RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  S/CSC/M/55 
10 November 2010 
 (10-6002) 
Committee on Specific Commitments   
  
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 28 SEPTEMBER 2010 
 
Note by the Secretariat1 
 
 
1. The Committee on Specific Commitments (CSC) held a meeting on 28 September 2010, 
chaired by Ms. Natalie Burke from Barbados.  The agenda for the meeting, contained in 
WTO/AIR/3612, was adopted.  
A. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OLD AND NEW COMMITMENT  
2. The Chair  recalled that the new proposal from Cana da had re-stimulated the discussion on 
protocol language at the Committe e's last meeting.  The Canadian proposal, like previous proposals, 
was meant to ensure the legal certainty of Member s' rights under the pre-existing commitments on the 
entry into force of the new schedules.  Howeve r, despite the new proposal, some delegations 
maintained their concerns that the proposed prot ocol language might create legal uncertainty with 
respect to the status of commitments in the new schedules.   Also, delegations continued to have 
divergent views on whether the Committee should discu ss the definition or parameters of rollback.   
Given that the Committee had held intensive discu ssions in this regard for quite some time, 
delegations might wish to consider whether it was possible to explore the scope for compromise that 
would address the concerns expressed.  On verificati on, it was agreed that the Committee should start 
to discuss how to conduct the exercise.  To facilitate  a more focused exchange of views, as requested, 
the Secretariat had prepared a roadmap, containe d in document JOB/SERV/21, which had taken into 
consideration past practice and recent discussions in the Committee. 
3. The representative of the Secretariat  stated that the Note (JOB/SERV/21) was self-
explanatory, based on previous practice.  There were  some gaps to be filled in by Members, which 
were referred to in square brackets.  The most important decision to be taken by Members was whether the exercise should take place before or af ter the conclusion of market access negotiations.  
He also mentioned a typo in paragraph 2 (vi), wh ere the reference to (iv) should be (v).   
4. The representative of Canada
 thanked Members for the comments on her delegation's 
proposal.  Given the importance of the issues raised, her delegations wished to hear further views and 
would review them carefully.  While Canada was willing to participate in the discussions aimed at 
exploring the scope for compromise, it thought that  Members shared the same objective which was to 
preserve market access gains as well as the legal certainty of commitments.    
5. The representative of Switzerland  stated that what mattered was the content of protocol 
language, not the length of the text.  Members ha d undertaken rights and obligations through their 
schedules of specific commitments which were lega lly binding.  Protocol language should create 
absolute transparency an d ensure precision and clarity.  It should be made clear that no old 
commitment could disappear or be reduced.  Ther e was no linkage between the content of protocol 
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and without prejudice to 
the positions of Members and to their rights and obligations under the WTO. S/CSC/M/55 
Page 2  
 
