RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  S/WPGR/M/55 
4 May 2006 
 
 (06-2149) 
Working Party on GATS Rules  
  
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING OF 10 APRIL 2006 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
  
1. The meeting was opened by Mr. Sumanta Chaudhuri, from India.  The agenda for the 
meeting, contained in WTO/AIR/2796, included th e following items: election of the chairperson, 
emergency safeguard measures, government procuremen t, subsidies, date of the next meeting, and 
other business.  The agenda was adopted
.   
I. APPOINTMENT OF THE CHAIRPERSON 
2. The Chairperson  indicated that the outgoing Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Services 
had undertaken consultations on the appointment of the chairpersons for the subsidiary bodies and had 
subsequently put forward to delega tions, on 24 March, a list of names.  Accordingly, the Chairperson 
proposed that the Working Party elect Mr. Trond Gabrielsen , from Norway, as its new Chairperson.  
Mr. Gabrielsen was elected  by acclamation.  The incoming Chairperson thanked delegations for their 
confidence and expressed gratitude to the outgoing Ch airperson for the work done under his tenure.  
Delegations expressed their appreciation for the out going Chairperson's efforts and dedication, in 
particular in the lead-up to the Hong Kong Minister ial, and congratulated the new Chairperson on his 
election.   
II. EMERGENCY SAFEGUARD MEASURES (ARTICLE X) 
3. The Chairperson  recalled that at the last meeting in February ASEAN Members, less 
Singapore, had presented a room document on certain issues relating to an ESM, namely domestic 
industry, vested rights, determination of injury, modal issues, and special & differential treatment.  
More generally, the Chairperson recalled that the di scussions on this topic were still characterized by 
important divergences of views.  The Hong Kong D eclaration called for focused discussions and he 
would welcome delegations' thoughts on the organization of future work, for example on how best to 
avoid repetitions of past arguments and help to ensu re that key areas of divergence - both on technical 
issues and on desirability - were approached in a pragmatic and concrete manner.    
4. The representative of the Philippines  said that some ASEAN countries had fundamental 
economic and political interests in the issue of emer gency safeguards;  he was confident that the new 
Chairperson would maintain the same degree of im partiality and professionalism as previous chairs.  
His group of delegations had conduc ted only a small number of inform al exchanges since the last 
formal meeting due to time constraints resulting fr om the plurilateral negotiations.  However, they 
intended to intensify this process of informal exch anges.  His group of dele gations intended to update 
and revise the room document presented at the last  meeting so as to take into account the views 
expressed since then.  He invited delegations to further comment on the room document, especially on 
the definition of domestic industry an d the issue of vested rights.   
                                                      
