RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONS/CSS/M/7
2 March 2001
(01-1072)
Council for Trade in Services
Special Session
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 5 AND 6 DECEMBER 2000
Note by the Secretariat
1. The Council for Trade in Services held a Special Session on 5 and 6 December 2000.  The
agenda for the meeting is contained in docume nt WTO/AIR/1455 and Corr.1.  Under Other Business,
the Chairman said that he would make a statement concerning a provisional schedule of meetings for
the year 2001.
2. The Chairman proposed that the Council adopt the agenda as circulated.
3. The Council so agreed.
A. NEGOTIATING GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIX
OF THE GATS
4. The Chairman recalled that, at the previous meeting of the Special Session, Members had
focused on the specific elements that might be included in the guidelines on the basis of submissions
made by delegations.  Given that some of the proposals had been submitted shortly before the meeting
with little opportunity for Members to study them, further comments on those proposals would be
welcome.  The discussion had been structured along the lines of the revised list of elements produced
by the Secretariat in Job no. 5658.  He suggested that Members follow the same approach, because
structuring the discussion according to issues, as opposed to addressing each submission separately,
appeared to be a more efficient way to proceed, as it helped to avoid repetition.
5. He then recalled that, at its last discussion under this item, the Council had also agreed that a
special meeting be held to address exclusively the issue of the treatment of autonomous liberalization.
The meeting had taken place on 1 December, and the two informal papers submitted at the meeting,
from the delegations of Korea and of Hong Kong, China, were a useful contribution to the debate.
The general feeling was that many of the issues raised required further reflection.  The very basic
concepts referred to, such as recognition, credit or even the definition of "autonomous liberalization",required further examination.  It was also clear that taking a quantitative approach to the treatment of
autonomous liberalization would be difficult, as valuably demonstrated by the Korean paper.  At the
end of the discussion, many delegations appeared to feel that the debate on the issues raised should
continue and that there would be a good chance of clarifying and refining many of the issues during
the course of the negotiations.
6. He then said that his initial proposal at the last meeting had been that, based on that
discussion and drawing upon the submissions from Members, the Secretariat should prepare a first
draft of the guidelines and procedures for Members to start work on the basis of a common document.
However, some delegations had rightly taken the view that another round of discussions, as well as
more time for additional submissions, was necessary before the Secretariat could produce a first draft.Without prejudging the outcome of the Council's discussion, he also recalled that at the end ofS/CSS/M/7
Page 2
previous discussion there had been a certain level of expectation on when a first draft of the guidelines
should be produced.  He stressed that the Secretariat paper would be no more than a first draft.  He
invited delegations to avoid repetition in discussions under items A and B of the agenda, even if the
two items overlapped to the extent that the more general proposals under item B covered negotiating
guidelines.  He suggested that Members focus their comments under item A on issues relating to theguidelines and under item B on all matters raised other than the guidelines.  He then drew delegations'
attention to a submission by a group of countrie s in document S/CSS/W/13, a submission by the
delegation of Korea in document S/CSS/W/14 and a submission by the delegation of Switzerland in
document S/CSS/W/16.
7. The representative of India expressed great satisfaction and warmly welcomed that twenty-
three developing country delegations, namely Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, El
Salvador, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay,
Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Uruguay, and the Members of the Andean Community (Bolivia,
Colombia Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela), had jointly submitted the communication in document
S/CSS/W/13, setting out their views on the guidelines and procedures for the negotiations.  He
focused upon the issues of particular interest to his delegation.  In section I, he stressed the importance
of appropriate flexibility being given to individual developing country Members and of thenegotiations respecting national policy objectives and the level of development of individual
Members, in view of the opinion expressed by some developed countries that there was an imbalance
in the commitments made by developed as compared to developing countries which should be
redressed.  He stressed that any commitments undertaken by developing countries would be in full
conformity with the principles enshrined in Articles XIX and IV of the GATS.  As for the objectivesfor the negotiations, Members should achieve progressively higher levels of liberalization, secure an
overall balance of rights and obligations by promoting the interest of all participants, and increase the
participation of developing countries in services trade in keeping with the letter and spirit of
Article IV.  In his delegation's view, the real test of the negotiations was the extent to which
Article IV would be effectively implemented through meaningful commitments by developedcountries in sectors and modes of interest to developing countries, such as in mode 4, where win-win
scenarios benefitting both groups of countries could be realized, especially in computer software and
health services.  On autonomous liberalization, he  acknowledged the complexity of the issue, but
stressed its importance for developing countries.  The Council had to draw up multilaterally agreed
criteria for giving credit, recognition and negotiating leverage to those countries that had undertaken
autonomous liberalization;  if this was left to bilateral negotiations or if Members were asked to bind
such liberalization in order to get credit, they would have no incentive to carry out autonomousliberalization in the future.  Modalities for the negotiations were as important as the negotiations
themselves.  Request-offer had to be the principal method, because it was a tested and equitable
method that did not prejudge Members' interests and was in line with the GATS architecture.
Complementary methods could be considered, provided that they were agreed to by all Members and
were consistent with the GATS architecture.  He stressed the importance of preserving the existingGATS framework and was concerned by suggestions  that the GATS be reviewed without clearly
specifying what would be reviewed, or by approaches, such as the cluster approach, that seemed to
take away the inherent flexibility in the GATS.
8. Without prejudice to further comments, the representative of Brazil pointed out those
elements which were essential for inclusion in the guidelines, namely Articles IV and XIX, as well the
GATS built-in agenda, stressing the importance of concluding the rule-making work before the end of
the market access negotiations.  On the organization of the negotiations, he said that document
S/CSS/W/13 addressed many of the elements contai ned in Members' contributions, including the one
by the African Group.  As for the structure of the guidelines, this should be developed on the basis of
the Secretariat note Job No. 5658, as a framework to proceed to a final text.S/CSS/M/7
Page 3
9. The representative of Korea said that the proposal by his delegation in document S/CSS/W/14
had been submitted in accordance with paragraph 2(c) of the road-map and it documented and
clarified Korea's position on the guidelines.  As for the scope of the negotiations, the agenda should
be comprehensive, including negotiations on MFN exemptions and not precluding other items such as
accounting rates or air transport services.  He particularly stressed the importance of the resumption ofthe negotiations on maritime transport services.  A technical review of the GATS should also be
included.  On negotiating modalities, his delegation was flexible but would prefer request-offer as the
main approach.  Modalities for the treatment of autonomous liberalization also had to be developed,
but not necessarily in the immediate future.  A timetable for the negotiations appeared premature.
Work in the Committee on Specific Commitments had to be completed in advance of the conclusion
of the market access negotiations, as the two were closely related, and work on rule-making and
domestic regulation concluded before the end of the negotiations.  In this regard, he had taken note ofthe decision by the Council for Trade in Services on the new deadline for the negotiations on
emergency safeguard measures, which should be abided to by Members.  Flexibility should be given
to developing and least-developed countries, as set forth in Articles IV and XIX.  Korea's submission
contained a negotiating proposal in section III, suggesting that Members pay special attention to the
liberalization of infrastructural services on a global basis in the negotiations, as such services were notonly important as economic sectors in themselves, but also for the balanced growth of the whole
economy, as had been shown by the Korean presentation under the assessment of trade at the October
meeting.  He supported the proposal that the Secretariat produce a first draft of the guidelines at the
earliest possible date.
10. The representative of Switzerland explained that his delegation's submission in document
S/CSS/W/16 contained elements from a 1999 submission  as well as points which had been presented
orally.  Negotiations should aim at deepening and broadening existing commitments, thereby securing
a higher level of legally-binding liberalization, guaranteeing effective market access through
appropriate rules and disciplines for trade in servic es and ensuring transparency, predictability and
certainty in Members' respective regulatory regimes.  There should be no a priori  exclusion of any
sector or mode;  different negotiating modalities could be used beyond the traditional request-offer
method;  the starting-point for the negotiations were existing commitments;  MFN exemptions should
be included in the negotiations;  there should be a standstill commitment;  in view of efforts to launch
a bigger round of negotiations, deadlines were premature;  work on rule-making and on domestic
regulation should proceed hand-in-hand with the market access negotiations;  the special situation of
developing countries had to be taken into account and Articles IV and XIX fully applied.  He said that
his delegation's submission was similar in many respects to other Members' submissions, andtherefore felt that the process was sufficiently mature for the Secretariat to produce a first draft of the
guidelines.
11. The representative of the Dominican Republic, speaking on behalf of the Paradisus Group,
expressed support for India's statement and informed Members that the delegation of Guatemala had
also endorsed the submission by the group of twenty-three developing countries contained indocument S/CSS/W/13.  He said that that submissi on and the one by the African Group were the best
bases for the establishment of the guidelines, as they both covered all the essential points in the
Secretariat note without leaving open the possibility of changing the GATS architecture.  He stressed
the importance of the effective application of Article IV to increase developing countries' participation
in services trade.  At present, sectors and modes of interest to developing countries had not beenliberalized significantly, their export capacity, efficiency and competitiveness had not been
strengthened and their access to distribution channels and information networks had not been
improved.  Hence, a special mechanism had to be put in place to ensure the effective application of
Article IV;  the Council should consider to what exte nt the provisions of Article IV had been applied
and suggest ways of improving the situation.  Th e guidelines had to reflect the principles and
objectives of Articles IV and XIX, as well as the special treatment for developing countries in the
negotiations.  He indicated that the members of the Paradisus Group would also offer individualS/CSS/M/7
Page 4
comments.  The representative of El Salvador associated himself with the statement by the Dominican
Republic.
12. The representative of Guatemala informed Members that his delegation had joined the group
of twenty-three developing countries who had submitted document S/CSS/W/13 and endorsed the
proposal.  It reflected the interests and common view of many Members and represented a good basisfor the drafting of the guidelines.  He stressed the importance of transparency and of effective
implementation of Article IV.  Clear rules had to be set up, such as on scheduling guidelines and
classification, before market access negotiations could start in order to ensure legal certainty.  On
autonomous liberalization, he said that it had to be recognized and credit for it had to be granted, so as
to provide an incentive for further liberalization.
13. The representative of Venezuela spoke as the pro-tempore chair of the Andean Community.
He emphasised the importance of the submission  in document S/CSS/W/13, which reflected the
common vision of so many Members.  The negotiations were understood as a valuable opportunity of
progressively liberalizing services trade, while respecting the current architecture of the GATS.
Instruments were needed that could contribute to the improvement of the economic situation of
developing countries in the framework of the progressive liberalization of their economies.  The
ultimate objective of the negotiations was to contribute to Members' national policy objectives andfoster development.  The guidelines had to respect the political need of developing countries to obtain
full benefits from the negotiations.  The negotiations had to be rooted in emergency safeguard
measures, as well as clear rules on subsidies, or else developing countries would be constrained in
their development and growth.  Modalities for the treatment of autonomous liberalization were
important, and should not be conditioned on the requirement that such liberalization be bound.  Theguidelines had to contain as far as possible all the elements necessary to the conduct of the
negotiations in their entirety, as certainty was important.  He said that further work was necessary and
he did not rule out the possibility that additional papers on specific issues would be submitted.
14. The representative of Pakistan stressed the impor tance of the guidelines in providing direction
to the negotiations and ensuring that they did not deviate from the provisions of Articles IV and XIX,
which already contained the broad parameters and main elements for the conduct of the negotiations.
He stressed that the Council had to fulfil the mandate in Article XIX to carry out the assessment of
trade in sectoral and overall terms.  The assessment was the basis for future negotiations and he was
encouraged by the fact that it was underway.  He concurred with the Domincan Republic that the
submission in document S/CSS/W/13 and the one by the African Group should be used as the bases
for drawing up the guidelines.
15. The Chairman noted that only the proposal by Switzerland had been issued as an unrestricted
document and invited those Members having submitted proposals to consider de-restriction of their
submissions, in view of the practice followed in the negotiations on agriculture and to help defuse
secrecy allegations.
16. The representative of Mexico said that document S/CSS/W/13 was a pragmatic reflection of
the views of twenty-four developing countries;  it  contained the elements to be included in the
guidelines, none of which went beyond what was mandated in the GATS, and specifically in Article
XIX.  The document could accommodate elements contained in proposals by other Members provided
that they respected the mandate in Article XIX, such as the proposal by the African Group, of which
he shared certain elements.  He added that nothing pre-empted additional proposals.
17. The representative of Sri Lanka said that the proposal for the guidelines in document
S/CSS/W/13 reflected the concerns and expectations of developing countries and captured the essence
of important elements, fully recognizing that the negotiations had to be conducted within the GATS
architecture and that respect had to be given for national policy objectives and the level ofS/CSS/M/7
Page 5
development of individual Members.  Article XIX prescribed that higher levels of liberalization be
achieved progressively, and Article IV:1(c) that liberalization focus on sectors and modes of export
interest to developing countries.  Article XIX:2 also guaranteed appropriate flexibility for developing
countries for opening fewer sectors, liberalizing fe wer types of transactions, progressively extending
market access in line with their development situation.  She expressed concern about the EuropeanCommunities' suggestion that the negotiations should aim at reducing the imbalance in commitments
across Members, sectors and modes, as a Member's schedule reflected its capacity to undertake
commitments in line with its level of development, thereby explaining why many developing
countries had undertaken relatively less commitments.  She observed that the proposal by the
European Communities in document S/CSS/W/15 referred to promoting the interests of all Members
and achieving a balance of rights and obligations, and stressed the importance of differentiating
between WTO Members on the basis on their different capacity to implement and take advantage ofexport opportunities.  She said that the assessment of trade was necessary to the establishment of the
guidelines, noted that it had not yet been completed and agreed that it be an on-going process feeding
into the negotiations.  On autonomous liberalization, she said that multilaterally agreed criteria should
be established for the granting of credit, as a means of providing market access opportunities and
encouraging further liberalization.  She stressed that Members' existing commitments were thestarting-point for the negotiations, which had to be conducted on the basis of request-offer as the main
negotiating modality, which might be supplemented as necessary by other methods as long as they
were consistent with the basic architecture of the GATS.  The needs of small delegations had to be
taken into account and meetings should not run in parallel but in sequence.
