 RESTRICTED  
  
TN/C/M/46  
 
14 September  2023 
(23-6121) Page: 1/53 
Trade Negotiations Committee    
 
MINUTES OF MEETING  
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD ON 20 JULY 2023 
Chairperson: Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala (Director -General)  
Contents1 
 
1   INTRODUCTORY REMARKS BY THE CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ......................  1 
2   REPORTS BY THE CHAIRPERSONS OF THE BODIES ESTABLISHED BY THE TNC  ...........  2 
3   REPORT BY THE CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ................................ ...................  5 
4   STATEMENTS BY PARTICIPANTS  ................................ ................................ ...............  11 
5   EXTENDED INFORMAL HEADS OF DELEGATION MEETING  ................................ ..........  48 
 
1  INTRODUCTORY REMARKS BY THE CHAIRPERSON  
1.1.  The Chairperson  welcomed Members to the forty -sixth meeting of the T rade 
Negotiations  Committee (TNC)  and to the Informal Heads of Delegation. She wished 
Colombian  colleagues a Happy Independence Day. She noted that the FIFA Women's World Cup had 
officially kicked off in Australia and New Zealand  and recalled that in May, during the WTO event on 
"Making T rade Score for Women" – FIFA President Gianni Infantino and herself had  unveiled the 
2023 Women 's World Cup official trophy together with Ambassador Clare Kelly (New Zealand)  and 
Ambassador  George  Mina (Australia) . Before turning to the business of the meeting, she put on 
record her appreciation to one of the Negotiating Group Chairs and one of her DDGs, who w ould 
soon leave their positions . 
1.2.  She said that l ike herself, many of Members  had probably not had the opportunity to participate 
in a meeting of the Negotiating Group on  Non-Agricultural Market Access (NAMA). This ha d nothing 
to do with the outgoing NAMA Chair – Ambassador Didier Chambovey of Switzerland. 
Ambassador  Chambovey  had had a rich and long history with th e organization – from his early days 
as a capital -based official in Bern, to eventual posting as Ambassador to the WTO. 
Ambassador  Chambovey  had ably chaired several WTO Bodies through delicate moments – most 
recently the D ispute Settlement Body (DSB)  and G eneral Council, where they had an excellent 
working relationship. As GC Chair in particular, and as coordinator of the Friends of the System, 
Ambassador Chambovey  had been a key pillar in building convergence among the membership and 
had helped lay the fou ndations for Members'  collective success last year at MC12. Members  would 
remember Ambassador Chambovey  as Mr WTO Reform. He was leaving a stellar legacy in th e house 
of trade.  She thanked him  for his important contributions as ambassador – and for being a  wonderful 
host to the WTO . He should  be looking forward to practicing his guitar and enjoying hikes and 
mountain bikes without an urgent call from the WTO . But she hoped to see him  around in Geneva 
or elsewhere. She knew the WTO  could count on him to keep  advocating for it and the multilateral 
trading system in Switzerland and wherever his future would lead  him. She thanked 
Ambassador  Chambovey  for being a true friend of the system.  
 
1 The Reports by the Director -General, including as TNC Chairperson, the Chairperson of the General 
Council and the Chairpersons of the NGR, C oA SS and C TD SS can also be found in document  JOB/TNC/111 . TN/C/M/46  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.3.  She also thank ed the departing Deputy Director -General, Anabel González. W hen taking office, 
she had  pledged to ensure that the WTO was relevant, dynamic, and resilient – and DDG González , 
with her combination of intellectual dynamism and managerial skill, ha d been a vital force in all 
these efforts. She ha d led Secretariat -wide and external collaborative work on the digital economy, 
intellectual property, technology and AI, global supply chains, services and trailblazing research and 
databases. She hoped that DDG González  would continue sharing her insights as she had through 
her Trade Thoughts blogs. The WTO owe d her a debt of gratitude for her relentless efforts in the 
lead up to MC12 that had helped make possible the outcomes on the TRIPS Waiver and pandemic  
response. Having served th e organization in several capacities over the years, she had seen the 
WTO and its Members transform. She was confident that DDG González  would continue to be one of 
the WTO's  strongest advocates  and thanked DDG González  for her  service to her, the Secretariat, 
and the Membership. She wished her all the best . 
1.4.  Regarding the organization of the meeting, she drew Members' attention to the convening 
notice in ICN/TNC/3  and the proposed agenda in TN/C/W/84 . At Members' request, she had set out 
in more detail expectations under each agenda item – including the list of Negotiating Group Chairs 
who would provide a report, as well as two guiding questions to focus discussions. After Members' 
interventions, agai n in line with their request at the last WTO Reform retreat, the Informal HODs  
would be extended  to allow her as Director -General to update Members on ongoing developments 
within the Secretariat, including the transformation process, the strategic vision a nd focus pillars 
exercises, the new Civil Society and Business Advisory Groups, ongoing DDG selection process and 
the WTO budget. In the interest of making the best use of time, she appealed to delegations to be 
focused on their interventions – in particul ar, to respond directly to the two questions in the 
convening notice, as well as to her report – and to consider sending the rest of their statements to 
the Secretariat for the record. Given that many of Members had praised as effective, the timing of 
interventions that the GC Chairperson had introduced for GC meetings, she thought that adopting 
the same approach in the TNC would serve Members well in ensuring an efficient conduct of business. 
In this regard, starting with the current meeting, interventions  would be timed . In this regard, she 
requested Members speaking on behalf of the delegation to intervene for a maximum of 5 minutes 
and those speaking for a group for a maximum of 7 minutes. To aid in the time management, a 
stopwatch would be shown on the screen.  
2  REPORTS BY THE CHAIRPERSONS OF THE BODIES ESTABLISHED BY THE TNC  
2.1.  Ambassador Einar Gunnarsson (Iceland) , Chairperson of the Negotiating Group on Rules 
(NGR) , delivered the following report:  
2.2.  My report will be brief given that my comprehensive report at last week's Fish Week closing 
was circulated to all Members on 17 July. Since my last report to the TNC, we have progressed quite 
well. We have held four Fish Weeks – one in March, one in April, one in June and one last week. We 
started the second wave negotiations with the first Fish Week in March focusing on the conceptual 
underpinnings of the work before us. One month later, in April, these conceptual discussions went 
from the 'what' or 'why' of what we want to get out of the second wave of negotiatio ns, to the 'how' 
of what we can do to get the results we want. By the third fish week, we had proceeded from these 
conceptual discussions to exchanging views on five proposals tabled at the beginning of June and 
additional three in the fourth fish week in July. Members have been extremely constructive, in both 
bringing forward and engaging on ideas and in engaging on the new ideas. The objective of the 
fourth Fish Week was to hear concrete ideas and specific views on the elements in the various 
proposals as  well as the outstanding parts of the W5 and W20 documents that could help form a 
basis for our text -based discussions in the fall. To provide a reference for Members, I created a table 
containing a "menu" of options, which was viewed as helpful in organiz ing the discussions. As 
requested by Members, I intend to circulate an updated version of the Menu to incorporate the latest 
proposals. Clearly, we have done a lot over the last few months. I would like to thank all Members 
for their hard work and construc tive engagement toward our common objective of concluding our 
negotiations by December.  
2.3.  On substance, my overall assessment is that there are overlaps between many proposals, and 
I think this reflects that this is a mature negotiating file. Generally, Memb ers' perspective on what 
to use as the basis for text -based discussions can be categorized into three broad views:  
a. First, there are Members who view W20 and W5 as a clear basis while nevertheless 
recognizing that adjustments need to be made.  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 3 - 
 
  b. Second, there are Members that while still speaking from the basis of W20 and W5 are 
calling for more fundamental changes to the approach.  
c. Third, there are some Members who propose a different approach to W20 and W5, however 
still formulating their approach as a hybrid  one. 
2.4.  Considering  where the weight of preferences among these categories currently seems to lie, 
taking into account not only on numbers but also on diversity, and participation in global fisheries, 
my sense is that the greatest degree of convergence is st ill found around W20 and W5 but with 
varying degrees of adjustment or further development. These variations are numerous and 
somewhat diverse, so we still have a lot of work to do to reach consensus by December. Before 
suggesting a specific basis for text -based discussions in the fall, ideally, we should have the full 
picture of Members' ideas and proposals. I thus urge those Members with pending submissions to 
provide them as soon as possible as to maximize the possibility of them for impacting the process . 
In that respect, let me note that the United Kingdom has circulated their proposal this morning. So, 
thank you, United Kingdom. I have made it clear  that our negotiating space in the fall will be short . 
We will have to hit the ground running in mid -Septe mber and finish our work before the TNC and 
GC in December to be in good shape for MC13. That gives us about ten weeks of negotiating space 
following the summer break. While we have scheduled four Fish Weeks in the fall, I would ask 
delegations to be prepa red to continue working, potentially in different configurations, in between 
them. The Senior Officials meeting in October provides us with an excellent opportunity to take stock 
of the negotiations and Members resolve to conclude in time for MC13.  
2.5.  Finally, just a quick note to say that yesterday, 19 July, we launched the technical process of 
working on documents, practices, and processes for the Committee on Fisheries Subsidies to use 
when established. This was a constructive  first meeting where Members p rovided concrete ideas of 
priority areas on which the technical work should focus. I asked Josefina Bunge from Argentina to 
help me with this work. She will be working with Members during the coming months on the various 
elements that the Committee on Fish eries Subsidies, upon entry into force of the Agreement, would 
need to address as a first order of business.  
2.6.  Ambassador Alparslan Acarsoy (Türkiye), Chairperson of the Special Session of the Committee 
on Agriculture (CoA SS) and the Sub Committee on Cotto n, delivered the following report:  
2.7.  I will briefly take stock of where we are in the agriculture negotiations today. Following my 
designation as Chair of the CoA Special Session on 27 January, almost six months ago, I have 
convened five meetings of the CoA Special session, and four meetings of both the dedicated 
sessions  on PSH and SSM. I also convened one cotton quad plus meeting in April. We have also 
had five seminars on food security, PSH, domestic support, market access and export restrictions 
back-to-back with the March and May meetings. These seminars were in my view useful  in informing 
the negotiations by providing Members with an opportunity to hear from one another based on their 
own experiences and exchange with experts from various international o rganizations. Members 
discussed in March a proposal on PSH initially introduced before MC12, as well as an analytical 
submission on Domestic Support and a new submission on food security. In June, Members discussed 
three new submissions on Domestic Support , including two proposals and one analytical paper, a 
scoping paper on Export Restrictions, a list of questions on the proposal discussed earlier on PSH 
and a revised submission on SSM. The proponents on PSH also organized on 26 June an information 
session  on external reference prices for PSH.  
2.8.  Following the June meetings, I decided to focus the discussions in July on Domestic Support 
and PSH, as these are the two topics to which most of the Members have ascribed priority and that 
have attracted most attenti on. I therefore circulated two outlines listing various approaches for 
several key elements deriving from recent submissions. These outlines did not purport to fully 
capture all Members' positions and past inputs and it was made clear that they were withou t 
prejudice to Members' positions. Their objective was only to stimulate substantive and more granular 
discussions, without providing any sense of direction regarding a possible outcome. Members were 
encouraged to suggest new approaches. I also stressed th at similar approaches would be followed 
for other negotiating topics, also building upon submissions and inputs by Members, as 
commensurate progress would have to be made on all negotiating topics to reach a balanced 
outcome at MC13. I was encouraged  by the level of engagement demonstrated by Members during 
our June and July meetings. I want in particular to commend Members for their thorough and 
interactive exchanges when commenting on the various approaches on Monday and Tuesday this TN/C/M/46  
 
- 4 - 
 
  week. Considerable wo rk has thus been done since the beginning of the year and the nature of our 
discussions has changed since our June meeting. But I do not underestimate the existing 
divergences, including on how to best address the food security challenge and the complexity  of the 
negotiating topics before us. A lot more remains to be done and we have little time left before MC13.  
2.9.  Food security also remains on the top of our agenda. The new numbers released last week by 
the FAO and other agencies showing that around almost 9  percent of the world population are facing 
hunger confirm the gravity of the situation. Members have confirmed on many occasions their shared 
willingness to take a significant step at MC13 following the emergency response to food insecurity 
agreed at MC12 . The question before us is not whether but how we can translate this commitment 
into concrete action. MC13 will not be the end of the road. But it can and should be an important 
milestone confirming that the WTO is back on track and working towards achiev ing a fair and 
market -oriented agricultural trading system, ending hunger, achieving food security and improved 
nutrition and promoting sustainable agriculture and food systems, as reaffirmed by Minister at MC12. 
The negotiation process is and will remain Member -driven and I once more invite Members to engage 
with one another, building upon the constructive spirit demonstrated at our meeting earlier this 
week. I will on my side spare no effort to support this process. The 25 -26 September CoA SS meeting 
will be important , as it will set the tone for the next five months we have left before MC13. I therefore 
invite the proponents of various topics to consider introducing new inputs and submissions before 
this meeting and to engage in outreach with other Member s as soon as possible. It will be followed 
by the Senior Officials meeting scheduled on 23 -24 October that will also constitute a critical 
milestone in providing direction to our work.  
2.10.  Ambassador Kadra Ahmed Hassan (Djibouti), Chairperson of the Special Se ssion of the 
Committee on Trade and Development (CTD SS) , delivered the following report:  
2.11.  When we last met in this format in April, I had reported on the formal CTD SS meeting that 
took place in March. At the March meeting, the CTD SS agreed on a process p roposed by the G90 
to advance work on the ten Agreement -specific proposals (ASPs) on S&D. The process consists of a 
series of formal meetings to have in -depth discussions on each of the ASPs, complemented as 
necessary by informal meetings and technical wor kshops. The G90 had also indicated at the March 
meeting that it would be making further textual submissions on each of the ASPs, starting with the 
proposals relating to the SPS and the TBT Agreements. Accordingly, the G90's textual submission 
on the ASPs c oncerning the SPS and TBT Agreements was circulated in May. A formal CTD SS 
meeting was convened on 7 June to allow the proponents to introduce the new submission and to 
have a discussion on it.   
2.12.  The meeting in June also allowed me to explain how I intend to take forward the agreed 
process in practical terms. I informed the Special Session that, after due consideration – and after 
taking on board the views and suggestions shared by Members – I will be appointing a number of 
facilitators to assist me in adva ncing the discussions on the various G90 ASPs. To be specific, a total 
of five facilitators will be appointed as we move through the process. Each facilitator will have 
responsibility for two ASPs. The facilitators will work with Members on the concerned A SPs under 
their responsibility with the ultimate objective of finding landing zones and areas of convergence. I 
am confident that the facilitators will conduct their work in a transparent, objective, impartial and 
inclusive manner.  It will be for the facil itators to hold technical and focused discussions with Members 
on each of the ASPs, in informal settings. The facilitators will keep me regularly informed of the 
status of the discussions they are facilitating. Furthermore, the facilitators will provide an  update on 
their work at each formal CTD SS meeting as we progress through the year. I additionally took the 
opportunity at the meeting in June to announce the first facilitator, which is Singapore.  
2.13.  As facilitator, Singapore has the responsibility for the  ASPs concerning the SPS and TBT 
Agreements. Let me once again express my sincere thanks and appreciation to Singapore for having 
agreed to take on this role.  I understand that the facilitator from Singapore recently met bilaterally 
with any delegation tha t so wished, in order to hear views on how to structure the informal work on 
the ASPs concerning the SPS and TBT Agreements. Following from the discussions in these bilateral 
meetings, the facilitator intends to hold two informal experience -sharing worksho ps in the week of 
2nd October – one for SPS and one for TBT.  As for the other facilitators, I will nominate them as and 
when the additional textual submissions by the G90 on specific ASPs are submitted. Depending on 
how the discussions advance, we can even tually expect technical and focused work to be taking 
place simultaneously on all ten ASPs. Nevertheless, the CTD SS will remain the overall coordinating 
body for horizontal discussions on the ASPs and where reports by the facilitators will be made.  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.14.  I woul d like to reiterate once again that we are dealing with important  issues in the CTD SS. 
The issues that are contained in the ten ASPs are not only important to the proponents and other 
developing countries but are also systemically important to the organiz ation as a whole and the 
entire Membership. I therefore encourage all Members to participate actively and constructively in 
the upcoming discussions organized by the facilitators, as well as in future discussions in the CTD 
SS, and to engage in good faith and with an open and results -oriented mind with a view to achieving 
concrete outcomes. I am confident that, with the right amount of political will, delegations can find 
solutions to their respective concerns and challenges, and that we will be able to del iver on the 
broader political mandate received from our Ministers in view of reporting to them at MC13 . 
2.15.  The Trade Negotiations Committee took note  of the reports of the Chairpersons of the bodies 
established by the TNC.  
3  REPORT  BY THE CHAIRPERSON  
3.1.  The Chairperson  noted that, before proceeding to her report, the General Council Chairperson 
would like to say a few words concerning MC13 Administrative Matters and the conduct of the July  
General Council meeting . 
3.2.  Ambassador Athaliah L esiba Molokomme  (Botswana) , Chairperson of the General Council , 
delivered the following report:  
3.3.  As the Director -General indicated in the airgram convening this meeting, the work of the 
TNC/HoDs complements and is in full coordination with the work and broa der ongoing consultations 
by myself as the Chairperson of the General Council on the work ahead. I shall therefore use this 
the opportunity to briefly update all delegations on a few matters ahead of the General Council 
meeting scheduled for next week. Fir st, as I indicated in the Informal Meeting on WTO Reform which 
took place on 16 June and in a communication sent to all delegations on 30 June, I have been holding 
consultations on a range of matters related to preparations for MC13, including WTO Reform 
follow-up. In particular, I asked delegations to share their views on an emerging roadmap to MC13 
on the deliberative function, including major milestones, priority topics to be taken up and expected 
outcomes. I take this opportunity to thank all delegation s that have come forward to consult with 
me. I will report in full on these consultations at to the General Council next week.  As I also shared 
during my consultations, there are a number of administrative matters related to MC13 that the 
General Council w ill take up next week – which are listed on the agenda of the General Council 
meeting under Item 2. These are:  
a. Election of Officers  
b. Attendance of Observers  
c. Attendance of NGOs  
3.4.  On the Election of Officers, as delegations are no doubt aware, the past practic e has always 
been that a Minister of the Government hosting a Ministerial Conference is elected as Chair of the 
Conference. For MC13, at the General Council meeting, I would therefore propose to repeat this past 
practice, and that the General Council agree s to elect H.E. Dr Thani bin Ahmed Al Zeyoudi, Minister 
of State for Foreign Trade of the United Arab Emirates – the host Government – to chair the 
Conference. I trust that this will be welcomed by all delegations. In this regard, let me inform you 
that Mi nister Al Zeyoudi is planning to visit Geneva for the General Council meeting and to address 
the Council on that occasion. We look forward to welcoming him to the Council. Concerning the three 
Vice-Chairs, in line with practice, I intend to invite the repr esentatives of the other three 
broad  groupings – i.e., Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean (GRULAC) and the developed 
countries – to consult with their constituencies so that we can revert to this matter at the following 
General Council meeting and app oint the Vice -Chairs at that time. We will not yet take a decision on 
the MC13 Vice Chairs at next week's GC meeting.  Regarding the attendance of Observer 
governments, at the GC meeting next week, my intention is also to propose that the General Council 
agree to repeat past practice – that is to invite the governments with regular observer status in the 
General Council, plus the following five Governments which have previously been granted observer 
status only at Ministerial Conferences: Cook Islands, Eritr ea, Niue, San Marino, and Tuvalu.  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 6 - 
 
  3.5.  Finally, regarding the Non -Governmental Organizations, their attendance has been governed 
by a procedure agreed by the General Council in 1996. This procedure is as follows:  
a. a limited number of accredited NGO representat ives are allowed to attend only the Plenary 
Sessions of the Conference, without the right to speak;  
b. applications from NGOs are accepted on the basis of Article V, paragraph 2 of the WTO 
Agreement, i.e. NGOs "concerned with matters related to those of the W TO"; and,  
c. a deadline will be established and communicated for the registration of NGOs. Once the 
registration procedure is finalized, the Secretariat will circulate the list of registered NGOs 
to all Members. On this matter also, I intend to propose that the General Council agrees 
to repeat this past practice.  
3.6.  Before I conclude, as delegations have no doubt seen, we have a long  agenda for the GC 
meeting next week, which includes several communications – many of which are relevant in part or 
in full to the work of a number of WTO bodies. In this regard, I join the Director -General in 
welcoming  and commending Members' interest to discuss the matters. However, this raises the 
question on how we can effectively utilize the WTO bodies to discuss matters which ar e relevant to 
their work – and maximize the efficiency of General Council meetings. I therefore invite delegations 
to reflect on this and how we can all contribute to achieving this goal. In addition, for those items 
already introduced and extensively disc ussed in previous meetings of the General Council, I would 
like to urge delegations to focus their interventions next week on changes or new developments as 
much as possible and as applicable . Let me also take this opportunity to confirm that, at the Gener al 
Council meeting next week, I intend to continue to apply the same elements on the duration of 
interventions. Given the long  agenda, I urge all delegations to prepare for the meeting with this in 
mind. Finally, and in the context of efforts to improve th e conduct of work and functioning of WTO 
bodies, including the General Council, and in an attempt for reform by doing for the General Council, 
an annotated agenda has been circulated for the first time, to assist delegations with the 
preparations for the m eeting.  I hope you find it useful.  
3.7.  The Chairperson  delivered the following report:  
3.8.  Excellencies, when we return from the summer break, time will be short  to the Senior Officials 
Meeting (SOM) and MC13. We will have to work really hard on both process and substance to get us 
to a successful SOM and to MC13. If we get this right, it will be a boost for a successful MC13. So, I 
want to focus my report mainly on the road to the October SOM. I know delegations are rightly 
seeking clarity about this meeting ahea d of the summer break. A number of questions have been 
posed to me and the GC Chairperson – Ambassador Athaliah Molokomme (Botswana). We will 
provide some responses today. Given this, my report will be a bit lengthy, and I seek your 
indulgence.  If you will  recall, the SOM was an idea put forward by several of you as a 
possible  problem -solving milestone on the road to MC13. So, I also expected clarity and ideas on its 
preparation and conduct from you. What attracted me to the SOM idea was its inclusivity, 
all Members would be involved in the project of moving us along to MC13 – hence I picked up on 
it. You will also recall that my report on my consultations on this issue was circulated as 
JOB/TNC/109 – which I also referenced in the convening notice for today 's meeting.  Members  agreed 
that the SOM idea was a good idea – with many preferring the autumn to the July window that I had 
suggested. The GC Chairperson and I therefore wrote to your Ministers, inviting Senior Officials with 
decision -making authority – Vice Ministers or Ministers of State, or, depending on the Member, 
Permanent Secretaries or Directors -General – to a two -day meeting on 23 and 24 October.  
Objectives of the SOM  
 
3.9.  One of the questions that has been posed is about what we should try to get out of the SOM.  
First, I believe we should be able to draw some operational and political conclusions from the SOM 
that will advance our work and determine the level of ambition for MC13. This could be a combination 
of political directio n as well as some specific decisions. At the end of day, what I think would be 
useful is having a clearer idea on what we are aiming for and the universe of things that we would 
be able to deliver at MC13. Having said this, we should also be careful that t he SOM does not become 
a forum to close issues or negotiations off prematurely. There is always a risk, but we all need to 
collectively manage that risk well. That is why I believe we should wait a bit before setting the TN/C/M/46  
 
- 7 - 
 
  agenda for the SOM – which many of you wanted to have by this TNC or next week's GC. As I 
mentioned earlier, Members are still working on several issues. I therefore think that we should 
come back after the summer break and use the month of September to work before setting a clear 
agenda ar ound the beginning of October. This would give Senior Officials a full three weeks to digest 
and prepare. I will return to this issue when I outline next steps.  
3.10.  Across all negotiations, what I think will be helpful is for Senior Officials to take stock of where 
we are, including outcomes achieved at the level of the GC, what the challenges, gaps and 
opportunities are, assist us to narrow down realistic deliverables for MC13, and provide a clear signal 
that those are items that should get done. At the same t ime without foreclosing issues, Senior 
Officials can also signal where more work will need to be done beyond MC13 to get us to an outcome. 
I think Senior Officials need to come to Geneva not with wish lists and certainly not to map out well 
known positions , but with realistic expectations of what is truly doable. I will be expecting them to 
go a step beyond Ambassadors in moving the agenda along because they have decision -making 
stature and authority. Coming here to rehearse well -known positions would not be helpful  – and 
would be a true missed opportunity. In addition to taking stock and mapping out deliverables, Senior 
Officials could also be expected to focus on some specific problems and solve them, so we can take 
them off Ministers' agendas, except for having them bless the outcome.  
Possible topics  
 
3.11.  Now, some of the questions you have been asking relate to the agenda of the SOM and the 
level of ambition on the topics. As I have noted, it is still too early to provide a concrete response, 
given that you a re still working, and we need to give it until the of end September. But here is a 
possible organizing principle for the agenda. Let me say that at this point, I cannot tell what we put 
under each of these categories, but I will put forward the organizing principles for our SOM agenda.  
a. First, is stocktaking. Here, the SOM would take stock of where we are on all issues. In this 
regard, it might be useful for the Secretariat to prepare a brief, factual state of play report 
for each of the MC12 outcomes that S enior Officials would receive in advance to assist 
them. This, together with updates during the SOM from the Chairs, facilitators and others 
assisting us with our work, would be the basis on which the stocktaking exercise would 
take place possibly in plena ry session.  
b. Second is blessing of things already agreed by the General Council. Examples could be our 
Reform -by-Doing work – including the matrix on the state of play and LDC Graduation if 
we get it done before they arrive.  
c. Third is solving specific proble ms. Here, I do not know yet what these problems will – but 
they could emerge as we progress our work further in September and they could be related 
to the various negotiating strands. So, we will identify specific issues that Senior Officials 
would solve.  
d. Fourth, pointing the way to deliverables for MC13 for which Senior Officials can give a 
political push. Examples could include Fish 2, ratification of the Agreement on Fisheries 
Subsidies Agreement – in other words, those things that are ripe or close to r ipe or where 
you can give a direction of travel such as on agriculture, food security, and e -commerce 
moratorium, among others.  
3.12.  So, this is the organizing principle for our agenda and the way the work will be done. With 
this in mind, allow me to offer my reflections on some issues and then make suggestions on the way 
forward.  On development issues, I believe that our target should be to deliver on LDC Graduation. I 
keep hearing you refer to this issue as a possible deliverable even prior to the SO M. Early this year, 
the LDC Group's aim was to have Annex 1 of their proposal agreed at the General Council in May. 
Other Members said July. Well, July is two -thirds of the way through. I understand that work is 
ongoing, and I thank Members who are working  on this – but we cannot keep kicking the can down 
the road. If you cannot do this at next week's GC, then we should prepare the issue for a decision 
by Senior Officials. But we should be wary  of trying to overload the agenda. We would want 
Geneva -based de legations to do as much work as they say they can do before some of these 
meetings take place.  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 8 - 
 