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/WPGR/M/55 
Page 2  
 
  5. The representative of China
 expected the rules negotiations to achieve substantial outcomes.  
He thought that the room document by the group of ASEAN Members was useful for further technical discussions and would revert to it at a later stage.   
6. The representative of Chinese Taipei
 wished to convey some preliminary views.  Article 
4.1(c) of the Agreement on Safeguards defined domes tic industry as the "producers as a whole of the 
like or directly competitive products operating with in the territory of a Member, or those whose 
collective output of the like or directly competitiv e products constitutes a major proportion of the total 
domestic production of those products".  This defi nition was closely linked with that of like or 
directly competitive products.  In practice, this me ant that the investigative authorities should look at 
the domestic industry in light of what they had de fined as the like or directly competitive products, 
which were extremely difficult to define in the goods  context and generally varied from case to case.  
In the services context, the basic principle remained the same, i.e., that the domestic industry might 
vary from case to case depending on what services under which mode(s) would need to be protected.  
Therefore, in developing an ESM in services, a definition of domestic industry might run into difficulties in application for different sub-sectors and modes if it contained a rigid set of definitional 
elements, such as those proposed by the group of  ASEAN Members in the room document.  The 
problem was especially apparent if the intent of the investigative authorities was to protect domestic 
national service suppliers.  A flexible definition of dom estic industry might be in the interest of those 
who wanted to impose safeguard measures.   
7. Regarding the determination of in jury, the representative of Canada
 recalled her delegation's 
view that the lack of reliable data in services rendered the determination of injury and causality 
extremely problematic.  Regarding the concept of domestic industry, her de legation could not support 
any agreement that would leave the definition of do mestic industry open to mu ltiple interpretations.  
This stroke at the heart of the principle of non-discriminatory treatment.  Moreover, in a global 
environment, the rationale for differentiating between  domestic and foreign firm s in defining domestic 
industry was not clear.  Partitioning a sector on the basis of ownership for the purpose of applying an 
ESM seemed odd considering that many countries welc omed foreign investors and maintained vibrant 
domestic sectors that were totally or almost entirely foreign-owned.  With regard to mode 3, it was difficult to understand how a country's commercial out put in a particular service sector could be 
threatened by foreign contributions to that very output.   
8. The representative of Pakistan
 wished to inform the Membership of what her delegation had 
discussed in informal exchanges with some AS EAN Members.  Overall, the proponents were 
agreeable to exploring new ideas and delegations  involved did not envisage any mechanism that 
would be inimical to the interests of investors or w ould-be investors.  Most participants wanted such a 
mechanism to protect small and medium enterpri ses that might experience strong competition from 
foreign firms who might have recourse to subsid ies in the home country and resort to cross-
subsidization.  In such a scenar io, the Member invoking the proposed ESM would: 1) seek to deviate 
temporarily from commitments so as not to allow new en trants and;  2) seek some form of arbitration.  
The intent was to discuss any possible actions th at would not damage investors or those already 
present in the market.  These were preliminary though ts and she hoped to come back with something 
more concrete in the future.   
9. The representative of Hong Kong, China  said that domestic industry could mean different 
things depending on the mode of supply.  The notion of domestic industry seemed particularly 
difficult in mode 3.  In other modes, the dis tinction between domestic and foreign was obvious.  
While he recognized that the sponsors of the room document intended to focus on technical aspects of 
domestic industry, this concept was linked to th e fundamental question of why an ESM might be 
needed in the first place.  To define the domestic industry, one would need to have a clearer idea of 
whom was to be protected, for what purpose, an d against what.  These were not new questions.  
Measures restricting the influx of foreign industries could pose problems for domestic employment  S/WPGR/M/55 
 Page 3 
 
 
  and the domestic economy more  generally.  That begged the ques tion as to why certain foreign-owned 
firms, if they had established and integrated th emselves as part of the domestic economy, should be 
distinguished from others.  When it came to applyi ng safeguard measures, for example in regard of 
the expansion of business activities, to what extent would a distinction need to be made between the 
locally-owned and the foreign-owned?  He recalle d that some Members' constitution prohibited any 
type of discriminatory treatment of established s uppliers.  In that case, he was not particularly 
opposed to the idea to leave some flexibility for i ndividual Members to consider how best they 
wanted to define the domestic industry.  However,  any kind of definition had to be underpinned by a 
very clear policy understanding on why the safeguard was needed in the first place.   
10. The representative of Turkey  said he saw merit in this discussion and would come back to the 
room document at a later point.   
11. The representative of the Philippines  recognized that, in addition to technical issues, certain 
fundamental threshold and systemic issues also had to be further considered and addressed at the end 
of the day.  Concerning Canada's concern in re lation to domestic industry, he thought that, while 
flexibility should not be too extensive, Members s hould try to agree on some mechanism or criteria 
that preserved some flexibility in defining domestic industry.  This might be done by ensuring 
appropriate transparency and by prohibiting arbitr ariness on the part of national regulators.  He 
wished to suggest an additional idea for further refl ection: the possibility to come up with a different 
criteria for defining domestic industry under mode 3.   As the delegation of Hong Kong, China had 
pointed out, the definition of domestic industry for modes 1, 2 and 4 might be more obvious.  
Delegations might thus want to concentrate on how to resolve divergences with respect to mode 3.  
Nothing should prevent agreement on two-pronged cr iterion in terms of defining domestic industry: 
one for modes 1, 2 and 4 and another for mode 3.  With respect to mode 3, he was also wondering whether it would be acceptable if foreign service supplie rs were not eligible to file an application for 
an emergency safeguard measure, while their vest ed rights when an ESM was applied by a Member 
were protected.  This might contribute to addressi ng concerns raised about situations where the 
domestic industry would be dominated by foreign servi ce suppliers.  He wished to hear reactions of 
delegations to that suggestion.   
12. The representative of the United States
 thought that the intervention from the delegation of 
Pakistan, in particular, was interesting.  She hoped to engage in further exchanges on some apparently 
useful comments and sentiments.  She shared the concer ns raised at the end of the intervention by the 
delegation of Canada.  In response to the delegation of the Philippines,  she reiterated that the issue of 
domestic industry was only one of several problem s her delegation had raised in these technical 
discussions; any comments on specific issues should therefore not be taken up in isolation of more general points concerning the concept of an ESM in  services.  On the suggestions made by the 
delegation of the Philippines in rela tion to mode 3, it was comforting to hear signs of flexibility on the 
issue of vested rights, although this should not be  perceived as a panacea for resolving the ESM issue 
and one still needed to know the details. Among all modes of supply, mode 3 had been a particular 
concern for her delegation.  She echoed the comments of Canada in that regard and appreciated that 
the proponents recognized the difficulties and were looking at ways of addressing sensitivities.  She 
had been looking forward to further informal ex changes.  Certain ideas seemed to be developing 
through that channel, as hinted by the delegation of Pakistan, although it was not clear where things 
were headed.  Her delegation still  failed to understand why the pr oponents appeared to insist on a 
goods-type mechanism for services;  she was more interested in a bottom-up approach in the 
discussions on ESM, looking at the very nature of the GATS and of services rather than trying to make a goods-type mechanism fit into a services context by chipping at the edges.   
13. The representative of New Zealand
 hoped that the delegation of the Philippines could provide 
further details regarding the sugg estions made, including on situati ons where certain sectors were 
dominated by foreign suppliers.   S/WPGR/M/55 
Page 4  
 
