WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION

Transcription

1 WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION RESTRICTED WT/COMTD/M/86 18 December 2012 ( ) Committee on Trade and Development Eighty-Sixth Session NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 19 NOVEMBER 2012 Chairperson: H.E. Ms. Elin Østebø Johansen (Norway) 1 A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA... 2 B. OBSERVERS... 2 (i) Request for attendance of ad hoc observers... 2 (ii) Further consideration of requests for observer status by the League of Arab States, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the Gulf Organization for Industrial Consulting, the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, the Common Fund for Commodities, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC) and the Groupe de la Banque Africaine de Developpement... 2 C. TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND TRAINING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING PLAN: UPDATE BY THE SECRETARIAT ON THE STATUS OF THE DOHA DEVELOPMENT AGENDA GLOBAL TRUST FUND... 3 D. TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT - WORK IN THE COMMITTEE ON THE BASIS OF THE CHAIRMAN'S CONCLUDING STATEMENT FROM THE EIGHTH MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE (WT/MIN(11)/11)... 4 E. ELECTRONIC COMMERCE - DECISION OF 17 DECEMBER 2011 (WT/L/843) WORKSHOP ON "E-COMMERCE, DEVELOPMENT AND SMES" - STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN F. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE ENABLING CLAUSE GULF COOPERATION COUNCIL (GCC) NOTIFICATION OF CUSTOMS UNION COMMUNICATION FROM CHINA, EGYPT AND INDIA (WT/COMTD/W/175) NOTIFICATION OF THE AGREEMENT ON TRADE IN GOODS BETWEEN THE ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN NATIONS (ASEAN) AND KOREA NOTIFICATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIA AND KOREA (GOODS) GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES - NOTIFICATION BY SWITZERLAND (WT/COMTD/N/7/ADD.5) G. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE TRANSPARENCY MECHANISM FOR PREFERENTIAL TRADE ARRANGEMENTS The meeting was chaired by H.E. Ms. Elin Østebø Johansen (Norway), the Chair of the General Council, who stood in for the Chairman of the Committee on Trade and Development, H.E. Dr. Anthony Mothae Maruping (Lesotho). As was explained, Ambassador Maruping had recently relinquished his official duties in Geneva, and had requested Ambassador Johansen to chair the 86 th Session of the Committee.

2 Page 2 H. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HONG KONG DECISION ON DUTY- FREE AND QUOTA-FREE MARKET ACCESS FOR LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES I. DRAFT ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2012 (WT/COMTD/W/190) J. OTHER BUSINESS A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 1. The Chairperson said that the draft agenda for the 86 th Session of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD) was contained in document WTO/AIR/4043 circulated on 9 November The agenda was adopted. B. OBSERVERS (i) Request for attendance of ad hoc observers 3. The Chairperson recalled that, at previous sessions of the CTD, Members had agreed to invite a number of intergovernmental organizations on an ad hoc, meeting-by-meeting basis. These included the Arab Maghreb Union (AMU), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), the Inter-Arab Investment Guarantee Corporation, the Islamic Development Bank (IDB), the African Union (AU), the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the South Centre, the Pacific Islands Forum, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). She said that, following the decision taken at the previous meeting of the Committee, the organizations had been invited to the present meeting. She proposed that these organizations be invited to the next formal meeting of the CTD. 4. It was so agreed. (ii) Further consideration of requests for observer status by the League of Arab States, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the Gulf Organization for Industrial Consulting, the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, the Common Fund for Commodities, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC) and the Groupe de la Banque Africaine de Developpement 5. The Chairperson said that the positions of delegations were on the record. Members were aware that she had, in her role as Chair of the General Council, been holding informal consultations on issues relating to requests for observer status in the WTO. Some Members had also requested that the CTD Chairman hold independent consultations on this matter. The Chairman had, indeed, held consultations, including at an informal, open-ended, CTD meeting held on 5 October 2012, where one of the issues for discussion was requests for observer status in the Committee. She expected that this issue would be brought to the attention of the new Chair of the CTD, who would take over in She expressed her hope that it would soon be possible for Members to find convergence on a way forward. In the meantime, Members were encouraged to consult amongst themselves. She suggested that the Committee revert to this matter at its next meeting. 6. It was so agreed.