  3.13.  On the other development issues, we have heard the report of the CTD SS Chair – 
Ambassador  Kadra Hassan (Djibouti). Work in the CTD SS seems to have been rejuven ated through 
the facilitator -led discussions on the G90 Agreement -Specific Proposals on SPS and TBT issues. I 
have read these papers and I think there are reasonable requests that senior officials might be able 
to deal with. I understand that there are pla ns to do the same for the remaining ASPs. We will see 
how far we go on this. I also read the papers relating to the ASCM Agreement. At a 26 June Informal 
CTD meeting, Members shared views on possible development -related outcomes for MC13, and 
S&DT was one of the issues that was frequently mentioned. If we are aiming to achieve something 
on development for MC13, which we absolutely should, we need clarity on Members' expectations. 
This will allow us to use the SOM as a platform to focus our work in the lead up to Abu Dhabi.  
3.14.  On fisheries subsidies, I have received 14 instruments of acceptance of the Agreement, 
putting us close to one -third of what we need for the Agreement to enter into force by MC13. This 
is encouraging  progress, and I truly believe that we c an deliver on this. I want to thank those who 
deposited their instruments early. Since the last TNC, a few others have joined, the European Union, 
Nigeria, Belize, China, Japan, Gabon, and yesterday – Peru. It is great to see that acceptances are 
coming fr om a wide range of Members, including Members that are among the top fishing nations in 
the world . These ratifications send an important signal that Members are willing to get this done. I 
want to share with you why we, the Fish Team and myself, all keep o n pushing on this. It is gratifying 
that when I pick up the phone to speak to a Minister, the first thing they do is to inform me on how 
far they are on their ratification process. That makes me hopeful. If we are to achieve our objective 
to enter this Agr eement into force by MC13, we really need to continue and redouble our efforts. 
The WTO Secretariat remains ready to assist Members to accelerate their processes and has shared 
the straightforward  template. I therefore hope that you will utilize part of yo ur holidays to nudge 
your authorities, so that many Vice Ministers can bring instruments of acceptance in October. The 
Public Forum will also be a good opportunity for those who can do it even earlier.  On the second 
wave of fisheries negotiations, from the  report of the NGR Chair – Ambassador Einar Gunnarsson 
(Iceland), I recognize Members' hard work including textual proposals. I also took note of the cordial 
tone during Friday's HoDs which I attended. It seemed to me that people are willing to look at oth er's 
proposals and see what they can pull out of this. This is an indication about a willingness to deliver 
in this area which is positive. It does not mean that this is easy – there are still gaps – but there is 
a positive will. I thank all Members and ou r Chair in this regard. As the Chair has pointed out, this 
is a mature negotiating file. It is not a question of time but getting Members to a real negotiating 
mode with the political will to get to yes. I agree with the Chair that the SOM will be an impor tant 
milestone in getting the strong political signals of how to get an outcome at MC13.  
3.15.  Regarding agriculture, as you heard from the CoA SS Chair – Ambassador Alparslan Acarsoy 
(Türkiye) – work has intensified. I acknowledge the Chair's optimism in the fa ce of great difficulties 
and the plethora of proposals tabled. However, even though desire for outcomes in the agriculture 
negotiations is palpable – you can feel it from all of us – my impression is that divergences continue 
to deepen. We cannot ask Senio r Officials for political guidance on the "how", unless we have 
determined the "collective what" that we are hoping to achieve. So, this is the homework for us, 
during the continuing round of negotiations, to work with Ambassador Acarsoy after the summer 
break so that we can determine the "collective what". This "collective what" looks at issues from 
both an agriculture and a food security angle. That food security angle has become even more acute 
given the upshot in global grain prices that we are seeing t his week. So, we must be seen as an 
organization to be leaning into solutions that will help the world solve this problem.  
3.16.  On other areas which are critical for Members, especially as we prepare for MC13, dispute 
settlement reform remains a key priority. I  commend Members for actively participating in the 
ongoing informal discussions, and particularly thank Mr. Marco Molina (Guatemala) for his efforts in 
this regard. I recognize that Members have recently put forward papers – and I know that many 
ideas are being exchanged in the informal process.  Excellencies, let me say this again – we simply 
will not look credible if by MC13 we have nothing strong to show on DS reform. The absence of DS 
Reform is the single most important issue that I hear globally – giving this organization the name of 
being dysfunctional and behind, not being up to speed. It is not exactly true. Somehow it has been 
branded because of this which makes it difficult to show the many good things we are doing in other 
areas. So, we have to wor k hard at it because many of our stakeholders are watching us. I hope 
some success will help re -brand us. But let's give the informal process more leeway to work and 
Marco can then see where we are after we come back from the summer break and work until 
September. It would be important to agree to principles to guide the reform and what an outcome 
could look like, so we are able to know how to skin the cat.  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 9 - 
 
  3.17.  As part of MC12 follow up, efforts should also be made to come to a mutually agreeable 
solution in li ne with Paragraph 8 of the MC12 TRIPS Decision. I understand the discussions continue 
in the TRIPS Council and I hope that we could report progress or achieve clarity on this matter so 
that Senior Officials can take action, as appropriate, when they meet. One of the things of concern 
to me is how we liaise with the ongoing Pandemic Treaty negotiations at the WHO which touch on 
the TRIPS Agreement. We are trying to work with the WHO to make sure that things are congruent. 
Many of the Members are also the one s negotiating this treaty. We will be depending on you to 
ensure that we have an outcome that is sensible given our own particular responsibility and what is 
being proposed in that treaty. I am also hoping that we can work at the technical level to help ma ke 
sure this works well.  
3.18.  Work is also progressing on the overall WTO Reform under the leadership of our General 
Council Chairperson. I commend her for her efforts, including her work with the Membership on a 
roadmap to MC13 on the WTO's deliberative functi on. The Secretariat has also continued to support 
Members' reform by doing efforts – from procedural improvements to digital tools and support to 
delegates. They have also updated the reform by doing document in JOB/GC/345/Add.1 . At the 16 
June retreat, I also noted that the TNC must utilize its oversight function to provide results -oriented 
momentum to ongoing negotia tions. Making our meetings more meaningful is part of ensuring that 
the WTO remains fit for purpose. We have already implemented measures in this regard based on 
Members' suggestions – including on the convening notice and the structure of today's meeting.  I 
therefore believe that for the SOM all reform -by-doing improvements – which have been a subject 
of the GC Chairperson's consultations, should simply be taken note of and blessed by the Senior 
Officials.   
3.19.  Work is also advancing on the E -Commerce Work Pro gramme and Moratorium in the dedicated 
discussions facilitated by Ambassador Usha Dwarka -Canabady (Mauritius). I have heard from some 
that clarity on the moratorium and on how to move forward with the other topics taken up in the 
dedicated discussions will  be key as we prepare for the SOM.  
3.20.  I have also looked at a number of papers and proposals from Members – some of which have 
been tabled to the GC and other WTO Bodies and it seems there is an increasing interest from 
different angles on forward -looking top ics:  trade, climate change and sustainability issues; 
inclusivity including MSMEs, gender and youth; industrial subsidies; technology; global value chains; 
and institutional matters, among others. These are subjects for deliberative sessions which are 
important . But given the framing for the agenda that I just announced, I am wondering, it looks to 
me unlikely that there will be time for Senior Officials to get into this. I therefore think that 
deliberative sessions should be prepared for Ministers. But I am in your hands on this one. If you 
think that Senior Officials should also be put into deliberative sessions, please speak up. Whatever 
the case, it will require preparation – including of concept papers with specific questions to be 
addressed which the Secretariat is willing to do to help prepare. We have already discussed on how 
to do it. I am open. I just want you to know that there are two days so we will have to organize this 
smartly  if we want to include deliberative sessions which are vitally impor tant. 
Possible SOM structure  
 
3.21.  The other question where you have sought clarity about is how the SOM will be structured in 
a meaningful way. We had preliminary discussions about this, and I invite you to take a look at my 
report in JOB/TNC/109 , if you haven't done so. While some  wanted a more interactive structure, 
akin to what we had in our recent retreats, it was clea r that we could only put in place a concrete 
structure once we know the topics to be taken up and the expectations on them. Given that there is 
an expectation that the SOM should in addition to providing the necessary political push, also help 
us solve som e specific problems. I think that the format should be designed with flexibility that 
enables senior officials to engage with each other to tease out the knotty problems.  Here, I am 
reflecting on how best we can maximize the possibility of bilateral and s mall conversations, in 
addition to plenary sessions and breakouts groups. We should provide space and time for senior 
officials to talk to each other and thrash out things amongst themselves. In designing a possible 
structure for the SOM, the principles of  transparency, full participation and inclusion should be 
upheld. Members  should have a chance to share their views.  
3.22.  In this regard, we could organize the SOM, starting in plenary where the Chairs and 
Facilitators will present state of play reports which S enior Officials would take note of – having also 
received a summary report before the Secretariat. Then, assuming we agree to take up say four TN/C/M/46  
 
- 10 - 
 
  topics, just for example, we could organize four breakout groups on the four different topics 
happening simultane ously so that e Member in the four groups will have the chance to discuss e 
topic. Therefore, each group will spend two hours on a subject. There will be four facilitators who 
would rotate and talk to all other groups on the same subject. We will have peop le taking notes on 
the deliberations and the discussions in order to help the facilitator summarize overall what has 
emerged on these topics. If we do that and rotate facilitators among the four groups, e single 
Member would have had a chance to discuss e topic, and nobody will be left out. If we will have 
deliberative sessions, if you so decide, we will carve out a bit of the next day to run these deliberative 
sessions. We will then move to a closing plenary where we would share the outcome of what has 
happened in the group sessions, the problems that have been tackled, the results that the Senior 
Officials have come to, and give them a chance to comment on that. Then, we will have a wrap up 
report that sends us on the way to MC13. These are just suggestion s before we go for you to mull 
on. In order to stimulate our thinking, we are suggesting this structure and this possible way of 
going about it so that people have a little bit of direction on the path we are traveling. Please feel 
free to give us feedback , suggest amendments, possibly better ways to do it. We just want to let 
you know that we have been giving it a great deal of thought.  
Way forward  
 
3.23.  Summing up, Excellencies, I am beginning to have clarity about where we might go, especially 
given our MC12 mandates and the other emerging areas that Members wish to discuss. However, I 
know that for Members, it is early days, and you are still working on the issues. So, let's look to 
work in September when we get back, before setting the agenda. To assist  this process, allow me 
to map out a potential journey from after the summer break to the SOM and MC13.  In so doing, let 
me stress that the work in the TNC/HoDs complements and is in full coordination with the work led 
by the General Council Chairperson. We are truly keeping in touch and making sure that what we 
are doing is congruent. There is no doubt that technical work will continue to advance in respective 
negotiating or regular bodies under the leadership of our Chairs and facilitators.  As a compleme nt 
to these efforts, I intend to intensify my own consultative efforts as TNC Chairperson 
and Director -General through a series of informal conversations in various small group 
configurations. This with the aim of supporting the work of the chairs through free and frank 
exchanges outside the formal negotiating environment about where we are, where we are going and 
help iron out specific sticky issues. My plan is to have these consultations at least fortnightly until 
the SOM. I am envisaging to have the firs t consultation on 6th of September or thereabouts – before 
the Jeune Genevois break – and the following one on 28th September. These are suggested dates 
so I can move them.  
3.24.  Thereafter, the GC Chairperson and I have discussed the possibility that in lieu of  convening 
separate TNC and GC meetings in October, we could jointly convene an Informal HoDs on 10 October 
to take stock of where we stand before the SOM on 23 and 24 October. We would use the October 
HoDs meeting to report to the Membership on our own co nsultations in various configurations. Our 
expectation is that based on these consultations, ongoing work in negotiating groups, regular bodies, 
and Members' own discussions, we should be in a position to outline three or four areas to be taken 
up at the S OM including deliberative sessions if you so decide. This HoDs would be an opportunity 
for Members to react to these suggestions, and we therefore expect Ambassadors to come prepared 
with the specifics for us to arrive mutually at an agenda.  Thereafter, ou r task will be to write to your 
Senior Officials in the beginning of October providing details about how the meeting will be 
structured, the three or four topics to be taken up and the expectations on each of them. We must 
make sure that our Senior Officia ls come here with a clear agenda. These are busy people so we 
should be clear on what we want them to do and how we want them to work. We will work hard to 
make it so.  
3.25.  Following the SOM, I expect my consultations to further intensify to once a week. So, be  
prepared. We will then further take stock at the GC in November and adjust our roadmap 
accordingly. While I will aim to ensure broad representation in the smaller format meetings and I 
will want to have a mix of groupings, some will involve group coordina tors. So, I will be counting on 
group coordinators to consult with their groups before once they know what we are going to discuss 
to bring their feedback and after to give them feedback on what was discussed. I do recognize that 
there are Members that do not belong to a group or have particular situations or where 
group  positions are diverse or do not necessarily align. Let me assure you that I am cognisant of 
this – and will take account of this in my planning. So, this is the roadmap that I wanted to sha re 
for our work after the summer break. In closing, let me emphasize that at the end of the day, no TN/C/M/46  
 
- 11 - 
 
  matter how structured a process might be or who leads it, what ultimately matters is the will of all 
Members to desire an outcome and work together to find solutions and deliver it. How you will 
engage is what will make the difference – after all, it remains a Member -driven process. So, while I 
have set out this roadmap, I will be counting on your commitment and full support.  
3.26.  The Trade Negotiations Committee took note  of the reports of the General Council Chairperson 
and the Chairperson of the TNC.  
4  STATEMENTS BY PARTICIPANTS  
4.1.  The representative of  Cameroon , speaking on behalf of the African Group , delivered the 
following statement :  
4.2.  As we proceed towards MC13, and the October senior Officials Meeting to precede that, the 
Africa Group reiterates its call for conclusion of the numerous WTO development mandates that 
remain unfulfilled and for outcomes that confront our most pressing development needs and 
challenges . Such MC13 outcomes must contribute towards, and support our industrialisation 
objectives, and diversification of our economies, and enhance our productive capacities and 
potential.  We meet a few days after the United Nations warned of a worsening state o f food security 
with a particularly devastating and disproportionate impact on all regions of the African Continent. 
It is such realities that should urge us to redouble our efforts towards agricultural trade reform that 
will level the playing field and ad dress the systemic causes of food insecurity which stem from 
historical and current imbalances in the Agreement on Agriculture. These reforms should also foster 
resilience to future food security crises and shocks. The African Group, therefore,  continues t o call 
for a food security and livelihoods package as a priority outcome at MC13 and has in this regard 
recently tabled submissions on domestic support reforms and SSM. A permanent solution on PSH 
remain an intrinsic part of this package, including an outc ome on cotton. We also reiterate our call 
for meaningful outcomes on the MC12 mandate contained in paragraph 8 of the Ministerial 
Declaration on the Emergency Response to Food Insecurity.  
4.3.  The extension of the TRIPS MC12 Decision to cover therapeutics and d iagnostics remains a key 
priority of the African Group and is long overdue. We call for an urgent Decision on this matter to 
be taken without further delay and in any event well before MC13. This is about saving lives and any 
linkages with other envisaged MC13 outcomes would be morally unjustifiable.  The African Group 
remains committed to the full realization of the Fisheries subsidies negotiating mandate and SDG 
target 14.6 and continues to engage constructively in NGR discussions. The OCOF pillar with eff ective 
and appropriate S &DT is a cardinal element. The African Group is encouraged by the renewed spirit 
of engagement in the CTD -SS on the agreement specific proposals that were submitted by the G90 
focusing on the TBT and SPS Agreements. We hope this pos itive development will also permeate 
discussions on the remaining 8 ASPs the G90 will be submitting. We also welcome the approach by 
the CTD -SS chair for facilitator -led processes to steer more detailed and technical consideration of 
possible landing zones .  
4.4.  WTO Reform is a high priority issue for the Africa Group, particularly as it relates to its 
development dimension and the urgent need for Africa to embark on a sustainable growth path and 
confront contemporary challenges and multiple crises. We envisage  concrete outcomes at MC13 on 
our initiative and submissions calling for focused negotiations on select WTO Agreements to 
rebalance trade rules and availing policy space and tools in support of the industrialization, 
diversification, and structural transfo rmation of our economies. In this regard, our most recent 
submissions to the General Council covering the ASCM, TRIMS, Transfer of Technology and the TRIPS 
Agreement refer. Indeed, where there are areas of convergence, those elements must be harvested 
at MC13, whilst those that require further engagements post -MC13 could be delegated to the General 
Council to decide on without necessarily waiting for MC14.  Reforming the dispute settlement 
mechanism and restoring the two -tier system with the right to automat ic appeal; ensuring 
accessibility and equitable participation remain priorities for the Africa Group. To this extent, the 
African Group is engaging actively and constructively in the current informal DS discussions. We call 
for a multilateral process with a clear roadmap towards achieving these objectives. We expect a fully 
and well -functioning dispute settlement system accessible to all Members by 20 24 as mandated by 
Ministers .  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 12 - 
 
  4.5.  The African Group is gravely concerned by the rise in unilateral trade -related environmental 
measures that will increasingly impact the exports of developing countries, particularly our Members. 
This includes the increasing arbitrary imposition of SPS measu res with no clear basis in science. We 
call for conscious multilateral action and effort to ensure coherence of the WTO with relevant 
multilateral environmental agreements and principles therein, such as CBDR.  Lastly, on 
e-commerce, we reiterate our call f or due attention to be paid to the development dimension of the 
Work Programme on E -commerce in line with the mandate set out in WT/L/274 . In summary 
Madame Chair, our priorities elaborated on in our statement that we consider important for the 
attention of Senior Officials and their guidance at the meeting of 23 -24 October are the following:  
a. WTO Reform covering trade and industrial policy as well as dispute settlement reform.  
b. Agricultural trade reform, with key focus on food security and livelihood, and  
c. Trade -related environmental measures  
4.6.  We also trust Senior Officials will also be able to adopt an outcome on the over due extension 
of the TRIPS MC12 Decision to cover therapeutics and diagnostics; and to also adopt a 
comprehensive outcome on LDC graduation; or at a minimum provide the necessary guidance.  On 
the process and structure of engagements after the summer break,  the African Group would like to 
underscore the importance of transparency and inclusivity.  You can count on the constructive 
engagement by the African Group on all matters, and our support towards a productive and fruitful 
meeting of Senior Officials in O ctober, and indeed a successful MC13 in February 2024.  
4.7.  The representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia , speaking on behalf of the Arab Group , 
delivered the following statement :  
4.8.  The Arab Group will not reiterate in detail its positions and priorities for  MC13 as those  are well 
known and have not changed since the previous meeting – and would instead respond to the agenda 
regarding the preparation of the October Senior officials ' meeting . With the 13th Ministerial 
Conference seven months away, we stress th e need to make the upcoming Senior Officials Meeting 
meaningful and fruitful. Members should work in a constructive spirit to expedite actions by fully 
engaging with each other to bridge gaps in certain areas that seem to be low hanging fruits, so that 
by autumn, senior officials can have concrete areas to engage on and be able to provide solutions 
that can lead to fruitful outcomes at MC13.  This could happen, if members start working from now 
until the senior officials meeting on a focused agenda that list s the priority topics and the key areas 
that should be addressed by our senior officials and need urgent actions and solutions on a fast 
track, this is on one hand. On the other hand, Members also should identify issues that require 
political guidance and clarity for further focused work until MC13 and post MC13 including issues 
from MC12. The Senior official meeting should provide us with a clear road map and way forward to 
MC13 and post MC13. In terms of priority topics, the Arab group would like to highl ight the following 
areas that need a clear road map including urgent actions and solutions by our senior officials in 
October:  
a. Food Security and Agriculture , 
b. Development and LDC Graduation ,  
c. WTO Reform particularly Dispute Settlement Reform,  
d. Second Wave of the Fisheries Subsidies negotiations , 
e. Accessions , and 
f. The Work Program me on E-Commerce and the Moratorium.    
4.9.  The Arab Group stresses that the way in which the senior officials resume in October will be 
critical, as it will set in motion the trajecto ry of negotiations towards a meaningful and tangible 
results at the next Ministerial Conference (MC13) . Finally, the Arab Group remains committed to 
work constructively towards meaningful outcomes in MC13 that would serve the interests of all WTO 
Members.  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 13 - 
 
  4.10.  The representative of Kenya , speaking on behalf of the ACP , delivered the following 
statement :  
4.11.  This year, the ACP Group has been active, in particular in the negotiating groups on rules 
fisheries subsidies negotiations phase 2, agriculture negotiations, a nd with the G90 on the work of 
the CTD  SS. We were pleased with the interaction in phase II of the fisheries negotiations and the 
manner in which the Chair is leading the process so far, which up to now, is inclusive and transparent. 
It so far does not app ear to place any particular submissions above others, and is quite 
members -driven, allowing us time to hold bilateral engagements with each other and explore 
understandings and possible pathways to convergence.  The ACP Group held 8 bilateral meetings 
that we initiated, and others that were requested by other delegates.  Due to the lapse of time during 
the last Fish Week, the Group plans to continue with more bilateral meetings. The ACP Group finds 
that there are many elements in the different proposals on th e table, as well as the ACP plus 
South  Africa 's submission. We hope that all Members will keep an open mind to draw out those 
threads that can make the right connections and solutions.  We are aware that other proposals may 
be tabled soon, which we much  welcome. These proposals warrant the same treatment and 
consideration.   It is important to keep the focus at the WTO on what is in the WTO 's mandate. The 
WTO is not a fish management or sustainable fishing organization.   We successfully concluded the 
agreement on fisheries subsidies last year, and therefore this Agreement must not 
undermine  good fisheries management practices. We need only to focus on the part that was 
intractable – overcapacity and overfishing.  We are not addressing "capacity ".  It is ove rcapacity.  
While certain Members claimed last week that their interpretation is to address e veryone and 
everything for the future, we must be careful to keep our sight on responsibility for certain subsidies 
contributing to Over -capacity and Over -fishing, massively depleting our global fish resources.   Many 
of us are nowhere near Overcapacity or having the means to overfish and will not be in that position 
for decades to come.  We must also respect the principles in the Law of the Sea and the WTO should 
not overstep to try and solve the problem or aspect of sustainability which is already in the domain 
of other institutions.  Do no harm is another principle that we ask Members to keep at the centre  of 
these negotiations.  
4.12.  For the Senior Officials meeting we mu st have a common understanding of how much we 
should agree on overcapacity and overfishing (OCOF) in this phase II negotiations.  We may not be 
able to engulf all aspects of OCOF.  At least we must achieve a discipline that targets the most 
egregious subsidi zation that has brought this issue to the WTO and SDG 14.6, in the first place.  On 
agriculture, our priorities for MC13 are Domestic Support, cotton, PSH and SSM. We will, however, 
engage actively and constructively in the other areas.  Importantly, MC13 pr ovides an opportunity 
to discipline Blue Box support and strengthen Green Box provisions to prevent circumvention of 
domestic support disciplines.  Delivering on cotton is long overdue. We should adopt specific 
modalities to progressively eliminate any use of Final Bound AMS as product -specific cotton 
subsidies, taking into account the unique challenge faced by cotton -producing members, including 
developing countries and LDCs.  If we pursue disciplines on market access, it is important that we 
make sufficient  progress on domestic support. Such disciplines must include S&DT for developing 
countries, LDCs and SVEs, make allowance for designation of special products, must seek to address 
non-tariff barriers, and deal with concerns on tariff escalation. The ACP Gr oup has made a submission 
in RD/AG/115 on how we see the WTO contributing to resolving the food security issues of LDCs and 
NFIDCs in accordance with para 8 of the MC12 declaration on food insecurity.  
4.13.  Regarding the CTD -SS Agreement Specific Proposals, thes e are long overdue as well.  We 
applaud the Chair of CTD -SS, Ambassador Kadra Ahmed Hassan, for her efficient process to deploy 
facilitators to help gather the elements for reporting back to her and working with us to find targeted 
agreement on the differen t proposals.   After the facilitators report back to the Chair, we might start 
to forge elements for agreement in the next semester before the close of the year.  This way we can 
gauge what we can take to MC13.  Paragraph 10 of the MC12 Outcome Document ackno wledges "the 
need to facilitate the increasing participation of developing members, including LDCs, in global 
services trade, including by paying particular attention to sectors and modes of supply of export 
interest to them. " In this regard, the ACP Group  notes the recent launch of the WTO -World Bank 
publication entitled Trade in Services for Development. We recommend that informal meetings or 
information sharing sessions be convened in the fall to have discussions on the topics covered by 
the publication,  with a view to finding avenues for incorporating services in an outcome of MC13.  
4.14.  For both the Senior Officials meeting and MC13, it is important to address WTO Reform, both 
institutional and deliberative matters, as well as dispute settlement reform. Seni or Officials should TN/C/M/46  
 
- 14 - 
 
  be presented with a concrete plan to advance the work on institutional and deliberative reform 
through an appropriate vehicle, ideally a General Council appointed facilitator or facilitators.  As you 
have mentioned, the Senior Officials should also be updated on the work already undertaken with 
respect to 'reform by doing ', namely the improvements already to, and being implemented within 
the subsidiary bodies. However, it is important not to be overly ambitious and to narrow the scope 
of issues ahead of MC13, mindful of the multiplicity of proposals that are currently on the table, and 
which are forthcoming. Perhaps what would be helpful would be some guidance from the Senior 
Officials on which of the issues might be better resolved at the  level of the General Council, with a 
narrower range of issues going to the Ministers.  On dispute settlement reform, the Senior Officials 
should receive an update on the ongoing informal discussions. Well in advance of the Ministerial, 
this informal proces s must be formalized, and Senior Officials presented with a pathway towards 
formalization. Here, we note the forthcoming discussion at the next General Council based on the 
proposal by the Africa Group to formalize the process.  
4.15.  On preparations for the seni or officials meeting and MC13, we have emphasised that our 
agenda should be targeted to what Ministers must address and cannot be addressed or completed 
in the General Council.  The agenda should not be overly ambitious.   We begin with the instructions 
from the last ministerial, and any other pressing areas we feel we must put before the Ministers.   
Only last year we were able to agree on a number of decisions and work proceeded accordingly this 
year to put us in a positio n to deliver what the traffic can bear.   The E -commerce work programme 
and moratorium must also be taken up by the senior officials. There are those negotiating areas 
where action of Ministers may be required.  However, we will see after the Senior Official s Meeting 
what negotiating areas can yield ripe fruit to bring forward to Ministers at MC13. The process must 
remain truly Member -driven, fair, inclusive and transparent.  
4.16.  The representative of Djibouti , speaking on behalf of the LDC s, delivered the followi ng 
statement :  
4.17.  Areas of priority for us under the TNC, which could have elements in time for MC13 are in 
fisheries subsidies, overcapacity and overfishing component remaining from MC12, agriculture 
outcomes, and the CTD -SS. The Group commends them for thei r efforts to advance the negotiations 
ahead of MC13. The LDC Group participated actively in the work, including the consultations of the 
Negotiating Group on Rules and the Committees on Agriculture, and Trade and Development in 
special sessions.  The LDC Gr oup submitted a negotiating text RD/TN/RL/171  in the framework of 
the Negotiating Group on Rules Phase 2 negot iations. It is based on our previous communications 
TN/RL/GEN/193  and RD/TN/RL/125 , and on WT/MIN(22)/ W/20 . Through this communication, we 
propose disciplines for certain forms of subsidies which contribute to overcapacity and overfishing 
and more particularly those granted to industrial fleets which are practicing distant wa ter fishing 
close to, or within the exclusive economic zones (EEZ) of other Members, including LDCs. 
Furthermore, we are of the view that fishing activities related to artisanal, traditional, or small -scale 
fisheries as well as fishing activities, which pr edominantly exploit domestic fish stocks in developing 
country Members' EEZ should be exempted from future disciplines. Appropriate and effective special 
and differential treatment (S &DT) is critical to the mandate. In our view, our contribution constitute s 
a good basis for the second phase of the negotiations on fisheries subsidies.  
4.18.  On Agriculture, LDC Group would like to reiterate its commitment to establishing disciplines 
that promote fair trade in agricultural products, including cotton. As Net Food Imp orting Countries 
(NFIDCs), LDCs would like to be exempted from any commitments in any reform aimed at correcting 
agricultural market asymmetries. We urge Members to be more transparent in the provision of 
domestic support.  With regard to the negotiations o n the proposals on specific agreements, the LDC 
Group, as a member of the G90, encourages Members to engage constructively so that the series 
of meetings to discuss the ten G90 proposals. We must bear in mind paragraph 2 of the MC12 
outcome document which states: "We instruct officials to continue to work on improving the 
application of special and differential treatment in the CTD SS and other relevant venues in the WTO, 
as agreed and report on progress to the General Council before MC13 ". The LDC Group th anks you 
for your report Madame Director General with regard to your reflections on the activity reports of 
the Chairs of the negotiating bodies and on the meeting of senior officials to be held next October.  
4.19.  Now, allow us to address the two questions in t he order in which they were asked.  We 
congratulate the WTO Secretariat and in particular the Director -General for considering, in keeping 
with the Member -driven nature of the WTO, the organization of the meeting of senior officials next 
October. It is a go od initiative not only to test the ground a few months before MC13, but also to TN/C/M/46  
 