  14. Regarding comments from the delegation of Chinese Taipei, the representative of Malaysia
 
recalled that the room document was not a proposal, but was intended to spark off discussion.  She therefore welcomed comments on the need to be ve ry specific about the definition.  Regarding the 
points raised by the delegation of Canada, she hope d that more information could be provided on the 
concerns about different definitions of domestic i ndustry and wondered whether these had anything to 
do with Canada's domestic regime.  She encouraged other Members to share their experiences on the 
definition of domestic industry in their domestic regimes.  With respect to points raised by the 
delegations of Pakistan and the United States, her group of delegations was looking for measures that 
least affected vested rights.  Her authorities we re discussing possible measures, for example cross-
subsidization and perhaps some kind of fund to  which contributions could be made upon the 
establishment and licensing of foreign companies or jo int-ventures.  This fund could be used for the 
development of national provide rs when injury occurred or when it was otherwise deemed 
appropriate.   
15. In response to the intervention from the delega tion of New Zealand, the representative of the 
Philippines
 reiterated that he had put forward two ideas.   One was to have two sets of criteria or 
mechanisms for defining domestic industry, a strai ghtforward one for modes 1, 2 and 4, and a more 
elaborate one for mode 3.  The second idea was the possibility of limiting the ability to apply for an 
emergency safeguard measure to those who are nationally-owned suppliers, although vested rights 
should be respected when measures we re actually applied.  Thus, foreign suppliers already established 
in the domestic jurisdiction could not initiate an investigation, nor would they be affected by 
safeguard measures.  With respect to issues raised  by the United States, he said that there had been 
few informal exchanges since the l ast meeting because of the time taken by the preparations for the 
plurilateral meetings.  He belie ved that a general goods-type fram ework could also work in the 
services context.  Most of the problems raised by  other Members concerned only specific elements of 
the proposal by his group of delegations.  If the de legation of the United States and others considered 
that the general approach proposed was flawed and no t going to lead to any outcome, this should be 
discussed in more detail and as soon as possible.  He  wished to reassure Members that ideas explored 
in informal exchanges could be shared with th e Working Party for transparency purposes and that 
agreements were not struck in these exchanges.  He also recognized that certain fundamental and 
threshold issues remained and that these would need  to be addressed at the end of the day.   
16. The representative of India  stressed that mode 3 was not the only outstanding issue relating to 
an ESM.  The fact that the specific issue of domestic industry might not be as much of a problem for 
modes 1 or 4 did not mean that there were no other problems in regard of these modes of supply.   
17. The representative of Chinese Taipei  referred to his previous remarks on the definition of 
domestic industry in the Agreement on Safeguards and said that the intent was not to apply something 
from the goods context to services.  Rather, he saw so me parallels in what the investigative authorities 
were doing;  in the goods context, there was significant discretion from case to case in defining 
domestic industry, depending on what the investigativ e authorities wanted to achieve.  Therefore, it 
was difficult for his delegation to see how a very conc rete definition of domestic industry could be put 
together.  He agreed with Hong Kong, China that  it was important to see whom one was trying to 
protect;  this might vary from case to case.  Dr awing from the goods context, the definition could only 
be very general and with proper discreti on to the investigative authorities.   
18. The representative of Mexico  lent support to the intervention by the delegation of India.  He 
reiterated that it would be useful for the Working Pa rty to discuss the implications of a proposed ESM 
for mode 4.   
19. The Working Party then reverted to informal mode.    S/WPGR/M/55 
 Page 5 
 
