ࡱ> q` JbjbjqPqP 7::$%       :::8:: F;h;;"<<<<<<$hSP( Q<<QQ(  <<=UUUQ < <UQUU~Z8  z<; :yRXS0USz zt<LTC6UH,L<<<((WU^<<<QQQQ5::        Report on the Assessment Workshop on the 6th WTO Ministerial Conference By SEATINI Ridar Hotel, Seeta, Mukono. 23-25th January, 2006 Introduction: The WTOs 6th Ministerial Conference took place between the 13th and the 18th of December in Hong Kong. The WTO negotiations in Hong Kong were part of the Doha Round which was launched in 2001 with the view of redressing the imbalances in the Global Trading System by taking care of developing countries development concerns. Prior to the 6th WTO Ministerial Conference, a number of activities including meetings were held to prepare especially the delegation for the negotiations in Hong Kong. These activities allowed for the participation of different stakeholders right to the grassroots in the trade debate. They culminated into the formulation of positions expressing stakeholders concerns that were then taken to Hong Kong. The outcomes of Hong Kong received mixed reactions from both developing and developed countries. Given this state of affairs SEATINI organised a stakeholders workshop to assess the outcomes of the Ministerial Conference against the developing countries concerns prior to Hong Kong and Ugandas development concerns in particular. Below is a report of the deliberations from this workshop. Background to the workshop: Jane Nalunga, the Country Director of SEATINI opened the workshop and reiterated the need to critically assess the Hong Ministerial Conference against Ugandas development concerns. She stressed the objectives of the workshop as being: To discuss the outcomes of the 6th Ministerial Conference against the development concerns of developing countries in general and Uganda in particular. To debate the extent to which the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration especially the Development Package offers sufficient policy space and supportive measures to address supply side constraints in developing countries so as to take advantage of market openings. To draw strategies on how to take up the trade work in 2006 and beyond. Below is a summary of the presentations and discussions An Assessment of the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference Mr. Peter Elimu from the Ministry of Trade emphasised in his opening remarks the need to demystify trade issues. Reporters for example mis-report at certain times because they may not understand the issues. De-minimis level of subsidies may sound foreign but yet these are the critical issues that need to be broken down to allow for all stakeholders to understand and appreciate their role in trade and development. He appreciated the good working relationship between government and CSOs, and noted that trade policy and development should not lead to antagonism but to cooperation for the good of the country. All parties have a big role to play in the final outcomes from trade. Trade negotiations contain compromises, and are not about getting a glassful of water as a must for example. The important question should be that with a gain of 10%, what could a country have done better? Its important to assess the Hong Kong Conference right from Doha. At Doha development was prominently brought into the WTO with a view to address the development concerns of developing countries. Before that the WTO was not a development/funding agency. However, the WTO has issues that are development oriented. Say in agriculture, one cannot have discussions without looking at development. After Cancun also the July Framework was put in place to bring the negotiations back on track on all key areas on which the negotiations would continue for example trade facilitation. Prior to Hong Kong Uganda developed positions on different areas which were synchronized with other positions like that of the Africa Group, LDC, and ACP etc. Going to negotiations as Uganda alone may not produce a lot. Issues of negotiation take into account market access, and which can be attained collectively. With the failure of the 5th Ministerial Conference at Cancun, no country wanted the same at Hong Kong. Big countries for example always met but there were also contradictory messages. While many of them promised things in the negotiations, back home their politics gave a different picture. In short this is what was agreed in Hong Kong. Agriculture Export Subsidies: Parallel elimination of all forms of export subsidies and disciplines on all export measures by end-2013. A substantial reduction to be realised by 2011. Domestic Support: Agreement on three bands to classify WTO Members as per their levels of trade-distorting domestic support. As per this classification the EU would fall in top band, the US and Japan in middle band and rest in bottom band. Market Access Agreement on four bands for structuring tariff cuts with different thresholds for developing countries. Flexibility for developing country members to self-designate an appropriate number of tariff lines as special products and also right to have recourse to a Special Safeguard Mechanism. The issue here is for how Uganda should position itself to take advantage of the few market access openings that may have been accorded. If all market distorting subsidies were done away with, would Uganda be ready to utilize them? Industrial tariffs Uganda is dependent on preferences to be able to compete within the given tariff lines. Thus if the preference margins on tariffs were removed, many developing countries would lose out. The Swiss formula was chosen. It was an achievement