inside this issue the caricom single market & economy...

CARICOM: Guyana’s Implementationof the CARICOM Single Market & Economy ............... 1Moftic and the Private Sector ............................................ 2Editorial ................................................................................ 2Negotiations of Economic Partnership Agreement withthe EU .................................................................................... 3Synopsis of Developments in the WTO Doha Agenda ... 6TRINIDAD & TOBAGO: Trade & Cooperation ............ 8BRAZIL: International Road Transport Agreement ...... 8The Guyana/Brazil Road .................................................... 9NARI/EMBRAPA MOU and TCP ....................................... 9COLOMBIA: Advancement of Guyana’sAgricultural Sector ............................................................. 9MALAYSIA: Technical Training ....................................... 9CUBA: The Guyana/Cuba Joint Commission ................ 9INDIA: Guyana/India Joint Commission ...................... 10CHINA: Bilateral Investment Treaty with China ....... 108th Session of the Guyana/China Joint Commission ... 10Guyana International Conference Centre .................... 10Visit by High Level Chinese Delegation ....................... 11JAPAN: New Amsterdam Hospital Project .................... 12Technical Training ............................................................ 12KOREA: Korean Grant Aid ............................................. 12Technical Training ............................................................ 12RUSSIA: Trade & Economic Agreement ........................ 12ITALY: Soft Loan of 3.305 Million Euros ....................... 13Organisation of American States .................................... 13International Organisation of Migration ...................... 13Commonwealth Secretariat ............................................. 13Voluntary Service Overseas ............................................. 13First Review Of Guyana’s Foreign Trade ...................... 14Services Seminar ............................................................... 16WTO Trade Policy Review Seminar ............................... 18The 14th Session Of COTED ........................................... 21World Intellectual Property Organisation ..................... 22Canada-CARICOM Culture & Trade workshop ......... 25The NACEN ........................................................................ 26N-TNC ................................................................................. 26http://www.moftic.gov.gy .................................................... 27

GUYANA’S IMPLEMENTATION OFTHE CARICOM SINGLE MARKET &

ECONOMY (CSME)Ms. Bevon McDonald, Foreign Service Officer

Background

The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Conference ofHeads of Government in 1990 agreed to the establishmentof a single market and economy. In 1992 they further agreedto the establishment of an Inter-Governmental Task Force(IGTF) to supervise the revision of the Treaty ofChaguaramas in order to establish the CARICOM SingleMarket & Economy (CSME).

The IGTF, which was established by the Conference, decidedthat the Treaty Revision Process should be done by a seriesof nine (9) Protocols (which have now been incorporatedinto the Revised Treaty) treat with: establishment, servicesand capital; industrial, trade, agricultural and, transportpolicies; disadvantaged countries, regions and sectors;competition policy, consumer protection, dumping andsubsidies; and the settlement of disputes.

Protocol II has been defined to include the Single Market &Economy and will operate to approximate the differenteconomies of CARICOM to a single economic space. Detailsrelating to the specific activities with respect to the exerciseof these rights, the time-frame within which existingrestrictive conditions for the grant and enjoyment of theserights, are currently the subject of negotiation anddetermination at the relevant fora within CARICOM.

The full implementation of the Protocol II is critical to theeffective and successful functioning of the CSME. In thisregard, Member States were obligated to notify all existingrestrictions that are inconsistent with Protocol II. Theserestrictions include:

Restrictions on the right of establishment; Discriminatoryrestrictions on banking insurance and financial services;Restrictions on movement of capital and all currentpayments; Administrative practices and procedures whichrestrict establishment and provision of services; Restrictions

INSIDE THIS ISSUE

cont’d on page 3

MOFTIC Digest — Issue No. 1, 2003 2

The relationship between the private sector andthe Ministry of Foreign Trade and InternationalCooperation (MOFTIC) continues to be fruitful.In the constant interaction of the variousworkshops, consultations and seminars heldby MOFTIC, opportunity is always availed tothe private sector to air our opinions onfundamental trade issues relating to privatesector development:

• • • • • Workshops/seminars provide knowledge andaid by equipping the private sector with the toolsneeded to plan for the trading agreements(WTO, FTAA and EU/ACP).

• • • • • Discussions in technical working groupscontribute in making the private sector muchmore viable, enabling it confront and exploitopportunities emerging from various free tradearrangements.

• • • • • Involvement in trade agreements has enabledus to establish relationships with countries thatare interested in doing trade with Guyana’sprivate sector.

The Hon. Minister and his team are doing anexemplary job. It is most expedient at this pointto mention the “Review of Guyana’s ForeignTrade”. It is an excellent start in disseminatinginformation and statistics that is always achallenge to access taking congnisance of ourlimited resources and capabilities. The periodicpublication of such a document will assist usin analysis and planning.

The private sector would like to encourage theMinistry to continue its good work. We lookforward for your continued support inpromoting growth and development within theprivate sector.

Dr. Peter De Groot, Chairman of thePrivate Sector Commission

This first issue of MOFTIC Digest endeavors toprovide coverage of issues that the Ministry ofForeign Trade & International Cooperation(MOFTIC) has been engaged in the first quarterof 2003.

MOFTIC’s responsibilities strand across differentagencies in government and the private sector,and While MOFTIC is the lead agency in thedevelopment and pursuit of Guyana’s trade policyand programmes of international Cooperation,effective trade policymaking, internationalcooperation and implementation of policydecisions requires commitment and cooperationbetween diverse arms of stakeholders in thepublic and private sectors.

MOFTIC Digest represents an effort by theMinistry to facilitate access to information,understanding of, and disseminate informationabout MOFTIC’s goals and achievements to abroad potential readership. It is hoped that thispublication will provide a platform for a betterunderstanding of the aims and objectives of thework of the Ministry of Foreign Trade &International cooperation.

MOFTIC Digest is a quarterly publication.Readers are invited to forward their commentsand suggestions aimed at improving the scopeor focus of future publication.

Múthoni Múgo, EditorBevon McDonald, Assistant Editor

MOFTIC AND THEPRIVATE SECTOR

EDITORIAL

A Publication of the Ministry of Foreign Trade& International Cooperation,

Takuba Lodge, 254 South Road,Georgetown, Guyana.

Tel (592) 226-5064/226-8246;Fax (592) 226-8246

Email: [email protected]: www.moftic.gov.gy


on the movement of managerial,technical and supervisory staffincluding spouses and immediatefamily members; Restrictions on theestablishment of agencies, branchesand subsidiaries of companies ofCARICOM nationals; and Restrictionson access toland, buildings and property essentialto carry out business.

The CARICOM Secretariat hadcontracted a Consultant to identify allexisting restrictions to be found inMember States’ laws andadministrative practices that wouldprohibit the smooth implementation ofProtocol II. Guyana’s proposals for theremoval of those restrictions wassubmitted to the CARICOM Secretariatin December 2001, and was acceptedby both the Community Council andthe Inter-Sessional Meeting of theConference of Heads of Government,in February 2002. The schedulebecame effective from March 1, 2002.

Status of Implementation of theCSME by Guyana

· Treaty RevisionCurrently, the Attorney General’sChambers is processing the RevisedTreaty to have it ratified and enactedinto domestic legislation.

· Caribbean Court of JusticeThe Agreement establishing theCaribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) was

ratified in July 2002.

Attorney General’s Chambers iscurrently taking steps to have thisAgreement enacted into locallegislation.

· Free Movement of SkillsThe Attorney General’s Chamber’s ispursuing a draft order for theexemption of work permit requirementfor categories CARICOM Nationals asapproved by the Council for Humanand Social Development (COHSOD).

· Implementation of theprogramme for the removal ofrestrictionsThe Ministry of Foreign Trade & Inter-national Cooperation is currently coor-dinating the programme for the removalof restrictions which would facilitate thefree movement of other categoriesGuyanese.

· Adoption and implementationof the Manual of AdministrativeProcedures for implementationof the CSME nationallyThe Manual of Administrative Proceduresfor the national implementation of theCSME sets out the administrativeprocedures required for theactualization of the CSME. This manualhas been submitted to the Cabinet foradoption.

· Facilitation of TravelWith respect to the elimination of

passport by CARICOM Nationals, it wasagreed that whilst Guyana has neitherthe equipment to issue machine-readable Photo-ID nor to read those ofother CARIOCM nationals, Photo-IDpresented by CARICOM nationals willbe accepted at all ports of entry.

The Attorney General’s Chambers isexpected to commence work shortly onamending the Immigration Regulationsto provide for the implementation of aCommon (CARICOM) e/D Form.

· Establishment of a NationalAccreditation BoardThe Ministry of Education hasindicated that it is anticipated that theNational Accreditation Board will beestablished by the 2nd Quarter of 2003and the Standards of the Board effectedby the 4th Quarter of 2003.

Expected Benefits of the CSME

The CSME is intended to facilitateeconomic development within MemberStates and across the Region and itskey features include the free movementof factors of production – goods,services, capital and labour; along withthe appropriate supporting measures.It should also provide the frameworkfor the efficient and competitiveproduction of goods and services forboth the regional and internationalmarkets.

NEGOTIATIONS OF ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTWITH THE EUROPEAN UNION (EU)

Ms. R. Jagarnauth

This is the first in a series of articles intended to sensitise the public, private sector andnon-state actors about the Cotonou Agreement.

What is the Contonou Agreement?

On June 23, 2000, Guyana and 76other African, Caribbean and Pacific(ACP) countries signed a newpartnership agreement with the 15

Members States of the European Union(EU) in Cotonou, Benin. TheAgreement is referred to as theCOTONOU Agreement.

The objectives of the CotonouAgreement are as follows:

• The eradication of poverty


• Sustainable development• The gradual integration of

ACP countries into the worldeconomy.

The Cotonou Agreement established anew relationship between the ACPregion and the European Union thatencompasses economic, political anddevelopment dimensions.

In terms of trading relations, theCotonou Agreement sets the platformfor building ‘new trading relations’between the ACP countries and the EU.The Agreement refers to thenegotiation of Economic PartnershipAgreements that build on the past 40years of partnership between the ACPcountries and Europe and suggests aclear departure from the past 25 yearsof non- reciprocal preferential traderelations that Guyana benefited fromunder the Lomé Conventions.

Other key goals of the CotonouAgreement include the following:

• Reinforcement of the politicaldimension between the ACPcountries and the EuropeanUnion.

• Involvement of civil society,the private sector and othernon-state actors.

• Poverty reduction. This will bein keeping with objectives andstrategies agreed at theinternational level.

• Economic and tradecooperation framework (thatis WTO compatible).

• Rationalisation of financialinstruments.

The Agreement will be in effect for 20years and makes provision for revisionevery 5 years.

Trade Negotiations, the CotonouAgreement & EconomicPartnership Agreements

Recognising that the past tradingrelations (under the Lomé

Conventions) between the EU and theACP are no longer compatible withWTO rules, Part 3 – CooperationStrategies- of the Cotonou Agreementmakes provision for new tradingarrangements between the two groupsof countries.

This arrangement will be characterisedby the progressive abolition ofobstacles to trade between the ACP andthe EU and will be achieved throughthe development of EconomicPartnership Agreements (EPAs).

Launching of NegotiationsNegotiations for the EPAs wereofficially launched on September 27,2002, in Brussels, at a Special Meetingof ACP-EU Council of Ministers.