 
  20. With respect to a proposal that  the Chairperson prepare a Note on the state of play in the 
negotiations pursuant to Article X, the Chairperson  believed that there was no outright opposition to 
such a Note.  He would undertake consultations on what it might entail and the way forward.  The 
representative of the United States  registered her objections to the proposed Chair Note, but was not 
against consultations on what kind of document would be appropriate to carry out the mandate 
provided by Ministers in Hong Kong for more fo cused discussions.  Her delegation had in mind 
something along the lines of the informal note by th e Secretariat on the synthesis of views expressed 
on the definition of a subsidy.  However, more discu ssion would be needed on the parameters of such 
a contribution.  The Chairperson  said that he would undertake informal consultations on the contours 
of a possible Note that reflected all delegations' interests and concerns.     
21. In summing up, the Chairperson  welcomed efforts for more focused discussions on such 
issues as domestic industry, vested rights, and moda l application.  For example, diverging views 
continued to be expressed on domestic industry; this was an important topic because it touched on such core issues as the purpose of a safeguard, who was protected and what might be the threshold for 
invocation.  He proposed that the Working Party take note
 of the comments made.    
III. GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT (ARTICLE XIII) 
22. The Chairperson  recalled that the delegation of the European Communities had made a 
detailed intervention at the last meeting in the lig ht of their latest proposal, S/WPGR/W/52, and he 
invited delegations to make further comments.   
23. The representative of the European Communities  reminded delegations of the proposals and 
contributions which had previously been put forwar d regarding government pr ocurement, as well as 
the specific elements put together by the Secretar iat on the basis of economic integration agreements 
(EIAs) in force.  Moreover, the Communities ha d answered a certain amount of questions and 
comments raised in relation to S/WPGR/W/52.  Wi thin the framework of the rules of procedures 
which could be part of an annex to GATS, one of  the issues raised concerned provisions on special 
and differential treatment.  The mechanism proposed  by her delegation regarding the undertaking of 
commitments on government procurement would enable each Member to choose the sectors, the 
contracting entities, the thresholds, and the natio nal treatment limitations under which access would 
be granted to foreign service suppliers with r espect to tenders.  The question was now whether 
additional specific provisions regarding special and differential treatment should be foreseen.  EIAs, 
given their very nature, did not cast light on this point.  The plurilateral Government Procurement 
Agreement included a number of specific provisions in  that regard.  Offset mechanisms had already 
been mentioned as something that might be furthe r considered under certain conditions.  She hoped 
that developing countries could pr ovide further suggestions.     
24. Another point that had been raised related to  the establishment, within a set of multilateral 
rules, of appropriate time limits between the publi cation of the tender notification and the deadline for 
the submission.  The Note by the Secretariat on government procurement-rela ted provisions in EIAs, 
S/WPGR/W/49, provided useful examples of minimu m time limits.  They often varied depending on 
the type of procurement methods selected (open, sel ective or limited) and ranged, in the agreements 
reviewed by the Secretariat, from an absolute mi nimum of 10 days to 52 days.  Some Members also 
individually set minimum deadlines outside the frame work of EIAs, which would be useful for the 
Working Party to learn more about so as to fac ilitate the elaboration of common rules under the 
GATS.  
25. A third important point concerned procedures fo r review at the demand of a service supplier 
that considered itself affected by a measure relati ng to government procurement.  Most of the EIAs 
reviewed by the Secretariat included special provisions for disputes regarding government procurement.  She wondered whether, in the context of the proposed annex to the GATS, the S/WPGR/M/55 
Page 6  
 
