RESTRICTED  
  
S/C/M/121  
 
9 March 2015  
(15-1311)  Page: 1/28  
Council for Trade in Services    
 
 REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 5 FEBRUARY 2015 
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
The Council for Trade in Services held a High-Level Meeting on the Operationalization of the 
LDC services waiver on 5 February 2015 chaire d by Ambassador Choi (Republic of Korea). The 
agenda was contained in document WTO/AIR/CTS/1. 
The Chairman welcomed the Minister of Commerce of Bangladesh, H.E. Mr Tofail Ahmed, 
and the Minister of Trade, Industry and Cooper atives of Uganda, H.E. Mrs Amelia Kyambadde.  
The agenda was adopted.  
The Chairman reminded delegations that the LDC services waiver was testament to the 
shared understanding of the Membership that services preferences constituted a positive effort 
towards facilitating the increased participation of least-developed countries in trade in services. 
The Ministerial Decision that had adopted the se rvices waiver noted specifically that least-
developed countries were confronted with exceptio nal circumstances justifying a waiver from the 
MFN principle in their favour. The waiver Decision enabled Members to notify and grant more 
favourable treatment to services and service suppliers of LDCs with respect to measures falling within the six categories of market access listed in Article XVI of the GATS, or any other measures 
if approved by the Council for Trade in Services . Since the adoption of the waiver Decision in 
December 2011, Members had collectively grappled with the operationalization of the LDC services 
waiver, and no preferences had been notified hitherto.  
The Bali Decision concerning the operationalization of the waiver, contained in document 
WT/L/918, marked an important milestone in en couraging its full implementation. The Decision 
had instructed the Council for Trade in Services to initiate a process to promote the expeditious and effective operationalization of the waiver. As part  of this process, the operationalization of the 
waiver had been made a standing item on the Council's agenda, providing Members an opportunity 
to offer each other updates, share information, and seek and present clarifications. Furthermore, 
the Decision mandated the Services Council to periodically review the operationalization of the 
waiver and provides for the possibility to reco mmend steps to be taken towards enhancing the 
waiver's operationalization. As such, Ministers had envisaged that the Services Council play a pro-active role in promoting the operationalization of the waiver.  
In addition, the Bali Decision had instructed the Services Council to convene a High-Level 
Meeting, six months after the submission of the LDC collective request, "with a view to 
accelerating the process of securing meaningf ul preferences for LDCs' services and service 
suppliers". "At that meeting, developed and developing countries, in a position to do so, shall 
indicate sectors and modes of supply where they in tend to provide preferential treatment to LDC 
services and services suppliers". Accordingly, the Chairman expected the High-Level Meeting to be 
one important milestone towards the full operationalization of the waiver. 
The Chairman also recalled that the date and agenda for this High-Level Meeting had been 
agreed through a consultative process back in December 2014. In particular, it had been agreed that the meeting be convened as a formal meet ing of the Council for Trade in Services and 
                                               
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to thei r rights and obligations under the WTO. S/C/M/121 
 
- 2 - 
 
  conducted in line with the Council's Rules of Procedure. Hence, all statements made during the 
meeting would be reflected in a formal record.  
1  ITEM A – OPENING STATEMENTS  1.1.  The Chairman announced that the Director-General had provided, by video-message, a few 
short remarks, to be followed by a full opening st atement by Deputy Director-General Yi, on behalf 
of the Director-General.  
1.2.  The Director-General stated that it was vi tal that Members implement all the elements of the 
Bali package without delay – and particularly the decisions on LDC issues. The Decision on 
operationalising the LDC services waiver was extrem ely important in this context. Services exports 
from LDCs were increasing rapidly, though of cour se they were starting fr om a very low base. WTO 
Members had a duty to support the growth of this  sector. He urged potential preference-granting 
Members to indicate where they intend to prov ide preferential treatment to LDC services and 
service suppliers. He further urged all Members to agree some clear 'next steps' to take the operationalization of the waiver forward. Whil e Members could make important progress at the 
High-Level Meeting, continued engagement wo uld be needed to ensure that meaningful 
preferences are provided. He stood ready to help in that effort in any way he could.  
1.3.  The current year was crucial for the WTO, and crucial for LDCs. The WTO must take the 
services waiver and all of the Bali issues forward in the interests of the LDCs. The WTO must also 
deliver a work programme on the remaining DDA issues which puts development – and LDC issues – at its heart. The Director-General stated that he would be following the High-Level Meeting with great interest. He had asked Deputy-Director General Yi to attend the meeting on his behalf and to 
report back in detail. He would also be consulting with Ambassador Aparr (Uganda), as the LDC 
Coordinator, on the next steps. He would, in a ddition, be discussing the issue, and others, with 
LDC Ambassadors at the retreat in Montreux in tw o weeks' time. He looked forward to playing a 
full part in taking forward the outcomes of this  High-Level Meeting and wished delegates a very 
productive session.  
1.4.  Deputy Director-General Yi, speaking on be half of the Director-General, noted that the High-
Level Meeting marked a very special occasion in that, for the first time, the WTO was focusing its 
attention on the granting of preferences for least-developed countries in the area of trade in services. He noted that services had in the past  often been treated as an area of trade for 
developed countries and emerging markets. Yet all countries, including least-developed countries, 
were exporting services. In fact, the average annu al growth of LDC exports of commercial services 
stood at an impressive 14% between 2000 and 2013 . This continuous growth had allowed LDCs to 
double their share in global trade of commercial se rvices during that period. However, that share 
was overall still very, very small, standing at 1. 2% of total trade in commercial services in 2013, 
for a total of US$105 billion. For a long time, tourism had been the main services export of many least-developed countries, but evidence of the deve lopment of services export capacity in other 
sectors, such as ICT services in Bangladesh, air transport services in Ethiopia, and education and 
computer services in Uganda –to name but a few - was encouraging. That LDCs increase their export-potential for services was not only import ant with regard to the net revenue earned, but 
also with regard to the strategic role that services play for development. The services share in the 
production, sale, and export of manufactured goods amounted to some 26% for developing 
countries, indicating that usage of efficient and competitively priced services was a key determinant of competitiveness of all exports.  
1.5.  The development of LDC domestic services capacity and their increased participation in world 
services trade was a clearly stipulated objective of  the multilateral trading system. This objective 
was enshrined in the Preamble to the General Agreement on Trade in Services, and further 
elaborated in Article IV of the Agreement. The GATS sought, inter alia, to achieve the greater 
participation of least-developed countries by giving special priority to the liberalization of market access in sectors and modes of supply of special interest to them.  
1.6.  The GATS was built on the paradigm of achiev ing a progressively higher level of liberalization 
through successive rounds of negotiations. In such negotiations, special priority was to be given to 
the interests of developing and least-developed coun tries. However, the absence of a conclusion of S/C/M/121 
 
- 3 - 
 
  the DDA services negotiations thus far meant that the Membership had not been able yet to 
deliver on this objective.  
1.7.  The services waiver that Members adopted in 2011 was not directly linked to the outcome of 
multilateral negotiations. The waiver allowed Members, at any time during its 15 year existence, to 
notify the preferential reduction of trade barrier s for the benefit of LDCs. The reasons why LDCs 
did not export more services are manifold: it has been pointed out that supply-side constraints – relating to human capital, access to technology and finance are important factors. Here, assistance 
through other means was called for, and indeed, the "Modalities for the Special Treatment for 
Least-Developed Country Members in the Negotiations on Trade in Services"(contained in document TN/S/13) which Members adopted in 2003, calls upon Members to take measures within their capacity to address such supply-side prob lems. Aid for Trade and the Enhanced Integrated 
Framework were additional mechanisms through which these issues could be tackled. But in 
addition to problems on the supply-side, there were also real market access barriers that impeded LDC exports of otherwise competitive services. So me of these barriers had been brought down in 
regional services agreements, but least-developed countries had hardly benefitted from these 
initiatives. 
1.8.  DDG Yi noted that the High-Level Meeting had been agreed by Ministers in Bali with a view to 
contributing to the operationalization of the LDC services waiver that was adopted in 2011. As was 
well known since the agreement on the services  waiver, no preferences for least-developed 
countries had been notified. Potential granters of  preferences had in the past expressed the view 
that they needed to know more about the concrete preferences which would be commercially 
meaningful for least-developed countries. On the other hand, LDCs had argued that the scope of 
the waiver already indicated areas of restrictions that could be lowered for the benefit of LDCs. This pattern of dialogue had changed since July  2014, when the LDC Group presented its collective 
request to the Membership, detailing those sect ors and modes in which preferences would be 
desirable. Next to market access restrictions that hamper LDC services exports, the collective 
request also indicated a number of regulatory measures, the relaxation of which would facilitate 
exports by LDC service suppliers. Following the coll ective request, LDCs had engaged in bilateral 
discussions with a large number of Members that form their main target markets, with a view to assisting in the design of meaningful preference s. The High-Level Meeting - six months after the 
circulation of the collective request - marked an opportunity to hear indications from developed 
and developing countries in a position to do so, about the sectors and modes in which they were 
intending to provide preferences, and to seek fu rther inputs and reactions from the many LDCs 
present. The meeting was not, and was never meant to be, the end of the process, but it would be 
an important opportunity to take stock of what could be done. 
1.9.  Minister Kyambadde of Uganda, as coordi nator of the LDC Group, recalled the progress 
achieved at the Bali Ministerial Conference in that many Members lauded the results on Trade 
Facilitation as the first Agreement from the Doha Development Round in WTO history. However, 
the Bali Decision to operationalize the LDC services  waiver came with promises of concrete results, 
after the LDC Group had tabled a collective request.  In Bali, LDCs recognized that the promise to 
grant preferential treatment to LDCs services and services suppliers in the form of a waiver, was 
suffering from attrition. The waiver Decision ha d a shelf-life of only 15 years. Three years had 
slipped away with no notifications of commitments from any Member in favour of services preferences to LDCs. While a less than perfect soluti on to remedy the problem, a collective request 
followed by this High-Level Meeting was agreed upon. To define what was commercially 
meaningful to LDC suppliers, Members had asked LDCs to come forward with research-based requests. The collective request reflected the LD Cs definition of commercially meaningful 
preferences.  
1.10.  After submitting the collective request, the LDC Group quickly engaged in bilateral meetings 
with over 30 Members in order to better explai n LDCs interests and expectations. Some Members 
had claimed that the LDCs had overly high expect ations from this High-Level Meeting. However, 
the collective request had already lowered ambition compared to what LDCs had aspired to at the 
start of the services negotiations in 2000, the st art of the Doha Round in 2001, and with regard to 
efforts to see the GATS provisions in favour of LDCs implemented. 
1.11.  The WTO was celebrating its 20th anniversary this year. She was optimistic that LDCs could 
also celebrate by coming out of the High-Level Meeting with concrete commitments in the form of S/C/M/121 
 
- 4 - 
 
  preferences responding to the LDC collective request, and expeditiously notified to the Council for 
Trade in Services. 
1.12.  The WTO Secretariat 2013 Report on Market Access for Products and Services of Export 
Interest to least-developed countries stated that  LDC's share of world services exports were a 
meagre 0.6% in 2012. The updated report of 20 14 showed that in 2013, LDC supply of services 
accounted for 0.7% of world exports. This data revealed that although the export growth was 
marginal, there was potential for higher growth for LDCs than other developing countries and the 
rest of the world. In terms of sectors, the colle ctive request focused on those areas prioritized by 
the LDC Group as a collective. LDCs had directed their attention to key sectors and modes of supply where research revealed LDC suppliers were having difficulties. Examples included various professional services reflected in the Annex to the request, and in the broad priority sectors 
categorized in the request such as travel and tourism, ICT and other business services, 
banking/non-bank financial services, transportation and logistics-related services, education and training services, and creative industry services. The collective request also highlighted a number 
of services mined from conditional DDA offers, where preferences could be provided to LDCs. 
1.13.  She reminded those Members who held the view that they had already bound everything in 
their existing GATS schedules and could not provide any preference, that the waiver was needed in 
the first place so that Members could seek derogation from the GATS Article II (MFN treatment) 
requirements in order to provide a preference. As far as the sectors and modes of supply were concerned, the LDC request had provided specificity, priorities, and flexibility. LDCs had reduced their ambition on the supply of services throug h the movement of natural persons (mode 4). In 
the collective request, aside from market acce ss and quotas, LDCs had actually focused their 
attention on preferences in administrative areas such as reducing procedures, reducing fees and paperwork for visas, work permits, residence pe rmits and the like, for cases where LDC service 
suppliers had received an offer or obtained a contract from preference-granting countries. Onerous 
application fees for visas, licenses, and residence and work permits were for many LDCs tantamount to one month's salary for their families, and resulted in a severe loss in cases in which 
the visa was not granted and the fees were no t returned. LDCs believed that Members could 
provide preferences to LDC service suppliers in the form of reduced application procedures and 
reduced fees, whether or not the granting Member was providing market access preferences or bindings. 
1.14.  With regard to commercial presence (mode 3), LDC small and medium sized enterprises had 
endured barriers similar to those found with regard to presence of persons (mode 4), in terms of burdensome paperwork; restrictions; and requirements that rendered the ability to establish a 
commercial presence impossible. 
1.15.  Some Members had informed the LDC Group that their markets were already open and that 
they were considering assistance initiatives to help LDC suppliers avail themselves of such 
openness. However, LDCs were seeking market acce ss bindings and certainty. Technical assistance 
and capacity building in response to the additional  element in paragraph 4 of the MC9 Decision and 
the collective request, paragraph 3.2, remained supplemental. Technical assistance should not 
replace the mandate in the MC9 Decision to provid e preferences.  The waiver would not be needed 
to discuss technical assistance and capacity bu ilding. Regarding preferences on par with RTA 
commitments, LDCs would welcome intentions that responded to their collective request and were followed up by notification. The LDC Group would not dictate to Members how to respond to the 
request, but preferences needed to be meanin gful and notified to the Services Council. 
1.16.  In closing, she noted that Members had always argued that it did not matter what the 
nature and form of the Bali outcome was. Rather, what mattered was that it was an outcome 
borne out of good will and consensus of the en tire Membership. LDCs wanted to believe the 
Membership. The High-Level Meeting would be a decisive test on the credibility of the Organization. A successful outcome of the meeting would greatly impact the lives and livelihoods of millions of poor people in LDCs. 
1.17.  The Chairman thanked the speakers and proposed that the Council take note of the 
statements made. 
1.18.  It was so agreed. S/C/M/121 
 