3 Page 3 C. TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND TRAINING - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING PLAN: UPDATE BY THE SECRETARIAT ON THE STATUS OF THE DOHA DEVELOPMENT AGENDA GLOBAL TRUST FUND 7. The Chairperson invited the Director of the Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation (ITTC) to provide Members with an update on the status of the Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund (GTF). 8. The Director of the ITTC said that it had been possible to carry forward from the end of 2011 an amount of Sw F 10.2 million. By June 2012, Sw F 4.6 million had been received from seven Members, out of a total budget of Sw F 18 million. In addition, pledges of Sw F 4 million were made by two Members. As of 31 October 2012, Sw F 10.7 million had been received, representing about 59% of the total GTF budget for 2012 activities. Since most of the contributions had been received in the second half of 2012, the amount carried forward from 2011 had helped the Secretariat to implement planned activities in the first half of She added that a small number of Members had increased their contributions in For example, Norway had increased its contribution by 50% compared to Furthermore, in order to increase the predictability in funding, a number of countries - including Switzerland and Canada - had made multi-year contributions. 9. She also observed that there had been a slight deterioration in the timeliness of contributions per quarter compared to previous years. Furthermore, the total number of countries contributing to the GTF had decreased, from 24 in 2008 to 14 as of August While this had not had a very serious impact on the level of funding to implement planned activities in 2012, it had the potential to impact negatively on the number of activities for 2013, if the trend continued. She explained that the WTO's technical assistance activities were heavily dependent on extra budgetary contributions, and that it was only possible to incur expenditures against cash received. The lack of predictability as to when resources would be received made the timely implementation of activities challenging. 10. It was expected that an amount of Sw F 9 million would be carried forward at the end of 2012, thereby allowing activities to be implemented from the beginning of The accumulation of this amount was partly due to cost saving measures by the Secretariat, as well as to existing partnerships in the delivery of technical assistance. In addition, host governments had in some instances contributed to the costs of hosting activities. Singapore, for example, had funded all participants in the activities it had hosted. While the existence of partnerships did allow the leveraging of some resources, there remained a number of issues to consider, particularly with respect to non-traditional donors. For example, it was necessary to explore on what basis it would be acceptable to partner with a particular institution or organization. While these were not new issues, they would nevertheless require more attention as partnership arrangements expanded and become more creative. A revision to existing policies and practices might be required. 11. She went on to say that the number of national activities in 2012 had remained at the same level as for 2011 in all regions. There had, however, been a slight decrease in the number of regional activities - from about 71 in 2011 to 58 as of 31 October The most important reduction had been observed in Africa. In particular, while 32% of the regional activities had taken place in Africa in 2011, the figure had shrunk to 19% in The Central and Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the Caucus (CEECAC) region had also registered a slight decline, from 11% to 9%, as had the Arab region - from 13% to 10%. If this remained the case at the end of 2012, there would be a need to explore the reasons for the declines. In contrast, the Asia-Pacific region's share of the regional activities had increased, from 21% in 2011 to 28% in Similarly, Latin America's share had increased from 14% to 17%, while the share of the Caribbean region had increased from 8% to 9%.

4 Page With regard to the internship programmes, she said that there had been an increase in the resources contributed to both the Netherlands Trainee Programme and the Mission Intern Programme. There was also continued support by China for the China WTO Programme. As for the Progressive Learning Strategy, she indicated this would continue to be applied to all activities, including national activities. In this regard, work was ongoing to make changes to the technical assistance request form that was being used for national activities. The intention was to introduce the new form at some point in She noted that most of the courses offered thus far had been intermediate-level courses. About 29% of resources had been spent on courses of a general nature, while 28% had been spent on specialized training activities. She concluded by thanking all the Members that had contributed to the GTF. 13. The Committee took note of the intervention by the Director of the ITTC. D. TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT - WORK IN THE COMMITTEE ON THE BASIS OF THE CHAIRMAN'S CONCLUDING STATEMENT FROM THE EIGHTH MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE (WT/MIN(11)/11) 14. The Chairperson recalled that, at the Eighth Ministerial Conference (MC8), Ministers had, inter alia, reaffirmed the link between trade and development and called on Members to fully operationalize the mandate of the CTD as a focal point for development work. The CTD had been directed to report the results of its work under the MC8 mandate to Ministers at the Ninth Session. 15. She went on to say that the MC8 mandate had been discussed at each of the formal CTD meetings in In addition, the CTD Chairman had held several informal consultations in the course of the year to hear views and suggestions on what specifically could be done by the CTD under this mandate. On several occasions, the Chairman had invited Members to consider submitting written proposals on concrete areas of work for the CTD, as written proposals were more conducive to focused discussion, and would ensure a Member-driven process. 16. She recalled that a written proposal by Cuba and Ecuador had been circulated earlier in 2012 in document WT/COMTD/W/188 and Addendum 1. This proposal, which was made in relation to paragraph 3 of the CTD's terms of reference, called for an update to a Secretariat document on the implementation of special and differential treatment (S&D) provisions. The proposal was discussed at the 85 th Session, and was generally welcomed by Members. However, the similarity was also noted between this proposal and one of the proposals in a non-paper by the African Group that was introduced by Egypt at the same meeting. These Members were therefore encouraged to work together. Subsequently, at the informal, open-ended CTD meeting held on 5 October 2012, Members had been informed that the African Group was indeed working with Cuba and Ecuador, as well as with other delegations, in concretizing proposals on the basis of earlier work. She said that she now wished to inform the Committee that a proposal by China, Cuba, Ecuador, India and the African Group had been made available for the present meeting. Since the proposal had only been received shortly before the meeting, it had not yet been formally circulated as a CTD document. The proposal would be circulated as a CTD document after the present meeting She went on to say that, also at the 5 October 2012 informal, open-ended CTD meeting, Australia had introduced a proposal contained in a non-paper. This non-paper put down in writing some of the suggestions that had previously been made concerning the potential usefulness of presentations by Members on their trade and development experiences and their participation in the multilateral trading system. Australia had indicated at that meeting that it would be continuing its consultations with Members on the proposal. She said that she now wished to inform the Committee that an updated version of this proposal had been recently circulated in document 2 The proposal was circulated after the meeting in document WT/COMTD/W/192.

