RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE S/FIN/M/13
29April 1997
ORGANIZATION(97-1890)
Committee onTrade inFinancial Services
REPORT OFTHE MEETING HELD ON10APRIL 1997
Note bytheSecretariat
1. The thirteenth meeting oftheCommittee onTrade inFinancial Services was chaired by
Mr.Yoshio Okubo ofJapan. Theagenda forthemeeting wascontained inWTO/AIR/556 andconsisted
ofsixitems: requests forobserver status; status ofacceptance andimplementation oftheresults of
thefinancial services negotiations in1995; recent developments infinancial services trade; technical
issues regarding theSchedules ofSpecific Commitments andLists ofArticle IIExemptions infinancial
services; timetable fortheresumption ofnegotiations andorganization offuture work; andother
business.
2. TheChairmanstatedthatthemeetingmarkedtheresumptionofthefinancialservicesnegotiations
thisyear. Heintroduced astatement from theDirector-General expressing hisconfidence inasuccessful
conclusion ofthenegotiations andoffering toprovide allthesupport andassistance thathecould give
totheCommittee inthenext nine months ofnegotiations. TheChairman reminded theCommittee
oftheMinisterial Declaration made inSingapore which expressed theintention toresume financial
servicesnegotiationsinApril1997.InthisDeclaration,MinisterslookedforwardtofullMFNagreements
inservices negotiations. Itwasstated thattheaimofthefinancial services negotiations wastoachieve
significantly improved market access commitments with abroader level ofparticipation intheagreed
time frame. TheChairman alsorecalled theSecond Decision onFinancial Services adopted bythe
Council forTrade inServices on21July 1995, which stated thataMember may, during aperiod of
sixty days beginning on1November 1997 andending on30December, modify orwithdraw allor
partofthespecific commitments onfinancial services inscribed initsSchedule, aswell astolistMFN
exemptions. Heemphasized thattheprimary taskoftheCommittee thisyear wastobring about a
successful conclusion ofthose negotiations andinvited delegations tomake general comments onthe
negotiations under agenda Item Cregarding recent developments infinancial services trade.
3. Therepresentative ofIndia pointed outthatinparagraph 17oftheMinisterial Declaration in
Singapore, Ministers hadagreed thatthey were determined toobtain aprogressively higher level of
liberalization inservices onamutually advantageous basis with appropriate flexibility forindividual
developing country Members.
Item A: Request forObserver Status
4. The Chairman recalled thatanumber ofgovernments andinternational intergovernmental
organizations hadbeen granted observer status intheCommittee. Four international intergovernmental
organizations, namely theUN,UNCTAD, IMF andtheWorld Bank, hadbeen granted observer status
onanadhocbasis. Hestated thattheOECD Secretariat andtheACP Group (African, Caribbean
andPacific Group ofStates) hadbeen requesting observer status intheCommittee. Inregard tothe
OECD Secretariat, henoted thattheWTO Secretariat hadbeen granted observer status inthemeetings
ofOECD Committees related tofinancial services andthatthistreatment bytheOECD Committees
wasconditional onthegranting ofreciprocal treatment.S/FIN/M/13
Page 2
5. TheCommittee decided togrant theUN,UNCTAD, IMF andtheWorld Bank observer status.
Regarding theOECD andtheACP Group, theChairman stated thatsome Members were notyetin
aposition totake adecision onthismatter andthathewould beconducting informal consultations
onthisissue. Heinvited theCommittee toconsider thisitem inthenext meeting. TheCommittee
soagreed.
Item B: Status ofAcceptance andImplementation oftheResults oftheFinancial Services
Negotiations in1995
6. TheChairman recalled thattheSecond Protocol totheGATS, embodying theresults ofthe
1995agreementonfinancialservices,enteredintoforceon1September1996,asdecidedbytheMembers
which hadaccepted itbefore 1July oflastyear. Hestated thatalltheMembers concerned except
Belgium andBrazil hadformally accepted theProtocol, andtheir commitments hadalready entered
intoforce. Inresponse toaquestion, therepresentatives oftheEuropean Commission (forBelgium)
andBrazil explained theprocedural difficulties faced bythem intheir domestic ratification processes.