in the sense that the formula provides for multiple coefficients for tariff reductions. With this developing countries may start entering markets with products having some value addition. Services Uganda and many other developing countries went to Hong Kong with emphasis especially on mode 4. From Hong Kong there was agreement on further negotiations on liberalizing services, continue with the request and offer process and later these to be taken on plurilaterally. A Fund was being put up (aid for trade for instance) to allow developing countries to meet their supply side constraints. TRIPS Out of the Doha Ministerial Conference a protocol to address the issue of pandemics, access to medicines was developed. To date there has been a difference say in the cost of drugs (ARVs for example). In Hong Kong the search for a permanent solution to the problem continued. LDCs managed to get an extension of 7 years for implementing the TRIPS agreement. Its up to Uganda now to ensure that what came from Hong Kong turns into something tangible. An Assessment (Ambassador Irumba Nathan) The assessment of the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference should be based on what Ugandas expectations were. It should be an estimation of the modalities. In brief, what happened in Hong Kong was not real cuts but rather maintaining the status quo e.g. in agriculture negotiations would touch the ceilings but not the exact subsidies or levels. What the big powers did was to lower their general expectations of the Conference, focus on what was achievable and extend negotiations forward so that another Cancun wasnt created. From that perspective one could say that there was success in Hong Kong. There was focus on development e.g. aid for trade. However, the question should be that what percentage of this is new aid/money before celebrating the success. Another instance is that while 97% duty free market access may look appealing to developing countries, their counterparts, the developed countries are left with great leverage to exclude many products of developing countries from their markets. Again theres no point in duty free access on things that one doesnt produce. Services Prior to Hong Kong there was an attempt to change the architecture of the Services negotiations. It has originally been a request-offer approach. On realization that they werent getting what they wanted, developed countries introduced the idea of benchmarking which would do away with the fair system. The Chair of Services Committee came up with those proposals which had already been opposed by developing countries but somehow included them in the discussions. The problem with the plurilateral approach is that once requests are made collectively by a group of countries to participate in plurilateral, sectoral or modal negotiations, it would become hard for developing countries to oppose them. Agriculture The 2013 end-date for elimination of agricultural export subsidies was no victory. This greatest-distorting subsidy of all should have been eliminated many years ago. The developed countries may well be just shifting boxes. Special and Differential Treatment Increased market access, policy space and capacity building are very important for LDCs. Despite their importance, deadlines to have them addressed have all been missed. The argument is that the bigger developing countries like India and Brazil cannot be given privileges that should go to other LDCs. This would need to be resolved first. However, the past four years have passed without this issue being resolved. These issues of importance to the developing countries are instead being pushed to far away dates. What this means is that once agreement is reached on those issues considered substantial, then the issues of concern to the developing countries can easily be pushed to the next round of talks. In negotiations one countrys weight matters in line with market power. In the WTO negotiations decisions are in most cases taken by the US, EU, G20 (But which can be narrowed down to Brazil, India, and China). At the end negotiations usually narrow down to five Ministers. To date India and Brazil have been co-opted to sell agreements reached between themselves and the other three to their fellow developing countries. At Hong Kong India did a lot in convincing the other developing countries to accept the services text. Despite this scenario developing countries will still have to negotiate with the big powers so as to have some of their issues discussed. In summary, the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference had limited results. What was most important was to keep the negotiations alive. Plenary Theres an urgent need to break down the trade language to take into consideration the interests of the different stakeholders. The Swiss formula has an advantage of harmonizing tariffs while cutting deeper the higher tariffs. a glass may be better, but theres need for developing countries to always have key tests for tracking delivery on the promises that they are given. Developing countries should guard against acceptance of issues of interest to other parties just so as the negotiations can be kept alive. The fronting of the LDC issue of development for example was used to try and tilt balance. Increase in policy space for developing countries is difficult to see until theres a balance in the agreements at the end of the Round. The Development Package Mr. Elly Twineyo begun with emphasis on the importance of following closely all negotiations. The significance of this is that meetings are held to negotiate but