5 Page 5 WT/COMTD/W/191. The co-sponsors of this proposal were Australia, Chile, Colombia and Singapore. 18. She indicated that the Committee would consider each of the proposals in turn. She invited China, Cuba, Ecuador, India or the African Group to introduce their proposal first. 19. The representative of Egypt, on behalf of the African Group, said that the proposal by China, Cuba, Ecuador, India and the African Group contained three elements on proposed ways forward for the CTD in the context of the MC8 mandate. The first element, which essentially re-produced the earlier proposal by Cuba and Ecuador, called for an update to the Secretariat document on the implementation of S&D provisions. 20. Under the second element, the document highlighted the importance of development in the GATT and the WTO. The mandate of the CTD was highlighted, and in particular the first paragraph of the CTD's terms of reference, which instructed the CTD to serve as a focal point for consideration and coordination of work on development in the WTO and its relationship to development-related activities in other multilateral agencies. The specific proposal under the second element was for the CTD to recommend that the General Council amend the second paragraph of the Decision on "Procedures for an annual overview of WTO activities and for reporting under the WTO", contained in document WT/L/105. In particular, it was proposed that the following be added after the first sentence of the second paragraph: "The CTD is instructed to report, within its mandate, on development-related activities and issues raised in other WTO bodies; and provide the necessary recommendations to the General Council on achieving better coordination within the WTO on development issues." On how this would function in practice, he said that it was envisaged that each WTO body would annually submit information on its development-related work to the CTD. The CTD would then use the information provided by other WTO bodies to prepare a report. He observed that this would allow the CTD to truly be a focal point for development-related work in the WTO. 21. He went on to say that the third element of the proposal was concerned with the implementation of the Transparency Mechanism (TM) for Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs). He noted in this regard that Members had for a number of years been debating the issues relating to the RTAs with a dual notification under both the Enabling Clause and GATT Article XXIV. In the context of this debate, there were three sub-items that had been continuously appearing on the CTD's agenda under the item "Notifications under the Enabling Clause". It was hoped that Members would view the third element of the proposal as a constructive effort to avoid future problems of this nature. The idea was for the CTD to recommend to Members which were parties to RTAs to jointly fulfil their notification and information obligations laid out in paragraphs 1, 3, 4, 14, and 15 of the TM for RTAs. He added that the proponents were aware that some Members were of the view that issues relating to the review of the RTAs TM had to be discussed in the Negotiating Group on Rules (NGR). In this regard, he emphasized that what was envisaged was a recommendation by the CTD, which the NGR could then look into. 22. In closing, he returned to the first element of the proposal, which concerned the update to the Secretariat document on the implementation of S&D provisions. He said that it was important for the co-sponsors of the proposal to assess the utilization of S&D provisions, and to get feedback on the provisions that could not be utilized for technical reasons. Any other information regarding the utilization of S&D provisions would also be useful. These points needed to be included in the updated Secretariat document. 23. The representative of Cuba expressed his delegation's support for the intervention by Egypt. He noted that the proposal under consideration demonstrated the unity of developing countries and their interest in seeing the CTD deliver on development-related issues.