Noindication could begiven astowhen those countries would beabletoformally accept theSecond
Protocol, buttheratification process was still proceeding forboth Members. ForBelgium, the
commitments hadalready entered intoforce effectively under domestic legislation. Both representatives
stated thatregarding financial services theSchedules ofCommitments effective atthemoment forthese
twocountries were those agreed attheendoftheUruguay Round.
Item C: Recent Developments inFinancial Services Trade
7. TheChairman observed thataspartofitsreview andsurveillance function, theCommittee should
beinformed ofanydevelopments inMember countries relating tofinancial services trade, particularly
with regard toliberalization measures. Heinvited delegations tomake general comments onthe
negotiations under thisagenda item.
8. Onrecent developments, therepresentative oftheUnited States saidthattheU.S. market was
effectively open. Since September 1995, interstate banking byacquisition hadbeen ineffect inall
50States. Anybank holding company, including foreign ones, mayacquire abank inanyState. With
regard tointerstate branching, anout-of-state bank maymerge with anin-state bank andthenbeallowed
tocontinue tooperate branches. New York andCalifornia were among the46States thathadacted
topermit interstate branching ahead ofthetarget date of1June 1997. Only 2States hadopted out
ofinterstate branching bymerger. Anumber ofStates hadalsoallowed interstate banking through
denovo branching. Inaddition, theU.S. hadtaken steps tostreamline theFederal Reserve Board 's
prudential oversight ofnew bank applications from foreign banks. The Fedwas expediting the
establishment ofbanks from those countries ontrack towards implementing aconsolidated supervision
system. Inregard tosecurities regulation, theU.S. wastaking steps torealign theregulatory partnership
between State regulators andfederal regulators. Ithadreduced theoverlap andlimited theability of
States toimpose additional regulations onsecurities already approved forissue bythefederal regulators.
Shealsostated thatproposals forfinancial modernization were under consideration inCongress. Several
billshadbeen introduced, andtheU.S. Administration wasconsidering whether itwould make itsown
proposal onfinancial modernization.
9. Therepresentative ofCanada stated thatthereview ofthefinancial sector legislation inher
country, reported attheprevious meeting, wasconcluded. Asaresult ofthatreview, draft legislation
wasalready before theParliament andwasexpected tobepassed inthenear future. Shestated that
thedraft legislation contained measures with respect toconsumer protection andthereduction ofthe
regulatory burden, aswell asmeasures tofacilitate foreign access totheCanadian market. Another
development wasthatCanada would bereviewing itsforeign entry policy toallow direct branching
byforeign banks. Itwascommitted tohave draft legislation onthisissue completed bytheendofS/FIN/M/13
Page 3
theyear. Therepresentative ofSwitzerland reported thattwonew pieces oflegislation hadentered
intoforce on1January 1997. ThefirstwastheSecurities Exchanges andSecurities Dealing Actwhich
provided foruniform rules atthefederal level with regard tolicensing andsupervision ofsecurities
exchanges andsecurities dealers. According totheAct, primary responsibility forthesupervision of
securities markets would beassumed bythesecurities exchanges, which would report totheSwiss Federal
Banking Commission. Thesection oftheActregulating take-overs would come intoforce later in1997.
Thesecond piece oflegislation wasthenewOrdinance onforeign banks inSwitzerland. Thisamendment
further liberalized theactivities offoreign banks, abolishing anobligation todeposit partoftheassets
offoreign bank branches inSwitzerland, aswell asremoving theneed foranauthorization forthe
acceptance ofdeposits byforeign banks. Switzerland would beready toreflect those changes inits
Schedule ifparticipants could reach anoverall agreement inthepresent negotiations. Therepresentative
ofAustralia announced thatanumber ofchanges inthefinancial sector hadoccurred since 1995, which
they would consider reflecting inanyimproved offer they would make. Shesaidthatarecent report
resulting from aninquiry onthefinancial system inhercountry had contained some major
recommendations. Those recommendations concerned thenature ofregulatory arrangements which
would bestensure anefficient, responsive, competitive andflexible financial system. Sheadded that
information onthetiming ofthegovernment 'sresponse tothose recommendations would beprovided
subsequently.