most key decisions are taken informal settings/meetings and also through green room processes. While quoting the Doha Ministerial Declaration, he noted that Special and Differential Treatment is an integral part of the various WTO agreements and hence should be observed so that developing countries especially LDCs secure a share in the growth of international trade commensurate with the needs of their economic development. Prior to Hong Kong Uganda developed a number of positions around the need to ensure that development is enshrined in all the various agreements and outcomes of the Conference. To sum up the development issues, they included: S&DT Implementation related issues Technical assistance Special concerns of LDCs Other development related issues Uganda also feels a great need of creating coherence between trade, debt and finance. This is particularly in the view that the LDC situation of debt has continuously deteriorated into a crisis Some of the statements relating to the fulfillment of the development promises were reiterated in Hong Kong. What needs to be done by Uganda and other developing countries is to follow these up, thereby holding accountable those countries that may have made some of them. Some of these statements are below: All developed countries should commit to providing duty and quota free access to all products from all LDCs Peter Mandelson EU Trade Commissioner Our developing members will need aid for technical assistance and capacity building, for enhancing supply side capacity, infrastructure improvement, improving production efficiency and training. Pascal Lamy, Director-General WTO. What is aid for trade? The presenter noted that aid for trade encompasses five main activities. They are; technical assistance, capacity building, institutional reform, infrastructure, and assistance with adjustment costs. He quoted Art. 47 of the Ministerial text as stating; the stipulation that developed members in a position to do so should provide duty-free and quota- free market access for products originating from LDCs is not at this point concretely operational for all members. At this stage several members have made undertakings. Proposals for this to be rebound remain on the table. In his conclusion, the LDCs got that which they already had for example under duty and quota free market access. The year 2006 will determine the modalities to reveal in real terms what was achieved by the developing countries. Plenary: In Hong Kong the Development Package was used as a divisive factor among developing countries. It was evident that the confusion was being brewed that aid for trade for instance was for LDCs. It was also a tool used for manipulation. All developing countries should accept this package cautiously. It may be used for dumping purposes, say by ACDI-VOCA. Any form of aid for trade that may come to Uganda and other developing countries should be utilized efficiently. Most developing countries still lack the qualities of morality. The Asian Tigers for example developed not only by addressing resource constraints but by upholding morality values as well. If aid for trade is to benefit at all the developing countries then accountability should be a two-way requirement right from the international institutions that may be granting that aid. The Power Games in the WTO and its processes. (Nathan Ndoboli) The WTO is formally the most democratic of all institutions as it operates on a one-country-one-vote principle unlike the Bretton Woods Institutions that use consensus based on majority. However, behind the scenes the WTO is also filled with undemocratic processes that include the green rooms championed by the Quad (Canada, EU, Us, Japan). These are the fore-runners in bullying using economic and political muscle plus military power. Some of the methods used against developing countries Political pressure; arm-twisting of negotiators. These range from empty threats to direct life threats. In some instances the Capitals of the developing countries may be given false information that their negotiator does not have the countrys interests at hand. Political pressure on the Capital using preferential schemes e.g. AGOA, EPAS. If for instance a country said no to aid from the developed counterparts, then they may threaten that even the little that has been coming in will be withdrawn. Out-sitting/green rooms and the possession of big negotiating teams. The trick here is to schedule many meetings day and night to put pressure on small delegations that cannot be at each meeting. Green rooms date back from the GATT period. Invitations to these meetings are based on a countrys economic power. Green rooms are a real pressure cooker. Abrupt calling of conferences. A meeting may be rescheduled for another two days outside the original conference programme thereby throwing out some members given factors like financial constraints. The world is being re-aligned. The old Quad has brought in new players in the form of the bigger developing countries, i.e. India and Brazil. These have been included because they are upcoming economic powers able to contribute to the interests of the big powers. The result in most cases will be that developing countries will tend to go along with decisions agreed to by their two counterparts. Experience of Hong Kong In Hong Kong the pressure on developing countries was not comparable to previous Ministerial meetings, but all the same pressure was applied. The developing countries used the divisive factor to ensure that while some developing countries discussed say cotton, others were engrossed in discussing