- 5 - 
 
  2  ITEM B – INDICATIONS BY DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPING MEMBERS, IN A POSITION 
TO DO SO, OF SECTORS AND MODES OF SUPPLY WHERE THEY IN TEND TO PROVIDE 
PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT TO LDC SERVICES AND SERVICE SUPPLIERS, AND OF THE EXPECTED TIME-FRAME FOR THE NOTIFICATION OF SUCH PREFERENCES 
2.1.  The Chairman recalled that Ministers in Bali had directed the Council for Trade in Services to 
convene a High-Level Meeting six months after the submission of an LDC collective request. Under 
the present agenda item, "developed and developing Members, in a position to do so, shall 
indicate sectors and modes of supply where they in tend to provide preferential treatment to LDC 
services and service suppliers." He further reca lled that Members had agreed in December to 
indicate, to the extent possible, the expected ti me-frame for the notification of preferences. 
2.2.  Minister Ahmed of Bangladesh endorsed th e views of the LDC coordinator and mentioned that 
he had started his journey in WTO negotiations way back in 1996 as Commerce Minister of 
Bangladesh. He had had the opportunity to lead the LDC Group in the first WTO Ministerial Conference held in Singapore in 1996, where LDCs  first raised the issue of duty-free & quota-free 
(DFQF) market access for LDCs. In fact, LDCs had high hopes and expectations from the WTO 
system. However, they now felt frustrated to see DFQF market access was yet to be provided to LDCs by all developed partners, and that many of  the LDC issues still remained either unresolved 
or unimplemented and LDCs still remained marginalized in international trade even after 20 years 
of existence of the WTO.  
2.3.  The issue of preferential market access in  services was a long-standing one. It was a well-
recognized fact that LDCs needed preferential market access to better integrate them into the 
multilateral trading system. In this spirit, the GATS provided for special priority to LDCs. However, 
LDCs had to negotiate for years to develop a mechanism for providing this special priority. The waiver Decision had been agreed in 2011 though the GATS had come into force already in 1995. 
The waiver Decision had not yet been operationalized. Bangladesh attached great importance to 
trade as an engine of growth and developmen t, and had been trying to benefit from the 
opportunities evolving in the multilateral trading system for improving socio-economic 
development. As a result, the contribution of trade to Bangladesh's GDP was increasing 
progressively. The Government, led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, had set a vision to make the country a middle income one by 2021, the Golden Jubilee Year of National Independence. By 
achieving this target, Bangladesh wants to graduate from LDC status and achieve a better socio-
economic situation for its people. It was also the dream of the father of the Nation, Bangabandhu 
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, to make Bangladesh "Son ar Bangla" (Golden Bangladesh), where people 
would live with peace and prosperity. 
2.4.  To achieve the goal of becoming a middle- income country by 2021, faster growth of the 
economy was needed by utilizing trade opportunities. Bangladesh's situation in trade in goods had improved, in part because of DFQF market access in various markets. Trade in services still 
remained very poor even though 50% of Bangla desh's GDP came from services, and the country 
had enormous potential in services. With a population of 160 million, Bangladesh had a large pool of human resources, capable of providing a divers e range of services based, if proper market 
access opportunities were provided. He urged all trading partners to come up with generous offers, 
and with an open mind to operationalize the services waiver so that LDCs can accelerate their 
process of development and alleviate poverty.  
2.5.  The representative of Mexico emphasized hi s delegation's support for granting preferential 
treatment to LDCs services to promote their gr eater integration into the international trading 
system. Mexico had free trade agreements with 45 different countries and among them, there were some countries with development levels similar to the levels of LDCs. Mexico was currently 
considering granting LDCs similar treatment to that provided for in those treaties. As a participant 
in the negotiations on the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA), Mexico had regularly insisted on granting LDCs the benefits resulting from th e negotiations of this future agreement.  
2.6.  Mexico was considering granting specific preferences concerning GATS Article XVI-type 
measures, in response to the collective request submitted by the LDCs in July 2014, particularly 
the elements included in section A and the individual requests received during bilateral meetings. More specifically, his delegation considered granting unrestricted access in modes 1, 2 and 3 in 
different subsectors of Business Services, such as professional services, including accounting 
services, architecture services, engineering servic es, integrated engineering services, planning and S/C/M/121 
 
- 6 - 
 
  landscaping services, medical services and dental services. His delegation further considered 
granting the same treatment to IT-related services , renting and leasing services without operators, 
and others services supplied to companies such as building cleaning services, washing and cleaning services, editorial and printing services, services supplied at assemblies and conventions 
as well as translation services. Further, Mexico considered granting unrestricted access to 
recreational, cultural and sporting services, which would include entertainment services, news agency services, library services, sport services an d other recreational services, as well as tourism 
services, services related to travel, including ho tel and restaurant services and travel agency 
services, as well as distribution services.  Regarding mode 4, and in particular concerning professional services, his delegation was still analysing in what way it could grant the greatest number possible of preferences. The preferences indicated would be notified as soon as the 
relevant domestic procedures had been completed. 
2.7.  The representative of Tanzania aligned hims elf with the statement made by Uganda on behalf 
of the LDC Group. He recalled the mandate for the High-Level Meeting set out in the Bali Decision, 
and the submission of the LDC collective reques t in July 2014. He thanked delegations who had 
engaged in the very productive bilateral process subsequently. It was time now to receive feedback from all non-LDC Members in a position to grant preferences. LDCs did not expect the 
same from every granting Member, but commercially meaningful access for LDCs services 
suppliers in response to the collective request. He requested non-LDC Members to respond positively to the LDC request and to extend indivi dually, voluntarily and proactively preferences to 
LDC services and services suppliers consistent with the waiver. Finally, he recalled that time was of 
the essence, since three years had already been lost since the waiver had been adopted and the 
waiver was in place for only fifteen years.  
2.8.  The representative of Australia informed the Council that his delegation had been working 
actively in capital to identify areas where Australia could provide meaningful services trade 
preferences for LDCs in response to the collective request. His delegation had engaged in very useful discussions with a number of LDCs about areas where Australian preferences would be of 
greatest interest. Australia was also examining where its FTA commitments aligned with areas 
identified in the LDC request.  
2.9.  His delegation was considering three categories of preferences: firstly, as concerned 
temporary entry (mode 4) which was a strong focus for LDCs, Australia was looking at its Doha 
Round offer, and at FTA commitments exceeded  Australia's existing GATS commitments, 
particularly in relation to temporary entry for contractual service suppliers or independent professionals. Secondly, his delegation was working on preferences in the area of transport and 
logistics related services looking at the core transport sectors including maritime auxiliary services 
beyond Australia's existing maritime transport services commitments; air transport services; road and rail transport services; but also focusing on services that support all modes of transport. 
Lastly, Australia was considering specific areas of interest to LDCs, particularly where preferences 
could support trade and economic development ob jectives such as computer related services; 
other business services; tourism; and construction.  
2.10.  With regard to aspects of the collective re quest that go beyond market access and national 
treatment, he noted that Australia's FTAs cont ained disciplines on transparency and domestic 
regulation to ensure their service suppliers benefit fully from the negotiated market access commitments and to address many of the non-tr ade barriers that are highlighted in the LDC 
collective request. It was worth exploring what could be done as part of the post-Bali work 
program to address the constraints identified in the LDC request that go beyond market access limitations. 
2.11.  In addition to work on preferences, Aust ralia had also been working on potential capacity 
building activities to support effective operationalization of the waiver, and to complement trade preferences provided by WTO Members and assist LDCs to utilise market access opportunities. Australia's market was already fully open in nearly  90% of the services trade areas included in the 
collective request. Increased LDC participation in global services trade was not just about trade 
preferences. Australia had listened carefully to in dividual LDC Members about the constraints they 
were facing in building trade in services. He was pleased to announce two development activities 
in the Indo-Pacific region valued at nearly AUS $2.5 million over two years to support LDC services 
trade. The first activity with the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development would assist LDCs to identify services potential and maximise services trade capacity including S/C/M/121 
 
- 7 - 
 
  through increasing LDCs capabilities to secure outcomes in services trade negotiations. The second 
activity with the Institute for International Trade (Adelaide University) had the objective of building an understanding of how services can contribute to economic growth, particularly in relation to the use of the LDC waiver. The two development activities mentioned were new, and were expected to 
commence in the coming months to support the effective operationalization of the waiver. They 
were in addition to existing development activities which responded to some of the other LDC priorities highlighted in the collective requ est but which went beyond the scope of trade 
commitments, such as the New Colombo Plan under which the Australia government provided 
scholarships and grants to Australian undergraduate students to study in locations in the Indo-Pacific region. In 2015 the New Colombo Plan would support more than 3,000 Australian undergraduates in 32 Indo-Pacific locations. The locations included seven LDC WTO Members and 
one acceding LDC Member. The Australian governme nt also funded the Australia Awards Program 
which provided opportunities for citizens from de veloping countries, including LDCs, to undertake 
study, research and professional development in Australia. This initiative included traditional study 
opportunities such as diplomas, bachelors, masters and PhD degrees at Australian universities and 
Technical and Further Education institutions as well as opportunities for short term study, research and professional development programs delivered by Australian Host Organizations. 
2.12.  In closing, the representative of Australia hoped that WTO Members would be in a position 
to notify preferences as soon as possible, idea lly in the first half of 2015. His delegation was 
working with the relevant agencies to reduce as far as possible the normal lengthy domestic processes and to find the right format for allocating  preferences so as to enable Australia to notify 
preferences as soon as possible. 
2.13.  The representative of Canada stated that his delegation placed great importance on 
increasing the participation of developing countries, and particularly of LDCs, in world trade. Not 
only was this an objective enshrined in the GATS and a key element of the post-Bali work 
programme, but there was overwhelming evidence that developing countries that participate in the global economy grew faster, and thus could create more jobs and better reduce poverty, than 
those that stayed isolated from this "made in th e world" global economy. In this context, GATS 
Article IV stressed rightly the need to strengthen the supply-side capacity of developing countries 
in addition to our shared commitment to liberalize market access in sectors and modes of supply of export interest to them. While the High-Level  Meeting largely focused on the latter, Members 
should not lose sight of the former. Building capacity was a development objective that could be 
met not so much through trade negotiations as through development assistance and the 
participation of the private sector in a healthy domestic economic environment. He noted that the 
High-level Meeting had been long in gestation, from Article IV itself to the development of 
modalities to consideration of mechanisms such as waivers to the Bali direction to operationalization of the waiver. Canada had given much thought to how to do so; in this context 
the LDC collective request had helped to focus on areas that merit particular attention. Canada had 
also looked in good faith at those elements of th e collective request that went beyond the scope of 
the waiver and indeed of the GATS it self, and could meet a number of them. 
2.14.  He informed delegations that Canada wo uld submit a notification that would provide a 
detailed response to the LDC collective request. The notification would provide a clear picture of 
the opportunities for LDC services and service suppl iers in the Canadian market. Highlighting some 
elements of the forthcoming notification, he stated that regarding the 74 sectors listed in item 
A.40 of the collective request, for modes 1 and 3, Canada's notification would include a list of 
sectors with full market access and national treatment, and another list of sectors subject to limited reservations. Taken together, these lists  would cover three-quarters of the sectors 
identified by LDCs, and include GATS-plus market  access elements. Canada's notification would 
also address many of the elements of the LDC mode 4 market access requests. For LDC business persons in the categories of business visitors , intra-company transferees and professionals, 
Canada provided temporary entry free from economic needs tests. For example, business visitors 
were eligible for temporary entry into Canada for up to 6 months without the need for a work 
permit. This treatment went beyond Canada's GA TS commitments. Such visitors could be engaged 
in a broad spectrum of activities, including key areas identified by LDCs, such as after-sale and 
after-lease services and installation services. Canada was also committed to making decisions with 
respect to work authorizations within a reasonable period of time and to limiting application processing fees to ensure that they did not unduly impair trade. With regard to recognition of 
licenses and qualifications of LDC professionals, Canada would encourage the relevant self-
regulating professional bodies to consider establis hing a dialogue with their LDC counterparts.  The S/C/M/121 
 
