RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE S/NGBT/16
29July 1996
ORGANIZATION(96-3015)
Negotiating Group onBasic Telecommunications
REPORT ONTHE MEETING OF26APRIL 1996
1. TheNegotiating Group onBasic Telecommunications held itssixteenth meeting on
26April 1996. The agenda forthemeeting was contained inairgram WTO/AIR/316 of
19April 1996.
2. TheChairman noted thatPakistan andCôted'Ivoire hadannounced their intention to
become afullparticipant inthenegotiations. With thisaddition, thenumber offullparticipants
inthenegotiations rose tothirty-nine1while thenumber ofparticipants with observer status
stood attwenty-four2.
3. Under theagenda item onpresentation ofthelatest offers andrevisions ofoffers, the
Chairman announced thatCôted'Ivoire Iceland, India andPakistan hadsubmitted draft offers
bringing thetotal number ofdraft offers submitted byparticipants thus fartothirty-three.3
Inaddition, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Israel, Poland, Thailand andVenezuela
had submitted revisions totheir draft offers. An m.f.n. exemption list onbasic
telecommunications wassubmitted byIndia. These delegations were afforded theopportunity
tointroduce their new andrevised draft offers. Also, Colombia announced thatitwould be
submitting anoffer veryshortly. Australia saidthatitsGovernment intended tosubmit arevision
binding elements ofplanned liberalization. Hungary, Norway andSwitzerland announced that
theirforthcomingrevisionswouldincludeadditionalcommitmentsbasedontheReferencePaper.
TheChairman welcomed these developments, thanked thedelegations fortheir submissions
andreminded delegations thataresponse tothequestionnaire onbasic telecommunications
hadrecently been circulated byThailand.
1Argentina, Australia, Barbados, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Côted'Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, theCzech Republic, Dominican Republic,
Ecuador, Egypt, theEuropean Communities andtheirMember States (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom), Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, India, Israel, Japan,
Korea,Mauritius,Mexico,Morocco,NewZealand,Norway,Pakistan,Peru,thePhilippines,Poland,Singapore,SlovakRepublic,Switzerland,
Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, theUnited States andVenezuela.
2Bolivia, Bulgaria, Brunei Darussalam, theRepublic ofChina, Chinese Taipei, Costa Rica, ElSalvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Indonesia,
Jamaica, Latvia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Panama, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovenia, South Africa, Trinidad
&Tobago, United Arab Emirates, andUruguay.
3Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Côted'Ivoire, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, theEuropean
Communities anditsMember States, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, India, Israel, Japan, Korea, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, New
Zealand, Norway, Pakistan Peru, thePhilippines, Poland, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Switzerland, Thailand, Turkey, theUnited States
andVenezuela.
./.S/NGBT/16
Page2
4. The Chairman invited delegations toexchange views ontheresults thus farofthe
negotiations. Intheir assessments, anumber ofdelegations observed that substantial progress
hadbeen made inthesubmission ofoffers andthatimportant obstacles hadbeen addressed
within thecontext onwork onregulatory principles. However, many noted thatalthough the
quantity ofoffers wasencouraging there stillremained room forimprovement inthequality
ofoffers. Some indicated thattheresults were notyetofsufficient quality toyield asuccess
forthenegotiations andurged participants tocontinue intheir efforts toimprove offers. It
wasalsonoted thatmore offers concerning additional commitments ofregulatory principles
wereneeded.Somedelegationsalsocautionedagainstpossiblemovestoreconsiderandwithdraw
commitments relating tointernational services, saying thatsuch moves could pose aserous
threat toconcluding thenegotiations. Inthisvein, onedelegation urged thatparticipants should
take intoconsideration thediffering stages ofdevelopment oftelecom reforms inevaluating
theresults.
5. Under theagenda item onconsideration ofthedraft Protocol andthedraft Decision
oftheCouncil, theChairman invited delegations topropose comments ordrafting points. No
changes tothedraft Decision were proposed. Regarding thedraft Protocol, onedelegation
suggested thatthere should beashorter period oftime between acceptance andthedate of
entry intoforce oftheProtocol andproposed adateof30November 1997 asthedeadline for
acceptance while maintaining thedate of1January 1998 forentry intoforce. Thequestion
wasraised whether thetextoftheAnnex onNegotiations onBasic Telecommunications meant
thatm.f.n. exemption listscould besubmitted atanytime upuntil entry intoforce oftheProtocol
andwhether itmight bedesirable toconsider adding anelement totheProtocol toclarify that
theextent ofparticipants 'm.f.n. exemptions should bemade known bytheconclusion of
negotiations. Onedelegation noted thatitwasunlikely tobeabletosubmit anoffer by30April,
butwould want toensure that, ifitwere inaposition tosubmit anoffer prior totheentry into
force oftheProtocol, itsability toalsosubmit anm.f.n. exemption waspreserved. TheChairman
noted theconcerns expressed andindicated thatthey would bekept under consideration.
6. Regarding consideration ofthedraft final report ofthenegotiating group, theChairman
requested comments. One delegation observed thatitwasconsidering what group might be
assigned tomonitor telecommunications-related issues intheperiod oftime between the
conclusion ofthenegotiations andtheentry intoforce oftheresults andthatitmight make
specific suggestions atalater time. Noother comments orsuggestions were made onthedraft
final report.
7. Noissues were raised under other business. TheChairman reminded delegations that
thenext andfinal meeting oftheGroup would takeplace on30April andwould befollowed
byasession oftheCouncil forTrade inServices.