At this and subsequent meetings, it wasdecided that negotiations for EPAs willbe conducted at two levels; theMinisterial and Ambassadorial levelsand will be undertaken in two phases.Phase 1 is referred to as an “ALL-ACP”Phase in which matters of commoninterests and concerns to all the ACPcountries will be addressed. This phaseis to last until September 2003.

Phase 2 will address matters ofconcerns that are specific to the regionor at a national level and willcommence at the completion of Phase1 negotiations.

The Structure of NegotiationsThe Joint ACP/EU Committee ofAmbassadors met on October 30 andDecember 9, 2002 to discuss mattersrelating to the scope, structure andcontent of the negotiations.

The ACP has identified six clusters forthe conduct of the negotiations. Theseare to ensure that all matters of ACPconcerns can be adequately andcomprehensively dealt with.

These clusters are:-

1. Market access2. Agriculture and Fisheries

3. Trade in services4. Development cooperation5. Trade related issues6. Legal issues

For each of these clusters a leadMinisterial and Ambassadorialspokespersons were identified.Alternates at the Ministerial andAmbassadorial were also identified.

Guyana has been identified as theAlternate Ambassadorial Spokespersonfor Agriculture.

For the rest of the Caribbean, Barbadoshas been identified as the leadMinisterial Spokesperson on Services.Haiti is the lead Ambassadorialspokesperson on Legal Services and theEastern Caribbean States theAmbassadorial Alternate for marketaccess.

Issues currently in discussionThere are two broad issues concerningthe structure of negotiations that arestill being discussed by Ambassadors,namely:

• How the ACP’s concerns ondevelopment issues will beaddressed in a holistic mannersince the EU does not see itnecessary to discuss developmentissues separately.

• What the configuration for thesecond phase of the negotiationswill be and whether at the end ofPhase 1 of the negotiations willresult in a legally bindingagreement or an Understanding.

The ACP/EU Council of Ministers areexpecting to meet in June/July toadvance the process of the negotiations.

GUYANA HAS BEEN IDENTIFIEDAS THE ALTERNATEAMBASSADORIAL

SPOKESPERSON FORAGRICULTURE.


Content of the ChallengeIn September 2002, Australia and Bra-zil submitted a challenge to the EU sugarregime in the World Trade Organisation(WTO). The two countries voiced ob-jections to the export subsidies that theEU have in place, claiming that they arein violation of the EU’s commitments atthe WTO. It is asserted that the subsi-dies depress world prices and, therefore,weaken the earnings of all other sugarproducers.

How is Guyana affected?Guyana, as one of the ACP states ex-porting sugar to the European marketbenefits from preferential sugar pricesoffered by the EU stemming from theprogramme of subsidisation that the EUcurrently operates.

ACP countries receive a price over 300%higher than the world price from the EUfor their sugar exports to Europe. Thishigh price is considered as vital to thesurvival of their industries with the worldprice of sugar being at record lows.

Guyana’s sugar industry contributes ap-proximately 20% to the national GDP,provides direct employment to over24,000 people. The industry is also astrong anchor in the social developmentof Guyana.

Any loss of preference to the Europeanmarket will undoubtedly have graveeconomic and social consequences na-tionally.

Although both Australia and Brazil haveindicated that they do not intend to chal-lenge the preferential access that devel-oping countries enjoy in the EU market,it is difficult to see how the challengeto the sugar regime will not affect theEU’s total sugar subsidisationprogramme.

Guyana’s response to the ChallengeIn November 2002, WTO consultationson this matter took place in Geneva inNovember 2002. Fourteen ACP sugarproducing and supplying countries joinedas third party observers in the consulta-tion process. Statements were presentedby a number of ACP states highlightingthe critical importance of the EU pref-erential markets to the social, economic,political, cultural development of theireconomies.

The ACP countrieshave also undertakena number of initia-tives to lobby the coun-tries with the viewthat they will with-draw the challenge orsettle the matter out-side the WTO disputesettlement mecha-nism.

On February 7, 2003the ACP EnlargedSugar Bureau com-prising of Guyana,Mauritius, Belize, Fijiand Swaziland under-

took a lobby mission to Brazil. The Bu-reau met initially in Guyana, along withother Caribbean countries for a co-or-dination meeting.

The Ministry of Foreign Trade and In-ternational Cooperation is monitoringthe developments on this matter

In Brazil, the Ministers met with a num-ber of Ministers and high-level officialsin the Brazilian government. At thismeeting, Brazil reiterated assurance thatthe aim of the challenge is not to hurtACP sugar interests. They did, however,inform the Bureau that the Brazilianauthorities have agreed to take the mat-ter to the WTO panel.

Australia and Brazil Challenge to the EU Sugar Regime

The ACP had decided to meet the Bra-zilian authorities in the context of therequest of Brazil and Australia for con-sultations on the EU sugar regime. Ourvisit was prompted amongst otherthings by our belief that Brazil, a de-veloping country like ours, would un-

STATEMENT ACP LOBBYING MISSION TO BRAZILderstand our concerns.

On the basis of our own analysis andconsidered view that if the challengewas being pursued, it would have seri-ous implications for our sugar indus-tries including reducing dramatically

the preferential price that the ACP re-ceives for its exports of sugar to the EUand cause irreversible damage to ourcountries.

Since the request for consultations,Brazil had given a series of assurances

Press Conference at Colgrain House on WednesdayFebruary 5th, 2003 - Left Dr. Carrington, SecretaryGeneral Caricom, Minister Knights – Jamaica,Minster Rohee – Guyana and Minister Jugnuath –Mauritius


to the effect that its action was in noway meant to undermine the preferen-tial access of ACP sugar exports to theEC market. At that time, we requestedBrazil to give concrete expression tothese assurances by firstly putting an endto the consultations procedure and sec-ondly, by using the negotiations on ag-riculture at the WTO to arrive at a solu-tion that would satisfy all parties con-cerned.

It is most unfortunate that we wereapprised during the course of a meet-ing we had with the Minister of Exter-nal Relations of Brazil that a decisionin principle had been adopted to takethe challenge to the Dispute SettlementBody of the WTO. However, at thesame time, the Minister declared thatBrazil was prepared to examine andconsider any proposals by the EU toresolve the issue.

Notwithstanding this decision, the ACPis still hopeful that consultations be-tween the parties will be ongoing andthat a satisfactory solution can befound which will bring a halt to thewhole exercise. Needless to say, we

would expect that resolution throughconsultations would result in the pres-ervation of the preferential arrange-ments for ACP sugar exports to the EUin keeping with the assurances we havereceived from the Government of Bra-zil. These assurances were also repeatedduring discussions with the Brazilianauthorities.

Having said this, it must be emphasizedthat while the seven (7) ACP develop-ing countries which export sugar to theEU under the Sugar Protocol may bevery small players in the world sugarmarket, sugar is vital for the socio-eco-nomic development of our countries.Sugar production accounts for a con-siderable proportion of the workforceand provides gainful employment tomany small planters. In some cases,sugar accounts for as much as 80% ofthe total number of persons employedin agriculture. Sugar is a major com-ponent of foreign exchange earningsin the ACP Sugar Supplying States e.g.in the case of Barbados, constitutingthe only agricultural export; and repre-senting in other cases up to 9% of allagricultural exports. In a number of

ACP countries, sugar is the main sourceof foreign exchange in the agriculturalsector. Without soundly based sugar in-dustries, there would be a severe nega-tive impact on the agricultural and agro-industrial sectors of the ACP supplyingcountries.

It should be noted that many ACPcountries are engaged in modernizingour sugar industry at considerable costin order to bring down costs of pro-duction and improving efficiency. Anyadverse development with regard toour preferential access to the EU andto our predictable and stable earningswill undoubtedly undermine our ef-forts. Not only will a price reductionlead to an immediate decline in thestandard of living of the people of thesecountries, but it will also have a severenegative impact on the agro-industrialhealth of the ACP sugar supplyingStates given that the sugar industry isessential to the socio-economic life ofthe rural population.

We reiterate our deep concern aboutthe decision taken by the BrazilianGovernment.

Notwithstanding the extensive workundertaken in the Committee onAgriculture (CoA) during the‘modalities phase’ of the currentnegotiations, Members failed to agreeon modalities for further commitmentsin the area of agriculture by themandated deadline of 31st March 2003.For the most part Members,particularly the major players (the USand the EU), remain divided on mostof the core issues captured in both thefirst and revised draft text onmodalities for further commitments

SYNOPSIS OF DEVELOPMENTS IN THE WORLD TRADEORGANISATION (WTO) DOHA AGENDAMr. Gregory Downes, Assistant to Minister MOFTIC on WTO Issues

AGRICULTURE NEGOTIATIONS

circulated by the Chair of the CoA onthe 18TH February and 18th March,respectively. There is also concern bydeveloping countries with regard to thetreatment of developmental issues inthe draft text. The core issues includequantitative targets for tariffsreduction, export subsidies anddomestic supports reductions, and S&Dprovisions for developing countries.

No other meeting of the CoA wasscheduled prior to the fifth MinisterialConference on 10th -14th September in

Cancun, Mexico. However, given thatMembers failed to agree on modalitiesby the 31st March deadline, the Chairof the CoA indicated that othernegotiating sessions will be convenedprior to the Cancun Ministerial.Harbinson is to also continueconsultations with Members States ontariff formula, Strategic Products,special safeguard mechanism fordeveloping countries, food aid andexport credits, inter alia.


Although the Services negotiationshave had some progress since the DohaMinisterial, they seem to have reacheddeadlock in recent months in the ar-eas of rules, domestic regulation andthe establishment of an emergencysafeguard mechanism (ESM). Someprocedural progress has been made thisyear, e.g. modalities for AutonomousLiberalization (AL)1. After being in astate of stalemate for several months,on 6th March, the Council on Trade inServices finally adopted modalities totreat with liberalisation undertakenunilaterally since the Uruguay Round.The ‘credits’ however have to be nego-tiated bilaterally between the request-ing country and the country that ben-efited from the liberalisation.

On the market access side, about 30Members (counting the EU as one)have made initial requests since thedeadline of July last year. As for initialoffers with the Doha deadline of 31st

rch this year, these have been put for-ward by 11 Members so far, namely theEU, the US, Canada, Australia, Japan,New Zealand, Norway, Paraguay, SouthKorea, Taiwan, and Uruguay.CARICOM is to submit common re-quests as well as offers; however thisis yet to be done.

On the issue of special treatment forLeast Developed Countries (LDCs), TheGeneral Agreement on Trade in Ser-vices (GATS) Article XIX:3 providesthat modalities shall be established onspecial treatment for LDCs, giving pri-ority to facilitating these countries in-creased participation in world trade.At the Special Session of the CTS heldon 20th January 2003 initial and sub-stantive discussions were held on a texttabled by Zambia on behalf of LDCs.The Text was considered as a good ba-sis for further deliberation on this is-sue, although some Members ex-

SERVICES NEGOTIATIONS

pressed concerns regarding certainprovisions in the document.