  provisions of Article VI:2 would be sufficient to the extent that, like provisions included in EIAs, they 
guaranteed "judicial, administrative tribunals or procedures which provide, at the request of an 
affected service supplier, for the prompt review of , and where justified, appropriate remedies for, 
administrative decisions affecting trade in services".  She invited delegations to express their positions 
on the points she had highlighted and hoped that in terested delegations could indicate areas for joint 
work.     
26. With respect to time periods between the publication of the tender notification and the 
deadline for the receiving of tenders, the representative of Switzerland
 thought that it would be 
interesting to learn more from the practices of par ties to the agreements reviewed in S/WPGR/W/49.  
This might be done directly by obtaining informati on from the parties or indirectly by deepening the 
study done by the Secretariat.  The representativ e also noted that most EIAs included specific 
provisions on review procedures.  He wondered whet her, in the GATS context, Article VI:2 would be 
sufficient to respond to relevant situations of demand s for a review of decisions by a service supplier.   
27. The representative of the Dominican Republic  recalled that at the last meeting her delegation 
had asked for a written copy of the interventi on made by the delegation of the European 
Communities.  The Chairperson  indicated that such intervention was reflected in the report of the last 
meeting, which was available in the three official languages.   
28. The representative of China  noted that paragraph 14 of S/WPGR/W/52 said that the MFN 
clause of the GATS applied across the board to each  service sector, regardless of whether the sector 
had been subject to specific commitments.  Para graph 15 said that Article II of the GATS was not 
applying to government procurem ent.  She hoped to get further clarification from the EC on these two 
statements.  Moreover, the representative found it hard to understand the statement in paragraph 18 
that the provisions of Article VI of the GATS and the disciplines of Article VI:4, once agreed, would 
apply to government procurement in services.  Sh e asked if the EC was suggesting that possible 
disciplines pursuant to Article VI:4 would automati cally apply to government procurement regardless 
of whether any commitments on government procurement were included in schedules. 
29. The representative of th e European Communities  said that Article II did not apply at this time 
to government procurement; the purpose of the nego tiations was, among other things, to extend its 
application to government procurement.  With r espect to the second question put forward by the 
delegation of China, Article VI applied to gove rnment procurement.  Nothing in Article XIII 
suggested otherwise.  Disciplines on domestic regul ations were being discussed at this time and the 
general view seemed to be that any such di sciplines would only cover sectors where specific 
commitment were undertaken, but no final decision ha d been taken on this aspect as yet.  If domestic 
regulation disciplines only applied where specific commitments were undertak en, such disciplines 
would not apply to procurement if no commitments were undertaken on government procurement.  If 
disciplines applied to all services sectors regardless  of whether they had been scheduled, these would 
apply to government procurement, regardless of whether government procurement commitments were 
undertaken. 
30. Reacting to points raised with respect to dom estic regulation, the representative of India  said 
that two different issues had been raised, which s hould not be confused.  One was whether domestic 
regulation disciplines would apply where specific co mmitments had been undertaken.  The other issue 
was whether, even if it applied to specific comm itments, government procurement in services would 
be covered.  These were separate issues.   
31. The Chairperson  noted that the intervention by th e European Communities, which had 
focused on S&D treatment, time limits and review  procedures, had elicited a number of questions, 
including on issues relating to MFN application an d to Article VI.  He proposed that the Working 
Party take note  of comments made.    S/WPGR/M/55 
 Page 7 
 