  language and the definition of rollback.  It was possi ble to state that no rollback was accepted and to 
leave the question of what constituted rollback to pa nels which should rule on the possible difference 
between obligation and implementation.      
6. The representative of Hong Kong, China
 noted that the Committee had discussed the 
relationship between old and new commitments fo r a long time and might have exhausted all the 
arguments regarding the need for protocol language as we ll as appropriate texts.  Therefore, his 
delegation supported the Chair's suggestion that Memb ers consider the scope for compromise.  With 
respect to the Note on verification, his delegati on had a few specific questions:  (1) Had the TNC a 
role to play in the process or was the Special Session of the Services Council the right place to 
conduct the exercise?   (2) In case of disagreemen t between Members regarding the substance of a 
particular entry in the schedule (i.e. whether it was rollback), what procedures were to be followed?  
(3) Would the draft schedules be translated into a ll the three official languages of the WTO for the 
purpose of verification?     
7. The representative of Argentina  stated that his delegation remained uncertain about the need 
to include the text proposed by Canada in the final protocol.  The consequence of the text might be to 
have two valid schedules of commitments from a legal standpoint and thus create problems in 
determining the scope of the commitments in force.  According to Articles 31 and 32 of the of Vienna 
Convention on the Law of Treaties, previous schedul es, as a result of the replacement method, might 
constitute context or the supplementary means of in terpretation of the commitments contained in the 
new schedules.  However, Canada's proposal imp lied that commitments of the Uruguay Round would 
have a higher hierarchical status.  This would be  in conflict with the rules of interpretation.  
According to Canada's proposal, the determination of whether the level of a commitment was reduced 
should be made line-by-line.  This, however, cont radicted Article XIX:4 of the GATS whereby the 
progressive liberalization process should consist of increasing the general level of specific 
commitments.  The proposal might also create di fficulties for future negotiations.  Should it be 
adopted, there would be a problem as to which sched ule should be used as a basis for negotiations.  In 
addition, there existed a horizontal problem: wh y were Members expected to agree on a legal 
guarantee of "no less favourable treatment or no rollbacks" in the area of services, when it was not provided in other areas, particularly in Agricultu re?  If such guarantee was to be introduced in 
services, it should also be provided in other areas.  
8. He noted that the Secretariat's Note on verification pointed out that the exercise should not 
only verify the technical clarity of new commit ments and their consistency with the Scheduling 
Guidelines, but also ensure that existing commitments would not be undermined.  This was consistent 
with what was upheld by Argentina as far as rollb ack was concerned: an exhaustive and thorough 
verification would enable Members to identify and so lve any rollback.  The ni ne steps proposed in the 
Note were, in principle, acceptable without prejudice to any discussion Members might have.   More specifically, the launch of the process should be afte r the conclusion of market access negotiations as 
was the GATT/WTO practice.  Nonetheless, he wished  to hear the opinion of the Secretariat or other 
Members why the verification exercise should take place before the conclusi on of negotiations and on 
what basis the negotiations would be carried on.  The dedicated meeting was the central part of the 
exercise, and the Note  needed to be clarified in th is regard.  For example, what would occur if after 
the review of a Member's schedule it was im possible to agree on the necessary correction, in 
particular in cases where Members had divergent views on whether a commitment was an 
improvement or a rollback?  Finally, regarding th e timing and the length of the exercise, the resource 
implications for WTO Members, particularly de veloping countries, should be borne in mind.  
Sufficient time should be allowed between the circula tion of the draft schedules by the Secretariat and 
the communication of questions to the Secretariat by Members.  Also, there s hould be sufficient time 
between the circulation by the Secretariat of a compilation of the questions received and the dedicated 
meeting to examine the schedules.    S/CSC/M/55 
 Page 3 
 
 
   