- 8 - 
 
  collective request underscored the importance of improved access for LDC financial service 
suppliers. Canada's framework permitted banks from  LDCs to establish subsidiaries, full-service 
branches or lending branches. The framework fo r foreign bank branches allowed LDC service 
suppliers a choice of juridical forms that provide for specific business powers and regulatory 
requirements. This provided LDC suppliers flexibility  with respect to how they wish to provide their 
services. Finally, Canada's notification would also address other areas of interest to LDCs, such as 
access to scholarships and student work permits, double taxation relief, the negotiation of co-
production treaties, the duty-free temporary entry of equipment, ship registration and fees for 
registration of intellectual property. In closing, he reiterated Canada's commitment to further 
integrating LDCs into world services trade, with Canada's notification representing a sincere effort to address the interests of LDCs. His delegation stood ready to engage with LDCs on ways of 
taking advantage of the significant market a ccess Canada offered, and on the supply-side 
constraints facing service suppliers in developing countries.  
2.15.  The representative of India recalled the LDC collective request was going to indicate 
substantial and commercially meaningful offers in services. She urged other Members to also offer 
liberal trade in services preferences to the LDCs. She reminded the Council of India's special preferences to LDCs in the area of good s, pursuant to the Hong-Kong Ministeria l Declaration of 
December 2005 for Duty Free Quota Free access to the LDCs. India now provided duty free market 
access on about 96% of tariff lines and preferential duties to another 2.2%, for a total of about 98.2%. These were by any yardstick very significant concessions.  
2.16.  She indicated that India proposed preferential treatment to LDCs in three areas: (i) in 
respect of Article XVI of the GATS (Market Access ); (ii) in respect of technical assistance and 
capacity building; and (iii) visa related offers. 
2.17.  With regard to preferences under Article XVI of the GATS, relating to mode 4, India 
proposed to offer a significant number of new GATS-plus commitments in response to the LDC 
collective request, in the categories of Contractual Service Suppliers (CSS) and Independent Professionals (IP) in: engineering services; integr ated engineering services; computer and related 
services; management consulting Services (excludi ng all services relating to legal consultancy); 
project management services other than for construction; hotel and other lodging services; travel agency and tour operator services; tourist guides conversant in a foreign language other than English. For the latter, India proposed an exclusive quota of 250 tourist guides from LDCs. In 
addition to the subsectors already mentioned, for th e category of CSS, India also proposed to offer 
substantive improvements over India's revised DDA offer in respect of access for foreign language teachers (other than English language), specia list chefs, and sportspersons. Further, India 
proposed to undertake commitments in a new category of Installers or Servicers. Market access 
for all the mentioned categories would be subject to requisite visa, entry regulations and other requirements such as educational requirements, du ration of temporary entry stay, etc. that would 
be inscribed in the commitments. 
2.18.  With regard to sector-specific offers, India proposed to take liberal commitments in 15 sub-
sectors which had not been scheduled in Indi a's GATS commitments. These included key sub-
sectors such as integrated engineering services, management consulting services, entertainment 
and sporting services, cultural and sporting services, maritime transport and maritime auxiliary 
services, etc. In addition, India proposed to significantly improve its GATS commitments for LDCs in engineering services, computer and related services, hotels and other lodging services, and 
travel agencies and tour operator services. More specifically, given that modes 1 and 2 were 
critical for LDCs for sectors such as travel & tourism and ICT-BPO services, India proposed to improve commitments under modes 1 and 2 from presently 'unbound' to 'none' limitations. In 
computer and related services, India proposed to  offer preferences at 2-digit level (CPC 84) 
considering the rapid technological advancement in this field. In all these new and improved sectors, offers in mode 3 would be without any foreign equity limitations. 
2.19.  India was implementing several schemes related to  training and capacity building activities 
under which many LDCs are covered. India proposed to earmark a share of such technical 
assistance exclusively for LDCs. In addition, India also proposed to design new schemes and programmes aimed at providing technical assistance to LDC service suppliers in certain service 
sectors. Such programmes and their duration wo uld be designed on the basis of institutional 
capacity and resource availability and would be subject to periodic review. India would positively consider requests from LDCs for any programmes targeting specific sectors and service suppliers S/C/M/121 
 
- 9 - 
 
  where there was a perceived requirement for such tr aining and capacity building. Concretely, India 
proposed to earmark a share of at least 25% out of all technical assistance and capacity building opportunities currently offered by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, exclusively for the LDC Members. India further proposed to accord top priority in providing preferential 
treatment in training of LDC professionals and se rvice suppliers or providing consultancy services 
in areas such as t raining programmes in financial services, where India's Central Bank (the 
Reserve Bank of India - RBI) conducted training programmes in important areas of central 
banking. She proposed that India maintain a share of 50% for LDC applicants out of total 
international participants in the various international training programmes conducted by the RBI. India would not charge course fees from LDC app licants for such training programmes. Further, 
with regard to consultancy courses for LDC prof essionals, India proposed to conduct specially 
designed courses for around 1000 LDC professionals each year in areas such as management 
consulting, technical consulting, project manage ment, etc. Such programmes could be conducted 
either in India or in any LDC country. The Govern ment of India would bear the fee component of 
these programmes. In addition, India also proposed to earmark seats for LDC applicants in central 
institutes of hotel management at concessional rates. India further proposed to accord priority in training of LDC professionals and consultancy services in areas such as insurance services; 
promotion of the MSME, agriculture and rural development sectors in LDCs, development of their 
railway infrastructure and professional services such as chartered accountancy and company/corporate secretary services. 
2.20.  Given the LDC's interest in creative industry services, India welcomed proposals for audio-
visual co-production agreements with the LDCs on  mutually agreed terms. India recognized that 
tourism was a very important service sector for the LDCs not only in terms of its export potentia l 
but also for the overall economic progress and empl oyment generation in any LDC. In this regard, 
the government of India proposed to p romote LDC participation in Indian international fairs and 
exhibitions. The Government proposed to provide free space to LDCs during the upcoming Indian 
edition of the Global Exhibition on Services (GES) and every year thereafter in this annual event. 
The first edition of the Indian Global Exhibition on Services would be held in New Delhi, India from 
23-25 April 2015. The Government also proposed to designate one LDC country as the partner country every year for the GES as well as for the India International Trade Fair (IITF) organized every year by the Indian Trade Promotion Orga nization (lTPO). The IITF had emerged as the 
largest consumer goods fair in the Indian sub-continent. This would promote trade and 
cooperation between India and the LDCs and showca se them as a tourist destination in India and 
abroad, and would provide major impetus to their tourism exports. To promote mode 2 trade in 
tourism services by LDCs, India welcomed proposal s for bilateral agreements with LDCs on tourism 
cooperation, on mutually agreed terms. Such agreements would accord approved destination 
status to LDCs. 
2.21.  As concerned visa-related offers, India proposed to waive visa fees for LDC applicants 
applying for Indian business or employment visas. Her delegation believed that visa-related offers 
were very significant to ensure real and commercially meaningful market access for LDC service suppliers. 
2.22.  She announced that the notification of the preferences would be undertaken after 
completion of necessary internal approval processes. 
2.23.  The representative of the United States welcomed the opportunity to participate in this 
High-Level Meeting to discuss ways in which all WTO Members, in a position to do so, could 
operationalize the MC8 Decision concerning preferen tial treatment to services and service suppliers 
from least-developed countries. He appreciated the importance attached to the issue and the effort 
of the LDCs in submitting the collective request and identifying their key areas of interest in 
services. This effort had been critical to leadin g Members to a much clearer understanding of LDC 
objectives with regard to the waiver, and had moved a somewhat abstract discussion into a more tangible phase. The collective request also crystallized in important ways why the concept of 
preferences, as applied to services trade, remained technically and substantively complex. His 
Government had struggled to look for ways to be as responsive to the request as it would like. The frame of reference presented in the request reflected an impressive effort, but also confronted his 
delegation with a much clearer appreciation for the challenges surrounding this issue.  
2.24.  It was important to put the MC8 LDC waiv er Decision, and the subsequent MC9 Decision, 
into a historical perspective. He recalled that the basis for these decisions originated with the 2003 S/C/M/121 
 
- 10 - 
 
  Decision by the Council for Trade in Services – Special Session on Modalities for the Special 
Treatment for Least-Developed Country Members in the Negotiations on Trade in Services ("LDC Modalities"). The United States had actively participated in the process to develop ways for the full and effective implementation of the LDC Modalities,  and continued to do so. The one area of the 
LDC Modalities that had created a lot of interest was developing a mechanism whereby Members 
could accord special priority to service sector s and modes of supply of interest to LDCs in 
accordance with GATS Article IV:3. His delegation, and others, including LDCs themselves, had 
recognized that coming up with such an appropriate mechanism would be a challenge. It was 
decided that one way to accord special priority to is sues of interest to LDCs in the area of services 
was to allow WTO Members to deviate from a core general obligation – MFN – and accord preferential treatment to services and service su ppliers from LDCs. It was thought that granting 
such preferences may facilitate effective access of LDCs' services and service suppliers into foreign 
markets. But, unlike in the goods area, where Members had considerable experience with trade 
preferences, the very different nature of services  trade made the development of a parallel waiver 
mechanism for services subject to considerable uncertainties. Trade preferences for goods were 
more easily identified and measureable by way of tariff preferences. In contrast, services were, by their very nature, a more complex area of econ omic activity, and therefore presented a unique 
technical challenge. These technical challenges helped to explain why, during the 3 years since the 
services waivers' adoption, no Member had notified the WTO of a preference in the area of services under the waiver decision. Through this High-Level Meeting, Members could learn from one another about where "the art of the possible" may lie  with respect to a concept of preferences that 
had so far been rather perplexing. His delegation approached the exercise in a constructive spirit 
as a valuable learning exercise. 
2.25.  Having thoroughly reviewed the collective request, the United States had found it 
challenging to identify, within the context of its own domestic services market, where his 
delegation could have confidence of how a specif ic services trade preference would contribute 
directly to the LDC Modalities' objective of addr essing poverty, upgrading welfare, and improving 
the availability and access to basic services. His delegation wanted to be as sure as possible that 
waiving MFN in specific instances would be more than simply a symbolic gesture and would produce meaningful outcomes beyond what was already provided for in US MFN treatment of 
services trade. His delegation had continued to struggle in relation to many of the elements 
outlined in the collective request. 
2.26.  The United States had a very open market for services, with few restrictions. Identifying 
areas where in which preferences could be offere d was difficult when LDC services and service 
suppliers already received broad access to the US market. For example, the United States had few 
if any of the restrictions identified in the collective request in important areas such as tourism, education, ICT services and the creative services industries. Likewise, his delegation had been 
unable to identify significant restrictions in the gr eat majority of identified sectors. For example, 
there were no significant discriminatory barriers to  professionals in the occupations identified as 
LDC priorities. And service suppliers from LDCs already benefited from binding commitments in 55 of the 74 sectors identified in the collective request. In most cases, the goods equivalent – just to 
provide some illustrative reference point – would be lines on which the US MFN tariffs were zero. 
In such circumstances, it was not possible to prov ide any more preferential treatment. Many of the 
specific elements of the collective request dealt with issues related to visas and work and 
residency permit requirements. The United States did not impose work permit and residence 
permit requirements. While the US required service suppliers to obtain visas in order to provide services in the United States, his delegation's existing mode 4 commitments were among the best 
in the WTO, supporting a wide range of sectoral commitments that reflect the high level of 
openness in the US services economy. Import antly, US commitments applied to all committed 
sectors, including the sectors identified as priori ties by the LDCs, and US commitments treated all 
WTO Members equally. An often overlooked fact was that the US employment-based temporary-
entry visa system for service suppliers was demand driven. These visas were available to service 
suppliers from LDCs, and, indeed, many of them were issued to citizens of LDCs every year. While there was a cap on the annual number of certain visas, these visas were available to all Members. 
Within this system, to introduce a preference for LDC suppliers, the United States would have to 
either require US employers to discriminate in hi ring, or overhaul the existing US regulatory 
regime altogether. In the view of the United States, the most useful focus of effort in connection 
with seeing LDC service providers achieve a greater proportion of relevant US visas was to 
examine and address export capacity constraint issues. His delegation remained committed to working with LDCs in this regard. The US continuously worked to improve procedures with regard S/C/M/121 
 
- 11 - 
 
  to the implementation of temporary entry measures. Of course, as a general matter, issues 
surrounding mode 4 were among the most sensitive for all WTO Members, and expectations in this area should be tempered accordingly. 
2.27.  Finally, with respect to another key theme of the collective request, qualification and 
accreditation, the United States had few if any nationality requirements; thus, the pathway for a 
qualified professional from an LDC to obtain a license to practice in a particular jurisdiction of the United States was, with few exceptions, precisely the same pathway that would be required of a 
US citizen. Issuing professional licenses, for the most part, was carried out by private associations 
at the state level. For this reason, the few formal recognition agreements that the United States had completed generally had been less successful th an the ongoing work among most professional 
associations to establish efficient procedures for evaluating and recognizing the credentials of 
foreign applicants. The United States actively encouraged this type of work, including with respect 
to professional applicants from LDCs. 
2.28.  It was worth bearing in mind the fact that the LDC Modalities were about more than simply 
creating a waiver mechanism. They were about increasing the participation of LDCs in services 
trade, including through programmes to promote investment in LDCs and building their domestic services capacity and enhancing their efficiency and export competitiveness. This was a crucial 
part of the discussion that sometimes got lost when one focused exclusively on the waiver as a key 
component of trade in services by LDCs. Supply side constraints in the services markets of LDCs had been stressed many times in the discussion about increasing LDC participation in the global services market. And many US aid programmes could help address that issue. For example, USAID 
had a Development Credit Authority that used partial credit guarantees to mobilize local financing 
in developing countries. These guarantee agreements encouraged private lenders to extend financing to underserved borrowers in new sectors and regions. One such guarantee highlighted an 
entrepreneur in Uganda who had been able to receive a loan large enough to expand his business 
and substantially increase his profits and ability to hire additional workers (including some service suppliers). While these programmes did not fit squa rely in the category of trade "preferences" 
sought under the collective request, and the Hi gh-Level Meeting was not about cataloguing all 
these efforts that help LDCs, it bore mentioning that without strong service suppliers domestically, it would be more difficult for those service suppliers to enter into the global services market. Thus, the US delegation continued to believe that a more holistic examination of services trade and 
development, particularly with respect to LDCs , was warranted. Indeed, without the capacity to 
serve domestic markets, simply obtaining preferential access to a foreign market might be meaningless. Therefore, the waiver was simply one tool in a whole arsenal of actions that might be 
taken to help address both supply side and demand side shortcomings for LDC services markets. 
This type of discussion was clearly in line with the objectives outlined in the LDC Modalities which recognized "the importance of trade in services " for, among other things, ensuring sustainable 
development. Therefore, WTO Members should we lcome a discussion that was broader than one 
centred around the benefits that might be derived solely from a preference that was provided under the waiver. 
2.29.  Just as LDCs had expressed frustration at the lack of progress in advancing services issues 
of interest to them, so too had the United States experienced frustration at the lack of progress in 
advancing services liberalization via the DDA. The US had advocated for a long time that services 
liberalization would increase the level of openness in global services markets, which, in turn, would 
further expand the opportunities for services and services suppliers from LDCs. But, achieving 
services liberalization in the WTO had so far failed, and created a huge missed opportunity to expand global services trade.  While his delegation was hopeful that the post-Bali work programme 
could deliver some multilateral results on services, in the present environment, trade liberalization 
in services was only truly happening outside the multilateral trading system. In this regard, the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) represente d a great opportunity to consolidate the gains 
made in services trade through various bilateral and plurilateral trade agreements. Indeed, the 
United States was working to consolidate much of its work on improving commitments under the 
umbrella of the TISA. The new commitments that the US was contemplating in this agreement will, if successful, cover most of the sectors that the United States was unable to commit during the 
Uruguay Round. TISA went beyond simple market a ccess, as it included new disciplines in areas 
that would be important for the 21
st century global economy and areas where LDCs may see 
significant gains should they so choose to ad opt them. These include greater transparency and 
good governance provisions in the area of do mestic regulations and professional services, 
disciplines in the area of e-commerce, compet itive delivery, and transport services. The TISA S/C/M/121 
 