- 15 - 
 
  prepare it for the Ministers in order to facilitate the success of the said conference.  Priority topics for 
LDCs including decisions in the MC12 outcome document calling for re porting or recommendations 
to MC13. These relate to paragraphs 2 and 8 of the said document, paragraph 8 of the Ministerial 
Decision on the TRIPS Agreement paragraph 8 of the Ministerial declaration on the urgent response 
to food insecurity.  The implementa tion of decisions adopted at previous sessions of the Ministerial 
Conference identified in paragraph 8 of the MC12 Outcome documents should be reviewed at the 
senior official meetings and  should also be part of the agenda of this meeting. Then, the senior 
officials meeting should focus on Agriculture, including cotton, fisheries subsidies, the conclusion of 
agreement specific proposals in the CTD  SS, and the WTO Reform we applaud Members that have 
been working with us on our proposal containing practical ap proaches on the functioning of the 
secretariat and committees to improve our participation in the regular bodies.  We specifically thank 
those delegations that have cited our submission, thus recognizing our contributions and offensive 
interest on the refor m agenda.  There are other elements we hope that Members will take on board, 
The reconstitution of the Appellate Body is an interest for us in institutional reform of the WTO.  The 
LDC Group has placed the utmost priority on agreement on our graduation propo sal in the General 
Council next week.  We thank all delegations working with us to find solutions.  We are encouraged 
by our engagements so far and working with our esteemed Chair of the General Council Ambassador 
Molokomme.  
4.20.  During the fall, we should focus  our efforts on a package, a set of topics of importance to 
members. Topics of importance to LDCs should be prioritized.  Small group meetings have been 
helpful  so far in the NGR,  with the listen and view mode to ensure inclusiveness.  This could be 
replicat ed for the Senior Officials Meeting.  Small groups do make it possible to strengthen mutual 
understanding between members on the subjects under negotiation in order to build consensus.  We 
look forward to text-based  interaction in the fall before the senior officials meeting. Furthermore, 
the negotiation processes would benefit from the engagement of senior officials on negotiating texts 
from the chairs instead of a multitude of proposals.  Before concluding, the LDC Group urges the 
WTO Secretariat to finance senior LDC officials to ensure effective participation of the group.  In 
conclusion, the LDC Group wishes to renew its constructive engagement in the preparatory work for 
MC13 in order to contribute to the success of this event.  
4.21.  The representative of Barbad os, speaking on behalf of CARICOM , delivered the following 
statement:  
4.22.  Our overall assessment is that intentions are good, momentum is fair, and some gaps remain 
wide.  We do  not have a lot of time. But we do have some  time which we must use intelligently and 
strategically.  The Senior Officials Meeting will be key. It needs to be arranged so that the focus is 
on precision of discussion while also allowing space for bilateral engagement. It will be a stress test 
for MC13 , and we need to approach it carefully.  It will need to continue to be governed by 
pragmatism but with our shared principles of being Member -driven, inclusive, transparent and with 
consensus at the forefront.  Senior Officials should address issues that req uire political guidance and 
provide clarity for further focused work for MC13, including issues not resolved from MC12.  Do not 
overload the agenda but also be cognizant of what are top tier priorities for all members. It is a 
balancing act that must be ach ieved. We agree with your broad contours: Report on MC12 outcomes, 
updates from Chairs and Facilitators, blessing of things agreed by GC such as LDC graduation and 
matrix of reforms by doing; and pointing way to deliverables for MC13.  In terms of issues,  we would 
value having political guidance on the Ecommerce Work Programme and Moratorium.  
4.23.  On Fisheries Subsidies we remain pleased with the level of transparency demonstrated to 
date, look forward to proposals being submitted at the earliest, and to the next  stage. The Chair has 
set an ambitious roadmap of meetings for the Fall and here we ask the Secretariat to be sensitive 
to not scheduling other meetings of interest to small delegations during some of the key negotiating 
periods.  The reality is that the OC OF pillar is the most difficult element of the fisheries subsidies 
mandate to reach consensus on because it is the most meaningful for people and planet. The ACP 
position on adequate S&DT including through a de minimis approach remains our priority.  On WTO  
Reform - for us there is reform with a small 'r' and reform with a big 'R'. For little 'r' we are making 
good progress through "reform by doing " which should remain the purview of Ambassadors in the 
General Council.  On reform with a big 'R'- the biggest is  clearly the discussions on Dispute Settlement 
Reform. We take note of the progress made in the ongoing informal process.  We must have at a 
minimum, a transparency session with senior officials in October and seek their guidance on how to 
move forward on t his critical time bound issue.  On Agriculture we have a series of issues: SSM, Food 
security for LDCs and NFIDCs, and Special and Differential Treatment G90 Agreement Specific TN/C/M/46  
 
- 16 - 
 
  Proposals.  I commend the work of the Chair of the CTD SS and the facilitator on the TBT and SPS 
proposals and thank Members for their enhanced engagement on the G90 ASPs.  On Investment 
Facilitation for Development. We need to find a way to anchor this multilaterally. Barbados was 
among 18 developing countries to have requested a Self -Assessment Guide. These are similar to 
the needs assessments carried out during trade facilitation negotiations and will be crucial in helping 
us map out next steps.  There are a few other issues that warrant mention  – continued support for 
the Small Econom ies Work Programme, a need to have agreement on the LDC Graduation requests  
– these should be agreed to in the GC.  
4.24.  And although these are not part of the formal work streams of the WTO - the discussions in 
the MSME Working Group, the Trade and Gender and TE SSD warrant acknowledgment by 
interested  senior officials. And I take this opportunity to inform that these 3 groups are 
coming  together on September 25 to have a solutions lab event on Women -led MSMEs, Trade and 
Climate Change – Adapting and Investing for the Future . In terms of how to capture these at the 
SOM – perhaps a factual note based on a common format showcasing state of play could be a 
minimum form of transparency to senior officials given the moderate  time frame we are working 
around.  We all know we must seek to accelerate our work after the summer break and focus our 
attention on a priority basket of issues for a programme of work for the agreed shortlisted issues.  
This does not mean that we stop work ing on areas that are not included in the priority listing, rather, 
we should continue our active deliberations on other areas of work in an effort at reaching the same 
level of maturity as those which have been elevated to Senior Officials.  We are in broa d agreement 
of how you have set out what the SOM meeting could look like , but we would discuss this with our 
CARICOM, SVE s and ACP colleagues to decide best way forward.  But please remember the capacity 
constraints of developing countries, particularly tho se with small delegations and who are accredited 
to other organizations in Geneva. How wonderful it would be if other agencies in Geneva agreed not 
to have any major high-level events on the two days of the Senior Officials meeting. D G, I leave 
that with y ou to gently nudge your compatriot heads of agency on this.  
4.25.  The representative of Vanuatu , speaking on behalf of the Pacific Group , delivered the following 
statement :  
4.26.  We align with the ACP Statement . It is evident from the Negotiating Group Chairs ' report s 
that while work is gathering momentum, much work remains ahead of us. We only have six working 
months left before MC13. We need to work constructively and collaboratively to advance discussions 
and ensure we deliver concrete outcomes in Abu Dhabi.  We als o welcome the convening of the 
Senior Officials Meeting in October, which should provide clear political guidance from Senior Officials 
on expected outcomes at MC13.  For the Pacific Group, our utmost priorities for MC13 include fisheries 
subsidies, agricul ture, development issues, and WTO Reform. We think that these issues could be 
the focus of the Senior Officials Meeting in October . On Fisheries Subsidies, like many Members, the 
Pacific Group continues to prioritise the second wave of negotiations. The co mprehensive agreement 
we aim to conclude by MC13 must fully meet the mandates of SDG 14.6, MC11 and MC12. It must 
address subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing (OCOF), in particular, those 
subsidies provided to large -scale fishing inclu ding distant water fishing. We refer to our statement 
at the closing plenary of the Fish week held last Friday.  Also, we thank the Chair for the report 
delivered at closing plenary of Fish Week last week and circulated on 17 July 2023.  We welcome the 
Chair's intention to circulate a draft text after summer. This draft could be further considered by 
Senior Officials in October, or at least a few elements of the text that could reach consensus. We 
should work constructively during the four fish weeks to progress negotiations and support the 
Chair's aim to conclude textual negotiations by December. We also reiterate that we do not want a 
repeat of MC12 Green Room process at MC13.  We also welcome the launch of work to consider the 
rules of procedures and se tting up of the Fisheries Committee. We congratulate Ms. Josefina Bunge 
of Argentina, as she takes up her role as Facilitator to progress this work. We note that a structured 
list of topics will be  developed and shared with Members, and that a Workshop to understand the 
SCM Committee procedures will be organized in late September. We look forward to participating in 
the planned Workshop and further meetings in this workstream.  
4.27.  On Agriculture, we consider the pillars of Domestic Support, PSH and SSM as our p riorities in 
the negotiations. We note there is still some work to do to bring about some agreement among the 
proponents of the various proposals on how to proceed in the negotiations. The Pacific Group is still 
examining the proposals on the table. We exp ect that the WTO 's response to the food security 
challenges we continue to face as Net Food -Importing Developing Countries (NFIDCs) is prioritised. 
We also acknowledge the role that trade could play, as a tool to advancing the food security TN/C/M/46  
 
- 17 - 
 
  objectives of o ur Members.  On Development issues, we continue to support the work on improving 
the application of special and differential treatment (S &DT) in the WTO to be precise, effective and 
operational. We welcome the appointment of Mr. L oh Jia Jie of Singapore as Facilitator for 
progressing the G -90 Agreement -specific proposals related to SPS and TBT Agreements. We also 
take note of the intention to hold an experience -sharing workshop in October on these two areas.  
Also noting the LDC proposal on smooth transition,  we strongly support a decision on this item 
preferably before MC13. This could be an outcome to be adopted by the Senior Officials in October.  
4.28.  On WTO Reform, the Pacific Group stresses its position for an open, transparent and inclusive 
process for discus sions, as well as the need to meet the MC12 mandate to restore a fully and 
well-functioning dispute settlement system that is accessible to all Members by 2024. Perhaps a 
focus on the Dispute Settlement reform could be considered for the Senior Officials M eeting, given 
the mandated deadline. Also noting the many reform proposals on the table, we believe a structured 
work programme on this issue could be delivered at Abu Dhabi for implementation post -MC13.  We 
are aware that there are MC12 decisions that refe r to MC13 as the deadline for much of our work. 
Therefore, we cannot stress enough the need to structure the work ahead in the remaining six 
months. We urge the respective Chairs, Facilitators and Secretariat to ensure that there are no 
clashes in key nego tiating meetings to allow small Missions such as ours to actively participate.  To 
conclude, the Pacific Group stands ready to engage constructively with all Members to deliver 
meaningful outcomes at MC13. We take this opportunity to wish you all a restful summer break and 
to come back refreshed for the work ahead.  
4.29.  The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement :  
4.30.  At the outset, we wish to associate ourselves with the statement delivered by Camero on on 
behalf of the African Group and the stat ement by Kenya on behalf of the ACP.  Let me begin by 
assuring you of Nigeria 's commitment towards ensuring a successful MC13. As we approach the 
Senior Trade Officials Meeting which we believe would lay a strong foundation for a successful MC13, 
we call on  Members to prioritize the deli very of Development Centred outcomes that would rebalance 
trade rules, unlock productive capacities in Developing Countries and broaden the circle of 
prosperity.  Africa is on the throes of a food crisis not seen before in rec ent times. UN Agencies 
consistently draw attention to the deteriorating acute food insecurity situations in Africa and Nigeria 
is classified as hunger hotspot of highest concern. The sustained erosion of the competitiveness of 
African producers due to the growing use of trade distorting domestic subsidies by developed 
countries, as well as the inability of Developing Countries to support production and farmers ' 
livelihoods through necessary subsidies constrained by AoA are combining to create a food crisis of 
unprecedented proportion in Africa. Consequently, our priority in the ongoing Agriculture 
negotiations is to secure outcomes that would underpin Domestic Support reforms that are needed 
to level the playing -field and foster fair global agricultural mark ets. We are also seeking outcomes 
that would respond to the immediate and urgent challenges of food insecurity and loss of livelihoods. 
On Fisheries Subsidies, the need for adequate policy space through effective S&DT to foster 
sustainable development of D eveloping Countries Fisheries sector cannot be overemphasised given 
the severity of food and livelihood difficulties faced by these countries. We believe that the necessary 
baselines should be re-established  on the basis of submitted proposals. Ideally, a chair's text should 
focus on disciplining largescale industrial fishing in its totality.  We believe that the first step would 
be to identify effective disciplines on subsidies to large scale fishing including distant water fishing. 
This can be achieved by setting out effective criteria and principles such as the polluters pay and 
common but differentiated responsibilities principles that are relevant to disciplining such subsidies.  
The second step would be to identify effective S &DT bearing in mind that sma ll scale and artisanal 
fishing in small developing countries do not contribute to Over Capacity and Overfishing (OCOF) and 
therefore should not be subject to the discipline. On Dispute Settlement Reform, we believe that the 
general reform process including  the dispute settlement reform should continue to be member 
driven. Therefore, it is of critical importance that discussions on this issue remains open, transparent 
and inclusive. The reforms discussions should be geared towards addressing the difficulties  
undermining the credibility of the Dispute settlement system as well as address the challenges with 
effective participation of Developing countries especially LDCs in the WTO Dispute Settlement 
System. It is equally important to develop a clear framework that contains the scope and ToR on 
the parameters of discussion on the WTO Dispute Settlement Reform agenda in a formal and 
multilateral setting. On TRIPS, we welcome the inclusive and transparent nature in which the Chair 
has conducted her consultations a nd we stand ready to engage constructively. Regarding Paragraph 
8 of the Ministerial Decision, we believe that intensive work and discussions ought to be undertaken 
by the entire membership to ensure the deli very of the mandate which is to extend the TRIPS waiver TN/C/M/46  
 
- 18 - 
 
  decision on COVID -19 Vaccines to therapeutics and diagnostics in a timely manner so as to address 
the challenges of developing countries and least developed countries in the fight against COVID -19 
Pandemi c. Finally , on TRIPS Non-Violation and Situation Complaints, we believe that this should not 
apply in the context of the TRIPS agreement as this was not the intention of the Members in the 
agreement.  
4.31.  The representative of Colombia  delivered the following s tatement :  
4.32.  Colombia wishes to make four points regarding its preferences in the ongoing negotiations . 
First, with regard to agricultural negotiations, we consider it essential for progress to be made in 
reducing and limiting domestic subsidies by MC13 in o rder to level the playing field. Several Latin 
American countries submitted a position paper on this issue for discussion at next week's meeting 
of the General Council. Going further, Colombia would like to point out that Costa Rica's proposal on 
domestic support for agriculture is the way forward. It is the best proposal in years, and we believe 
that a serious and committed discussion in this regard is a prerequisite for any progress to be made 
at MC13.  Second, we must deepen our discussions on intellectua l property and medicines. The 
protection of intellectual property rights must be balanced with other key public policy objectives, 
such as human health or the fight against environmental degradation. In this connection, Colombia 
supports the extension of t he waiver, but above all, we support a conversation that is aligned with 
the discussions that are taking place at the WHO in relation to the pandemic treaty. In the end, we 
need to have an "open trigger", which allows the waiver to come into operation imme diately in the 
face of any new pandemic, without us wasting extremely valuable time in new negotiations.  Third, 
Colombia supports the idea of having a mechanism to discuss industrial subsidies. Industrial 
subsidies are skyrocketing, and small and medium si zed countries cannot match the amounts of 
resources granted by large economies. Colombia shares and supports the need for such a 
mechanism, as expressed in the document circulated by the European Union at the most recent 
General Council meeting. This discu ssion must not cover topics that are off limits but  must take into 
account the environmental impact of the proliferation of subsidies in recent years, as well as the 
ideas of the African Group and others in this regard.  Fourth and lastly, in line with the above, we 
would like to highlight explicitly the scope and high level of the wave of proposals made by the 
African Group in recent weeks, which Colombia in principle welcomes as a necessary step toward a 
balanced and successful MC13.  These are our prioriti es in the negotiations under way, and you can 
count on Colombia on the road to MC13. A special greeting and the best of wishes to Anabel González 
in her future undertakings.  
4.33.  The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement :  
4.34.  As a developing c ountry, Brazil wants a strengthened and modernized WTO that fully 
incorporates development and SDGs in its agenda. In that process, MC13 is an opportunity, but also 
a test: a test of our collective wisdom to safeguard the multilateral trading system into t he future.  
Retreats, ministerial gatherings, and senior official meetings next semester must have clear 
objectives. The goal for MC13 is to have a WTO fit for new challenges, while addressing longstanding 
issues such as the agriculture reform mandated in A rticle 20. Food security and agricultural trade 
must go hand in hand since meaningful outcomes in both areas require a broader discussion over 
domestic support. Developing countries, especially LDCs, need increased food production and 
stronger participatio n in global food trade, something that will not be achieved while  large players 
have access to effectively unlimited subsidization. For the MC13, Brazil wants a debate on domestic 
support which leads to effective food security now and in the future. Toget her with many Latin 
American partners we will deliver an important joint message on these subjects in the next GC.  WTO 
Reform, especially dispute settlement reform, remains a priority for the Brazilian government. Brazil 
is fully engaged in the ongoing inf ormal process on dispute settlement reform. We thank the 
facilitator for his efforts to move the process forward while keeping it inclusive and transparent. To 
reach our goal of having a fully functioning dispute settlement system by 2024, we must avoid a 
proliferation of issues and focus on the critical aspects that need to be resolved to achieve a 
permanent solution to the crisis.  Regarding the other aspects of WTO Reform, we thank the Chair of 
the General Council for the reform retreat in June. We need t o show results and harvest a number 
of institutional improvements by the next General Council.  Environmental sustainability is also a key 
issue, but it cannot be used as a cover for unilateralism and protectionism. Moreover, it cannot be 
used as an excuse for discriminatory policies and subsidies that generate unfair competition, widen 
the gap between rich and poor countries, and exacerbate excess capacity, ultimately harming the 
environment itself.  Brazil welcomes the African Group 's document on "policy sp ace", which 
encompasses not only industrial subsidies and policies, but also IP rights and investment measures. TN/C/M/46  
 
- 19 - 
 
  In September 's retreat, we must have a horizontal discussion on subsidies, both agricultural and 
industrial subsidies. In line with the African Group document, we must also have a serious discussion 
on the TRIPS agreement and its relation to industrial policy and development. Intellectual Property 
rights are part of industrial policy deliberations and can be tools to support not only sustainable 
development and the fight against climate change, but also needed transformations in global 
production and trade patterns.  Annual WTO Ministerial Conferences would enable us to better engage 
collectively and to provide political guidance to the WTO, enhanci ng its responsiveness to 
longstanding and emerging trade issues. They would also better reflect the interests of developing 
countries, particularly LDCs, contributing to rebuilding much needed trust among Members. Brazil 
tabled document WT/GC/ W/882 , which we will introduce in the next General Council.  
4.35.  The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement :  
4.36.  With just six months to go until MC13, we urgently need to put in place a clear MC13 road map 
to channel Members ' contributions and structure the discussions in the different areas in preparation 
for the Senior Officials meeting (SOM) in October. We see the Senior Officials meeting as the first 
important opportunity for political discussions an d to provide guidance on the critical areas for MC13, 
including on the MC13 ministerial statement. The agenda of the SOM could be structured around the 
following four key topics: dispute settlement reform, fisheries subsidies (phase 2), agriculture and 
new issues for deliberation. The Senior Officials meeting could also endorse some outcomes on WTO 
Reform. We see horizontal institutional improvements on the functioning of the subsidiary bodies as 
a candidate given that the various reform papers show some co mmonality. We also support an 
outcome on improvements of Ministerial Conferences/TNC/General Council, but for this to 
materialise, we would need a facilitator. The European Union also supports an outcome on the LDC 
Annex 1 graduation proposal for the Senio r Officials meeting. A facilitator on LDC graduation could 
also be helpful.   
4.37.  First, I would like to thank the Chairs of the negotiating groups for their reports and important 
work they are carrying out in preparation for MC13. From the perspective of the E uropean Union, 
we are looking for an ambitious, yet realistic package of MC13 outcomes that would also be a 
stepping -stone for more results at MC14. Such a package would include rulemaking and a reinforced 
deliberative function in critical areas on top of the MC12 mandates. Starting with dispute settlement, 
restoring a well and fully functioning dispute settlement system in the WTO is the top priority. We 
must aim for a landing zone agreement on DSU reform as a deliverable at MC13 and we cannot miss 
this po litical opportunity. The European Union is keen to see ongoing discussions continue in a result -
oriented manner and start text -based discussion after the summer. By the time of the Senior Officials 
meeting in late October, technical discussions on the text  should be sufficiently advanced to allow 
for political discussions.  We place strong importance on an outcome on reinforced deliberation on 
trade and industrial policy, trade and environment and trade and inclusiveness. On trade and 
industrial policy, the European Union looks forward to discussions in the dedicated retreat in 
September to lay the foundations for subsequent engagement towards defining a work programme 
on trade and industrial policies, including the development angle, to be launched at MC13.  On 
fisheries subsidies, we appreciate the hard  work of Ambassador Gunnarsson to conclude the fisheries 
negotiations by MC13. We urge all WTO members to complete their ratification of the phase 1 
Agreement so it can enter into force by MC13.  
4.38.  On agriculture , the European Union is concerned that with a few months to go there is still no 
convergence and no clear candidates for deliverables. The European Union calls on all Members to 
step up engagement on selected issues. It is clear that not e verything will be  possible, but it is 
important to look for deliverables, which strengthen the agricultural pillar and support WTO Reform. 
The Senior Officials meeting could be used as a convergence building moment. MC13 should provide 
guidance on reforming trade distortin g domestic support, including for cotton, as well as on the 
permanent solution for the PSH, given their impact on food security. MC13 could also help providing 
guidance on reforms of agricultural policies taking account of both trade distortion and environ mental 
sustainability. The current food security context requires us to look at a possible food security 
deliverable that could include advancement on export restrictions and transparency across all pillars.  
Looking ahead to MC13, the e -commerce moratorium  extension and the development -focused 
e-commerce work programme also remain key priorities. We welcome the recent momentum in the 
work programme discussions. The moratorium is of vital importance for business both in developed 
and developing countries and  of systemic importance to the WTO.  
4.39.  The representative of Samoa  delivered the following statement :  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 20 - 
 
  4.40.  Samoa appreciates the Director -General's  thoughts and suggestions on how we could optimi ze 
the Senior Officials meeting in October and pave the road to a successful MC13. You spoke for 
30 minutes, well worth the time as now we have a better understanding of how we can plan for the 
next few months and how we can organi ze ourselves better. It also now shortens my statement to 
just emphasise only a few key poi nts. Firstly, your statement was packed with ideas and already 
responds to the two questions you posed or at least forms the basis of preparing for the Senior 
Officials meeting. The Senior Officials meeting is only for two days and therefore we have to be 
precise. The Secretariat can already prepare those stocktaking reports and have those available well 
in advance of the meeting.  We found the dedicated sessions at MC12 useful but let  us see how the 
suggested breakout groups could work.  The mandate of the  negotiating bodies reporting this 
morning cover priority issues – development, including improving the application of S &DT, the 
systemic challenges linked to WTO reform and agriculture.  The concluding fisheries subsidies 
negotiations to discipline the ha rmful subsidies contributing to overfishing and overcapacity  is in our 
view on top of the list of priorities.  Senior Officials can consider fisheries in their meeting with a 
view of concluding the negotiations by December and receive the blessing of our M inisters at MC13. 
It is indeed a mature file and a low hanging fruit and as you have stated it does  not require time but 
political, and if I can add, a genuine good will.  
4.41.  The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , speaking on behalf of the OECS , delivered  the 
following statement : 
4.42.  We align with the statement by the ACP Group and the CARICOM Group. The OECS is pleased 
with the work being carried out by Ambassador Gunnarsson in the Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations. 
We commend Ambassador Gunnarsson for the dem onstrable commitment to transparency and 
inclusivity which will continue to serve us well during the text -based negotiations in the fall. We take 
note of the many proposals on the table. The OECS is fully aligned with the ACP and South Africa 
proposal. It is important to have an agreement which imposes stringent prohibitions on those chiefly 
responsible for the problem of overcapacity and overfishing which based on the evidence, are 
large-scale industrial fishing nations. These are the nations that traditio nally have had the 
wherewithal to provide massive amounts of economic incentives to their fishers to enhance their 
capacity to engage in overfishing. Therefore, we support straightforward prohibitions for these 
Members with little to no ability for them to  circumvent the prohibitions under the guise of having 
management systems in place. Meanwhile, appropriate and effective special and differential 
treatment must be an integral part of a final outcome and while we support a list of options for 
developing an d least -developed countries, we continue to repose our interest in a small players ' or 
de minimis  exemption with an appropriate threshold.  The OECS will be part of shaping what we are 
confident will be a balanced and meaningful outcome on fisheries subside s.  
4.43.  The Chair of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session must also be commended for 
his work to date. This continues to be a difficult  file as Members remain entrenched in their positions. 
There is a long laundry list of areas in which Members want  to see meaningful outcomes on 
Agriculture at MC13. On our part, we believe that it is overdue for us to arrive at concrete outcomes 
on Domestic Support, Cotton, Public Stockholding (PSH) and Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM). 
The current state of global f ood security or insecurity, exacerbated by the climate crisis, geopolitics, 
inflation and other crises, necessitate a binding WTO outcome in these areas. Particularly on 
Domestic Support, it is extremely important to preserve, or possibly strengthen, those  flexibilities 
available to developing Members to encourage agricultural and rural development.  We recognize the 
tireless efforts of Ambassador Kadra to facilitate a meaningful outcome on the G -90 Agreement 
Specific Proposals on Special and Differential Tr eatment. We have a systemic interest in 
strengthening the development dividend of the WTO. We trust that by MC13, we can all agree on 
the elements which could constitute a package for Ministers to consider.  
4.44.  Ahead of and after the Senior Officials meeting in October, we need to determine those 
outcomes which would be good to have and those which are essential. For us, the essential ones 
relate to the E -Commerce Work Programme and the Moratorium; Fisheries Subsidies; Agriculture 
and Reform, including Reform of the Dispute Settlement System.  We would like to see a less 
contentious approach to the discussions on the E -Commerce Work Programme and Moratorium. We 
call for pragmatism on this topic. We believe that Senior Officials can be updated on the good work 
being done by the Facilitator, Ambassador Canabady. However, we do not anticipate that Senior 
Officials will be able to make any definitive pronouncements on the Work Programme and 
Moratorium. On both Fisheries and Agriculture, we also anticipate that at bes t, Senior Officials will 
only be able to do a stocktake. These two issues will likely not be ripe to get concrete reactions from TN/C/M/46  
 