18. The representative of Malaysia said that the submission in document S/CSS/W/13 cut across
many developing countries.  The proposal reflec ted the Preamble to the GATS, which referred inter
alia to promoting economic growth and development and recognized the differences in levels of
development as well as developing countries' need for capacity building, and the guiding principles in
Articles XIX and IV.  The negotiations had to be based on market reality;  he observed that the
information presented in the Secretariat note in  document S/C/W/27/Add.1 showed that many if not
all developing countries were net importers of services and that the exports of Asia and Latin America
were far below the global average.  Such imbalances, and not those in Members' levels of
commitments, could create economic problems.  The principle of progressive liberalization in
Article XIX:2 was based on Members' capacity to adapt to liberalization;  while not denying the
benefits of liberalization, he stressed the need to proceed carefully.  In this sense, progressive
liberalization was linked to autonomous liberalization, which had to be recognized and for which
credit had to be given, and to Members' previous commitments, which had to be looked at in apragmatic way, taking into account the constraints they faced.  He stressed that Members should
respect each others' expectations, especially t hose of developing countries, who were services
importers and not exporters.  In this respect, ma rket opening should be economically beneficial and
help the development of a domestic services industr y;  it was up to individual Members to decide how
much liberalization their economies could endure.  He also stressed the importance of emergencysafeguard measures.
19. The representative of Thailand stressed the importance of guaranteeing appropriate flexibility
for developing countries and of the recognition of autonomous liberalization.  She also underscored
the importance of emergency safeguard measures and said that the blank in document S/CSS/W/13
should be filled with the date of 15 March 2002;  her delegation was encouraged by Members'discussions in the Working Party on GATS Rules and believed that the negotiations on emergency
safeguards could be successfully completed before 2002.
20. The representative of Norway said that special attention had to be devoted to developing
countries in all negotiations, including the ones on services.  He expressed support for paragraphs 7, 8
and 11 in the submission by the African Group, and observed that it shared many of the elements ofthe submission in document S/CSS/W13.  With respec t to the submission by Korea, he concurred thatS/CSS/M/7
Page 6
the inter-related nature of many sectors, particular ly infrastructural ones, made them a priority for
liberalization.  He said that a lot of common ground existed amongst Members' proposals and hoped
that the Secretariat could produce a first draft of the guidelines well in advance of March 2001, to
facilitate their adoption by the March meeting;  his delegation was flexible as to the basis on which
the Secretariat draft would be produced.
21. The representative of Japan concurred that the time was ripe for the Secretariat to produce a
first draft of the guidelines.  Members should be careful not to undo the balance in the GATS, by
placing too much emphasis on only some of its provisions, and not to confuse those issues which
belonged to the guidelines with Members' individual objectives, as the negotiations should aim to
promote the interests of all participants and as specific individual interests, where Members' views
had not converged, should not be included in the guidelines.  The Secretariat note in Job No. 5658
was generally acceptable, with the exception of the reference to pro-competitive principles, andshould be used as a basis for the Secretariat draft of the guidelines.  As for his delegation's view on
the elements for inclusion in the guidelines, he said that a balance had to be maintained when
describing the objectives of the negotiations and proposed inserting the sentence:  "Pursuant to the
objectives of the GATS, as stipulated in the Preamble, in Article IV, and in the mandate contained in
Article XIX, negotiations on trade in services should aim to achieve progressively higher levels ofliberalization of trade in services".  A reference to due respect for national policy objectives and to
flexibility for developing countries could also be included, but it was important not to lose the overall
balance.  As for the legal basis for the negotiations, these were Articles IV and XIX and the Annex on
Article II Exemptions.  The negotiations had to promote the interests of all Members and be
comprehensive in the sense that no sector or mode should be excluded a priori;  a reference to thespecial attention to sectors and modes of interest to developing countries could be included.  As for
modalities, he suggested inserting the sentence:  "Liberalization may be achieved through bilateral,
plurilateral or multilateral approaches, based on the request-offer approach and supplemented as
necessary by other appropriate negotiating modalities, applied on a horizontal or sectoral basis".
Special treatment should be given to least-developed countries, as stipulated in Article IV:3.  Withrespect to autonomous liberalization, he suggested that reference be made to the discussion under way
in the Council, stating that modalities for its trea tment would be developed by the Special Session.  In
order to improve the clarity and legal consistency of the GATS, existing provisions might be subject
to a technical review.  As for work in the subsidia ry bodies, he suggested the insertion of the sentence
"work currently in progress under the GATS should be expedited alongside negotiations on specific
commitments", as well as a reference to the Council's decision to extend the negotiations on
emergency safeguards.  On the overall timeframe, he reiterated that establishing a separate deadlinefor the services negotiations was not acceptable while Members were endeavouring to launch a new
comprehensive round of negotiations.  Similarly, it was not appropriate to establish a timetable for a
next step in the guidelines supposed to give guidan ce to the negotiations in general, as Members had
agreed to consider how to move forward with the negotiations during the stock-taking exercise in
March 2001.
22. The representative of the Philippines said that document S/CSS/W/13 was statement to how
many developing countries considered that the negotiations should be conducted, as well as to their
commitment to contributing to the guidelines and to advancing work in the negotiations.  He stressed
the importance of carrying forward and finishing the work on the modalities for the treatment of
autonomous liberalization, which should have been incorporated in the guidelines.  He could agreethat the submission in document S/CSS/W/13 be used as a basis for the first draft of the guidelines.
23. The representative of Indonesia was in favour of continuing discussion on modalities for the
treatment of autonomous liberalization.  He highlighted a number of elements in that respect.
Members who had undertaken liberalization autonomously should be given credit, so as to encourage
further liberalization;  the basis for such credit should be wide, and take into account, for example,Article VI-type of measures;  the scope of autonomous liberalization should cover all measuresS/CSS/M/7
Page 7
covered by the GATS;  the value of liberalization measures was difficult to measure with a strict
formula;  credit had to be valued fairly and broadly, depending on the extent of the measure to be
bound.  He then stressed the importance of making Article IV operational, especially with respect to
the attention to be given to sectors and modes of export interest to developing countries, to ensure that
their concerns were taken into account and that technical assistance was provided to them.  It was alsoessential to assess the impact of services liberalization, especially for developing countries, to help
them prepare and be forthcoming in the negotiations;  he wondered how far the Special Session had
responded to the need for such an assessment.  As  concerned setting a timetable for the negotiations,
he said that this was premature and should await de velopments at the stock-taking exercise in March.
24. The representative of the European Communities said that the establishment of the guidelines
required a collective effort.  He highlighted five elements of his delegation's submission in
S/CSS/W/15.  First, on the objective of the negotiations, he said that documents S/CSS/W/13 andS/CSS/W/14 contained all the necessary elements, to which he would add three more:  the promotion
of regulatory disciplines, pro-competitive principles and that liberalization be supportive of policy
objectives, including sustainable development.  Second, no sector or mode should be excluded a
priori.  In this respect, he said that " inter alia " had to be added to the sentence contained in paragraph
9 of S/CSS/W/13, that in paragraph 10 a reference to the negotiations on government procurementwas missing and should be added and that the possibility for a technical review of the GATS had been
omitted, and suggested that it be foreseen to deal  with any potential interpretation or application
problems.  The rule-making work had to proceed in parallel with the market access negotiations.  A
reference to the reviews of air transport servic es, MFN exemptions and accounting rates had to be
included;  paragraph 5 in the submission by Korea and that paragraph 11(ix) of the submission by theAfrican Group were good possibilities.  A reference to the negotiations on maritime transport services
also had to be inserted, and paragraph 6 in the Korean submission was useful.  Third, on autonomous
liberalization, he said that the formulations in S/CSS/W/13 and Korean submissions had to be
revisited in light of the situation which had emerged from the Special Session meeting dedicated to
the issue which had taken place on 1 December;  he found the submission by Switzerland useful inthis regard.  Fourth, with respect to modalities, he concurred with paragraph 17 in S/CSS/W/13 that
request-offer was the main negotiating modality, but preferred the Korean drafting in paragraph 8,
which defined more precisely other methods, including clusters and multilateral and bilateral
approaches.  As for a timeframe, his delegation considered it premature to set an end-date, but could
agree to some in-between dates;  paragraph 12 of the Korean submission or section VIII of the
submission by Switzerland were useful references.  Fifth, he wondered whether the reference to
implementation in section VII of S/CSS/W/13 was necessary, as it was not relevant to thenegotiations, and sought further clarification.  As for the basis on which the Secretariat should
produce the first draft of the guidelines, he acknowledged that S/CSS/W/13 was one of the most
advanced submissions, but said that no single paper should be stressed in particular.
25. The representative of Jamaica said that a development-oriented approach was fundamental for
the negotiations, which had to be based on Articles IV and XIX.  The main objective of the
negotiations was to achieve progressively higher levels of liberalization, as stated in paragraph 1 of
Article XIX, but such liberalization had to take place, as prescribed by paragraph 2, with due respect
for national policy objectives and the level of development of individual Members.  Negotiations also
had to achieve concrete benefits in terms of market access in sectors and modes of export interest to
developing countries, which should not be hamper ed by administrative procedures resulting in a
denial of benefits.  She said that documents S/C SS/W/7 and S/CSS/W/13 were valid inputs and solid
bases for the establishment of the guidelines.  Her delegation shared many of their elements:  the
starting-point for the negotiations were existing commitments, request-offer was the main negotiating
modality, the assessment of trade had to feed into th e guidelines and the negotiations themselves.  She
supported section VII in S/CSS/W/13 on effective impl ementation of Article IV of the GATS;  in this
regard, she recalled the United States proposal for a needs assessment for developing countries, noting
that Article IV provided a ready identification of the needs of developing countries and that fulfillingS/CSS/M/7
Page 8
such needs would contribute to increasing the participation of developing countries to services trade.
She concurred with the African Group proposal that regional integration schemes among developing
countries be accommodated under Article V.  She called for the needs of small developing country
delegations to be taken into account in the frequency and scheduling of meetings.  She underscored
that the conduct and outcome of the negotiations had to take full account of the dependency of smalland vulnerable developing countries on services for their well-being.
26. The representative of Trinidad and Tobago echoed Jamaica's statement and concurred that
S/CSS/W/13 be used as a basis for the guidelines.  She stressed that appropriate flexibility had to be
granted to developing countries;  that the negotiations had to be conducted within the existing GATS
architecture;  that the participation of developing countries to services trade had to be increased;  that
the assessment of trade had to continue, with particular reference to the objectives in Article IV:1;
that Article IV had to be implemented and that the constraints of smaller delegations had to be takeninto account.  She said that the guidelines should include a specific reference to economic integration
agreements among developing countries being accommodated under Article V, analogous to the one
in the African Group proposal.
27. Echoing the statements by Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago, the representative of Barbados
expressed support for many of the principles contained in documents S/CSS/W/7 and S/CSS/W/13.
In his delegation's view, the negotiations had to be conducted to facilitate and ensure the realization of
developing countries' development objectives, with appropriate flexibility and due account of national
policy objectives, as provided for by Articles IV and XIX.  All sectors and modes had to be included
in the scope of the negotiations, with particular consideration given to the liberalization of those of
export interest to developing countries.  As for negotiating modalities, request-offer was the basicmethod, which could be supplemented by other approaches provided that they had been previously
agreed by all Members.  The start of the negotiations were existing commitments.  The pace of the
negotiations had to accommodate the capacity of small developing countries, both in Geneva and in
capital.  The operation and application of Article V was also of importance to his delegation.  He
concurred that the submission in S/CSS/W/13 be used as a basis for the guidelines, with the additionof some of the elements in document S/CSS/W/7.
28. The representative of Mauritius said that document S/CSS/W/13 was a welcome support to
the submission by his delegation on behalf of th e African Group.  It reconfirmed the importance of
respecting the principles and architecture of the GATS, of taking due account of the difficult market
situation of many developing countries and of increasing their services competitiveness through
technical assistance, investment and the setting-up of joint-ventures.  Articles IV and XIX provided
the basis and essential principles for the negotiations.  He agreed that the Secretariat bring togetherMembers' proposals into a consolidated first draft of the guidelines.
29. The representative of Turkey concurred with many of the elements in document S/CSS/W/13
and stressed in particular the importance of mode 4 issues, of no sectoral exclusion from the
negotiations and specifically of the inclusion of infrastructural sectors, and of credit being granted for
liberalization undertaken autonomously, so as to give impetus to the negotiations.
30. The representative of Australia was encouraged by the convergence of delegations' positions.
With respect to those issues where views differed, her delegation's position was that the starting-point
for the negotiations were Members' existing comm itments, and not their commitments at the end of
the Uruguay Round.  She supported the inclusion in the guidelines of a reference to a technical review
of the GATS.  She concurred that there should be no a priori exclusion of any sector or mode from the
negotiations but added that paragraph 9 in S/CSS/W/13, on liberalization focusing on areas of interest
to developing countries, had to be balanced with paragraph 6, on the negotiations promoting the
interests of all participants, as was also stated in the Preamble to the GATS;  she also warned of the
danger of trying to identify which were the sectors of export interest to developing countries.  SheS/CSS/M/7
Page 9
sought clarification on whether the reference to multilaterally agreed criteria in paragraph 13 on
autonomous liberalization in S/CSS/W/13 reflected  the approach in the paper submitted by Hong
Kong, China on the issue, and again on paragraph 20, which appeared to duplicate paragraph 13;  in
this regard, she said that paragraphs 8 and 9 in the submission by Switzerland were useful.  She
agreed that the Secretariat prepare a first draft of the guidelines and said that S/CSS/W/13 was a goodbasis from which to start.  She added that, in order to finalize the guidelines before March, and given
that Members might not have a firm take on the length of the negotiations by then, it might be
practical to compile the guidelines as a series of principles underpinning the negotiations;  detailed
dates and procedural issues that might be agreed upon subsequently could be set out in an
accompanying document.