- 12 - 
 
  remained a work in progress, just as the examination and review of the collective request by the 
LDCs remained an ongoing exercise. The outcom e of TISA would be truly ground-breaking and 
would be the direction of global services trad e in the future. Because the United States was 
committed to supporting the integration of LDCs in to the world trading system, one important step 
was to ensure that LDCs had the greatest possibl e range of opportunities to access the US market. 
In that regard, to the extent feasible, the United States planned to provide LDCs the level of access to the US services market that the United States will provide under TISA. Such an approach 
would still require broader consultation, and one factor in any future consideration of this approach 
would be its impact on helping LDCs to better integrate into the world economy. Going forward, he expressed the view that Members should continue to  look more holistically at the challenges faced 
by LDC service suppliers and be even more  creative in finding possible solutions. 
2.30.  In the shorter term, the United States wo uld work to extend to LDCs some of the access 
reflected in the revised DDA offer, which for example, contained a commitment on translation and interpretation services, which was one of the sectors identified in the collective request. The US 
could look at providing that access to LDCs effective immediately.  
2.31.  The United States placed considerable pr iority on remaining deeply and directly engaged 
with LDCs on the full range of issues related to se rvices trade, and the promise of services trade to 
contribute directly to economic development an d improved livelihoods. The US was signalling a 
tangible determination that LDCs should not be left behind in the context of efforts to open services markets. 
2.32.  The representative of Norway recalled his de legation's role in the development of the waiver 
Decision and as well as in work on the decision on the operationalization of the waiver. Important 
work had been carried out in order to identify se ctors and modes of supply of key interest to the 
LDCs as well as barriers representing difficult ies to LDC services suppliers. His delegation 
welcomed the collective request submitted by th e LDC Group. The High-Level Meeting was an 
important milestone and would serve as a solid base for continued efforts. Norway would submit its notification of preferences to the Council for Tr ade in Services as soon as internal consultations 
were finalized and in line with agreed procedures, hopefully by March/April. Norway had 
undertaken a thorough and open-minded assessment in  order to respond to the collective request, 
and listened carefully to the needs and expectations expressed by LDCs.  
2.33.  Norway had an open market for trade in servic es, and many of the specific items in the LDC 
collective request, at least those relating to modes 1, 2 and 3, were already covered in the GATS 
commitments. However, since the GATS had been negotiated over 20 years ago, Norway had negotiated various FTAs that provide increased market access in the services sector for many 
partners. Norway therefore offered, as a basis, to give the LDC Group preferences equivalent to 
what Norway had negotiated in its most liberal FTA. The details would be set out in the forthcoming notification to the Services Council. He highlighted the sectors which the LDC Group 
had specifically brought to his delegation's attention, and which for which market access and 
national treatment would be offered: (i) d omestic maritime freight transportation (parts of CPC 
7212), limited to transport feeder services, maritime transport servicing offshore petroleum exploration and production, as well as transport of empty containers;(ii) domestic maritime towing 
and pushing services (parts of CPC 7214); (iii) maritime auxiliary services, including cargo 
handling, storage and warehousing; (iv) air transport Services, including ground handling, as well as (v) cargo handling (CPC 741), storage and warehouse services (CPC 742) which were services 
auxiliary to all modes of transport. 
2.34.  The LDC collective request had also placed great emphasis on measures and restrictions 
related to mode 4, some of which were within th e scope of the GATS, and others which were not. 
As for the horizontal commitments for movement  o f  p e r s o n n e l ,  N o r w a y  w o u l d  c o m p l e m e n t  i t s  
GATS commitments with four new groups for LDCs, namely: (i) contractual services suppliers (employed by a foreign based company), with at least 3 and possibly up to 6 months temporary entry and stay; (ii) independent professionals (h ighly skilled natural persons providing services 
based on a contract and not employed by a juridica l person), with at least 3 and possibly up to 6 
months temporary entry and stay; (iii) trainees related to intra corporate transferees and holding a university degree, up to 6 months, and (iv) installers (to assemble or disassemble) with up to 3 
months stay. For the first three categories a residence permit would be required, as well as 
fulfilment of other requirements regarding wages, social security benefits etc. Permits would not be required for installers.  S/C/M/121 
 
- 13 - 
 
  2.35.  He expressed the view that LDC exports wo uld get an extra boost with these preferences as 
well as further ones not specifically mentioned.  However, given supply-side constraints in the 
LDCs, he noted the importance of a continued focus on trade-related assistance and regional efforts. Norway channelled its aid for trade mainly through multilateral institutions, and would 
work with them to see how LDCs could best be su pported in taking advantage of their new market 
access opportunities emanating from notified prefer ences. Trade in Services would be one of the 
main topics at this summer's Global Aid for Trade Review, and Members should take advantage of 
that meeting to further support the services waiver.  
2.36.  The representative of Switzerland expressed his appreciation for the efforts by the LDC 
Group in developing a collective request identifying services sectors and modes of supply of ' 
particular export interest to LDCs.  The High-Level Meeting was an important component of the 
post-Bali agenda, work on which was at a critical juncture. Switzerland had for a long time been 
committed to development and in particular subscr ibed to the importance of strengthening the 
integration of LDCs in international trade. In this context, he stressed that developing services 
markets in LDCs was a broad objective that needed to be pursued through a range of measures, 
including specific development cooperation activities in support of services industries in LDCs as 
well as foreign direct investment - two areas in which Switzerland was actively involved. He also 
recalled that Switzerland supported efforts made by LDCs to integrate global value chains through 
preferential market access for goods (100% DFQF and the application of a favourable regime of 
rules of origin), as well as by supporting Aid for Trade programmes. 
2.37.  The current level of openness of the Swiss services market already provided for significant 
export opportunities for service suppliers also from  LDCs, with Switzerland maintaining only a very 
small number of MFN-exemptions. On the basis of their substantial specific commitments on market access and national treatment in the Sw iss GATS schedule, market access was granted 
already today in many sectors identified in the LDC's collective request. In particular, he was 
pleased to confirm that numerous priority interest s included in the LDC's request were to a very 
large extent covered by Switzerland's GATS commitments. In particular, the number of horizontal 
mode 3 restrictions was very small in the Swiss schedule; residency requirements were applied in 
very limited cases only; the Swiss schedule contained substantial mode 4 commitments for intra-corporate transferees, contractual services suppliers and business visitors; there were no discriminatory measures on salaries; there were in general no restrictions in modes 1 and 2, and 
only limited restrictions in mode 3; in modes 1 to 3, economic needs tests were almost non-
existent – including in relation to tourism and travel-related services; commitments in banking and other financial services provided for non-discrimination and included mode 1; logistics-related and 
freight transport agency services and computer and related services were widely open . While 
making use of these opportunities might pose cha llenges in a competitive market environment, he 
encouraged suppliers from LDCs to use these alre ady available opportunities as far as possible. 
2.38.  His delegation was at an advanced stage of examining what could be included in 
Switzerland's notification under the services waiver, based on the collective request and the 
sectors of interest identified therein. The Swiss notification to the CTS would contain market access elements covering modes 1 to 3 and he hoped that a final decision by the competent 
authorities would be reached before mid-year.  
2.39.  The representative of the European Union expressed the highest appreciation of the 
leadership shown by the group of LDC countries in  their consistent work leading up to the High-
Level Meeting, and hence implementing the Bali Ministerial Decision. A solid result on services was 
a key pillar of the DDA negotiations, and integrating LDC economies would be a vital part of its success. The EU attached major importance to the LDC services waiver which could be seen as a 
services equivalent to the "enabling clause" for goods that allowed, for instance, the EU to 
maintain the "Everything But Arms" initiative providing duty-free quota-free access in favour of the LDCs. The indications of unilateral preferences under  the services waiver, by Members in a position 
to do so, would ensure that the Bali Minister ial Decision was fully implemented. They also 
represented an important step on the way to im plement the ministerial pledge to change and 
improve the situation for the LDC countries. The EU  preferences would include both a significant 
sectoral scope, and market access in specific sectors and modes of supply. The indications 
presented at this meeting would be followed by a formal notification with a specification of these 
unilateral preferences, once a formal internal legal decision was taken. The Council for Trade in Services, as the relevant body, would be able to monitor progress as Members would make such 
notifications during the coming months. The services waiver of 2011 and the decision on its S/C/M/121 
 
- 14 - 
 
  operationalization of 2013 gave Members an opport unity to revitalize the DDA-offers by including 
key elements as the basis for the preferences. It also allowed the EU to select some additional elements from recent development oriented agreements. The EU had taken an approach that combined elements of these two sets of commitmen ts into unilateral services preferences for the 
LDC countries. In general, the EU preferences should be seen in the context of a union that had 
grown from 12 Member States when GATS commitments were negotiated to 28 Member States today.  
2.40.  The preferences provided by the EU for the pu rpose of the waiver would include horizontal 
and sector-specific preferences.  With regard to the former, a substantial part of the LDC requests 
concern the movement of natural persons. For mode 4, the EU was prepared to offer preferences that constitute a comprehensive improvement ov er existing GATS commitments. These would 
include key elements of the improvements made in the DDA offers, such as the expansion of 
categories, sectoral scope and periods of stay, as well as benefits found in recent EU preferential agreements, such as a broadening of the sectors covered by commitments.  
2.41.  The EU had progressively improved its DDA offers, for example by adding new commitments 
for graduate trainees, doubling the period of stay for contractual services suppliers, or adding the categories of i ndependent professionals (IPs) and graduate trainees. Further, such consolidated 
benefits now applied on an EU-wide basis in the enla rged Union, subject to specific limitations. As 
a result, LDC services companies would for example be able to transfer management trainees to 
their affiliated companies in the enlarged EU, and al low them to get up to one year of experience 
in the EU. LDC companies with a contract to provide services - in any of approximately 30 
important sectors or subsectors - would be able to  send skilled professionals to the EU to provide 
these services for up to six months at a time.  
2.42.  Another improvement brought by the prefer ences would be for independent services 
suppliers based overseas to enter the EU for up to  six months at a time to provide services to 
clients based in the 28 EU member States, on specified conditions and in certain sectors. For  intra-
corporate transfers, the preferences would generally extend the period of stay for up to three 
years for managers and specialists, and introduce the new sub-category of graduate trainees, with 
a one year period of stay, and substantially expand the sectoral coverage compared to specific existing commitments.  For business visitors, including business visitors for establishment purposes and service sellers, the EU preferences wo uld reconfirm the period of stay to be 90 days 
in any 12-month period, and i mprove the coverage by adding individual Member States to the 
relevant sectors (i.e. remove relevant limitations found in GATS). The additiona l preferences for 
the categories above would imply improvements in  the majority of the 150+ subsectors covered 
by the EU offer.  
2.43.  For contractual service suppliers (CSS), the EU preferences would double the period of stay 
from 3 to 6 months in a 12 months period, and introduce a broader sectoral coverage than in both 
the existing GATS commitments and the DDA offers . The expanded list of sectors/ subsectors 
covered the following sectors (* denoting s ectors also covered by improved commitments for 
independent professionals, subject to specific exemptions) : legal advisory services in respect of 
international public law and foreign law (i.e. non-EU law)*; accounting and bookkeeping services; 
taxation advisory services; architectural services·*; urban planning and landscape architecture 
services·*; engineering services·*; integrated engi neering services·*; medical and dental services; 
veterinary services; midwives services; services provided by nurses, physiotherapists and 
paramedical personnel; computer and related se rvices·*; research and development services·*; 
advertising services; market research and opinion polling·*; management consulting services·*; services related to management consulting·*; technical testing and analysis services; related 
scientific and technical consulting services; maintenance and repair of vessels; maintenance and 
repair of rail transport equipment; maintenance and repair of motor vehicles, motorcycles, and road transport equipment etc.; maintenance and repa ir of aircraft and parts thereof; maintenance 
and repair of metal products, of (non-office) machinery, of (non-transport and non-office) 
equipment and of personal and household goods; translation and interpretation services·*; 
construction (site investigation work); higher education services (only privately-funded services); environmental services; travel agencies and tour operators' services; and tourist guides services. 
These commitments covered more than 1.000 entries in the EU's schedules for such qualified 
service suppliers, of which roughly half were full commitments. S/C/M/121 
 