9. The representative of Japan  stated that more discussions were needed with respect to protocol 
language.  This issue was closely related to the defin ition of rollback.  It might be difficult to define 
rollback quantitatively as seemed to be implied by the Canadian proposal with the reference to 
"reduce the level of commitment".    He recalled Canada's explanation that this expression made sense 
because GATS Article XIX used the term "level of lib eralization".  However, paragraph 1 of the same 
Article mentioned that "that negotiati on shall be directed to the reduc tion or elimination of the adverse 
effects on trade in services of measures as a means of providing effective market access".  The 
provision did not describe the rollb ack of commitments.  Japan wished  to hear Canada's comments on 
this.  Given the difficulties associated with defi ning rollback, Japan shared the view expressed by 
other delegations that it should be addressed on a case-by-case basis.  It might be helpful to discuss 
possible rollback cases, which could be provided by  the Secretariat, in small group meetings as 
Australia had proposed. 
10. The representative of European Union  raised a couple of questions with respect to the 
Secretariat's Note on verification.  What would happen if Members could not reach agreement on 
whether an entry constituted a rollback during the exer cise?  The roadmap implied that there would be 
agreement and that Members would then move in to the process of ratification, but what would 
happens if that was not the case?  Another qu estion was whether the process should be launched 
before or after the conclusion of the market acces s negotiations.  On the issue of timing, given the 
complexity of the exercise, three to six months mi ght be needed between steps 2 and 4 in order to 
have a serious and thorough verification.  
11. The representative of Chile  reiterated his delegati on's concern over the inclusion of particular 
language into the protocol due to possible interpre tational uncertainties.  On Canada's proposal, his 
delegation shared the comments made by Argent ina.  The co-existence of two schedules would 
generate serious uncertainty and was not in line with the replacement method.  In addition, Members 
could always resort to dispute settlement to addr ess discrepancies in schedu les.  Therefore, the 
reference to dispute settlement in  Canada's proposal was redundant a nd might generate confusion.  
Concerns over rollbacks could be addressed by a thorough verification exercise.  The Secretariat Note was a good start for the Committee to look into the de tails of such an exercise.  Given its special 
features in this Round, sufficient time should be gua ranteed, and a period of three to six months would 
be necessary.  The time needed from one step to anothe r should also be specified.  Given the nature of 
the exercise, it should begin once the negotiations we re finished. While his delegation was willing to 
work with other delegations in exploring the sc ope for compromise with respect to the issue of 
protocol language, the focus of the Committee's wo rk should be on the design of the verification 
exercise.        
12. The representative of China
 reiterated that his delegati on could go along with specific 
language in the protocol to prevent rollbacks as long as Members could be certain about the legal 
implications for the relationship between old a nd new commitments.  China supported the idea of 
having discussions on what constituted rollback, which would provide Members with more clarity.   
Regarding the Secretariat's Note on the verifica tion exercise, China had specific questions: Would 
there be only one round of questions-answers in the process or would there be chances for Members 
to raise new questions?  How would the Secretaria t assist developing country Members, given the 
huge volume of work and possible large number of requests by Members?       
13. The representative of Guatemala , on behalf of El-Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, 
reiterated that the verification exercise would enable  Members to solve any technical concerns arising 
from the new schedules and guarantee that the exis ting commitments would not be undermined.  The 
steps described in the Secretariat's Note were appropriate and the process should start immediately 
after the conclusion of the market access negotiati ons.  Sharing the concerns expressed by Argentina, 
these delegations were still convinced that there was no need to include specific language in the S/CSC/M/55 
Page 4  
 
  protocol to prevent rollbacks.  The Committee should focus its work on the design of the verification 
process.   
14. The representative of Brazil
 stated that his delegation was doubtful of the need to include 
specific language in the protocol, considering the existence of Article XIX of the GATS and possible 
legal uncertainty associated with such language.  Brazil also shared the concerns expressed by 
Argentina regarding the linkage between the discu ssion in this Committee and the negotiations in 
other areas.     
15. The representative of the United States  associated himself with the concerns expressed 
regarding protocol language which could result in tw o sets of schedules with formal legal standing.  
Nevertheless, his delegation was w illing to work with other Members to explore options, noting that a 
robust verification exercise could help mitigate some  concerns over rollbacks.  The Secretariat's Note 
was very helpful to move discussions forward.   His delegation also had some specific questions on 
the Note:  Would there be a consultation period before written questions were submitted to the 
Secretariat whereby Members could clarify certain issues and reduce the number of questions?  How 
long might the process take according to past practi ce?  What was the process and timeline of the 
negotiations in other areas?  What did the "conclusi on" of the negotiations mean?  He understood that 
the verification process would take place between the conclusion of the negotiations and the entry into 
force of the schedules.  Looking forward to furthe r discussion on verification, he thought it was better 
to do it now rather than in the heat of the final stage. 
16. The representative of Thailand  stated that his delegation might have further comments on the 
protocol language proposed by Canada.  He shared  the view of some other delegations regarding the 
need to have specific reference in paragraph 2 of  the proposed text to the recourse to dispute 
settlement.  On the verification exercise, the Secr etariat's Note helped Members develop a better 
understanding.  His delegation was sceptical, however, about the possibility of reaching agreement on rectification as suggested in paragraph 2(vi)-(vi i) of the Note.  He suggested that "agreed 
rectification" be replaced with "suggested rectifica tions" or "appropriate rectifications".  He also 
thanked the Secretariat for being willing to assist developing country Members.    
17. Commenting on paragraph 2(ii) of the Secretariat's Note, the representative of Switzerland
 