10. Therepresentative ofJapan informed ontheresults ofJapan-U.S. insurance talks, concluded
inDecember 1996, andthefinancial system reform initiative, announced inNovember 1996. In
summarizing theoutcome oftheinsurance talks, hestated that, intheprimary insurance sectors, rate
differentiation inautomobile insurance would beapproved, effective September thisyear. Itwasalso
intended toconduct afundamental reform oftheinsurance rating organization system byJuly1998,
andtoabolish theobligation formember companies touseunified rates calculated bytherating
organizations. Regarding thethird sector business bysubsidiaries ofmajor Japanese insurers, restrictions
would beimposed onthese subsidiaries toprotect certain existing sales networks offoreign andsmall
sized Japanese insurers. Therestrictions aretobelifted twoandahalfyears after thecompletion of
primary sector deregulation. Henoted thattheconclusion ofthetalks centred onchanges todomestic
regulation, andthey would notimmediately affect thelevel ofJapan 'scommitments intheSchedule.
However, thenewmeasures would practically improve thecompetitive environment oftheJapanese
insurance market. Thebenefits ofsuch measures would beavailable toallcountries.
11. Turning tothefinancial system reform initiative, therepresentative indicated thattheinitiative
aimedatrevivingtheJapanesefinancialmarketthroughvariousreformmeasuresbasedonthreeprinciples;
namely free, fairandglobal. This initiative encompassed acomprehensive review ofregulations and
improvementsinfinancialmarketinfrastructure,throughthepromotionoffreercross-bordertransactions,
theexpansionofthescopeofbusinessactivitiesoffinancialinstitutions,andthediversificationofproducts
andliberalization offeesandcharges inbanking, securities, insurance, foreign exchange andcorporate
accounting. Specific contents oftheinitiatives were under consideration intherelevant Government
Councils. Headded thatthefront runner ofthereform, aproposed amendment totheForeign Exchange
Control Act, hadalready been submitted totheDiet. Themost important changes proposed were the
abolition oftheauthorized foreign exchange bank system andtheabolition inprinciple ofallprior
approval andnotification requirements forcross-border capital transactions. Only expost reporting
would berequired forforeign exchange transactions under ordinary circumstances. Ifpassed, the
amendment would beimplemented from April 1998.
12. Therepresentative ofBrazil stated thatthefinancial system inhiscountry hadbeen going through
avigorous process ofchange promoted byhisGovernment. Themain targets ofthisprocess hadbeen
thereduction ofpublic sector presence, liberalization aimed atderegulation andanincrease intheinflow
offoreign capital. Theprivatization process ofBrazilian statebanks wasunder way. Arecent provisional
measure bythePresident oftheRepublic hadsetaprogram ofincentives toreduce therôleofthepublicS/FIN/M/13
Page 4
sector inbanking activity. When thechoice wasmade forprivatization, foreign banks would beallowed
toparticipate onthesame basis asdomestic banks inthatprocess. Consequently, foreign banks could
acquire domestic ones, provided theoperation wasapproved bytheNational Monetary Council and
sanctioned bythePresident. Approval hadbeen already granted foranumber offoreign banks tooperate
inBrazil. Astotheinsurance market, headded thatbased onanewinterpretation ofthecurrent law,
foreign companies were subjected tothesame setofrules imposed ondomestic firms. Furthermore,
theState Monopoly onreinsurance hadbeen broken byaconstitutional amendment, which hadyet
tobesubjected toimplementing regulations. Toaccelerate theprocess, thegovernment waspassing
implementing legislation onArticle 192oftheConstitution which regulated Brazilian financial markets.
Further advances inthisareadepended onapproval ofthatimplementing legislation bytheBrazilian
Congress. Therepresentative ofUruguay referred totheremoval ofamonopoly intheinsurance sector.
13. Therepresentative ofThailand announced thaton6November 1996, several fullbranch licenses
were awarded toforeign banks with BIBF (Bangkok International Banking Facility) licenses. On27
December 1996, seven BIBF licenses hadbeen awarded tonewforeign banks. Therepresentative of
India reported thatinimplementing their commitments since 1993, theyhadallowed anumber offoreign
banks toopen branches inthecountry. In1996 and1997 eight newforeign banks hadopened branches
inIndia. Thedelegate ofVenezuela saidthatthecrisis ofthefinancial system of1994 and1995 had
been brought toanend. Hestressed thattheopenness ofthefinancial sector inhiscountry wasindicated
bythesuccess oftheprivatization system, setupbytheVenezuelan State incooperation with private
entrepreneurs infinancial institutions. Hestated thatthisprocess would beintensified andthatmore
specific information would beprovided insubsequent meetings.