- 15 - 
 
  2.44.  With regard to preferences related to specific sectors, the LDC collective request covered 
almost all sectors used for the classification of services offers. Some requests covered a single sector while others covered more than 75 subsectors. The EU was preparing preferences, in addition to the mode 4 elements referred to above,  within all groups of sectors identified in the 
LDC collective request. The EU was prepared to offer preferences, going beyond the extensive 
offers already presented as part of the DDA, in a number of sectors including for example: travel and tourism services also including convention services; financial services; possibly also including 
payment services; transport and logistics services; ICT and outsourcing services. 
2.45.  The collective request also covered an extens ive list of sectors in addition to the groups 
mentioned above. The EU welcomed this approach , and was prepared to offer preferences for a 
majority of these. This would imply market acce ss and national treatment commitments that built 
on the EU's DDA offer supplemented with furthe r improvements found in recent development 
oriented FTAs. Examples of these included profe ssional services such as auditing and taxation 
services; business services like real estate, design, rental and leasing services, management 
consulting, repair and maintenance services and several more. Overall the list of sectors where the 
EU was prepared to offer preferences for market  access and national treatment for LDC services 
suppliers was considerable . In many cases this included additional specific improvements through 
removal of limitations, and extending the application of the various improved horizontal mode 4 
categories. 
2.46.  Turning to the issue of recognition of professional qualifications of LDC services providers 
and accreditation of LDC institutions, the collective request addressed a group of issues on 
recognition of professional qualifications and academic titles issued by LDC education institutions. 
He referred to the extensive existing cooper ation between EU and LDC higher education 
institutions. Several EU member States had confirmed that their higher education institutions were 
working closely together with an extensive ne twork of LDC counterparts. This implied that 
students of either side could participate in exchange programmes. The courses could be counted, fully or partially, towards their degrees. In many cases, the financing of such exchange of students 
was also covered. He mentioned the example of Sweden, which maintained a list of at least 60 
education institutions in LDC countries where financing of courses was provided. A more general example was the EU's Erasmus Mundus Master course programme which had accepted almost 1600 students from LDC countries for master courses at universities during the years 2004-2013, 
making LDCs one of the larger groups of users of this specific programme. 
2.47.  Capacity building for LDCs was an integrated element of the DDA, even if addressing the 
level of financing of aid was not part of the wa iver itself. The waiver referred to the need for 
enhanced technical assistance and capacity building to help LDCs benefit from the 
operationalization of the waiver. It noted that this would imply making optimal use of existing aid for trade channels and the technical assistance and capacity building work of relevant international 
institutions. The EU and member States provided approximately 60% of global trade-related 
assistance. The financing of capacity building took  place in the context of aid programming, in 
which beneficiary countries identified their own needs. The EU and its member States were engaged in a wide range of capacity building init iatives, covering for example the strengthening of 
service businesses in general, the creation of SME networks, support for specific sectors, 
improvement of cooperation between institutions like universities etc. The LDC collective request provided an important list of relevant issues that reflect practical challenges in doing business 
faced by LDC-services suppliers. The EU was in a position to address all issues in the context of 
the waiver. This was the case when a request falls outside the remits of trade in services negotiations, and concerned elements such as visa issues, taxation, and social and labour policies. 
For entry procedures, the EU was however prepared to engage in further exchange of information. 
In this regard, he stressed that there were no quantitative restrictions for LDCs on visas to enter 
the EU to prov ide services.  
2.48.  In conclusion, the EU shared the view set out in the LDCs' collective request that a workable 
waiver needed to grant preferences in a wide ra nge of services sectors. For this reason the 
preferences under prepara tion would build on both the elements of the DDA services offer, and 
elements that the EU had been ab le to supplement in other contexts. The preferences announced 
at the High-Level Meeting covered market acce ss, but also removal of national treatment 
limitations. The EU believed that the extension of market access preferences to national treatment 
was a natural development to ensure the practical effect of preferences. The EU contributions to S/C/M/121 
 
- 16 - 
 
  the implementation of the Bali decision, as ' outlined above, would be followed by a notification of 
these unilateral preferences as foreseen in the waiver decision.  
2.49.  The representative of Japan stated that 2015 was a year of commemoration and challenge 
in the WTO. Its future hinged on the steady implementation of Bali Decisions; the further 
development and integration of LDCs into the global trading system was a key to a brighter future. 
As it was essential to facilitate the increased participation of LDCs in trade in services for the strengthening of the multilateral trading system, Japan therefore supported the implementation of 
the LDC services waiver, the Bali Decision on th e operationalization of the waiver, and the LDC 
collective request. While being already a highly open economy, Japan had closely examined the 
request and looked to provide market access trea tment to LDCs that exceeded the treatment set 
out in its GATS commitments. With regard to the wide-ranging sectors and modes of interests 
identified under item A.40 of the LDC collective re quest, Japan was intending to provide GATS-plus 
treatment to LDC services and service suppliers as follows: engineering services (modes 1, 3 
and 4); hotel and restaurant services (modes  1, 3 and 4); urban planning and landscape 
architecture services (modes 1, 3 and 4); placem ent and supply services of personnel (modes 1 
and 3); maritime cargo handling services (modes 1 and 3); container station depot services (modes 3 and 4); and tour guide services (mode 1). In addition, with regard to other elements of 
the collective request, Japan would provide treatment as follows: with reference to section A. 1 of 
the collective request, economic needs tests and labour market tests for LDC suppliers would not 
be required; as concerned section B.1-2, residence permit fees for LDC contractual services suppliers, independent professionals and Intra-corporate transferees would not be required; with 
regard to section B.8, stamping on LDC service su pplier passports that a visa was denied will not 
be required.  Japan was going to submit a notificati on to the Council for Trade in Services as soon 
as possible. 
2.50.  The representative of Japan expressed the view that capacity building was crucial to 
enhance LDC service export capacity suppliers. Japan had provided specific assistance and capacity building to LDCs through the implementa tion of numerous projects, covering but not 
limited to tourism, financial services, transportati on, education and ICT. In the past five years, 
Japan had invited more than 3700 persons from 49 LDCs to training courses in Japan, and had dispatched more than 3600 Japanese experts to LD Cs with a view to transferring technology 
though these projects. Japan intended to continue such assistance to LDCs based on its aid policy, 
taking into account bilateral policy consultations and individual requests.  
2.51.  The representative of Brazil noted that throughout the negotiations for the adoption of the 
waiver in MC8 and particularly during the talks leading up to the MC9 Decision on the matter, 
Brazil was among those few vocal advocates of a robust outcome for LDCs. Consistent with that 
stand, Brazil had been supportive of the operationa lization of the services waiver in accordance 
with the direction and pace indicated by LDCs th emselves. With the formalization of the collective 
and bilateral requests, LDCs had played their part  for the prompt and effective implementation of 
the waiver. It was now incumbent upon other Members to deliver on the mandate. Brazil was ready to make a contribution as a "developing country in a position to do so", and was happy to announce a series of sectors and subsectors in which Brazil intended to make a commitment in the 
interest of the implementation of the waiver. The offer was commensurate with Brazil's level of 
development and the state of maturity of so me of the sectoral regulatory frameworks. The 
preferences covered fell under Article XVI of the GATS, and had considerable commercial value as 
they partially overlapped with the collective requ est as well as specific requests addressed to 
Brazil. They were also extensive as they en compassed 7 out of the 12 sectors listed in W/120.  He 
emphasized that Brazil did not adopt visa quotas or ENTs for the temporary movement of natural 
persons. Brazil's relevant legislation was already quite receptive to foreign labour participation. In 
addition, it was guided by transparent criteria, which were equally valid for all workers, irrespective of their nationality. In a similar vein, there was no legal basis in Brazil for the granting of more favourable treatment with regard to domestic regulation. Brazil's regulatory framework 
was aimed at public policy objectives, such as co nsumer protection and the quality of the service 
rendered, and thus did not constitute trade barriers. 
2.52.  Brazil's offer to LDCs would comprise the following sectors: engineering design services - 
mode 3; other engineering services during the cons truction and installation phase - mode 3; urban 
planning and landscape architectural services - mode 3; veterinary services - modes 1 and 3; computer and related Services - mode 3; technical testing and analysis services - mode 3; 
services incidental to fishing – mode 3; placement and supply services of personnel - mode 3; S/C/M/121 
 
- 17 - 
 
  maintenance and repair of equipment (not including maritime vessels, aircraft or other transport 
equipment) - mode 3; photographic services - mo de 3; packaging services - mode 3; convention 
services - mode 3; building completion and finish ing work - mode 3; commission agents' services - 
mode 3; a gencies and brokerage services for insurance and open private pension funds - mode 3; 
agencies and brokerage services for reinsurance and retrocession - mode 3; consultancy, actuarial 
and survey services - mode 4; travel agencies and tour operators services - mode 3; tourist guides services - mode 3; sporting services - mode 3; maritime agency services - modes 1 and 3; 
auxiliary services to maritime transport: ca rgo handling services - mode 3; storage and 
warehousing services - mode 3; customs clearance services - mode 3; container station and depot services - mode 3; road transport services: freight transportation - mode 3. 
2.53.  The signals would require fleshing out to take the form of specific commitments, and to that 
effect, further consultations would have to be un dertaken. His delegation would also need to be 
clear on the legal form of the text consolidating th ose preferences, as well as the legal steps for its 
consideration and eventual approval , at the national level.  
2.54.  The representative of China stated that tw o decades after the creation of the WTO, the least 
developed countries still could secure an adequate share in the growth of world trade in services. 
He called on each Member of the WTO family to address this long-standing issue with sincerity, 
urgency and efficiency. Full and fast implementation of the services waiver would create greater 
trade opportunities for LDCs. This process could help LDCs integrate more deeply into the global trading system. It was also crucial to delivering the development dimension of the Doha Round. 
2.55.  Over the past five years, China had assisted LDCs in constructing 59 infrastructure projects, 
including road, railway, port, telecom, broadcasting  and television networks. During the same time 
period, China had assisted LDCs in building up 127 services facilities, covering hospitals, schools, 
stadiums and theatres. China had also trained more than 100000 persons from LDCs in the 
medical, tourism and ICT areas during that time. These efforts had supported the robust 
development of services in LDCs and produced en couraging results. In the WTO, China had been a 
strong advocate of preferential treatment for LD Cs. China attached great importance to the High-
Level Meeting. After receiving the collective request in July 2014, his delegation had undertaken a 
great deal of preparation for the High-Level Meeting. He was pleased to announce that China was ready to provide preferential treatment to se rvices and services providers from LDCs. The 
preferential treatment could be classified into three categories. The first category was market 
access, and the second category related to domestic regulation. The third element was related to 
capacity building and assistance for the construction of infrastructure and service facilities. 
2.56.  The market access category of preferential  treatment consisted of four elements: 
(i) movement of natural p ersons (mode 4) was of essential interest to LDCs. Therefore, China was 
striving to provide preferential treatment in this area to the best of its ability . "Business visitors" 
from LDCs, including both services investors and salespersons, would be able to enter China and 
stay up to 6 months. This new market access would be applicable to all 100 services sectors and 
sub-sectors that China had listed in its WTO services schedule; (ii) for  computer reservation 
services (CRS) in  air transportation, China would allow LDC CRS providers to establish joint-
venture enterprises with Chinese partners under mode 3. These joint-venture enterprises could 
directly provide services to Chinese tourists; ( iii) China would provide preferential treatment to 
LDCs under mode 3 in building cleaning services ; (iv) China would provide preferential treatment 
to LDCs with respect to printing of packaging materials se rvices under mode 3. 
2.57.  With regard to domestic regulation, he noted that tourism was of particular importance for 
many LDCs, as this sector held enormous potential for expanding services exports and creating jobs. If more Chinese tourists travelled to LDCs, greater export opportunities for LDC tourism 
services would arise. China would hence provide preferential treatment relating to domestic 
regulation in the tourism sector. Some LDCs had expressed strong interest in applying for the Authorized Destination Status (ADS). In resp onse, he stated that China would simplify and 
streamline the related procedures. On top of that, China would shorten the timeframe for 
processing the applications from LDCs. 
2.58.  With regard to capacity building, China would provide targeted assistance as requested by 
LDCs through bilateral consultations within the framework of South-South cooperation. Such 
assistance would typically be carried out in three ways: (i) China would reinforce capacity building 
efforts. In 2015, China would invite 1200 people from LDCs to visit China and join training or post-S/C/M/121 
 