- 21 - 
 
  Senior Officials. However, our objective should be to work in a manner up to MC13 where we reduce 
the range of outstanding issu es to go before Ministers to the greatest extent possible.  Concerning 
Reform, this is perhaps where Senior Officials may be able to take some concrete action. On the 
institutional and deliberative issues, we may want Senior Officials to help to narrow the scope of 
what will form part of a package for MC13. We may also want to get the endorsement of Senior 
Officials regarding the format for reform discussions going forward, whether that be through a 
facilitator or facilitators. Regarding the Dispute Settleme nt matters, Senior Officials should of course, 
receive an update on the informal process. However, we should also seek their endorsement of a 
roadmap to formalize this process ahead of MC13.  
4.45.  The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following stateme nt: 
4.46.  It is true that, as Chairman of the NAMA negotiating group, I have not had anything to report 
to the TNC for quite some time. Do not worry. I am not going to lament this calamitous state of 
affairs nor plague Members with a long valedictory statement.  I would like to thank you , 
Director -General,  for your kind words. They really touched me. I also much  appreciated our good 
cooperation. I will remain a staunch defender of the multilateral trading system. But in other ways 
as I will have greater freedom to express my thoughts.  Many thanks to all the colleagues with whom 
I have cooperated constructively. T his is a page that is turning for me, a long and important phase 
of my life in which I have found a great deal of satisfaction. But it is with serenity that I approach a 
new phase in which I will devote more time to the passions that I have neglected durin g my 
professional life.  
4.47.  We would like to thank you for your report and your useful comments and suggestions on the 
Senior Officials Meeting. We also thank the chairpersons for their substantive reports.  The SOM is 
an important step in the preparations for the ministerial conference. It must be carefully prepared if 
we are to make the most out of it. With this in mind, the consultations that you will be conducting 
after the summer break, as well as the progress in the various processes should shape the agend a 
of the SOM as well as the format of debates. We would suggest the following approach:  
a. Firstly, the number of topics should be limited to allow for in -depth discussions.  
b. Secondly, the issues that require an impulse from the senior officials to reach an 
immediate result should be identified. They are not many. The graduation of LDCs could 
fall into this category if not solved beforehand.  
c. Thirdly, for the other issues, the aim would be to identify a realistic level of ambition for 
the ministerial conference.  This would be key to guide our work during the short time 
remaining before MC13.  
4.48.  In fact, we should answer the following two basic questions:  
a. The first question would be: Can we aim for a substantive and fully fledged or partial 
agreement on the issue at stake? For instance, the negotiations on fisheries subsidies 
should squarely fall into this category. The SOM could confirm that the objective is a fully 
fledged agreement on fisheries subsidies and that the text put forward by the Chairperson 
is the basis  to achieve that goal.  
b. In case the answer to the first question is negative, the second question would naturally 
be: Should we seek a consensus on the way forward after the Ministerial Conference by 
adopting specific mandates or work programmes? For instan ce, on WTO Reform, the SOM 
could provide guidance on how to deal with issues of political importance, like the subjects 
raised in the submissions of the European Union and of the African Group.  
4.49.  These are the questions we need to ask ourselves as we prepare  for the SOM. This applies in 
particular to the negotiating groups on fisheries subsidies and agriculture as well as to WTO Reform.  
With this in mind, the Chairpersons and other colleagues in charge of the relevant negotiations and 
processes should assess the situation and make proposals as to the realistic level of ambition for the 
Ministerial Conference. Senior officials would have an opportunity to comment on their proposals.  
And we would see if any trends emerge that would allow us to focus our subsequ ent efforts on 
realistic objectives. This would not call into question the objectives already clearly identified at MC12, TN/C/M/46  
 
- 22 - 
 
  which would remain relevant.  In this vein, MC13 will also be an important milestone for DSU reform. 
We welcome the progress made in th e informal process facilitated by Marco Molina that we 
understand is continuing in this moment . We call upon all members to engage constructively in 
further narrowing down the issues to prepare a constructive restart after the summer break.  
4.50.  The representat ive of Australia  delivered the following statement:  
4.51.  Australia has noted often that Abu Dhabi could be the first genuine WTO Reform Ministerial.  
Now it is clear that Abu Dhabi must be a big reform moment for this organization.  The Conference 
must deliver on  our top reform priority, restoring all Members ' ability to resolve disputes with finality 
and it must launch our work on the future of the system to ensure we can respond to the big global 
challenges of our time.  You asked us what our Senior Officials should address when they come here 
in late October.  Our objective should be to have our Senior Officials review and shape as much as 
possible the emerging package of outcomes for MC13 – across dispute settlement reform, the 
deliberative agenda an d rulemaking.  Senior Officials should indeed engage in shaping the WTO 
Reform package – the real promise of Abu Dhabi.  How? First, Senior Officials should engage in 
October on how we can advance convergence on the vital work of dispute settlement reform.  Second, 
WTO Reform requires us to consider how the global trading system must evolve, or what is often 
described as the deliberative agenda.  So, between now and the October Senior Officials ' meeting, 
we should hold working groups or retreats that help us he lp our Ministers to define a deliberative 
pathway for this organi zation towards MC14 that Ministers can announce in Abu Dhabi.  You also 
asked where we should channel our efforts in the fall.  On rulemaking, we need to maintain our 
steady progress in coming months, following our three big wins over the last three years.  In 2021, 
on services domestic regulation.  In 2022, on fisheries subsidies and, just in recent weeks, on 
investment facilitation for development.   Each concluded negotiation is a statement of c onfidence 
by the Membership in the WTO.  Each is a statement of support for the multilateral trading system.  
Also on the rul emaking agenda, we heard encouraging reports today from both the fisheries and 
agriculture chair - and their efforts to move us stead ily towards text is commendable.  A fisheries 
second -wave deal is within reach, if we are all willing to work with sustainability as our guiding 
objective.  This is crucial to all of us and particularly to our Pacific Vuvale, as the Deputy Prime 
Minister of Fiji said in this house just yesterday and Vanuatu and Samoa said earlier.  Modalities on 
the reform of domestic support – essential to both food security and the climate fight – are also 
within reach, and the Cairns Group is playing its part.  Thanks to Amb assador Acarsoy 's efforts and 
some important proposals, a middle ground is starting to be sketched out.  But as you said, 
Director -General, big divergences are still evident, and if we are to have a shot at success the four 
biggest subsidisers also need to get more seriously behind this effort and back it.  And if we  are to 
be true to our aim to use Ministerial Conferences more wisely, we should conclude the necessary 
work on rulemaking ahead of time, concluding what is possible on fisheries and agriculture s ubsidies 
by December for endorsement by our Ministers.  Senior Officials should also be in a position to 
endorse a deliberative package to put to Ministers if we are to fulfil the reform promise of Abu Dhabi.  
We therefore agree with the idea you set out tod ay that we hold deliberative sessions at Senior 
Officials on the topics that many have already mentioned in recent months – state intervention, 
trade and climate and inclusion and development.  Senior Officials could then, if we work "smartly ", 
as you chall enged us to do, endorse the scope of that deliberative package to be agreed and even 
the recommendations to put to Ministers at MC13 as part of an Abu Dhabi Reform Declaration.  We 
agree with the idea you mentioned of seeking concept notes to be drafted by the Secretariat and 
agree work should start on this now.  In addition to the three topics that are often mentioned, we 
should continue to seek maximum progress on agriculture and food security - but, if we fail again 
on agriculture at MC13, we will need our  Ministers to reflect on why we have failed and how to move 
forward.  Ministerial engagement on that task would be even more important in that context.  With a 
steadiness of purpose, we can and should make Abu Dhabi a genuine reform Ministerial by setting 
up the reform outcomes well in time, including at the October Senior Officials ' meeting.  On our rule -
making work, we should not wait till then for a throw of the dice.  Steady progress on rulemaking 
requires slow, deliberate advances.  That's within all of our grasp, right here in Geneva.  
4.52.  The representative of Costa Rica  delivered the following statement :  
4.53.  The work on fisheries subsidies and agricultural subsidies encourages us to believe that this 
will lead to a productive Senior Officials Meeting wh ich will deliver tangible outcomes or progress at 
MC13. I thank the Secretariat for its commitment and for work it is doing and whose ideas have 
been presented to us today. You have the support of Costa Rica. We will engage in the consultations TN/C/M/46  
 
- 23 - 
 
  that you ar range.  On the priority topics to be addressed at the Senior Officials Meeting in October 
and our expectations for MC13, I would like to underscore five topics.   
a. WTO Reform, including the following priority areas:  
i. The deliberative function of the organizati on, 
ii. Ensuring that the dispute settlement mechanism is operational by 2024 , 
iii. Institutionalizing stakeholder participation in the Organization without changing the 
intergovernmental nature, led by WTO Members , 
iv. The issue of responsible consensus, to which Sing apore has made reference on other 
occasions , 
v. We believe that the Organization must have a space dedicated to the discussion of 
new topics that can be incorporated into the Organization, where members can put 
forward topics and where they can be discussed a nd analysed in a transparent and 
constructive manner. We are not suggesting which body such a space should exist in, 
but we are proposing that discussions should begin on where such a space could be 
established.  
b. The second part of the Fisheries Subsidies A greement.  
c. Developing outcomes, where we see LDC graduation as low hanging fruit.  
d. Continuation of the moratorium on electronic transmissions.  
e. Compliance with the Article 20 mandate of the Agreement on Agriculture to complete 
agricultural trade reform.  
4.54.  Agriculture is an issue that cannot be ignored by our deputy ministers in the run up to MC13, 
because the vast majority of Members have called for it and because we have the Article 20 mandate. 
In this regard, I would like to take the opportunity to reiterate C osta Rica's proposal on the reform 
of domestic support for agriculture. This proposal, which has been extensively discussed, has been 
widely recognized for its technical soundness and has received support of Members from different 
groups, at different leve ls of development, acting as the springboard for negotiations in which all 
Members can secure a positive result.  This proposal, with its principles of progressivity and 
proportionality, aims to comprehensively address all types of domestic support, thereby  opening the 
door to the possibility of a new agreement on agricultural reform and resolving critically important 
and relevant issues for the WTO:  
a. Improving food security , 
b. Supporting sustainability , 
c. Levelling the playing field in international markets , 
d. Driving the reform process forward and effectively addressing product specific support , 
e. Providing a permanent solution for PSH, and  
f. Providing a solution for cotton.  
4.55.  At the last meeting of the Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture, suppor t for this 
proposal was strong , as was the request not to address the issue of public stockholding in isolation, 
but rather as part of the negotiations on domestic agricultural support.  We know that other Members 
will have different lists of deliverables a t MC13. For this reason, we believe that the Senior Officials 
Meeting should examine what is possible and what is not and move forward with trade-offs to allow 
Ministers to take the political decision on all issues.  Costa Rica will continue to contribute TN/C/M/46  
 
- 24 - 
 
  constructively in all areas of work toward MC13, seeking to build consensus and results that will 
ensure the WTO can remain relevant in international governance.  
4.56.  The representative of New Zealand  delivered the following statement :   
4.57.  New Zealand  sees the period ahead to MC13 as falling into three  parts. We consider the Senior 
Officials meeting at the end of October should provide guidance on all three  stages and crystalize 
our focus for MC13 and be yond. The first part is what we can and should be doing here and now in 
Geneva. We support efforts to move ahead on those practical steps to reform the functioning of the  
WTO that have received a large measure of support as this is what reform by doing is all about. We 
also encourage efforts to arrive at an agreement on Annex 1 of the LDC graduation proposal and 
appreciate the work a number of delegations are doing to enable a decision on this as soon as 
possible.  Senior Officials will be expecting to achi eve clarity about the focus of MC13, in particular, 
which issues Ministers should or could take decisions on at MC13 and what the forward work 
programme post MC13 should contain.  Top of mind amongst this first set of issues, where we 
already have existing  riding instructions from our Ministers, are completion of work on fisheries 
subsidies disciplines, agricultural trade reform and the restoration of a functioning dispute 
settlement. We believe that the Senior Officials meeting, when we have our Permanent 
Representatives and Capital based officials here together in Geneva, is the right moment to ask 
delegations tough and focused questions about their positions on the core issues and these core 
negotiations. We need to ask Senior Officials specific questions  on the approach we take to the 
overfishing and overcapacity  text, on how we progress agricultural domestic support and PSH side 
by side as we seek to meaningful deliver on food security and what we expect for dispute settlement.  
Running through all of th e above is the development dimension and the importance of ensuring the 
outcomes we achieve in these areas support the fuller integration of developing countries into the 
rules-based multilateral trading system.  New Zealand has been encouraged that we hav e seen some 
new and creative proposals brought to the table in many of these areas in recent weeks, especially 
in fish and agriculture, and that efforts are being made to synthesize elements of these proposals to 
help achieve convergence. We encourage all delegations to approach these new proposals with fresh 
eyes and to bring that spirit to the Senior Officials meeting to help achieve the outcomes needed in 
these areas at MC13. We are also looking to the discussions in the lead -up to and at the SOM  to 
help guide the way ahead for the post MC13 work programme. Realistically, some of the issues that 
we are working on or would like to work on in this Organi zation will require further discussion and 
participation before they are able to make major advances – and should form part of this post MC13 
work programme. Given this , New Zealand will be looking to work hard with you including, on your 
informal consultations that you have mentioned, and all other colleagues to get as much done as we 
can in the coming month s before the Ministerial Conference to prepare the ground for our Ministers 
to take the important decisions expected of them and to enable them to have that important high -
level political discussions that can guide our work post MC13. We would also advise that New Zealand 
has now completed its Parliamentary examination of the Fisheries Subsidies A greement and we 
expect that we will be able to deposit our instrument of ratification before the end of next month.  
4.58.  The representative of Egypt  delivered the follo wing statement :   
4.59.  We associate ourselves with the statements made by the African Group and the Arab Group.  
As we approach MC13 and the upcoming October Senior Officials Meeting, Egypt reaffirms the 
urgency to address the unfulfilled WTO development mandate s. Our focus must be on achieving 
outcomes that align with our development  goals.  Egypt emphasizes the need for reform that 
addresses the systemic causes of food insecurity. These reforms should foster resilience against 
future food crises and shocks. Egyp t participates constructively in the para 8 dedicated work 
programme discussions. Yesterday marked the initiation of our substantive discussions on crafting 
a comprehensive food security package to present to our esteemed ministers for adoption. In these 
discussions, we advocate for a resolute demonstration of political will, ensuring that the outcome on 
food security stands independent.  It is imperative that we avoid linking the outcome on food security 
solely to the agricultural negotiations; as such a li nkage could jeopardize our ability to make 
substantial contributions or, worse yet, render our efforts negligible.  Agriculture is a priority to us. 
The A frican Group  submitted a proposal addressing Domestic support reduction and the parameters 
of a special  safeguard mechanism. This proposal should form the basis of our discussions as it levels 
the playing field by targeting heavy subsidizers, hence correcting current market failures. It also 
takes food security and livelihood concerns into account. Egypt st ands firm in its call for the extension 
of the TRIPS MC12 Decision to cover therapeutics and diagnostics. We urge the commencement of 
text-based negotiations on this matter without delay.  The full realization of the Fisheries subsidies TN/C/M/46  
 
- 25 - 
 
  negotiations is of u tmost importance to Egypt. Our focus is on disciplines on subsidies contributing 
to OCOF. Large subsidizers are basically the segment we should target the most, especially those 
who fish beyond their national Jurisdictions with negative implications on EEZ  stocks of developing 
coastal states. Effective S&D T should be present to sustain our livelihood and food security concerns 
especially of artisanal and small scall fisheries.  The positive developments in the CTD  SS on 
agreement -specific proposals by the G90 are encouraging. Egypt hopes for a similar spirit of 
engagement on the remaining 8 ASPs.  WTO Reform is critical for Egypt, particularly in terms of its 
development dimension. In context of this reform process, we would call for focused negotiations to 
provide policy space to support the structural transformation of our economies. Reform should be 
effective, and development should be measurable.  Restoring the two -tier dispute settlement system 
and ensuring equitable participation remain priorities for Eg ypt. We advocate for a clear formal 
multilateral process to achieve these objectives.  Egypt expresses grave concern about the rise in 
unilateral trade -related environmental measures, which disproportionately impact developing 
countries. We call for multila teral action to ensure coherence between the WTO and relevant 
environmental agreements.  In the domain of e -commerce, Egypt emphasizes the importance of 
addressing the development dimension in the Work Programme in accordance with the mandate set 
out in WT/L/274 . Our priorities for the October Senior Officials Meeting are centered on the following 
key areas: food security, a ddressing trade -related environmental measures and their implication on 
market access opportunities for developing members, agricultural trade reform, reforming the DSB, 
and WTO Reform. We support the governing principle the road map that you explained in this regard.  
Additionally, we urge the adoption of overdue outcomes concerning the extension of the TRIPS MC12 
Decision to cover therapeutics and diagnostics and a comprehensive resolution on LDC graduation 
at the SOM meeting in October. Egypt pledges its full support to ensure a productive and successful 
meeting of Senior Officials in October and a fruitful MC13 in February 2024.  
4.60.  The representative of Norway  delivered the following statement :   
4.61.  As others , we see that the Senior Officials meeting will be ex tremely important for guiding us 
towards MC13 and we share many of the thoughts that you outlined in your intervention or 
presentation this morning. Efforts have to be channelled both to decide themes for what we would 
call a deliberative policy discussion , such as on trade and climate , industrial policy , and inclusiveness . 
All of those themes have been mentioned, and we have to decide on which themes  would be  possible 
for decision -making at MC13. Regardless of the format, however, there are two themes we w ant to 
highlight for the agenda, namely fisheries subsidies and dispute settlement. For fisheries subsidies, 
hopefully after the two first negotiating weeks of the fall , we should have the outline of convergence 
and a draft text. Some very specific questio ns will have to be posed as also New Zealand alluded to. 
The answers to which will guide us towards an agreement that should pass the red -phased text, or 
whatever you may call it, while noting that no one is going to get the perfect outcome seen from 
their side.  Our Senior Officials should also encourage further work on ratification so that we at MC13 
can celebrate entry into force of the FSA.  For dispute settlement, discussing the status quo of where 
the informal process has led us and on what themes we need to direct our efforts and how will be 
important . Nearly all Members want a result by MC13. We keep hearing that. A high -level Senior 
Officials meeting should not lose time on the nitty gritty of institutional WTO reform and I agree with 
those who suggested having  a report at the meeting. Most of the issues should be solved by us, by 
experts in Geneva, but a topic for Senior Officials could be, and I have  not heard it mentioned today, 
on how we welcome stakeholder engagement at the WTO. Another issue wh ich has been mentioned 
is how the consensus principle should or should not be used. As we see it, it should  not impede 
Members from having either discussions , negotiations or results . Costa Rica and Barbados point ed 
out the issues that we have in front of us on the Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement. 
Development is a core theme throughout most of what we do at the WTO, but even more specifically 
the meeting can be used to finali ze again something other s have said, the decision on LDC 
Graduation Annex 1 in the LDC revised proposal, if not finalised at next week 's General Council. 
Finally, you have also asked on the procedural issues for the S OM and if we have parallel discussions 
on a number of themes , we do agree with you that it would be useful to use one facilitator per theme 
to get everything together so that we actually can have reports that point us in certain directions.  
4.62.  The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement :   
4.63.  The main obje ctive of the Senior Officials Meeting (SOM) in October is for capitals to take 
stock of the situation and share a realistic outlook on the outcomes of the main agendas of MC13 as 
well as necessary subsequent work to accomplish them. It would then be useful  to hold another SOM 
just before MC13 to make final preparations for Ministers to agree on the outcomes.  Summarizing TN/C/M/46  
 
- 26 - 
 
  the discussions among Members so far, the candidates for the main agendas for MC13 are: (i) WTO 
Reform (DS Reform), (ii) agriculture and fo od security, (iii) fisheries, (iv) the Work Programme on 
E-Commerce and the moratorium, (v) development and inclusivity, (vi) new critical issues for 
deliberation such as state intervention and industrial policy, and trade and environment including 
climate . In the SOM in October, we consider it important to take account of these themes, leading 
to the setting of expectations for MC13.  While DS reform is the top priority in this house, an informal 
process is currently underway and the discussion among Senior  Officials needs to be based on the 
progress of discussions in light of what the WTO can accomplish at MC13 and within 2024.  The 
functional improvements of each subsidiary body should be carried out on a "reform by doing" basis 
under the GC Chair while the  SOM could take up items of genuine needs to be discussed at that 
level.  The Work Programme on E -Commerce and the moratorium : Japan considers it appropriate 
that the SOM will take stock of the ongoing discussions in the dedicated session, looking at the 
outcome of the ministerial decision at MC13.  Active discussions are taking place under the C oA SS 
Chair. Japan has continuously insisted on the importance of food security in the context of 
agricultural negotiations, and we would like to discuss what the WTO  can deliver in this regard at 
MC13 in the SOM.  With regard to the second wave of negotiations, it is not easy to foresee its 
progress as of October at this point, but we consider it appropriate to assess the prospects for its 
conclusion at MC13 in order t o accelerate negotiations.  The impact on trade of State Intervention 
and Industrial Policy, Japan suggests that, after deepening common understanding at the September 
retreat meeting, in -depth discussions should be held among us in Geneva to distil the ite ms where 
Members ' positions converge in order to agree on the establishment of an appropriate venue for 
discussion at MC13.  On trade and environment, based on the discussions taking place in the CTE, 
Japan suggests that Members exchange views in the SOM on  items to be agreed at MC13 with a 
view to advancing discussions on these items toward MC14. Development aspect is also important  
as a cross -cutting issue and it is an agenda that we should discuss in the SOM to assess the state 
of play. LDC  graduation should also be settled in the process to MC13.  
4.64.  The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement :  
4.65.  The credibility of the WTO and MC13 will rest on the ability to deliver meaningful development 
outcomes.  On the MC12 TRIPS Dec ision, it is highly regrettable that a few delegations have thus far 
prevented the Membership from reaching a Decision on the extension as mandated by Ministers and 
the decision is key to the credibility of the WTO. The delay in reaching this decision high lights the 
need for a trigger -ready mechanisms to obviate the need to negotiate waivers in the event of future 
pandemics. On Ag riculture , MC13 must deliver a comprehensive food security and livelihoods 
package that addresses the most trade distorting suppo rt, a permanent solution on PSH and SSM, 
as well as an outcome on cotton. We have proposals, on the table including by the Africa Group that 
can serve as a good basis for text -based negotiations. Effective S&D, including the preservation of 
policy space to  safeguard the livelihoods of low -income and resource -poor farmers is important. The 
agriculture package at MC13 must not only address immediate food security challenges, but also 
deliver outcomes that build resilience in agriculture production, correct th e systemic imbalances in 
the AoA and level the playing field. In relation to WTO Reform,  development must be at its centre. 
We therefore expect MC13 to deliver tangible outcomes on the proposals that have been tabled by 
the Africa n Group on policy space fo r industrialisation. This requires rebalancing of trade rules to 
avail policy tools that will place developing countries on a sustainable growth trajectory.  WTO Reform 
must also ensure a fully and well-functioning  two-tier dispute settlement mechanism acce ssible to 
all Members by 2024. As discussions advance towards the drafting phase, the process will need to 
be multilateralised under the DSB with a clear roadmap. We are concerned with calls for an early 
harvest, especially if it does not address our issue s. Any outcome must be balanced and take into 
account the interests of all. Regarding Fisheries, we commend Chair for an open and transparent 
process to date. We reiterate our calls for a balanced text that delivers on the SDG mandate and on 
effective and appropriate S&D. S&D cannot and must not be regarded as being at odds with 
sustainability. The disciplines in the OCOF pillar must ensure that major subsidisers engaged in large 
scale industrial fishing take the biggest responsibility. The ACP proposal ref lects our position and 
hence our decision to cosponsor it. We also welcome the LDC proposal.  A development package 
must also deliver outcomes on the long outstanding 10 G90 ASPs which have already been 
significantly reduced from over 150. We welcome the pr ocess initiated by the Chair of the CTD  SS. 
We once more call for the urgent conclusion of an agreement on LDC graduation. It is our firm belief 
that a meaningful and substantive outcome is achievable even before MC13.  Upcoming Senior Trade 
Officials Meeti ng and Process towards MC13 : In relation to the  Senior Trade Officials we believe this 
to be a stock taking meeting towards MC13 but also an opportunity to make decisions on some 
longstanding issues such as LDC graduation and extension of TRIPS decision to  therapeutics and TN/C/M/46  
 
- 27 - 
 
  diagnostics if not done by then, and also provide guidance, particularly on the following issues we 
consider a priority:  (i) WTO Reform – policy space for industriali zation, (ii) a gricultural trade reform, 
PSH, SSM and cotton with a view towards a food security and livelihoods package , and (iii) t rade 
and environment - we cannot afford to ignore the concerns of governments and the private sector 
on the rising proliferation of unilateral trade -related environmental measures.  Overall, it wou ld be 
important that we avoid prematurely prejudging outcomes that are or not feasible at MC13. We 
should just get on with it, and allow the negotiating processes to, at the right time, determine what 
an emerging package could look like. Any process toward s the Senior Trade Officials Meeting and 
MC13 must be open, transparent and inclusive.  
4.66.  The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement :  
4.67.  Following the convening notice, I will focus on what could be addressed at the Senior Officials ' 
Meeting in October and how we should best channel our efforts after the summer break.  At SOM as 
well as MC13, Korea 's top priority is WTO Reform. WTO Reform should cover all functions of the 
WTO, as our Ministers reaffirmed in the MC12 ou tcome document, which includes the dispute 
settlement, monitoring and deliberative, and the rule -making function.  First, on dispute settlement 
reform, we are making steady progress in the informal discussions and ready to start drafting after 
the summer br eak. We should also strive to reach agreement on important topics and should 
stocktake what has been achieved by then at the SOM, for further political thrust to agree on a 
package by the end of this year to fulfil our objective of ensuring a fully and wel l-functioning dispute 
settlement system by 2024. On the monitoring and deliberative function, the retreat last June served 
as a good opportunity for Members to have candid discussions.  Korea supports the bottom -up 
approach on "Reform -by-doing " and looks fo rward to in -depth discussions in the relevant bodies 
during the fall.  In doing so, Korea expects that the Secretariat could develop and update further 
progress on the table of measures in JOB/GC/345 and the state of play of WTO bodies in its 
addendum, to b e reported to Senior Officials in October and, consequently, to Ministers at MC13.  
Korea also regards development as an integral part of WTO Reform and appreciates the various 
proposals put forward by the African Group and others.  We should have a clear fa ct-based diagnosis 
before moving on to prescriptions, and we would benefit from having more clarity on the priorities 
between various submissions and how they relate to one another.  We should also make substantial 
headway rather than "holding and delaying " deliverables until MC13.  For example, Korea is willing 
to discuss early adoption of LDC graduation on Annex I  before or at the October SOM. In addition to 
WTO Reform, I would like to shortly comment on E -commerce moratorium,  Fisheries Subsidies and 
Agricu lture.  Regarding the Moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions, the two 
dedicated discussions and the workshop with IGOs were useful in deepening our understanding of 
this issue, including its scope and definition. Korea believes that the E -Commerce moratorium is one 
of the important topics that should be addressed in the upcoming Senior Officials Meetings.  
Regarding Fisheries Subsidies, we are fully back in negotiation mode and hope that new proposals 
can be circulated before summer break. A s we begin text -based discussions at the September fish 
week, we can take advantage of the SOM to stocktake and reach further convergence.  To expedite 
the progress, it would be crucial for us to recognize the core elements that have been widely 
supported a nd preserve them in the new text. On Agriculture, strengthening global food security is 
now the most important element in negotiations for MC13.  To contribute to these discussions, Korea 
hosted the 'High Yield Grain Seed Development and Green Revolution ' Workshop yesterday, to show 
that the revitalization of Green Revolution could be the most efficient and meaningful way to solve 
the persisting food shortage problem in LDCs and NFIDCs.  We hope to further discuss this issue and 
that this aspect could be adeq uately reflected in the MC13 outcome on food security.  Lastly, I would 
like to take this opportunity to touch upon the recently achieved milestone in Investment Facilitation 
for Development (IFD) negotiations.  It is an important contribution to development , in relation to 
the rule -making function.  This agreement will serve as a global benchmark for investment facilitation 
and developing countries and LDCs stand to benefit most from "better and more investment " flows.  
We hope this will help us keep relevance  of the multilateral trading system.  
4.68.  The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement :  
4.69.  In our view, a successful Senior Officials Meeting would be one that sets up MC13 so our 
ministers can truly engage on priority issues such as industrial policy and trade and climate change 
and so that ministers provide direction for our future work.  On substance, we also need to use this 
meeting to decide together what outcomes are realistic, to build convergence, and to start to take 
the measur e of difficult issues. It is essential that this meeting, and its most crucial discussions, be 
conducted in an open, transparent, and inclusive manner. We heard loud and clear at June 's retreat TN/C/M/46  
 
