1996 Meeting of APEC Ministers Responsible for Trade

We met here in Christchurch, New Zealand because of the importance APEC Leaders attach both to fulfilment of APEC goals through implementation of the Osaka Action Agenda and to APEC's contribution to the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

The overall theme of our meeting was open regionalism in support of the multilateral trading system. From its inception APEC has emphasised the importance of the open, rules-based and non-discriminatory multilateral trading system. We recognise the central role of the WTO and agree on the importance of the Singapore WTO Ministerial Meeting in advancing the liberalisation of trade and ensuring that the multilateral trading system continues to develop in response to the evolution of the world economy. This follows our determination, expressed at Marrakesh, to build upon the success of the Uruguay Round through the participation of our economies in the world trading system, based upon open, market-oriented policies and the commitments set out in the Uruguay Round Agreements and Decisions.

In respect of the WTO, we set ourselves the question of how APEC could contribute to the success of the Singapore Ministerial Conference. We recognise the significance of holding the first WTO Ministerial Council Meeting in an APEC member economy, Singapore. We are determined to contribute fully to its success, both through the approaches we have decided on here in Christchurch and by building on them in our preparations in Manila for the APEC Leaders Meeting in Subic Bay in November.

In respect of our APEC goals, we recalled that the Bogor Declaration sets an ambitious goal for the achievement of free and open trade and investment in the Asia Pacific region no later than 2010 for industralised and 2020 for developing economies. In implementing the Osaka Action Agenda, through their Individual Action Plans and through APEC Collective Actions, each member of APEC is working towards this goal and thereby contributing towards a progressively more open world trading environment.
Implementation of the Uruguay Round

We recalled that APEC members have committed themselves in the Osaka Action Agenda to the full and effective implementation of their respective Uruguay Round commitments. We agreed that full and timely implementation of the commitments contained in the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation, by all members that had accepted them, was essential. To this end we undertook to ensure that we were fully up to date with our implementation commitments by the time of the Singapore Ministerial Conference. We were pleased to have positive reports on the programme of Uruguay Round implementation seminars designed to improve APEC members' understanding of their obligations, identify operational difficulties, and undertake cooperative technical assistance to overcome them. We decided to continue them in the coming months. We recognised the need for this type of assistance to be available, in a coordinated manner, to the broader WTO membership. In our discussions we identified a number of problems associated with implementation which we will wish to have addressed by appropriate mechanisms in Geneva.
Current Work in WTO

We discussed the on-going work in the WTO on trade in services. We expressed disappointment that only one of the four areas in which Uruguay Round negotiations on services were extended - Movement of Natural Persons - had been completed. We expressed our determination to make definitive progress in the remaining areas, Financial Services, Basic Telecommunications Services and, in due course, Maritime Transport Services, when negotiations resume in accordance with respective decisions. We looked to the Singapore Ministerial Conference to reaffirm our commitment to concluding these negotiations on the basis of mutually advantageous commitments in accordance with the agreed timetables. Each of us agreed to examine what further contribution we could make in each area. We noted the role of our Individual Action Plans in indicating liberalisation initiatives.

We remain convinced of the importance of ensuring that trade and environment policies are mutually supportive of sustainable development and therefore agreed that momentum must be maintained in the current work programme of the WTO Committee on Trade and Environment. In order to help reduce the uncertainty and lack of coherence which surrounds rule making in this area we resolved to work towards a balanced report from the Committee including specific recommendations to the Singapore Ministerial Conference.
WTO Work Programme

We agreed our key task at the Singapore Ministerial Conference would be to establish a work programme for future liberalisation in the WTO. We consider the built-in agenda resulting from the Uruguay Round agreements is central to this. We noted that the built-in agenda covers future negotiations or reviews in a wide range of areas including agriculture, services, textiles and clothing, rules of origin, intellectual property, investment and competition policy. We concluded that the built-in agenda constitutes a substantive and balanced work programme that should take the global trading system forward on a trade liberalising path.