6 Page The representative of China said that his delegation was of the view that the earlier submissions by the African Group, and by Cuba and Ecuador, raised pertinent issues and proposed appropriate actions. In this light, China was pleased to co-sponsor the proposal that was currently under consideration. The implementation of the proposed actions would help to strengthen the functioning of the CTD and would also help developing countries to integrate into the multilateral trading system. This would be to the benefit of the membership as a whole. 25. The representative of Argentina expressed his delegation's support for the elements contained in the proposal. 26. The representative of El Salvador indicated that, while her delegation was still studying the proposal, the feeling was that it laid out a number of appropriate ways to proceed in order to comply with the MC8 mandate. 27. The representative of the United States said that the proposal under consideration, and in particular the package of elements, would be reviewed in his capital. In the meantime, he indicated that he would provide some preliminary reactions. On the first element, he recalled that his delegation had viewed favourably the earlier proposal by Cuba and Ecuador. The US would look carefully at the new text in this light. The US would also examine the second element closely, with an eye to the CTD's mandate. As for the third element, he said that this was a non-starter for his delegation. The CTD was not the proper forum for addressing horizontal issues with respect to RTAs. 28. The representative of Nigeria expressed his delegation's support for the proposal under consideration. The three elements in the proposal took into account the MC8 mandate, as well as the terms of reference of the CTD. The proposal was not complex, and could be operationalized in a straightforward manner. 29. The representative of the European Union said that her delegation would study the proposal carefully. She asked whether the representative of Egypt could elaborate on his observation that some S&D provisions could not be utilized for technical reasons. 30. The representative of Australia said that his delegation, like others, would study the proposal. He recalled that his delegation had been open to the initial submission by Cuba and Ecuador calling for an update to the Secretariat document on the implementation of S&D provisions, and it appeared that the first element of the proposal under consideration was a reproduction of that idea. In this light, his delegation was keen to see the first element taken forward. With regard to the second and third elements of the proposal, he indicated that his delegation was interested in discussing some operational and mandate-related issues with the co-sponsors. 31. The representative of Barbados said that her delegation recognized that there was work to be done to strengthen the CTD. In particular, there was scope for the CTD to take greater initiatives in certain areas. It appeared that the proposal under consideration was a step in the right direction. Her delegation would carefully consider the elements in the proposal, though the initial feeling was that they could be supported by Barbados. She went on to say that the small, vulnerable economies (SVEs) had also prepared a document on strengthening the CTD, which was still in draft form. Given that there was some overlap between the SVEs' document and the proposal under consideration, the SVEs would need to consider how best to proceed with their ideas on strengthening the CTD. 32. The representative of Canada welcomed the proposal as a basis for further discussion. She recalled that her delegation had previously supported the submission by Cuba and Ecuador. Noting that the proposal under consideration had other elements to it as well, she said that it would be sent back to her capital for further review.

7 Page The representative of Dominica indicated that the proposal appeared to contain ideas that his delegation could support. The proposal would be studied in detail by his delegation. 34. The representative of Ecuador said that, at the CTD's various formal and informal discussions on the MC8 mandate in 2012, his delegation had suggested that the Committee resume its review of the implementation of S&D provisions. A formal proposal on this matter had been submitted by Cuba and Ecuador. The African Group had also presented its ideas to the CTD in this regard. In response to the CTD Chairman's invitation, Cuba, Ecuador and the African Group had coordinated and consolidated their ideas and put together a single proposal. The proposal under consideration was based on three elements, these being the review of the implementation of S&D provisions, the consolidation of the CTD as a focal point for the consideration and coordination of development in the WTO, and a recommendation from the CTD for Members which were parties to RTAs to jointly fulfil their notification and information obligations as contained in the TM for RTAs. In closing, he said that it was of fundamental importance for his delegation that an assessment be made of the utilization of S&D provisions. It was also important to obtain feedback on provisions that could not be used because of the expiry of timeframes. Any other information on the use of S&D provisions would also be useful. He indicated that the Secretariat needed to include these elements in its work. 35. The representative of South Africa expressed her delegation's support for the proposal. She noted that the proposal came at an appropriate juncture, as the implementation of the elements of the proposal would help to deliver a meaningful outcome to the MC8 mandate, and would also help developing countries to better integrate into the multilateral trading system. 36. The representative of Nicaragua indicated that his delegation was favourable to the proposal, and was open to discussing it further with the co-sponsors. 37. The representative of Egypt said that he wished to respond to some of the points that were raised by delegations on the proposal. With regard to the question of how the second element of the proposal fitted into the mandate of the CTD, he explained that the CTD was not the only WTO body working on development-related issues. The CTD had the mandate to serve as a focal point for the consideration and coordination of work on development in the WTO, and it was therefore necessary for other WTO bodies to provide the CTD with pertinent information so that it could fulfil its mandate. 38. He next turned to the third element in the proposal, in particular to react to the indication that this element was a non-starter for the US. He said that a number of developing countries were, in fact, of the view that the issues relating to RTAs with a dual notification could be resolved in the CTD. In explanation, he referred to paragraph 4 of the CTD's terms of reference which, inter alia, provided the Committee with the mandate to consider any questions that might arise with regard to either the application or the use of special provisions in the Multilateral Trade Agreements and related Ministerial Decisions in favour of developing country Members. He pointed out that questions had arisen with regard to the application or use of the Enabling Clause, and the CTD therefore had the mandate to consider these questions. He added, however, that the co-sponsors were trying to be constructive, and were therefore only seeking a recommendation from the CTD. This would be a first step towards avoiding any future problems relating to RTAs with a dual notification. 39. Finally, in response to the EU's request for an elaboration on his observation that some S&D provisions could not be utilized for technical reasons, he pointed in particular to the timeframes contained in some S&D provisions that had elapsed. He explained that the co-sponsors wanted to know how many S&D provisions could no longer be used by developing countries. This would also be useful for the future work of the Committee.