- 28 - 
 
  that we must abandon the model of having discussions or making  decisions that leave the majority 
of members in the dark. It 's true that my ambitions for this fall are high. But they are high because 
I think there is a lot of good work we can do in Geneva, both in the lead up to the Senior Officials 
Meeting and MC13.  There is clear convergence around which issues we wish to see addressed at 
MC13.  We now need to get to work on figuring out the process.  Canada is a firm believer in the 
power of informal discussions between diverse groups of Members.  We saw how useful Jun e's retreat 
was in terms of stimulating free -flowing and frank discussions. Let 's capitalize on the momentum it 
has opened up and start organizing our own conversations with members who are not our usual 
interlocutors.  Yesterday, I hosted just such a discu ssion, here at the WTO.  It was both productive 
and rewarding.  We heard Members ' views on both substance and process, at the SOM, in the lead -up 
to MC13, and beyond to MC14.  There was agreement on some issues, and candid but cordial 
discussion on more chall enging areas. I would unreservedly encourage all of you to organize your 
own discussions like this.  My team and I would be happy to share experiences and offer assistance 
in setting something up.  Canada strongly condemns the decision of the Russian Federat ion to 
withdraw its participation in the Black Sea Grain Initiative. This is a grave escalation of the 
weaponization of hunger by the Russian Federation. The decision of the Russian Federation will lead 
to an increase of global food prices, impacting first  and foremost emerging economies dependent on 
food imports.  Canada commends the efforts of Türkiye to facilitate negotiations with Russia in good 
faith. The Russian Federation continues to claim that their agricultural exports are impeded while 
exporting a  record amount of grains this season. Canada calls on the Russian Federation to 
immediately renew its participation in the agreement to avoid any further shocks to global food 
systems already strained by its war of aggression against Ukraine.  
4.70.  The represen tative of Chile delivered the following statement :  
4.71.  We much  agree that the Senior Officials' Meeting is an opportunity that should be utilized as 
much as possible, and we share the view that that this should be done by addressing both operational 
topics an d moving forward on substantive conclusions. As mentioned by the Director -General, the 
aim of all this is to have political signposts on the road to delivering outcomes at MC13.  The format 
used for the meeting will be essential, especially the questions th at will guide the various sessions, 
and the way in which we take stock of the conversations held.  As potential priority topics, we would 
highlight:  
a. the second wave of the fisheries subsidies negotiations , 
b. the impasse affecting the Appellate  Body (at senior  official level, it will be important to 
listen and gather impressions regarding this situation and ways to proceed) , 
c. negotiations on agriculture: how to achieve concrete progress on a framework for food 
security, involving reductions in trade -distorting domestic support, and taking into account 
a joint and balanced approach with other pillars, such as PSH.  
d. exploring ways to invigorate discussions on trade and the environment and trade and 
inclusiveness. This has a two -fold objective: (i) to ide ntify areas where the WTO can 
contribute; and (ii) to address global challenges from a collaborative and multilateral 
perspective.  
e. deliberative and monitoring function (with elements such as the functioning of Ministerial 
Conferences, the work of councils and committees, transparency, promoting stakeholder 
participation, and the use of factual and scientific information). On that point, deliberative 
function, together with the moratorium on electronic transactions, we believe that an 
"early harvest" can be achieved before MC13.  
4.72.  The representative of Chile, speaking as Coordinator of the Structured Discussions on 
Investment Facilitation for Development , delivered the following statement:  
4.73.  I take this opportunity to update Members on the latest developments in the Joint Initiative 
on Investment Facilitation for Development. At the high -level plenary meeting held in the afternoon 
of 6 July , after over five and a half years of preparatory work and intense text -based negotiations , 
the over 110 WTO Members participa ting in the initiative announced the conclusion of the 
negotiations on the text of the IFD Agreement. As highlighted by many of you present for this TN/C/M/46  
 
- 29 - 
 
  landmark occasion, this represents a momentous achievement. However, this clearly is not the end 
but rather  the beginning of the journey  – a journey that will entail engagement with the wider WTO 
Membership. As laid out in the statement by the co-coordinators issued on 6 July, next semester , 
work will proceed along the following four complimentary tracks. First , advance discussion on legal 
incorporation of the IFD Agreement into the WTO legal architecture, further analysing all procedure 
aspects in full respect to the  WTO Agreement. Second, IFD participants will increase their outreach 
efforts towards all WTO Me mbers including non -participating Members. They will not only highlight 
the benefits of joining the IFD Agreement and the extensive technical assistance and capacity 
building support available under it. Ambassador Park and I are always available for any Member or 
group of Members who would like further information on the IFD Agreement and what it can bring 
to your country. Third, IFD participants will intensify their support to the investment facilitation 
needs assessment process for developing and LDC Members. A survey to assess the demands for 
needs assessment among participating developing and LDC Members was launched a couple of 
months ago. I encourage you to complete it before the deadline on 28 July. So far, 20 Members 
have finali zed their interest to conduct an investment facilitation needs assessment with 18 of them 
requesting technical assistance to do so.  Any delegation who would like to flag its interest to conduct 
a needs assessment including non -participants in the initiative is more than welcom e to reach out 
to me or Ambassador Park. Finally, IFD participants will complete the final refinements to the IFD 
Agreement next semester  – namely, the textual adjustments that will emanate from the discussions 
on legal incorporation , the legal review of t he text and ensuring the language consistency across the 
three  language versions of the agreement. As I said, and in line with the IFD initiative 's open, 
transparent and inclusive nature , Ambassador Park and I stand ready to engage with all WTO 
Members on any issue they may wish to discuss.  
4.74.  The representative of Argentina  delivered the following statement :  
4.75.  We would like to underscore that we believe that the Senior Officials Meeting should serve as 
a consensus building meeting for MC13.  That meeting will undoubtedly be guided by the ongoing 
reform process, which must out of necessity include the actual implementation of the pending 
negotiating mandates, which were painstakingly negotiated over many years, reflecting a balance 
that was achieved through  those negotiations and most of which include issues of vital importance 
for the development of many of Members.  Agriculture is the greatest outstanding issue. Reforming 
agricultural trade rules must be the central part of the WTO's response to the food se curity problems 
facing many countries, including through the elimination of distorting subsidies and disguised 
restrictions on trade. Let us not forget that many of these agricultural subsidies, sometimes 
amounting to billions of dollars, are trade distort ing and often harmful to the environment.  Following 
this premise, we hope that Members will continue to work hard to reach agreements in the second 
wave of negotiations on fisheries subsidies, in order to achieve disciplines that complement the 
Agreement, such as those that ban subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, which 
not only distort markets, but also have a negative impact on the sustainability of the oceans.  The 
COVID -19 pandemic highlighted inequalities in access to vaccines, dia gnostics and treatments, with 
availability initially limited to a small number of Members. In this regard, we must agree without 
further delay to extend the Decision of the TRIPS Agreement of June this year to diagnostics and 
therapeutics, in accordance wi th the paragraph 8 mandate.  WTO Reform should have at its 
foundation an improvement in all the functions of the Organization, to facilitate the development of 
Members, with special attention given to the needs of developing countries. In this regard:  
a. We be lieve it is essential to overcome the deadlock situation with the Appellate Body, 
which not only undermines the WTO's dispute settlement system, but also adversely 
affects the WTO's negotiating and deliberative functions.  
b. All Members, particularly developi ng Members, are facing major challenges in their efforts 
to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. We agree on the importance of the 
environmental protection objective and the fight against climate change, although this 
does not imply endorsing unilate ral measures that unnecessarily restrict trade. These 
topics should be addressed as part of the WTO's mandate. We must also avoid bringing to 
this negotiating table a new mandate on industrial subsidies related to the environment 
as a means to move forward  in the negotiations on the long delayed agricultural reform, 
with a current mandate that has already been in force for more than a quarter of a century 
without substantive progress.  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 30 - 
 
  c. On transparency issues, we are willing to discuss this point, but above a ll, we value 
compliance with existing WTO rules and agreements. We must also stress the 
incompatibility of many unilateral measures with WTO rules and principles, which have 
been increasingly imposed in recent times.  
d. Lastly, we are analysing the submission s on policy spaces, technology transfer and scope 
for industrial development. We thank the African Group and look forward to discussing 
these submissions at the September retreat.  
4.76.  The representative of China  delivered the following statement :  
4.77.  For MC13, ou r priority issues should be those that have a clear MC12 mandate and are 
urgently needed by people, including DS reform, fisheries subsidies, food security, and developmen t. 
On dispute settlement reform, in spite of various challenges, we are glad to witne ss that all Members 
are seriously engaging with each other, conducting frank and solution -orientated discussions and 
making progress on certain issues. Given the limited timeframe, we urge Members to continue to 
work hard and focus on remaining core issues  with a pragmatic spirit so that we could move to the 
text drafting stage after the summer break and finish text -based discussions by the end of 2023. 
On fisheries subsidies, with a deepened understanding among Members through the well -organi zed 
fish weeks , we are looking forward to receiving the new Chairs' text and having text -based 
negotiations starting from September. To achieve this goal , we believe a Chair 's text adhering to 
the mandate and establishing fair and balanced discipline is of vital importa nce. More specific ally, 
special ability criteria should be the core principle for the disciplines, in particular, with regard to the 
subsidies for the fish activities beyond Member 's jurisdiction. On food security, in order to reach 
realistic and substanti al outcomes in the next few months , Members should be encouraged to 
contribute with specific ideas and proposals. We hope a forward -looking discussion could be started 
as early as possible. At the same time, discussions in COA  SS Working Group on Food Security could 
also be taken into account. On development, we are expecting the proposal on G raduated LDCs ' 
smooth transition to be an early harves t. On the G90 proposal, if we are unable to reach consensus 
on all ten deliverables, at least we should harves t some of them. On e -commerce , I would like to 
take this opportunity to thank Ambassador Dwarka -Canabady for her efforts in facilitating the 
e-commerce dedicated discussions. We believe this will help us learn more from each other and find 
common ground an d deliver a positive outcome at MC13, including extending the moratorium. 
Considering the limited time before MC13, we must make full use of the October S OM. For efficient 
discussion s, we agree with the ideas that the Director -General  shared this morning o n organi zational 
principles. We suggest that the first session is a plenary session for Negotiating Chairs and 
Facilitators to make reports to Senior Officials indicating the progress made and that remaining 
issues needed to be addressed, perhaps Senior Of ficials can gather the Geneva panorama together 
with the documents presented to them before the meeting. Then , Senior Officials can break into 
several groups and give the views and guidance through in teractive discussion s based on what they 
have heard in t he first session. After that, another planning session can be held to allow Group 
Coordinators and the Chair to make reports. Third – deliberative session.  At this moment, we agree  
that this could be left to Ambassadors in Geneva to make some more focus o n issues that need their 
engagement. Bilateral conversation is important but we also see the value of Room D format on 
having reached consensus so we suggest that based on the discussion, the Director -General, 
together with the GC Chair can organi ze Green Room or Room D format meetings with a view to 
letting Senior Officials reach consensus on the list of MC13 outcomes and give clear instructions on 
those difficult or critical issues. It is expected after Senior Officials, in principle, no further new issue s 
should be tabled. In order to have a meaningful and fruitful October Senior Officials, good 
organi zation is essential. In the meantime , we also need a good basis of the discussion. Therefore , 
as we are one week away from summer break and only have a mont h in the fall to prepare for Senior 
Officials, we hope Members could r amp up the ir efforts to achieve as much progress as possible by 
the October SOM.  At the same time,  China is discussing a TBT document with others to use the WTO 
as a path for response to  the new challenges such as digital economy and climate change. We also 
submitted a supply chain proposal to the July General Council. We are looking forward to Members ' 
support , opinions and suggestions  on these matters . 
4.78.  The representative of Thailand  delivered the following statement :  
4.79.  At this stage, we will not comment in detail on what we foresee in MC13 but would like to 
focus on the questions related to the Senior Officials' meeting (SOM). I think, for us in ASEAN, we 
are used to having the SOM meetin gs. So, at least for the Thailand delegation, we see the SOM as TN/C/M/46  
 
- 31 - 
 
  not only the technical top person to discuss and negotiate things, but also a political engagement. 
Given the number of members at the WTO, I do not think that long drawn negotiations should b e 
foreseen at the SOM meeting. So, in our view, the SOM meeting that will take place in October 
should focus on the state of play in the WTO and also provide political guidance if at that stage in 
October we could agree or need some advice. Also, I think i t is important for the senior officials  to 
understand what is going on at the WTO and take back what they see as a signal to the ministers to 
prepare for the ministerial meeting in early 2024. So, having said that, I think that not only the SOM 
meeting should see the state of play, they should have  an understanding of the stocktaking and also 
help us prepare for the groundwork for the MC13. Regarding the areas that we see as priorities in 
MC13, I think when we have the SOM here, they should not go home empty handed. They must be 
here and able to gav el and achieve something otherwise it is no use to have another SOM and they 
would not be interested. So, I would think that there are some issues that are low hanging fruits or 
early harvest. Good candidates are the LDCs graduation, TRIPS and E -Commerce m oratorium that 
we can have some agreements in October. So, we have some issues SOM can agree and also other 
issues that SOM can understand that there would be political guidance or decision needed from 
ministers at MC13 and that would be the WTO of the fut ure because I don't want SOMs to 
acknowledge that WTO is preoccupied with the existing issues. We have to give them the impression 
that we are moving forward. But, of course, we have to discuss agriculture and fisher ies at the SOM. 
These are the two issues , but I am not going to go into detail regarding Thailand 's position in these 
areas. Last but not least, for WTO of the future, we call them WTO Reform which includes dispute 
settlement. But I think even though some suggest to leave the deliberative issues  for the Minister 
to decide. However, it is important for the SOM to understand that what the minister may have to 
face up at MC13. So, I would like to propose that we should have a session for the SOM to familiarize 
themselves with the upcoming new issues  of the WTO trade such as trade and climate change, 
industrial development, digital economy and even some of the issues that are being discussed in the 
JSIs. So, those are our ideas at this stage.  
4.80.  The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the foll owing statement :  
4.81.  I will start with where we want to finish  and think where we want to be in Abu Dhabi next 
February/early March. We know about some of the issues, not only within the organi zation, but also 
outside which will impact our Ministers ' views an d their expectations as they come to Abu Dhabi. We 
know, that sadly, we are going to be in a crisis of food insecurity, which has, to be honest, been 
worsened this week by Russia 's withdrawal from the Black Sea Grain Initiative and the subsequent 
threats t o civilian shipping in and around Ukraine. We know that we are going to be in an 
environmental crisis,  probably the hottest year on record. We will be meeting in Abu Dhabi on the 
back of COP28. We know that we are going to be meeting at a time of economic uncertainty for so 
many of the Members of this organi zation. So , we need to think about the expectations of our 
Ministers. And we work our way back from Abu Dhabi in a way that is purposeful and thank you for 
setting out so clearly your sense of the proces s going forward. The most important thing for us to 
avoid doing over the coming weeks and months leading up to the Senior Officials Meeting is 
discussing what our officials should discuss.  Rather than actually doing the hard work, of negotiating 
with our p artners to actually achieve the substantive negotiations that our Ministers and senior 
officials, and most of all, our businesses and consumers, our workers are expecting us to be doing.  
There will be a couple of things for us to celebrate in Abu Dhabi. Th at's a good thing. We know that 
we will be able to celebrate what we have achieved in the last couple of weeks on the Investment 
Facilitation for Development. But we have hard work to do over the Autumn with colleagues. We 
know we all hope to achieve somet hing on Dispute Settlement. It is hard for our Ministers to come 
to Abu Dhabi and walk away without agreeing something on Dispute Settlement. We would have a 
hard job, all of us, explaining to our Ministers, our public and our media, if we were not able to  
achieve something.  I was struck  by the comments by the Africa n Group, presented by Cameroon, 
to agree something on food security which is actually meaningful. That might actually make a 
difference to increasing food security. We have tried to make a modes t contribution to that on export 
restrictions which we think is part of the policy mix; others have other suggestions. I think it is really 
good that our distinguished Chair of CoA  SS is now equipped with so many proposals on the table 
that we can really l ook at in detail. We need to come away from Abu Dhabi with real progress on 
fisheries. First of all, we have to ratify the agreement and provide support for the implementation. 
We are certainly on the case, if not quite as swiftly as some of us might wish.  Let me pay tribute to 
the Chair of the fisheries negotiations as to the way in which they are being dealt with. As he kindly 
said, we have put down a proposal today that tries to capture some of the really useful ideas that a 
whole number of delegations h ave made in those fish weeks. But of course,  there is some hard work 
to be done in the Autumn in those fisheries negotiations. E -commerce is really important for a TN/C/M/46  
 
- 32 - 
 
  number of reasons. A number of us were at the JAG (the advisory group of the ITC) and I was struck 
by how vital digital trade is to the work they do to enable MSMEs in the developing world to reap 
the benefits of global trade. I do think that it is incumbent upon us to ensure that we are enabling 
digital trade, not disabling it. It plays a really  important role. Similarly, an agreement on LDC 
graduation is important and we need to do the hard work on that over the coming weeks to get a 
deal on that. Similarly , we need to sort the long-term future of the Enhanced Integrated Framework. 
My delegation  is on the case with recipients and donors. Those are all decisions, one way or another 
that we need to take by Abu Dhabi. But we also know we need to set an agenda for ourselves for 
the years ahead. We have a lot of work where we should have made more pro gress. There are a 
number of issues where we ned to be doing more,  where they are not sufficiently on our agenda. 
We need to be thinking ahead for an organi zation in the 2020s and  looking ahead to 2030s. That 
agenda that you have set out DG; as trade being  green and inclusive, services that are digital. We 
need to equip ourselves for that. We need to ensure that gets done. So, there is a lot of work to do. 
We need real clarity on how are going to do that.  We need to come back from our summer holidays 
in Sep tember, and as others have said, there is not much time. Not a lot of meetings, either formal 
meetings, or GC or Senior Official Meeting.  So, less discussion about discussion and more negotiation 
about how we can bring ourselves closer to substantive agree ments, in what we hope, will be a 
successful MC13 in Abu Dhabi.  
4.82.  The representative of Mauritius  delivered the following statement :  
4.83.  We associate ourselves with the statements made by Cameroon on behalf of the African Group 
and Kenya on behalf of the ACP Group. On fisheries subsidies , we would like to commen d the NGR 
Chair for the transparent and inclusive manner in which he has been driving the process, trying to 
foster understanding and building momentum. A lot has been said last week in the fisheries we ek 
so that we are focused simply on what we expect from MC13 : (i) an adequate response to the 
negotiating mandate aimed at disciplining subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing ; 
(ii) an effective and appropriate special and differential tr eatment ; and (iii) to carve a fair deal that 
responds to the concerns of large fishing nations and small fishing nations in a proportionate manner 
with the aim of restoring balance in our seas for sustainable trade. I will not dwell on agriculture, 
except to say that the common expectation should be to move away from the stalemate and at the 
very least to address food security concerns that COVID, climate change and international conflicts 
have brought to the fore. This issue is especially a hard one for NFIDCs who expect to find some 
answers. On reform , we are pleased to note the high number of written submissions which reflects 
Members ' engagement. Reform from our perspective inter alia  means S&DT and policy space to run 
hand in hand with disciplines being  negotiated. Not all Member s are at the same level of development 
and we need to provide them with necessary flexibilities to allow them to smoothly integrate  into 
the global value chain and benefit from international trade. Reform should therefore address  the 
development needs of WTO Members especially small , developing  ones. We have noted substantial 
progress on changes being proposed and implemented for the effective and efficient running of a 
number of committees and we welcome this. Turning to DS  Refor m, while we understand that 
substantive work is being undertaken on DS reform through the informal facilitator -led process, we 
wish to emphasi ze the need to formali ze this process to make it more inclusive and transparent, 
especially by scheduling meetings  that do not clash with other major committees and provide 
adequate time between successive meetings. The dispute settlement system has always been the 
core of the WTO and it is what gives credibility to the rules and disciplines we establish and trust in 
the multilateral trading system. So , we look to the bigger traders and regular users of the DS  system  
to lead the way on this one. Turning to the October  SOM, we agree with your proposals : 
(i) stocktaking, factual report to be prepared by the Secretariat a nd the updates from the Chairs, 
(ii) the early harvest, wherever possible – surely the Senior Officials can give themselves a pat on 
the back for having delivered on LDC Graduation, and (iii) the identification of specific issues that 
Senior Officials can solve and give a push to . The EU proposal to focus on dispute settlement, 
agriculture and fisheries makes sense because we cannot do everything , and we need to get the 
Senior Officials to take time to reflect on things. But another issue on which we could also engage 
them is on the way we intend to conduct MC13  – the process.  We need to look at this because we 
would like the process to remain as inclusive and transparent as possible and we need to know what 
is going to happen, how our Ministers are going t o be engaged, and what they are expected to do. 
As the EU said, we need to prepare this space of identification of issues carefully, if we are to handle 
this successfully. However , we seem to have developed a culture in the house whereby no one will 
even hint about the possibility of a compromise until the very last moment, including stopping the 
clock, if need be, to reach there. I find this a pity because movement forward on any o ne of the 
three issues we could identify could lead to momentum on the other issues on the understanding TN/C/M/46  
 
- 33 - 
 
  that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. I do not know how to address this , but I am 
certainly willing to engage with any thinking that goes on regarding this issue and whether we need 
to go through a similitude of discussion with the Senior Officials knowing full y well that we wo uld 
not do anything until February or whether we can actually engage them to see how far we can push 
this. 
4.84.  The repre sentative of Uruguay  delivered the following statement :  
4.85.  Uruguay recognizes and supports the efforts of Ambassador Alparslan Acarsoy in finding a 
way forward in the agriculture negotiations, which is the WTO's greatest outstanding topic. We 
reaffirm our ab solute commitment to continue working constructively with all Members to achieve 
positive outcomes at MC13.  Members must fulfil outstanding mandates, in particular the original 
mandate that we set for ourselves in 1995 in Article 20 of the Agreement on Agr iculture, which 
instructs us to make substantial progressive reductions in support and protection resulting in 
fundamental reform.  The direction of the reform process is clear and does not allow for different 
interpretations. Issues such as experience to d ate from implementing the reduction commitments, 
non-trade concerns, and special and differential treatment are elements to be taken into account as 
we move toward an outcome, and they cannot be used as an argument to change the direction of 
the reform pro cess as agreed by all.  We hope that Members will show the necessary political will to 
make decisive steps on this long overdue mandate, with the firm belief that this will mark a 
fundamental contribution by the WTO to our common development, food security and environmental 
protection goals that will benefit e veryone, in particular developing and least developed countries.  
We know from recent experience where we can end up when we insist on finding definitive solutions 
to certain issues as a prerequisite for  making any progress on reforming the agricultural trade rules 
to which we all committed ourselves in 1995 – and let me say this, it is not far . We therefore urge 
all delegations to act constructively to reach convergence in order to ensure we can move for ward 
on all outstanding agriculture areas, while taking into account the interests of all delegations in an 
effective and balanced way.  In this regard, we have a proposal on the table on the domestic support 
pillar, presented by Costa Rica, which provides for a balanced and feasibility -oriented  approach, and 
is, in our view, an ideal baseline for the post summer recess negotiations. We invite Members to use 
this platform to engage in a negotiating process to build, jointly and progressively, a comprehensive  
outcome that effectively addresses the concerns and interests of the different WTO Members, in a 
manner consistent with the reform mandate.  In regard to fisheries subsidies, we congratulate the 
Chairperson of the Negotiating Group for the way he has led t hese negotiations and in particular the 
fourth Fish Week that was held recently. We support the importance of focusing on the elements 
that are common to all proposals in order to engage in a text-based  discussion after the summer 
recess. We are willing to  work on all proposals that meet the objective of designing a stricter 
discipline, while also having a menu of options that take into account the particularities and situations 
of developing countries. The time available to us is limited if we are to final ise the text in December. 
Bridges would therefore need to be built and the right degree of convergence found to secure a 
positive outcome with which we can all live.  We underscore the importance of the Work Programme 
and moratorium on electronic commerce a nd support the process and leadership of Ambassador 
Usha Dwarka -Canabady in conducting dedicated discussions that facilitate an exchange of 
information and strengthen the levels of confidence among Members, with a view to the adoption of 
critical definitio ns over the coming months.  Taking into account in particular the principles of 
non-discrimination  and transparency, as well as the objectives of achieving greater levels of certainty 
and predictability in international trade, Uruguay recognizes that the mo ratorium has had positive 
effects and constitutes a cornerstone of the development architecture for electronic commerce and 
the digital economy. In this regard, we believe it is important to clearly state our support for the 
renewal of the moratorium on th e imposition of customs duties on electronic transmissions at the 
next Ministerial Conference.  Regarding the dispute settlement system, we would like to reiterate our 
concern about the disappearance of the Appellate Body and the systemic consequences that this has 
brought, as reflected in the number of cases appealed into the void.  Uruguay views the dispute 
settlement system as a two-stage  system, with a second, specialist and comprehensive instance of 
review, as provided for in the WTO Agreements . Having s aid that, we would like to express a certain 
degree of optimism and expectation for the discussions that are taking place as part of the informal 
process to reform the dispute settlement system coordinated by Mr Marco Molina. In this regard, we 
would like to recognize the integrity, honesty and commitment of both the coordinator and Members 
in the discussions. Lastly, we would like to reaffirm our delegation's commitment and flexibility in 
this process and  express our expectation that Members will be able t o reach a compromise to 
overcome this impasse.  In conclusion, in order to best prepare for October's Senior Officials' Meeting, TN/C/M/46  
 