31. Noting the emerging convergence of views, the representative of Hungary agreed that the
Secretariat prepare a first draft of the guidelines, on the basis of the submission in document
S/CSS/W/13, as well as other submissi ons and oral comments.  On the principles and objectives of the
negotiations, he reiterated that both the respect for the level of development of individual Members,
overall and in individual sectors, and the respect for their national policy objectives had to be
included, and echoed paragraph 4 in S/CSS/W/13.  He also referred to the principles of progressive
liberalization and appropriate flexibility for developing countries, and stressed that the GATSarchitecture had to be preserved.  As for scope, he concurred with paragraph 10 in S/CSS/W/13 that
the rule-making work was part of the negotiating package and that it was of equal importance to the
market access negotiations, and with paragraph 4 of the submission by the European Communities,
that disciplines on transparency and necessity were important to underpin market access;  the rule-
making work had to proceed in parallel with the market access negotiations and be concluded well inadvance of the end of the negotiations.  As for modalities, he said that the bilateral request-offer
approach did not preclude the recourse to other approaches if these were fully agreed to by all
Members and that the starting-point of the negotiations were Members' current schedules.  He agreed
to having a technical review of the GATS, with the understanding that it would not change the
existing architecture of the Agreement.  He echoed the European Communities that the work on-goingin the Committee on Specific Commitments on classification and scheduling be addressed throughout
the negotiations.  As for a standstill, his delegation had in principle no problem with a political
commitment, as long as it did not hinder the process of accession to the European Union;  in this
regard, he fully endorsed paragraph 2 of the EC submission.  On setting a timeframe for the
negotiations, he agreed that setting a deadline for their conclusion was premature but said that he
could consider setting milestones, such as a target date for the submission of requests.
32. The representative of Kenya observed that the submissions in S/CSS/W/7 and S/CSS/W/13
shared many similar elements, such as the preservation of the GATS architecture, the attention to
sectors and modes of interest to developing countries, request-offer as the main negotiating modality,
the granting of credit for autonomous liberalization and the attention to be paid to the needs of small
delegations.  He agreed to the Secretariat preparing a first draft of the guidelines, using the
submissions in S/CSS/W/7 and S/CSS/W/13 as base s but taking into account contributions by all
Members.
33. The representative of Hong Kong, China concur red that the Secretariat be tasked with the
preparation of a first draft of the guidelines.  He said that the guidelines had to be balanced and, in
that respect, observed that document S/CSS/W/13 contained elements which were of interest to the
delegations that had endorsed that submission, but not necessarily to all Members;  hence, hesuggested that the Secretariat document in Job N o. 5658 be used as a basis for the guidelines.  He
added that matters of ongoing work under the GATS should not be excluded from the negotiations.
With regard to the principles of the negotiations, he  said that the guidelines had to be balanced;  the
negotiations had to respect the GATS architecture, but should not prevent a review of the Agreement
on issues fully agreed to by Members.  He was sceptical about the European Communities suggestionthat a reference to sustainable development be included.  On scope, he said that the review andS/CSS/M/7
Page 10
negotiations of MFN exemptions had to be included, noted that a reference to the negotiations under
Article XIII was missing from S/CSS/W/13 and that the focus on sectors and modes of export interest
to developing countries was an admirable aim but that each Member had its own objectives and
suggested that the text be more neutral.  He sought clarification from Korea on the meaning of
reviewing the legal status of the commitments in maritime transport services in paragraph 6 of theirsubmission.  He agreed that a reference to the assessment of trade be included in the guidelines, but
sought clarification on the suggestion in paragraph 12 of S/CSS/W/13 that the negotiations be
adjusted in light of its results.  As for autonomous liberalization, he supported the formulation in
document S/CSS/W/13 and disagreed with the European Communities that the main issue in this
regard was transparency.  On modalities, the request-offer method could usefully be supplemented by
other approaches;  he concurred in principle that these should be agreed, but said that if some
Members wished to use an alternative method, as had been the case with the Understanding onFinancial Services, they could not be prevented from doing so, and therefore suggested that the
guidelines remain silent on the issue.  As for th e standstill, his delegation was still considering the
issue but could not agree with the second sentence in the proposal by the European Communities.
With regard to the timeframe of the negotiations, he  said that some dates should be included in the
guidelines, such as for the start of the market access negotiations and the rule-making work.  Heconcurred with the European Communities that the reference to effective implementation of
Article IV in S/CSS/W/13 should not be included in the guidelines.
34. The representative of New Zealand said that each proposal touched upon all the issues which
should be included in the guidelines as envisioned by Article XIX:3.  He stressed the importance that
no sector be excluded a priori and that the negotiations be conducted on the basis of request-offer aswell as other appropriate negotiating modalities Members might be able to agree upon;  in the latter
regard, he had taken note of the comment by Hong Kong, China.  He underscored the objectives of
Articles IV and XIX:2 in relation to developing and least-developed countries and supported the
proposal that they be given substance.  The guidelines had to take into account the outcome of the
reviews, and in particular of the review of air tran sport services;  he supported the formulation on the
issue in the submission by the African Group.  He agreed that the Secretariat produce a first draft of
the guidelines, taking into account all written and oral contributions, and hoped that the guidelines
could be agreed by the March stock-taking session.
35. The representative of the Czech Republic noted the great number of views expressed and the
emerging convergence of positions and agreed that the Secretariat prepare a first draft of the
guidelines.  His delegation favoured an ambitious approach to the negotiations, which should aim at
broad liberalization in all sectors, greater market access for all Members, reduced discrimination,promotion of the participation of developing countries, completion of the rule-making work as well as
work on scheduling and classification.
36. The representative of Morocco said that the negotiations had to ensure transparency and
promote the liberalization of sectors and modes of export interest to developing countries.  They had
to be conducted with due respect for national policy objectives and had to ensure appropriateflexibility, in accordance with Article XIX:2, for developing countries for opening fewer sectors,
liberalizing fewer types of transactions and progre ssively extending market access in line with their
development situation.  They could, for example, attach conditions to companies setting up a
commercial presence under mode 3.  She also said  that the measures taken by developed countries
under Article IV were insufficient, and that the negotiations had to focus on the effectiveimplementation of this Article;  she mentioned in particular information services, environmental
services, professional services, tourism, transport and construction services, as well as mode 4.  The
negotiations had to take place within the GATS architecture and the work of the subsidiary bodies, in
particular on safeguards, domestic regulation and in the Committee on Specific Commitments, had to
be concluded before market access negotiations could start.  Her delegation was still sceptical aboutS/CSS/M/7
Page 11
the concept of clusters, and felt that air transport services and sustainable development should not be
included in the guidelines.
37. The representative of Chile suggested that the Secretariat prepare the draft guidelines taking
account of all the proposals and drawing upon their si milarities, such as the principles set out in
Article XIX, request-offer being the main modality, there being no a priori exclusion of any sector ormode.  She hoped that Members could arrive at a consensus on a balanced draft quickly.
38. The representative of Egypt supported document S/CSS/W/13, as it reflected a large number
of elements in the submission by the African Group.  He said that the two papers were good bases for
the establishment of the guidelines.  He highlighted a number of elements of importance to his
delegation:  the need for flexibility for developing and least-developed countries and the need to
intensify efforts to finalize the modalities for the recognition and the granting of credit for
autonomous liberalization, so as to give a boost to efforts by developing countries in this respect.  Hisdelegation was flexible on a technical review of the legal inconsistencies in the GATS, as long as it
did not change the structure of the Agreement.  On the proposal that the Secretariat prepare a first
draft of the guidelines, he said that all delegations had to have an opportunity of expressing their
views and that the conclusions of the stock-taking session in March should not be prejudged.
39. The representative of Canada was encouraged by the large degree of convergence in
Members' positions.  She said that she would revert to the Korean proposal that Members focus on
infrastructural sectors.  As for document S/CSS/W/13, she sought clarification on the reason why a
reference to government procurement was missing from paragraph 10, on the meaning of adjusting
the negotiations in the light of the results of the assessment in paragraph 12 and on what form special
mechanisms for the effective implementation of Article IV would take.  She expressed support formany of the elements contained in the European Co mmunities submission, said that the proposal for a
technical review was interesting and endorsed the refe rence to Members' right to regulate to meet their
national policy objectives in paragraph 1(e).  She observed that over eighty Members had provided
contributions on the guidelines and that positions were converging in many respects and could
therefore support the proposal that the Secretariat prepare a first draft of the guidelines, to reflect allcontributions, including the one that her delegation would be submitting in the new year.
40. The representative of the Slovak Republic said that the negotiations had to be based on the
principles set out in Article XIX with a view to achieving progressively higher levels of liberalization,
with due respect for national policy objectives and the level of development of individual Members.
There should be no a priori exclusion of any sector or mode, in order to secure a balance of rights and
obligations and the interests of all Members.  She stressed the importance of completing the rule-
making work in order to give certainty and security.  The negotiations had to be conducted on thebasis of request-offer, to allow Members to choose sectors and modes or interest to them, and their
starting-point were Members' existing commitments.  She supported the proposal that the Secretariat
produce a first draft of the guidelines.
41. The representative of Cuba said that the objectives of the negotiations included not only
growth but also development.  She added that th e assessment of trade had not been completed, and
should be terminated before the guidelines could be established, as it had to feed into the guidelines.
On the assertion that there existed an imbalance in commitments, she stressed that this only reflected
Members' different levels of development.  She said that document S/CSS/W/13 reflected the
common interest of many developing countries as well as their spirit of compromise, and that it
represented a solid foundation, with the submission of the African Group, with which it shared manysimilarities, for the drawing up of the guidelines.
42. The representative of Panama echoed the statement by India and by the Dominican Republic
on behalf of the Paradisus Group.  He stressed th e importance of devoting great attention to makingS/CSS/M/7
Page 12
Article IV operational, also to avoid falling into the trap of implementation, by having broad-based
negotiations, with no a priori exclusion of sectors.  In this regard, he recalled the mandate for the
maritime transport negotiations, and sought clarification on whether the term "voluntary" in
paragraph 1 of the Decision on the negotiations on maritime transport services meant that they could
possibly not be part of a single undertaking.  He  concurred with the European Communities on the
importance of setting milestones for the negotiations , and called for constant monitoring of the whole
negotiating procedure to ensure transparency and the effective participation of all delegations.  Of
particular importance to smaller delegations was that meetings be scheduled in sequence and not in
parallel.  He asked that adequate resources be allocated in the budget for the swift translation of
documents.  As for the standstill, he said that every Member had a degree of flexibility up to the
commitments which it had bound, and that, in the absence of modalities for the treatment of
autonomous liberalization, a standstill might not be appropriate.
43. In view of the number of similarities in Members' positions, the representative of Singapore
hoped that the guidelines could be agreed before the stock-taking exercise in March.  He had outlined
his delegation's position at the previous meeting, and just wished to comment on some of the
proposals presented.  On the objective of the negotiations, he concurred that Articles XIX and IV
were instructive and supported the formulation in document S/CSS/W/13 and in the Koreansubmission, but was worried by the European Communities three proposed additions, including
sustainable development and pro-competitive disciplines, which he supported in national markets but
not in the form of multilaterally agreed rules.  As for the treatment autonomous liberalization, this did
not imply just transparency, but recognition and the granting of credit;  he concurred that the value of
autonomous liberalization was dependent on a Member's trading partners, but multilaterally agreedcriteria were essential to encourage Members to liberalize autonomously.  On scope, he observed that
a reference to the negotiations under Article XIII was missing from S/CSS/W/13 and should be
included.  He said that setting deadlines for the ne gotiations would be useful to provide impetus and
concurred with the proposal by Hong Kong, China.  He supported the proposal that the Secretariat
produce a first draft of the guidelines;  he was flexible as to the basis of such a draft, but noted thatS/CSS/W/13 was one of the most advanced proposals.
44. Commenting on document S/CSS/W/13, the representative of the United States said that he
endorsed the reference to national policy objectives, the respect for the existing architecture of the
GATS, the flexibility for developing country Members, the contribution of services liberalization to
economic growth, the relevance of Article IV;  he also supported the absence of references to the
review of MFN exemptions, the review of air transport services and a technical review of the GATS,
as these were not part of the negotiations.  He expressed concern about the overall balance of thepaper and sought clarification about the reference to mechanisms for the effective implementation of
Article IV in paragraph 21.  On the submission by Korea, he disagreed that setting a timetable for the
negotiations was premature and should be linked to progress made in other WTO activities and
stressed the importance of establishing benchmarks;  he supported the negotiating priorities set out in
section III.  As for the submission by Switzerland, he concurred with the points made about MFNexemptions and autonomous liberalization, and with the practical arrangements for the negotiations in
section IX;  on subsidies and necessity, he looked forward to the identification of problems to be
addressed.  On the proposal by the European Communities, he said that it was similar to the
submission by his delegation in many respects and that he had already identified where the two
proposals differed, such as on pro-competitive disciplines.  By way of more general comment, heexplained that their suggestion that the starting-point for requests in the negotiations be current
restrictions reflected his delegation's position and was not meant for inclusion in the guidelines;  he
also wondered whether any reference to the starting-point for the negotiations should be included in
the guidelines and what its implications would be.  On negotiating modalities and the use of
alternatives to the request-offer method, in additio n to Hong Kong, China's point he stressed that
requiring a consensus to use alternatives to request-offer would be unprecedented.  He echoed Japan's
call that the guidelines not undo the balance in the GATS by placing too much emphasis on only someS/CSS/M/7
Page 13
of its provisions and that the issues belonging to the guidelines not be confused with Members'
individual objectives, as the negotiations should aim to promote the interests of all participants.  As to
how the Secretariat should proceed with the drafting of the guidelines, he endorsed Norway's
comments.
