage to WTO dispute settlement procedures.WT/WGTGP/M/12
Page 9
26. The representative of Indonesia said that Indone sia was also a participant in the APEC GPEG.
However, the work programme of that forum s hould not be imposed upon the Working Group.  It was
preferable to focus on the mandate of the WTO Working Group which was to study transparency in
government procurement practices.  Indonesia did not share the view that the time was ripe for the
Working Group to move forward on this issue.  It  was necessary to further study the elements of
transparency in government procurement.
27. The representative of Morocco stated that Morocco shared the concerns expressed by
developing countries.  Regional initiatives in government procurement did not have any direct
connection with the work in the Working Group.  Morocco was not a demandeur of a possible
multilateral agreement on transparency in government procurement.
III. OBSERVER STATUS OF INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS
28. The Working Group agreed to revert to the requests from intergovernmental organizations for
observer status (OECD, SELA and OIC) in the light of the consultations that were currently being
held by the Chairman of the General Council on this matter.
IV. DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING
29. The Chairman noted that the work programme in the WTO generally was uncertain due to the
various negotiations that were currently being held and also due to the preparations for the Qatar
Ministerial Conference.  He would hold consultatio ns before the summer break about the possibility
of a meeting to be held following the summer break.
__________