14. Onthenegotiations ingeneral, therepresentative oftheUnited States stressed theneed tomake
progress towards asuccessful conclusion ofthenegotiations. After citing positive developments since
1995, such asongoing liberalization inmany countries, shestated thattheU.S. aimed totable anoffer
attheearliest possible date. TheU.S. hoped totable anMFN-based offer providing substantially full
market access andnational treatment, provided thatMembers were abletoachieve significantly improved
commitments with abroad level ofparticipation. While theGATS incorporated theprinciple of
progressive liberalization, thecurrent round ofnegotiations must establish newandsignificant market
opportunities. TheU.S. noted thatfinancial sector liberalization coupled with sound regulation was
thefoundation necessary forsustaining economic growth andjobcreation. Recognizing thatsome
Members might notbeinaposition toimplement liberalization immediately, itwasemphasized that
theU.S. wasprepared toconsider phased-in commitments from those Members. TheU.S. approached
thenegotiations inaconstructive spirit, andwould work closely with itstrading partners.
15. Therepresentative ofCanada looked forward toapermanent MFN agreement andstressed the
importance ofrelaunching thenegotiations onapositive note. Therepresentative ofSwitzerland urged
Members, asaminimum objective, toschedule commitments thatreflected thelevel ofliberalization
already attained intheir countries. Furthermore, appropriate phase-in commitments should betaken
inorder toconfirm theliberalization path undertaken. Thefinal goal would betoattain anoverall
improved level ofliberalization allowing thesignature ofadefinitive agreement bytheendof1997.
Therepresentatives ofAustralia, Japan andHong Kong alsoexpressed their intentions tocontribute
toasuccessful conclusion based ontheprinciple ofMFN with abroader level ofparticipation. Japan
noted theJoint Statement ofAPEC Finance Ministers inSebu, Philippines, which supported the
resumption oftheGATS financial services negotiations.
16. Therepresentative ofBrazil noted thatinthenegotiations itwascrucial tokeep inmind that
thiswasamultilateral process which should beadvanced byseeking balanced concessions, taking into
accounttheprincipleofprogressiveliberalization.TherepresentativesofUruguayandNorwayexpressed
their intentions tocontribute toapositive result inthenegotiations, while therepresentative ofThailand
stressed theimportance thatthey attached toprogressive liberalization aswell. Thefinancial sectorS/FIN/M/13
Page 5
ofhiscountry wasaninfant industry interms oftechnological development andskills, andimmediate
liberalization ofthesector would notgiveittime toadapt andbecome competitive. Therepresentative
oftheEuropean Commission stated thatthey were participating inthenegotiations expecting thatthe
interim agreement would betransformed intoapermanent one,andthatthemain features oftheGATS
would beapplied tothefinancial services sector. Headded that predictability based onbound
commitments wasimportant since itprovided toinvestors around theworld thesecurity they needed
tomake investment decisions. Hestressed theimportance ofstatements being translated intodraft offers,
andtothiseffect, itshould betheobjective toseethesubmission ofdraft offers atanearly point in
time, hopefully well before thesummer break. Last-minute surprises should notbeallowed. The
objective wasforfullMFN-based commitments from allparticipants. Therepresentative ofIndia
expressedhercountry'sintentiontoparticipateinthenegotiationsinaccordancewiththeSecondDecision
onFinancial Services.
17. Therepresentative ofEgypt stated thathewaslooking forward tothefaithful implementation
ofwhat Members hadagreed inSingapore, particularly toobtain aprogressively higher level of
liberalization inservices onamutually advantageous basis with appropriate flexibility forindividual
developing country Members. Inhisview, asuccessful conclusion could bereached in1997, bearing
inmind theabsorptive capacity oftheeconomy andwithout sacrificing theinterests ofdomestic operators
whowould notbeinaposition tobenefit fully intheshort andmedium runfrom theoffers bydeveloped
partners. Healsonoted thatoneshould avoid hastened liberalization leading tobankruptcies inthe
banking sector. Therepresentative ofArgentina stressed theimportance oftheMFN principle inreaching
aresult which would benefit allparticipants. Progressive liberalization wasalsoimportant. Venezuela
alsostressed theimportance itattached tothose negotiations. Therepresentative ofPakistan recalled
thattheprocess ofliberalization wastobeseen inlight oftheprinciples laiddown inArticle XIX of
theGATS, andthatthisArticle clearly stipulated thatliberalization should takeplace with duerespect
fornational policy objectives andthelevel ofdevelopment ofindividual Members. Therepresentative
ofIndonesia stressed hiscountry 'sintention tocontinue liberalizing inaprogressive way. Thefinancial
services sector inhiscountry hadbeen expanding quite rapidly andtherefore itrequired careful attention.