S&DT. The result was that when announcements were made of agreement by one group in one area, others engrossed in the other discussions had no time to challenge that. Way forward Join major trading powers cautiously developing countries need to get their act together Strengthen internal coherence G90, ACP, African Group so that they all stand as a grouping, thereby encouraging collective bargaining. Develop institutional capacity. Plenary Uganda needs a firm national position known even by the State house, Ministers, MPs so that when phone calls are made to the Capital, there are checks on backing down on what has been agreed nationally. Ego-massaging is also used to influence country positions. For instance a Minister is co-opted to become an advocate for the developed countries. The developed countries may lure him with juicy promises. Before developing countries talk of decolonization, the peoples minds need to be decolonized first. Brainwashing is still a big factor used by the developed countries. Reading behind the scenes at the WTO Meetings has a lot of truth to it. Developing countries need to always be vigilant of those events/issues that happen behind the scenes. Advocacy and lobbying by CSOs especially of the internal system, Parliament, etc should continue. The international community should also be made aware of the developing countries concerns through the pro-Northern civil society. These can use such information to further the lobby work on trade. Developing countries should begin considering a re-group since Brazil, India the bigger developing countries are steadily being co-opted into decisions by the developed countries. Implications of the outcomes on the Services negotiations for Uganda and other developing countries. (Ms. Rose Mwebaza) The big powers always do their work. On Services for example they approached India because with its firm interest here, India would be able to sell the text to other developing countries. Its not surprising that the European Union and the United States are interested in Services because they provide the bulk of their income at a tune of almost 70% of GDP. Agriculture is the reverse for them. They dont depend on agriculture, but its rather a strategic sector in terms of negotiations. The Services sector is the global future. In developed countries there are shortages in the semi-skilled labour category justifying their need for only temporary labour to fill that gap. If some of the labour here could be taken up there, it would ease on the pressure on the economy in terms of unemployment. Ugandas major position on Services to Hong Kong was the attainment of market access on Mode 4. However, that is not the level of skills needed in the developed countries. Even then, if access were granted Uganda is still faced with supply capacity constraints to fill the gap. In case of any market access around this area Uganda needs to regulate the Services sector to avoid brain drain. It is in these areas that developed countries are head-hunting. Its important to note that even at the national level there isnt enough man power. An example is the few doctors in Mulago, one of the national hospitals. The main reason developing countries opposed the Services text was that they were not at all ready to take on the benchmarking/plurilateral mode of negotiations. There is no national legislation in place, in Uganda for instance to take the negative factors say brain drain into consideration and thereby manage it. Uganda needs to build her capacity to analyze point-by-point what the people want, what the market offers and how it can be optimised just as the developed countries do. When developing countries ask for market access for their unskilled labour, little do they know that no social security cover is granted on it. The human rights/social issues are issues the country needs to take into account while making requests. The domestic laws need to also be reviewed e.g. how can one be denied dual citizenship while they remit so much in terms of foreign currency back to their country? She noted that the implications of the outcomes from the Services negotiations are compounded by a lot more thats happening on the ground. In Uganda today while many may be engrossed in global negotiations, there is a global review of the privatization of water. There are people and civil society organisations participating in this review. At the same time National Water and Sewerage Corporation is load shedding the water supply. This review shouldnt be taking place. Water is a right to all and not a good to profit from. The Government should rethink all these efforts of privatization of this sector. In Hong Kong it was reiterated that Members had the right to regulate the opening up of certain sectors. However, while this may be a good point, most developing countries have already been scrapped of this right. Plenary While formulating basic national policies Government needs to cautiously think through such policies like from the World Bank. National policies should be broadly based on needs assessments from the people. The growth in the Services sector should also be monitored in that while the telecommunications sector is growing in the number of mobile phone users, the growth is reflected in an increase in consumption/spending patterns and not an increase in agricultural production for example. The growth in the sector should be able to provide forward and backward linkages with other sectors. The country needs to regulate the type of services that foreigners may supply locally. For example theres no reason why