TRADE RELATED INTELLECTUALPROPERTY RIGHTS (TRIPs)

TRIPS AND PUBLIC HEALTH

Paragraph 6 of the Declaration man-dated the Council to “find, expedi-tiously, a solution by the end of 2002to the difficulty countries with insuffi-cient or no pharmaceutical manufac-turing capacity may have in taking ad-vantage of the compulsory licensingarrangement”2. Currently, the TRIPsAgreement permits Member States toissue compulsory licenses for the pro-duction of patented products wheresuch a move is considered necessaryto protect public health. However, sucha facility is only available to countrieswith the capacity to manufacture thegeneric drugs necessary, production isrequired to be primarily for the domes-tic market. Negotiations came to a haltin December 2002 after all but one ofthe then 144 members, the US, refusedto endorse the Chairman’s December16 draft solution with respect to dis-ease coverage3. The US wants the cov-erage to be specific to certain infectiousdiseases only, however this position isnot supported by the wider groupingof developing countries. For the lattergroup of countries the Doha mandatecovers public health problems in gen-eral. Several subsequent attempts tobreak the deadlock, including a mini-Ministerial held in Tokyo, Japan on 14th

– 16th February, and initiatives by theEU, Japan and Brazil to resolve this is-sue have been futile.

OTHER TRIPS ISSUES

On the establishment of a multilateralsystem of notification and registrationof geographical indications (GIs) sig-nificant areas of disagreement remains.One relates to whether all WTO mem-bers should be obligated to protect theterms in the multilateral system orwhether it should be at the discretionof each country. Another area of diver-gence relates to whether only the no-tification and registration of GIs shouldbe voluntary or whether it should beextended to the protection of regis-tered terms. In an effort to harmonisepositions the Chairman of the Councilon 20th March circulated a note whichis based on consultations with Mem-bers. The Note seeks to “suggest pos-sible elements/options” regarding theestablishment of a GI register for wineand spirits (see JOB(03)/60 availableat http://docsonline.wto.org). TheNote however offers little in terms ofthe way forward. The Chairman of theCouncil circulate a draft negotiatingtext on GIs which was discussed at theCouncil 29-30 meeting. However, de-spite several useful interventions Mem-bers still remain divided on several coreissues Members are to agree on a mul-tilateral system for the notification andregistration of GIs by the fifth WTOMinisterial Conference scheduled for10-14 September.

NON-AGRICULTURE MARKETACCESS

As part of the work programmeadopted by the Negotiating Group onMarket Access (NGMA) on 19th July2002, Members were required to sub-mit proposals on possible modalitiesfor further commitments. The propos-als received by the Secretariat wereused to prepare two overview papers.The first, which was circulated on 5th

February deals with tariff modalities(see TN/MA/6 http://docsonline.wto.org), while the second1 The final text, document TN/S/6, is

available at www.docsonline.wto.org

2 See WTO DocumentWT/MIN(01)/DEC/W/23 See the Chairman’s draft decision on theImplementation of Paragraph 6 - JOB (02)/217


document circulated on 7th April, 2003deals with non-tariff barriers (NTBs)issues. Both documents have been dis-cussed at meetings of the NegotiatingGroup convened during the months ofFebruary and April respectively, how-ever little progress has been made withregard to harmonising positions heldby Member States. While CARICOM asa group is yet to table a paper in thisnegotiating forum, Barbados, Jamaicaand Trinidad and Tobago have co-spon-sored a paper which was submitted tothe Group on March 25th (see docu-ment TN/MA/W/30 http://docsonline.wto.org) which spoke to arange of market access issues. TheChair of the negotiating Group has in-dicated his intensions to circulate aninitial draft text on modalities by mid-May for the consideration of Members.

May 31st is the deadline for membersto agree on a framework for negotia-tions on market access for non-agricul-tural products.

TRADE AND DEVELOPMENTSPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIALTREATMENT

Three deadlines to report to the Gen-eral Council with clear recommenda-tion for a decision on how to strengthenexisting special and differential treat-ment (S&D) provisions have not beenrealised by the Committee on Tradeand Development (CTD) – 31st July, 31st

December 2002 and 10th February2003. Of the 85-plus Agreement –spe-cific proposals tabled by Members, onlyapproximately 22, all of minor signifi-cance, have clear consensus. Members

are divided on a host of issues underthe consideration of the CTD. Amongthem are the Agreement-specific issues,cross-cutting issues, the “Way Forward”for the Special Session of the CTD, theestablishment of a monitoring mecha-nism for special and differential treat-ment and criteria for technical and fi-nancial treatment. There is also diverg-ing views regarding the Doha mandateof the CTD. Specifically, whether theCTD has the authority to amend exist-ing agreements in pursuit of its man-date, that is, strengthening existingS&D. An early harvest on those Agree-ment-specific proposals that have clearconsensus was suggested by developedcountries. This sentiment, however,was not supported by the wider group-ing of developing countries.

Recognizing the severe trade imbal-ance between themselves and theirCARICOM trading partners, the Gov-ernment of Trinidad and Tobago initi-ated a “CARICOM Support Programmeto redress intra regional trade.

Guyana responded positively to thisinitiative because it is compatible withthe mechanisms, which were estab-lished under the High Level BilateralCommission (HLBC) and the inaugu-ral meeting of trade experts, which wasconvened in Port-of-Spain in Septem-ber 2000. In an effort to improve our

share of trade with Trinidad and To-bago in particular and the region ingeneral, Guyana prepared and submit-ted to the Government of Trinidad andTobago, a concise executive summaryby sector and industry and other re-sources needed to redress the tradeimbalance.

This summary was prepared througha consultative process with represen-tative of different sectors of theGuyanese economy. It addressed issuedwith respect to restricted trade in anumber of sectors of the Guyanese

economy and areas of cooperation be-tween Guyana and Trinidad and To-bago that could help overcome con-straints and strengthen trade betweenthe countries.

On February 11, 2003 the Ministry ofForeign Trade and International Coop-eration submitted the executive sum-mary to the Government of Trinidadand Tobago for their consideration andcomments to further the process ofimproving trade and cooperation withTrinidad and Tobago.

TRINIDAD AND TOBAGOTRADE & COOPERATION

BRAZILINTERNATIONAL ROAD TRANSPORT AGREEMENT

During an official visit to Brasilia, Min-ister Clement J. Rohee, Minister of For-eign Trade and International Coopera-tion and Minister Celso Amorim, Min-ister of External Relations signed theInternational Road Transport Agree-ment between Guyana and Brazil onFebruary 7, 2003.

The International Road TransportAgreement specifically deals with pas-sengers and goods that use the roadon route and crosses at least at onepoint of the border between the twocountries as its’ transport infrastruc-ture. It also facilitates the commercialtransport of all goods that can be mer-chandised. In addition to taking these

strategic steps Guyana and Brazil arein the process of negotiating new ar-eas of technical cooperation, which willintensify cooperation.

The added dimension of economic andTechnical Cooperation is significant fora number of reasons, under which, theVenezuela/Brazil/Guyana/Suriname


HUB evolved. The Hub is wide inscope, among which is the Integrationof Regional Infrastructure in SouthAmerica (IIRSA). Specifically, theIIRSA involves the development ofphysical infrastructure (transportation,energy and telecommunications) pro-duction and natural resources. Thisenables validated and improved busi-ness visions of the Hub (developedmostly with information from second-ary sources).

One of the IIRSA’s objectives is the de-velopment of strategic infrastructuralprojects, which would be beneficial toGuyana. In this regard, inter-agencyconsultations were conducted with themanager of IIRSA, Mr. Alfredo MoscosoChiape who visited Guyana and hadmeetings with sectoral Ministries, in-cluding the Ministry of Foreign Tradeand International Cooperation.

Discussions were entertained regard-ing project ideas/proposals that wouldbe beneficial to Guyana. Consultationsare ongoing.

THE GUYANA/BRAZIL ROAD

As an off spring of the International

Road Transport Agreement, Guyanaand Brazil commenced constructing aroad that would link the two nations.The contract to construct the road wasawarded to Mekdeci Machinery Con-struction Inc (a Guyanese company).Construction of the road is currentlyongoing on the Southern side betweenKurupukari and Annai. The delay incompletion of the road has been largelydue to inclement weather. MekdeciMachinery Construction Inc, however,has given full assurance that the roadwill be an all weather road. Construc-tion is currently ongoing on the south-ern side between Kurupukari andAnnai. However, due to the foreseenMay/June rain, construction would betemporarily suspended and recom-mence after the rain.

NARI/EMBRAPA MOU and TCP

The National Agricultural ResearchInstitute (NARI) and EmpresaBrasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuaria(EMBRAPA) have declared their mu-tual interest in a Memorandum of Un-derstanding, which enables coopera-tion programmes and exchanges, in thefields of agricultural research and tech-nology.

In a new energetic approach,Guyana has been cooperatingwith Colombia towards furtheradvancement of Guyana’s agri-cultural sector. Colombian ex-pert assistance is being providedin Feedlot Development for BeefCattle facilitated by the Guyana/Colombia Technical Coopera-tion; technological improvementof the Intermediate Savannahs;establishment of a geographicalInformation systems unit. Re-cently, a Colombian sports ex-pert arrived in Guyana to holdcoaching sessions with theGuyanaFootball Federation. Theexpert was deputed at the re-quest of the Ministry of Culture,Youth and Sports.NARI and EMBRAPA are ex-pected to sign the MOU in duecourse.

ADVANCEMENT OFGUYANA’S AGRICULTURALSECTOR

COLOMBIA

The Government of Malaysia has invited the Government of Guyana to nominate suitable candidates toparticipate in the following training courses:

(1) Library Visit and Attachments(2) General Tax Administration Course

MALAYSIATECHNICAL TRAINING

The Guyana/Cuba Joint Commissionhas consultations ongoing for theimplementation of the followingprojects:

A Guyanese technician is expected to

CUBATHE GUYANA/CUBA JOINTCOMMISSION

depart shortly for Cuba for training inmicro transplant techniques for fruitcrops. The main developmental objec-tive of the training is to improve thefruit export potential and foreign ex-change capacity in the country.

• The interchange of informationbetween Guyana and Cuba regard-ing genetic material in fruit crops.

The XXII Session of the Guyana/CubaJoint Commission is scheduled forMay/June 2003. Projects that were notimplemented from the XXI Session ofthe Joint Commission will be carriedover to the work programme emanat-ing from the XXII Session.Some of these projects include: assis-tance from Cuba on a feasibility studyfor the establishment of a cancer treat-


ment centre and a dialysis centre,Spanish tutor for primary school teach-ers, training in dairy development, ar-tificial insemination and experts forbeehive development and the opera-tions of drainage and irrigation sys-tems.

· MOU on Trade between the Min-

istry of Foreign Trade and Interna-tional Cooperation and the Minis-try of Foreign Trade of Cuba.

The following agreements are expectedto be concluded shortly:· Cooperation Agreement between

the Guyana Export PromotionCouncil and the Promotion Centrefor Cuban Exports.

· Agreement establishing theGuyana/Cuba Joint Business De-

velopment Council.

INDIAGUYANA INDIA JOINT COMMISSION

For the First Quarter of 2003 the gov-ernment of Guyana and the govern-ment of India further strengthenedtheir Bilateral Relations in a numberof areas. These areas of cooperation areunder the auspices of the Guyana/In-dia Joint Commission.

In the area of technical assistancethe government of India has agreed inprinciple to increase the annual allo-cation of Indian Experts to Guyana

under the Indian Technical and Eco-nomic Cooperation (ITEC) pro-gramme.

In the agricultural sector the Min-istry of Foreign Trade and InternationalCooperation had facilitated the sign-ing of a Memorandum of Understand-ing (MOU) between the National Ag-ricultural Research Institute (NARI) ofGuyana and the Indian Council of Ag-ricultural Research (ICAR) of India on

January 22, 2003 to conduct researchin agriculture and for the promotingof agricultural development inGuyana.