 
  IV. NEGOTIATIONS ON SUBSIDIES (ARTICLE XV) 
32. The Chairperson  invited delegations to provide an y further comments or questions on 
Switzerland's response to the questionnaire (S/WPG R/W/16/Add.5) and to inform the Working Party 
of any efforts undertaken with respect to the exchan ge of information, as stipulated in the Hong Kong 
Ministerial Declaration.  He invited the Secretariat to present the update of its Note on the synthesis of 
views expressed on the definition of subsidy (JOB(05)/4/Add.1).    
33. A representative from the Secretariat  said that the Note intended to update the previous Note 
circulated in February 2005 and should be read in  conjunction with it.  As the original Note, the 
addendum did not imply that there was consensus am ong delegations on the defi nition of subsidy.   
34. The representative of Hong Kong, China  welcomed the Note by the Secretariat and stressed 
the importance of making progress on a provisional defi nition of subsidy.  He hoped to have a more 
focused discussion on elements of the definition at th e next meeting.  The Working Party's discussions 
could be organized around the elements highlight ed in the Secretariat Note, e.g., financial 
contribution, income or price support, conferring bene fit.  In the context of such thematic discussions, 
it would be helpful if the Secretariat could indicate to delegations the relevant jurisprudence arising 
from the Agreement on Subsidies and Counterv ailing Measures (ASCM).  He took note of 
sensitivities of some Members regarding a Note by th e Secretariat with respect to jurisprudence, but 
thought that instead of preparing a formal or in formal document, the Secretariat could offer its 
assistance to delegations by drawing up a Note listi ng relevant jurisprudence and making it available 
as a technical background document to any delega tion who asked for it.  With respect to the 
information exchange, he drew attention to the Mi nisterial Declaration, which called on Members to 
intensify their efforts to expedite and fulfil the information exchange required for the purpose of the 
negotiations.  He recalled that at the last mee ting the European Communities had suggested that 
Members let the Secretariat know where informat ion on subsidies could be found and that the 
Secretariat subsequently circulate a list of such sources of information.  He found this suggestion 
useful and remained open to discussing studies undertaken by other organizations.   
35. Aside from the information exchange and the definition, the representative thought that a 
number of issues relevant to subsidies had been rais ed during the plurilateral meetings that had taken 
place the previous two weeks, even if the focus ha d been on market access issues.  For example, the 
question of cross-subsidization ha d been referred to in the plurilateral discussions on postal, courier 
and express delivery services.  Issues raised included the scope of cross-subsidies, as well as possible 
ways to discipline such activities.   The possibility of additional commitments under Article XVIII had 
been alluded to, as well as Article VIII, but there might still be other ways.  This discussion had been 
useful in highlighting that certain issues relating to  subsidies could be relevant to the market access 
negotiations and also contribute to the Working Part y's consideration of whether subsidy disciplines 
might be needed in a more general context.  With  respect to education, the role of subsidies in 
supporting a public education system was well rec ognized and was, from the perspective of the 
sponsors of the collective request in that sector, not c onsidered to be in conflict with the initiative of 
securing access for the supply of private education ser vices.  The role of subsidies seemed to have 
different connotations in that context.  Concerni ng audiovisual services, the sponsors of the collective 
request had recognized the role of subsidies as a possible means for governments to achieve cultural 
policy objectives, which might merit special consider ation in the negotiations .  This underscored the 
importance of clarifying the role of subsidies in that  particular sector.  While such specific issues 
should continue to be debated in the plurilateral process, he believed that certain issues arising from 
such process could perhaps merit further deliberations on a more horizontal basis.  In any event, there 
was merit in looking at subsidies on a more sectoral  basis because the effects and purpose of subsidies 
in different sectors could be very different.   S/WPGR/M/55 
Page 8  
 
  36. Subsidy-related issues had been raised in differe nt sectors.  For example, in postal and courier 
services, the scope of cross-subsidies had been ra ised, including whether these included subsidies to 
services provided by the monopoly beyond its borders.  In education and audiovisual services, the 
extent to which subsidies were specifically provi ded to buttress the domestic industry in pursuit of 
policy objectives could be discussed further.  Such issues could have implications for other sectors 
and, more generally, for the definition and the scope of any necessary disciplines on subsidies.  The 
discussions on education and audiovisual services also led to a key question, that is whether certain 
subsidies should be exempt from disciplines or s hould be non-actionable.  He wished to further 
discuss the extent to which government objectives, especially those relating to public services, would 
play a role in determining whether subsidies should be subject to disciplines.   
37. Coming back to the proposed provisional defi nition of subsidy, he reminded Members that 
the purpose was not only to make progress on a workin g definition, but also to see how it could be 
used to further the information exchange.  The in formation exchange was important in providing the 
information base for discussing the substance of any kind of disciplines on subsidies.  Another 
purpose of the information exchange was, as under scored in the plurilateral context, to allow 
Members to know the amount of subsidies in exis tence when undertaking commitments;  transparency 
in that regard was a key consideration in market access discussions.  
38. The representative of the United States
 welcomed the update of the synthesis Note by the 
Secretariat.  It brought together the main ideas that had been expressed to date on a subsidy definition.  
It demonstrated that a considerable number of topics - solely on the definition - could be explored even further.  Her delegation encouraged additio nal views on the specific kinds of subsidies that 
Members saw a need to discipline.   She was disappointed that examples had been put forward that 
interlocked with negotiating elements raised in pl urilateral requests.  The examples given by the 
delegation of Hong Kong, China would be further re flected upon;  she nevertheless thought that it was 
useful for Members to provide examples of perceive d problems, so as to get a better sense of any need 
for disciplines on subsidies in services.  This would he lp to bring delegations closer to the formulation 
of a definition.  Focusing initially on subsidies that caused trade-related problems would help to 
advance work.  As signalled in the past, her de legation was working on another contribution on 
subsidies, in reaction to the proposal by Hong Kong , China and others on a definition.  The paper was 
nearing completion and she hoped it could be circulat ed for the next meeting.  The Working Party 
might postpone any decision on whether to engage on a thematic discussion until the next meeting.  
While a thematic discussion on definition could be useful, the contribution from her delegation might 
highlight other aspects that would need to be looked into.   
39. The representative expressed reservations on comments made in respect of plurilateral 
discussions on audiovisual, postal-c ourier and education services.  She cautioned that some Members 
had mentioned in the plurilateral negotiations that they did not want to discuss market access barriers 
that might be addressed in the additional commitmen t column.  Her delegati on would not participate 
in an exercise that would somehow compromise its negotiating approach in the plurilateral or bilateral 
negotiations.  Her delegati on had participated in the discussions  on domestic regulation in the WPDR, 
while pursuing bilateral requests on the same topic.  She was interested in discussions in the WPGR, 
but this should not serve as an excuse not to address re levant topics on a bilateral or plurilateral basis. 
40. The representative of the European Communities
 sought further clarifications from the 
delegation of Hong Kong, China with respect to  comments made in relation to the plurilateral 
meetings.  He recognized that some scheduling issu es relating to subsidies might have come up during 
plurilateral meetings;  the scheduling approach pr oposed in the request on education services had 
spurred some questions in his delegation because cert ain measures that, in his view, did not constitute 
subsidies were considered as such.  He failed,  however, to see the relationship between these 
plurilateral discussions and the discussion of subsidy disciplines in the WPGR.   S/WPGR/M/55 
 Page 9 
 