foreigners should be waiting on people in bars or restaurants etc. This is a skill that the country can supply in full. While the countrys nationals abroad are regulated on how much they can send back home as remittances, the country has no arrangements in place to regulate corporate companies on how much may be taken out of the economy. These companies should have an arrangement where they give back to the communities in which they operate. The biggest damage under the Services agreement is actually being done under the bilateral offer and request. While negotiate developing countries lobby for a regulated opening up under the WTO, the pressure that they face at the national level to open up different sectors is appalling. This needs to be checked. What needs to be done? If CSOs are not ready to be political like in Kenya then it will always be hard to hold Government accountable. A bigger and firm voice is required of CSOs here. CSOs need to be more vigilant and pro-active. For example telephone companies recently connived to shift the increases in tax levied on them onto the consumers but there was no such advocacy around it from the CSOs. In the same instance its important to always build on lobby opportunities that come around. Say when the Minister of Finance, Dr. Suruma critiqued a number of economic policies that the country has been championing for some time without clear benefits back to the people and the economy, CSOs did not take this up. The school curriculum should be tailored to meet the market demands. Its important for the education sector to be market-needs-based. Institutions providing capacity building on trade issues need to link issues with whats on the ground. For example how do the WTO rules affect a small producer? CSOs need to repackage information to suite the different stakeholders. Ugandas development concerns in the NAMA and Agricultural negotiations. (Emmanuel Mutahunga) Prior to the formation of the WTO, was the Uruguay Round (1986-1994). In this Round most developing country Members of the WTO did not sufficiently participate in it. There was a general feeling that the concerns of most developing countries were not adequately covered in the Uruguay Round. With this concern there was an outcry for a development Round, hence the launch of the Doha Development Round. The negotiating mandates for both Agriculture and NAMA are contained in the Doha Declarations. Agriculture is contained in paragraphs 13 & 14 of the Doha Declarations. NAMA is contained in paragraph 16 of the Declarations. In Cancun, negotiations were not moving in right direction nor at the right pace. Several deadlines had been missed before that. The Conference in Cancun did not help much in putting the negotiations back on track and in the end there was a stalemate. It was not until August 2004 that the General Council in Geneva adopted the July Framework Package with the view of putting the negotiations back on track. Agriculture and NAMA are covered in Annex A and B respectively. He noted that while establishing modalities in Agriculture the WTO built on the long term objective of the Agreement on Agriculture to establish a fair and market-oriented trading system through a programme of fundamental reform. Also the level of ambition set by the Doha mandate will continue to be the basis for the negotiations on Agriculture. It will be important also to incorporate in the negotiation of all the modalities operationally effective and meaningful provisions for S&DT for developing country members. Agriculture has three pillars i.e. domestic support, export competition, and market access. Under Domestic Support, the overall reduction in trade-distorting domestic subsidies will reduced according to the Tiered Formula. Under this formula Members with higher levels of trade-distorting domestic support will make greater overall reductions in order to achieve a harmonising result. Under Export Subsidies, after protracted negotiations, the EU finally agreed to eliminate export subsidies by the end of 2013. Other Members had suggested an end date of 2010. The LDC Group had asked for bound duty- and quota-free market access to rich countries' markets for all LDC products and countries. On product coverage, countries having difficulties providing such market access shall provide access for 97% of products. Under NAMA, it was agreed that the Swiss formula, with coefficients, would be used to cut industrial tariffs. It was also agreed that applied rates would be used as the basis for treating unbound tariffs. He cautioned that the use of words and statements like those below in these negotiations should carefully be watched and followed up to ensure that developing countries receive full gains from the commitments made. ..there will be substantial reductions in domestic subsidies. Tiered approach. Food aid disciplining that doesnt distort markets Sensitive products Quota and duty free market access: what does the 97% developing countries received in Hong Kong have to offer? It may offer too much lee-way to the developed countries since the 3% is big enough to protect those sensitive products that are of export interest to developing countries especially LDCs. Uganda and other developing countries need to start interpreting the language in all these texts to their advantage. Are other Trade Related Issues still of importance? (Jane Nalunga) These are issues that have not received due attention, and are likely to be put in the back seat in Geneva when negotiations resume. They are however of great importance to developing countries. They include: Trade