The mid-term review meeting was conceived as a result of the issues resulting from the annual monitoring meetings held during January and February 2006. In addition, during the meeting held by UNCTAD and SECO on 24 March 2006, seven topics were discussed as regards the following: (1) Comments to the Annual Plans of Action (POAs) 2006 done by SECO; (2) Situation in Bolivia and strategy to follow; (3) Global Annual Report (GAR) and lessons from the Annual Meeting in Managua and La Paz; (4) Improvement of the impact of the sectoral studies; (5) Establishing of academic programmes in Universities; (6) Fostering the presence of COMPAL in Latin America; and (7) Budget revision. Much of these topics were put into action during the first half of 2006 and the need to review them at the middle of the year was suggested by COMCO and other stakeholders. Finally, after consultations with the beneficiaries, the meeting took place in San Salvador on the occasion of the "Competition week" organized by the Salvadorian Competition Authority.
- Main Issues raised during the meeting
The one-day meeting was divided into two sessions in accordance with the agenda attached to this report. (see annex 1 available in Spanish version) The first session was devoted to the countries that do not have competition law (Nicaragua and Bolivia, although Bolivia was not present). In the case of Nicaragua, the status of the following projects was presented and discussed:
1. The national competition law was forecasted to be adopted in mid August. (N.1.1.2)
2. The internships in the Mexican Competition Agency have been very useful. (N.1.2.1)
3. The plan to launch an academic course in the university (UAM) in august 2006. (N.1.1.4)
4. The activities with schools are partially complete and the need to replace the national consultant on this project. (N.2.1)
5. The activity to create consumer protection centres in Universities has been completed. (N.2.2)
6. Consumer surveys in 2 markets have been launched (credit card and electronic devices). Two more surveys are expected to start. (N.2.3)
The second session reviewed the situation of those beneficiary countries that have competition law (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Peru, although Peru was not present). In the case of Costa Rica, the following projects were discussed.
1. The presentation of the diagnosis by Gesner Oliveira Edgar Odio, scheduled for August 2006. (CR:1.5.2)
2. The academic courses in universities.
3. The difficulties in sending an intern from COPROCOM to COMCO due to language constraints.
4. CR.2.5. The report will be finalized in august
5. CR: 2.8 The activity has not been initialized yet.
For El Salvador, the following issues were discussed:
1. Competition issues: The status on the study on transport and medicine and their date of dissemination. Emphasis was placed on the numerous difficulties faced in the study on transport (ES.1.1.1).
2. Consumer protection issues: Commented consumer protection law (ES. 2.3.3)
An important point of contention during these sessions was the creation of an advisory team. It was suggested that it would be judicious to establish an advisory team, consisting of experienced technical experts, to revise the sector studies. It was argued that this advisory team would ensure a better usage of the information provided by the sectoral studies. Nicaragua and Costa Rica endorsed the proposal and El Salvador suggested a reconsideration of the proposal in view that it may turn out to increase unnecessary bureaucracy. Instead, they suggested that it would be a better idea to hire more experienced international consultants instead of national ones. The latter has its drawbacks as hiring individual consultants will not be as useful to all countries and the COMPAL Programme as to have an advisory team for all.
- Measures to improve the Programme in the second-half of 2006
During the meeting several measures were proposed:
1. To request the countries to identify the activities that they foresee generating the biggest impact in the next 6 months.
2. To identify, where appropriate, the activities whose application and details might generate difficulties. In these cases, UNCTAD should dedicate efforts to assisting these countries in these activities.
3. To improve the coordination between consultants and national coordinators with UNCTAD support
4. To pursue a closer level of coordination between national coordinators and UNCTAD, at the level of the Program Management Committee.
5. To organize virtual meetings between the countries, COMCO and SECO. These virtual meetings would occur over the life of the COMPAL program.
6. To support the strengthening of the formation of professors in the field of competition and consumer protection.
7. To advance jointly with the national coordinators in the decision to establish tailor-made mechanisms for the creation and implementation of an advisory board of technical experts.