suggested that the Secretariat prepare for each Me mber a compilation of old and new commitments 
which would facilitate comparison and verification line-by-line.  On paragraph 2(iii), whether the 
process should be launched before or after the conc lusion of the market access negotiations would 
depend on Members' offers.  It would be useful to have a two-stage process and the first one would go 
through the revised offers before the final offers.  In this case, it would be possible to start the process 
before the conclusion of the negotiations, and th is would facilitate resource management.     
18. The representative of India  supported a through verification exercise and the inclusion of 
specific language in the protocol to prevent rollback s.  Recognizing the merits of Canada's initiative, 
India continued to examine all the proposals on the ta ble and would make further comments later.  On 
a preliminary basis, India remained concerned about  the absence of the defi nition of rollback.  This 
was a real issue as also expressed by some other Members.  It was not clear whether the level of commitments should be assessed line-by-line basis or on an overall basis.  India was not convinced of the view that rollbacks should be left to dispute pane ls.  This might give too much discretion to panels 
and result in too many cases.  Having recourse to dispute settlement did not address the issue highlighted by some delegations: What would happen in case Members did not agree on rectification 
or the identification of rollbacks during the process of verification?  This was not to say that the 
definition of rollback was a prerequisite to finaliz ing relevant language in the protocol.  The two 
issues could be addressed separately or in parallel.   Ideally, India would prefer the compromise 
suggested in the paragraph 4 of the annotated agenda  that the provision in the protocol should avoid 
difficulties associated with defining the concept of rollback.  On how to pro ceed with the discussion  S/CSC/M/55 
 Page 5 
 
 
  on rollbacks, Japan had provided a good solution which could be further explored.  Regarding 
verification, the launch of the process should be  done only after the formal conclusion of the 
negotiations.  It might be premature to decide the total time required at this stage.  Further, the resource constraints of developing countries shoul d be taken into account.  Argentina had already 
highlighted the importance of having sufficient time for that process.  He requested the Secretariat to 
explain how the staging of the process would differ from past practice. 
19. The representative of Mexico
 noted the concerns expressed by some delegations with respect 
to including specific language in the protocol to pr event rollbacks.  Her delegation might make further 
comments on this issue at the next meeting after in ternal consultations.  Given the nature of the 
verification exercise, it should take place after the conclusion of the market access negotiations to 
confirm the technical accuracy of schedules.  She sh ared the concerns express ed by other delegations 
regarding the dedicated meeting and resource constraints of developing country Members. 
20. The representative of Indonesia  stated that the Secretariat's Note had shed light on role of the 
verification exercise and how Members should carry it out at the end of the Round.  The exercise would be important in ensuring the quality and cl arity of new commitments.  His delegation would 
make detailed comments at a later stage as its capita l was still examining the issue.  He agreed with 
Argentina that verification should be based on th e overall market access improvement rather than 
line-by-line or sector-by-sector.  Given the different levels of development among Members and the complexity of the exercise, it should be designed as simple as possible.  While Members had agreed 
on the necessity of avoiding rollbacks, they had yet to develop an interpretation of what constituted 
rollback.  It was highly important to thoroughly disc uss the concept of rollback and its parameters.   
21. The representative of Australia
 reiterated that the verification exercise was necessary to help 
prevent rollbacks.  There was no benefit in trying to de fine rollback at this point.  Ultimately, this was 
to be addressed by dispute settlement. Members needed to further consider how to resolve 
disagreement on rollback in the verification exercise.  Her delegation would consider the idea that the 
prevention of rollbacks was to protect benefits a ccruing to services and se rvice suppliers under the 
existing schedules.   The verification process set out in the Secretariat's Note could be supplemented 
by bilateral and plurilateral discussions.  Therefore,  the timelines should be incorporated into the 
procedure.  Verification in services was a subs tantive exercise and should take place after the 
conclusion of the market access negotiations, but befo re the conclusion of the Round.  Sufficient time 
would be needed for the exercise.       
22. The representative of New Zealand  stated that it was useful fo r the Committee to focus on the 
verification exercise for the time being.  The pr ocess outlined in the Secretariat's Note looked 
sensible, in particular the transparency element in  paragraph 2(v).  Sufficient time would be needed 
for the process.  It should be launched after the conclusion of the market access negotiations to ensure 
that the agreement reached during the negotiations wo uld be fully reflected in the schedule.  Referring 
to paragraph 2(vi), she enquired how a single dedicat ed meeting might be able to deal with a large 
number of questions.  A series of concurrent meeti ngs could be held over a period of several weeks. 
She supported the suggestion made by Australia that  the process be supplemented by bilateral and 
plurilateral consultations.  
23. The representative of Egypt  preferred having a thorough verification process to other 
approaches such as special language in the protocol which might create legal uncertainty with respect 
to the legal status of commitments.  The exerci se should be launched afte r the conclusion of the 
market access negotiations.  While Members shoul d continue to discuss the exercise based on the 
roadmap presented in the Secretariat's Note , there was no urgency to adopt it.     
24. The representative of Pakistan  stated that Members should have a holistic approach to address 
how much time was needed to carry out the verifica tion exercise and check with the TNC's schedule.  S/CSC/M/55 
Page 6  
 