Facilitation. The negotiations under trade facilitation are about further expediting the movement, release and clearance of goods, including goods in transit. WTO Rules; anti-dumping, subsidies and Regional Trading Arrangements (RTAs). Developing countries especially the ACP are interested in the RTA Rules that will support their development. These Rules should be differential and more favourable to ACP countries Trade and Environment She noted that there has been misuse of some of these rules especially by the developed countries. Anti-dumping measures for instance have always been used as a major market entry barrier to developed country markets for developing countries especially in those areas where they are competitive. In such cases of dumping, the importing country will impose anti-dumping duties while investigations are being carried out. Unfortunately this may take up to a year, and in most cases no compensation is given to the injured party from this process. The US and the EU who are among the biggest abusers are reluctant to address this issue. Uganda and other developing countries need to put up domestic regulations to handle such situations. However, on the other hand anti-dumping measures are not being used by most developing countries. They are complex and that is why they need to be investigated. They may however, be useful to developing countries to protect their infant industries. The negotiating mandate under RTAs was to clarify and improve disciplines and procedures under the existing WTO provisions applying to regional agreements while taking into account their development aspects. She noted that the Africa Caribbean Pacific countries to which also Uganda is part are negotiating the Economic Partnership Agreements with the European Union. Clarification of the RTA rules is of importance to developing countries so as to support their development. Initially, the rules on RTAs were formulated to apply to those arrangements between developed countries. To date, these have to be carefully looked at so as to take into account the different levels of development. These rules should be differential and more favourable to the ACP countries. She emphasised the need to incorporate S&D Treatment in the rules to take into account the development concerns of developing countries. In Hong Kong it was agreed that the Negotiating Group on Rules intensifies negotiations so as to arrive at appropriate outcomes by end of 2006. She noted however that there was no time since the EPA negotiations are supposed to be concluded by 1 January 2008. Trade Facilitation Includes Article V (freedom of transit), VIII (fees and formalities) and X (publication and administration of trade regulations) Under trade facilitation, she noted that developing countries have a number of concerns regarding financial, legislative and administrative cost implications of the proposed measures under the agreement including infrastructure investments. The impact on collection of customs revenue is expected to be negative on the developing countries economies. Some proposals in the agreement even go beyond the negotiating mandate to include those relating to corruption, integrity of customs officials. Trade and environment: Under this theres need to put all trade related issues in the context of environment back on the negotiating agenda. In the negotiations and in the defining of environmental goods and drawing lists, developing countries must ensure that products that are of interest to them are included on the list for example goods based on indigenous innovations. Plenary The definition by developing countries of environmental goods should be advocated for. Capital goods shouldnt define environmental goods. The developing countries proposals on Trade facilitation (for example the need to cautiously negotiate this agreement so that developing countries may retain policy space for their development purposes), should be maintained and fronted. Its important for Uganda and other developing countries to critically look at their offensive proposals on trade facilitation for articulation of the same in the negotiations. The developing countries negotiators need to push for the expeditious resolving of the contradictions between Intellectual property and the Convention on Biological Diversity under the TRIPS agreement. Developing countries need to be mindful that while negotiations on the trade related areas may seem to be relegated there may be negotiations going on at the sidelines. Uganda and other developing countries should explore the possibility of using Anti-dumping measures, as they are easier to use than Countervailing measures. Countervailing measures are usually not used because you have to prove injury to say your industry. Uganda should develop her own national regulatory framework to handle issues of trade facilitation discrepancies. A workshop was proposed to specifically target organizing national issues and interests in trade before pushing for a number of things on the international trading scene. Major emerging issues and way forward. This is a summary of the key issues and actions for way forward drawn from the group discussions. Issues Defining national interests in the different sectors. Both defensive and offensive interests should be considered. Analysis of the negotiations outcomes/implications in relation to national interests. Clarification on the Regional Trading Arrangements especially in relation to the rich or the developed word i.e. what form should they take when it comes to LDC and developed countries? The power relations should be