An intensification of cooperation be-tween Guyana and India is antici-pated after the Fourth Session of theGuyana/India Joint Commissionwhich is scheduled for Georgetownduring the first half of 2003.

A Bilateral Investment Treaty was tabled by the Government of China in December 2001 after the conclusion of theGuyana/China Trade Agreement. It is seen as a complementary agreement to the Trade Agreement concluded on Septem-ber 17, 2001. This Bilateral Investment Treaty was signed on March 27, 2003 in Beijing, China by the Hon. Minister ofForeign Trade and International Cooperation of Guyana and the Minister of Commerce of China.

GUYANA INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE CENTRE (GICC)

The Exchange of Notes for Phase I of the GICC Project was signed on September 19, 2002. This facilitated the dispatchingof Team of Chinese experts to Guyana to carryout an initial feasibility study on the proposed site for the GICC.Beforereturning to China, the Team of Chinese experts signed the Design Contract for the GICC. The Design Contract was signedby the Ministry of Public Works and Communications on the Guyana side and the China Southwest Architecture andDesign Institute on January 14, 2003.

CHINABILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY WITH CHINA

EIGHTH SESSION OF THE GUYANA/CHINA JOINT COMMISSION

The Eighth Session of the Guyana/ChinaJoint Commission on Economic, Tradeand Technical Cooperation was held onMarch 27, 2003 in Beijing, China.Guyana’s Delegation was led by the Hon.Clement Rohee Minister of Foreign Tradeand International Cooperation and in-

cluded Ambassador Donald Abrams,Ms. Choo An Yin and Mr. Cecil Pollydore.This delegation was part of the largerPresidential delegation headed by H.EBharrat Jagedeo who was on a StateVisit to China.

The Eighth Session of the Joint Com-mission reviewed the progress of theprojects and proposals of the last JointCommission and examined possibilitiesfor further promotion of bilateral tradeand economic cooperation. It is antici-pated that these new areas examined


would be incorporated into the newwork programme. Also at this Sessionthe Hon. Clement Rohee, Minister ofForeign Trade and International Coop-

eration, Guyana and the Hon. Lu Fuyuan,Minister of Commerce, China, concludedthe Agreement on the Promotion andProtection of Investments and the Agree-

ment on Economic and Technical Co-operation.

Moco-Moco Hydropower ProjectThe Moco-Moco Hydropower Stationwas constructed to provide electricity toLethem and its environs. This Power Sta-tion was built by Chinese Engineerswhose period of deputation ended inSeptember 2002. The Power Station is

SOME OF THE CURRENT COOPERATION PROJECTS

now being managed, maintained andserviced by Guyanese Engineers whowere trained by the Chinese.

Medical CooperationGuyana has been benefiting from ongo-ing Medical Cooperation Programme

Deep Sea FishingGuyana and China are currently in dis-cussions on possible cooperation in thearea of deep sea fishing.

Cooperation between GTV andCCTVGuyana and China are exploring thepossibility of providing training andequipment for GTV.

with China by provision of Medical Ex-perts. Currently there are fifteen ChineseMedical Doctors in Guyana, who areattached to the Georgetown Public Hos-pital and Linden Hospital Complex.

SOME OF THE PROPOSED COOPERATION PROJECTS

Access to Chinese lines of CreditThe Private Sector of Guyana has ex-pressed an interest in obtaining prefer-ential lines of credit through the Bankof China. China has agreed to provideinformation on the terms and conditionsthat apply to these lines of credit. TheEighth Session was held on March 27,2003 in Beijing, China, coinciding with

the Presidential State Visit to China.Projects and proposals under the Sev-enth Joint Commission were reviewedand new areas of cooperation were fos-tered. It is expected that the new areasof cooperation would be implementedin the new work programme based onthe submission of detailed project pro-posals and guidelines.

VISIT BY HIGH LEVEL CHINESE DELEGATION

A High Level Chinese Delegation led by Madame Wu Yivisited Guyana on January 07-08, 2003. During the visit,there were discussions between the Private Sector and rep-resentatives from Chinese Companies on trade and invest-ment. The following sets of agreements were also signedbetween the Vice Minister of the Ministry of Foreign Tradeand Economic Cooperation of China and the relevantGuyanese Ministers:1. Exchange of Notes for Phase II of the GICC project -

Hon. Clement J. Rohee, Minister of Foreign Trade andInternational Cooperation;

2. Agreement for RMB¥10M Grant for Economic andTechnical Cooperation - Hon. Clement J. Rohee,Minister of Foreign Trade and InternationalCooperation;

3. Exchange of Notes for the deputation of one (1) tabletennis coach, (1) martial arts coach and one (1)interpreter to be attached to the Ministry of Culture -Hon. Dale Bisnauth, Minister of Labour, HumanServices and Social Security;

4. Protocol for debt relief for the following three (3)loans:

(a) August 26, 1963 £464,285 Pounds Sterling Loan;

President Jagdeo and Minister Rohee with the Chi-nese high delegation Madame Ma Xiu Hong, ViceMinister of Foreign Trade & Economic Cooperation(far left) and the leader of the Chinese delegation,Madame Wu Yi during the signing of notes inGeorgetown, Guyana.

(b) September 18, 1963 SFR 5,000,000 Swiss Francs loan; (c) April 10, 1972 £10,000,000 Pounds Sterling loan.


NEW AMSTERDAM HOSPITAL PROJECT

The Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Health and the Director of Regional Health Services traveled to Japanthrough the courtesy extended by the Japanese Government for these two (2) officials to witness the tendering processfor the awarding of the construction contract for Project for the Reconstruction of the New Amsterdam Hospital.TheConstruction Contract for the New Amsterdam Hospital Project was also signed on January 27, 2003 during the visit bythe two (2) officials of the Ministry of Health to Japan.The Japanese Resident Consultant for the Project arrived inGuyana on March 08, 2003 to commence work on the project. Construction is expected to commence in early April.A“Turning of the Sod” Ceremony was convened on March 31, 2003 by the Ministry of Health to mark the commencementof construction on the New Amsterdam Hospital Site. A formal invitation was extended to the Japanese Ambassador toattending this ceremony. The Japanese Counsellor from the Japanese Embassy in Caracas attended the ceremony onbehalf of his Ambassador.

TECHNICAL TRAINING

The Government of Guyana received technical training offers from the Government of Japan in the following areas:1. Sustainable Mineral Development2. Environmental Policy and Environmental Management Systems3. Fire Fighting Techniques II

JAPAN

THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

TRADE AND ECONOMIC AGREEMENT

The Government of Guyana has submitted for the consideration of the competent authorities in the Russian Federationa draft of a comprehensive Trade and Economic Agreement. This agreement would provide a framework for technicaland other forms of cooperation with the Russian Federation. In addition, the framework of the government’s NationalDevelopment Strategy provides for cooperation in many areas that would be of mutual benefit to both countries.

REPUBLIC OF KOREA

KOREAN GRANT AID

The Government of the Republic of Korea has donated to the Government of Guyana under Korean Grant Aid, five (5)vehicles. Three (3) of the five (5) vehicles were handed over to Office of the President, one (1) to the Ministry ofForeign Affairs and one (1) to the Ministry of Foreign Trade and International Cooperation.The Korean Consul Generalin Caracas traveled to Guyana for a formal handing over of the vehicles on March 20, 2003.

TECHNICAL TRAINING

A list of training courses conducted by the Korean Government was submitted to the Government of Guyana for theindication of three (3) training courses, which the Government of Guyana is interested in participating in during 2003.


ORGANIZATION OFAMERICAN STATES

The Ministry of Foreign Tradeand International Cooperation,the designated Focal Point forcollaboration with theOrganisation of American States(OAS) has benefited tremen-dously from this partnership.TheGovernment of Guyana in the firstquarter of the 2003 was awardedscholarships for individuals topursue advance studies overseasunder the OAS 2003 – “AgencyPlaced Graduate Fellowship andthe Fulbright –OAS Ecology”. Inaddition, the OAS has invitedlocal agencies to participate inworkshops and seminars that areusually fully funded and contrib-utes to the development of boththe private and public sector.The Inter-American Agency forCooperation and Development(IACD) of the Organisation ofAmerican States invited the Gov-ernment of Guyana to submitfive (5) project concepts for theOAS/FEMCIDI Programmingprocess that addresses the Na-tional Agenda.

INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION OFMIGRATION

The Ministry of Foreign Trade and International Cooperation is activelyinvolved in acquiring membership in International Organisation of Mi-gration (IOM). In consultation and collaboration with the ministry ofForeign Affairs Guyana, is expected to seek observe status with IOM.

COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT

The Ministry of Foreign Trade and International Cooperation is in activeconsultations with the Commonwealth Secretariat, with the view to ac-quiring experts to be assigned to several agencies.

VOLUNTARY SERVICE OVERSEAS

VSO volunteers continue to play an integral role in the development ofGuyana, as evident demand by the number of request for volunteers byboth the public and private sectors. Volunteers are assigned to the Minis-tries of Education, Health among other agencies. There are forty (40)VSO volunteers who are currently deputed to Guyana and on afrequent basis there are requests for extension of contracts bythe beneficiary agencies.

COOPERATION WITH INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS

ITALY

SOFT LOAN OF 3.305 MILLION EUROS

The Government of Guyana has received from the Government of Italy a soft Loan of 3.305 million Euros for therehabilitation, maintenance and construction of Drainage and Irrigation facilitates in the Mahaica Mahaicony Abary(MMA) area. The financial convention has been signed by the Honourable Minister of Finance, Saisnarine Kowlessaron August 20, 2002. The Procurement agreement was signed which allows for Italy to commence procuring equipmenton behalf of the Drainage and Irrigation Project. Implementation of the 3.305 million euros, Italian Soft Loan is tocommence shortly.


Dear Friends,

As this is my first public speaking engagement for the NewYear let me extend to each and every one of you present mybest wishes for a prosperous New Year.

In these trying times which we are currently experiencing, Ibelieve we need to take a cue from Frank Sinatra and keepon the “Sunny side of the Street”.

In August 2001, just eight months after the new Ministry ofForeign Trade and International Cooperation was established,I convened a meeting with local Statistics Providers to dis-cuss issues pertaining to trade statistics for use in the variousexternal trade negotiations in which Guyana is currently en-gaged. It was also my intention to lay the basis for a sustain-able collaborative relationship between my Ministry and theBank of Guyana, the Statistical Bureau and the Customs andTrade Administration.

Today, we are gathered here to mark just one, but a verysignificant result of this collaborative effort.

I emphasize just one aspect of this inter-agency cooperationbecause we have been collaborating in many other key andcritical areas such as the preparation of trade data for theCaricom Secretariat to facilitate the activities of the Councilfor Trade and Economic Cooperation (COTED).

We have also worked together in preparing relevant data forthe creation of a Hemispheric Data Base which is critical forenhancing transparency at the negotiations for the establish-ment of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).

These are but just a few of the many activities in which wehave collaborated over the past year or so. Now we havereached a critical stage in our collaborative efforts. We arenow going public with one manifestation of our joint efforts.This means subjecting ourselves to greater scrutiny and ac-countability by the general public.