45. By way of preliminary comments on the submissi on by Korea, the representative of Mexico
expressed concern with paragraph 5, as the neither the Understanding on accounting rates nor the
Annex on air transport services contained any explic it reference that the result of these two reviews
should be included in the negotiations, differently from the Annex on MFN exemptions, which
contained an explicit reference to the negotiati ons.  Air transport services and telecommunications
were part of the negotiations as sectors, but neither the air transport Annex nor the Understanding on
accounting rates could be subject to negotiations as legal instruments.  As for the reference to
technical review in paragraph 7, he said that he could support improving the clarity of provisions inthe Agreement, such as Article XX:2, as long this did not change the architecture of the GATS, but
that such a review did not belong to the negotiating forum, but rather to the regular sessions of the
Services Council.  Article XIX did not contain the legal basis to negotiate the text of the GATS, and
the guidelines should not include a reference to a technical review.  With respect the suggestion in
paragraph 8 on negotiating modalities, he said that his delegation could agree to supplementarymethods beyond request-offer only if such methods were strictly necessary, previously agreed upon
by all Members and respected the GATS architecture;  he said that paragraph 17 in S/CSS/W/13 was
sufficiently flexible to allow for the discussion of any optional method.  He asked if paragraph 14 was
meant to recognize that Article XIX provided developing countries with appropriate flexibility for
opening fewer sectors and liberalizing fewer types of transactions in the negotiations.  He alsoconcurred with the statements in paragraphs 15 and 16 about the importance of infrastructural
services, so long as this remained a negotiating objective and was not meant for multilateral
liberalization, and stressed that Members needed  to follow their own developmental and national
objectives.  As for the submission by Switzerland, he agreed with the statement in paragraph 7 that
alternative negotiating approaches should be used on a voluntary basis.  He had taken note ofparagraphs 8 and 9, but recalled the discussion that had taken place in the Special Session meeting
devoted to modalities for the treatment of autonomous liberalization and said that the issue needed to
be debated further and that the guidelines should contain a reference to it.
46. Responding to some of the questions posed on document S/CSS/W/13, the representative of
India explained that section VII had been inserted because the GATS contained no special and
differential treatment provisions;  Article IV only prescribed that the increasing participation ofdeveloping countries be facilitated through negotiated specific commitments, particularly relating tomarket access in sectors and modes of interest to developing countries, so that the right to negotiate
the implementation of this Article was fundamental.  He explained that paragraph 9 had to be seen in
light of the first sentence of the previous paragraph.  The Uruguay Round had neither achieved a
balance of rights and obligations nor promoted the interests of all participants, particularly those of
developing countries;  this had to be remedied in the negotiations, by focusing on the interests ofdeveloping countries, as stated in paragraph 9.  He acknowledged that there was an element of
repetition between paragraph 13 and 20, but explained that it intended to make clear that the
guidelines had to deal with modalities for the treatment of autonomous liberalization.  As for
paragraph 12, he observed that Article XIX:3 prescribed that the assessment of trade lead to the
establishment of the guidelines;  Members had however run into insurmountable statistical problemsand had therefore agreed that the assessment be on-going in order to provide useful pointers
throughout the negotiations, and was therefore linked to Article IV.  Commenting on the submission
by Korea, he expressed concern with paragraph 15, which appeared to be hinting at a possible cluster
on infrastructural sectors and sought further clarification.  As for the submission by the European
Communities, he was concerned by the reference to "any issue" in the second paragraph of 1(a),which seemed too broad, to "coherence" in the third paragraph in 1(a), which appeared to imply a
cluster, to pro-competitive principles in 1( c) and echoed Hong Kong, China's comments onS/CSS/M/7
Page 14
sustainable development and social policy.  He indicated that paragraph 1(e) mentioned national
policy objectives but lacked a reference to levels of development, and that the paper generally
contained no mention of developing countries.  As for paragraph 3, he said that the term
"comprehensive" in the first bullet should be changed to "no a priori exclusion";  the starting-point of
the negotiations were existing schedules, and he sought clarification on whether Members' reportingon their level of liberalization would be voluntary;  autonomous liberalization had to be addressed in a
multilateral context;  he still had reservations and questioned the value of a standstill;  he supported
the EC position on request-offer and supplementary negotiating modalities;  he indicated that deciding
whether a balance of rights and obligations had been achieved was only possible at the end of the
negotiations and that this would be more difficult with phased-in commitments;  he supported the
proposed treatment of least-developed countries, but reiterated that developing countries were
nowhere mentioned;  as for the organization of the negotiations, he expressed concern about theproliferation of subsidiary bodies.  On a more general note, he noted that there existed many areas of
convergence, but that divergence still existed with  respect to:  the negotiations being comprehensive
as opposed to there being no a priori exclusion;  pro-competitive disciplines;  standstill;  sustainable
development, social policy and coherence;  technical review, where he suggested that a list of issues
for review might possibly be drawn up;  negotia ting modalities, where there was a consensus that
request-offer be the main approach but differences existed with respect to supplementary methods and
on whether they required a consensus;  Article IV, the assessment of trade and autonomous
liberalization, which were all issues of importance to developing countries.
47. The representative of Brazil, speaking on behalf of Mercosur, explained that Article XIII had
been excluded from paragraph 10 in S/CSS/W/13 because government procurement was not
perceived as essential to the guidelines;  the negotiations under Article XIII were not strictly
concerned with rule-making, as was the case with Articles X and XV, as they were more related to
market access.  Commenting on the paper by the European Communities, he observed that it
contained no reference to developing countries and sought clarification on the meaning of "any issue"
in the second paragraph of 1(a), adding that at least one sector, namely the bulk of air transportservices, did not belong to the negotiations and expressing support for paragraph 5 in the submission
by Korea.  His delegation still had reservations on the suggestion about pro-competitive disciplines in
paragraph 1(c), as well as on the meaning of trade, environmental and social policies playing a
mutually supportive role in paragraph 1(d).  He had taken note of paragraph 1(f), but indicated that
government procurement was not a priority for developing countries and that emergency safeguards
and subsidies carried greater importance.  His delegation still remained to be convinced about the
need for a technical review and was supportive of paragraph 7 in the Korean submission.  As forelectronic commerce, he recalled that the Work Programme was on-going under the aegis of the
General Council and that electronic commerce was not part of the negotiations, and that only services
provided electronically or related to the provision of electronic commerce were subject to
negotiations.  As for paragraph 2 of section II, he recalled that paragraph 2(g) of the "road-map"
stated that at the stock-taking Members were to consider progress made and how to move forward.On section III, he concurred that the starting-point for the negotiations were existing commitments,
but wondered about the suggestion in the second sentence, noting that the GATS already contained
transparency provisions in Article III.  As for th e treatment of autonomous liberalization, he indicated
that transparency was not the main issue;  modalities had to be established first on the basis of
multilaterally agreed criteria and then Members could decide if more information was needed.  Hesaid that a standstill was not necessary for the negotiations.  He cautioned that the suggestion for
phase-ins conveyed the impression that there was a problem with the flexibility and progressive
liberalization principles in Article XIX, notin g that Article XX:1:(d) and (e) allowed for the
possibility of phased-in commitments.  He stressed that Article IV was neither limited to least-
developed countries nor was the concept of flexibility for liberalization.  On the rule-making workproceeding in tandem with the market access negotiations, he said that this was important provided
that the rule-making negotiations were conducted with the participation of all Members and with as
much substance as the market access negotiations.  As for a timeframe, he said that this could only beS/CSS/M/7
Page 15
set after the stock-taking sessions on services and agriculture, as the services negotiations were not
proceeding in isolation;  in this regard, he had found the suggestion in paragraph 12 of the Korean
paper interesting.  He concurred that the Services Council had an important role to play in the
negotiations, but reiterated that the overall guiding and monitoring role of the services and agriculture
negotiations rested with the General Council, and dr ew attention to the references to this effect in
S/CSS/W/13.  The representative of Pakistan associated himself fully with the statements by Brazil
and India.
48. By way of preliminary comments, the representative of Thailand sought clarification from the
delegation of Hong Kong, China on how the suggestion for a reference paper on electronic commerce
in paragraph 11 would fit with the Work Programme and further elaboration from the African Group
on paragraphs 5, 7(iii) and 10.  She would revert to the submission by Korea and to their paper on
autonomous liberalization.  As for the European Communities paper, she noted the lack of attention todeveloping countries, which needed to be redressed, and wondered which of the subsidiary bodies'
mandate would need to be reviewed, as suggested in section III.  Her delegation had difficulties with
the suggested three additional points for inclusion in the guidelines, namely sustainable development,
which would unnecessarily complicate the negotiations, pro-competitive principles, where she echoed
comments by Singapore, India and Brazil, and regulatory disciplines, as the negotiations had to focuson market access, not on the development of additional regulatory disciplines, and she sought further
clarification from the EC on whether they intended such disciplines to be developed in given sectors
where a consensus existed;  social polices also did not belong to the negotiations.  As for the
submission by Switzerland, she supported paragraph 16 on emergency safeguards, but was concerned
with the reference to clusters in paragraph 7, as well as the notion of "homogeneous levels ofcommitments", which seemed to reduce the flex ibility accorded to developing countries for
undertaking commitments in line with their level of development.  The argument for clusters was that
chain sectors should be liberalized together to attain meaningful liberalization in areas such as
electronic commerce, or, as in the Hong Kong, China, in a one-stop shop aspiration;  however, for her
delegation, cluster negotiations directly or indirectly forced developing countries to liberalize all thesectors in such a chain, whether or not they were ready for such liberalization.  She stressed that
liberalization had to take place in sectors and at a pace that Members were comfortable with.
49. Responding to comments by delegations, the representative of Korea explained that the
reference to reviewing the legal status of commitmen ts in maritime transport services in paragraph 6
was meant to suggest that the Council take up discussions where they had been left off in the maritime
transport negotiations.  He had taken note of the difference of views with the United States delegation
on the setting of a timetable.  With regard to Mexico's comment on distinguishing sectors frominstruments, he said that Article XIX contained no such definition or distinction, and noted that a
formulation similar to the one they had used was cont ained in the draft Seattle declaration.  On India's
comments about paragraphs 15 and 16, he explained that his delegation was not proposing a cluster,
but just that the negotiations focus on these areas.  Commenting on S/CSS/W/13, he concurred with
paragraph 13 that multilaterally agreed principles had to be developed for the treatment ofautonomous liberalization, and with paragraph 18 that work in the Committee on Specific
Commitments had to be concluded before the start of the market access negotiations.  As for the
European Communities submission, he said that transparency was not the only concern with respect to
autonomous liberalization and that the outcome of the discussion on the issue should not be
prejudged;  he echoed the suggestion that the stock-taking session discuss the organization of work aswell as the proposal for a technical review.  With regard to the submission by Switzerland, he
supported the language in paragraph 8 on the timeframe for the negotiations, as well as section III(v)
dealing with MFN exemptions;  as concerned the treatment of autonomous liberalization in section
(iii), he said that the evaluation was premature.
50. With regard to the reference to Article IV in document S/CSS/W/13, the representative of the
United States said that there was no question of the relevance of the provisions of this Article, butS/CSS/M/7
Page 16
sought further clarification of the meaning of "specific mechanisms for the effective implementation"
in paragraph 21.
51. The representative of Malaysia said that, whereas the importance of Articles IV and XIX was
obvious, where there was no agreement on some of the elements proposed for inclusion in the
guidelines, Members had to consider whether these should be included;  his delegation was concernedby the reference in the European Communities submission to pro-competitive disciplines, standstill,
sustainable development and social policy, and hoped that the EC would reconsider these issues.  He
was concerned about paragraphs 15 and 16 of th e Korean submission, which seemed to suggest a
cluster approach.  More generally, he asked that more time be allocated to this agenda item, to allow
for a more extensive discussion, as he felt that several issues had not been fully examined.
52. The representative of the European Communities indicated that only some parts of their paper
were relevant to the guidelines, whereas others were meant for discussion under agenda item B.
Responding to comments, he explained that the reference to "any issue" in paragraph 1(a) had been
included because any Member had the right to raise any issue and there should be no a priori
exclusions, so that the negotiations be transparent and open and promote the interests of all
participants.  On phase-ins, he indicated that the proposal was not meant to reduce the flexibility in
Article XIX, but rather represented one of many possible contributions to such flexibility.  As for therule-making work, he hoped for rapid progress, but felt that it would be artificial to split the
negotiations in different phases;  rules would be part of the final outcome of the negotiations and
hence the work had to proceed in parallel with the market access negotiations.  On the organization of
work, he explained that one of the functions of th e stock-taking exercise was to discuss and agree how
to move forward, including how to deal with ne gotiating proposals, such as the ones tabled by
Australia in document S/CSS/W/17 and India in  document S/CSS/W/12, and hence to consider
whether the Special Session could be expanded to  deal with such proposals, whether new working
groups needed to be established, whether the mandate of existing ones needed to be reviewed or
whether some issues needed to be grouped.  He stressed the importance of the Special Session of the
Services Council maintaining a strong  guiding role in the negotiations.