Healsoemphasized thesensitivity ofthissector forthedevelopment ofhiscountry andtheregion.
Theliberalization process needed tobesound, well sequenced, anddone inamutually advantageous
way.
18. The Chairman thanked thedelegations fortheir statements which were constructive and
encouraging. Inview ofthepace ofreform inmany countries, itshould bepossible toproduce an
agreement solidly based ontheMFN principle. Therepresentative ofJamaica suggested thatthisagenda
item onrecent developments bekeptinsubsequent meetings oftheCommittee, sothatcountries would
beabletoreport onanyfurther developments. Information onregional arrangements anddiscussions
taking place could alsobeprovided under thisagenda item.
Item D: Technical Issues Regarding theScheduling ofSpecific Commitments andListing of
Article IIExemptions inFinancial Services
19. TheChairman recalled thatatprevious meetings theCommittee haddiscussed some technical
issues andthattheSecretariat hadproduced anddistributed apaper (S/FIN/W/9 of29July1996) which
identified theissues involved andlisted some points fordiscussion. Heinvited delegations toexpress
their views onhow toproceed with thematter.
20. Onedelegation stated thatitwasimportant totackle oneortwotechnical issues atanearlier
stage sothatoffers could bemade with fullknowledge ofwhat wasbeing committed. Lack ofclarity
could affect thequality ofthecommitments. Shesuggested totackle theissue ofthedistinction between
mode 1andmode 2asamatter ofpriority, probably through aninformal orexpert group. Another
delegation stated thatsuch technical issues hadcaused problems inthelastnegotiations when initialS/FIN/M/13
Page 6
offers were made, andshould beclarified before initial offers were tabled inJuly. Discussion could
alsotakeplace intheCommittee onSpecific Commitments. Several other delegations shared theview
thatdiscussions aimed atclarifying thedistinction between mode 1andmode 2should beconducted.
However, anumber ofdelegations stressed thatthose discussions should notcause anydelay inthe
progress ofthebroader negotiations, given thelimited time frame. Tothiseffect, thediscussions on
technical issues should beconducted inparallel with thenegotiations andinaninformal setting. It
wasalsosuggested thatdelegations interested inpursuing such adiscussion should prepare some inputs
forit.TheSecretariat could provide some assistance onthismatter, either intheform offurther
developing thequestions raised intheSecretariat paper orproviding assistance tointerested Members.
21. Insumming up,theChairman observed thatclarifying some oftheissues mentioned inthe
Secretariat paper might behelpful inimproving offers andthatthere wasaneed tofurther pursue those
issues. Atthesame time, itwasessential thatthismatter didnotdelay thenegotiations. Henoted
thatonewaytoproceed might betorequest interested delegations toconsult with theSecretariat and
discuss those issues bilaterally orinaninformal group open toalldelegations. Hesuggested thatthe
Secretariat beready todiscuss these issues withinterested delegations and,ifneeded, toorganize informal
discussions. TheCommittee would takenoteofanydevelopments initsfuture meetings. TheCommittee
agreed tothissuggestion bytheChairman.
Item F: Timetable fortheResumption ofNegotiations andOrganization ofFuture Work
22. TheChairman noted thattoplan ahead forthenegotiations ofthepresent year, theCommittee
needed todevelop atimetable. Hehadprepared apreliminary draft timetable which hadbeen distributed
ahead ofthemeeting. Heinvited delegations toexpress their views onthatdraft, particularly inregard
to(i)thedeadline forinitial offers, (ii)thelevel ofofficials invited tothose meetings, and(iii)thefinal
deadline forthenegotiations.
23. With regard tothedeadline forthesubmission ofinitial offers, some delegations expressed
concern astowhether 14July1997 wasarealistic deadline, considering theneed toobtain sufficient
request listsandtoconduct internal consultations. Itseemed difficult oreven impossible forsome
delegations tomeet thisdeadline. Those delegations were infavour ofadopting amore flexible approach
forthesubmission ofinitial offers. Other delegations stressed theneed tohave theoffers submitted
asearly intheprocess aspossible.