We are nevertheless convinced that this is the way to go sinceamong other considerations, statistical analysis is a good

LAUNCHING OF THE FIRST REVIEW OF GUYANA’S TRADE2001/2002 JANUARY – JUNE

SPEECH BY HON. CLEMENT J. ROHEE, MINISTER OF FOREIGN TRADE AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIONAT THE NATIONAL LIBRARY, GEORGETOWN, JANUARY 22, 2003.

basis for developing public policy, formulating strategic re-sponses and to help make critical decisions.We believe that a good statistical system would enable acountry to form an accurate picture of the challenges con-fronting it in the region in which it is situated.

Moreover, the availability of timely, transparent and reliablestatistical data can be a decisive factor for achieving equi-table and sustainable development.

The modern business world has a great appetite for facts anddata. And it is an established fact that well-organized dataimproves our understanding of problems and helps us to takedecisions wisely.

Information and statistics are the lifeblood of the planningprocess undertaken by Governments. Without data, it wouldbe difficult to make any realistic decisions at all.

Information is power. It is not infrequent that persons can befrustrated by opposition to a proposal coming from someonewho claims to know the “real situation” or to have “reliable”information. Such claims, however spurious, if presentedconvincingly can be extremely powerful in a decision-mak-ing process. However, a planner with confident grasp ofinformation and armed with reliable data is in a strong po-sition to convince others of his/her case. No one involved inthe planning process can afford to underestimate the impor-tance of access and familiarity with data and statistics.

Information is a necessary prerequisite for planning andmaking decisions, it can also be used as an excuse for notplanning. An all too familiar argument for not taking adifficult decision is the apparent lack of sufficiently accurateinformation.

Availability of reliable, quality statistics will assist greatlythe work of the Ministry of Foreign Trade and InternationalCooperation and the other agencies contributing to tradepolicy planning. Government needs data on trade flows andthe direction of trade for a number of reasons namely:

Informing internal policy decisions;


• To provide the basis for deciding with which countries tonegotiate or not to negotiate free trade agreements;

• To make an educated input in key areas of negotiations, asregards the CSME, FTAA, WTO, ACP-EU as well as bilat-eral trade agreements;

• To respond to requests for modifications of the CET andimplementation of safeguards.

In addition to the above, Guyana is likely to undergo a WTOTrade Policy Review in the near future. A major part of thisexercise is the submission of data to the WTO which will bethe basis for scrutiny by other Member States of the WTO.This is a particularly important exercise for Guyana since itwill contribute to a review of the management of its tradepolicy and demonstrate how it measures up to internationalsstandards. It is important that quality data is in place tofacilitate the Review.

In addition to assisting Government in the planning process,the availability of accurate and reliable data is crucial toassist private companies in planning their business activi-ties. The availability of reliable, comprehensive statisticspresented in a format which is easily understood allows forforecasting to be undertaken for decision making and to helpattract new investments.

The publication that is about to be launched contains figuresfor exports and imports by value, volume and destination foreach sector of the economy. The data shows the trends dur-ing the period 2001 - 2002 - January - June in respect ofimports and exports of specific products as well as the direc-tion of Guyana’s trade.

In addition, the publication shows production data corre-lated with imports and exports.

It is hoped that the publication will in the longer term servethe purpose in providing timely and updated information topolicymakers, researchers and businessmen who can influ-ence trade flows between Guyana and the rest of the Carib-bean Community and the world as a whole.

The immediate objective of the publication is to provide forenhanced comprehension of Guyana’s trade flows, their im-plications as well as trade with our major trading partners.

In addition, the publication is aimed at helping to improveour capacity to provide current and detailed trade data and

also to improve the comparability of the data produced.

As I have pointed out in the publication’s foreword

Foreign Trade is an integral part of Guyana’s nationaleconomy. In the year 2001 exports from our country amountedto 85.7% of Guyana’s GDP. Guyana is a trade-dependenteconomy with a high reliance in tariff revenues. In the year2001 import and export duties accounted for 29 percent ofGovernment revenues.

A survey of the major export categories from 1990 to 2002indicates that improvements were registered in the exportsof non-traditional products such as, shrimp, timber, dia-monds, garments and furniture. Sugar, rice and gold showedsome improvements towards the mid-1990s, but in recentyears export earnings in these commodities have declined.

In addition, serious trade imbalances exist in capital andintermediate goods trade as well as in factor and non-factorservices.

On the positive side, Guyana enjoys a trade surplus with mostof its neighbours, as well as with Barbados and Jamaica.However, Guyana is experiencing a sizeable trade deficit withTrinidad and Tobago.

Seventy-six (76) percent of our exports are raw materials/commodities. This means we continue to be price-takers onthe global market. At the same time, the preferential andworld market prices for our traditional exports have beendeclining and will decline further.

However, the good news is that as regards non-traditionalexports that is, other exports, where there is value added,there has been a growth from 9 percent of total exports in1997 to 12 percent in 2002.

Some Key Internal and External Factors InhibitingExports are:-

(1) High cost of production - cost of inputs, freight aswell as human resource constraints;

(2) Sustaining the quality of the product;(3) The challenge to supply the external market on time;(4) Inadequate information on new products and market

segments;(5) No external marketing agency;(6) Declining external prices (competition from other

suppliers);(7) Declining quotas;


(8) Subsidies to competitors - for example the US farmbill 2002

In addition, port facilities continue to be a factor in the costof the final export. Guyana’s port facilities are centeredaround Georgetown and are not equipped to deal with hugebulk-cargo.

Incentives, both fiscal (taxes) and monetary (loans) are fac-tors to be considered if Guyana’s exports are to be broughtup to international standard and competitiveness.

Export growth depends to a large extent on incentives, stan-dards, quality, competitiveness and technological adaptabil-ity. The maintenance of existing markets and the ability tofind new markets are crucial to rapid export growth.

There are approximately 75 import and 76 export enterprisesoperating in Guyana.

Some of the steps necessary for Guyana to become a strong

trading nation are; improving our competitiveness, efficiency,as well as the quality/standards of our exports, our physicalinfrastructure and timeliness in the delivery of our exports.

With the slow down in the global economy casting its shadowon Guyana and the rest of Caricom we at the Ministry ofForeign Trade and International Cooperation (MOFTIC) willcontinue to monitor the situation and read the trends in theglobal economy. Above all we will continue to watch out forand to open up opportunities for increased trade by usingour analytical skills to the best of our ability to advanceGuyana’s trade and economic interests to the satisfaction ofour people.

We do hope that with the launch of this first Review ofGuyana’s Foreign Trade, the Ministry of Foreign Trade andInternational Cooperation will be well placed to advanceGuyana’s multilateral, regional and bilateral trading inter-ests to bring the maximum benefits to the people of Guyana.

I thank you.

On behalf of the Ministry of Foreign Trade and InternationalCooperation I would like to welcome you all to this impor-tant Awareness Seminar on the Services Trade.

I am especially grateful to Dr. Sherry Stephenson for agree-ing at very short notice to take time off her otherwise busyschedule to conduct this Seminar. Dr. Stephenson’s expertisein the area of Services has been made available to the Carib-bean Community (CARICOM) on various occasions, the mostrecent being over the past weekend here in Georgetown.

I would also like to thank USAID Director Mike Sarhan andGEO Project Coordinator Tom Whitney for responding to myrequest to have this Seminar and for putting the arrange-ments in place to facilitate it.

I would like to take the next few minutes and reflect on somedevelopments in the area of trade in services and some im-portant issues for us.

SERVICES SEMINAR

STATEMENT BY HONOURABLE CLEMENT J. ROHEE,MINISTER OF FOREIGN TRADE AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

AT LE MERIDIEN PEGASUS, MONDAY JANUARY 27, 2003.

First, the international trade in Services:

Over the past two decades or so, the services sector hasemerged as a major contributor to economic developmentand the global trade in services has been expanding at arapid rate, particularly in the area of “other services” (suchas business and professional services, value-added telecom-munications, financial services, health care, education andtraining etc.). Services account for approximately one-fifthof recorded world trade as well as the majority of domesticactivities in most economies.

Information technology has so transformed the sector that itis now not only a consequence of, but also a precondition foreconomic development. For most regional economies in theCaribbean, for example, the major employment providersinclude tourism, telecommunication and data processing,finance and insurance and entertainment. Since the 1990sthe telecommunications and computer related services suchas data processing have been registering increased growth


and making a greater contribution to the Caribbean servicessector. For many Caricom States the contribution of servicestrade to GDP is over 50%.

Second, the external negotiations:

The negotiations to liberalize trade in services are being un-dertaken in independent fora, with different calendars, andwith different objectives and procedures – the WTO, FTAAand the CSME. These processes are intimately related. In thisregard, the first issue that needs to be highlighted is that theWTO GATS norms and disciplines constitute the “floor” orthe minimum common denominator of other agreements forthe liberalization of trade in services. Consequently, anymodification or development of new norms and disciplinesin the GATS will affect the development of hemispheric, re-gional or sub regional initiatives.

Any agreement to liberalize trade in services must not onlybe compatible with the GATS provisions, current or future,but would also be expected to go further than GATS – that is,the Agreement would have to be WTO “plus” - in order tomaintain its own identity.

For Guyana, and indeed the region as a whole, developmentsin the various external negotiations are not divorced fromthe ongoing regional programme in the Caricom SingleMarket and Economy (CSME) concerning the implementa-tion of Protocol II on the Right of Establishment, Provision ofServices and Movement of Capital. The urgency to agreeand implement a regime on Services in the region ahead ofthe conclusion of the external negotiations places an equalurgency on us at the national level to identify our prioritiesat the macro level and strategic Services sectors at the indus-try level.

Against this background, I would say that the timing of thisAwareness Seminar is right for three main reasons: Firstly,the Caribbean Community has committed itself to a specificprogramme of implementation which would allow theCaricom Single Market and Economy (CSME) to be well inplace by the end of 2005. In this regard, under Protocol II ofthe Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas which deals with the Rightsof Establishment, Movement of Capital and Provision of Ser-vices, all restrictions on regional service providers are sched-uled to be removed by the end of 2005.

The idea is to ensure that regional service providers receiveno less favourable treatment than what is or will be given tonon-Caricom suppliers. Caricom members should in no waybe disadvantaged in terms of treatment in the regional

economy as a result of liberalization to the multilateral envi-ronment.

Secondly, in the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)substantive negotiations on services liberalization are sched-uled to begin in July 2003 and concluded by the end of 2004.Participating states, however, are expected to present theirinitial market access offers by February 15, 2003 – that’s justunder three weeks from today. The FTAA negotiations, inmany areas including services, are expected to be WTO-plus.

And thirdly, the multilateral trading environment under theWTO. As noted before, the built-in-Agenda negotiations areproceeding and would certainly impact developments else-where.

Third, why focus on Services?

Often the potential for expanding services exports is over-looked in national export development planning because ofinadequate statistics and a lack of familiarity with exportactivities of services firms. There may also be a presumptionthat the necessary developmental activities are the same forgoods and services, which is not the case.Given the fast pace at which trade in services is currentlygrowing, it is imperative that the Region be actively involved.Developments globally are increasingly towards services andhave seen the sector contributing an increasing share to na-tional output compared with the goods producing sector. Toensure the continued growth and expansion of services in theregion, the major constraints to growth must be identifiedand addressed.

With key agricultural exports being threatened by the persis-tent challenges to preferential trading arrangements, andlabour-intensive manufactured exports facing increased com-petition, the development of service exports in addition totourism is an essential plank of the region’s future develop-ment.