8 Page The Chairperson said that Members would need more time to consider the proposal by China, Cuba, Ecuador, India and the African Group. The Committee would therefore need to come back to this proposal. In the meantime, she encouraged the co-sponsors to continue their consultations with Members. Turning next to the proposal by Australia, Chile, Colombia and Singapore, she invited the co-sponsors of this proposal to introduce their submission. 41. The representative of Australia said that the proposal set out a simple but useful initiative to add value to the work of the CTD. The proposal addressed the key issues that had been raised in the initial discussions that had taken place in the informal, open-ended CTD meeting on 5 October The co-sponsors had also subsequently welcomed the opportunity to engage with other delegations on the proposal. 42. He went on to highlight several aspects of the proposal. He said firstly that the proposal was within the core business of the CTD, as set out in its terms of reference. In particular, part of the CTD's mandate was to keep under continuous review the participation of developing country Members in the multilateral trading system. The country experiences presentations would create a flexible, Member-driven process to contribute to this aspect of the CTD's mandate. The proposed exercise would not replace any other work in the CTD, and would be without prejudice to other proposals by Members. Second, the proposal would not overlap with the work of other WTO bodies. Some Members had asked what the difference would be between the proposed country presentations and the Trade Policy Review (TPR) process. He explained that the country experiences presentations were envisaged to operate on a very different scale. They would be smaller, more Member-driven, and focused on priority issues defined by individual Members. Members could circulate a brief background note in advance if they wanted to, but this would not be mandatory. This contrasted with the months of preparation and the detailed reports required for the TPR process. 43. As his third point, he said that the proposal allowed for an approach that was flexible and simple. Members themselves would decide if they wanted to present. Furthermore, Members could decide who presented for their delegations, and they could decide what issues in their trade and development experiences they would highlight. Members could present in groups to highlight regional successes and challenges, or individually. Members and Observers to the CTD would be able to contribute to the discussion as appropriate. Procedurally, it was foreseen that Members would inform the Secretariat at least ten days in advance of the Regular Session of the CTD if they wished to make a presentation, so that their presentation could be included on the agenda for the meeting. If there was high demand for presentations beyond the three or more Regular Sessions of the CTD held each year, the Chair could adjust the meeting schedule as needed. This would be consistent with the CTD's rules of procedure. Turning to his fourth point, he said that the co-sponsors did not think it would be possible or appropriate to set a specific outcome from this proposal, since it was not possible to prejudge the issues that could emerge. However, it was highly likely that useful lessons, problems in Members' development, or areas for further work would be identified after hearing Members' experiences. The objective would be to hear from several Members and then take stock on what had been achieved before the Ninth Ministerial Conference. 44. In closing, he reiterated that the proposal could be agreed to without prejudice to any other proposals by Members. He said that it would be ideal to strengthen the CTD by adding value to its work in a number of areas, and one of these areas should be through implementing the work laid out in the proposal under consideration. He also emphasized the limited time remaining before the Ninth Ministerial Conference. Members would need to start the country experiences presentations as soon as possible in order to have something of substance to report to Ministers. 45. The representative of Singapore said that the proposal added a dimension that would enhance the discussions in the CTD, and would also complement existing discussions. There was merit in the central idea of the proposal, which was to have voluntary, flexible and focused presentations from

9 Page 9 individual Members or regional groups. One aspect that his delegation felt added value to the CTD was that the proposal highlighted the pragmatic dimension of the relationship between trade and development. His delegation believed that there was plenty to learn from the concrete experiences of Members. The virtue of the proposed exercise was that it was really what Members wanted to make of it in terms of scope and topic, and it did not pre-judge the outcome or prejudice other areas of work in the CTD. The co-sponsors were also not proposing something that was burdensome and required months of preparation. Work in the CTD could, in fact, begin immediately. 46. The representative of Colombia said that her delegation had decided to co-sponsor the proposal under consideration because the suggested work would contribute to strengthening the CTD, and would also add dynamism and vitality to the Committee. She stressed the value of hearing the experiences of Members, so that a better understanding could be obtained as to what had worked - and under what circumstances - and what obstacles some nations faced. She added that the proposed country experiences presentations would not overlap with other work in the CTD, and also would not duplicate the work of other WTO bodies. 47. The representative of Korea expressed his delegation's support for the proposal under consideration. He said that there was a huge diversity in Members' economic development and trade policy experiences. Sharing information was a good approach, which would provide a clearer picture for future work. While other mechanisms such as the TPR and Aid-for-Trade processes were already in existence, the proposed work for the CTD would be more suitable for describing a country's unique development story, and would also reinforce the CTD's function to review the participation of developing countries in the multilateral trading system. 