WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG158/5 
8 December 2004 
 
 (04-5388) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original:   English 
 
 
SINGAPORE – AUSTRALIA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT 
 
Questions and Replies  
 
 The following  communication, dated 3 December  2004, is being circulated at the request of 
the Delegations of Australia and Singapore.  
 This document reproduces the questions addres sed to the Parties and the responses submitted. 
The questions and replies set out below are organized in accordance with document WT/REG158/3 
for the goods aspects of the Agreement, and WT/REG158/4 for the services aspects of the Agreement. 
  
_______________ 
 
GOODS ASPECTS
 
 
II. TRADE PROVISIONS  
 
1. Import Restrictions  
1. Please confirm that tariffs on all goods were  eliminated upon entry into force of this 
agreement. 
 All import duties on all goods that meet the rules of origin criteria provided under SAFTA 
were eliminated immediately upon en try into force of this agreement. 
 
6. Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures  
2. The Free Trade Agreement stipulates that some specific requirements should be applied 
with respect to the use of anti-dumping measures between the Parties. The EC would thus 
appreciate to know whether any of these require ments are also applied to antidumping measure 
involving non-Party companies and, if not, what  this would entail in practice for measures 
applied in a case involving companies from  both the other Party and non-Parties. 
 The specific requirements in SAFTA with respect to the use of antidumping measures 
between the Parties are also applied to antidum ping measures involving non-Party companies. 
 
9. Other 
Customs Procedures
 
 3. Please describe the changes undertaken by the customs administrations of the respective 
parties to implement the requirements for customs simplifications outlined in Article 4 of the 
agreement. 
 Article 4, Chapter 4 of SAFTA encourages in creased use of electronic / paperless trading 
between the Parties.  Accordingly, the Parties ha ve been working towards expanding the scope of WT/REG158/5 
Page 2  
 
 documents, that are necessary for customs reporti ng purposes, which can be accepted in electronic 
form.  
 4. The EC would appreciate if the Parties could clarify whether the simplifications 
provided under the agreement are equally applied to trade with the other Party and trade with 
non-Parties. If not, how are the different procedures applied in practice? 
 Any simplifications provided under the SAFTA will be applied equally to all other trading 
partners of Singapore and Australia.   
 
 Government Procurement
 
 
5. Please describe how the provisions on government procurement provided in Art 6 go 
beyond the obligations of the WTO GPA.  
 In so far as the GP Chapter under SAFTA is based on principles rather than prescriptive rules, 
the SAFTA GP Chapter goes beyond the WTO's GPA by applying the agreed principles to all contracts, and not only for certain contracts that  meet set criteria such as threshold value.   
 
6. The EC would like to seek further clarificat ion of Chapter 6 of the Agreement, and its 
related Annexes, with respect to the Agreement’s scope and coverage in government 
procurement: 
- Are there any categories of services excluded from the agreement? 
 The Government Procurement provisions apply to all goods and services.  The only 
qualifications areas are set out in Article 2.2.  Ru les of origin (Article 4)  are also relevant.   
 
- Does the Agreement apply to procurement irrespectively of the contract value?  
In other words, does the agreement apply to smal l value contracts?  Is there a threshold above 
which the agreement applies? 
 The Agreement applies to all procurements irrespective of contract value, and there are no 
specified threshold values.   
 7. In addition, considering that the scope of procurement covered by the FTA seems to be 
broader than the scope of Singapore procurem ent committed under the GPA, the EC would like 
to ask whether Singapore would be ready to be gin negotiations with a view to expand its 
commitments under the GPA vis-a-vis Parties to the GPA? 
 Singapore may consider negotiating with an y interested Party with a view to expand 
commitments under the GPA on a mutual bilateral basis.   
8. Finally, considering the similarity of rule s governing the procurement chapter with the 
rules contained in the GPA and seeing the level of ambition in terms of coverage in the FTA, the 
EC would like to pose the question to Australia whether it is now considering joining the GPA? 
 Australia has no plans to accede to the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) 
as the GPA has, in Australia’s view, some signific ant deficiencies, including departure from the MFN 
principle, allowing bilateral agreements between si gnatories that enable carve outs of sensitive and 
potentially lucrative sectors, and establishes procedural requirements that are not necessarily 
consistent with open and transpar ent government procurement practices, and are at some variance 
with Australian Federal, State and Te rritory practices and policies.    WT/REG158/5 
 Page 3 
 
