RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/REG109/M/3
15 May 2003
(03-2611)
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements
EXAMINATION OF THE FREE TRADE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND MEXICO, SERVICES
Note on the Meeting of 3 April 2003
Chairman: Mr. J. Meetoo (Mauritius)
1. The meeting was convened in document WTO/AIR/2056/Rev.1.
2. Under Agenda Item C.I, the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA or
Committee) took up the examination of the services aspects of the Agreement between the EuropeanCommunities (EC) and Mexico.  The following topics were discussed:
A. General Remarks
B. Section I – Background Information on the Agreement
C. Section II - Provisions Affecting Trade in Services
3. The Chairman said that the Committee would be carrying out the first round of examination
of the Services aspects of the Agreement between the EC and Mexico.  The EC-Mexico Economic
Partnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement had been signed in Brussels on 8
December 1997 and had entered into force on 1 October 2000.  Following the entry into force of the
Partnership Agreement, the EU-Mexico Joint C ouncil had implemented the objectives laid down in
articles 6, 9, 12(2)(b) and 50, covering trade in se rvices, through Decision No. 2/2001.  This Decision
had been notified to the WTO on 21 June 2002.  The notification, together with the Standard Format,
was contained in document S/C/N/192.  The te xt of such Decision appeared in document
WT/REG109/4, recently distributed.  He then recalled that the decision to refer this Agreement for
examination to the CRTA had been taken on 17 July 2002 by the Council for Trade in Services
(document S/C/M/61).  Pursuant to  paragraph 7(a) of Article V of  the GATS, the CRTA should examine
the services aspects of the Agreement between the EC and Mexico and report to the Council for Trade
in Services on its consistency.
A. GENERAL REMARKS
4. The representative of the European Communities, speaking also on behalf of Mexico, stated
that the Agreement between the EC and the United Mexican States was a trade liberalization
agreement covering trade in services.  Decision No 2/2001 of the EU-Mexico Joint Council of 27
February 2001 had implemented the objectives laid down in various articles of the EconomicPartnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement signed in Brussels on 8 December 1997.
The relevant Articles were specified in the notifica tion.  This trade in services Agreement therefore
formed part of a wider process of trade liberalization, as referred to in Article V:2 of the GATS.  As for
its coverage, it should be noted that the Agreement used in some cases different terminology to that
used in the GATS.  That might make it difficult to  make direct comparisons with the terminology of
the GATS, notably with respect to the four modes of supply, but coverage of services was,
nonetheless, comprehensive.  While the terms for the modes of supply were not used in the same wayWT/REG109/M/3
Page 2
as in the GATS, none of them had been excluded from the Agreement.  Sectoral coverage was
universal, as all services activities were covered, subject only to the limited exceptions foreseen under
Article 2 concerning coverage.  Specific provisions dealt with financial services and with international
maritime transport, including door-to-door and intermodal transport operations involving sea-leg,
where the principle of non-discriminatory access to the market was affirmed.  Subject to those limitedexclusions, the decision made provision for the progressive elimination over a ten-year transitional
period of substantially all remaining discriminatory measures.  It required the Parties to refrain from
adopting new or more discriminatory measures as regards services or services suppliers of the other
Party, in comparison with the treatment accorded to its  own like services or services suppliers.  There
were no provisions which affected the treatment of services and services suppliers from third parties,
and no modifications to the Schedules of Specific Commitments had been proposed.  No provisions
raised the overall level of barriers to trade in serv ices in respect of any WTO Member not party to the
Agreement.  Finally, the EC and Mexico would be happy to receive any questions that Members
might have on the basis of the notification made to the WTO.
5. Referring to the fact that the issue of notification was being considered in the Negotiating
Group on Rules, the representative of the United States noted that the Agreement had entered into
force in January 2001 but had been notified only a year later, and asked what the constraints were for
that.  Her delegation had a long list of questions on the Agreement, which would be sent to the Parties
in writing; document WT/REG109/4, which had been distributed after the circulation of the airgram
and therefore had not been considered by the capital experts, might however already provide some of
the replies.  The representative of the European Co mmunities replied that the delay in the notification
could be explained by the amount of work generated by the current negotiations and that her
delegation would be happy to reply to any questions submitted in written form.
B. SECTION I – B ACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE AGREEMENT
6. Noting that the list of restrictions was to be defined within three years from the signature of
the Agreement in 2000, the representative of Chile asked whether such definition had progressed and
if, once the work had been concluded, it would be notified to the Committee.  The representative of
the European Communities replied that the three-year period had started in March 2001; the EC-
Mexico Joint Committee was still working on that and the final text would come out eventually.
7. The representative of Japan noted that the Agreement provided for exceptions in the coverage
as regards audio-visual, air services and maritime cabotage.  It was his understanding that the audio-
visual sector was not excluded from other agreements to which either the EC or Mexico were party,
and he requested the Parties to provide the reasons and background for that.  The representative of the
European Communities indicated that she would reply later to that question.
C. SECTION II - P ROVISIONS AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES
8. The representative of Japan referred to Article 7.3 of the Decision in WT/REG109/4, which
stated that the Joint Committee was to come up with a decision providing for the elimination of
substantially all remaining discrimination between the Parties.  In that context, he wondered whether
it was the intention of the Parties to include all the four modes of supply, as in the GATS Schedules ofCommitments, and whether it was going to be a positive list.  The representative of the European
Communities replied that the Agreement itself indicated that the four modes of supply would be
covered; the question of how that was going to be done, namely through a top-down or bottom-up
coverage, was currently being discussed and she was not in a position to comment on that.
9. The Chairman said that the first round of the services aspects of the Agreement between the
European Communities and Mexico had allowed the Committee to clarify a number of points, butWT/REG109/M/3
Page 3
some remained pending.  He asked delegations to submit questions to the Secretariat by end of July
2003 and for the Parties to submit replies by the end of October 2003.
10. The Committee took note of the comments made.
__________