The key policy issue, therefore, is what type of arrangements,both internally and in any extra-regional trade agreement,can be developed to encourage the expansion of non-tourismservices in the region. Having implemented the necessaryinternal reforms, external trade arrangements could becomplementary and further improve the local environmentfor foreign investors.

In Guyana, though the key economic activities remain fo-cused on the tradable goods sector, concentrated in the tradi-tional commodity sectors, there is growing evidence of the


potential for the development and contribution of the ser-vices sector in the expansion and diversification of the na-tional economy.

Clearly we need to broaden and deepen, at the same time,our understanding of the Services sector and its potential forthe modernization of the national economy. We need to doso quickly, not only in relation to the rapid developments inthe multilateral trading environment but importantly for thecritical issues that need to be addressed in the context of ournational development.

To overcome the “invisibility” of services industries, an im-mediate first task is to develop a widespread awareness thatservices firms make important contributions to nationaleconomy in terms of job creation, wealth creation, and for-eign exchange earnings.

Also, because there is little training available as yet on ser-vices marketing and exporting, managers of services indus-try firms may need technical assistance to take advantage oftheir export potential. They need to be aware of interna-tional expectations for service quality and be prepared tomeet them. The satisfaction of foreign investors with theservices of local service firms can impact positively on na-tional capabilities in services. This can be very helpful tolocal service firms in capturing export business in the homemarkets. As such, efforts to increase the use of local suppli-

ers can bring economic benefits.

Over the past months the Ministry of Foreign Trade & Inter-national Cooperation (MOFTIC) has been involved in con-sultations with local service providers with a view to estab-lishing a National Association of Services Providers. We hopeto launch this Association sometime in March 2003.

We are convinced that this is a step in the right directionespecially since we are now in the offers/requests stage ofthe negotiations on Services both at the WTO and the FTAA.In this regard, the views of the Private Sector here in Guyanaas well as the granting of greater market access to ServiceProviders from the industrialized States is a matter whichthe Private Sector must be a key.

Finally:

Today’s event is intended primarily to build greater aware-ness of the subject among the Guyanese public, especially theprivate sector and the services sub-sectors. The Workshopthis afternoon with the staff of my Ministry and a technicalworking group would assist in our ongoing national prepa-ration for the external negotiations.

With these brief remarks, ladies and gentlemen, I thank youonce again.

I am very pleased to welcome you to this WTO Trade PolicyReview seminar for Guyana. I am happy you have found itpossible to be here and I can assure you that the subject ofour meeting is of great importance to all of us.

I am especially pleased to welcome our two special guestsseated at the head-table. Mr. Clemens Boonekamp and Mr.Angelo Silvy are official representatives of the World TradeOrganization (WTO) in Geneva, here in Guyana to conductthis Trade Policy Review Seminar and to hold important dis-cussions with senior government officials over the next twodays.

Mr. Boonekamp is the Director of the WTO Trade Policy Re-view Division and a national of the Netherlands. Mr. Silvy is

WTO TRADE POLICY REVIEW SEMINAR (GUYANA)

STATEMENT BY THE HONOURABLE CLEMENT J ROHEE, MINISTER OF FOREIGN TRADE AND INTERNATIONALCOOPERATION AT The FOREIGN SERVICE INSTITUTE (FSI), GEORGETOWN, JANUARY 29, 2003

a Counsellor in the Trade Policy Review Division as well andhe is a national of Peru. They arrived here late last night,having traveled all day yesterday from Geneva. And while Iam aware that their schedule could be a packed one, I hopethey would have some time to look around – the city at least– since I understand this is their first visit to Guyana.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have been asked to make an Opening Statement at thismorning’s proceedings. I thought it would be fitting that Ibear in mind the theme which the Programme seems to sug-gest. I, therefore, wish to speak to the issue of participationin the multilateral trading system and the challenges for smalleconomies.


In his Overview in the Trade and Development Report 2002,the Secretary General of UNCTAD stated, and I quote:“Since the third session of the WTO Ministerial Conference,held in Seattle, a renewed effort has been made to addressthe concerns of developing countries, culminating in a dif-ferent kind of bargain being struck at Doha. Developingcountries, by agreeing to a comprehensive programme ofwork and negotiations, demonstrated their commitment totackling global political and economic threats; in return,they expect that development concerns will be central to thenegotiations. The challenge is now to translate an expandednegotiating agenda into a truly development agenda…to makethe multilateral trading system more development-friendly.The outcome will be judged by the extent to which develop-ing countries achieve greater market access without theirpolicy options being restricted.”

Following the Seattle failure in 1999, the WTO was imme-diately faced with the critical need to establish itself as acredible institution capable of meeting the aspirations ofall its members. The unmistakable, unambiguous call, es-pecially by developing countries, therefore, has been forthe WTO to fully recognize the real differences amongstmember countries in terms of resources, trade volumes andlevels of development, while endeavoring to keep its agendain time with the dynamics of international trade and glo-balization. This would entail a number of key undertak-ings, including:

- the need to increase the degree of univer-sality of the WTO and the transparency ofthe decision-making process in the trad-ing system; and

- the need to ensure the full integration ofdeveloping countries, and especially theleast developed among them, into the trad-ing system as soon as possible.

Small trading economies such as those of the Caribbean Com-munity (CARICOM) are faced with tremendous challenges inan increasingly globalized world environment characterizedby rapid economic integration and trade liberalization. Thesechallenges are compounded by the realities we know so wellin Guyana – narrow production base and limited supply ca-pacity, often remaining dependent on one or two commodi-ties.

We witness the impact of this globalization process every-where in our daily lives. Information, know-how, ideas –

these are the new forces that are driving the global economyforward. And the global economy is not waiting for us.Technological change is advancing rapidly all over the globe.If we are to succeed we must at least seek to build capacityand train our people for the modern economy – one based onincreasingly less restricted cross-border movement of people,goods and services.

The international trading system is central to the ongoingprocess of economic reforms in the economies of the Carib-bean Community (Caricom). The region’s establishment ofthe Caricom Single Market and Economy (CSME) representsthe critical and pragmatic steps which a group of small vul-nerable economies found necessary to take to respond effec-tively to the changes in the global trading environment. It isabout recognizing that our national interests are increas-ingly global interests and that our economic security increas-ingly hinges on the strength of others.

Many of our countries, including and especially Guyana, haveundertaken comprehensive structural adjustment programmesin collaboration with the international financial institutions.In most cases – certainly in Guyana’s case – the commence-ment of these structural adjustments preceded the World TradeOrganization as well as the Uruguay Round negotiations.

For Guyana it has not been an easy process to mobilize thenational political support for the structural adjustment andliberalization programme. Besides, the adjustment processbrought with it, immediately, certain debilitating conse-quences for the weaker sections of the populations, includ-ing the productive and business sectors of the nationaleconomy.

Market access for our agricultural and non-agricultural prod-ucts in the developed markets has ironically become less andless certain – in the face of trade liberalization. This un-equal distribution of the benefits from trade is in large partdue to the persistence of barriers to the entry of products inwhich developing countries have a comparative advantage.In addition, the widespread use of all forms of subsidies ef-fectively nullifies the market access concessions that mayhave been made by developed countries. Penetration of de-veloping country markets is also promoted through subsi-dies.

This is why we continue to argue that the liberalization andglobalization process must ensure sustainability and stabil-ity in the development of the smaller economies. Disloca-tions must be minimized to the very least. In the WTO con-text, therefore, future special and differential treatment should


be based on specific development criteria instead of arbi-trarily defined transition periods, and must be part of a spe-cial programme in the WTO that focuses on the trade devel-opment needs of smaller economies.

As you would be aware, Guyana has been participating ac-tively in the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) negotia-tions from its inception in 1995 and continues to do so withinthe framework of CARICOM’s joint approach to the externalnegotiations. The FTAA negotiations are fairly advancedand the expectation is that an agreement should be achiev-able by the 2005 deadline set by the countries of the hemi-sphere. The Caribbean Community negotiates as a groupand we have advocated consistently and forcefully the prin-ciple of the “differences in levels of development and size ofthe economies” in the negotiations. We also continue to ad-vance the reasonable case for funding mechanisms includinga Regional Integration Fund (RIF), to take care of the adjust-ment needs of the smaller economies in the hemisphere.

These things, one would think, would be easily recognizedand accepted by our more developed trading partners – espe-cially in the face of the severe disruptions and turbulencewhich the globalization process has in recent times invitedupon many large and small developing countries alike.

From the inception of the Summit of the Americas (SOA)process in December 1994, Guyana spearheaded the Carib-bean Community’s call for the establishment of a RegionalIntegration Fund (RIF) that would help the “smaller econo-mies” respond effectively to the adjustment challenges thatwould result from the implementation of the FTAA and theadjustment to the hemispheric and wider trade liberaliza-tion.

After several years of lobbying and active representation bythe CARICOM group, Trade Ministers of the hemisphere metin November 2002 and, for the first time since the FTAAprocess commenced in 1995, agreed to the creation of aHemispheric Cooperation Programme (HCP) to assist coun-tries in three key areas: (i) Participation in the external ne-gotiations; (ii) Implementation of trade commitments; and(iii) Adjustment to integration (into the hemispheric and glo-bal trading environment). The Ministers also mandated thetechnical negotiators to discuss the critical matter of fundingfor the Programme and the identification of the sources ofsuch financial resources.

In the Market Access negotiations relating to agriculture wehave articulated the clear position that: (i) Caricom mem-bers must be allowed to apply their WTO bound tariff as the

base tariff for tariff liberalization in the agricultural sector.This has been conceded to Caricom, though not without astern fight; and (ii) Since we do not maintain or have ac-cess to resources for subsidies, any commitments to reduceour tariffs must be matched by the commitments of othercountries to reduce their high incidence of non-tariff mea-sures (NTM) and subsidies. On this latter point the discus-sions are not yet concluded.

Institutional Arrangements

A big question in all of this naturally relates to how a smallcountry such as Guyana copes with the multiplicity of nego-tiations and new commitments. This is a real challenge –especially in the face of scarce human and technical resources.

First, as I mentioned earlier, in keeping with its rights andobligations as a Member State of the Caribbean Community(CARICOM), Guyana participates in CARICOM’s group ap-proach to the various external negotiations and the work ofthe Caribbean Regional Negotiating Machinery (RNM). TheRNM was established by Caricom Heads of Government inApril 1997 to coordinate the region’s preparation for andparticipation in the various external trade negotiations.

Second, as a consequence of the establishment of the RNM,member states established national committees to coordi-nate national positions to feed into the regional machineryprocess. In September 1997 Guyana established the NationalAdvisory Committee on External Negotiations (NACEN) withwhich many of you are familiar.

We took specific action in February 2002 to establish a Na-tional Trade Negotiations Committee (N-TNC) under theNational Advisory Committee on External Negotiations(NACEN). The N-TNC is technical in its structure and work,and reports to the NACEN. The N-TNC is comprised of ten(10) technical working groups, each covering related subjectareas in the various external trade negotiations in the WorldTrade Organization (WTO), Free Trade Area of the Ameri-cas (FTAA), the ACP-EU Post-Cotonou Negotiations and theCaricom Single Market and Economy (CSME).

These technical working groups (TWGs), which include bothpublic and private sector representation at senior technicallevel, allow for technical analyses of negotiating proposalsand issues and the development of national positions in theexternal negotiations. The N-TNC functions as the technicalarm of the NACEN.