- 34 - 
 
  and to ensure that it is as productive as possible, we believe it is essential to learn more about the 
topic that will be addres sed at that meeting, as well as expectations regarding these issues . 
4.86.  The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement :  
4.87.  We thank the CoA  SS Chair for the update and his efforts to try to mobilize Members toward 
negotiations on a base text. However, we cannot help but note, as we did in this week's CoA  SS 
meetings, that it is an incomplete menu and does not provide adequate options for non -stockpile 
proponents, missing basic elements such as the need for capping, which is a key provisio n and not 
just an issue that can be "negotiated later". As we have also stated, we are ready to help with 
concrete suggestions to complete the menu and support you in Members efforts.  Agriculture is 
undoubtedly the most neglected issue at the WTO and conse quently the most distorted sector in 
international trade.  Concluding negotiations to reduce progressively and substantially the levels of 
agricultural trade distortion and protection mandated by Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture 
is an obligation o f international law that all Members must abide by.  This mandate has been 
neglected for so long that it is sometimes presented as something from the past that has no real 
application in the context of today's crisis, yet it is as relevant as ever and even more urgent to 
address if we want a real WTO response to today's challenges.  Reform under Article 20 of the 
Agreement on Agriculture is the best way for the WTO to contribute to ensuring global food security, 
in particular for developing countries, and env ironmental sustainability in agriculture.  Food security 
and reform are indivisible issues at our organization.  Progress should be made to deliver concrete 
and tangible results across the three pillars of the Agreement on Agriculture.  For MC13, reform of 
the domestic support pillar must be tackled, covering all product specific support and concentration 
of subsidies, including those for public stockholding for food security purposes at administered 
prices, in a holistic, balanced, fair and market -oriented ma nner.  At the same time, work must be 
done to improve market access conditions for agricultural products, which not only includes the 
market access pillar of the reform, but also the strengthening of the implementation of other WTO 
agreements in order to av oid unjustified non-tariff barriers.  Electronic commerce : Separately, my 
delegation believes that we should work together to advance technical discussions on the extension 
of the electronic commerce moratorium and revitalization of the 1998 Work Programme on Electronic 
Commerce.  Paraguay believes that the digital economy can be transformed into a vehicle for 
development and in this sense has historically supported the extension of the moratorium. This is 
notwithstanding the discussion of the scope and impac t of the moratorium and a better 
understanding of how to use internal taxes applied to digital services as an alternative to increase 
tax revenue, in line with the National Development Plan 2030 and the SDGs.  For the same reason, 
Paraguay is actively parti cipating in the Joint Initiative on E -commerce and is even facilitating a 
negotiating group. But as we pointed out at the Heads of Delegation meeting held on 6 July, we 
believe that if we want to achieve an inclusive outcome that has an impact on the econo my of all 
Members, the Director General and the co convenors should engage Ministers and senior officials in 
the discussion as soon as possible.  Regarding the best way to channel efforts in preparation for the 
Senior Officials Meeting , we believe that it w ould be best to have a limited agenda focused on the 
most relevant issues, on the issues that need the political momentum to ensure we approach MC13 
with the prospect of concrete results.  In this regard, as we have already mentioned, the agricultural 
quest ion in all aspects should not be excluded. Likewise, issues such as reform, from a development 
perspective, where special and differential treatment for developing countries, and even more so for 
landlocked countries, is addressed. The full implementation of the Dispute Settlement Body is 
essential in order to continue building trust that the agreements will not become dead letters.  I could 
not fail to mention the work we have been doing in the different groups on "reforming by doing", as 
this gives even mo re momentum to the task of seeing and making the WTO more active and up to 
date. Lastly, the decision to extend the vaccine waiver to therap eutics  and diagnostics is a decision 
that should not be delayed any longer; it is a commitment to our society.  In ou r country, in less 
than a month a new government will take office, with renewed hopes to continue providing greater 
welfare to our people. Two months into the new government, a high-level authority will be able to 
come to Geneva if the conditions are right  to achieve the progress and political momentum we need, 
and we will only achieve this if we show a little flexibility in addressing each other's red lines and 
striking a balance in the interests of all parties.  
4.88.  The representative of the Philippines  delive red the following statement :  
4.89.  We agree with your guidance on the going forward steps towards both the SOM and MC13. 
The value of the SOM is the opportunity for dialogue and gathering of these high officials for a frank 
exchange of ideas, building camaraderie, evolving the resulting buy  in to our shared goals of TN/C/M/46  
 
- 35 - 
 
  development and prosperity through open markets and a rules -based system.  On the Fisheries 
Subsidies Agreement (FSA), the recent exchange of proposals and positions on the key disciplines 
provide us with more clarity on workable options to start text -based negotiations in the fall.  The 
Philippines is encouraged by the leadership shown by large fishing nations in fast -tracking the 
domestic acceptance of the FSA. SOMs  should guide negotiators with a firm timeframe for narrowing 
options for text -based negotiations and commit to early ratification and entry into force of 
FSA Part 1. On agriculture, we note the divergent positions that still persist on core issues such as 
domestic support, PSH and SSM, and deadlocks of ideas on the reform process under Article 20 of 
the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA). There are new proposals that have been put forward that merit 
consideration, and we agree that food security must be prioritized, with special care in considering 
the situation of net food import developing countries.  Building on the SDGs, and given the clear 
impact of climate change, we w ould stand to benefit from having a shared vision of sustainable, 
resilient and efficient farming systems and consider what trade policy tools would have the most 
positive impact for developing countries and LDCs.  On development, we support the many 
interv entions to ask the SOM to pave the way for early resolution and deli very of the LDCs Graduation 
Package. The Philippines welcomes the updates on developments on the Joint Initiatives, and in 
particular, we appreciate the constructive engagement demonstrate d by over 110 delegations in 
finalizing textual negotiations for the Investment Facilitation for Development (IFD) agreement, 
which provides us with one key deliverable for MC13.  The future IFD Agreement, with its enhanced 
transparency and facilitation pro cedures will contribute to increased foreign direct investments, 
particularly in emerging economies.  We also note the steady progress that has been achieved in the 
JSI on e -commerce and welcome efforts to increase the pace of negotiations. Given the progre ss 
made in IFD and SDR, the SOM should engage on the question of how plurilateralism fits within the 
WTO architecture and the concept of responsible multilateralism.  On digital trade, Members should 
provide greater clarity on the scope and definition of el ectronic transmissions and consider early 
consensus and compromise on the moratorium extension and work program expansion.  We could 
also seek further convergence on the format and frequency of future MCs. And we are mindful of 
considering ways to ensure in clusive participation and substantive engagement over the two days 
by looking at various modalities that have proven effective, such as the prior circulation of written 
statements by delegations, break -out sessions, and guide questions.  It would also be im portant to 
provide a space for informal engagement and networking.   
4.90.  The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement :  
4.91.  Many of the mandated issues are coming from the Doha Development Round and I would like 
to further reaffirm Indonesia 's commitment that our utmost priority is in concluding the unresolved 
mandated issues under this Round.  With that in mind, allow me to highlight several issues of our 
interest . On Agriculture, I believe that the agriculture negotiations have reached a critic al juncture. 
With several months left prior to MC13, we need to expedite our works to bridge the gap. In this 
regard, we share the view on the importance of having a concrete outcome in the next MC13. 
However, it is clear that such outcome cannot  be achiev ed without real efforts to fix the on -going 
historical imbalances of the agriculture trade sector.  Moreover, we also note that there have been 
other submissions that tried to address the issue of PSH as well as Chair 's efforts to narrow the 
differences. In  this regard, Indonesia along with proponents continue to see the importance of 
text-based negotiations that are based on document JOB/AG/229 , which represents the interests of 
80 WTO Members and more than 80% of the world's population. To move the discussion forward, 
Indonesia stands ready to early start the text -based negotiation and engage constructively. 
Together, w e need to ensure that permanent solution on the issue of public stockholding for food 
security purposes, as mandated by the WTO 's Ministerial Decisions in Bali and Nairobi, can finally be 
achieved at MC13.  On the work programme of e -commerce, we are of the  view that the issues 
discussed in the dedicated discussions on e -commerce represent the concerns of all WTO Members, 
especially developing countries and LDCs, over the difficulties they face in contributing to global 
digital trade. There is still a wide d igital divide, which was reflected in the meeting, and needs to be 
addressed urgently.  With regard to the issue of moratorium, Indonesia is of the view that WTO 
Members, particularly developing countries and LDCs, should be given instruments and policy spa ce 
to support public policy objectives while at the same time upholding national sovereignty. We are of 
the view that a moratorium in the long run would be beneficial  for developing countries and LDCs to 
promote local companies, especially MSMEs and their digital talents. This will enable them to 
compete globally with international companies, as well as to formulate other strategic policies, 
including domestic software development, human resource quality improvement, and other strategic 
policies.  Therefore, Indonesia welcomes the plan of the Facilitator of the Dedicated Discussion on 
E-Commerce Meeting, to have an active and intensive discussion on issues of our concern in TN/C/M/46  
 
- 36 - 
 
  response to the implementation of fair digital trade, especially on the issu e of moratorium, at the 
last 4 meetings of the upcoming dedicated discussion, prior to the implementation of MC13.  On 
fisheries subsidies, the last four clusters of fish weeks are valuable in enabling members to identify 
elements that are important for mem bers and brought them to the text -based negotiation. While 
different views remain, there was a common interest to discipline those who have contributed to the 
depletion of global fish stocks, namely the large-scale industrial fishing. There has also been 
widespread affirmation that effective and appropriate special and differential treatment must remain 
an integral part of the comprehensive agreement. Indeed, we need an agreement that target the 
most responsible, instead of distributing the responsibility i n equal share to all members, including 
small fishing nations. This is the spirit that we hold, as we drafted and submitted document 
RD/TN/RL/172 . Now, it is time to put our negotiating hat on, and Indonesia stands ready to engage 
and work with other members in the next phase of our negotiation.  On Paragraph 8 Ministerial 
Decision on TRIPS Agreement, I would be re miss if I do not, once again, reiterate our disappointment 
at the collective failure of WTO and its members of our inability to reach an agreement on the 
extension of the decision to include therapeutics and diagnostics at the mandated time. I will not 
repeat our arguments as to why the accessibility, availability and affordability of countermeasures 
that include vaccine, therapeutics and diagnostics, are vital to developing members and LDC, 
because it is clear that the lack of one or the other will severel y impact the response to the pandemic 
in a country. On that note, while we acknowledge the Chair 's effort to conduct a thematic session to 
further inform our move forward, we cannot afford to have this protracted discussion with no end in 
sight. Therefore,  we further stress the need to have a trigger ready mechanism or mechanism for 
applying flexibilities (including TRIPS waivers) by default in time of crisis. We want to see more work 
to be done in this area.  Concerning dispute settlement reform, our utmost  priority is filling the 
vacancy of the Appellate Body to make it operational as mandated by the DSU. This issue can be 
resolved in a separate manner, and therefore should be delinked with the discussion on the dispute 
settlement reform as a whole. On that  note, Indonesia has been actively participating and 
contributing ideas in the discussion that are interests -based, instead of position -based. Thus, our 
interest is security and predictability of the system, that is only achievable through the upholding of  
the two -tier dispute settlement system. Furthermore, all interests in the discussion shall be brought 
together as a whole package to the Minister, not in a piecemeal basis. We are not interested in any 
other way.  In addition to the priority topics that I have mentioned, I would like to also highlight the 
importance of WTO Reform, especially to ensure WTO 's relevance and enable the deli very of WTO 's 
support for members to address multiple global challenges in world trade. To this end, we have had 
fruitful d iscussion and identified valuable inputs, including the most recent informal meeting on WTO 
Reform held last June.   I believe that today we will further discuss on the topics related to the issue 
Secretariat  and Civil Society and Business Advisory Groups. Thus, Indonesia stands ready to engage 
in the said discussion.  
4.92.  Now regarding the questions that you have circulated Chair , first, I believe all of the topics I 
have mentioned earlier deserve an equal amount of attention at the Senior Official Meeting, 
regardless of  whether or not they move at a lesser pace than the other negotiated issues on the 
table. Yes, we can be pragmatic, but doing so at the expense of picking and choosing issues that 
are important for some and neglected others is not the kind of dire ction that we envisioned.  Second, 
with that in mind, the presence of Senior Officials can provide necessary push either  in moving a 
negotiation from a standstill, such as in the case of waiver to therapeutics and diagnostics, or in 
other issues, such as fi sheries subsidies and dispute settlement reform Certainly, we need necessary 
guidance for the next step forward before the ministerial meeting, to avoid what happened last year 
when we are pushed to agree on i mportant outcomes in last minute.  Third, while we agree that we 
must switch to high gear after the summer break and Indonesia will make an effort to do so, we 
should bear in mind that developing members and LDCs with small delegations may have the 
capacity constraint to follow all negotiations when the y are held at the same time. Not acknowledging 
this issue means violating the basic principle of WTO, which are member -driven, inclusivity, and 
transparency to build a consensus.  In conclusion, the Indonesian delegation remains committed to 
working collabo ratively with all Members to address all these mandated issues. Only through 
inclusive and constructive engagement we can achieve outcomes that benefit all WTO Members in 
furthering their development, instead of upholding the status quo.  
4.93.  The representative  of Türkiye delivered the following statement :  
4.94.  At MC13, we wish to build on the success of MC12. We echo your and many members ' 
numerous appeals on managing our expectations from MC13 and being realistic. As we have 
indicated before, the Senior Officials meeting is an important step towards having a successful TN/C/M/46  
 
- 37 - 
 
  Ministerial Conference. It is important to make the meeting fruitful by  having a focused agenda so 
that Senior Officials can provide needed practical and political impetus for our work.  Regarding your 
first question on the priority topics, WTO Reform obviously has to be a part of the agenda. Starting 
with the reform on proced ural aspects of the work undertaken in various WTO bodies, I believe that 
we can present a mature work to our Senior Officials, since we have achieved good  progress on this 
matter.  This is an important step in terms of improving the deliberative function o f the WTO as 
having effective and efficiently working WTO bodies is essential for being able to make substantive 
reform.  However, it is not only enough to have concrete results with regard to procedural aspects, 
but we  also need to deliver in terms of subs tance, particularly in areas that need urgent action. 
Dispute settlement reform is the first of these areas. We are not expecting to have decisions at this 
stage; however, we can determine broad principles that will guide our work and possibly a concrete 
timetable to achieve results. Informal negotiations ongoing at the delegate level should be concluded 
before the end of this year and the outcome paper should be circulated to Members as soon as 
possible to allow time for capitals to evaluate the draft text  and conclude formalized negotiations 
until MC13.  Other priority areas include agriculture and food security, development and the second 
phase of fisheries subsidies negotiations.  After MC12, agriculture negotiations did not move in the 
way many members wo uld wish for. However, we welcome the positive atmosphere at CoASS 
meeting earlier this week and believe that the more members from different groups engage with 
each other, the more chance of success we have. We hope that engagement can be intensified afte r 
the summer break and based on that engagement, our Senior Officials may help us in identifying 
the focus of our work and how we can deliver. In that context, we have to also consider the 
importance attached by members to food security and their intention  to reach an outcome in this 
matter.  With regard to the fisheries subsidies negotiations, if we manage to proceed as planned, we 
will be having two clusters of text-based  negotiations prior to the SOM. It would be useful to 
determine convergence areas as w ell as areas we cannot proceed further at technical level. We can 
ask from our senior officials political and practical guidance, where we need decision -making power 
to come towards convergence. Thus, the SOM could be a productive one serving its purpose. With 
regard to the modalities of meetings, we continuously emphasize the importance of ensuring full 
participation, transparency and inclusiveness in the process leading up to MC13. In this regard, we 
support the format you suggested for the SOM.  On your s econd question on how to best channel 
efforts during the fall, we are also supportive of the roadmap that you are planning in the lead up 
to the Senior Officials Meeting.  We believe that if we can agree on the items,  we would like our 
senior officials to f ocus on, then we can channel our efforts to conclude the technical work on those 
items. We have to do e verything that could be done at technical and HODs level and reach the stage 
where we need political guidance, since we cannot expect from our senior off icials to focus on 
technical aspects of the discussions. Along the way, we think it would be good to further empower 
the GC and relevant bodies to reach decisions whenever needed.  
4.95.  The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement :  
4.96.  On Fisher ies Subsidies , Malaysia would like to register our appreciation to Ambassador 
Gunnarsson for initiating a transparent  and inclusive approach, and we would like to congratulate 
the Chair and his team for the completion of another productive Fish Week, last week.  For the past 
two Fish Weeks, we have received new submissions from Members, and these well -thought 
proposals have successfully guided our discussions and assisted us to further understand Members ' 
interests and concerns. We have also heard Members ' views and feedback on the elements that they 
want to see to be in the 'future ' text - that could be the basis for future negotiations; in this regard, 
we observed that there are still significant gaps between Members in some core issues.  Nevertheless, 
based  on the current momentum, we do believe that we are on the right track, and look forward to 
continuing our constructive discussions after the Summer Break.  On Agriculture,  Malaysia has 
participated in the CoA  SS meeting and dedicated sessions held earlier this week, and we welcome 
Chair's process of listing the key elements derived from Members ' submissions to guide and 
stimulate our discussions.  In the last few months, we have intensified our discussions in two 
contentious issues – namely, the domestic sup port and public stockholding for food security purposes 
(PSH). While we observed that Members ' positions are still widely diverged, Malaysia considers these 
conversations are crucial and helpful . On this note, we would like to register our sincere appreciation 
to all proponents, especially to those who has tabled their comprehensive  fact-based proposals to 
facilitate our discussions, and to find the middle -ground.  On Trade and Development , we wou ld like 
to thank Ambassador  Hassan for her leadership and dedication in advancing these important 
discussions. Malaysia has deliberately stressed and  will continue to emphasise that the reform 
process must prioritise the development needs of developing mem bers and LDCs; and the S&DT 
must continue to be an integral part of the current and future WTO agreements. On proposals put TN/C/M/46  
 
- 38 - 
 
  forth by G90 related to the S&DT, Malaysia looks forward to engaging constructively with other 
Members in the upcoming discussions.  Senior Officials Meeting;  I believe most of us, if not all of us, 
are on the same page. However, I concur with you that we need to wait a bit longer, to identify and 
confirm what we should write on that page.  At this stage, Malaysia doesn 't want to single -out any 
specific item to be included in the SOM 's wish list. Our only wish is for the Senior Officials Meeting 
to be a productive one, and able to facilitate our work in Geneva by providing the much -needed 
political guidance for some contentious and sticky  issues. In ensuring this, the heavy -lifting needs 
to be done right after the Summer Break – by all of us. Having said all the above, let me conclude 
my intervention by stressing – Malaysia has always and will continue our strong support for a fair, 
open a nd non -discriminatory rules -based multilateral trading system. On this note, we strongly 
believe that a fully functioning of the two -tier dispute settlement system is fundamental to this 
organi zation and must remain as the central pillar to reflect the cre dibility of this House.  
4.97.  The representative of the Plurinational State of Bolivia  delivered the following statement :  
4.98.  We welcome the proposal to move forward with the Senior Officials' Meeting, which we hope 
will provide a significant boost to the work prog ramme in Geneva. As we have pointed out before, 
the results achieved at the previous Ministerial  Conference were positive. Although not ideal, they 
struck a delicate  balance that encompassed the minimum consensus among Members. It is vital that 
we deliver on the decisions taken at the last Ministerial Conference and address remaining topics, 
while highlighting the need to promote our countries' development so as to respond to the multiple 
crises we face.  In regard to agriculture, we underscore the importanc e of pursuing credible reform 
that takes into account the concerns of all Members. We also highlight the issues of food security 
and sovereignty to ensure better conditions for production, effective access to regional and global 
local value chains, the var ious forms of market access, the elimination of unjustified tariff barriers 
and the improvement of living conditions for farmers and producers, in full harmony with the 
environment.  we require a systemic and multi -dimensional response, but it is also true that we 
cannot be selective in choosing the elements of that response. If we are to incorporate climate 
change into our discussions, for example, all relevant elements must be included, such as CBDR and 
financial assistance, which are essential for mitigat ion and adaptation for resilient agriculture.  In 
regard to the TRIPS  Decision, we support the extension of the waiver. We regret that consensus has 
not yet been reached. We need to strengthen commitments to find a convergence solution as 
mandated by Minist ers at the previous Conference. This issue is still important. Working for fairer, 
more equitable and affordable access to treatments and diagnostic tests should remain on our 
agenda, and as mentioned by the distinguished Ambassador of Colombia, we should also consider 
discussing this issue and finding convergences with the discussions taking place at the WHO on a 
potential treaty on responses to health emergencies.  It is also imperative to reinforce our 
commitment to re -establishing a fully functioning dis pute settlement system and to make this 
system accessible to all.   In regard to reform, we reiterate that international trade is key to 
promoting sustainable and inclusive economic growth and development. In this context, WTO 
Reform should consider the asy mmetries of Members, and of course, we believe that the principle 
of special and differential treatment is of vital importance to developing countries in order to leverage 
the development benefits of international trade.  We hope that the outcomes of the pr eparatory 
meetings toward MC13 will help us to fulfil the mandates of MC12 and outstanding priority topics 
that should be clearly identified in order to present a concrete agenda and format to senior officials. 
But we must move forward, and in no way go ba ckward.  We reiterate that decisions should be taken 
in a transparent and inclusive manner, respecting the legitimate positions and expectations of all 
WTO Members.  
4.99.  The representative of Nepal  delivered the following statement :  
4.100.   I wish to associate myself w ith the statement made by Djibouti on behalf of the LDC Group 
and wish to add few points . My delegation appreciates your good initiation to organize senior officials 
meeting in October which, we hope, will be able to accelerate the possible outcomes of the  MC13 
both engaging in Geneva not only in multilateral mode but also in bilateral and regional level, and 
returning to the capital. In this regard, my delegation would like to propose several  items as the 
priority topics at the meeting of the Senior Offici als in October 2023 . Firstly, on LDC graduation 
proposal, meeting the graduation criteria from LDC category does not necessarily mean that the 
countries do not face any trade related challenges rather they have to cope with new economic 
environment, enteri ng into the competition zone from the comfort zone in principle, therefore the 
proposal of LDC Group on smooth transition package should be in the priority, we are optimistic 
some reasonable progress in the upcoming General Council meeting next week on thi s proposal.  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 39 - 
 
  Secondly, the proposal on the extension of waiver under TRIPS agreement on production and supply 
of COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics, G90 's 10 agreement specific proposal, WTO Reform 
focused on development dimension and dispute settlement, ecommerce work program and 
moratorium, and agricultural reforms including PSH and food security issues are in the priority. While 
discussing about WTO Reform, trade deficit related challenges o f any member should also be in the 
priority.  Any member facing huge trade gaps after joining the WTO such as having several times 
higher export -import ratio like 1:10 (though ratio threshold can be discussed further) should be 
given adequate flexibility fo r adopting needful policy space in a non -discriminatory manner until it 
comes back below the threshold.  Furthermore, concerns of members especially the LDCs, which 
joined the WTO through accession process with high  level of commitment and obligations beyon d 
their capacity should be addressed. To facilitate the Senior Officials meeting, it would be better to 
enhance members ' engagement to develop textual options of possible decisions in the agreed topics 
by convening informal meetings before the SOM.  
4.101.   The rep resentative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela  delivered the following statement :  
4.102.   The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela reiterates the importance of the centrality of the issue 
of development as a cross cutting theme that should be addressed in all fo rums of this Organization. 
We are well placed to move forward in all the negotiations, but these should produce real results, 
not cosmetic ones, so that the WTO can fulfil all the functions for which it was created, in keeping 
with the principles agreed in  this Organization, respecting consensus and abiding by the negotiating 
mandates.  In this regard, the WTO's response to the COVID -19 pandemic continues to be a priority 
for our delegation. Consequently, we reiterated our call to urgently approve the waiver  from certain 
provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19, 
which we co -sponsored.  On fisheries subsidies, it is important to maintain our focus on the elements 
set out in the negotiating mandate reflected in Target 14.6 of the Sustainable Development Goals, 
especially the inclusion of appropriate and effective special and differential treatment for 
developing  and least developed countries. In this area, we hope that more flexible rules for artisanal 
and small -scale fisheries can be adopted.  With respect to the other negotiating areas, we note that 
the Members remain far  apart on agriculture, but we continue to work hard to achieve substantive 
outcomes on public stockholding for food security purposes and the sp ecial safeguard mechanism. 
Concerning the negotiations on special and differential treatment (S &DT), we hope for the adoption 
of a decision that will allow us to achieve results based on the G90 proposals, which our country 
supports.  Regarding the other fu nctions of the WTO, we consider it vital to launch the selection 
processes for Appellate Body vacancies.  We also believe that that any process we embark on over 
the coming months, including the Senior Officials' Meeting in October, must be transparent and 
inclusive, and there must be true political will to understand the real needs of developing and least 
developed countries. We sincerely hope that there will not be a repeat of the process of the 
12th Ministerial Conference.  Despite its critical and firm st ances on world trade relations, which give 
preference to goods rather than sustainable development, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has 
always worked constructively within the WTO. That is why we reaffirm our commitment to building 
a robust, mutually supportive, fair and predictable multilateral trading system, based on common 
and transparent rules, that meets the interests of the world's peoples and befits the moment in 
history that we are having to live through.  
4.103.   The representative of Brunei Darussala m delivered the following statement:  
4.104.   On the preparations for the MC13, Brunei Darussalam is of the view that the mandates from 
the MC12 would be a good basis of deliverables for the MC13. Similar to DG 's proposal earlier, we 
suggest the Secretariat could prepare a "List of Deliverables " that would also highlight the progress 
of work being carried out and it should be regularly updated. From this list, we can identify 
deliverables that have the highest co nvergence, so we can focus on their finalization before MC13.  
Notwithstanding this, I wish to refer to Brunei Darussalam 's priorities which we highlighted at the 
April TNC and HoD s Meeting.  Based on this "List of Deliverables ", it would be useful to have a  
"Roadmap " that could indicate a realistic timeline of work and targeted outcome. We note that maybe 
not all deliverables could be completed by the MC13. However, progress reports on ongoing issues 
could serve as key documents for the Ministers to provide political guidance or renew mandates at 
the MC13. On the preparations of the October Senior Officials ' Meeting (SOM), Brunei Darussalam 
supports your proposed 'Roadmap ' as well as your approach and format for the SOM. We also take 
note that it might be ear ly to have the agenda now.  In this regard, we also suggest that the "list of 
Deliverables " and "Roadmap " for the MC13, which we have proposed earlier, could be tabled at the 
October SOM which we hope could facilitate the discussions.  We continue to reitera te our call for TN/C/M/46  
 