- 18 - 
 
  graduate programmes on medical services, tourism services, as well as software and information 
technology services. For example, 19 training sessions on tourism services would be organized and around 500 people from LDCs would be invite d to attend. Topics of these tourism sessions 
included development of the tourism industry, management of tourism companies, protection of 
tourism resources, cultural tourism, ecological tourism and tourism cooperation. China was also 
committed to hold training programs on tourism services for LDCs in 2016; (ii) China would further 
assist the construction of infrastructure essential to the tourism services in LDCs. Such 
infrastructure included hotels, scenic spots, roads, railways, ports and telecommunication 
networks. They would underpin the rapid development of tourism services in LDCs; (iii) China would further assist the construction of services facilities in LDCs such as hospitals, schools, stadiums, and theatres. The objective was to improve the living conditions of local people and 
enhance the supply capacity of medical services, education services, cultural services and sports 
services in LDCs. 
2.59.  The High-Level Meeting marked a significant step  in the implementation of the LDC services 
waiver. It also represented the collective efforts of the international community to help LDCs 
enhance confidence in the multilateral trading system by sharing the outcome of global trade 
liberalization and facilitation. He called on other Members, particularly developed Members, to 
make commitments in those sectors where preferen tial treatment could be provided to LDCs. He 
also encouraged these Members to accelerate their domestic procedures and to implement preferential treatment as soon as possible. Development was at the core of DDA negotiations, and his delegation was committed to making further contributions to push forward the DDA 
negotiations, and would work closely with other Members to help LDCs better integrate into the 
international economic and trading system. 
2.60.  The representative of Korea recalled the background to the LDC waiver and expressed the 
view that the swift operationalization of the waiver was crucial for maintaining the credibility of the 
WTO. Korea took the process very seriously, and wo uld exert its utmost efforts in this endeavour. 
2.61.  Korea had sincerely reviewed the LDC collective request as well as some specific requests 
that the LDCs had communicated. After long inter-ministerial consultations, his delegation had 
identified areas that were commercially meaningful  f o r  L D C s ,  s u c h  a s  m o d e  4 ,  r e n t a l  s e r v i c e s ,  
maritime auxiliary services, and entertainment se rvices. Korea had focused on alleviating market 
access restrictions, based on the judgment that these might be the most commercially meaningful 
to LDC countries and also subject to the simp ler procedural requirements where additional 
approval procedures were not necessary.  
2.62.  Concrete areas where preferences were being considered include contractual service 
suppliers in maintenance and repair of industrial equipment, consulting services in IT, e-business, 
biotechnology, consultancy services in accounting and auditing standards, architectural services, 
management consulting and professional engineering services, if certain conditions were met. 
Further preferences under consideration related to leasing or rental vessels and personal or 
household goods; maritime auxiliary services, such as pushing and towing, tally/measuring and survey services; and entertainment services  provided by individuals or groups.  
2.63.  On those areas mentioned, his delegation considered providing LDC countries preferences at 
GATS-plus level. As swift notification was the key to the operationalization of the waiver, Korea 
was therefore intending to submit the notification right after domestic procedures were concluded, 
which should not take a long time. The specific details of the preferences being granted would be 
included in the notifications, and the duration of  the waiver was until 2026, 15 years after MC8. He 
expressed his hope that the efforts made so far to operationalize the LDC services waiver would help LDCs develop their services markets, strengthen the credibility of the WTO as an organization 
and have a positive effect on the collective task of coming up with the post-Bali work programme.  
2.64.  The representative of New Zealand welcom ed the opportunity to discuss the implementation 
of the waiver agreed at MC8 enabling WTO Memb ers to provide preferential treatment to LDC 
services and service suppliers. His delegation recognised the important role services trade could 
play in achieving the development objectives of LDCs, and took  note of the range of barriers 
highlighted in the LDC collective request and in the subsequent bilateral meetings with LDCs. The 
waiver constituted a positive effort towards facilitating the increased participation of LDCs in trade 
in services and provided an opportunity for LDCs  to benefit from a more liberalised services 
market internationally so as to promote their economic growth and development. It was important S/C/M/121 
 
- 19 - 
 
  to recognise that all LDCs, like all Members, already had very good access to the open New 
Zealand services market. New Zealand had undertaken commitments in 90 sectors under GATS, 
with around 30 sectors and subsectors that were completely open for market access and national treatment in modes 1 - 3. This included sectors iden tified by LDCs in their request as of interest, 
such as accounting, auditing and book keeping se rvices; architectural services; a range of tourism 
and travel related services including hotels and re staurants; travel agencies, tour guides and tour 
operators; a range of computer and related services; services incidental to agriculture, hunting 
and forestry; and computer reservation system services. He noted that, on the OECD Services 
Trade Restrictiveness Index, New Zealand scored better than the average for 15 out of the 18 sectors covered. In some areas identified as of interest to LDCs, such as accounting services, engineering, road and air transp ort, New Zealand operated one of the most open regimes amongst 
all countries surveyed. In addition, New Zealand also had a regulatory environment which 
facilitated uptake of these opportunities and wa s internationally recognised for the continuing 
efforts to make it easy for all overseas interests to do business in the country, including LDC 
suppliers. New Zealand ranked second out of 189 economies on the World Bank's Ease of Doing 
Business Index and fifth out of 178 economies on the Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom. He further noted that New Zealand was deli vering on LDC interests in other areas of the 
Doha mandate, for example in providing 100% duty free quota free access to goods from LDCs. 
2.65.  Despite the already open services regime , New Zealand nonetheless recognised the 
importance of the LDC services waiver as a contribution towards the Doha Declaration objective of conducting trade in services negotiations with a view to promoting the economic growth of least-
developed countries, and the delivery of the broader Doha development round. New Zealand  had 
listened carefully to LDCs, paid close attention to the collective request and the sectors and modes of supply explicitly highlighted by LDCs in relation to New Zealand during bilateral consultations. 
His delegation had examined both its Doha Ro und services offers and FTA commitments which 
went beyond the already comprehensive commitments under GATS. Specific areas currently under consideration for LDCs included (i) professional services: consideration of new GATS-plus elements 
in modes 1-3 on consultancy related to urban planning and landscape architecture and 
improvements on veterinary services; (ii) other business services: consideration of new GATS-plus 
elements in modes 1-3 on market research an d opinion polling services; placement and supply 
services of personnel; interior design services; telephone answering services; and mailing list 
compilation and mailing services; (iii) construction services: consideration of new GATS-plus 
elements in modes 1-3 on renting services related to equipment for construction or demolition of building or civil engineering, with operator; and (iv) transport services: consideration of new 
GATS-plus elements on modes 2-3 on aircraft repair and maintenance services; and cargo and 
baggage handling services. 
2.66.  In identifying these areas of consideration, hi s delegation had given some focus to elements 
of the LDC request which presented synergies with New Zealand's existing GATS commitments. 
For example, preferences in respect of repair and maintenance, and rental services were expected 
to enhance opportunities for LDC service suppliers to benefit from New Zealand's high quality 
installer and repairer GATS mode 4 obligations. New Zealand recognised that the LDC interests as 
expressed in the collective request were divers e. Despite New Zealand's already facilitative 
regulatory regime, New Zealand was also not sure that a number of the nontariff barriers identified were amenable to being addressed within the scope of the preferential waiver. However, New 
Zealand remained willing to explore these issues fu rther with LDCs to consider ways in which they 
might be pursued within the context of the post-Bali work programme. A number of these elements could be meaningfully advanced through reinvigorated negotiations on domestic 
regulation. He announced that New Zealand would be working through its domestic processes in 
the coming weeks and months to turn these signals into notifications, which would be submitted in accordance with the terms of the 2011 Ministerial Decision. 
2.67.  The representative of Qatar, speaking on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) 
countries, stated that the GCC was mindful that se curing meaningful preferences for LDC services 
and service suppliers was part and parcel of the Ministerial Decisions in Bali. Members must not lose sight of the fact that the Doha Development Agenda was centred on development. Granting 
the preferences to LDCs would catalyse market  opportunities for LDCs and facilitate their 
integration into the multilateral trading system. The GCC had recently held a meeting with the LDC Group to discuss the collective request and intended to continue efforts to find common ground.  S/C/M/121 
 
- 20 - 
 
  2.68.  The representative of Chinese Taipei expres sed his delegation's satisfaction that the High-
Level Meeting was taking place in response to the call by Ministers in Bali to operationalize the 
MC8 Decision. He also hoped that through the collaboration of those Members that are in a 
position to respond, the waiver Decision would benefit L DC service suppliers and help them further 
integrate into the multilateral trading system. 
2.69.  The Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu was a recently 
acceded Member with a very open services regime. On accession to the WTO, his delegation had 
committed to opening 114 sectors and sub-sectors, in modes 1, 2 and 3. In mode 4, his delegation 
had also made comprehensive commitments in the categories of business visitors, intra-corporate 
transferees, and contractual service suppliers. LDC service suppliers could enjoy national treatment on a non-discriminatory basis according to the existing WTO commitments. Careful 
review of the LDC c ollective r equest revealed that some of the sectors identified were already open 
under the terms of the GATS commitments. To help implement the Bali Ministerial Decision and in 
an effort to respond favourably to the collective r equest, he was considering, within the scope of 
GATS Article XVI, offering further treatments in  the following areas: on the entry and temporary 
stay of natural persons, on top of existing WTO commitments in mode 4, his delegation was 
considering allowing contractual service suppl iers and independent professionals from LDC 
Members entry into several more of our service markets. Specifically, this extension of market 
access covered publishing services; rental/leasing services without operators; building-cleaning services; packaging services; duplicating services; translation and interpretation services; storage and warehousing services; TV and radio advertising services; food serving services; photographic 
services; and telephone answering services. In line with the policy to stimulate the development of 
local culture and creative industry, his delegation considered allowing more contractual service suppliers from LDC Members to participate in their theatrical and entertainment services. At the 
same time, the possibility of extending the treatment included in our DDA offer to allow LDC 
service suppliers to provide audiovisual services through a commercial presence was also under discussion among the competent authorities. An d, fourthly, to complement the above, his 
delegation also considered allowing LDC service providers, through commercial presence, to enter 
the commission agent services sector, the road freight transport services sector, and rental/leasing services without operators concerning aircraft. The domestic process to finalize those offers was 
ongoing, but he hoped to be in a position to submit  the notification no later than July this year.  
2.70.  The representative of Iceland expressed hi s support for the development objectives of the 
LDCs in the context of the Dona Development Agenda. Only a few generations ago, Iceland had 
been among the least-developed countries in Western Europe. Its economic development in the 
latter half of the 20th century had been spurred not only by economic support from neighbouring 
countries, but also by opening its market to competition and by integrating more broadly into the global trading system. Today, trade related development assistance already represented a 
substantial part of Iceland's Official Development Activities - or 28%. These activities were mainly 
within the sectors of fisheries and renewable energy, where his delegation felt it could contribute the most and have the biggest impact. Priority was given to Sub-Saharan Africa and LDCs, and funds were channelled through multilateral organizations and bilateral partners . Iceland would 
continue strengthening its  trade related activities with LDCs in  these priority areas in the coming 
years. 
2.71.  The services waiver was one of many tool s at his delegation's disposal to support the 
integration of LDCs into the global trade in services market - with the ultimate goal of supporting 
the overall development aims of LDCs. In Icelan d, the services sector accounted for 76% of 
employment and was the fastest growing export sector. Iceland's services market was relatively 
small but open, as reflected both in GATS commitments as well as subsequent free  trade 
agreements. The vast majority of services sectors were already committed without limitation. With regard to market access Iceland tried to commit the majority of sectors and modes of supply to match its regulatory regime. It was much more valuable to reflect the reality of the market place, 
and give service suppliers legal clarity, than to distinguish between services suppliers on a 
preferential basis.  
2.72.  He congratulated the LDC Group on the comprehensive collective request and the much 
more specific request to Iceland. This had helped ensured that the sectors under consideration had 
substantial commercial meaning for the LDCs. Internal consultations with domestic stakeholders were on-going, but he was nevertheless in a position to indicate the intention to provide 
preferential treatment to LDC services and servic e suppliers in a number of sectors and modes of S/C/M/121 
 
- 21 - 
 
  supply. For starters, Iceland was aiming to notify all of the improvements, in all sectors an d in all 
modes of supply as reflected in the revised Doha offer from 2005. This included not only  market 
access preferences, but also national treatmen t. His delegation aimed to provide the same 
treatment as the best FTAs Iceland had concluded.  With regard to the specific request to Iceland 
and on other areas identified by the collective re quest, Iceland was looking to confirm preferential 
market access and national treatment for modes 1 and 3 in the following W/120 sectors: computer and related services (CPC 84); landscape architec ture services (CPC 8674); placement and supply 
services of personnel (CPC 872); travel agency bookings for modes 1 and 2; freight transport 
agency services (CPC 748); air transport services as listed in the GATS Annex; construction and 
related engineering services (CPC 512 to 517). A more exhaustive list would be reflected in the notification, which his de legation was aiming to notify to the Council for Trade in Services no later 
than July. 
2.73.  The representative of Hong Kong, China re called the background of the High-Level Meeting 
and expressed his delegation's full support for the services waiver. In value-added terms, services 
accounted for nearly half of world trade, and would continue to be the growth sector of the future. 
If Members were true to the Marrakesh Agreement, that they ' recognize the need for positive 
efforts designed to ensure that … LDCs … secure a share in the growth in international trade 
commensurate with the needs of their economic development ', then it was imperative that actions 
be taken to enable LDCs to overcome their exceptio nal difficulties in this regard. If better market 
access was provided to their services and service suppliers, in particular in sectors and modes of supply where they had export interests, LDCs would be in a better position to integrate more 
effectively into the global trading system, benefit from more active participation in global value 
chains, and build capacity for their long-term, su stainable economic development. That would be a 
remarkable achievement for the DDA which had development at its core. 
2.74.  After thanking the LDC Group for the collective request and subsequent bilateral 
consultations, he noted that Hong Kong, China was already a very free and open market economy 
which did not impose any services trade barriers. The services regime generally observed a 
nationality-neutral principle and did not maintain di fferential treatment to foreign traders. Services 
suppliers and investors found Hong Kong, China's tr ading environment very business-friendly, as it 
was underscored by, among other things, simple and efficient government procedures, and low 
fees and taxation. Last year, the number of compan ies setting up regional headquarters, regional 
offices and local offices in Hong Kong reached a record high of 7585, and he was pleased to see 
among them companies from LDCs. Market access wa s essential in promoting services exports. His 
delegation was prepared to unilaterally extend so me of its DDA offers to LDCs by means of the 
services waiver. Amongst the services listed under A.40 in the collective request, several specific 
sub-sectors had been highlighted by the LDC Group in  bilateral consultations. More specifically, for 
urban planning and landscape architectural services, packaging services, printing and publishing 
services, and other lodging services, for which Hong Kong China had made no GATS commitments 
so far, LDCs would be unilaterally assured of full market access in either mode 1 or mode 3, or both. As for certain travel agencies and tour operator services, his delegation intended to go beyond existing GATS commitment to assure LDCs of full mode 1 market access. These assurances 
on market access to LDCs by way of the services waiver were subject to the completion of certain 
domestic procedures, which his delegation would try carry out expeditiously. As goods and services were nowadays inseparable, and both come through an extensive network of global value 
chains, economies big and small, and at different  stages of development could all make their 
useful contributions to world trade. As Members had become so increasingly connected and mutually dependent, the development goal of LDCs  could also be seen as a development goal for 
all of us. He hoped the market access offered to LDCs through the services waiver could play a 
constructive role in attaining this goal and would also strengthen his delegation's ties with its LDC trading partners, and that enhancing their trading opportunities would also enhance the economic well-being of all Members. 
2.75.  The representative of the Philippines, on  behalf of ASEAN, expressed ASEAN members full 
support for the services waiver and the Bali Decision on its operationalization, and recognized the 
efforts of the LDC Group in submitting a comprehens ive collective request last July. Identification 
of the group's interests and the conduct of the High-Level Meeting were other important 
milestones recognizing the crucial role of LDCs in the multilateral trading system. Following the collective request, ASEAN had engaged the LDC Group in consultations to clarify aspects of the 
request and to determine specific interests in the relevant markets of each ASEAN member. Based 
on the request and further information obtained  from the consultations, ASEAN members had S/C/M/121 
 