  The time available for services would also depend on the timelines in agriculture and NAMA.  The 
idea to have a two-stage verification process appeared  attractive as it might help avoid backlogging at 
the last minute.  The interim verification could be on a non-binding basis even before the finalisation 
of offers and revised offers.    
25. He reiterated the need to have specific language  in the protocol to prevent rollbacks.  The 
starting point of DDA negotiations was not to roll back from the pre-existing commitments.  If this 
was agreeable to all Members, there should no probl em in clarifying this issu.  While "benefits 
accruing to services and service suppliers" might, in theory, serve as a good criterion for the 
determination of rollback, the aff ected party would have to prove before panels the benefits i.e. 
service suppliers' capacity to supply services at a given point in time under a commitment undertaken 
by the defending party.  There was a problem of how  to establish the accrual of benefits over time, for 
example 5 years or 10 years, because the assessment of  benefits in services was qualitative rather than 
quantitative and rely on the interpretation of comm itments.  If a Member inadvertently changed a 
bound tariff rate, it might be brought into a disput e settlement process and the case would be dealt 
with based on the Member's previous schedule which remained alive.  This was sought for in services 
by including specific language in the protocol   It would not create uncertainty.  Rather, it would 
create more certainty because merely Article XIX was not enough.  As the Secretariat had clearly mentioned previously, while a change in commitmen ts might be considered as an improvement in 
terms of macro economy, it might not be the case fo r an individual Member concerned.  Protocol 
language could provide more clarity in this regard .  Regarding the question of rollback, it would be 
better to have an illustrative list or understa nding on rollbacks rather than waiting for the 
interpretation of panels.   
26. The representative of Turkey
 stated that the issue of what constituted rollback should be 
decided on a case-by-case basis.  Participation in the verification exercise should not be limited. While having no objections to the sequence presented in  the Secretariat's Note, her delegation felt that 
the exercise could be time-consuming and, thus, that it would be difficult to decide its timelines.  She 
agreed that the Committee should focus on verifi cation rather than protocol language.    
27. The representative of Chinese Taipei
 recalled that the Secretariat had prepared a useful Note 
regarding past practice in terms of incorporation protocols and verification, which was contained in 
S/CSC/W/55.  Existing GATS protocols could not provide guidance as to how to deal with conflicts between old and new schedules since they simply replaced or supplemented existing commitments.  
He noted that the Supplement VI to the Closer  Economic Partnership Agre ement between China and 
Hong Kong China provided that " [i]n the event of conflict with the provisions of the other six 
instruments, the provisions of the Annex of this Supplement VI shall prevail."   He thought that 
certain language was also needed in the protocol to ensure certainty and credibility of schedules.  In 
this context, his delegation wished to continue th e discussion on protocol language in order to find the 
most appropriate language to be incorporated.  With respect to the verification exercise, he shared the 
view that timing was an important issue, not only for the whole process, but also for each step.  He 
noted that in the Uruguay Round the exercise had take n seven weeks, much shorter than a period of 
three to six months as suggested by some delegations for this Round.  He proposed that the Secretariat 
specify time needed for each step of the verification exercise in the Note. 
28. The representative of Nigeria
 noted that everybody shared view that there should be no 
rollbacks in the new schedules.  Ho wever, the question what constitu ted a rollback remained.  Some 
ideas had been raised.  One was that the issue shoul d be tackled on a case-by-case basis; the other was 
to have an illustrative list.  Members needed to explore how to proceed.  The verification exercise 
would be transparent, but at the same time cumber some.  The timeline should be  reasonable.  He 
welcomed the possibility of having the exercise done  after the conclusion of the negotiations, which 
would enable Members to have both the old and ne w schedules side-by-side.  With respect to the 
issue of legal certainty and textual proposals for protocol language, it was important to avoid any  S/CSC/M/55 
 Page 7 
 