- 40 - 
 
  better organization of meetings ' schedule to avoid as much as possible meeting clashes to allow 
effective participations of small missions.  
4.105.   The representative of Singapore , speaking as Co -Convenor of the Joint Statement Initiative 
on E-Comm erce, delivered the following statement :  
4.106.   I will start by providing, on behalf of the other co -convenors Australia and Japan, a quick 
update on the Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) on E -Commerce cluster meeting for the second quarter 
of 2023. First, the cl uster meetings in the second quarter of 2023 were productive in fostering 
Members ' understanding on key issues including data flows and localisation. The co -conveners also 
regularly discussed development issues to better understand how the JSI can support developing 
and LDC members to tap opportunities in digital trade. Second, we continued to make progress in 
streamlining other issues under discussion, including single windows, personal information or data 
protection, source code, and cryptography. Third, we were pleased  to have held our first Head of 
Delegation (HOD) meeting on JSI on E -Commerce earlier this month. DG Ngozi reiterated the 
importance of the E -Commerce negotiations in addressing modern business realities, while all other 
Members unanimously emphasised the importance of doubling down on efforts to achieve substantial 
conclusion by end 2023.  
4.107.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
4.108.   We agree that it will be crucial to make wise use of our Senior Officials ' time and allow them 
to engage substantively. The structure of the SOM should allow us to achieve two objectives; namely 
(a) to create an environment for our Senior Officials to have honest conversations that goes beyond 
what we have been hearing here in G eneva; and (b) give clear directions to Geneva delegates in the 
run-up to MC13. Hence, we agree with the work plans that Director -General has outlined in 
preparation for the SOM. In Singapore 's view, the SOM should advance negotiations on issues 
mandated b y MC12 such as the restoration of the Dispute Settlement System (DSS) and the 
moratorium on custom duties on electronic transmissions. The SOM should also narrow gaps in 
on-going negotiations as Agriculture and Fisheries Subsidies; and have an exchange of views on 
emerging issues such as nexus of trade and environmental sustainability as well as digitalisation. 
On the substance and possible outcomes for MC13, Singapore sees the potential deliverables as one, 
meaningful progress to restore a binding and two -tier dispute settlement system; two, a globally 
relevant outcome on food security, three, to keep business certainty in these challenging economic 
times through the extension of the E -Commerce moratorium; and four, to acknowledge the 
development dimension of the WTO through the extension of unilateral trade preferences for 
graduated LDCs, if not already done by next week or the SOM in October.  
4.109.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
4.110.   The delegation of Bangladesh aligns with the st atement delivered by Djibouti on behalf of 
the LDCs and flags some general points . We expect that some issues will be mature by that time to 
be part of concrete decisions and results in the MC13. In this regard, we consider LDC graduation 
package mature en ough to be part of an early harvest before the MC13. We are heartened that 
many Members have been supporting this plea of the LDCs. A fuller fisheries subsidies agreement, 
food insecurity, TRIPS waiver to cover therapeutics and diagnostics for the future p andemic, 
implementation of the decision of the past MCs particularly those related to the LDCs, e -commerce 
work programme with development elements, solutions to the AB impasse, and improving the works 
of the WTO committees and councils that would support the smaller delegations and LDCs are some 
of our priority issues.  The work under WTO Reform must be organized based on identified needs of 
the 'necessary reform items ' and ensure that any reform must not lead to any alteration of the 
multilateral and inter governmental character of the WTO.  We urge Members to consider the LDC 
Group 's submission JOB/GC/223/Rev.1  in April 2022. Development Agenda should be prioritized in 
all WTO bodies. We thank the GC Chair for  announcing the annotated agenda for the GC meeting. 
This is an instance of work in progress. In the MC12 outcome document paragraph 4, Ministers 
recognize the importance and urgency of addressing the challenges and concern s regarding the 
dispute settlemen t system including the Appellate Body and commit to conduct discussions with the 
view to having a fully and well -functioning dispute settlement system accessible to all Members by 
2024.  Here the commitment is clearly to conduct discussions. Including Bangl adesh, a majority of  
the WTO Members, in fact more than two third, are cosponsors of a submission 
(WT/DSB/W/609/Rev.23 ) that requests the DSB to make effective decision to launch selection 
process to fill in the vacancy of the Appellate Body.  Without the Appellate Body, the DS system is TN/C/M/46  
 
- 41 - 
 
  not fully functional. Therefore, discussion for the AB appointment becomes a top priority. 
Suggestions and inputs from individual Member or group of Members should be the basis of such 
discussions. We thank the D irector -General  for informing us regarding her Business and Civil Society 
Advisory Group. Our delegation takes good note of t his information. We hope that the 
Member -driven nature of the WTO will be continued. We also hope that the WTO Public Forum will 
continue to be an informal forum for informed dialogues among Members and other stakeholders to 
shed new light on any specific issue. We believe that WTO 's primary interface is with government 
representatives and officials based in Geneva missions including the internal coordination and 
consultative frameworks that all Members have domestically where inputs from business and civil 
society remain at the core . The delegation of Bangladesh looks forward to working with Members on 
carrying out the works assigned by Ministers as well as for a meaningful senior officials ' meeting in 
October this year.  
4.111.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following s tatement :  
4.112.   On the arrangement for the October SOM, we have a couple of overall expectations, several 
suggestions about the approach and some suggestions about the specific topics to be addressed by 
the senior officials.  We hope that the October SOM will se t up the goals for MC13.  We also hope that 
the SOM will help delegations tackle difficult issues. In this regard, we must identify and present to 
the senior officials a "limited " number of clearly defined critical issues to be addressed.  We agree 
that the meetings should be arranged to allow interactive engagements by senior officials. In this 
regard, having break -out and parallel sessions is a good approach.  The SOM agenda should be 
designed to lead to focused discussions and to "discourage " senior officia ls to make overly broad 
statement.  In order to have focused discussions, it is important to properly formulate appropriate 
"leading questions " to attract "positive answers " from the senior officials. If we can harvest as 
many  "yeses " from the senior offici als in October as possible, we will be in a better position to 
have productive outcomes in the later part of the year leading to MC13.  About the 
questions  to be posted  to senior officials, it is preferable to formulate the questions in a strait 
forward and not -too-complicated manner so as not to lose focus. We should also avoid giving senior 
officials "technical questions " for them to answer. Such questions would not be helpful for 
convergence.  About specific topics to be addressed , the WTO Reform on its deliberative function is 
certainly an appropriate topic. But since there have been many good proposals being widely 
supported, it is appropriate merely to have a report o n the deliberative function reform for the SOM 
to recognize. Fisheries subsidies negotiation is another critical topic for senior officials to tackle. This 
would mean that in the September fish week, we will need to have a new chair 's text. Certain critica l 
bracketed elements in the chair 's text can be discussed by the senior officials. Senior officials should 
of course discuss agriculture. Given the urgent nature of food security, the focus of agriculture can 
be on the global food insecurity. We also sugge st including e -commerce as a topic for the SOM. We 
hope Members will be able to identify any difficult issues for the SOM to overcome toward the 
continuation of Moratorium.  For dispute settlement reform, we are satisfied with the format and 
progress of the  current informal discussions. In case the dispute settlement reform is to be a topic 
of the SOM, it could be for stock -taking purpose. It might not be desirable to transform the current 
inform al setting into a formal one. For those Members having particip ated in JSIs, it should be the 
opportunity for their senior officials to recognize the progress and to set their goals of concluding 
the JSI negotiations prior to MC13. It is also an opportunity to reach out to senior officials of the 
non-participating Mem bers, to exchange views and to clarify any possible concerns about joining the 
initiatives, so as to expand the participants.  
4.113.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following statement : 
4.114.   We take note of your suggestions and proposals on the structure of these meetings and 
share your vision to hold these sessions in a productive manner and avoid engagement in a way 
that might only reinforce existing positions causing more harm than good. That is surely not the 
intent of senior official meeting . Before providing our comments on the questions posed in the 
convening notice, allow me to make some general comments.  The global economic context coupled 
with the climate challenges that we are currently witnessing and living e very day, should compel us 
to take meaningful action. Since MC12, you have been pointing out that to stay relevant, WTO needs 
to reform itself and Pakistan has consistently reiterated that in order to address issues of the global 
commons all players have to adopt cooperative and not  a competitive approach to arrive at an 
optimal outcome. We do appreciate the efforts made by the membership to find common landing 
zones on issues of critical importance but for that to happen we might need to go an extra mile to 
make this organization 'fit-for-purpose ' and to respond effectively to the poly -crises the world faces TN/C/M/46  
 
- 42 - 
 
  today. If we fail, the WTO might be able to deliver for certain countries or business interests,  but it 
will not be  able to deliver for the global commons ' issues, at least. In t his vein, it is important for 
the membership to agree to a package of trigger ready mechanisms for LDCs and developing 
countries to save them from succumbing to a complex political, economic and climate induced poly 
crisis.  Now before turning to your quest ions, we heard members today sharing not only the issues 
that they feel are important for SOM but also reiterating their well -known positions on these issues. 
we feel this is exactly what needs to be avoided to have a productive SOM. Members need to start 
working now on how and where flexibilities can be found for identification of horizontally balanced 
paths at SOM leading to balanced outcomes at MC13 as hinted by Ambassador from Mauritius this 
afternoon.  Pakistan remains a strong supporter of 'necessary r eform ' of the WTO in order to enhance 
its efficacy and increase its relevance in terms of global economic governance. Pakistan strongly 
believes that it is important to have a  two tiered, fully functional and accessible DSB by the time our 
Ministers meet a gain. We believe a positive political support in this regard during the Senior Officials 
Meeting will be necessary and useful to achieve an outcome on this agenda. Notwithstanding the 
form and configurations of the reform efforts around DS reform, Pakistan  believes that the process 
must be based on core WTO principles of inclusiveness, multilateralism, consensus, openness and 
transparency.  For the Fisheries Subsidies Agreement, Pakistan supports the second wave of 
negotiations. We are happy to affirm that w e have witnessed inclusivity and transparency in the 
fisheries negotiations in phase 2 and we commend the way the work has been undertaken so far by 
the chair. We are hopeful that the Senior Officials Meeting will help bridge the differences among 
membersh ip to allow MC13 to deliver conclusively and comprehensively on the mandate of SDG 
14.6. Pakistan appreciates the work done by the members in the Working Group under Committee 
on Agriculture in terms of Paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Declaration on emergen cy response to food 
insecurity.  However, we still see differences among members on approaches to ensure food security 
for LDCs and NFIDCs . The decisions for food security for millions of impoverished living in LDCs and 
NFIDCs would possibly require political support to agree to a report by the WG due in November this 
year. On the issue of wider reforms in agriculture, we do see that subsidy  concentration is an 
important  and critical issue standing in the way of fair and just competition among the membership. 
However, we do note that the mandate from our Ministers for a permanent solution to the PSH needs  
immediate solution and we look forwar d to constructive engagement from members on this issue at 
the Senior Officials Meeting and urge members to de -escalate on sequencing issues around 
agriculture negotiations.  We are also mindful of the importance and sensitivities of the proponents 
calling for a termination of the e -commerce moratorium and reinvigoration of the work program.  As 
you said this could be one of the important issues where the senior officials can provide clear 
directions moving towards MC13.  Before I close, allow me to reflect on  the issue of TRIPS Waiver. 
As we draw close to the October meeting of the Senior Officials and subsequently MC13, the 
prospects of a favourable decision for the humanity are discouraging. We would like the membership 
to come -up with a timely decision on t his important decision of extension of the waiver to 
therapeutics and diagnostics. Finally , there are more active engagements in areas other than the 
ones I indicated today. These are to us, the first contours of the areas likely to be discussed at the 
Senior Official Meeting and that without prejudging the work and efforts that members are putting 
and will be putting as we come closer to the summer break. However, doubling efforts in discussions 
and deliberations in areas where there is traction would rema in our preferred way of engagement 
and it would be useful that the list of issues is not too long making it difficult for small delegations 
to attend to each discussion in a productive manner.  
4.115.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  delivered the following statement :  
4.116.   With progresses so far on different fronts, Hong Kong, China remains optimistic that we are 
building the foundation for a successful MC13.  On fisheries, we are pleased to note the progress 
made in the second  wave negotiations and is confident t hat Members will keep up the momentum 
as we move on to the text -based negotiations soon.  We are hopeful that the coming Senior Officials 
Meeting would provide further impetus to achieving, by MC13, the two goals of bringing into force 
the Fisheries Subsidi es Agreement and further enhancing the disciplines.  On this note, we are glad 
to report that Hong Kong, China is planning to deposit our Instrument of Acceptance for the Fisheries 
Subsidies Agreement soon, later this quarter.  On e-commerce, we note that so me Members have 
called for a special session on e -commerce in the margins of the Senior Officials Meeting; Hong 
Kong, China supports this approach, in the hope that high -level dialogues would help drive 
convergence on issues of common interests, such as le gal architecture and horizontal disciplines, 
and help the membership reach substantial conclusion by the end of this year.  As for MC13, making 
the moratorium permanent or at least securing its extension continues to be one of Hong Kong, 
China 's key priorit ies. In view of the "sunset " clause in the MC12 ministerial decision, we hope that TN/C/M/46  
 
- 43 - 
 
  the relevant discussion will commence soon.  On IFD, Hong Kong, China welcomes the recent 
conclusion of negotiations on the text of the IFD Agreement.  The IFD initiative has so far attracted 
participation of over two -thirds of the membership.  We encourage all Members to positively review 
the text with a view to incorporating this meaningful outcome to the WTO architecture, in the hope 
that we may reach another landmark by MC13 . On dispute settlement system, restoring a fully 
functioning, two -tiered dispute settlement system accessible by all is Hong Kong, China 's top 
priority.  The timeline set out in the MC12 Outcome Document is tight.  Hong Kong, China values the 
informal subst ance-based discussion currently underway, and the target to concretise ideas and 
start a drafting exercise in the coming months.  We urge Members to keep up the momentum and 
aim for significant progress by MC13.  On WTO Reform, Hong Kong, China is delighted to see the 
progresses made on improving day -to-day functioning and procedural matters by various WTO 
bodies and the Secretariat.  To provide further impetus to the process, Hong Kong, China suggests 
that GC Chair may revisit the idea of holding a dedicated discussion on the negotiating function and 
appointing facilitator(s)/ "Friends of the Chairperson " to assist the process, for discussion of common 
emerging issues and horizontal procedural reforms.  The Secretariat may also consider extending the 
current ef forts of categorising proposals to cover also substantive issues.  With efforts on all fronts, 
we expect that this could form a good progress report for the Senior Officials Meeting and, in time, 
concrete outcomes at MC13.   
4.117.   The representative of  the United State s delivered the following statement : 
4.118.   I am going to focus on reactions to the roadmap and the framework laid out by the 
Director -General for the  October SOM . People know where our positions are on substantive issues , 
so I do  not need to dwell on  that. The mo re important part right now is how we set ourselves up for 
the S OM because that will be a test run for how we set ourselves up for the Ministerial Conference 
and again recogni zing that what you laid out with a few ideas as of now and how it ca n evolve – I 
do think that they did make a lot of sense to me but I would like to take your principles one by one 
because there are other issues that have been raised. In terms of your possible organi zing principles, 
the number one with stocktaking of wher e we are on all issues and that that would include a factual 
state of play report by the Secretariat. We fully support that. We would note that , if you go back 
and look at the MC12 outcome document , there are a lot of "to-do's" that we agreed to that invol ve 
reporting . We certainly would encourage that this stocktaking start s now and be taken by the 
relevant committees in the Secretariat . Presenting that to the Senior Officials at that meeting would 
be a good way of trying to set some things aside or make s ure that they are headed in the right 
direction so that less attention or less effort has to go into them as we try to deal with the harder 
issues. Going to your second principle  concerning  blessing of things already agreed  – where you  
mention ed reform by doing and LDC graduation. I fully agree. We will be talking about this at the 
General Council meeting next week , so I am not going to dwell on it. I do hope that we can have at 
least the Annex 1 issue for LDC graduation addressed and that would be somethin g that in the S OM 
hopefully the Senior Officials could bless because the General Council can agree to many of these 
things,  and this is something that to us is part of reform by doing that we need to get more in the 
habit of doing. On the reform by doing a nd the issue of procedural reforms, it was also mentioned, 
and has been noted by others  that there is a lot of good work that has been done that I do  not think 
we need to spend more time in the General Council . We just need to acknowledge this. In this 
regard, t here is a very comprehensive status report that was put together by the Secretariat . We 
fully support that these are things that can be put together, can be sent ahead of time and can be 
taken care of. Whatever reports and whatever the agenda is for the Senior Officials meeting, 
hopefully I would think that it should be circulated two weeks before  the SOM.  This would  be 
important in order for the Senior Officials to be prepared to have the reports available so that they 
can review them with sufficient time . We all have interagency and internal processes that we have 
to do so to be better prepared, having an agenda and all the relevant documentation prepared ahead 
of time, with sufficient time is really useful . Your third principle  is resolving specific issues, and you 
did say to be determined . I agree that maybe now is not the time to cut -off what specific issues can 
be put before Senior Officials but again we should all go back and look at what we agreed at M C12 
that we were going to be delivering for MC13 and start looking at what things realistically speaking 
could be taken care off ahead of time.  In this regard, I take note of the comment made by China 
about no new issues after the Senior Officials meeting . That is an admirable goal to have. We already 
have a very loaded agenda as we will talk about next week at the General Council meeting. There 
are a lot of papers on the table, which is great, because it demonstrates that people are interested, 
but we nee d to start thinking of what we are doing with all those things , what things are ready  for 
decisions at the Ministerial or before and what things, in some conversations that we have been 
having, what are the things that we can put in the basket of "let's se t up this conversation going TN/C/M/46  
 
- 44 - 
 
  forward with a view to the future ". This goes to your fourth principle which is using the Senior 
Officials to point the way for deliverables and for political guidance and direction . The SOM is a 
meeting where we can do that an d start lining up the things that we should try to get done before . 
We all know the things that are going to need a lot more discussion, but this does take me to a 
comment that has been made  regarding the issue of trying to avoid clashes of meetings, which  is 
an issue even for us. In this regard, w e need to start taking care of issues so that we have the time 
to do other things. Dispute settlement reform sounds great but again this requires engaging , and 
we are happy with the process that has been led by Mr. Marco Molina . We hope that Members will 
continue engaging so that we can have something , and we are open to early harvesting or getting 
things that have convergence to a place where we can set them aside and we can open the space 
for more conversations o n the more technically difficult things. You did mention you were going to 
have meetings in different configurations going forward which we fully support,  and we also fully 
support that we should be organi zing ourselves to have conversations  – honest ones like th ose that 
were led by Ambassador Theodore (Canada) yesterday . It is impossible to have that kind of 
conversation with everybody in the room , but every grouping and geographical region should be 
represented , and we would fully support this as we move forward to MC13.  
4.119.   The representative of Jamaica  delivered the following statement :  
4.120.   We can support the roadmap you have outlined.  The Senior Officials meeting should be 
focused, result oriented and should set parameters for our work leading up to MC13. Senior officials 
should have dedicated discussions on fisheries subsidies, agriculture, e -commerce and WTO Reform. 
However, we can ha ve a horizontal session where specific questions are put to Senior Officials with 
a view to narrow differences on or create momentum for issues such as LDCs graduation, dispute 
settlement, food security, pandemic preparedness and response, and services.  On fisheries 
subsidies, we should adhere to W/20 as much as possible with doable tweaks or streamlining to 
address specific concerns of members. Radically changing the approach and structure of W20 will 
only widen divergencies and put at risk a success for d elivery at MC13. The de minimis  threshold for 
small fishing nations should remain a key component of the special and differential treatment 
provisions. For agriculture, Jamaica 's priorities are in the areas of domestic support, SSM, cotton, 
PSH and a follo w-up outcome on paragraph 8 of the MC12 declaration on food insecurity for LDCs 
and NFIDCs. As a deliverable for MC13, we can, target the streamlining of green box disciplines to 
close loopholes in existing rules, which we believe can be resolved by streng thening transparency 
provisions. The African Group and Costa Rica have put forward proposals with useful elements on 
domestic support, which we believe can be integrated by the proponents to form a document that 
can be the basis for negotiations going forw ard in the CoA  SS. With this in mind, we should target a 
draft work programme that can be endorsed by Senior Officials as the basis for negotiations 
preparatory to Ministers ' adoption of that work programme at MC13, with a deadline for a final 
outcome at M C14. We also believe that the Working Group on Food Security can finalise a report for 
endorsement of the CoA with concrete recommendations for LDCs and NFIDCs, which Ministers can 
adopt at MC13.  As it relates to WTO Reform, we believe that administrative reform by doing should 
be a matter for WTO bodies may not need to be escalated to Senior Officials or Ministers for approval. 
Senior Officials should be put in a position to provide clear guidance on the way forward preparatory 
to MC13 on issues such as or ganization of Ministerial Conferences, collaboration with external 
stakeholders, trade and development, the way forward for S&DT and DSB reform. The other issues 
can be targeted for MC14.  We believe the WTO should seek to agree a renewal of the work 
progra mme on e-Commerce based on the outcome of the discussions we have had over the past 
few months under the leadership of Ambassador Dwarka -Canabady. We also believe that the WTO 
should agree to the extension of the e -commerce moratorium. Senior Officials sho uld be asked to 
narrow the divergences in these areas.  Jamaica is of the view that Senior Officials should also be 
able to agree on modalities for LDCs graduation and if this is not doable, Senior Officials should 
significantly narrow the areas of divergen cies so that a decision can be finalized by Geneva -based 
delegates for adoption by Ministers at MC13. In this regard, we would support calls for the 
appointment of a facilitator on LDCs graduation.  Following on the MC12 declaration on the WTO 's 
response to  the COVID -19 pandemic and preparedness for future pandemics, we believe that the 
Chair of the General Council can lead a process for the preparation of a comprehensive report for 
Minister 's adoption at MC13.  Paragraph 10 of the MC12 Outcome Document sets out the importance 
of increasing participation of developing members in global services trade. Building on the recent 
launch of the WTO -World Bank publication entitled Trade in Services for Development, it is important 
for the WTO to have informal meetings  or information sharing sessions. This includes work in the 
various committees after the summer break, so that we can have discussions on the topics covered 
by the publication, with a view to finding avenues for incorporating services in the outcomes of TN/C/M/46  
 
- 45 - 
 
  MC13. We fully support the way forward by the Chair of the CTD -SS. We will support the facilitators 
and work towards deli very of the targeted ASPs by MC13.  It is important that our processes remain 
truly member driven, fair, inclusive, transparent and takes into account constraints faced by smaller 
delegations. This fosters ownership of the processes. In closing  we align ourselves to the statement 
by Kenya on behalf of the ACP Group . 
4.121.   The representative of Viet Nam delivered the following statement :  
4.122.   My delega tion wishes to focus on Viet Nam 's three high priorities: Fisheries Subsidies, 
Agriculture, and WTO Reform, including the Dispute Settlement Reform, among other priority issues.  
On Fisheries Subsidies negotiations, Viet Nam shared Members ' positive comments on the good 
progress, the constructive engagements among Members, with our sincere appreciation to the Chair 
for his leadership and the Secretariat for their facilitation efforts. As there have been new ideas and 
approaches on the table from a number of Members, we see the need to have additional technical 
dialogues in the format of workshops or seminars with the participation of fisheries professional 
staffs and managers from Capital alongside the Fish -Week Clusters, so as to bring about  greater 
understanding and help keep the negotiations well informed.  On Agriculture, while noting Members ' 
still diverse views, Viet Nam welcomes the high level of engagement among Members to identify 
common priorities and believes that the process can res ult in outcomes where Members ' interests 
meet, including food security, supply chain resilience, trade sustainability, elimination of market 
distortions and dealing with modern challenges. We are committed to working in collaboration with 
other Members and  ready to engage with others in any configuration to make progress.  In addition 
to the two topics that we shared our views above, the WTO Reform is certainly another priority need 
to prepare for the SO Meeting in October and for the MC13, as indicated in a  large amount of 
proposals already on the table.  My delegation welcomes the understanding achieved from the results 
of dedicated sessions on Development Dimension in February early this year and on Deliberative 
Functions, Institutional Matters of the WTO l ast June, as well as significant efforts on the ground to 
streamline and improve the way the WTO works. We would like to reiterate the urgency of meeting 
the MC12 mandate to restore the fully and well -functioning Dispute Settlement System, in particular 
the Appellate Body, to provide security and predictability to the multilateral trading system. The 
Senior Officials Meeting obviously needs to focus on this issue.  We beli eve that we need to take the 
advantage of the SO Meeting, and for that it is important for the SO Meeting to harvest certain 
elements, and to provide the political push and guidance on the roadmaps for moving the priorities 
topics towards deliverables at the MC13.  Turning to the second question set forth by DG in the 
agenda, we are of the vi ews that it is critical to facilitate the preparation work in a concrete, 
transparent, inclusive and results -oriented manner. Viet Nam wishes to join calls for a text -based 
package of MC13 outcomes, which could be presented in preliminary format to the SO Meeting to 
take advantage of this opportunity.  
4.123.   The representative of India delivered the following statement :  
4.124.   Our suggestion in agriculture is to  begin text -based negotiation, particularly for a permanent 
solution to PSH. For this purpose, the submission s made by more than 80 members, in JOB/AG/229 , 
makes a good starting point. It also calls for using dynamic ERP; The  present method of determining 
ERP on 1986/87/88 prices is hugely flawed and defies logic. This was demonstrated convincingly in 
the recent information sharing session on the 26 June, including in presentations made therein by 
IFPRI and OECD therein. We wo uld also like to reiterate that no outcome in agriculture may be 
possible unless there is an outcome on permanent solution to PSH.  In Fish , the NGR Chair deserves 
a huge compl iment for greater transparency and inclusive participation in the process. This h as led 
to better participation from the capitals too. We anticipate the same level of transparency in 
text-based negotiation. India reiterates that disciplines on fisheries subsidies agreement be balanced 
in current and future fishing needs, providing,  appropriate and effective S&DT that protects the 
livelihoods of poor fishermen, addresses food security concerns, and provides future policy space, 
while recognizing and incorporating the principles of 'Polluter Pays ' and CBDR -RC. As Capital based 
delegations  will have frequent visit to Geneva as discussions intensified, WTO may like to take up 
with the Swiss authorities for providing longer period visas to such delegates at  least till the MC13.  
The renewed activity in the CTD  SS on G90 submissions is encouraging. We hope that these 
discussions pick up momentum going forward, for a meaningful outcome, and facilitators led 
discussion add to the transparency while expediting the discussions.  We should be working sincerely 
to make tangible progress on othe r pending Ministerial mandates, particularly, Trips Waiver for 
therapeutics and diagnostics, restoration of a fully functional two-tier dispute resolution system 
including the appellate body, and other mandated issues on development dimension. Our TN/C/M/46  
 