Also, in February 2002 Caricom Heads of Government agreed


Madame ChairmanMinisters of GovernmentSecretary-General, CARICOMAssistant Secretary-General ofCARICOMMembers of the MediaLadies and Gentlemen

Allow me to bid you a warm welcome to Guyana. Home tothe Secretariat of the Caribbean Community.

Since this is the first COTED Meeting in the New Year, Iwould like to extend to each and every one of you best wishesfor 2003.

And while I am on this note of felicitations, I would like torecognize the presence and participation of the Cuban del-egation as well as the newly appointed Minister fromSuriname to this 14th COTED. A warm welcome to you andbest wishes also.

Colleagues,

This 14th COTED is convened at a time when Trade Ministersand Officials are just a busy as Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei but with some fundamental differences. They areengaged in myriad trade negotiations and related activitiesfor “regime changes” in trade, the “removal of materialbreaches” of WTO disciplines and other trade distorting mea-sures, not to mention the accomplishment of “deadlines” un-

THE 14TH SESSION OF COTED

ADDRESS BY HON. MINISTER OF FOREIGN TRADE AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION OF GUYANA-GEORGETOWN, GUYANA, JANUARY 31-FEBRUARY 1, 2003

der pressure from circumstances over which we have verylittle control.

We here in the Caribbean are also caught up in a “smokinggun” syndrome albeit from the standpoint of our own eco-nomic survival.

In almost every Member State of the Community the compe-tent authorities are at their wits end as they valiantly battleon several fronts to cope with the rising tide of trade negotia-tions to ensure that their national and regional interests areadequately and effectively represented.

Compounding this situation, is the fact that the much vauntedoffer by members of the Donor Community to provide re-sources to help build national capacity have turned out to beempty promises, if not illusive, so much so that Governmentsare now left to fend for themselves and to “paddle their owncanoe” as it were lest they be left pondering at the cross-roads trying to figure out in a state of desperation if notexasperation, who to turn to next with the proverbial beg-ging bowl.

Colleagues,

It is not my intention to be labour the point or bellyache overthe fact that the enormity of the Region’s agenda with ongo-ing negotiations both at bilateral and multilateral levels isplacing a major challenge to us in many respects.

on the appointment of Ministerial lead spokespersons for theregion in the key external trade arenas. Guyana, in the per-son of the Minister of Foreign Trade, was designated theregion’s Ministerial spokesperson on WTO matters.

Following this decision of the Caricom Heads, the Govern-ment of Guyana, with a view to strengthening appropriateinstitutional arrangements, strategically accredited its Em-bassy in Brussels as the country’s non-resident Mission to theWTO in Geneva, taking into account the need to effectivelycoordinate the country’s participation in both the Genevaprocess at the WTO and the ACP-EU Negotiations in Brus-sels. This arrangement will suffice as an important one until

Guyana is able to establish a resident Mission or presence inGeneva.

The Trade Policy Review which we have now commencedwith the WTO is aimed in this direction as well – that is thestrengthening of our institutional arrangements as well asour domestic trade policy environment. We should hear moreabout this from our guests from the WTO.

On this note, Ladies and gentlemen, I wish to end my presen-tation.

Thank you.


And mind you, it is not only the negotiations per sey, as amatter of fact, it is the dizzying pace with which these nego-tiations are galloping and worse yet, the imminent deadlineswe have to meet.

Yet we have to rise to the occasion, the paucity of our humanand financial resources notwithstanding.

To those on the other side of the negotiating table who arebankingon these deficiencies to gain negotiating advantage and touse this as leverage. I believe that it would not be idle talk tosay with full confidence in our negotiators that our adversar-ies are in for some pleasant surprises.

In the final analysis, the responsibility is ours to ensure thatthe region’s negotiating capacity is continuously strength-ened and sharpened and our negotiating positions made un-assailable.

At the same time, we must take cognizance of those criticalproposals that have been advanced by the major players inthe current global trade negotiations. We must of necessitybe in a position to develop adequate responses to these pro-posals. This is no time for guess work or engaging in fanci-ful formulae.

We are now in the season of serious business that requiresserious and thoughtful responses.

What we sign on to eventually is what we will have to livewith for a very, very long time. And lest we forget, as was

said in the case of Getsemany - we shall not pass this wayagain.

The desire for Special and Differential Treatment must con-tinue to be our clarion call and our negotiating mantra aswe proceed with confidence and optimism towards the goalsof 2005 and 2010.

On the home front, we should avoid duplicity and engagingin double standards in so far as unfair trade practices areconcerned.

We cannot on the one hand, call as a community, for theremoval of barriers to trade, subsidies and other trade dis-torting measures while at the same time maintain similarunfair measures and practices among ourselves as we pro-ceed inexorably towards a Single Market and Economy.

A discriminatory tax or a trade distorting measure againstone Member State is at the same time, a discriminatory taxand trade distorting measure against all Member States.Colleagues,

We have a packed Agenda before us. It is just as dizzying asthe pace of the external negotiations in which we are cur-rently engaged.I urge that issues on the Agenda be prioritized in such a waythat the matters requiring Ministerial decisions are highlightedand given the attention they deserve in our deliberations.

Thank you.

Mister Chairman, Mr. Jaoquin Alvarez, Programme Officerof WIPO with responsibilities for Guyana, Members of theWIPO Mission, Participants Special Invitees, Ladies andGentlemen.

It gives me great pleasure to bid a formal welcome to thedelegation from the World Intellectual Property Organiza-tion and to all present at this illustrious gathering today.

WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANISATION

SPEECH DELIVERED BY THE HON. MINISTER OF FOREIGN TRADE AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ATTHE OPENING SESSION OF THE JOINTLY HOSTED WORKSHOP BY THE GOVERNMENT OF GUYANA AND THE

WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION, GEORGETOWN, GUYANA, MARCH 3, 2003

Viewed from the prospective of a small developing country,of which Guyana is an example- the theme of this workshopis thought provoking, timely and of high importance. Therole of intellectual property protection in today’s globalizedtrading economy is complex, multi-functional and to a sig-nificant degree, contentious as it applies to all aspects of ourdaily lives.


Guyana acceded to the WIPO on October 25, 1994. We alsobecame a signatory to the Paris Convention for the Protec-tion of Industrial Property and the Berne Convention for theProtection of Literacy and Artistic Works, simultaneously af-ter our accession to WIPO.

Guyana received its first WIPO Mission in June 1995. TheMission convened a seminar to sensitize the Guyanese Publicon the importance and the value of intellectual property.

In September 1996, WIPO dispatched its second mission toGuyana to conduct a follow up seminar to the first held in1995. Again, the aim of this seminar was to sensitize thepublic on the importance of intellectual property in the en-couragement of creativity and innovations.Early in 1999, WIPO dispatched a Fact Finding Mission tothe Caribbean Region to carry out research and investigativework in the fields of traditional knowledge, biodiversity, ge-netic resources and folklore. Guyana was identified as one ofthe countries, which would benefit from the findings of theFact Finding Mission. The results and findings of the FactFinding Mission was published in a book titled “IntellectualProperty Needs and Expectations of Traditional KnowledgeHolders” in April 2001.

These activities signify the Government of Guyana’s recogni-tion of the importance of intellectual property in today’s glo-balized economy. It expresses the willingness of the Govern-ment of Guyana to work along with WIPO in the encourage-ment of creative activity and the promotion of intellectualproperty throughout the world.

The Government of Guyana recognizes that hand in handwith technological development, intellectual property hasbecome a global issue, because of its increasing relevance tokey and critical policy issues such as food security, health,labour, trade, cultural heritage, environment, investment andscientific and technological transformation.

Over the years, the Government of Guyana and WIPO hasdeveloped friendly relations through consultations based ontechnical assistance needs, especially in the areas of institu-tional strengthening and capacity building. The Governmentof Guyana has benefited from the participation at seminars,workshop and training programmes sponsored and organizedby WIPO.

In June 2002, Guyana, at the invitation of WIPO, partici-pated in the WIPO Ministerial Level Meeting on IntellectualProperty for Caribbean countries, which was hosted by theSurinamese Government. The Suriname Ministerial laid the

foundation for future work on intellectual property in theregion. Consultations were held in the areas of public educa-tion and strengthening of enforcement capacities, commit-ment of resources for assistance in capacity building andcontinued support for the development and promotion of in-tellectual property protection in the region.

In September 2002, a CARICOM Ministerial Delegationheaded by Guyana met with the Director General of WIPO atthe WIPO Headquarters in Geneva. This meeting provided aunique opportunity to discuss the road map for preparationfor the next WIPO Ministerial Meeting, which is scheduledfor Antigua and Barbuda in November of this year. The DGof WIPO expressed the willingness to collaborate with theCaribbean in areas other than the traditional training andsupport for legal drafting. WIPO is willing to expand beyondthese traditional areas of cooperation and to take on theinitiative with CARICOM in the fields of Small and MediumSized Enterprise, Traditional Knowledge, Genetic Resourcesand Folklore, WIPO net, Collective Management of Copy-rights and Museum Works.

Turning to developments in the international arena, I wouldlike to highlight some typical intellectual property matters,which are of great importance to Guyana both at WIPO andat the WTO.

Debates are currently taking place which are making it in-creasingly obvious, that there is a great divide between theinterests of the developed countries and the developing coun-tries. It is important that as Developing Countries we fight toensure that our interests and views are put forward in thedebates and that the Agreements which are ultimately reachedreflect our needs if we are not to be swamped by obligationswhich impose on us great burdens and have no correspond-ing benefit for ourselves and our people.

Firstly, there is the WIPO Patent Agenda: Options for Devel-opment of the International Patent System which was tabledthe 37th Sessions of Meetings of the WIPO General Assem-blies in September 2002. This Agenda sets out a plan for thedevelopment of a Harmonized International Patent LegalSystem.

At that meeting, Developing Countries expressed concernsthat the proposed harmonization process will lead to theharmonization of the laws of a small group of countriesnamely, the Industrialized Countries and their adoption bythe majority, which are principally the Developing Countries.This will mean the adoption of standards, which do not takeaccount of the interests of Developing Countries. Concerns


were also expressed that the new law will affect the sover-eignty of States, and further erode the flexibilities currentlyprovided for under the TRIPS Agreement.

On our part, Guyana has advanced certain views as part ofthe Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries(GRULAC). Our view is that the Patent Harmonization AgendaDocument is not balanced. Since it tends to focus princi-pally on the interests of patent holders. Further, the docu-ment, in our view does not deal with the issue of whether ornot disclosure of the country of origin of genetic material ortraditional knowledge and proof of prior informed consentin their acquisition would be required in the registration of apatent. These matters among others are very important is-sues for us as Developing Countries as we search for ways toimplement the Convention on Biological Diversity.

As a Country with vast Bio Diversity, Guyana has a big stakein the issues at hand. Therefore a one-size fits all approachas proposed by the Patent Agenda could only bring disas-trous consequences for intellectual property in our country.

We urge that the Patent Harmonization Agenda should en-sure that the different interests and levels of development ofthe WIPO Members especially the Developing Countries aretaken into account in drafting of the Patent HarmonizationAgenda.On the other hand, it is worth noting that the industrializedStates have generally expressed their support and satisfac-tion with the work already done for the harmonization ofpatent laws through the Patent Harmonization Agenda. Thiscomes as no surprise since their interests were to a greaterextent catered for in the Patent Harmonization Agenda.