53. By way of preliminary comments on the submission by the European Communities, the
representative of Egypt echoed Mexico's comments on pro-competitive principles in section 1(c), said
that sustainable development was admirable but not relevant to the establishment of the guidelines,supported the reference to national policy objectives in paragraph 1(e) and the aim to complete the
rule-making work in section 1(f), and especially the work on safeguards.  He was still concerned by
the inclusion of a technical review, as it did not belong to the rule-making area;  he suggested that
identifying potential issues to be reviewed might be helpful.  The suggestion for the stock-takingsession envisaged in paragraph 2 was premature, and he recalled paragraph 2(g) of the road-map in
that respect.  He concurred that the starting-point for the negotiations were existing commitments, but
sought clarification about the suggestion in paragraph 3 that modalities be established for Members to
report on their level of liberalization.  On their suggestion for the treatment of autonomous
liberalization, he echoed the statements made by several developing countries.  He said that request-offer was the main negotiating modality and that his delegation was still unconvinced about the need
of using other approaches.  As for the timeframe of the negotiations, he said that this depended on the
stock-taking session and that it was premature to address the organization of the negotiations.
54. Concluding the discussion, the Chairman said that this item had been on the agenda of the
Special Session over several meetings.  There was broad support for his proposal that the Secretariat
be asked to produce a first draft text of the guidelines, consolidating proposals and building on
convergence while at the same time addressing discrepancies.  He said that the draft would draw from
all inputs, both oral and written, while noting that S/CSS/W/13 was helpful in that it was a very
advanced proposal.  He suggested that the Secretariat make the draft available to Members by the
third week in January, and that informal meetings be called in early February to refine the text;  heS/CSS/M/7
Page 17
stressed that it would be a first draft, the only purpose of which would be to provide a common basis
for further work, not the final one.  Responding to Malaysia's comment, he said that, while the
discussion on the issue had not been exhausted, it had been a full discussion, substantial time had been
devoted to it and a critical mass of proposals had been put forward.
55. The Council so agreed.
B. OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO THE NEGOTIATIONS UNDER ARTICLE XIX
OF THE GATS
56. The Chairman recalled that, at its last meeting, the Council had held a useful discussion under
this agenda item focusing on submissions by delegations on various issues relating to the negotiations
under Article XIX.  It had been pointed out that there was considerable overlap between this item and
item A of the agenda on guidelines and procedures, and it had been suggested that the two items,
being closely related, should be placed subsequently on the agenda;  that was why the item figured asB on the agenda.  He suggested that delegations focus on all matters under this item other than
negotiating guidelines.  He then drew delegations' attention to the communication on the negotiations
on maritime transport services from the delegations of the European Communities, Japan, Korea,
Norway, Singapore and Hong Kong, China contai ned in document S/CSS/W/8;  a communication on
the liberalization of movement of professionals under the GATS by the delegation of India indocument S/CSS/W/12;  a communication from the European Communities on an overall approach to
the services negotiations in document S/CSS/W/15;  a communication from Australia on a negotiating
proposal for telecommunication services in document S/CSS/W/17;  and a note by the Secretariat, in
Job No. 7436, on the incorporation into the GATT of successive schedules of concessions on goods.
57. The representative of India asked that his delegation's submission be placed also on the
agenda of the following meeting of the Special Se ssion to allow for a detailed presentation and full
discussion.  He then recalled that his delegation, along with a few others, had been instrumental in
introducing mode 4 into the GATS.  However, the results achieved in the Uruguay Round and in the
extended negotiations on mode 4 had been disappointing, and he pointed to the imbalance in
Members' commitments across modes;  the current negotiations were an opportunity to rectify thisimbalance.  He explained that his delegation's paper contained an empirical assessment of Members'
commitments on mode 4 and then focused on the specif ic problems with regard to such commitments,
due to their nature, to administrative procedures, economic needs tests (ENTs), recognition of
qualifications and licensing requirements and social security payments without the corresponding
benefits.  The paper then suggested strategies and approaches for effective liberalization.  It proposed
that the ILO International Standard Classification of Occupation be superimposed to the W/120
classification, as illustrated in the Annex.  It then suggested that multilateral norms be established toreduce the scope of ENTs, in the form of a Reference Paper on the use of ENTs, to address their
definition, criteria for their introduction, pro cedures for application, guidelines for their
administration, transparency and duration and revi ew of application.  It further suggested the
introduction of a GATS visa, to distinguish immigration and job-seeking from mode 4 and to try and
address the problem that it was generally immigration departments that dealt with the issue.  Thestrengthening of norms and disciplines on the recognition of qualifications was also proposed.  The
paper therefore suggested the establishment of modalities and administrative procedures for effecting
mode 4 liberalization, namely horizontal discussion of the issue in the Special Session, monitoring by
the Council of the implementation of Article VII notifications, adding that a proposal on the issue
would figure on the agenda of the following meeting of the Services Council, and the Committee onSpecific Commitments overseeing the implementati on of existing commitments relating to mode 4 as
laid down in the decision contained in S/L/16 dated 24 November 1995, so that the procedures
involved in granting visas and work permits be admi nistered in a reasonable, objective and impartial
manner in accordance with Article VI:1.  He asked that his delegation's submission be de-restricted.S/CSS/M/7
Page 18
58. The representative of the European Communities said that his delegation's submission,
document S/CSS/W/15, had already been presented under item A, so that he would focus only on
point 1(g) dealing with electronic commerce and introduce the paper circulated as S/C/W/183.  He
said that the outcome of the Work Programme on electronic commerce was relevant to the services
negotiations.  His delegation's starting point was that electronic commerce was not something new,but just commerce with telecommunications infrastructure.  It followed that the electronic delivery of
services fell within the scope of the GATS and that Internet access and network services were
telecommunications services covered by the Fourth Protocol and the Reference Paper.  Electronic
commerce required the availability of a number of services, such as telecommunications, computer-
related services, advertising, distribution and paymen t services;  the checklist included in the Annex
could be a useful tool for the negotiations.
59. The representative of Australia said that further work had to be undertaken to promote the
liberalization of telecommunications services and to that effect her delegation had submitted a
negotiating proposal.  Five items needed to be addressed to achieve higher levels of liberalization in
telecommunications services.  First, all Members should adopt in full the provisions of the Reference
Paper and consider whether a clear and shared understanding of all of its elements existed.  Her
delegation also proposed that Members work through debate and exchange of information to addressany lack of clarity and so as to reap the benefits of the Reference Paper in full, while emphasising that
the proposal did not call for renegotiating the Reference Paper.  Second, the review of the
Understanding on accounting rates had only begun addressing the issues involved and more work was
necessary.  Her delegation proposed that all international telecommunication services be recognized
as traded services and that international settlement s arising from such services be subject to the GATS
principles of transparency and non-discrimination.  Third, she noted that electronic commerce would
deliver the expected benefits only with widespread, equitable and cost-effective access to the
infrastructure supporting electronic transactions.  Her delegation was concerned by existing Internet
charging arrangements, which might not provide such access and might discourage businesses from
making optimal use of e-commerce.  APEC had done useful work on the issue, and she proposed thatMembers consider the approach taken by APEC telecommunications Ministers in May 2000, as
reflected in the Cancun Declaration, that Members "need not intervene in private business agreements
on international charging agreements for Internet services achieved in a competitive environment, but
where there are dominant players or de facto monopolies, Members must play a role in promoting fair
competition".  Her delegation also proposed that Members recognize that Internet delivery services,
i.e. transport systems, not the other aspects of the Internet such as content and audiovisual services,
were basic telecom services, and that the Reference Paper should apply to them.  Fourth, limitationson market access, particularly those limiting the type of legal entity or those which privileged some
satellite operators, should be removed.  Fifth, rules on domestic regulation affecting trade in
telecommunications services, such as on licensing requirements and technical standards, should be
developed.  Her delegation's proposal had been tabled because cost-effective and efficient
telecommunications services were requested as inputs to all sectors of the economy to promotegrowth.
60. A representative of the WTO Secretariat introduced the document contained in Job No. 7436.
He explained that it had been prepared by the Market Access Division and it illustrated, using Canada
as an example, how successive tariff concessions had been incorporated.  The complexity of the
exercise pointed to the need for the Special Session to consider how the results of the new round ofservices negotiations would be incorporated in Members' schedules, particularly bearing in mind that
the services schedules were more complicated than goods schedules.  The paper also pointed to the
difficulty, at the end of a negotiation, of submitting a consolidated schedule of commitments;
Members should consider the submission of the results of the negotiations, to be followed by a
process of consolidation which could imply replacing existing schedules with new ones.S/CSS/M/7
Page 19
61. Commenting on the submission in document S/CSS/W/8, the representative of Panama said
that the negotiations on maritime transport services needed to begin, as stated in the 1996 Decision
contained in document S/L/24.  He referred in particular to paragraph 4 of the Decision, which called
on the Council to keep under review the effects of the continued suspension of Article II, said that it
should be adhered to as soon as possible, suggesting that the Chairman engage in consultations on thematter.
62. The representative of Norway said that electronic commerce was a priority for his delegation
and that the submission of the European Communities had raised important issues.  He concurred with
the importance of facilitating the availability of services critical to electronic commerce, was positive
to the suggested checklist, which could be a useful tool, and agreed that the definition of public
telecommunication transport networks and services of the Annex on telecommunications included
also Internet access and network services.
63. The representative of Japan said that he would revert to the submissions tabled, which were
useful contributions to the stock-taking session in March.  His delegation was preparing its own
proposal, which they would submit before the end of 2000, in accordance with paragraph 2(c) of the
road-map.  As for maritime transport services, he concurred that the negotiations on the sector should
start as the sector needed to be subject to the appropriate treatment under the GATS.
64. The representative of the European Communities said that he would revert to the proposal by
Australia.  Commenting on the Indian submission, his initial reaction was that the proposal required
careful reflection.  The proposal to harmonize categories of natural persons according to the ILO
International Standard Classification of Occupation was worth of further exploration;  the suggestion
for economic needs tests was also interesting, and he would reflect further on the proposal for aReference Paper on ENTs;  without prejudice to his delegation's position, the proposal for a GATS
permit could also be discussed further.  His delegation shared India's effort to add predictability and
legal certainty to Members' commitments on mode 4.
65. By way of preliminary comments, the representative of Korea said that the Indian submission
was very comprehensive and deserved careful attention.  The Secretariat paper showed that the
simplest way of consolidating schedules, namely following the GATT practice of attaching the new
parts to the old ones, did not seem very viable;  he proposed that the issue be set aside for the time
being, with the understanding that Members could revert to it.  On maritime transport services, he said
that the results of the negotiations until June 1996 had to be observed, as prescribed by the relevant
Decision.  He called for the negotiations to resume as quickly as possible, said that they should be
comprehensive and include consideration of model schedules and of multi-modal transportation and
that a decision on what to do with the Negotiating Group on Maritime Transport Services should betaken at the March stock-taking session.  He further proposed that the Secretariat produce a collection
of Members' latest schedules and of related documents, as well as a paper on recent developments in
the sector, building on the Information Exchange documents, but not necessarily before the stock-
taking session.
66. The representative of Poland expressed support for the submission in S/CSS/W/8 and looked
forward to liberalization in maritime transport services, which should start from the 1996 Decision on
the basis of existing and improved offers.
67. The representative of Uruguay sought Members' views on the important issues raised in the
note by the Secretariat in document Job No. 7436, and said that the consolidation of schedules might
be useful.  He also said that the services and goods cases were different and underscored theimportance of deciding how the results of the new round of negotiations would be incorporated in
Members' schedules.  He stressed that the electronic database of consolidated schedules of services
commitments had no legal value.S/CSS/M/7
Page 20
68. The representative of Hungary expressed broad support for the submission by the European
Communities in document S/CSS/W/15 and referred Members to his earlier comments, under agenda
item A.  He welcomed India's submission and said that he would revert to it
69. The representative of the United States welcomed India's submission and said that his
delegation was ready to engage in serious discussions and would revert to it for detailed comments;
he added that the first part of the submission wa s similar to his delegation's approach, which would be
presented in the near future.  He concurred with comments by the Secretariat and the Korean
delegation as concerned the Secretariat note in Job No. 7436, which raised important issues which,
however, were not necessarily pressing ones.  He  could not support the suggested work by the
Secretariat on maritime transport services;  every Member had its own priorities, and how to address
them was a matter for decision at the stock-taking session.  He indicated that his delegation would
also be submitting proposals on telecommunications;  as for the Australian submission, he wouldrevert to it, but said that it required careful examination.  He indicated that the APEC principles also
called for further discussion of the issues raised in the Australian submission, and cautioned against
proposing measures which were contrary to the goal of liberalizing telecommunication services.
70. By way of preliminary comments, the representative of Switzerland welcomed the Indian
submission and noted the usefulness of discussing the expectations of developing countries.  As
concerned the call for sector-specific commitments for independent professionals, he stressed that
Switzerland had undertaken such commitments in the Third Protocol.  On the recognition of
qualifications, he called for further consideration, but stressed the importance of distinguishing market
access and national treatment issues from recognition issues.  As for procedures for visas and related
issues, his delegation was prepared to undertake further discussion but the Annex on the Movement ofNatural Persons had to be duly considered in th at context.  On maritime transport services, he
supported the submission in document S/CSS/W/8 and reiterated that there be no a priori exclusion of
sectors in the negotiations.  As for the Secretariat note, he said that the issue would be of extreme
relevance at the end of the negotiations and that an agreement needed to be reached before the final
offers were submitted;  it was premature at that stage, but he had no objections to Members raisingtechnical questions.  He would revert to the Australian suggestion, which overall fitted his
delegation's expectations on the issues which had to be dealt with when going beyond what had been
achieved in the negotiations on basic telecommunications.  As for the European Communities
proposal, he said that, at first glance, it appeared to be going in the right direction.  In the course of the
Work Programme on electronic commerce, his delegation had been worried by the Services Council
availing itself of the ability of interpreting the text of the GATS;  the European Communities
suggestions were focusing on those issues which need ed to be decided with regard to e-commerce and
in this respect provided the right approach.