 
  41. Regarding the suggestion of a non-paper on ASCM  jurisprudence, the representative of the 
United States  recalled that her delegation had many times registered concerns about such work.  She 
was concerned that some delegations had not moved beyond the debate about the relationship 
between the ASCM and what might be needed in services.  The communication that her delegation 
had hoped to present today raised further issues in th at regard and she hoped to have time to further 
flesh out these issues before assuming that there w as something to be gained from any listing of 
dispute settlement cases in the goods context.  She would undertake further consultations with 
relevant authorities. 
42. The representative of Hong Kong, China  did not see the discussions in the WPGR as 
substituting for the discussions in the plurilateral meetings, but as complementary.  Some aspects 
raised in plurilateral discussions, which tended to be  more sector-specific, could be brought to the 
WPGR, for example with respect to definition.  The intent was not to bring the plurilateral negotiations into this body, but it was important to note that these sometimes went beyond issues of 
national treatment and market access and touched on issues within the mandate of Article XV.  Discussions of the role of subsidies in relation to  audiovisual, education and, maybe, environmental 
services had to do with the fact that subsidies in  certain cases would be necessary for certain policy 
objectives.  This was useful for the Working Pa rty's consideration of whether certain subsidy 
disciplines were needed;  it might help show that  disciplines might not be necessary for certain kinds 
of subsidies, either in certain sectors or in pursuan ce of particular policy objectives.  With respect to 
points raised regarding thematic discussions, the Chair could conduct consultations on how best to 
structure discussions on a provisional definition and then provide some guidance by way of an 
annotated agenda.  In concluding , he believed that additional exam ples, which were not directly 
addressed in the market access negotiations, could be shared with the WPGR.  For example, a 
delegation had stated that an MFN exemption was need ed in the sector of space transport in view of 
possible government involvement, in particular through subsidies.   
43. The representative of the United States
 stated that her delegation would not be able to go 
along with the suggestion of a paper on jurisprudence.   
44. The Chairperson  recognized the concerns expressed on this proposal.  He indicated that the 
Secretariat remained available to provide technical  assistance to delegations in that regard and he 
encouraged the relevant delegations to pursue informal discussions amongst themselves to see if 
common ground could be found at a future stage.  He  would undertake informal  consultations before 
the next meeting on ways to help structure discu ssions.  He suggested that the Working Party take 
note of the comments made.   
 
V. DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING 
45. The Chairperson  suggested that the next formal meeting be held during the next cluster of 
services meetings.    
VI. OTHER BUSINESS 
46. No items were raised under this agenda item.   
 
__________