48. The representative of Nigeria said that the proposal had been transmitted to his capital for review. He also indicated that his delegation was open to further discussion on the proposal. One question that his delegation wished to raise at this point was whether the proposal would contribute to the objective of mainstreaming development work in the CTD. He emphasized the importance of the CTD's mandate contained in paragraph 51 of the Doha Declaration. 49. The representative of Mexico said that his delegation attached great importance to the MC8 mandate. He expressed his delegation's support for the proposal under consideration, as it appeared to be going in the right direction towards strengthening the work of the CTD. The proposal was flexible and practical. It provided Members with the opportunity to draw lessons from various experiences in using trade policy, and to assess how these policies had contributed to development. Given the limited time available until the Ninth Ministerial Conference, he stressed the importance of beginning work in the CTD as soon as possible. 50. The representative of Pakistan indicated that the proposal, which had been transmitted to her capital, appeared to be going in the right direction. She said that it was important for Members to have an idea of what the final objective of the proposed exercise would be. If the idea was to come up with some recommendations to present to Ministers, it would be necessary for the CTD to explore not only the success stories, but also some of the challenges that Members faced. It was also important for Members to keep in mind that a set of policies needed to be in place in order to ensure that trade worked for development. Finally, she suggested that presentations from developing countries could also touch upon their experiences in using one or more S&D provisions. 51. The representative of Dominica said that the proposal had been transmitted to his capital. It appeared, however, that his delegation could support the overall thrust of the proposed work, as it would provide useful information on Members' successes and on some of the key challenges that Members faced. He welcomed the suggestion that presentations could be made on a regional basis. He also noted that there was a need to start work under the MC8 mandate as soon as possible.

10 Page The representative of Argentina said that his capital was still analyzing the proposal. While the proposal contained some interesting elements, he indicated as a preliminary comment that Members would need to discuss how to incorporate the suggested work within the dynamics of the CTD, as well as how to ensure consistency with other processes. He expressed his delegation's interest to participate in any future informal consultations on the proposal. 53. The representative of India said that his delegation did not understand how the sharing of country experiences could help to fulfil the MC8 mandate, particularly when country experiences were not included as part of the CTD's terms of reference. In this light, his delegation was of the view that the proposed discussions should take place in workshops and side events, where eminent economists could deliver presentations. 54. The representative of the United States said that his delegation considered the proposal to be helpful. While it was clear that the further contours of the proposal would need to be worked out, his delegation appreciated that it left Members with significant flexibility to discuss their individual experiences in using trade in the service of development. The proposal provided a platform for Members to gain valuable insights on the relationship between trade and development. 55. The representative of Egypt said that his delegation had in earlier informal consultations made the point that country experiences presentations needed to be related to the work of the WTO. In particular, there could only be value to the country presentations if the outcome of the exercise was to help Members gain a better idea of what needed to be done to serve the interests of developing countries in the WTO. His delegation was willing to work with the co-sponsors to explore how this could be achieved. He noted that Secretariat documents on the participation of developing economies in global trade had in previous years helped the Committee to address its mandate to keep under continuous review the participation of developing country Members in the multilateral trading system. 56. The representative of Barbados encouraged delegations to study the TPRs as a first step towards better understanding the trade-related policies of Members. She added that, while it was useful to share experiences, the country presentations exercise should not become a monitoring exercise of Members' policies. Finally, she observed that developing countries were in need of detailed and substantive analysis on specific issues. In this light, there was a risk that the country presentations exercise as presented in the proposal would be too general for developing countries to benefit. 57. The representative of the European Union said that the proposal was pragmatic and constructive. Undertaking the proposed work would make a contribution to Members' collective understanding of how developing countries participate in the multilateral trading system. The country presentations could be made in the context of the challenges faced by Members, or on the basis of particular topics. 58. The representative of Canada said that, while the proposal was still being reviewed in her capital, the preliminary feeling was that her delegation could be supportive of it. She also noted the comments that had been made at the present meeting, and indicated that her delegation wished to participate in any information consultations concerning the proposal. 59. The representative of the Dominican Republic indicated that it was important for Members to better understand and appreciate the difficulties that developing countries were facing in integrating into the multilateral trading system. The country presentations exercise could be a step in this direction. She believed that Members needed to continue thinking about the proposal, which had a number of useful aspects to it.