71. The representative of Hong Kong, China expressed his delegation's strong interest in
comprehensive negotiations on maritime transport services.  He would revert to the Australian
proposal.  As for the Indian submission, he  said that Hong Kong, China was not a demandeur  in that
area, but had an interest in greater transparency and certainty of Members' commitments.  He wasconcerned by the reference to norms being drawn up, as in the WTO framework Members just had to
work within these in the least-tr ade restrictive manner, and requested further clarification.  He found
the proposal that the ILO International Standard Cl assification of Occupation be used interesting, as
the categories in Members' schedules, such as intra-corporate transferees, business visitors and the
like were not very clear or descriptive.
72. The representative of New Zealand said that he would revert to each of the submissions.  As
for maritime transport services, he fully endorsed th e statement in document S/CSS/W/8.  With regard
to the Secretariat note, he said that it raised an important issue which merited further reflection, even
though he recognized that for the time being it was not a priority.  In a preliminary manner, he
suggested that Members might wish to explore replacing the old scheduled with the new ones.S/CSS/M/7
Page 21
73. The representative of Mexico said that the European Communities proposal on electronic
commerce was premature, in view of the on-going Work Programme;  the issue could be addressed in
the regular sessions of the Council, but not in Special Session meetings.  As for the Australian
proposal, he said that it was interesting but that he disagreed with their interpretation of the
Understanding on accounting rates in paragraph 9;  he said that he would take up the issue in theregular meetings of the Council.
74. The representative of Canada said that discus sions on how to deal with different issues from
an organizational point of view should be taken up in  the stock-taking session in March.  She said that
the Indian proposal was useful to stimulate debate, for example on how to resolve the trade-off
between transparency and administrative burden and suggested that Members might consider making
use of enquiry and contact points and that having a list of temporary entry-related and specific mode 4
contacts could be useful even in preliminary stag es of the discussion.  She sought clarification on how
intra-corporate transferees in 3(a) differed from managers, executives and specialists in 3(c).  As for
the Secretariat note, she said that it raised important questions;  schedules had to be transparent and
user-friendly, and at the same time be legally certain.  She suggested that, given the complexities
involved and the on-going discussions in the Committee on Specific Commitments, Members not
postpone discussion of the issue too long and address it at least in a preliminary manner.
75. The representative of Brazil, speaking on behalf  of MERCOSUR, said that he would revert to
the submission by Australia.  He welcomed the I ndian proposal and said that it raised important
questions, such as on classification and domestic regulation.  As for the Secretariat note, he said that
the issue was of great importance and needed to be tackled, even if not necessarily as a matter of
priority.  He stressed that any approach for the consolidation of commitments had to take into accountthe fact that many Members needed to ratify their commitments by constitutional process.
76. The representative of Morocco drew Members' attention to the Annex on Maritime Transport
Services, the Ministerial Decision to continue the negotiations, the Negotiating Group on Maritime
Transport Services and the 1996 Decision suspending the negotiations until the present time.  Her
delegation supported the resumption of the negotiations to arrive at an agreement which fell within theGATS framework and which resulted in lower costs, particularly to developing countries.  In a
preliminary manner, she expressed support for the Indian proposal and said that she would revert to it.
77. The representative of Egypt welcomed the Indian submission as timely and helpful.  Mode 4
liberalization was important to address the asymmetry in commitments and he hoped that the
solutions proposed in the Indian submission could help achieve effective market access in mode 4.
78. The representative of the Dominican Republic supported the statement in S/CSS/W/8 and
stressed the importance of pro-competitive measures.  He also expressed support for the Indian
submission, noting that empirical evidence showed an asymmetry in Members' commitments across
modes.  Paragraph 18 of the paper was particularly interesting, as a GATS visa would be a great
innovation for developing countries, and welcomed the proposal to use the ILO International Standard
Classification of Occupation.
79. The representative of Guatemala stressed the importance of maritime transport services and of
resuming the negotiations, and hoped that higher levels of liberalization would be attained in this
sector similar to the ones realized in the telecommunications sector.
80. The representative of Pakistan reserved his delegation's right to revert to the submissions
tabled.  He recalled his delegation's interest in mode 4 liberalization and the proposals it had
submitted both in the Services Council and in the General Council.  The Indian submission containedproposals which could assist mode 4 liberalization and make Article IV of the GATS operational;  the
paper was comprehensive in reviewing both comm itments and limitations, such as economic needsS/CSS/M/7
Page 22
tests, lack of mutual recognition of qualifications and discretionary practices in visa regimes.  He
particularly supported the proposal that multilateral norms be established to diminish the scope for
discretionary practices in economic needs tests, and said that the a Reference Paper on the matter
could prove useful.  As for the European Communities proposal on e-commerce, in a preliminary way
he echoed Mexico's comments that the Special Session was not the appropriate forum and thatdiscussion of the issue was premature.
81. Concluding the discussion of this agenda item, the Chairman said that all submissions would
be included in the agenda of the next meeting of the Special Session.  He asked a representative of the
WTO Secretariat to respond to Korea's request for a compilation of commitments on maritime
transport services.  A representative of the WTO Secretariat indicated that such a compilation existed
already;  it had been produced at the end of the negotiations, and the Secretariat would check that itwas still up-to-date by inserting any commitments by countries that had since acceded to the WTO.
As for the Korean request for a paper examining de velopments in the sector, he had noted that the
delegation of the United States had requested that all such issues be addressed at the stock-taking
session in March.
C. ASSESSMENT OF TRADE IN SERVICES
82. The Chairman said that, at previous Council meetings, a number of delegations had pointed
out data and information problems that might affect Members' ability to trace developments in
services trade under the GATS.  At the same time, several delegations had mentioned the possibility
of new statistical sources being developed at national and international level, which might gradually
ease such problems.  Three new contributions had been submitted for this meeting:  the delegation of
the United States had provided information on sect oral services statistics from non-Balance-of-
Payments sources that were available for various US services industries in Job No. 4418/Add.1;  the
delegations of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Pola nd, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia had made a
submission on the assessment of trade in services in certain transition economies, contained in
document S/CSS/W/18;  and the Secretariat had updated its 1997 note reviewing statistics and
developments in international services trade.  He also recalled that, at the previous Special Sessionmeeting, the Korean delegation had submitted a paper on "Korea's Liberalization of Trade in Services
and its Impacts".
83. The representative of the United States recalled that, in occasion of the presentation by the
Secretariat of its document in Job No. 4418, Members had been invited to provide additional
contributions.  Hence, US governmental agencies and other relevant parties had been asked for
additional sources of statistical information to be ad ded to the Secretariat resources.  The information
presented had been drawn mostly from the US Bureau of the Census and could be accessed from theweb-sites indicated;  he would check whether the international sources identified had also been
included in the document.  His delegation would welcome additional similar contributions.
84. The representative of Slovenia, speaking also on behalf of the delegations of Bulgaria, the
Czech Republic, Poland and the Slovak Republic, said that light needed to be shed on the
development of trade in services as well as on the experiences of those Members with economies intransition or whose economies were in a post-transition phase.  With their note in document
S/CSS/W/18 they were distributing an OECD paper and explaining its nature as their contribution to
the assessment of trade exercise.  The paper had been prepared as background for the Round Table on
"Ten Years of Trade Liberalization in Transiti on Economies" organised by the OECD in July 2000
and attended by national officials and experts, representatives of OECD countries and of otherinternational organizations, including the WTO.  The document examined the role and the
development of trade in services in transition economies, and in particular in CEFTA countries, while
in some instances focusing on Slovenia.  It noted that, a decade ago, there was virtually no market for
services in former centrally planned economies, as the services sector in such countries wasS/CSS/M/7
Page 23
economically neglected and the regulatory structure underdeveloped.  Improving the environment for
the development of services was crucial to the modernisation of these economies, and governments
had to create entirely new legal structures and institutional capacities, simultaneously with the
adoption of GATS disciplines and liberalization commitments.  The participation of such economies
to the GATS liberalization contributed to their integration into world markets and to the developmentof sound trade policies, which in turn created an improved, transparent and predictable legal
framework for foreign and domestic services providers.  That led to increased efficiency, innovation
and economic growth.  On the other hand, liberalization often led also to competitive pressures on
domestic newly established providers, to the deterioration of the trade balance, and to reduced
economic policy options for governments to enhance development of their services sector.  Most of
the countries with transition economies shared an interest in seeing further development of the
multilateral trading system in the services sector, and it was considered important that the negotiationstake into account the specific concerns of these countries and that all the possible implications of
further liberalization on different countries and sectors be considered, pursuant to Article XIX:2.
85. Commenting on the substance of the paper, he said that it revealed the following
characteristics of services sectors in transition economies bearing upon liberalization of services trade:
in the past, no great attention had been paid to the development of services, in line with theideological perception that services were not vital to growth and development;  most services were
considered "unproductive labour" and their contribution to the efficient functioning of the economy
was neglected;  regulatory and institutional structures were underdeveloped or non-existent;  services
sectors were very rigidly regulated;  the trade regime lacked transparency;  and domestic services
providers were completed shielded from outside competition.  As a consequence, these countriesfaced poor development of most services sectors, inefficiency, absence of service culture and the
modest role of services in foreign trade.  At the beginning of the nineties, transition economies begun
to introduce regulatory measures enhancing competition among local suppliers, foreign exchange and
foreign trade liberalization.  The process of preparation to undertake GATS disciplines and
commitments enabled identification of existing barriers to services trade, represented an importantlearning experience for government administrations and gave impetus to trade liberalization through
the undertaking of GATS commitments.  Binding existing market access and national treatment in
GATS schedules provided for the irreversibility of on-going policy reforms and predictability as well
as transparency in transition economies.  The services export structure of these countries was still
dominated by traditional service sectors, in particular travel and transport.  Services liberalization
entailed new policy challenges; its main driving fo rces were related to market-oriented reforms.  In
most transition economies, the share of services in total trade declined in the 1990s, mainly because ofthe faster growth of their goods exports.  This mi ght be a reflection of retained advantages in goods
and of non-competitiveness in services;  the pressure for imports of competitive services and the
liberalization of services trade deteriorated the services balance.  Important non-economic
considerations related to services trade liberalization existed, such as national security, cultural
identity and social and regional policy objectives, which needed to be dealt with in the framework ofsafeguard provisions.  He then indicated that, at the end of the paper, the lessons learnt from the
experience of Slovenia and of some other transition economies were presented.  He would welcome
delegations' comments and reflections, and asked that the paper submitted by his delegation and the
delegations of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Poland and the Slovak Republic in document
S/CSS/W/18 be de-restricted.
86. A representative of the WTO Secretariat introduced the paper which updated its 1997 note
reviewing statistics and developments in intern ational services trade, contained in document
S/C/W/27/Add.1.  He highlighted the main developments since 1997.  As for data availability, he said
that an increasing number of countries had been reporting services trade on a Balance-of-Payments
basis;  broader-based information was therefore available on trade flows under modes 1, 2 and, to acertain degree, mode 4.  Little information was still available on mode 3 trade;  statistics on Foreign
Affiliates Trade compiled by the Unites States were the only comprehensive source of information,S/CSS/M/7
Page 24
even if other countries, mainly OECD members, had started collecting such statistics.  The level of
data aggregation remained relatively high;  for example, data for life and non-life insurance, or for
basic and value-added telecommunications services could not be distinguished.  With regard to trade
patterns, the share of top exporters and importers had not changed dramatically in recent years.
However, across all commercial services, the United States and Asia had expanded their shares inworld exports quite significantly;  by contrast, the European Communities had recorded a strong
decline.  On the import side, the United States had also increased its share, though less strongly, while
imports of the European Communities and of Asia had shrunk.  The underlying reasons were difficult
to identify.  Exchange rates and price movements might have played a role;  all statistics were
recorded in current prices and US dollars, so that fluctuations in the value of the US dollar were a
major factor and volume changes could not be distinguished from value changes.  Improvements in
reporting, sudden market changes, longer-term changes in industrial competitiveness could also havehad an effect.  It was impossible to determine to what extent these changes reflected policy
adjustments under the GATS;  it was difficult to see any effects of liberalization under the GATS, as
the Uruguay Round had mainly resulted in bindings of the status quo and any significant
liberalization, such as in basic telecommunications and financial services, had entered into effect only
too recently to have had an impact.  Therefore, while it was too early to answer the basic question ofwhat had happened to services trade, the motivation of governments to liberalize was not, normally, to
increase their share in world markets, but to increase efficiency and hence create income and
employment domestically.
87. The representative of Hungary thanked Slovenia for the valuable contribution to the
assessment and for showing the experience of countries in the process of transformation from
centrally planned markets to free enterprise economies.  He was pleased by the reference to the efforts
undertaken by his country and had found table 2 on page 8, showing the shares of scheduled entries
binding full and partial market access and national treatment commitments, particularly telling of the
causal link between trade liberalization and successful economic restructuring, as well as a good omen
for the negotiations.
88. The representative of Argentina said that he would revert to the submission presented by
Slovenia.  As concerned the Secretariat paper in document S/C/W/27/Add.1, he highlighted the first
paragraph of section II.A, which showed that the shar es of services exports in total exports of Latin
America and Asia were below the world average.  He also observed that, on a Balance-of-Payment
basis, North America and Western Europe had registered a trade surplus, while Africa, Asia and Latin
America had recorded deficits.  With regard to the concentration of trade, the paper showed that the
15 main services exporters and importers accounted for 70 per cent of total services trade and that thepicture had not changed throughout the 1990s.  He also pointed to the dependency of developing
countries on travel and transport services, as stated in the second paragraph on page 8, and said that
this information could be usefully explored.