 
  conflict of interpretation between old and new commitments. This was the objective of the 
replacement method.  Nigeria could support prot ocol language provided it was based on a common 
understanding. 
29. The representative of Argentina  noted that the negotiations in services were ahead of those in 
other areas where there was no discussion on rollback .  Despite concerns about the process at the 
horizontal level, his delegation had engaged in the Committee's di scussion constructively and would 
continue to do so. 
30. The representative of Canada  noted the importance of the verification exercise and associated 
herself with questions raised by some other delega tions regarding when the exercise should start, how 
much time was needed, and how to  deal with disagreement on rollbacks.  In addition, she asked 
whether there would be recording-keeping and, if so, of what nature.   
31. The representative of the Secretariat  noted that the objective of the verification exercise for 
this Round was different from that in the past.  Previous verification exercises had been aimed to primarily guarantee the technical and legal soundness of schedules.  Delegations had decided that for 
this Round, in addition, the exercise was also to  ensure that new commitm ents would not undermine 
existing ones.  This raised the issue of timing,  i.e.  before or after the adoption of the results of the 
market access negotiations.  This was of critical importance.  The market access negotiations would 
end when all Members in the Special Session of the Services Council have decided and agreed by 
consensus that the schedules annexed to the protoc ol together with the protocol represented the 
satisfactory result of the negotiations.  Yet, this did not mean the end of the Doha Round.  There 
would be a coordination at the TNC level and the General Council level in or der to develop a final 
document containing all the results of the DDA, which might be called, for example, the "Final Act" 
as in the past.  It would have various treaty com ponents, some of which might be considered as 
treaties in their own rights, and the services protocol would be one.  The adopti on of the results of the 
market access negotiations at the Special Session of  the Services Council would thus mark the final 
conclusion of the market access negotiations.  It me ant that the Protocol and the schedules annexed to 
it were no longer open for any changes.  In the past, after that point, it had been agreed to have a 
verification exercise on the understanding that an y resulting rectifications would be only of a 
technical nature and not affect the substance of the commitments reflected in the schedules.  This 
might not necessarily be the case in this Round,  because Members would want the verification 
process to have a dual objective: to verify the tec hnical accuracy of the schedules and to ensure that 
there would be no rollbacks.  In the latter context, several delegations had asked what would happen if 
there was no agreement in the dedicated meeting regarding an alleged rollback.  This was why the 
issue of timing mattered.  If the results of negotiations were adopt ed, it meant that Members were 
satisfied with the substance of what was in the sch edule.  If Members were to go back and adjust 
substance according to the result of the verificati on, the exercise would ideally need to be conducted 
between the conclusion of the request-offer negotiati ons/the submission of final revised offers and the 
adoption of the results of the negotiations in the Special Session.  Members would have agreed on a 
date for the submission of revised offers and fi nal draft schedules.  The Hong Kong Declaration 
referred to the submission of revised offers and draf t schedules.  The revised offers would reflect the 
overall state of the concluded negotiations.  If th e verification exercise took place between the final 
revised offers and the draft schedules, there would still be room for introducing substantive 
adjustments to be reflected in the final draft sche dules.  The submission of the draft schedules at the 
end would be contingent upon the success of the veri fication exercise.  The other option was to follow 
past practice.  The verification exercise would then take place after the formal adoption of the results 
of the negotiations in the Special Session.  It would be of a purely consultative nature as in the past.  
Members would examine each schedule and each Member concerned would have the discretion to introduce adjustments or not, based  on the comments received.   S/CSC/M/55 
Page 8  
 