11 Page The Chairperson said that Members would need more time to consider the proposal by Australia, Chile, Colombia and Singapore. The Committee would therefore need to come back to this proposal. In the meantime, she encouraged the co-sponsors to continue their consultations with Members. In closing the discussion on the MC8 mandate, she once again encouraged Members to consider submitting written proposals on possible areas of work for the CTD. She also emphasized that starting work in some areas under the MC8 mandate would not prevent the Committee from subsequently bringing in other areas of work, if Members so wished. It was important to ensure that the Committee had enough time to make progress before a report was submitted to Ministers at the Ninth Ministerial Conference. 61. The Committee took note of all interventions. E. ELECTRONIC COMMERCE - DECISION OF 17 DECEMBER 2011 (WT/L/843) - WORKSHOP ON "E-COMMERCE, DEVELOPMENT AND SMES" - STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN 62. The Chairperson said that the CTD's discussion on electronic commerce (e-commerce) since the beginning of 2012 had been in relation to the 17 December 2011 Decision taken at MC8, which was contained in document WT/L/ She recalled that a proposal by Cuba and Ecuador, circulated in document WT/COMTD/W/189, had been considered at the 85 th Session. The proposal was for a workshop on "E commerce, Development and SMEs" to be held at the end of In the discussion that took place at the meeting, it was apparent that some Members wanted to have further discussions on the programme for the workshop. The CTD Chairman had therefore encouraged the proponents to continue their consultations with Members. Subsequently, in a fax dated 10 September 2012, the Chairman had informed Members that further consultations between the proponents and these delegations had allowed an understanding to emerge on the programme for the workshop. He had attached the draft programme for Members' information. However, he had also informed Members in the fax that the necessary funds for inviting key speakers from Asia, Africa and Latin America had not yet been secured. In this light, the proponents had asked that the workshop be postponed to April 2013 to allow for adequate planning and preparations and to ensure that sufficient funding was available for a successful event. At the 5 October 2012 informal, open-ended CTD meeting, the Chairman had informed Members that the Secretariat was in the process of establishing contact with possible speakers, and had secured some funding from the budget of the Technical Assistance and Training Plan for If it proved necessary, the Secretariat would look into other possible sources of funding as well. In closing, she proposed that the workshop be held on 8 and 9 April The Committee agreed that the workshop on "E-commerce, Development and SMEs" would be held on 8 and 9 April The representative of Ecuador said that the Chairperson's summary accurately reflected the discussions that had taken place on the proposal by Cuba and Ecuador. He noted that the proposal had its roots in the 17 December 2011 Decision, and in particular the call by Ministers to reinvigorate the development dimension of the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce through the CTD. The underlying objective of the proposal was to examine e-commerce access by SMEs, including small producers and suppliers, in developing countries. He expressed appreciation to Members for their support for the proposal. 66. The representative of the United States said that his delegation was supportive of this work going forward, and was available to consult with the proponents as the details of the programme for the workshop were fleshed out. He added that the US was in close consultation with its own services

12 Page 12 and e-commerce experts on this matter. The US was also working with other delegations in putting together an e-commerce workshop in the Council for Trade in Services, which was expected to be held in the second half of The representative of Chinese Taipei expressed support for the workshop. His delegation believed that the workshop would not only help developing countries with technical assistance and capacity building, but would also facilitate greater access to e-commerce. It was hoped that SMEs in particular would benefit from the workshop. His delegation appreciated the efforts of the CTD to bring into effect the 17 December 2011 Decision, which would give developing countries, and in particular LDCs, the opportunity to benefit from the rapid growth of e-commerce in the global economy. 68. The Committee took note of all interventions. F. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER THE ENABLING CLAUSE 69. The Chairperson said that she wished to provide Members with a brief update on the RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause that were to be considered in the CTD's Dedicated Sessions on RTAs. She firstly informed the Committee that for a number of RTAs namely, RTAs between India and Nepal, India and Afghanistan, India and Bhutan and India and ASEAN the full set of data needed to complete the factual presentations had not been submitted by the parties. She urged the parties to these Agreements to provide the data as soon as possible. 