contextualized. Environment and trade concerns. The rules or laws Supply side constraints: There is no sufficient information on this in order to understand how to address them What needs to be done? There is need for simplified analysis of trade research and publications (related to what is happening in the negotiations and national policy actions). Thus Action-Oriented/Applied Research is needed and research outputs could include fact sheets in a simplified language which relates to day-to-day issues or life style e.g. similar to presentation by Rose Mwebaza on services. The research should be based on a cost and benefit analysis. Interest both the print and electronic media in the trade negotiations debate. Specific emphasis/target should be directed to the editors, and columnists. Develop a comprehensive information/media strategy. This should ensure their constant engagement. Disseminate information through the media like press releases, supplement. This will help the media not to make factual errors There is less understanding on the implications of trade agreement and outcomes of trade negotiations to various actors/stakeholders. There is therefore a need to increase the trade debate and Public Dialogues targeting Universities (students), key decision makers e.g. district officials, exporters, importers, MFPED, NPA, MAAIF/NARO, MPs, Manufacturers, and KASITA. Some of these could also be encouraged to be members of the ITTC or follow up issues from decisions of ITTC There is need for sensitization of farmers on the consequences of trade negotiations on their livelihoods. This will be first approach to making trade decisions politically risky as a process of ensuring trade works for the poor and development. Target groups Relevant Ministries especially Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development, Ministry of Tourism, Trade and Industry, Academic and Higher Institutions of learning, Farmers, CSOs, The private sector. Closing remarks: (Ambassador Nathan Irumba) He appreciated the full participation of the workshop participants and hoped that the 2 days were enriching for all. He challenged all the participants to actively take up the trade debate and the actions agreed to in the workshop. SEATINI highly believes in networking with the purpose of creating awareness on the implications of negotiated agreements to all stakeholders. He challenged the participants to ensure that the recommendations given guide their work and activities on trade. Reiterating SEATINIs mission which is to strengthen Africa in world trade, he appreciated that the workshop went a long way in ensuring that capacity around trade negotiations was built.     PAGE  PAGE 2  35QRST^_a|óxlxcxUxxJh{h uOJQJh{h{5H*OJQJh{5OJQJh{h u5OJQJh{h{5OJQJh{h{5CJOJQJaJh{5CJOJQJaJ"h{h{5CJ H*OJQJaJ h{h{5CJ OJQJaJ h{h{5CJ OJQJaJ h{5CJ OJQJaJ h{h u5CJ OJQJaJ h uOJQJhOJQJ QRST_`a~$a$gd{$a$gde$I  ! " # $ % & ' ( $a$gde       * + _  ' . 0 : J L M Q 89:[] ǻ҆{҆{o{gh6OJQJhHh6H*OJQJhHh6OJQJhHhOJQJhHh~E85OJQJhHhwn5OJQJh{5OJQJhJ5OJQJhHh65OJQJhHh# OJQJhHhwnOJQJhHhojH*OJQJhHhoj5OJQJhHhojOJQJ'( ) * + , - . / 0 L M :; !YZ[\]^_`ab$a$gd|r $ & Fa$gde$a$gdebcdefghijklmnopHIT$%$%hi$a$gde$a$gd|r p-09JV^jtuGHI  [fnoֵ˟ˉ~˪։ˉsssshshshhHh?pOJQJhHh#8WOJQJhHh+OJQJhHh(SOJQJhHhqOJQJhHh4VTOJQJhHh.OJQJhHh-OJQJhHhTjOJQJhHh6OJQJhHhOJQJh|rhOJQJhHh65OJQJh|rOJQJ("#$%3=AKV|"#$%2Zw{~(Sghij{ԾԳԳԳԳԳԳԳԨhHhkOJQJhHhpOJQJhHhOJQJhHh'mpOJQJhHhp`OJQJhHhmvOJQJhHhOJQJhHhqOJQJhHh?pOJQJhHh#8WOJQJ91z   %@Eco!"ǻǦuguZuZhHhjzOJQJ^JhHh,6OJQJ^JhHh,OJQJ^JhHh.o{OJQJ^JhHh.o{OJQJhHh.o{6OJQJhHh5OJQJhs5OJQJhHhjz5OJQJhHh.o{5OJQJhHh 9OJQJhHh'mpH*OJQJhHh'mpOJQJhHhOJQJ# $7$8$H$a$gde$a$gde"/ORSLM{| Cab 5Mglw·ͷͷͷhHh@|OJQJhHh-L"OJQJhHhpOJQJhHhjzOJQJhHh_>5OJQJhHh_>OJQJhHhOJQJhHh 9OJQJhHh,6OJQJ^JhHhjzOJQJ^JhHh,OJQJ^J2;<?V@SXeqx     ' + / F \ t ɽԦԛԛyyyhHhOJQJhHh+OJQJhHh5OJQJhHhV'MOJQJhHhaV OJQJhHhSX5OJQJhHh-L"5OJQJhHh_>OJQJhHhSXOJQJhHhpOJQJhHh@|OJQJhHh-L"OJQJ/   4!5!!!""h#i#!$"$ % %Q&R&\&]&''/(0())$a$gdet | 2!5!;!I!w!|!!!!!!!!!!!!!!""""""""""""""""" #ԾԵ߈ԈԈ}}}}hHhB&OJQJhHhbk OJQJhHh%5OJQJhM_h%OJQJhM_hM_OJQJhM_5OJQJhHhSXOJQJhHhaV OJQJhHh%OJQJhHh+OJQJhHh,^OJQJhHhOJQJ1 #(#3#7#?#@#I#M#\#f#g#h#i#n#r#######$$ $!$F$K$k$$$$$$$$$ % %+%9%%%%%%&&&F&P&Q&R&\&]&p&v&&&&&&&ԾɾhHh2OJQJhHhSE5OJQJhHh73DOJQJhHhSEOJQJhHh,OJQJhHhaV OJQJhHh%OJQJhHhB&OJQJhHhbk OJQJ=&&&&&'*'L'u''''''''''''(((!(0(5(A(d((((()))*)+),)b)m)x))))) * * **0*1*2*I*ɽԵɪhHhH5OJQJh[K5OJQJhH5OJQJhHhHOJQJhHOJQJhHh[K5OJQJhHh[KOJQJhHheOJQJhHhaV OJQJhHh2OJQJhHhSEOJQJ4)*)+) * **1*2*++,,////0000112 3 3 3 $ & Fa$gdN= $ & Fa$gdegdH$a$gdeI*x**********+'+7+^+u+~++++++++++/,6,E,,,,,,,,-2-;-@---------. . . ..$.I.Q.].x.|..ǿҴҖҖhHhY}OJQJhHhaV OJQJh<OJQJhHhCb,OJQJhsOJQJhHhMOJQJh$OJQJh/OJQJhHh/OJQJhHh[KOJQJhOJQJ;......////6/T/~////////0000206080>0?0C0M0r0000000011 1111f2222222 3 33÷夙ڙhN=5OJQJhHhIOJQJhN=OJQJhHh+OJQJhHhY}5OJQJhHh+5OJQJhHh[KOJQJhHhaV OJQJh/OJQJhHhY}OJQJh$OJQJ63#3$3%363^3e3h3i3q33%4&4q5r566677b8o88888W9X9B:C:#;<d======ƾƶƣ{sks{k_hz'hz'5OJQJhz'OJQJhcOJQJh"~|OJQJhOJQJhAOJQJht0OJQJhOJQJh{H,OJQJhN=h%AOJQJh%AOJQJhOJQJhN=OJQJh(OJQJhN=hN=OJQJhN=5OJQJhO 5OJQJhHhO 5OJQJ% 3$3%3r5s5#6$6U6Z6x666667788X9B:C:Z:[:#;$;<< $ & Fa$gd $ & Fa$gd%A$a$gde<====>@@@@@AAAABB C CDEbF)G*G $ & F a$gde $ & Fa$gde $ & Fa$gde $ & Fa$gdz'$a$gde==*?4??