89. The representative of Pakistan said that he would revert to the submissions tabled.  His
delegation attached great importance to the assessment, both from a quantitative and a qualitative
perspective.  He concurred that statistics were important to the assessment, but said that they were not
an end in themselves, but a mean to an end.  He said that the Uruguay Round had been concluded on
the basis of limited statistics, but that some statistics were available, and suggested that at some point
comparative work might be done on services trade flows at the end of the Uruguay Round and at
present.
90. The representative of Brazil said that he would revert to the submissions tabled.  By way of
preliminary comments on the Secretariat paper, he st ressed the importance of statistics for negotiators
to evaluate their countries' participation in services trade.  He echoed the statement by Argentina on
the participation of Latin America and Asia to services trade being below average and said that, since
the beginning of the 1990s, Brazil's Balance-of-Payment had registered continuous deficits inS/CSS/M/7
Page 25
services.  As for developing countries' dependance on travel and transport services, he was concerned
that increased deficits in services trade might have a bearing on goods trade and added that
liberalization of mode 3 might cause increased imports of goods.
91. The representative of the European Communities said that the comments by the Secretariat
were very relevant.  He welcomed individual contributions to the assessment like the one presented by
Slovenia.  It depicted an objective, neutral and very frank picture;  he felt that the statement in
paragraph 17, that the services negotiations were not a priority for the Slovenian authorities, was
contradicted by the great interest they had manifested with their paper.  He had found interesting the
conclusion in paragraph 26(b) on page 11 about the complementarity of services and goods
production.  The representative of Slovenia stressed that the OECD paper had been produced by
researchers and did not necessarily reflect the position of his government.
92. The representative of Mauritius said that statistics were important to advance Members' work
on the assessment.  Sources other than the Balance-of-Payments were useful and, in that respect, he
welcomed the United States submission.
93. The Chairman said that the Council would take note of the statements made and revert to this
item at its next meeting.
D. TOURISM SERVICES
94. The Chairman recalled that, at the previous meeting of the Special Session, the Secretariat
had presented a revised agenda for the tourism symposium to be held in early 2001, which had been
followed by comments from delegations.  An in formal meeting of interested delegations had
subsequently been held and had resulted in a new one-page draft agenda, circulated later as Job
No. 5842/Rev.1, dated 9 October 2000.  Following the suggestion of the Ambassador of theDominican Republic, he had proposed that the Council adopt the new draft agenda on the basis of a
written procedure.  Members had agreed that, if  no comments on the text were communicated to the
Secretariat by 27 October 2000, the draft agenda would be considered adopted.  On that basis, he
informed the Council that the agenda had been adopted.  He indicated that the Secretariat was in the
process of contacting potential speakers from the organizations specified in the agenda, and would
welcome recommendations from Members on speakers from the agreed organizations, as well as for
the speakers on national and regional experiences, in the ten days which followed.  A final agenda
would be circulated after speakers had been confirmed, and papers for the symposium would be
posted on the WTO Internet web-site as they were received.  He strongly urged Members to submit
any papers well in advance, in order to maximize the usefulness of the symposium.  He added that an
important outstanding issue was the actual date for the symposium and suggested that it be held on 27
February and, if needed, on 28 February.
95. He also recalled that a second main topic of discussion at the previous meeting had been the
proposal for a GATS annex on tourism by the Do minican Republic, El Salvador and Honduras,
contained in document S/C/W/127 and Corr.1, together with the presentation and discussion of the
paper submitted by the European Communities in document S/CSS/W/5.  Since the meeting, a new
communication had been submitted from the Dominican Republic, El Salvador and Honduras indocument S/CSS/W/9, containing replies to the comments received on the proposed Tourism Annex.
A further communication had just been received from the Dominican Republic, El Salvador,
Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama, contained in doc ument S/CSS/W/19, with a revised classification
of the tourism cluster.
96. The representative of the Dominican Republic asked that, due to shortage of time, the
submission by his own delegation and the delega tions of El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and
Panama in document S/CSS/W/19, containing a revised cluster of tourism industries, be placed on theS/CSS/M/7
Page 26
agenda of the next Special Session.  He indicated that document S/CSS/W/9 contained the statement
he had made orally at the previous meeting of the Special Session, when responding to Members'
comments on the proposed Tourism Annex.  He also drew delegations' attention to their commitment,
on page 4, to present a revised version of the Appendix to their proposal, which had indeed been
submitted in document S/CSS/W/19.  As for the suggested dates for the symposium, he could supportthe timing but said that one day might not be sufficient for the presentation also of national
experiences, and suggested that at least an additional half-a-day be scheduled for the event.  The
Chairman said that the Council would revert to the two submissions at its next meeting;  as for the
length of the symposium, he felt that scheduling only one day might help to keep the event focused.
97. The representative of Japan agreed with the date suggested by the Chairman.  He said that
document S/CSS/W/9 was a significant contribution.  He sought clarification about the reference to
anti-competitive practices in network services in section 3, about the anti-competitive practices whichwould result from mergers and acquisition of tour-operators and airlines and about the reference to
Codes of Conduct in section 5.  He also wondered whether the tourism sector presented characteristics
similar to the telecommunications sector, such as restricted competition, monopolistic and
oligopolistic structures, entry barriers, which made it necessary to have disciplines like the ones in the
telecom Reference Paper.
98. The representative of Korea also supported the Chairman's suggested date.  He observed that
both the European Communities and Dominican Republic submissions contained a reference to
sustainable development but that the concept seemed to be carry different meanings, and therefore
suggested that Members develop a common understandi ng of what sustainable development was.  He
then provided information on the fi rst APEC meeting of tourism ministers, held in Seoul in July 2000.
The Seoul Declaration, which was available on the Internet on http://www.apecsec.org.sg, contained
four policy goals, one of which referred to sustainable development;  this, in turn, implied five sub-
objectives, including fostering "ecologically sustainable development opportunities across the tourism
sector, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises, employment and providing for open and
sustainable tourism markets".  He indicated that Korea and New Zealand would co-chair the policyteam monitoring the development of sustainable tourism in APEC and that they had proposed the
development of a code of conduct.
99. The representative of Australia could support the symposium being held on 27 February, but
said that the event should last one day, to encourage a clear focus on those issues relevant to the
proposed GATS Annex on tourism.
100. Commenting on the submission by the European Communities in document S/CSS/W/5, the
representative of Turkey proposed two additions to the elements contained in Annex 1:  under
sector 1, renting of services concerning sea transport without operator, and under sector 3,
infrastructure of camping areas.
101. The representative of Canada could support the proposed date, but said that the symposium
should not be part of the "services week".  She observed that the agenda appeared tight and stressed
that sufficient time had to be allocated to it.  The Chairman confirmed that the symposium would not
be linked to the services cluster of meetings.
102. The representative of Mexico agreed with the Dominican Republic with respect to practices in
the tourism sector, but could not agree to any pr oposal that tried to develop sector-specific pro-
competitive disciplines.  He preferred to respect the general character of competition principles and
the neutral classification in the GATS.  He agreed with the proposed date for the symposium.
103. The representative of Panama supported the proposal by the Dominican Republic, El Salvador
and Honduras, and indicated that his delegation had joined them in the submission of a revisedS/CSS/M/7
Page 27
version of the Appendix to the proposal for a tourism Annex.  He also indicated that the additional
elements suggested by the representative of Turkey were contained in the revised Appendix.  He
supported the proposed date for the symposium, but advocated considering adding half-a-day to the
schedule of the event, to allow for discussion of national experiences, which were of great relevance.
104. The Chairman suggested that the symposium be held over one and a half days, on 27
February and in the morning of 28 February.  The Council so agreed.
105. By way of preliminary answers to the questions posed by Japan, the representative of the
Dominican Republic said that, as concerned network services in part III of their submission, the
proposal included sectors such as air transport serv ices, tour operators, computer reservation systems,
global distribution systems which made use of networks and were essential for tourists to get to their
destination.  As for anti-competitive practices, he hoped that the symposium would provide Members
with examples from the recount of national experiences.  As a first example, he mentioned that certainairlines' dominant position in key airports for interconnection to some destinations led to barriers to
entry for new airlines, implying discriminatory practices in the allocation of slots and also implied
that that not all tourists reached their destination on scheduled flights and that the only alternative
were charter flights provided by tour operators.  A second example were tour operators' anti-
competitive practices, such as mergers which result ed in increased vertical integration, implying a
diversion of local supply, such as local transport and guides, which were absorbed by the tour
operator, and in barriers to entry for new local operators wishing to come into the market.  He
indicated that he would be providing his answers in  writing.  With regard to codes of conduct, he
mentioned the abuse in the use of screens with in formation from computer reservation systems and
global distribution systems, resulting in certain airlines being discriminated against.  To prevent suchabuse, codes of conduct had been adopted which had a binding character and which drew penalties if
not fully applied.  He stressed the importance of taking the essence of the code and integrating it into
the GATS in an Annex, so that no discrimination took place in the use of computer reservation
systems.  He indicated that he had consulted with  the ITTC, IATA and ICAO and that what he was
proposing was already in national law.
106. Responding to Mexico's comment that pro-competitive issues should not be addressed on a
sectoral basis, the representative of the European Communities indicated that Members had already
had the experience of the telecommunication Reference Paper and suggested that Members explorewhether this would be useful also in the case of tourism.  His delegation's preliminary reaction was
that it would be, that the issue should be discussed further and that the examples provided by the
Dominican Republic could be useful in this respect.
107. The Chairman said that the Council would take note of the statements made and revert to this
item at its next meeting.
E. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT TO THE GENERAL COUNCIL – STATEMENT  BY
URUGUAY
108. The Chairman drew delegations' attenti on to document S/CSS/W/11, containing a
communication from the delegation of Uruguay conc erning the reports of the Chairman of the
Services Council to the General Council.
109. The representative of Uruguay recalled that, on 7 February 2000, the General Council had
decided that the negotiations on services and agriculture would be carried out in Special Sessions
which would both provide reports to the General Council.  He said that, as was the case for
agriculture, an item to that effect should be placed on the agenda of the Special Session of theServices Council, for Members to have an idea of th e outline of the report that the Chairman would
present to the General Council.  He also asked that the Chairman report be made available toS/CSS/M/7
Page 28
delegations sufficiently in advance of the General Council meeting.  He had noted that, since his
delegation's submission in document S/CSS/W/11, the Chairman's previous oral reports to the General
Council had been circulated in writing in docu ments S/CSS/1 and S/CSS/2, was grateful and asked
that the practice be continued in the future.  The representatives of Argentina and Brazil  echoed the
statement by Uruguay.
110. The Chairman acknowledged that a disparity in reporting practices had existed with respect to
the Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture, but indicated that he had talked to the Chairman
of that Committee and that the discrepancy had since been corrected and his reports to the General
Council were being regularly issued as formal documents.  He further indicated that, as concerned the
present meeting, the relevant report would not be ci rculated in advance of the meeting of the General
Council because the latter was scheduled for the following day.
F. WORK OF THE SUBSIDIARY BODIES – REPORTS BY CHAIRPERSONS
111. In keeping with what had been agreed concerning the regular reporting from the subsidiary
bodies to the Special Session, the Chairman invited the Chairpersons of those bodies to present their
oral reports.
112. The Chairman of the Committee on Specific Commitments, Mr. Tomo Uyama of Japan,
reported that, since his previous report, the Committee had held two formal meetings, on 4 October
and 28 November 2000, and three informal meetings, on 3 October, 31 October and 28 November
2000.  The Committee was working on two items:  the revision of the guidelines for the scheduling of
specific commitments and possible amendments to the existing services sectoral classification.
113. Since the previous meeting, there had been some important progress in the revision of the
scheduling guidelines, although there were still a small number of outstanding contentious issueswhich Members were trying to overcome as they approached the best endeavour deadline of March
2001.  The Committee had began discussions on a first draft of the revised scheduling guidelines, with
a view to reaching an agreement over the last contentious issues and over a number of technical
modifications to the text.  Although some obstacles still existed, delegations had shown increased
flexibility in their approach to the draft revised text and he was hopeful that the Committee might
conclude its work on the issue by March 2001.
114. The work on classification had seen another two rounds of informal discussions on services
sectors, namely environmental services, energy services, legal services, postal and courier services
and construction services.  Members also continued their discussions on the issue of “production on a
fee or contract basis”, which was relevant to the classification of some of the sectors under
examination.  In all sectors, Members focused their discussion on the classification of “core” sectors,
with the objective of amending the current sectoral classification where necessary and justified.Discussions on possible “clusters” in the environmenta l sectors were proceeding at a slower pace, also
in consideration of the link with the general debate on clusters in the Special Session.
115. In the sectoral discussions, Members continued to address the classification of environmental
services on the basis of a proposal by the European Communities.  At the end of the discussion, some
differences still remained on the question of the classification of water distribution services;  onenergy services, work advanced on the basis of a proposal by the United States, which linked a
number of activities in the energy sector to existing entries in the W/120 and in the CPC provisional
classifications.  The United States also proposed the creation of a new category in the W/120 titled
“energy services”;  on legal services, different views existed on whether to adopt a new detailed
classification based on the place of jurisdiction or whether to keep the current W/120 aggregated entryon “legal services”;  on postal and courier services, the debate continued to focus on the proposals byS/CSS/M/7
Page 29
the European Communities and the United States and on construction services on a proposal by New
Zealand.