24. Insummarizing thediscussion, theChairman stated thatsome delegations hadexpressed
difficulties insubmitting meaningful offers by14July. Nevertheless, hestressed thatinlight ofthe
short time frame forthenegotiations, Members should trytheir besttosubmit their offers bythetarget
dateof14July. Hesuggested thatthose who might notbeinaposition tosubmit offers bythatdate
might give some indications orprogress reports. Substantive discussions based onoffers needed to
start insummer given theshort time available. There were noobjections tothisformulation inthe
Committee.
25. With regard tothefinal deadline forthenegotiations, theChairman recalled thattheCommittee
haduntil 30December 1997 onthebasis oftheaforementioned Council Decision. However, given
thedifficulties innegotiating effectively after mid-December, hehadproposed thatthelastmeeting
oftheCommittee beheldon12December 1997. Several delegations expressed their support forsetting
the12December date asthefinal deadline forthenegotiations. One delegation raised aquestion
regarding theprocedure tobefollowed inorder toformally change theconcluding date. TheSecretariat
explained inresponse thatadecision oftheCouncil forTrade inServices would benecessary tomake
thischange legally effective andsecure. Several delegations supported theideaofasking theCouncil
totakeadecision which would formally move forward thedeadline ofthenegotiations to12December.S/FIN/M/13
Page 7
Anumber ofdelegations suggested thatsuch adecision bytheCouncil betaken early intheprocess,
possibly before thesummer, toprovide security toMembers.
26. Insumming up,theChairman stated thattheCommittee seemed tobeinagreement thatthe
lastmeeting oftheCommittee should take place on12December 1997. Henoted thatthesense of
theCommittee wastorecommend totheCouncil thatittakeadecision toconclude thenegotiations
onthatday. Hesuggested thatdelegations consult their capitals onthismatter, andinform theChairman
ofanydifficulties with theCommittee making such arecommendation totheCouncil. Heasked
delegations toinform himofanysuch difficulties before theendofApril, sothattheCommittee would
beinaposition tomake therecommendation totheCouncil intime foritsMay meeting. TheCommittee
agreed tothissuggestion bytheChairman, andadopted thetimetable (seeattached) onthebasis of
thesupplementary remarks bytheChairman summing upthediscussions.
27. Inresponse toarequest, theChairman stated thattheSecretariat would prepare anote forthe
next meeting, clarifying from alegal point ofview therelationship between thenewcommitments to
beattached toaprotocol concluding thepresent negotiations andtheexisting commitments annexed
totheSecond Protocol in1995 ordating from theUruguay Round. Some clarification might alsobe
useful with regard tothestatus ofthose Members maintaining their existing commitments atthe
conclusion ofthepresent negotiations. Astothedate ofthenext meeting, itwasagreed tohave it
onThursday 5June, asindicated inthetimetable.
Item F: Other Business
28. Noissues were raised under other business.S/FIN/M/13
Page 8
9April 1997
Committee onTrade inFinancial Services
DRAFT TIMETABLE FOR COMPLETION OFTHE NEGOTIATIONS
April 1997
* Start ofthenegotiations 7April
* CTFS Meeting Thursday 10April
June 1997
* Bilateral negotiations 2-6June
* CTFS Meeting Thursday 5June
July 1997
* Submission ofinitial offers Monday 14July
* Bilateral negotiations 14-18 July
* CTFS Meeting Thursday 17July
September 1997
* Bilateral negotiations 15-19 September
* CTFS Meeting Thursday 18September
October 1997
* Bilateral negotiations 13-17 October
* Informal CTFS Meeting todraft Protocol Thursday 16October
* CTFS Meeting Friday 17October
November 1997
* Submission ofdraft schedules Monday 10November
* Bilateral negotiations 10-14 November
* CTFS Meeting Friday 14November
- Drafting ofProtocol
- Review andconsideration ofdraft schedules
December 1997
* Submission offinal draft schedules Monday 1December
- Review andconsideration ofrevised draft schedules
* Bilateral negotiations 8-12 December
* CTFS Meeting Friday 12December
- Adoption ofProtocol
Meetings atsenior level willbescheduled induecourse.