RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE S/GBT/M/5
31January 1997
ORGANIZATION(97-0385)
Group onBasic Telecommunications
REPORT OFTHE MEETING OF15JANUARY 1997
1. TheGroup onBasic Telecommunications helditsfifthmeeting on15January 1997. Theagenda
forthemeeting wascontained inWTO/AIR/500 of16December 1996.
2. Under thefirstagenda item, exchange ofviews onprogress inbilateral negotiations, itwas
noted thatbilaterals hadonlybegun andwould becontinued through therestoftheweek. The
representative oftheUnited States indicated hisavailability toexchange bilaterally onamutual basis
information about internal measures. Therepresentative ofJapan noted thatthesharing ofinformation
withalltheparticipants would beveryuseful forfurther understanding oftheUSproposed rules on
benchmarks foraccounting rates, particularly inrelation toMFN obligations.
3. Onpresentation ofneworrevised draftoffers, Bolivia formally submitted anewdraftoffer
onbasic telecommunications. Canada andSwitzerland submitted draftrevised offers andSingapore
indicated thatitsrevision would besubmitted thenextday.Canada alsostated thattheywerecontinuing
toreview theiroffer, inorder tobeabletomake further improvements. Therepresentative ofGhana
saidthatamultilateral agreement onBasic Telecommunications would bebeneficial tothedevelopment
ofGhana 'stelecommunication sector, inview oftheir policy ofliberalisation andprivate sector
participation. Healsoannounced that,following progress inbilateral negotiations, Ghana intended
tosubmit anewoffer onbasic telecommunications byendofJanuary 1997. Therepresentative of
Indonesia stressed thatIndonesia 'sofferwould takeintoaccount national development interests, and
inparticular thewishnottojeopardize domestic service industries atanearly stage ofdevelopment.
Mexico informed participants thatasof1January 1997 theirdomestic market hadbeenopened to
competition forbasictelecommunication services, andthatthiswould bereflected intheMexican offer.
Therepresentative ofRomania announced thathiscountry intended toparticipate tothenegotiations
onbasic telecommunications andthatadraftofferhadbeenprepared andwasbeing reviewed bythe
government. Several other delegations, including Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hong Kong, Indonesia,
Jamaica, Singapore andSouth Africa announced thattheyintended tosubmit neworrevised offers.
TheChairman reminded participants thatMinisters hadagreed inSingapore onastatement calling
forasuccessfulagreementbythedeadlineandinviteddelegationstocomeforwardwithneworimproved
offers by31January.
4. Under thethirdagenda item, discussion ofoutstanding issues, thedelegation ofSwitzerland
introduced aninformal paper oninternational services, circulated inlateNovember 1996 inorder to
contribute toabetter understanding oftheissue. Some delegations expressed concern about thephrase
‘subject tospectrum availability ',which appeared inthemarket access limitation column ofthebasic
telecommunication offers ofseveral countries. Onedelegation argued thatthespectrum being alimited
natural resource, itsallocation andassignment should notconstitute aviolation ofArticle XVIofGATS,
aslongasitsmanagement washandled inaccordance withother GATS obligations. Another delegation
suggested thatforthisreason itwould bebetter tosimplify theschedules byremoving thewords ‘subject
tospectrum availability 'fromthemarket access limitations column andallowing those countries who
would need todosotoinsert numerical limitations. However, another delegation noted thatthe
management ofthespectrum wasnotexclusively atechnical matter. Itwassuggested itmight beuseful
./.S/GBT/M/5
Page2
totrytodevelop anunderstanding between allparticipants astohowtoregard themanagement of
suchascarce resource, inorder toenhance thesecurity ofoffers. Other delegations, although they
agreed thatthewording ‘subject tospectrum availability 'wasnotclear, wereconcerned thatthedeletion
ofsuchwords might notresolve theproblem, andsuggested thatasolution might consist infinding
alternative words. Onedelegation saidtheywished tounderstand better thetechnical implications of
thephrase ‘subject tospectrum availability 'andwhether, ifthere were offers which contained this
phrase andoffers which didnot,thiswould create animbalance. TheChairman saidthatifsome form
oftextweretoemerge fromthediscussions among participants onspectrum availability, hecould offer
tocirculate anyproposed texttotheGroup forconsideration atthenextmeeting.
Regarding participation intheITUspectrum coordination process, onedelegation noted that
GATSobligationsshouldalsoapplytotechnicalcoordinationexercisestakingplaceinanothermultilateral
forum. Ontheapplication ofcompetition rulestoISOsandtoISOsaffiliates, onedelegation suggested
thatthismight leadtotheexclusion ofsuchentities frommarket access. Thedelegation alsostressed
thattheymighthavegeneralproblemswithsuchaninterpretationoftheGATS,althoughtheyrecognized
thatMembers hadtherighttoapply competition rulesinamanner consistent withGATS obligations.
Onissuesrelatingtovideotransmission,onedelegationsaidthatthedefinitionofbasictelecommunication
services should include thetransport ofsignals ofallkinds, while thecontent ofthesignal transported
would constitute adifferent service andshould bedealtwithinanother sector oftheschedule ofspecific
commitments.
TheChairman agreed toproduce arevision ofthe‘Notes forScheduling Basic Telecom Services
Commitments ',circulated asdocument S/GBT/W/2 on26November 1996, taking intoaccount further
suggestions made byparticipants.
5. Onfuture work, theChairman noted thatthenextmeetings oftheGroup werescheduled for
31January 1997 and10February 1997. TheChairman invited participants tosubmit theirnewor
revised draftoffers by31January 1997, sothatitwould bepossible tohaveasmany offers aspossible
bythatdate. Healsoasked theSecretariat toproduce, intimeforthemeeting of10February, afirst
draftofthereport oftheGroup onBasic Telecommunications totheCouncil ofTrade inServices.
Hesuggested thatdelegations consider whether toholdthemeeting of10February 1997 withthe
participation ofhighlevelofficials.
Other business
6. SomedelegationsnotedthattheirpositionswithrespecttotheUSproposedrule-makingregarding
benchmarks foraccounting rateswere notfullyindicated inthereport ofthe14November meeting
(S/GBT/M/4). Accordingly theyrequested thattheirpositions bereflected inthereport anditwas
soagreed.