  32. He referred to the discussion on whether rollback  should be assessed on a line-by-line basis or 
at an overall level of improvement in a schedule.  This issue was crucial because it would essentially 
determine whether there was rollback or not.  It had to be addressed either through a thorough process 
of  verification or through language in the protocol.   
33. There was also a question about the duration of the dedicated meeting. Technically, the 
meeting could take as long as several days, if necessary.  If Members agreed that the verification 
exercise would be the last step before the adopti on of the results of the market access negotiations, 
they would have to reach agreement on any identi fied alleged rollbacks, since the adoption of the 
results would be contingent upon the satisfactory co nclusion of the verification exercise.  The number 
of schedules subject to verification would not be e quivalent to the total number of Members in the 
WTO.  LDCs were not expected to submit commitm ents.  Although they were encouraged to do so, 
they would not represent an important burden in the verification exercise.  The Secretariat had 
prepared for each Member a consolidated schedul e in electronic format, which comprised all the 
commitments resulting from the Uruguay Round as well as the subsequent negotiations on financial 
services, basic telecommunications and mode 4.  Th e consolidated schedules had been verified by 
each Member.  Members were using the consolidated schedules as a template for introducing offers.  
This Committee had agreed on three sets of editori al conventions for presenting offers: the first was 
for the presentation of initial offers; the second for th e presentation of revised offers; and the third for 
the presentation of second revised offers which unfort unately had not yet materialised.  The editorial 
conventions were contained in JO B(02)/88, dated 16 July 2002;  JOB(05)/6, dated 31 January 2005; 
and JOB(06)/181 dated 9 June 2006.  In the veri fication exercise, when Members went through the 
revised offers and eventually the draft schedules,  the editorial conventions would highlight the 
changes and thereby sharpen the focus of verification on the entries that need  to be examined.  In 
addition, the draft schedules subject to verificati on would be the result of numerous request-offer 
consultations.  All these factors would mitigate the burden of verification on Members.    
34. The previous protocols determined the relati onship between old and new commitments in a 
very decisive and simple way.  For example,  in the extended financial services negotiations, 
replacement had meant that as of the entry into fo rce of the protocol, the old section of commitments 
on financial services would cease to exist and be replaced by the new one.  In the case of basic telecommunications, where new commitments were to either replace, supplement or modify old ones, 
the cover note of each schedule described exactly the relationship between old and new commitments.  These schedules had been subject to verification as well.     
35. In response to a question, he added that there were a series of steps from the conclusion of the 
negotiations to the entry into force of commitment s.  When the results of the services negotiations, 
including the protocol, were adopted in the Special Session of the Services Council, they would become part of the overall DDA package.  The dates of entry into force of the results of the DDA 
would be decided in the final instrument.  The final instrument might stipulate different dates of entry 
into force for certain parts of the package.  According to past prac tice, the entry into force of the 
package was contingent upon the acceptance by a mini mum number of Members.  For example, the 
entry into force of the services Protocol and the schedules annexed to it w ould be contingent upon 
acceptance by all Members concerned, i.e., all Members who had commitments annexed to the 
protocol.  If not all Members concerned had accepted by the deadline in the Protocol, those who had 
accepted the protocol would meet and decide how to proceed.  Normally, this would be stipulated in 
the final instrument as it had been done at the end of the Uruguay Round.  The entry into force would 
normally be after the acceptance, which depended on the legal procedures of the country concerned.   
36. The treaty copies of schedules would be annexed to the Protocol only in their authentic 
language.  However, draft schedules subject to veri fication would be circulated as working documents 
in the three official WTO languages in order to  serve the entire Membership of the WTO.    S/CSC/M/55 
 Page 9 
 
