RESTRICTED  
 
GPA/ACC/AUS/7  
19 November 2015  
(15-6133)  Page: 1/3  
Committee on Government Procurement  Original: English  
 
  ACCESSION OF AUSTRALIA TO THE AGREEMENT ON GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT 
COMMUNICATION FROM CANADA 
The following communication, dated 18 November 2015, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of Canada. 
 
_______________ 
CANADA'S COMMENTS AND REQU ESTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS 
ON AUSTRALIA'S INITIAL OFFER 
Canada welcomes the submission by Australia of its initial market access offer (GPA/ACC/AUS/1) 
for accession to the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), circulated on 
8 September 2015. Canada is pleased with the quality of Australia's initial offer and believes it is a 
reflection of Australia's genuine interest in acceding to the GPA as quickly as possible. Canada shares Australia's desire for its timely accession to the GPA. 
 
Please find below Canada's initial comments and requests for improvements, based on Australia's initial offer and on Australia's replies to the Checklist of Issues (GPA/ACC/AUS/2). Canada reserves 
the right to submit additional questions and requ ests for improvements as Australia's accession 
process moves along.  Canada looks forward to working closely with Australia towards its successful accession to the GPA. 
 
Annex 1 – Central Government Entities  
1.  Canada notes that the list of 65 Annex 1 entities in Australia's initial offer does not match the 
67 entities included in Australia's Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) offer. Canada encourages Australia to include the following entities in its next revised offer: 
1. Australian Transportation Safety Bureau; and 
2. Old Parliament House 
2.  Canada requests clarification from Australia regarding the smaller number of entities covered in 
Australia's initial offer, relative to the 69 entities listed in the Australia-Japan FTA (JAEPA); the 
70 entities covered in the Australia-Korea FT A (KAFTA); and the 78 entities listed under 
17 "portfolios" in the Australia-United States FTA (AUSFTA). Canada requests that Australia provide an explanation for the differences in the nu mber of entities covered in its GPA offer versus 
its bilateral trade agreements. Specifically, are these differences the result of governmental 
reorganization or a result of differences in covera ge? If these changes are a result of governmental 
reorganization, would Australia be able to share any relevant information summarizing these 
changes? If these changes are a result of differences in coverage, Canada requests that Australia 
identify which entities have not been covered in Australia's initial GPA offer that are covered in one or more of its other trade agreements. 
3.  Canada notes Australia's response to Hong Ko ng, China's question regarding the exclusion, 
under note 2, of procurement by or on behalf of the Australian Government Solicitor. Canada 
suggests that Australia explore alternative language that more clearly states that the Government Solicitor is part of a covered entity (Attorney-General's Department). GPA/ACC/AUS/7 
- 2 - 
  4.  Canada seeks clarification from Australia on the need for and rationale of Note 3.d. on the 
Australian industry capability program. If this  program falls under the scope of GPA Article III, 
paragraphs 1 and 2 of GPA Article IV will not appl y to procurement that is part of the program. 
Annex 2 – Sub-Central Government Entities 
 
5.  Canada requests that Australia remove the reciprocity note in relation to Annex 2 entities 
coverage found on the cover page of its offer. 
6.  Canada notes that under New South Wales both the Department of Finance and Services  and 
the Office of Finance and Services  are listed. Can Australia confir m that these are two distinct 
entities? 
7.  Canada notes that the Integrity Commission in Ta smania is not included in Annex 2. Please 
explain the rationale behind this entity's exclusion. 
8.  As per Chinese Taipei's request, Canada suggests that Australia adjust the wording of 
Queensland's coverage so as to make clear that departments and the four listed entities are 
covered. 
9.  Canada requests that Australia share the latest Queensland Government Gazette notice that 
lists the entities considered to be a department of government pursuant to Section 14 of the Public 
Service Act 2008.  
Annex 3 – Other Entities 
 10.  In order to achieve market access comparable with that of Canada in its Annex 3 coverage, 
Canada requests the reduction of Australia's Annex 3 thresholds for goods and services to 
355,000 SDRs. 
11.  Canada notes that in previous agreements Australia has offered Annex 3 coverage that goes 
beyond the 25 entities listed in its initial GPA offer. For instance, Australia covers 26 entities under 
JAEPA and 32 entities under the AUSFTA. Canada requests that Australia provide an explanation for the differences in the number of entities listed. Specifically, are they the result of governmental 
reorganization or of difference in coverage? If these differences are a result of governmental 
reorganization, would Australia be able to share with Canada any relevant information summarizing these changes? If they result from a difference in coverage, Canada requests that Australia identify which entities have not been covered in Australia's initial GPA offer that are 
covered in one or more of its other trade agreements. 
12.  In reply to question 7 of the Checklist of Issues  (p. 14), Australia states that there "are also 
other corporate Commonwealth entities that are not subject to the Commonwealth Procurement 
Rules or Australia's international trade obligations." Could Australia please share a list of these 
"other corporate Commonwealth entities"? 
Annex 5 – Services 
 
13.  Canada requests that Australia offer services coverage similar to its services coverage in the 
TPP, i.e. all services except for: 
a. plasma fractionation services; 
b. government advertising services; 
c. health and welfare services; and 
d. research and development services. 
14.  Canada requests that Australia remove  the reciprocity note under Annex 5. GPA/ACC/AUS/7 
- 3 - 
  Annex 7 – General Notes 
 15.  With regard to General Note 2., can Australia provide an explanation as to why this note is 
necessary? Please provide examples as to where th is type of action or non-disclosure would be 
necessary in a manner that is not already covered by Article III of the GPA. 
16.  Canada requests that Australia provide an explanation as to why Note 4. is necessary. How 
does Australia deal with "unsolicited innovative proposals"? Can Australia provide a reference to a 
government policy, regulation or guidance docume nt that sets out how procuring entities should 
respond to "unsolicited innovative proposals"? Furthermore, please provide examples of "unsolicited innovative proposals". 
 
__________