@@@@@@@ A AAAA!A$A'A0A4AKA}AAAAAAAAABWBdBBBBBB˿茔yyynhHhkOJQJh;0OJQJhHhYOJQJh+dOJQJhHhOJQJhvh+dOJQJh+d5OJQJhAZhAZ5OJQJhAZh5OJQJhAZ5OJQJh|r5OJQJhHhC,OJQJhAZOJQJhz'OJQJhAOJQJ'BBB C C CCCKCuCCCCCCCDD DD/DODDDDDDDEE0EGEMEREWE\EjEEEEEEEEFF)F*FgFFFFFFFGG*GLGMGaGdGGGGH&HǼǼǼǼǼǼǼǼǼDZDZDZhSbOJQJhHhhOJQJhHh'1SOJQJhvOJQJhHh[mOJQJhHhvOJQJh31#OJQJh;0OJQJhHh31#OJQJB&H1H7Hg5OJQJh~5OJQJhHh~5OJQJhHh>gOJQJh~OJQJh>gOJQJhHh[mOJQJh&|OJQJhHhh5OJQJhSb5OJQJhSbOJQJhHhhOJQJ/*GHHHHHHJJJJ KKKKKKLVMMNOPP $^a$gdCy $ & F a$gde $ & F a$gde$a$gde K KKKrKKKKKKKKKL LL*LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLMM6M;M@MEMKMRMTMUMVMMMMMMMM#N,NFNNNN¶׫׫׫׫ףכˣhHhi45OJQJh3T*OJQJh|yOJQJhHhi4OJQJhHh>g5OJQJh xR5OJQJhHh xR5OJQJh>gOJQJhHh xROJQJhHh[mOJQJhHh~OJQJ7NNNNNN OOOOOOOP"PPPPPPPQQQQ.Q5QAQEQGQOQRQWQQQQQQQRRR;R>RXRYRkRRRRRRRRRRR·«☣☐hGOJQJhHh.SOJQJh#OJQJhHh5OJQJhCyhOJQJhCyhCyOJQJhCy5OJQJhCyhCy5OJQJhHhOJQJhHhi4OJQJhCyOJQJ8PQQRR'T(T>U?UVVWWtXuXZZZZv\w\N]O]Y]$a$gd1 $ & Fa$gde $h^ha$gd8$a$gd8$a$gde$a$gdCyR SSSSSST T%T(T6T?T@TTTTTTT0U1UcBcJcicocccccddDdEdRdUdiddddǼϊϊϊϊϊϊϊϊϊhW@,OJQJhHhC6OJQJh0A6OJQJhHh0A6OJQJhC6OJQJhHhCOJQJh-OJQJhHh0AOJQJhCOJQJhHhc{OJQJh/'bOJQJhHh-OJQJ6ddeXebeeeeeeff'f_fffrfsfffffffg\g]g^g`ggggggghiiii2jmjkk l lnǾǧǧǟh %DOJQJh3dOJQJhBHOJQJh"OJQJh QOJQJhHh\4?OJQJhh5OJQJhJ5OJQJhOJQJhHh{>OJQJhRjOJQJhHhw#OJQJhHh0AOJQJhW@,OJQJ-3j l lhmimnnunvnooMpNpNqOqrrrr8sIs|sstt$a$gdV $ & Fa$gdegd}$a$gd=0gd|$a$gden5nsntnunvnnnoooppKpNppppNqOqrrrrQrbrrrrr6s7sͺͺů{p{h`hUQ``h}h}h 9OJQJhV OJQJh 9OJQJh}h|OJQJh}h}OJQJh 6|h}OJQJh=0h=0OJQJh=0OJQJh=0h|OJQJh=0h 6|OJQJh|h|OJQJh 6|OJQJh|OJQJh}OJQJhxCOJQJh\4?OJQJh %DOJQJhHh]OJQJ7s8sGssss ttttttuu&u2uguuuvuwuuHvIv[v]vmvvvvvvvv3w:wIQWc"15<@ANOYZ|}݇'vĈňӈ(BGP7?FI^noqxʾh|rOJQJh^h^OJQJh^OJQJhCVhvr5OJQJh^5OJQJhCVh5c5OJQJhCVOJQJhpaOJQJhHh5cOJQJh NOJQJhHhY7OJQJhHqOJQJ8GHIpqԊՊ݊ފSƌ67NO  & F%gda & F%gdMK & F%gdogdMK & F gdMK & F gda & F gd3gd3$a$gdCV $h^ha$gd^ъҊԊՊ݊ފ0PyȋɋЋыۋ,-5C͌4567ûûûèàØzqha5OJQJh:haOJQJhohaOJQJhaOJQJh3OJQJhoOJQJh3hoOJQJh:OJQJhMKOJQJh3h3OJQJh|rh35OJQJhCVOJQJh^hCVOJQJh^OJQJh^h^OJQJ(7NOʎΎ $6X`֏ Jfg’Ēߒabqr{ƓŽ뽲벽͡~hh35OJQJhoho6OJQJhahoOJQJ hohoB*OJQJhphh3h3OJQJhOJQJhoOJQJhohaOJQJhaOJQJhohoOJQJhMKOJQJhMKhMK5OJQJ1gabqr!+2GHIJvw_`bc !"#$&$a$gde & F&gdgd3 & F%gdaƓǓ "*+./125DEIJZ\gntuvwz{]`ٕƽƢϢϢϢϢϚϒϒχh,Oh,OOJQJh,OOJQJh}.OJQJhCVOJQJhGLOJQJhCVhGLOJQJhGL5OJQJhCV5OJQJhHhvrOJQJh3h:OJQJh:OJQJhOJQJh3h3OJQJ1 !0BCLV_ao !"#$%'(*+-.01789;<BCDĸح{{w{lhG0JmHnHuh: h:0Jjh:0JUh@lyjh@lyUhHh\4?OJQJhHh]OJQJhHh5cOJQJhHhvr5OJQJh,Ohvr5OJQJh8COJQJhHhvrOJQJh,OOJQJh,Oh,OOJQJh,O5OJQJ*&')*,-/09:;FGHIJ$a$gdeh]hgd8R &`#$gd8RDEFHIJhHh\4?OJQJh@lyh: h:0Jjh:0JU5 01h:p8R/ =!"#$% @@@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA@D Default Paragraph FontRiR  Table Normal4 l4a (k(No List4 @4 8RFooter  !.)@. 8R Page NumberJ QRST_`a~ !"#$%&'()*+,-./0LM:; !YZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopH I T $ % $ % hi 45hi!"  QR\]/ 0 !!*!+! " ""1"2"##$$''''(((())* + + +$+%+r-s-#.$.U.Z.x.....//00X1B2C2Z2[2#3$34455556888889999:: ; ;<=b>)?*?@@@@@@BBBB CCCCCCDVEEFGHHIIJJ'L(L>M?MNNOOtPuPRRRRvTwTNUOUYUZU)VWXY[[5[6[[]s^]_^___`___RaSa2b3b d dheieffufvfggMhNhNiOijjjj8kIk|kkll2m3mvmwmHnInno p p2q3qrrssuuvvqwrwvxwxxx yyypzqz{{{{}|~||||}~()GHIpqԂՂ݂ނSƄ67NO gabqr!+2GHIJvw_`bc !"#$'*-09:;FGK0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0000000000 0 0 0 0 000000 0 000000000000 0 0 000000000000 0 0 0 000000000000 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000000 000000 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 00000000 0 0 00000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000 0 0 0 0 0000% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0000& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0000000000000000I00I00I00I00I000I00I00@0@0I00  $$$' "t #&I*.3=B&H KNRX ]e`dn7sx7ƓDJLPSTUWXZ[\^_`cdeghjklnoqrtvwyz|}( b) 3<*GPY]3jtvG&JMOQRVY]abfimpsux{~IN  '!!Ɛ ݓ ̳  $ d    䶜 $ t  <4, tכ j ?丒  dU Oձ4  |  tǜ   $$  T     ȱ )+  윖  , $ǘ  ֱL d  Dd  |=–$ Ö Ė Ɲ Ŗ ${Ɩ  ǖtR Ȗ  ɖ  ʖt ˖ ̖ ͖  Ζtx ϖ  Ж і Җ D/ Ӗ, Ԗ̚ Ֆ ̚ ֖|gז l ؖ t- ٖ| ږ } ۖ Ĩܖڧ ݖ+ ޖ ߖ  d<  l   ˑ  Di T  t \l tf \: a      T  ܬ D  ӗ ѓ  쭛 ?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~?f f o o '' t~~ffio#&#&#%%%%%&#&#&&&--../00577b:q:q:???@@CCFFH"H"HHHWIIIJJ.LXLLLsMsMdOdOOORRTi[i[f_f_?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~hx*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity0http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags_*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-regionhttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/g*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsdate/http://www.5iantlavalampft-com:office:smarttagsV*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplacehttp://www.5iantlavalamp.com/ b>@@BBCCCCEVEOUXU[[a2b8kIkwxx{{|||}Ղނdbr!25J#$$&&'')*,-/0HK#$$&&'')*,-/0HK)qz! Nz *.[Rkd]z!1f&:1g! T$z!$NKM( vU(f&x"( 3I2 JR(6PP&~9nf;;x~@>!Cz!0E JEI24E̋.YJ GXA($Iw^~4I yK(N20$+Q*PxMSx~|ZMz0Z>D\ .VM\[_<)^6nweV|V tx"(Nz ]!Cd`z4IT$0Er}l24E q:1g!3I2))                                                                                                                                                                                    %\                                                                                         A-Vs%Dwn}aV m o # V bk O eP .,Oh.uM{F!H,>y[Ky-L"31#^$B&z'?(w)3T*5:+W@,{H,H,Cb,&-}./t01Y78~E8}9>{>\4?%A0A8CxC %D73DSEBHJV'M N+ Q Q8R xR(S'1S4VT&U$eU#8WSXAZ]p`aapa/'bSb5c3d+dpeggojRjTj[mop?p'mpHqqNrvr|rmvw {wCyIy@ly*{.o{|&| 6|`|"~|Y}+/Bwz u^Mq"M_c*lVu`EOJI?2N=vDi4~Ejz,^:JmGLc{.S+8kC@|" 9>kFpm.MKC,+,$/Yqn#ew#R3|y@H[<G>g1;0-[- 9tj(vG_>/U =0?`;![}CV6bK @/J@Unknown G: Times New Roman5Symbol3& : ArialK@Palatino LinotypeS PalatinoBook AntiquaA& Arial NarrowSMonotype SortsSymbol?5 z Courier New;Wingdings"1hcɦcɦ]yI]yI!4dێێ2QHX ?F!2Day ISEATINISEATINI)                           ! " # $ % & ' ( Oh+'0l  ( 4 @LT\dDay ISEATININormalSEATINI2Microsoft Office Word@F#@f\@f\]y՜.+,0 hp  SEATINIIێ Day I Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry F1TableSWordDocument7SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q