We recognised that in some cases, such as non-preferential rules of origin and government procurement in services, work on the built-in agenda has already begun while in other areas, detailed preparations will be necessary. We therefore emphasised the importance of all members of the WTO agreeing at Singapore to respect the dates contained in the built-in agenda and to utilise existing institutional machinery to begin further work - the process of analysis and information exchange which would allow members to understand the issues involved and to identify their interests in respect of them before undertaking the mandated negotiations and reviews. In some cases it was recognised that consideration would need to be given prior to the Singapore Ministerial Conference to the means by which these tasks might best be carried out in the WTO.

10 . We also considered further liberalisation initiatives that might be undertaken beyond the built-in agenda. We agreed that consideration should be given to further work on improvement of market access for industrial products. We discussed the possibility of undertaking more limited sectoral initiatives, perhaps in the shorter term. In this context we listened with interest to an explanation of the proposal for an Information Technology Agreement, which would contribute to APEC liberalisation objectives, and determined that we would consider this further in the lead up to the Singapore Ministerial Conference. Building on the work we have done in APEC to date and the work which is underway in the WTO in the area of services, we also agreed to examine the possibility of a broader discussion in the WTO on transparency, openness and due process in government procurement.

We recognised that a number of other issues for possible discussion have been raised in papers submitted by our delegations in Geneva#. We noted that these papers will be examined in Geneva in the coming months with a view to identifying consensus on how each of these issues should be looked at in the multilateral context.

We were encouraged by the complementarity of our efforts to further liberalise trade within APEC and in the WTO. APEC's voluntary framework and the WTO's legal one can mutually reinforce liberalisation and the process of analysis and consensus building in one forum can contribute to progressing negotiations in the other.
Osaka Action Agenda

We reviewed the state of implementation of the Osaka Action Agenda in respect of preparation of Individual Action Plans and reporting of collective actions. We received a report and recommendations on these matters from the Chair of the Senior Officials' Meeting (SOM).

We are encouraged that each APEC member tabled an initial draft of its Individual Action Plan at the Cebu Senior Officials Meeting in May and that a number of members have since submitted revisions of their plans. We noted the importance of the Individual Action Plan process to the private sector. We are committed to continue improvement of and consultation on plans prior to the assessment by the APEC Joint Ministerial Meeting in Manila in November. In particular we call for greater emphasis on transparency, comparability, and dynamism in revised plans. In this regard we found the SOM Chair's recommendations very relevant and invited our officials to give them immediate consideration.

We noted that APEC members are also engaging in information exchange, dialogue and collective actions across many areas that either form part of the WTO's agenda or have relevance to it. This process has value in itself and should also contribute to building confidence among APEC members in addressing these areas in the global context. We believe that the APEC Action Plan process demonstrates a unique and dynamic approach to regional liberalisation consistent with GATT/WTO principles. We expect this to contribute to sustaining momentum for further liberalisation at the global level.
The Future of the Multilateral Trading System

We are conscious of the outstanding applications for membership of the WTO, two of which are from APEC members. We expressed our support for achieving universality of WTO membership consistent with observance of the rules of the multilateral trading system and based on effective market access commitments.

We consider that it is now especially important that regional and multilateral approaches to trade and investment liberalisation support and reinforce each other. We recognise that economic growth and progress in today's interdependent world is inevitably bound up with the process of globalisation; a process which offers both opportunities and challenges to all our economies and to the multilateral trading system. We are convinced that to respond to these challenges and opportunities fully for the benefit of all our peoples and to avoid fragmentation of the international trading system we need to ensure convergence between regional and multilateral liberalisation initiatives.

We look to the Singapore Ministerial conference as providing an opportunity for WTO members to consider the objectives of the Organisation as it proceeds with its work programme, and to define them more clearly and more boldly. By undertaking this task, we could impart a sense of direction for trade and investment liberalisation within the WTO, consider the modalities by which it might be achieved and indicate the sense of urgency which we attach to their attainment.