- 22 - 
 
  sought guidance from their respective capitals, where separate evaluations and domestic 
consultations had been initiated. Given the comprehensiveness of the request, and the possible consequences on Members' laws and longstanding policies, in most cases the respective consultations and assessments were still ongoing. He emphasized, that while ASEAN had 
participated in the consultations as a group in order to make the exchange of information more 
efficient, ASEAN members had been engaged in this process on an individual basis, similar to the 
group's approach to the DDA services negotiations. Therefore, any possible offers or commitments 
in the future would be made individually by ASEAN members. On a broader policy perspective, 
ASEAN members remained committed and continued wi th their efforts to strengthen relations, 
commercial or otherwise, with LDCs. This included full support of initiatives to enhance LDC competitiveness and contribution to international trade. This was reflected, for instance, in efforts 
to meaningfully integrate LDC members in the ASEAN Economic Community, where trade in 
services played an important role, including through the provision of technical assistance and capacity building and supportive policy initiatives. 
2.76.  The representative of Liechtenstein attach ed great importance to the progress achieved in 
Bali and its implementation, paving the way for the crucial work ahead until the Ministerial 
Conference in Nairobi in December this year. The High-Level Meeting was an important milestone 
in this direction. In view of operationalizing the waiver concerning preferential treatment to 
services and service suppliers of LDC, Liechtenstein was looking into  the possibility to offer 
preferential treatment in important areas of interest to LDCs, as set out in the revised Doha offer and as committed in its FTAs. While his delegation's internal procedures and consultations in this 
regard had not yet been finalised, and he hoped that a notification could be made before the 
summer break, he was in a position to indicate that such preferences might improve further the already very liberal market access in the area of financial services, the main service industry 
sector in Liechtenstein, as well as for telecom services, in particu lar for enhanced and value-added 
telecommunications. His delegation was also considering granting preferential treatment for translation and interpretation services. Furthermore, waiving the horizontal requirement of specific 
government-recognized professional qualifications under mode 3 was under consideration. 
Additional sectors might be included in the notification. He underlined that many sectors listed in the collective request were already committed under the current GATS schedule, like accounting, auditing/bookkeeping, architectural services, building cleaning services, packing services, 
photographic services, printing, travel agency and tour operating services as well as tourist guides 
services or computer and related services. Technical assistance and capacity building enabling LDC to make full use of the multilateral trading system were particularly important. Liechtenstein had 
continuously supported trade related technical assistance activities of the WTO for developing and 
least-developed countries and was a long standing  contributor to the Doha Development Agenda 
Global Trust Fund. 
2.77.  The representative of the Russian Federation thanked the LDC group for an extensive 
research carried out in preparing the collective request. The waiver was an important element of 
the Bali package and a crucial step in LDCs  development, and Russia was giving careful 
consideration to support the development and the collective priorities of LDC Group Members. He 
recalled that the Russian Federation had recently joined the WTO, and had already taken a high 
level of market access and national treatment commitments in a wide range of services sectors, including the majority of sectors mentioned in th e LDC request. Under these circumstances market 
access liberalization, especially mode 4 liberalization was a sensitive issue for his delegation. 
However, pursuant to the Bali arrangement, he indicated readiness for further improvement of 
conditions to LDC services providers. He noted that market access liberalization was not the only 
element of the LDC request on the table. Other elements covered issues such as residence permit 
related items, salary, social protection including health and other benefits, or access to education. Whereas these elements were not in all cases co vered by GATS, the Russian Federation was open 
for further discussion on many of them.  
2.78.  The representative of Chile stated that  the High-Level Meeting was a positive element 
towards implementation of the LDC services waiv er. The collective request circulated by the LDC 
Group had been a catalyst in this process. From the perspective of Chile the services waiver was 
the logical next step following his delegation's im plementation of the duty-free regime for LDCs in 
February of 2014. Chile through much of its history had been a country with a lot of shortcomings and high levels of poverty, and was still struggling to achieve better living standards for its 
population. Therefore, his delegation was particul arly sensitive to the request put forward by the 
LDCs and supported all the efforts being made. Chile would be in a position to announce and notify S/C/M/121 
 
- 23 - 
 
  a full set of preferences for LDCs in the course of this current year. The content of this notification 
would be based on multiple regional agreements th at Chile had negotiated over the past 20 years, 
and would aim to integrate legal certainty, greater sectoral coverage and better commitments. Chile was ready to cooperate in technical assistance programmes directly or together with other 
Members of this Organization.  
2.79.  The representative of Panama expressed his delegation's full commitment to the 
implementation of the Bali Decision on the oper ationalization of the services waiver for the 
preferential treatment to services and service su ppliers for LDCs. Panama confirmed its readiness 
to work in a pro-active fashion to achieve results in the DDA in line with the broad development objectives of the round. In this thrust, his government had started consultations with the relevant national authorities to see in which sectors pref erential treatment to LDCs could be granted. 
Panama would inform the Council of the outcome of these consultations.  
2.80.  The representative of Kenya, speaking on  behalf of the ACP Group, stated that the ACP 
Group comprised a significant number of LDCs and therefore attached a lot of importance to the 
outcome of the High-Level Meeting. The meeting wa s a milestone in terms of putting greater focus 
on the operationalization of the LDC services wa iver. The collective request submitted by the LDCs 
in July 2014 had highlighted services sectors and modes of supply of their export interests. The 
ACP Group was glad to note that at this meeting, some developed and developing Members had 
indicated areas where they expect to provide pr eferential access to LDCs and would soon be 
making formal notifications. He urged other develo ped and developing countries willing to do so to 
also notify services sectors and modes of suppl y where they expect to provide preferential 
treatment to LDCs services and services suppliers in line with the LDC collective request. Besides 
preferential market access, he also expected Members to put more focus on addressing regulatory 
difficulties faced by services and service suppliers from LDCs which in most cases attempted to 
nullify market access opportunities. In conclusi on, the operationalization of the LDC services 
waiver was a cle ar demonstration by the Members of their commitments in placing development, 
and in particular LDC issues, at the heart of the Doha Development Agenda and in facilitating the 
integration of the LDCs into the global economy. 
2.81.  The representative of South Africa reca lled the milestones of the LDC services waiver 
process. As an African country, South Africa's fortunes were inextricably linked to the economic 
development across the continent, and his delegati ons were particularly mindful that most LDCs 
were in Africa. South Africa fully supported th e extension of preferences to the LDCs and had 
repeated this at various platforms across the glob e. The High-Level Meeting marked a crucial point 
in the process. The negotiations had been tough but the spirit of compromise had engendered 
optimism that this Round could deliver on its promise to advance the development of the poorest 
Members of the Organization. The time had now come to match deeds with the stated support for 
LDCs and would now require some hard work on the part of non-LDC Members. South Africa had 
already initiated a consultative process with key stakeholders and government departments to 
develop an offer for LDCs. These discussions had resulted in some positive initial indications from stake-holders. He hoped to conclude these consultations which would form the basis for his delegation's response. South Africa would table its notification as soon as national consultations 
had been finalized.  
2.82.  The representative of Singapore fully associated his delegation with the ASEAN statement 
delivered by the Philippines. Singapore was a longstanding friend of the LDCs. As a small country 
without a hinterland or natural resources, Singapore had grappled with the challenges of 
development upon independence 50 years ago, and had benefitted from technical assistance 
extended by a number of countries and international organisations. His delegation had therefore 
made it a point to pay it forward, and had been doing so primarily through the Singapore 
Cooperation Programme (SCP) which had been established in 1992 to offer technical assistance to fellow developing countries. LDCs had a special place in the Singapore Cooperation Programme. To date, over 40000 officials from LDCs had participated in the SCP, through courses held in 
Singapore and in-country courses under the Initia tive for ASEAN Integration (IAI). Singapore had 
also customised study visits to Singapore for senior officials from LDCs. While a significant portion of technical assistance had gone to its immediat e LDC neighbours in ASEA N - Myanmar, Cambodia, 
and Lao PDR - it had also reached out to LDCs in Africa and South Asia. As a small island state, 
Singapore was also well-placed to understand the vulnerabilities and unique challenges faced by fellow small island states. In this regard, Singapore had shared its development experience with 
over 8000 government officials from Small Island Developing States (SIDS) in areas such as public S/C/M/121 
 
- 24 - 
 
  administration, economic development, sustai nable development and climate change, civil 
aviation, maritime and tourism.  
2.83.  Apart from technical assistance, Singapore understood the importance of trade-driven 
development and the need for LDCs to enhanc e their competitiveness and contribution to 
international trade. Owing to Singapore's very liberal tariff regime, LDCs would not face any 
difficulties exporting goods into Singapore. On th e services front, in response to the LDC Group's 
list of requests, he was pleased to announce that Singapore would be granting enhanced market 
access for modes 2 and 3, for the following services: laundry collection services; textile and fur 
product cleaning services; dry cleaning services; pressing services; and dyeing and colouring services. He hoped that this would contribute towards increasing LDCs' services market access opportunities, and stated that his delegation woul d work towards the expeditious notification of 
these preferences in the WTO. 
2.84.  The representative of Turkey stated th at LDCs represented the weakest segment of the 
international community. Poverty, structural weaknesses of their economies and lack of capacities 
related to growth, often compounded by structural  handicaps, despite their sincere engagements, 
hampered efforts of these countries to develop th eir economies and to improve the quality of life 
of their people which constituted more than 10% of the world population. Turkey firmly believed 
that it was a collective and shared responsibility to  help the LDCs and assist them to realize their 
development objectives, not just because it was a moral and ethical imperative, but also because global peace and security were directly linked with global sustainable development. In this context, the services waiver constituted an important way to further integrate LDCs into the multilateral 
trading system. Turkey had hence been a strong supporter of LDC development efforts bilaterally 
and internationally. The Turkish Development and Cooperation Agency (TIKA) through its country 
or regional offices actively participated in these efforts in all LDCs. TIKA's mission was to 
contribute to poverty eradication and sustainabl e development. Turkey shared its own expertise 
and experience by tailoring its assistance to fit specific needs and development priorities of partner countries. Turkey provided technical assistance for development of institutional capacity and 
human resources in LDCs. This was accomplished by  providing training and advisory services in 
those fields in which Turkey had a comparative advantage in terms of know-how and experience. 
These services were complemented by donations for capacity building. Turkey also actively 
engaged in financing of infrastructure projects such as irrigation, sanitation and transportation 
projects, as well as the construction or renovation of schools, hospitals, architectural objects of 
cultural heritage, etc. Turkey, an emerging co untry, in 2013 ranked number three in the world in 
terms of total international humanitarian aid and number one in terms of international 
humanitarian aid to per capita outcome. Having re ceived the collective request by the LDCs, his 
delegation had started a process in order to better understand and streamline its efforts to support supply side restrictions that LDCs face, and GATS-plus areas where Turkey could offer better 
treatment or extend the scope of its current tr eatment to all LDCs. This screening covered all 
sectors and modes of supply of interest to LDCs. Turkey had recently put into force a new e-visa system which allowed visitors to obtain their visa in less than five minutes. Many developing countries and LDCs already benefit from this system. His delegation was working on the inclusion 
of the remaining LDCs in this e-visa system, so as to further facilitate temporary movement of 
business visitors and open new business opportunities. Increasing the number of educational grants to students from LDCs to Turkish universities and providing training opportunities for LDCs 
are among his delegation's immediate goals. He would update the Membership when his 
delegation's internal work was completed.  
2.85.  The representative of Thailand associated himself with the ASEAN statement and recognized 
the importance of a meaningful participation of LDCs in the multilateral trading system. Trade in 
goods and services with LDCs was very important to Thailand which was in the top five countries that imported goods from LDCs. To help further enhance these trade flows, his delegation's DFQF scheme covering 73% of the tariff lines would soon be up and running. Based on the bilateral 
discussions with the LDC Group, he was pleased to inform Members that his delegation was 
considering granting preferences in most of the sect ors which had been requested. The six service 
sub-sectors and modes of supply that his delegation planned to continue discussing with LDCs 
included: camping and cam p site services; entertainment services - theme parks and amusement 
parks; foreign language tuition services; holiday centre and holiday home services; maritime agency services; and maritime cargo handling. The preferences would be notified upon conclusion 
of domestic procedures. S/C/M/121 
 