- 46 - 
 
  suggesti ons on the process and roadmap approaching SOM  are broadly in line with your preliminary 
remarks earlier in the day. Further discussions on these would help.  The detailed modalities for the 
senior officers meeting may be worked out early for better prepara tion and focused discussions. 
Discussion on options provided in para 20 of your report in J OB/TNC/109 will help in finalizing the 
structure of SOM. Senior Officers may be formally apprised of work done on the pending mandates 
from MC12 and past MCs by way of stock taking, including present status thereof. The items that 
are, for decision by the Minister; or  for seeking further mandate; or for information , and the items 
that require further discussion.  These status notes be shared in advance.  We should take up 
mandated issues for MC12 and past MCs and not overload the agenda with newer issues. We already 
have a full plate.  This would facilitate the SOM to set expectation level and finalize agenda for the 
Ministerial. Considering the modalities and road map re quires developing further clarity in thought 
process, as you mentioned in your speech,  your proposed informal discussions as TNC Chair  and 
those of the  GC Chair on this specific item, as early as possible, and in next HODS, would be of 
immense help for a s erious work immediately after the summer break in an inclusive and transparent 
process.  
4.125.   The representative of Ecuador  delivered the following statement:  
4.126.   Among the great challenges in which trade can contribute effectively , food security occupies 
a priorit y position for  Ecuador especially as we head towards the SOM and MC13 . Given our  
agricultural producing background  and the relevance that agricultural production has for world food 
security, the Members of the Latin American region can and should contribut e effectively to the 
debates on the subject in the WTO . This reinforces our commitment to advance the agricultural issue 
in the WTO  – a matter that has been set aside for many years . Bearing this in mind , and as many 
will remember, several Latin American c ountries issued a Declaration on Agricultural Trade at MC12 . 
Looking towards the future and the priority of the matter, on behalf of the Latin American countries 
signatories of the aforementioned Declaration on Agriculture, Ecuador will intervene on this p oint at 
next week's General Council meeting . In any case, I would like to reiterate Ecuador 's position of 
supporting the reactivation of agricultural trade negotiations within the WTO – a matter of interest 
to all Members and, in particular, to t hose who a re still developing and less advanced.  This is long 
overdue – which has its own merits and support, and where delivery cannot wait any longer. In this 
regard, Ecuador  supports Costa Rica's recent proposal, which seems to us to contain elements in 
the right  direction and which can gradually facilitate Members' understanding.  Another issue, of 
great relevance for Ecuador, refers to the contribution of trade and trade measures to the global 
response to the environmental crises, which, in addition to the impairment of the natural resources , 
have a negative impact on human health, the functioning of our economies, sustainable development 
and social dynamics such as migration and human settlements. For this re ason, Ecuador supports 
the actions of the WTO in matters of trade and environment, both in the CTE and in future events 
on the work agenda of our organization, including at MC13 . We likewise congratulate  Ms. Josefina 
Bunge for her appointment as facilitato r – as announced by the NGR Chair . Her knowledge of the 
subject and active participation that she has had in the past negotiations augur a successful 
performance. She has our support. We also commend Mr.  Marco Molina  for facilitating discussions 
on DS Refo rm. Finding an understanding on the matter is one of the essential tasks that we have 
pending as an organization and that Ecuador  supports. On the SOM  and the next stages of our work 
towards MC13 , it is our understanding that the D irector -General  plans to hold consultations in 
September and that decisions on the organization of the High -Level Meeting would be taken at a 
meeting of Heads of Delegation on 10 October . In this regard, we suggest that,  before the HODs 
meeting on 10 October, Members  should  have a n indication of the results of the se consultations. 
This would allow us  to communicate them to our capitals and be ready to make informed, concrete 
decisions during the HODs meeting in preparation for the SOM . 
4.127.   The representative of Iceland  delivered the fo llowing statement:  
4.128.   Like many other Members , we see three main priorities looking towards the fall and MC13. 
First would be WTO reform with dispute settlement being the absolute top priority there. The second 
one is the fisheries negotiations where we remai n convinced that we can have an agreement by the 
end of the year and the third one is agriculture, admittedly a challenge, but also a shared 
responsibility of us all. And then on process, I simply say that we support your outline of the process 
towards MC1 3 including on the modalities for the Senior Officials meeting in October.   
4.129.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 47 - 
 
  4.130.   I have three points to deliver regarding our vision of the goals and preparation process for 
MC13.  My delegation considers unilateral trade -restrictive actions to be WTO -inconsistent and a 
major risk that undermine the post -pandemic reco very process of the global economy. In our view, 
that risk just reinforces the need for a prompt reform of the WTO. T he emerging trend of disregard 
for the WTO rules erodes the MTS. To correct this process of decay we urgently need to reinstall the 
mechanism ensuring consistency of Members' trade policies. That is why by MC13 it is imperative to 
deliver concrete results on restoration of a fully functioning dispute settlement system. Without that, 
the WTO will look like a house of cards. It is important to remember that the primary purpose of 
MCs is the adoption of systemically important decisions related to trade regulat ion. While procedural 
improvements may be a valid contribution to the success of MC13 and they merit our attention, they 
should not be the main focus of the preparatory process. The WTO Councils and Committees, as well 
as GC itself, should be able to refin e their modus operandi  through their regular work. The excessive 
attention to procedural matters will just distract us from effectively addressing the urgent trade 
issues and take away the focus from the negotiating function. We should avoid the scenario o f the 
previous MC, when some major final arrangements were presented to most Members just minutes 
before their adoption. Such an approach will not fly this time. The MC13 outcomes package should 
be prepared in advance, with the involvement of all delegatio ns. Disregard for transparency and 
inclusiveness are factors that will make it extremely difficult for most Members, including my 
delegation, to support the outcomes of MC13. This applies to our delegation as well. I hope that we 
will be able to overcome o ur differences in favour of constructive work for the benefit of all Members. 
This is the only way to produce meaningful results. I am still well within my time slot limits. I do not 
want to follow the example of our British colleague, who exceeded the lim it of his intervention by 
nearly twice the amount of time allotted and tested our patience by repeating ungrounded allegations 
against my country. I could use my time slot on spending your precious time, Madame Chair and 
fellow Ambassadors, by explaining t he real circumstances of the cessation of the Black Sea Grain 
deal and condemning those Members, who bear the real responsibility for the deteriorating situation 
in the world food and fertilizers' markets. And I will be forced to do so if some delegations continue 
to make interventions that are inconsistent with the mandate, purpose and agenda of WTO meetings. 
But I much  hope that you, Madame Chair, and other Chairpersons will finally use your authority to 
persuade those delegations to refrain from politici zing and disrupting the work of the WTO.  
4.131.   The Chairperson  delivered the following statement:  
4.132.   There is one thing that I do one to take note of – the comments by Kenya as the ACP 
Coordinator and Jamaica on the recent co -publication by the WTO and World Bank o n Trade in 
Services for Development. This is a comprehensive study, in which both organizations have invested 
significant time and resources. It is reasonable for delegations to try to make the most out of this 
study. I talked to the Chair of the CTS SS wh o brought this up that perhaps organizing a discussion 
along relevant themes touched upon in the report would be beneficial to Members – if she could do 
that in her Negotiating Group.  It is incredible how congruent the topics that have been mentioned 
are. As all of you have said, we know what topics on substance we want to focus on because all of 
you have alluded to them. It is how we choose among those topics for the SOM and the questi ons 
that we pose that would be key. The more we work together and talk to each other, the more we 
come to recognize that we have the same priorities even though within them there may still be 
differences in some. But I thought today was a great discussion.  I am almost two years and a half 
on the job, and I compared the quality of the discussion today with when I first came. There is a 
real difference in the atmosphere. That gives me a lot of hope. I want to commend Members for this 
great atmosphere and this  discussion. Let me also note that it looks like LDC Graduation maybe ripe. 
I want to thank those who are  working on it. I listened to Djibouti as LDC Coordinator, the United 
States and Bangladesh, among other Members. If there is work going on and we can deal with this 
at the GC meeting, that would be a worth celebration.  Excellencies, thank you for supporting the 
process I laid out – although there are Members who will think more about it and come back with 
suggestions. Like I said, we are open. We will r efine and take into account your comments. Some 
delegations are anxious to have a notion of subjects to be discussed to share with their Senior 
Officials. But I like to invite you to have patience. I do not think we are in a position to circulate 
something . What I will do is to share my remarks so if your Senior Officials are anxious, they can 
read those remarks and have an idea that it is not just an empty space. There are things that we 
are looking at. I will counsel us to have patience before even trying  to do a preliminary agenda 
because that may put us in corners where we may not want to be. The period between September 
and October gives us one month for more preparations and discussions. All of that can feed into the TN/C/M/46  
 
- 48 - 
 
  Joint Informal HODs. One more month  of work will surely make some of the ideas we have more 
solid going forward and sharpen questions that we may put to Senior Officials on some of the topics.  
4.133.   I want to borrow from what Ambassador Usha Dwarka -Canabady (Mauritius) and 
Ambassador Maria Pagan  (United States) said. A culture of not waiting for Ministers would help. If 
we can make decisions and take things off the table, it will leave less even for Senior Officials or 
Ministers to consider. We are asking for many things – transparency of meeting s, avoiding clashing 
meetings, among others. Like what Members said, if we don't want meetings to clash, let us try to 
conclude some things and make decisions. That could help us tick some items off the table. We will 
try our best. We know that there are s everal delegations that are challenged  because they are 
managing many things. We are sympathetic. But I don't think we will get it 100% perfect. I cannot 
promise you that. We will do the best  we can. We are entering a period of multiple negotiations. So, 
whatever we can do for you to have back up – if you can get this from home for this period, if we 
can reach out to Senior Officials from the capital somehow so that they can help you, we should 
work on doing that. We do not have much time. I have talked to Heads of other international 
organizations about how to manage the clash and we are all in a dilemma. Sometimes issues arise 
all of a sudden and they have to call a meeting, or they have some pre -planned statutory meetings. 
It is not easy. So, I am asking for understanding. We will try to be as inclusive and transparent in 
the meetings. But I also want you on your side to tell the capital officials that you need addition al 
help if they can during this short period of time. I do tell Ministers and Leaders wh en I see them that 
their teams are small . That is the plea I wanted because Brunei Darussalam and many other 
Members have raised this. We will do the best we can, but we cannot be perfect.  We are on a good 
path on the content, process and atmosphere. Today 's discussion has been helpful . We will do all 
the work you have indicated to make it easier for Senior Officials before they come. I hope that 
when we all come back from the summer, we can press some more. We will definitely have these 
things put down as a guide to help us all at that time.  
4.134.   The Trade Negotiations Committee took note  of the statements.  
5  EXTENDED INFORMAL HEADS OF DELEGATION MEETING  
5.1.  The Chairperson , speaking as Director -General , delivered the following statement:  
5.2.  Excellencies, let us now turn to the Extended HoDs. In the convening notice for this meeting, 
I indicated that I intended to provide:  
a. Updates on the Secretariat Transformation process and Strategic Vision and Focus Pillars 
exercises.  
b. Updates on the Civil S ociety and Business Advisory Groups to the Secretariat.  
c. Any other updates.  
Secretariat's high -level vision and strategic pillars  
 
5.3.  I will focus today mainly on the work on vision and strategy for the Secretariat. We launched 
the work to develop a vision and  strategy for the Secretariat at the end of March. On 10 July , I 
shared with Secretariat staff and with you the results of the first step of this work. This is in the form 
of a "Secretariat strategy house", comprising Vision and Mission Statements, strateg ic pillars, and 
enablers. Here, I would like to stress once again that this is a Vision for the Secretariat, rather than 
for the WTO or for its Members.  The document that I shared with you synthetizes three months of 
hard work, including engagement with an d inputs from a wide variety of stakeholders. Members' 
inputs were valuable , and I thank all of you who contributed to this exercise. I would particularly 
like to recognize the contribution of Ambassador Dacio Castillo (Honduras) in facilitating your input s. 
We believe that we have achieved our objective of elaborating a concise vision statement that is 
inspiring, forward -looking, relevant, unifying, action -oriented, and motivating for all staff.  
a. The Secretariat vision statement is: "Build a better world f or people through global 
cooperation and rules -based international trade".   TN/C/M/46  
 
- 49 - 
 
  b. The fact that service to Members is at the heart of our activities at the Secretariat is fully 
reflected in our Mission Statement, which is: "The Secretariat supports the WTO 
Membe rship with integrity, impartiality, independence, and expertise, in line with the WTO 
agreements".   
c. The strategic pillars are high -level, long -term goals that will guide operational decisions 
and help the Secretariat move towards its vision. These are desi gned to be cross -cutting 
and flexible enough to be relevant for the whole range of activities of the Secretariat and 
all the ways in which we serve Members. The pillars are action -oriented, can endure over 
time, and will serve as the starting point for the  elaboration and operationalization of a 
Secretariat strategy. The enablers are the foundations that we need to build and fortify to 
support e verything we want to do. Much of the transformation work that we have done so 
far has already targeted these two a reas – our people culture and our use of technology.   
5.4.  I hope that all Members have had the opportunity to read and reflect on our new Secretariat 
strategy house. I will be interested to hear your thoughts and reactions.  The Director for Vision and 
Strategy  and the Transformation Office are now moving to a new phase of work, which is to flesh 
out the Secretariat's strategy up to 2030. This will involve elaborating in more detail the content of 
the five strategic pillars and two enablers. Those will then be t ranslated into concrete, time -bound 
plans. Mechanisms will also be developed to ensure coordination as well as alignment of Secretariat 
planning and operations with the overall strategy. This phase will require involvement and active 
participation not only  across the Secretariat but will also benefit from regular engagement with 
Members.  I understand that questions have been raised as to possible links between this work on 
strategy and vision and the 2024 -2025 biennial budget proposal. I would like to clari fy that this work 
is separate from our budget proposal at this stage. The work on vision and strategy has always been 
part of the planned second phase of transformation work. We intended to begin this work in late 
2022, but the start was delayed until the spring of 2023. This means that we are only now beginning 
the detailed work on strategy, and that it is too early to link this in a concrete manner to our budget 
request. This will come at the next budget cycle.  
Secretariat's other transformation workstrea ms 
 
5.5.  DDG Ellard provided an update on other transformation work at the CBFA meeting held on 
Tuesday. I will not repeat the contents of that report today, but I do want to give you a quick update 
on the ongoing digital transformation. During the last WTO Ref orm retreat, you heard about what is 
going on in "the Reform by doing", including how the Secretariat collaborates with Committees on 
the release of digital tools. We are continuing to push forward with our digital transformation 
initiatives as we can, inc luding building governance to adjust the sequencing, scope, and 
prioritization of initiatives as circumstances and available budget evolve. The Global Trade Data 
portal was recently launched. This portal was presented to the Committee on Trade and 
Developm ent, including a demonstration of the new dashboard with real -time data on international 
wheat shipments. It is really fascinating when you look at it – which I invite all of you to do. The 
Secretariat is now actively investigating how generative AI can tr ansform the search tools we make 
available to you. The digital transformation work we have already done, and the lessons we have 
learned so far, will also feed into and enrich the development of our strategy, particularly around 
the Technology, Digital, Da ta Enabler, which is "Leverage technology to best serve Members, 
reinforce the Secretariat as a centre of excellence, and improve operational efficiency and user 
experience".  More detailed information on our transformation efforts is regularly provided to the 
Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration, including in written status reports – the most 
recent one is in document WT/BFA/635 – as well as in DDG Ellard's speaking notes on 
transformation, which are circulated after each CBFA meeting.  
Business a nd Civil Society Advisory Groups to the Secretariat  
 
5.6.  Turning to the Business and Civil Society Advisory Groups to the Secretariat, in my information 
note to you on 20 June, I shared the composition of my two Advisory Groups. I subsequently met 
virtually wi th the civil society leaders on 21 June and with the business leaders on 4 July. The 
discussions we had were interesting  and insightful, highlighting the importance of engaging more 
directly with our stakeholders. Let me share some of the main themes that emerged from my 
exchanges with the groups.  
5.7.  The Civil Society Group spoke to the following issues:  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 50 - 
 
  a. The role the WTO can a nd should play in shaping the world of tomorrow for the benefit of 
youth, workers, consumers, and the environment. In their view, this would necessitate a 
comprehensive reform of the current institutional framework.  
b. The important role that trade can and s hould play in improving the food security situation 
around the world, with a call to better understand the impact of different types of subsidies 
and climate change on food security. They dwelt a lot on the food security issue as 
something of prime importa nce to civil society.  
c. The need to address the nexus between trade, climate change and biodiversity and to 
provide a facilitating environment at WTO to discuss this.  
5.8.  What was interesting to me is what they raised – some of the issues that are bothering peo ple 
in the world today. These include climate and food security. There were things that civil society 
thought we should be delivering on.  
5.9.  The Business Advisory Group spoke to the following issues:  
a. The need for the WTO to be in touch with the realities of people that depend on trade, and 
with those of business, particularly small and medium sized enterprises.  
b. The impact of digitalization and technology on trade: the ever -growing importance of 
services and digital economy and the need to create and support an enabling environment 
for digital trade to develop further, especially in developing countries. Other rapidly 
evolving areas were also highlighted such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) where global 
standards they felt should be developed. The importance of maintaining the existing 
moratorium on customs duties on e -commerce was also underscored.  
c. The overall need to make trade more inclusive and sustainable and to translate ambition 
into action on both fronts. On inclusivity, capacity building an d trade finance were noted 
as key to MSMEs that want to trade internationally. In addition, the role of trade in 
achieving SDGs was underscored.  
5.10.  Business group members expressed concern about the dispute settlement system functioning 
partially, being the bedrock of stability of the system. They urged for repair, to continue to make 
WTO rules the underlying bedrock for the multilateral trading system.  As expected, I found a lot of 
value in hearing the views of the civil society and business leaders and I am  hopeful that at future 
occasions, there would be opportunity for the membership to interact with and benefit from the 
perspectives of these stakeholders. We are doing this transparently for you to share and hear the 
issues of concern that they are talking  about. Those who might be interesting in participating and 
listening to them at some point, I would like to know, so that we can have you join some of these 
meetings, pose questions or hear feedback. I aim to meet virtually with both Groups again before 
the end of the year, to be followed by an in -person meeting at some point – either before the end 
of the year or beginning next year.  
DDG Selection process  
 
5.11.  I also wanted to share with you, where things are with the search for a DDG to replace Anabel 
given the importance of the process so that we are open and transparent on what we are doing. We 
turn to GRULAC to provide a list of possible candidates. A list of seven candidates have been 
provided. I subsequently have put a panel together which was not easy. It takes a bit of time. The 
panel has commenced work. They had an initial meeting. We hope that within the next few weeks, 
they would be able to move speedily with this process. They have drawn up a road map for 
completing the process hopefully by August. But given the summer break, we hope it can be done.  
I have gone outside to get the Chair of this Committee who is Prof. Richard Baldwin who is the 
Professor of International Economics at the Graduate Institute. He is an expert on trade which many 
of you wi ll know. I have done that because it is quite an unusual list that contains some sitting and 
former Ambassadors on it. It is a delicate issue to handle. We have composed the panel as follows: 
Ambassador Clare Kelly (New Zealand), Ambassador Muhammadou Kah (The Gambia), WTO Chief 
Economist – Dr. Ralph Ossa, WTO Chief of Staff – Dr. Bright Okogu and Director of the Human 
Resources Division of the WTO Secretariat – Ms. Alison Holmes as the Secretary to the Panel. The TN/C/M/46  
 
- 51 - 
 
  panel will do its work in an open and trans parent way. When they finish, they will give me a shortlist 
of two or three candidates depending on what they wish to do. I want e verybody to know what we 
are doing so that there is no lack of transparency in the process from which I am standing back.  
Remarks on WTO Budget  
 
5.12.  Let me also make a few remarks on the WTO Budget. As you know this past Tuesday, I 
presented my 2024 -2025 budget request to the CBFA and spent several hours engaging with 
Members in a constructive dialogue. I want to thank the Chair of the CBFA, Ambassador Waldmann 
(Germany), for her guidance and patience. That document is available as WT/BFA/W/643 . I want to 
also thank my team, led by DDG Ellard. Those who were at the CBFA heard first -hand the discussion 
which I thought was constructive and I appreciate that. But many were not, and this is why I thought 
I should briefly address this issue today. The s uccess of MC12, the considerable work that Members 
are engaged in for completion by MC13, and exigent circumstances beyond our control, including 
inflation, create an important and, I believe, compelling, context for this budget request. Since 2012, 
the Se cretariat's budget has been frozen at zero nominal growth. But while our budget has remained 
flat in nominal terms, it has been declining significantly in real terms, taking Swiss inflation into 
account. In fact, in real terms, our budget has actually decl ined by more than CHF 10 million since 
2012. In 2023 alone, we are experiencing a 5 percent decrease.  In essence, what I am asking you 
is not really to increase our budget, but rather to adjust it for inflation accumulated over the 12  years 
of zero nomina l growth budgeting. I am just asking you to bring us back to our 2012 budget in real 
terms – to make us whole – with a little extra to improve our ability to serve you, particularly with 
15 additional staff posts dedicated to obtaining new technical and su bstantive expertise as well as a 
small amount to help fill the promotions backlog.  
5.13.  We know we must – and should – justify e very bit of our request. As I said when I presented 
this request, we know that many of you are in similar situations. So, we are not asking lightly. We 
know that some of you are also facing zero nominal growth. We are demonstrating that we are doing 
more with less, and have cut, redeployed, and repurposed including with heating and 
air-conditioning. We are working actively on competency  review and staff planning. But in the 
meantime, we also have a programme for rotating junior staff and we are looking at how to do this 
with senior staff, both inside and outside the organization. For example, we have MOUs with the 
World Bank, UNCTAD, UNE P and other organizations. We are also rotating staff to give them a 
different experience and get others in to also help us with different skills.  We have reduced this 
year's request compared to what we previously asked for at the mid -term review in recogn ition of 
what I just said. E verybody is experiencing cost pressures, inflation, rise in energy cost, debt levels, 
currency depreciations for many of the developing countries but even some of the developed ones 
on exchange rate pressures.  I ask you to work with us over the next few months. I realized you 
have many questions and I value the way you approached the budget discussions in the CBFA. We 
are willing to work with you to answer all your questions so we can finalize the budget by last 
meeting of the CB FA which is in November ready for the December GC meeting. That is a whole 
other piece of work that will have to be going on alongside all the other work we have. But such is 
life as they say. Hopefully, after MC13 we will have some respite. For our part, we will be working 
to provide answers to the list of topics you gave for technical discussions that we will convene. As 
some of you suggested, this will be more helpful to answer questions. This will begin after the 
summer break. Please let us know your su ggestions on how we can do this. We are willing and open. 
I hope that after all the work, you and the capitals will see fit to approve our request to make us 
whole.  
5.14.  The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
5.15.  We are only a few months awa y from MC. This calls for optimal utilization of resources, efforts, 
and time . As regards the Secretariat 's engagement with Civil Society and Business through the 
recently constituted Advisory Groups, we wish to recall that this has been a long -debated iss ue. The 
General Council  had issued instructions through document WT/L/1 62, dated 23 July  1996, outlining 
a cautious and a limiting approach for external such engagement considering the sensitivities 
involved in it in view of WTO 's member driven structure.  The 2005 Report of the Consultative Board 
to the then D irector -General  had accurately recognized that the p rimary responsibility for engaging 
with non -Governmental organization rests with the Members Governments themselves in their 
domestic constituency. This Board highlighted several concerns which continue to be relevant today.  
The relevant issues are :  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 52 - 
 
  a. under mining of Member -driven character.  
b. explicit objectives, the confines, and the gain and risk assessment for such engagements;  
c. rights, responsibilities, and accountability of participants.  
d. issues of concentrated competence, financial capacities, and  interest of such entities.  
e. non-representative and skewed selection and participation.  
f. trade policy competency gaps in participants.  
g. marginalization of developing countries, and,   
h. resource application issues.  
5.16.  Our immediate concerns in this regard are : 
a. lack of  transparency in the process and criteria of selection of entities, both at inter and 
intra region.  
b. ensuring that the agenda of certain members may not get pushed up considering that we 
have had a proposal from a member for a similar forum for such extern al engagements.  
c. Need for formal communication with members on the discussions held in these forums, to 
prevent distorted reporting in media and elsewhere.  
5.17.  We may recall here that para 12 of the MC12 Outcome Document also comes with caveats on 
engagement with relevant stakeholders, prescribing that engagement with external stakeholders 
who have responsibilities related to those of the WTO be done in accordance with the rules and 
principles of the WTO. So, there is a caveat hereto. Therefore, we are of the view that the issue of 
secretariat 's external engagements requires a fresh round of transparent and inclusive discussions, 
for mandate and guidelines, as the General Council considers appropriate.  As regards the vision and 
mission statement of t he secretariat, considering the effort needed for Secretariat vision and focus 
pillar exercise, it may be appropriate to reflect upon whether discussions on it is deferred to post 
MC. Also, we would like to suggest that vision statement and strategic pilla rs must remain in the 
confines of the mandated for the secretariat in the Marrakesh Agreement.  
5.18.  The Director -General  recalled that she also  had a discussion with Minister Goyal (India) about 
a few days ago. The Civil Society and Business Advisory Groups was not a new idea. One of her 
predecessors had also established one. This issue was also discussed at  the General Council. Some 
Members had expressed great support for the idea of engaging with other stakeholders. Some did 
not – including India. As a result,  the idea of Civil Society and Business Advisory to the WTO as an 
organization – had been abandoned precisely for the reasons India said that it was up to Members 
to deal with civil society if they so want ed. Therefore, she reiterated  that these Advisory G roups 
were for the Secretariat. There was nothing in the rules that stop ped the Director -General from 
getting advice from civil society and business  – and interacting with them. There was also nothing 
that stop ped her from sharing that advice with WTO Members. This was not an advisory group for 
the WTO. She was careful in trying to shape it so that it was for the Secretariat and not the 
organization. However, whatever business and civil society would say  to her could  be interesting 
and useful for Members to hear. If that was not the case, she would  stop briefing Members on what 
civil society and business were saying. But if she could not hear from them, she would not be doing 
her job well. It was business that trade d. It was civil society that represent ed ordinary people.  
Business want ed the WTO  to be able to deal with people. On transparency, she had  announced at 
the TNC that she was going to put up the Advisory Groups . She had  selected the group s to be 
representative. T here was nothing hidden about it. The information was  circulated to all Members . 
Lack of transparency ha d become a weapon in this  WTO. Members  should not use it carelessly. 
Establishing the Advisory Groups had been  an open process. She had  shared this idea  to Members 
and had asked for their comments. Since  she had n ot gotten any, she had gone  with what she had. 
In any case, she  remain ed open to listening to any other input or guidance that w ould make the 
Advisory Groups to the Secretariat work better.  TN/C/M/46  
 
- 53 - 
 
  5.19.  The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
5.20.  We welcome the transparency that the Director -General provided and the fact that you had 
circulated some time ago the list of names – to see who is there. We would welcome continued  
transparency in your engagements and your offer to have Members participate in conversations. 
Stakeholder engagement, which was mentioned earlier by Costa Rica and Norway, is an issue that 
we have also raised in the past and which we are interested in. Wh en we were thinking about this 
some time ago, we looked at those 199 6 guidelines – and I will say that they are from 199 6. From 
our perspective, it is something that we would certainly be interested in looking at and revising. We 
talk about trying to be cr edible and address different issues. For us to do this, we would need to 
engage with the people who are out there who feel the repercussions of the things that we negotiate 
here. We should be hearing from them. To be clear, we are not saying that we will h ave stakeholders 
in the room while we are negotiating. Rather, it is just about being able to engage with them – like 
what we have been doing with some good events that we have had in the recent past where we can 
listen to the voices from the field. These are the people who can tell us whether what we are doing 
here is working or not working for them.   
5.21.  The representative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
5.22.  With respect to the budget, I wonder if you could share with us the sort of flexibilities Mem bers 
could have to pay their contribution for the budget. This is something critical that we want to 
consider. Definitely, the flexibilities that we might have could really help.  
5.23.  The Director -General  said that she was thinking of this issue. Egypt was not the only one that 
had raised it with her. But she wanted to wait until there was clarity on  whether the Membership 
support ed her proposal. If that happen ed to be the case, the next step would be to discuss 
modalities.  
5.24.  The representative of the European Uni on delivered the following statement:  
5.25.  We have also been doing work to look at the question of external stakeholders. Our view is 
also that the guidelines of 1996 no longer reflect the way in which organizations like the WTO which 
depend on technical expert ise often  can function best. We would also invite a discussion on how we 
can increase external participation in the organization without those experts participating in the 
negotiations themselves. If we compare this organization with any international orga nization in this 
city, the judgment would be that we are significantly the most closed. But I  also think that  the 
argument that government representatives already include the knowledge of an external stakeholder 
because it has gone through their national p rocesses is no longer accurate today if you think about 
international issues and the expertise that foundations or issue -specific NGOs can bring – which 
enriches discussions in the organization. I would like also to make a plea to have that discussion. I 
accept that it would be an incremental process. We are looking more to evolution rather than 
something that is radical. But it would benefit the quality of the debate here if we can also count on 
the inputs from external stakeholders.  
5.26.  The Director -General  thanked those who had taken the floor including India for sparking the 
debate. She hoped they could talk further  on the matter . She likewise hear d what the United States 
and the European Union ha d to say  on stakeholder engagement. She thanked all Members fo r 
contributing to that day's meeting. She noted that it had been a productive day.  
 
__________  