70. Turning to the India-MERCOSUR Agreement, she said that the Secretariat had drafted the factual presentation on the Agreement, which would shortly be sent to the parties for comments. Following the receipt of comments, the factual presentation would be circulated to Members and the Agreement would be considered in a Dedicated Session on RTAs. The Secretariat would schedule a meeting of the Dedicated Session in the first half of With regard to the India-Malaysia Agreement, she said that the Secretariat was in the process of drafting the factual presentation, and would send it shortly to the parties for comments. She additionally drew Members' attention to a notification concerning the accession of Rwanda and Burundi to the Protocol on the Establishment of the East African Community (EAC) Customs Union. This notification had been circulated on 15 October 2012 in document WT/COMTD/N/14/Add.2. For purposes of preparing the factual presentation, the Secretariat had requested the parties to the Agreement to provide the required data by 8 March With regard to other Agreements notified under the Enabling Clause, it was the Secretariat's understanding that Venezuela had acceded to MERCOSUR in August 2012, and Panama had acceded to the Latin American Integration Association (LAIA), also in It was additionally the Secretariat's understanding that the South Asian Free Trade Agreement had now been ratified by all the parties, and in particular that the Agreement had entered into force for Afghanistan in August The Secretariat would check on the status of these RTAs with the parties. She went on to say that there remained one RTA notified under the Enabling Clause that had not been ratified by all the parties. This was the Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement (PICTA). Following the procedures of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA), an RTA falling in this category would only be considered by the CTD after it had been ratified by all the parties. The parties to PICTA were urged to inform the Secretariat as soon as all ratifications were complete. 72. She added that the delegation of Uruguay had submitted to the Secretariat on 4 October 2012 a number of biennial reports from past years on measures taken by member countries of the LAIA under the 1980 Treaty of Montevideo. While some of these reports had been previously circulated as GATT or WTO documents, it turned out that others had not, as the Secretariat had not previously received them. The Secretariat was currently in the process of preparing these reports for circulation

13 Page 13 as WTO documents. Taking into account current workloads, the aim was for the documents to be circulated in the three official languages in the first quarter of Finally, she said that she wished to say a word on the implementation reports that were required under paragraph 15 of the TM for RTAs. According to this paragraph, at the end of the implementation period of an RTA, the parties were to submit to the WTO a short written report on the realization of the liberalization commitments in the RTA as originally notified. With regard to the way forward on the implementation reports, she said that the CRTA would continue its discussion at its 66 th Session on 20 November She emphasized once again what had been said before, namely that it would be important for the CTD to monitor the outcome of the CRTA's discussion. The CTD could then hold its own discussion on the issue of implementation reports for RTAs notified under the Enabling Clause. From a practical point of view, she believed that it was in Members' interests to continue to maintain similar procedures between the two Committees when it came to implementing the TM for RTAs. 74. The representative of the United States, referring to the notification concerning the accession of Rwanda and Burundi to the Protocol on the Establishment of the EAC Customs Union, said that the US' view concerning the proper legal basis and notification of customs unions was well documented. It was not necessary to rehash this point. 75. The representative of Egypt said that he wished to emphasize the need to maintain on the CTD's agenda the first three sub-items under the present agenda item until the time when Members could agree on a way forward. 76. The Committee took note of all interventions. - GULF COOPERATION COUNCIL (GCC) NOTIFICATION OF CUSTOMS UNION COMMUNICATION FROM CHINA, EGYPT AND INDIA (WT/COMTD/W/175) 77. The Chairperson said that the first sub-item under the present agenda item concerned the GCC Customs Union notification. The sub-item also referred to the communication from China, Egypt and India which was circulated in document WT/COMTD/W/ The representative of the United States said that his delegation continued to have concerns with the present sub-item being listed on the CTD's agenda. The sub-item had fulfilled its purpose of informing Members of the notification made, and needed to be removed from the agenda. He regretted that this matter had taken up so much of the CTD's time over the past few years. These were the types of issues that took time, resources and attention away from other pressing development matters. The US had clearly stated its position on this matter. It was hoped that Members could move forward constructively, recognizing that the GCC Customs Union was not an issue of dual notification, but rather something to be addressed under the RTAs TM in the CRTA. He added that the GCC Customs Union had been incorrectly notified under the Enabling Clause. This had been subsequently corrected, and the GCC Customs Union was in the pipeline to be considered in the CRTA, in line with the procedures of the RTAs TM. His delegation considered this issue closed, and continued to request that it be removed from the CTD's agenda. The US wanted to be very clear that it had no quarrel with any developing country notifying a qualifying agreement under the Enabling Clause. However, this was not what the GCC Customs Union notification issue was about. The GCC Customs Union notification concerned a customs union, which made it different from non-customs union RTA notifications. 79. He next turned to the communication from China, Egypt and India contained in document WT/COMTD/W/175. He said that, in reviewing the communication, his delegation had not seen any specific issues relating to the GCC Customs Union notification. The paper appeared to be seeking a