In May 1963, ministers agreed on three negotiating objectives: the assertion that Article 24 could be used in this way was criticized as unrealistic by Mark Carney, Liam Fox and others, as paragraph 5c of the treaty had to require agreement between the parties so that paragraph 5 ter was not an agreement in the event of a „non-agreement“. In addition, critics of the GATT 24 approach point out that services would not fall under such regulation. [28] [29] Transparency: GATS members are required, among other things, to publish all measures of general application and to set up national investigative bodies to respond to requests for information from other members. However, this part of the result was not authorized by Congress and the U.S. selling price was not abolished until Congress passed the results of the Tokyo Round. The results in agriculture as a whole have been poor. The most notable achievement was the agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding on the basic elements for the arrangement of global subsidies, which was eventually incorporated into a new international agreement on cereals. This statement served as the basis for the so-called „Malthouse Compromise“ between conservative parties on how to replace the withdrawal agreement. [26] However, this plan was rejected by Parliament. [27] The assertion that Article 24 could be used was also adopted by Boris Johnson during his 2019 campaign as leader of the Conservative Party. Following the UK`s vote to leave the European Union, proponents of leaving the European Union proposed that Article 24, paragraph 5B of the treaty could be used to maintain a „stalemate“ in trade conditions between the UK and the EU if the UK left the EU without a trade deal, thereby preventing the imposition of tariffs.

Proponents of this approach believe that it could be used to implement an interim agreement until a final agreement of up to ten years is negotiated. [25] In addition to facilitating tariff reductions, GATT`s contribution to trade liberalization involves „the commitment of tariff reductions negotiated for a longer period (which became more sustainable in 1955), the definition of the universality of non-discrimination through the treatment of the most favoured nation (MFN) and the status of national treatment, the guarantee of greater transparency of trade measures and the creation of a forum for future negotiations and settlement bilateral disputes. All of these have helped to streamline trade policy and reduce trade barriers and political uncertainty. [4] Agriculture has been essentially excluded from previous agreements, as it has been granted special status in the areas of import quotas and export subsidies, with few reserves. However, at the time of the Uruguay Round, many countries considered the agricultural exception so egregious that they refused to sign a new no-move agreement for agricultural products. These fourteen countries were known as the „Cairns Group“ and consisted mainly of small and medium-sized agricultural exporters such as Australia, Brazil, Canada, Indonesia and New Zealand. The GATT has introduced the principle of the most favoured nation into members` collective agreements. The interests of developing countries have inspired both the overall structure of the agreement and certain articles.