This development again emphasizes the need for DevelopingCountries to intensify the fight to ensure that their own issuesare put on the table, forcefully articulated and reflected inany subsequent Agreement. This is more so because the set-ting up of a world patent system may mean the end of do-mestic patent policy normally used as a tool for nationaldevelopment.

The same applies to the debate, which is presently raging inthe TRIPS Council on intellectual property protection andaccess to medicines for Developing Countries.

In November 2001, at the Fourth Ministerial Conference atDoha in Qatar, the Ministers produced a Declaration in whichthey stressed that it is important to interpret and implementthe TRIPS Agreement in a way that supports public health bypromoting both access to existing medicines and the cre-

ation of new medicines. In particular, they noted that com-pulsory licensing and parallel importing are tools availableto Developing Countries under the TRIPS Agreement to en-able them to deal with public health crises.

However the Ministers recognized that countries with littleor no manufacturing capacity may face problems in makinguse of compulsory licensing and mandated the TRIPS Coun-cil to find an expeditious solution to this problem. The dead-line for the TRIPS Council to find a solution and report backwas December 31st 2002; however, this deadline was not metagain because of a division that has emerged vis-à-vis theinterests of both the Developing and Developed Countries.

Three possible solutions have been addressed to help resolvethis problem. These are firstly; Member States agree not toinitiate dispute settlement proceedings for an indefinite timeagainst countries, which use compulsory licensing for prod-ucts of the pharmaceutical sector either through a morato-rium or through a waiver, in terms of the GATT. Secondly theuse of an authoritative interpretation of Article 30 of theTRIPS Agreement to the effect that products of the pharma-ceutical sector are excluded from patentability and lastly, anamendment of Article 31 of the TRIPS that would establishthe circumstances under which a compulsory license couldbe used for products of the pharmaceutical sector.

Guyana’s position as set out together with other CaricomCountries is that each of the solutions outlined above has arole to play depending on the circumstances of the healthcrises being faced. Therefore all should be made available ifthe full flexibility of the TRIPS Agreement is to be used toprevent intellectual property from obstructing the solution ofpublic health crises.

Finally, I would like to point out that the implementationof the TRIPS Agreement has been costly to Developing Coun-tries. We have had to make changes to both our nationallaws and structures involving a great deal of efforts and re-sources. However the cost has been even greater for smallvulnerable economies such as our own in Guyana.

These problems have stemmed from the fact that we havelimited capacity to implement the complex rules and proce-dures in the TRIPS Agreement. The Agreement provides thatDeveloped Countries may upon request provide technical andfinancial cooperation to Developing Countries to assist inthe implementation of the Agreement. However, because ofthe small size of our administrations and the complexity ofthe Agreement, we even experience difficulties in identifyingour needs and requirements in order to make requests for


assistance. Further, because of the small size of our popula-tions, we do not have the requisite manpower and institu-tional capacity to be able to establish domestic offices andrelevant agencies or to train personnel to deal with thesevery important matters.

Because of these factors, a group of Small Vulnerable Econo-mies which includes Guyana, Antigua and Barbuda, Barba-dos, Belize, Dominica, Fiji Islands, Grenada, Jamaica,Mauritius, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Suriname,Swaziland, Namibia, St Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, St.Vincent, and the Grenadines and Trinidad and Tobago sub-mitted a proposal which is to be tabled at the Special Ses-sion of the WTO’s TRIPS Council.

The proposal states that it should be explicitly recognizedthat Small Vulnerable Economies may designate a regionalbody as the competent authority for the implementation ofthe relevant provisions of the TRIPS Agreement and that De-

veloped Country Members of the WTO shall provide techni-cal and financial assistance for the establishment of such abody.

These are the issues at stake. These are the issues that willaffect the future of our trade with other nations and the de-velopment of our country. These are the implications of in-tellectual property in today’s world. As a small vulnerabledeveloping state, Guyana has very limited options, but it isclear that in order to sustain a knowledge based economy inthe globalization process, intellectual property would play amajor role in releasing the creative potential of nations andin channeling that potential into tangible, sustainable devel-opment for the benefit of our people.

I wish your two-day Workshop every success.

I thank you.

CANADA-CARICOM CULTURE AND TRADE WORKSHOP

The Ministry of Cultural Heritage of Canada hosted theCanada-CARICOM Culture and Trade Workshop in Halifax,Nova Scotia, Canada from 24-25 March 2003. Trade andCulture officials from the following Caribbean countries at-tended the Workshop: Antigua and Barbuda, Anguilla, Bar-bados, British Virgin Island, Guyana, Grenada, Jamaica,Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and theGrenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago. Representatives fromthe Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Secretariat and theUniversity of the West Indies were also present. Guyana wasrepresented by Mr. Gregory Downes of the Regional Negoti-ating Machinery (RNM) who is on assignment at the Ministryof Foreign Trade and International Co-operation and Mr.Raymond Cummings, Director, Research and DocumentationDivision, Ministry of Youth, Sports and Culture.

The primary objective of the workshop was to provide aplatform for both trade and culture officials to converse onissues of mutual concern. Specifically focusing on how coun-tries could preserve and promote their cultural diversity whileconcurrently adhering to the principles of globalisation andliberalisation. Given that this was the debut meeting of cul-tural and trade officials of the Caribbean region a consider-able amount of time was exhausted explaining cultural and

Mr. Gregory Downes, Assistant to Minister MOFTIC on WTO Issues

trade jargons to trade and culture officials respectively.

Several issues were discussed at the workshop. These include:factors affecting the preservation and promotion of culturaldiversity and the need to maintain policy space in trade agree-ments, particularly in the World Trade Organisation (WTO)and Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) negotiations;the role of cultural policies from a developmental perspec-tive; and the nexus between cultural and trade policies. Theforemost concern among cultural officials is that, albeit newinformation technologies, globalisation and evolving tradeliberalisation policies at all levels offer unquestionable op-portunities for the expression of cultural diversity, they mayalso be detrimental with regard to cultural preservation.Consequently there is need to ensure that cultural diversity,as a factor of social cohesion and economic development ispreserved. It is within this context that an International In-strument on Cultural Diversity (IICD), which inter alia seeksto set a framework through which members can preserveand promote its cultural diversity, is being proposed byCanada.

Generally, while Caribbean participants acknowledged thepotential utility of an IICD, concerns were expressed with


regard to the extent such a facility will benefit the region,especially in light of the limited financial and human re-sources in the region to develop cultural industries. Concernswere also expressed with regards to, inter alia, the ambigu-ity surrounding what is regarded as cultural goods and ser-vices, and the trend towards the homogenisation of cultureglobally. Consequently, for the proposed IICD to be of benefitto the region it needs to take the peculiarities of, and issuesgermane to, the Caribbean on board.

At the end of the workshop Caribbean participants agreed tomaintain contact with each other with a view to sharingrelevant information on trade and culture that will enableofficials to get a better appreciation of the trade-culture nexus.However, it is still imperative that culture and trade officialsmeet at the national and regional levels in a more formalsetting to deliberate on the issues of concern to the Carib-bean.

THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON EXTERNALNEGOTIATIONS (NACEN)

The National Advisory Committee on ExternalNegotiations (NACEN) of Guyana was established onSeptember 1, 1997 following a decision of the CaribbeanCommunity (CARICOM) Heads of Government in April1997 to establish the Caribbean Regional NegotiatingMachinery (CRNM). Simultaneously, the Heads alsodecided that al Member States should establish nationalcommittees to work with the CRNM. The NACEN,therefore, evolved out of a regional initiative to enhanceCARICOM’s coordination in and execution of its externaltrade negotiations, that is, at the WTO, the FTAA, andLomé (ACP-EU) levels, so as to maximize the Region’schances of success in those negotiations.

The NACEN is an inter-agency group which is chaired atthe Ministerial level and comprises high-levelrepresentation from government, private sector, labourand academia. The primary function of the NACEN is tocoordinate Guyana’s effective, informed and timelypreparation for and participation in the various externaltrade negotiations.

It is in this regard that during the past quarter, severalmeetings of the NACEN were convened in preparationfor Guyana’s participation on the Trade NegotiationsCommittee (TNC) and Market Access meetings of theFTAA.

A National Trade negotiations Committee (N-TNC) wasestablished in February 2002 to operate at the technicallevel and to feed into the NACEN. The work of the N-TNCis assisted by several technical Working Groups (TWGs)that are subject-specific in their focus (eg. Agriculture,Intellectual Property Rights, Services, etc.). The TWGsare comprised of those public and private sector agencieswhich have a direct or specific interest in the subject

THE NATIONAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE(N-TNC)

areas to be addressed.

Therefore, over the last quarter, meetings of the varyingTWGs were convened. With respect to the TWG-Services, meetings were convened to assist in thepreparation of Guyana’s offers to and requests of otherWTO Members, vis-à-vis the further liberalisation of theservices sector.


http://www.moftic.gov.gy

The Ministry of Foreign Trade and International Cooperation recently established itswebsite whose address is: http://www.moftic.gov.gy. The site provides valuableinformation on economic and trade related issues at the national, regional andmultilateral levels.

On this website there are linkages to government agencies such as Ministry ofAgriculture, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Tourism, Industry and Commerce,and Guyana Sugar Cooperation (GUYSUCO), Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) alongwith Regional and Multilateral Organizations.

It also provides links to the following regional Organizations:-

!!!!! CARICOM (Caribbean Community)

!!!!! FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas)

!!!!! ECLAC (Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean)

!!!!! CDB (Caribbean Development Bank)

!!!!! SELA (Latin American Economic System)

!!!!! IADB (Inter-American Development Bank)

In addition it provides links to multilateral websites such as the World Trade Organization

(WTO), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB), World International Property

Rights (WIPO), ACP-EU (African Caribbean Pacific-European Union), International Center

for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), European Center for Development Policy

Management (ECDPM), South-Centre for developing Countries, Overseas Development

Institute – United Kingdom (ODI-UK) and The Commonwealth Organization.

MOFTIC’s site is designed to be used by importers and exporters as a channel of doing

business with Guyana and it provides information on Trade Agreements of which Guyana

is a party, in addition to accessing links to export/import market information from all over

the world.

Very soon, this site will be affording you access to “MOFTIC Digest” and “ Review of

Guyana’s Foreign Trade 2001/2002"

Any comments and/or suggestions should be forwarded to [email protected]


COOPERATIVE REPUBLIC OF GUYANA

WELCOME TO THEMinistry of Foreign Trade & International Cooperation

{ Facilitating Coherent & Effective Trade Policy }

14th COTED Meeting........

!!!!!!!

Home Page UNDP Guyana I SDNP Guyana I Regional Organizations I Multilateral Organizations I Trade Leads

Ministry of Foreign Trade and International CooperationTakuba Lodge 254 South Road

Georgetown, Guyana - South AmericaTel: 592-226-5064 / 8427, Fax: 592-226-8426

For website issues and/or comments, please contact : [email protected]©2002 MOFTICLast modified: 03/28/2003

Home Page

Mission Statement

Foreign Trade

International Cooperation

Press Releases &Publications

Conferences &Workshops

More Information

Ministry of Agriculture

Guyana SugarCompany

(GUYSUCO)

Guyana Custom& Trade(GRA)

Ministry ofTourism

Ministry ofForeign Affairs

GuyanaAgricultural

Links

MINIS

TRY

OF

FORE

IG

N TRADE & INTERNATIONAL CO

OPERATION

inside this issue the caricom single market & economy...

Documents