 
 III. GENERAL PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT 
 
2. Accession 
 
9. Article 17.4 provides that SAFTA is open to accession or association. While we welcome 
the openness of this agreement, we’d like to seek a clarification regarding the concept of 
association. Given the difference between Customs Union and FTA, it seems that an association 
agreement could not imply a new RTA with SAFTA as a single party and an associated Member 
as another party. Could the parties shed some light on the difference between accession and 
association as envisaged in SAFTA? 
 Article 17.4 provides that SAFTA is open to accession or association on terms to be agreed 
between the Parties.  The Parties understand "Accession" to mean normally that a third party becomes 
a Party to the SAFTA on the full terms and conditions of SAFTA.  
 
 On the other hand, we understand "Association"  to be different in that a third party which 
joins the Agreement may do so on terms that de part in some way from the SAFTA text and the 
existing commitments of the Parties. 
 
 This phrase “on terms to be agreed between the Parties” is relevant to both ‘accession’ and 
‘association’.  It is open to the Parties to consider the terms on which any third Party may accede or 
associate with the Agreement.     
 
SERVICES ASPECTS
 
 
I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE AGREEMENT  
 
3. Scope 
 
10. Both Parties have undertaken GATS commitments covering measures taken by any 
level of government. In SAFTA, both Parties have excluded from their market access and 
national treatment commitments measures at local level. Is there a particular reason for this 
exclusion? Is there not a risk that discrimination between the Parties be introduced by a simple 
process of decentralisation? 
 SAFTA does not exclude regional or local gov ernment from the services and investment 
commitments.  The definition of “measures by Partie s” (Article 7.1(h) and 8.1(e)) is quite clear in 
stating that such measures include measures ta ken by central, regional or local governments and 
authorities.  In relation to the lis t of reservations, Article 7.5.1 a nd Article 8.5.1 provide that any 
existing non-conforming measures at the local level may be maintained under the standstill 
commitment of Annex 1, without the need to specifically list such measures in the Annex.   
 
II. PROVISIONS AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES 
3. Standards/Recognition 
 
11. As regards Article 7.23 (recognition), coul d the Parties inform whether the autonomous 
recognition and the negotiations foreseen in th at provision bind the Parties under international 
law? Is the intention of the Parties to comply with obligations imposed by Article VII of GATS 
in implementing this provision? WT/REG158/5 
Page 4  
 
  Article 7.23 is not prescriptive about the status  of any agreements or arrangements that might 
be reached as a result of the negotiations between the relevant competent bodies.  The appropriate 
nature and status of such agreements would need to be determined on a case by case basis.  There is 
nothing in Article 7.23 which would interfere with the ability of the Parties to fully adhere to the 
provisions of Article VII of GATS.  Australia has been a strong supporter of the work in the WTO 
relating to Article VII, including the notification provisions, and intends to fully comply with these 
provisions. 
 
 12. Annex 4-III of SAFTA contains provision re lating to autonomous recognition of law 
degrees for admission as qualified lawyers, Do si milar provisions exist in Singapore for law 
degrees of third Parties? 
 With respect to law degrees of "third Parties"  (ie apart from Australia ), Singapore recognises, 
for Singapore citizens and permanent residents, law degrees from 19 universities in the United 
Kingdom and 2 universities in New Zealand. Singapore has also agreed to recognise, for Singapore citizens or permanent residents, law degrees (J.D 's) from 4 universities in the United States of 
America. This will take effect once consultations be tween the USA and Singapore are completed.     
 
__________