- 25 - 
 
  2.86.  The Chairman noted with pleasure the very high level of engagement and the quite positive 
spirit from the preference granting countries. Cl ose to 30 Members intervened under this agenda 
item with specific indications of preferences that they would grant to sectors and modes of interest 
to LDC services and service suppliers. Their willing ness to contribute substantially to the process 
through their indications today was a positive development. Most developed Members and 
developing Members in a position to do so had indicated a willingness to grant access on the basis of their DDA offers to LDCs. Some of them had gone further and had expressed readiness to 
consider granting access to LDCs on the basis of their most liberal preferential agreements. With 
regard to specific sectors and modes of supply,  numerous delegations had expressed a willingness 
to provide improved access in modes 1, 2 and 3, with few, if any restrictions in a range of services sectors, such as: professional services; IT and computer services; other business services; 
construction services; distribution services; financial services; transport and logistics services; 
tourism services; and recreational and sporting services. He noted that in identifying sectors for preferences, Members had looked closely at the se ctors identified by LDCs in their collective 
request. Some Members had foreshadowed preferences in more quantitative terms. One Member, 
for example, indicated that it would respond to some 75% of requested sectors with the granting 
of either full access, or access with very limited restrictions. With regard to the LDC collective 
request on mode 4, a number of delegations had stat ed their willingness to respond specifically on 
the sought after categories of contractual servic e suppliers and independent service suppliers for a 
range of professions and occupations, on which, as delegations knew, only very few commitments had been made at the multilateral level. Additi onal commitments on other requested categories, 
such as graduate trainees, and installers had equally been indicated by several Members. In 
addition, on other categories such as business visitors or intra-corporate transferees, GATS-plus preferences for LDCs had been detailed by many Members. Several Members indicated that 
specific restrictions would not apply to LDC Memb ers, such as economic needs and labour market 
tests, and indicated the extension of timeframes  for the duration of stay of natural persons 
engaged in mode 4 movement. One Member specifically indicated the waiving of visa fees for 
business and employment visas for LDC persons. Another Member proposed waiving of residence 
permit fees. Other Members reported on their efforts to streamline and rationalize their visa procedures which would benefit LDC service suppliers. 
2.87.  Compared to these substantive indications, fewer specifics on the area of recognition and 
professional accreditation had been signalled. A few Members had informed the Council about 
areas where cooperation arrangements between educational institutions were in place and 
benefitting natural persons from LDCs. One Member had stated that it would encourage its 
professional bodies to consider establishing di alogue with their LDC counterparts. A large number 
of Members emphasized the importance of targeted  technical assistance to address supply side 
constraints, and to enhance the participation of LDCs in world trade in services. A number of 
concrete initiatives conceived to benefit LDC servic es suppliers had been mentioned, many of them 
relating to training programmes to the benefit of LDC service suppliers, and support in infrastructure upgrading. Importantly, a number of Members announced specific new technical assistance initiatives and new measures granting preferential access for LDCs to existing training 
and educational programmes. Finally, a number of Members noted the large degree of openness 
that they were already extending on an MFN-ba sis to all WTO Members, including LDCs. It was 
clear that to the extent Members were fully libera lized with regard to Article XVI measures, there 
was no scope for preferences under this Article. That said, numerous specific requests by the LDC 
Group dealt with measures that went beyond Article XVI, and related to positive actions that would further facilitate the supply of services by LD Cs. He expressed the view that such measures 
required consideration by all Members, also those who were generally more "open". 
2.88.  The Chairman also noted the expectations expressed by LDCs on the indications that were 
given at the meeting. Given the large amount of in formation provided by Members, additional time 
might be required to fully digest and analyse the substance of the indications received. He recalled 
that the meeting had been conceived as one important stepping stone towards the 
operationalization of the waiver, but not the final concluding step. That said, it was crucial to follow up on the verbal indications delivered through co ncrete notifications to the Council. Many Members 
had indicated that they were working expeditiously on the submission of a formal notification that 
captured the indications that had been expresse d during the meeting. Depending on domestic 
procedures, some Members were confident of notifying in the near future, whereas others, albeit 
fully committed to making notifications, realized that completion of domestic processes might 
require a little more time. Therefore it was important to be pragmatic and realistic in looking at our next steps. He then suggested that the Co uncil take note of the statements made. S/C/M/121 
 
- 26 - 
 
  2.89.  It was so agreed. 
3  ITEM C - NEXT STEPS  
3.1.  The Chairman invited Members to reflect what "next steps" should be taken to advance the 
operationalization of the services waiver, both at the level of individual Members, as well as at the 
institutional level, in WTO structures. At the Member level, he recalled that Members, in their 
individual capacities, were already encouraged at any time to extend preferences to LDC services 
and service suppliers consistent with the waiver  Decision. It was clear that the design of 
meaningful preferences requires dialogue between LDCs and potential preference grantors. It was 
his understanding that this dialogue was taking place, especially following the submission of the LDC collective request. With regard to next steps in the Council for Trade in Services, Ministers in Bali had instructed the Council to initiate a process aimed at promoting the expeditious and 
effective operationalization of the services waiv er. Furthermore, the Council had been tasked to 
periodically review the operationalization of the waiver, and to make any recommendations on steps that could be taken towards enhancing its operationalization. Following the Bali Ministerial 
mandate, the services waiver had been a standing item on the agenda of the Council for Trade in 
Services, allowing for a regular exchange on its operationalization. As set out in the waiver Decision, any notifications, or requests for approval of preferences, would also be made to the 
Services Council, and taken up therein. He opened the floor for suggestions on any next steps that 
would contribute to the operationalization of the waiver, both at Member level and at the level of the Services Council. 
3.2.  The representative of Uganda thanked dele gations who had intervened at this High-Level 
Meeting to register their indications of preferen ces in favor of LDC services suppliers. The LDC 
Group was operating as a collective and had to jointly evaluate the indications made at the 
meeting. Personally, she thought that many of th e interventions made were on the right track and 
warmly thanked Members. It was her preliminary view that, if converted into notifications, many of 
the interventions could provide the WTO with a strong deliverable in response to the collective request and a valuable contribution to the DDA for the poorest Members.  
3.3.  In terms of next steps, the LDC Group requ ested that an item be added to the agenda for a 
Council for Trade in Services regular meeting in March to read "LDC Group Assessment of the Results of the MC9 LDC services waiver Decision  High-Level Meeting". Secondly, she requested 
that all preferences indicated at the High-Level  Meeting should be notified no later than 
by 30 April 2015. Finally, a date should be set for a meeting of the Council for Trade Services for 
May 2015 in order to authorize all notified preferences that fell outside the scope of Article XVI measures. 
3.4.  The LDC Group saw no problem with the fact that preferences notified in response to 
elements of the collective request falling outside of  GATS Article XVI would need to be adopted by 
the Council for Trade in Services. This process after the High-Level Meeting would also enable 
those Members who announced partial indications and others who could not provide sufficient 
indications in response to the collective request, to meet with the LDC Group and find a way to include in their notification better responses. As  indicated in the opening remarks, the LDC Group 
had met with over 30 delegations since the tabling of the collective request in July last year. These 
efforts both in the collective request and the extensive consultations with delegations including the 
major developed Members had enabled LDCs to untangle any perceived complexities in the request.  In fact, she applauded all those Member s who could find their way around any perceived 
complexities to come forward with such detail and strong commitment to this critical event 
launched by Ministers in Bali and critical to the Membership's work in preparation of a post-Bali work programme to conclude the DDA. She also thanked those delegations who, in their 
interventions, put aside any notions of holding th e LDCs, the poorest nations, hostage to broader 
issues, and deliberated with the highest commitment to announcing preferences that would help facilitate the integration of LDCs into the multilateral trading system. 
3.5.  The representative of Australia agreed wi th Uganda's assessment that the meeting had been 
promising with regard to deliverables under the LDC service waiver. With regard to the proposed 
timeline for notifications, her delegation was working as hard as possible to table a notification as soon as possible. However, the completion of the necessary domestic process was not simple, 
because it was the first time that her government tried to offer services trade preferences 
unilaterally and outside a formal agreement like a FTA. It had been a complex process to agree S/C/M/121 
 
- 27 - 
 
  with relevant agencies on a domestic process and she did not want to see that a formal deadline 
could reduce the level of ambition of the preferences that Australia would be able to offer. It might 
be possible to complete domestic procedures on some of the preferences before the deadline, but 
not others. She therefore cautioned against setting a firm deadline.  
3.6.  The representative of the United States agreed with Uganda on the importance of 
maintaining momentum in the process and supported the proposal for a more elaborate discussion 
during the March Services Council of reactions to the indications presented. Establishing a deadline 
for notifications as ambitious as the end of April might inhibit the ability of his delegation to fully 
consider what had been indicated at the meetin gas his delegation moved forward with its own 
potential notifications. Allowing for a somewhat longer period of time would contribute to his 
delegation's ability to process what was learned during the meeting and to be able to take that 
into account. The March meeting would allow delegations to get into a detailed discussion, 
subsequent to which the Council could return to the issue of the establishment of a time-frame for notifications.  
3.7.  The representative of the European Union shared Uganda's positive assessment of the 
meeting, which constituted a clear step forward and which needed to be followed up by other 
actions. He was optimistic on the way forward. On  the proposed target date, he noted that it was 
not really easy to design and to understand a binding commitment on something that was by 
nature unilateral. From a practical perspective, as domestic processes were difficult to foresee, it was difficult to take a commitment in this respect.  With reference to the request of the LDCs, he 
understood the need to go as quickly as possible and his delegation was ready to do that. With 
regard to the proposal of a meeting in May to authorize preferences in areas other than Article 
XVI, this could be foreseen only for those preferences falling outside XVI for which authorization had been requested by that time.  
3.8.  The representative of Hong Kong, China echoed the view that setting a deadline for 
notification was difficult because the domestic processes could not be completely controlled, 
adding that a deadline should not undermine her delegation's offer by setting a constraint upon 
themselves.  
3.9.  The representative of Bangladesh joined the LDC coordinator to thank the Members who had 
come forward to operationalize the services waiver  by positively responding to the LDC collective 
request. He had a sense that many WTO Members had carefully gone through the request and 
were willing to provide preferences in the areas of interest to LDCs. It was essential to transform 
this good gesture into concrete actions. He fully endorsed the next steps proposed by the 
coordinator and supported the setting of a time line.  
3.10.  The representative of Japan expressed his de legation's readiness to prepare a notification in 
accordance with the consensus. 
3.11.  The representative of Lesotho noted that once a full set of notifications was received, LDCs 
would be expected to raise awareness in capitals and with services suppliers. As three years 
without notification had passed already, it was important to have at last the certainty of a date for the notifications. Setting a date should not lead to a reduction of the level of ambition.  
3.12.  The representative of Tanzania expressed hi s support for setting a deadline for notifications, 
and expressed concern about the time that had passed without any notifications having been 
received.  
3.13.  The representative of China stated that it was crucial to translate the positive signals into 
written notifications and agreed that the setting of a specific date would help the operationalization 
of the services waiver. His delegation could agree to the proposed date of 30 April 2015.  
3.14.  The representatives of Benin and Nepal also supported the establishment of a date for 
notifications, so as to enable the Council to take forward its work on the waiver. 3.15.  The representative of Uganda took note of the statements by other delegations and 
proposed that a deadline should be set, possibly in June or July, to allow for delegations to 
conclude their domestic procedures. S/C/M/121 
 
- 28 - 
 
  3.16.  The Chairman noted that the interventions under the agenda item had shown that a specific 
date for notifications, while desirable, was not easily doable for delegations needing to involve 
other domestic constituencies in the finaliza tion of a preference package. Based on the 
interventions, he suggested that Members shall endeavour to submit notifications at the earliest 
possible date, and no later than 31 July 2015. He further suggested that the proposed assessment 
of the High-Level Meeting at the March Services Co uncil be designed as a collective exercise, with 
inputs from all delegations. The sub-item on the agenda could read "Assessment of the Results of 
the LDC services waiver High-Level Meeting".  
3.17.  The representatives of Uganda and Banglade sh supported the suggestions by the Chairman.  
3.18.  The Chairman proposed that the Council take note of the statements made, and agree 
(i) that Members shall endeavour to submit notifications at the earliest possible date, and no later 
than 31 July 2015; and (ii) that a sub-agenda item be included on the agenda of the next Services 
Council, reading "Assessment of the Results of th e LDC services waiver High-Level Meeting".  
3.19.  It was so agreed. 
3.20.  The Chairman then requested the representa tive of the World Bank to make a statement. 
3.21.  The representative of the World Bank ex pressed the view that the High-Level Meeting 
represented a decisive step forward, in aid of greater integration of LDCs into international 
services trade. The process that had been followed since Members agreed on the waiver had been 
an acknowledgment of the critical importance of th e services sector for economic competitiveness, 
development and poverty reduction in LDCs. The World Bank Group fully supported these actions 
and congratulated the LDC Group on the collectiv e request and the hard work that had put the 
Membership where it was today.  
3.22.  The World Bank had taken careful note of the statements from WTO Members that the High-
Level Meeting was not the end, but an important step forward in the operationalization of the 
waiver. The World Bank Group stood ready to assist the WTO Membership in this process, both 
through its analytical and knowledge work and technical assistance and financial support to LDCs on the ground. The World Bank had information re ady and was happy to provide further detail in 
future meetings of the Council for Trade in Services. The Bank Group has over 500 staff working 
across 80 country offices on trade and competitivene ss issues, with a portfolio of US$5.5 billion in 
commitments, US$600 million in grants, and over US$300 million in advisory services projects. The World Bank Group could hence bring considerab le experience to Geneva, to support Members' 
ongoing action to maximize the potential offered by the waiver. The Bank Group had worked with 
a number of developing and least-developed countries to assess the nature and impact of services sector regulations; to develop services knowledge  platforms; to develop and implement strategies 
to attract investment and boost exports in critical sectors for LDCs like tourism; and to improve 
the transparency and effectiveness of services re gulations. Actions in these areas and many more 
would have an important role in boosting the competitiveness of LDC services sectors, and in 
complementing the important process in Geneva that the High-Level Meeting was part of. The 
Bank Group stood ready to assist in Geneva and on the ground with LDC governments, to make 
sure the actions taken at the meeting had the greate st impact in increasing the integration of LDCs 
in international services trade.  
3.23.  The Chairman suggested that the Council take note of the statement made by the World 
Bank. 
3.24.  It was so agreed. 
4  ITEM D - OTHER BUSINESS 4.1.  No items were raised under Other Business.  4.2.  The meeting was adjourned. 
 
__________