116. The Committee was doing its best in order to complete its work on scheduling guidelines by
March 2001.  He was hopeful that Members would meet the target and for that purpose he was
planning to hold informal consultations before th e first formal meeting in 2001.  At the last meeting,
Members had emphasized that the completion of the work on the scheduling guidelines should
constitute a priority for the Committee.  On the other hand, although the work on classification had
intensified in the previous few months, at its last meeting the Committee had expressed a preference
for continuing work on the sectors at the current pace rather than accelerating before the end of March
2001.  This could signify that the Committee might not  be able to meet the best endeavour deadline
set by the Special Session with respect to that aspect of its on-going work.  However, the Committee
would be able to report on how its classification work was progressing by the March session, bytaking stock of the serious and constructive contributions submitted by various delegations.
117. The Chairman of the Working Party on GATS Rules, Mr. Tony Sims of the United Kingdom,
reported that, since the previous Special Session, the Working Party on GATS Rules had held one
formal meeting on 30 November, where it discussed the three issues on its agenda:  safeguards,
subsidies and government procurement.  The Working Party had also met informally to discuss issuesrelated to emergency safeguard measures.
118. On safeguards, the ASEAN Members had tabled a non-paper containing a Draft Agreement
on Emergency Safeguard Measures for Trade in Services, in Job No. 6830.  From 1 to 3 November,
the Working Party had met informally and exchange d views on the ten topics identified on the list of
issues governing its thematic discussion, contained in document Job No. 1979/Rev.1.  On thatoccasion, delegations also discussed the ASEAN non-paper and an earlier communication from Korea
on the definition of domestic industry contained in document Job No. 6034.  A report of this informal
meeting, made under the Chairman's own responsibility, was contained in Job No. 6943 and
Addendum 1.  The Working Party agreed to hold another informal meeting on the issue of emergency
safeguard measures at the beginning of 2001.
119. Since the last formal meeting of the Working Party, he had held a series of plurilateral and
multilateral consultations on the extension of the negotiating mandate under GATS Article X.  At its
last formal meeting, the Working Party had agreed that negotiations would continue until 15 March
2002.  At its meeting on 1 December, the Council for Trade in Services had adopted a decision to that
effect.
120. With respect to subsidies, the Checklist on Subs idies had been revised in order to take into
account a suggestion made at the September meeting of the Working Party.  At the last meeting,delegations addressed in informal mode the second item contained in the Checklist, namely the
examination of any evidence of subsidies which might have distortive effects on trade in services,
including production, distribution, consumption and export subsidies.  The delegation of Argentina
presented a non-paper on the definition of subsidies in services, contained in Job No. 6629.
121. On government procurement, the Secretariat circulated two informal papers, which had been
requested by the Working Party at its meeting of  7 July 2000:  a list of documents dealing with
relevant activities in the Working Group on Transparency in Government Procurement and the
Committee on Government Procurement, in document Job No. 7053, and a factual note compiling
services concessions made in the framework of the Agreement on Government Procurement, in
document Job No. 7072.
122. An informal meeting was scheduled for 7 and 8 February 2001.S/CSS/M/7
Page 30
123. The Chairman of the Working Party on Domestic Regulation, Mr. Sergio Escudero of Chile,
reported that, since his previous report to the 5-6 October meeting of the Special Session, the Working
Party on Domestic Regulation (WPDR) had held one formal meeting, on 29 November 2000.  The
debate primarily concerned further discussion of the informal document "Checklist of Issues for
WPDR".  The Secretariat introduced its synthesis of Members' reports on their domestic consultationswith professional services organizations, as well as a revised listing of international professional
organizations.
124. At the previous WPDR meeting, Members had agreed to provide examples of the kinds of
measures to be addressed by regulatory disciplines.  During the 29 November meeting, a few
examples were presented, with additional inputs promised in writing.  The Secretariat would also
review the documentation of the previous Working Party on Professional Services for relevant
examples.
125. Interest was again expressed in having the Secretariat compile information on jurisprudence
relating to the application of necessity provisions in the WTO.  As an interim step, Members agreed to
first review a 1998 document on this issue from the Trade and Environment Division before asking
the Secretariat for a new paper.  Further discussion of the informal Secretariat document "Checklist of
Issues for WPDR" focused on the issues of legitimate objectives, scope of the necessity test, criteriafor the necessity test, definition of regulation, and appropriate levels of transparency.  Members
agreed to revise the summary of the previous discussions to include the results of the meeting.
126. The Secretariat presented its "Synthesis of Results to Date of the Domestic Consultations in
Professional Services", with favourable initial responses from Members.  The delegations of Canada,
Chile, Mexico and Thailand then presented verbal reports of their domestic consultations withprofessional organizations regarding the applicability of the accountancy disciplines to other
professions.  Overall, however, the level of reports by Members remained low.  The meeting
concluded with a brief presentation by the Secretariat of the revised listing of international
professional services organizations, as based on Members' suggestions, which was edited to remove
regional organizations not open to all WTO Members.
127. An informal WPDR meeting would be held in February 2001.
128. The Chairman informed Members that the Chairman of the Committee on Financial Services,
Mr. Lofty-Abdel-Hamid of Egypt, had been unable to attend the meeting and that he was reporting in
his place.  He reported that, since the previous Special Session, the Committee on Trade in Financial
Services had held two formal meetings on 9 October and 29 November.  The Committee's discussions
had addressed the acceptance of the Fifth Protocol to the GATS, the classification of financial
services, and the proposal for requesting information from international organizations working onfinancial services regulatory issues.
129. With respect to the acceptance of the Fifth Protocol, the delegations of Kenya and Nigeria
informed the Committee of the conclusion of their domestic processes and of their requests for the re-
opening of the Fifth Protocol for acceptance.  Their acceptance would bring down to 7 the number of
Members whose 1997 financial services commitments had yet to enter into force.
130. Regarding the classification of financial services, a number of delegations were still reflecting
on questions raised by the delegation of Japan regarding the coverage by the classification in the
Annex on Financial Services of possible new activities that had appeared with the advent of Internet
and the rapid proliferation of electronic trading systems.  One delegation, however, felt that the broad
definitions of the Annex should in principle cover those activities and called for caution in addressing
those issues, as work by the Committee on that front could conflict with the general discussion takingS/CSS/M/7
Page 31
place in the Services Council, in relation to technological neutrality, under the Work Programme on
electronic commerce.
131. Regarding the proposal to request information from international organizations, the
Committee decided that more time for reflection and discussion was necessary.  While most
delegations supported undertaking the information ga thering exercise following a two step approach,
namely by first requesting written submissions from selected organizations and then deciding whether
oral presentations were necessary, three delegations continued to oppose it as they questioned the
objective of such an exercise.  The latter felt that the information gathering could develop into a
discussion on the legitimacy of Members' prudential regulations.
132. The next formal meeting of the Committee would take place in the cluster of services
meetings in March 2001.
133. The representative of the European Communities sa id that the report by the Chairman of the
Committee on Specific Commitments described the current situation in that Committee.  He felt that
work on the revision of the scheduling guidelines could be completed by the March best-endeavour
deadline.  On classification, however, more work was necessary and some issues might only be
resolved in negotiations, so that meeting the March deadline might be difficult;  he therefore
suggested that Members focus on the revision of th e scheduling guidelines.  As for the Working Party
on GATS Rules, he noted that the work on emergency safeguards had taken up most of the Working
Party's activity, which was justified in view of the deadline, but nonetheless stressed the importance
of the negotiations on government procurement.  He had been struck by the Working Party
Chairman's report in this regard, and hoped the Working Party might be able to spend more time on
the issue, which was of great importance for some sectors, such as construction services.
134. The Chairman said that the Council would take note of the reports and of the comments by
the delegation of the European Communities.
G. OTHER BUSINESS
135. The Chairman informed Members about the pr ovisional schedule of meetings for the
year 2001.  He had checked with the Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture and indicated that
their stock-taking session was scheduled from 28 March until 30 March.  He therefore suggested that
the services stock-taking session might be scheduled on 26 and 27 March.  He then indicated that the
provisional schedule of meetings for 2001, which further depended on the discussions at the stock-
taking session, consisted of five clusters of meetings, for which rooms had been provisionally blocked
on the following dates:  19 to 30 March;  9 to 18 May;  9 to 17 July;  1 to 5, 8 to 9 and 12 October;  26
November to 7 December.  He also indicated that a date would also need to be agreed for the meeting
of the review of air transport services.
136. A representative of the WTO Secretariat explained that the schedule had been dictated also by
the availability of meeting rooms and the need of avoiding conflicts with other formal meetings.
137. The representative of Canada said that her delegation had hoped for one more meeting to
discuss all proposals and to prepare for the stock-taking session in March.  She asked that sufficient
time be allocated in March to the discussion of all proposals.  The Chairman explained that he
intended to call one or more informal meetings before  March to discuss the first draft of the guidelines
that the Special Session had tasked the Secretariat with producing and to prepare for the stock-taking
session.
138. The representative of India said the he coul d support the Chairman's proposal.  The road-map
agreed on 26 May 2000 provided that proposals be submitted by the end of December 2000, on theS/CSS/M/7
Page 32
understanding that there would be flexibility for the submission of further or more detailed proposals
thereafter.  He stated that paragraph (g) of the road-map also provided that the second phase of the
negotiations would begin with a stock-taking exercise by the Special Session in March 2001, to
consider progress made and how to move forward, as part of a seamless stream, and not as an
irreversible deadline.
139. The representative of Brazil said that the services stock-taking session should take place after
the one on agriculture.  He added that it would be more convenient to consider the pace of the
negotiations and the number of meetings in 2001 in light of the discussions at the stock-taking.  The
representative of Bolivia stressed the importance of avoiding overlaps between meetings.  The
representative of Venezuela concurred, cautioned against the proliferation of informal meetings,
noting that the Council and the subsidiary bodies were planning on holding informal meetings before
the March cluster, and echoed India's comments that the stock-taking did not imply a cut-off date tofinalize issues.  The representative of Mexico supported the statements of the three previous speakers.
140. The Chairman said that informal meetings favoured transparency and recalled that in 2000 he
had called them only in conjunction with the adoption of the road-map document.
141. The representative of Thailand said that she needed time to consider the tentative schedule,
which would depend also on progress in the Working Party on GATS Rules and in the Committee on
Specific Commitments.  She said that the programme of work from March onwards could be decided
at the March stock-taking, and supported the proposal by Brazil that the services stock-taking session
be held after the one on agriculture.
142. While recognizing the usefulness of having tentative dates, the representative of Uruguay said
that his delegation needed to further consider the number of meetings, suggested that this be decided
at the stock-taking session and that dates be fixed only until May.  Given that services was not the
only issue for consideration at the stock-taking, he  suggested that the week of 26 March be fixed
without any indication of which stock-taking session would take place first and further proposed that a
decision on this issue be taken by the General Council.  The representatives of Bolivia, Colombia  and
Argentina concurred.  The representative of Cuba  echoed the statements by the representatives of
India, Venezuela, Mexico and Uruguay.
143. The representative of the European Communities said that it was for the Services Council to
set its own calendar.  He recalled that in the road-map it had been decided that the stock-taking
session would take place in March, and he found the suggested dates in late March acceptable.  As for
the tentative calendar, he said that being clear on the dates of meetings was important for their
preparation, and indicated that the Committee on Agriculture had set its own calendar.  He agreed that
informal meetings be held to prepare the stock-taking session in March.
144. The representative of the United States said that he could agree to the proposed schedule of
meetings, which was useful to plan future work and in view of the heavy agenda ahead.  He also
indicated that the Committee on Agriculture had set its own dates and that the Services Council
should be able to do likewise.  He concurred with the delegation of India that the stock-taking session,
which should be held in March in accordance with the road-map, was just a step along the way in thenegotiations.
145. The representative of Egypt said that he could agree with the tentative dates suggested by the
Chairman.  He looked at the stock-taking session to be a productive exercise.  However, it could not
be denied that the services negotiations were linked to work in other WTO areas and he doubted that
any conclusion could be reached on services before the agriculture stock-taking session had takenplace.S/CSS/M/7
Page 33
146. The representative of the Philippines said that he could agree with the tentative dates as well
as with the suggested number of meetings, also in view of the fact that the Committee on Agriculture
had already agreed that, in addition to the stock-taking session, it would be meeting four times in
2001.  He could agree to the services stock-taking session being held in the last week of March but
suggested that the actual dates be only tentative, as was the case for the dates of the agriculture stock-taking session.
147. The representative of Pakistan said that the frequency and scheduling of meetings had to take
into account the needs and capacity of developing countries delegations.  He cautioned against
rushing the negotiations and compromising quality for quantity and expressed support for the proposal
by Brazil.
148. The representative of Hong Kong, China expressed disappointment that the parity issue with
the negotiations on agriculture should rule the discussion in the Services Council.  He stressed the
importance of agreeing to the schedule and number of meetings in 2001.  He agreed with the last
week in March for the holding of the stock-taking session, said that the sequence with the agriculture
stock-taking session could be decided in a different forum but asked that two and-a-half days be set
aside for each session.
149. Summing up the discussion, the Chairman said that Members agreed that the stock-taking
session would take place during the last week of March;  he would consult as concerned the order of
the services and agriculture stock-taking sessions, and added that there should be no overlap of
meetings.  He had suggested tentative and notional dates, also in view of the calendar which had been
set in the Committee on Agriculture, which Members would discuss, along with the number of
meetings they wished to hold, at the stock-taking session.  He added that parity should not implysameness and that substance should be more important than process.
150. The representative of the European Communities said that, at a recent conference of the
European Services Forum, Article I:3 of the GATS was discussed and asked that the Secretariat
presentation at the event be distributed.  A representative of the WTO Secretariat said that the speech
given at the ESF Conference, which also addressed issues related to Article I:3, would be made
available.
___________