 
  37. The representative of Switzerland  repeated his delegation' s suggestion of having a 
compilation of old and new commitments side-by-side.  He understood that at the end each Member would submit a clean version of its schedule, whic h would contain no strikethroughs.  The verification 
exercise should be carried out when the clean ve rsion was submitted.  On the issue of whether 
rollback should be determined line-by-line or on th e basis of the overall level of commitments,  he 
stressed that each Member should comp ly with what it had committed.   
38. The representative of the Secretariat
 confirmed that the verification exercise would be 
conducted on the basis of the clean version of  schedules.  Members might consider whether 
supportive material such as the versions  reflecting changes was needed.     
39. The Chair  noted that the discussion on the verifica tion exercise, based on the Secretariat's 
Note, had been encouraging.  She suggested that it  be continued and that the Secretariat provide a 
revision of its Note.  She felt that Members had exhausted arguments on whet her particular language 
was needed in the protocol to prevent rollbacks.  Despite absen ce of consensus on this matter, 
Members seemed willing to explore the scope for co mpromise.  She would hold consultations to see 
how to move forward.  In this context, she woul d also consult with delega tions on how to address the 
issue of rollback.  Finally, she suggested that th e Committee take note of the statements made and 
revert to this agenda item at its next meeting.   
40. It was so agreed . 
B. CLASSIFICATION ISSUES  
41. The Chair  recalled that the Committee had agreed to carry out discussions on classification 
issues based on the Secretariat's sectoral Background Notes, focusing on the gap between market 
realities and the current classification system under th e GATS.  For this purpose, the Secretariat, upon 
request, had prepared a compilation (JOB/SERV/22) of classification issues contained in the Notes that had been circulated to date.  She invited dele gations to indicate specific interests and priorities. 
42. The representative of the Secretariat
 stated that, given the terms of reference of the 
Committee, the compilation excluded financial services.     
43. The representative of Nigeria  sought clarification on the classification issues concerning 
audiovisual services raised at the beginning of the compilation. 
44. The representative of Chinese Taipei  recalled that experts on CPC version 2 would be invited 
to give a presentation at the next meeting.  He thought that delegations might have a better sense of 
the classification issue for discussion after the presentation. 
45. The representative of the Secretariat  explained that the issues raised on audiovisual services 
on page 3 of the compilation summarized the analysis  reproduced on page 18 of the compilation.  He 
confirmed that the presentation on CPC version 2 would be provided either  in November or in 
February 2011.  
46. The Chair  suggested that the Committee invite experts on CPC version 2 to give a 
presentation at the next meeting.  She hoped that af ter the presentation, delegation would be able to 
indicate their specific interests and priorities for di scussion.  She suggested that the Committee take 
note of the statements made and revert to this item at the next meeting 
47. It was so agreed . S/CSC/M/55 
Page 10  
 
  C. S
CHEDULING ISSUES  
48. The Chair  noted that there had been no substantiv e progress under this agenda item for some 
time, despite the fact that Members continued to express interest in certain  scheduling issues.  She 
encouraged delegations to make  written contributions under this item and suggested that the 
Committee revert to this item at the next meeting. 
49. It was so agreed . 
D. OTHER BUSINESS  
50. There was no intervention under this item.   
 
__________