RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/S/M/41 
7 April 2011 
 (11-1753) 
Council for Trade in Services 
Special Session  
 
 
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 18 MARCH 2011 
 
Note by the Secretariat1 
 
 
1. The Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services held a formal meeting on 
18 March 2011, chaired by Ambassa dor Fernando de Mateo of Mexico.  The agenda for the meeting, 
contained in document WTO/AIR/3716, was adopted.  To facilitate discussion, the Council agreed to 
the Chairman's proposal to deal concurrently with Agenda items A and B.   
A. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MODALITIES FOR THE SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR LEAST -
DEVELOPED COUNTRY MEMBERS IN THE TRADE IN SERVICES NEGOTIATIONS  
B. REVIEW OF PROGRESS IN NEGOTIATIONS , INCLUDING PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 15 OF THE 
GUIDELINES FOR NEGOTIATIONS ; AND ORGANIZATION OF FUTURE WORK 
2. The Chairman  indicated that the purpose of the meeting was to assess the progress made in 
the negotiations so far, including on the LDC waiv er, and to determine how best to proceed to a 
successful conclusion.  The recent intensive cluster of  meetings and consultations was to inform this 
discussion.  It was important, in arriving at an ass essment, to identify the pr ecise elements needed to 
conclude negotiations and to consider carefully an y appropriate new ideas or techniques that had been 
discussed.   A further cluster had been agreed for the week of 11 April.   
3. The delegation of Norway  took the floor as facilitator of the LDC small group.  In 2008, 
Norway, along with some other Members, had taken the initiative to put together a waiver for LDCs 
that would allow other Members to provide them with preferential market access.  At that time, a text 
had been produced by a small group.  In 2009, wo rk resumed in the same group in order to finalize 
the waiver and some progress was made, but some un resolved issues remained.  A bracketed text was 
presented to the Enchilada group and to the Special Session in 2009 and 2010, and discussions were 
held by the Chair on how to fill the gaps.  Recently , Norway had accepted again to act as facilitator in 
order to finalize the work.  A meeting had been held  in the original small group, which comprised a 
number of LDCs, the key markets fo r the LDCs, as well as some add itional developed and developing 
Members.  The intention was to close the remain ing gaps.  Unlike many other negotiating processes, 
the waiver would allow Members to give preferen tial market access to LDCs, the poorest Members.  
This was not an obligation and no Member was giving up any rights or obligations in doing this.  The 
objective was to produce a text and this mi ght be done with minimum complication.   
4. One remaining question concerned the scope: wh ether the waiver, as with a goods waiver, 
was to focus on market access or to also allow othe r rules and regulations to be waived.  The LDCs 
were cautious not to close any doors on the rules an d regulations side, but they were unable, for the 
time being, to indicate what such types of preferen ces might be.  Others thought that it was difficult to 
make a decision when implications were uncertain .  This divide would ha ve to be bridged and 
                                                      
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. TN/S/M/41 
Page 2  
 
  Norway urged the key players to find a compromise.  The other issue was that of rules of origin.  In 
the original draft from 2008, the small group th ought that this, as in goods, would be addressed 
through the existing provisions of the GATS, but th e process after January 2010 had shown that some 
Members were uncertain that this would be suffi cient.  It was necessary to assess the need for 
additional writing on this issue.  On a technical le vel, the small group was trying to bridge the gaps, 
and when that seemed possible, the small group woul d meet again and try to increase the size of the 
group involved.  The small group led by Norway wi shed to end up with a simple and consistent 
waiver that would work in the services area, as had happened in goods. 
5. The delegation of Bangladesh
 spoke on behalf of the LDC group.  The draft circulated in 
January 2010 had been the subject of extensive discussions in various formats including in this 
Special Session.  Subsequently, in June 2010, th e LDC group had submitted its own proposal, which 
tried to accommodate some of the concerns expressed  by Members.  This proposal now formed the 
basis for negotiation in the Special Session.  During discussions, the LDC group had again demonstrated considerable flexibility and indicated  its readiness to accommodate concerns raised.  
The two areas where gaps remained were the scope of  the waiver and rules of origin.  The LDC group 
thanked Norway, which was once again facilitating th e process.  The group felt encouraged that many 
Members viewed the existing gaps to be bridgeab le.  An increasing number of Members saw validity 
in giving the waiver as wide a scope as possible.   Limiting the scope to market access would run 
contrary to the spirit of decisions made at the H ong Kong Ministerial.  The LDCs hoped to make fast 
progress in the small group, but did not see any value added in re-doing the wo rk that had been done 
in the course of 2010.  The LDCs remained fully committed to constructive discussions in the small 
group and hoped for an early agreement on the waiver.   
6. On the review of progress in negotiations, th e delegation noted that the LDC waiver was only 
one of the elements of the LDC modalities.  Para graph 9 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration 
identified other areas that were to be expeditious ly implemented.  The LDC group wanted to see the 
full and effective implementation of the LDC modali ties as committed in paragraph 3 of Annex C of 
the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration.  LDC-speci fic flexibilities had been agreed in the modalities 
text and in the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration.  These had to be reflected in  all areas, especially 
in GATS rules and domestic regulation.  The speci al economic situation of the LDCs and their 
development, trade and financial n eeds had to be taken into account.  This also warranted targeted and 
coordinated technical assistance and capacity-bui lding programmes in order to strengthen LDCs' 
domestic services capacities, build institutional cap acities and enable them to undertake appropriate 
regulatory reform.  Technical assistance was also necessary to carry out national assessments of trade 
in services in overall terms and on a sectoral basis with reference to the objectives of the GATS and 
Article IV in particular.  Such provisions for tec hnical assistance had to be built into new agreements 
reached. 
7. The delegation of China
 said that the LDC waiver mechan ism was an important component of 
the services negotiations and hoped that an early consensus could be reached.  Regarding the 
instrument's scope of application,  the delegation noted that the waiver was an enabling mechanism for 
permitting Members to grant preferential treatment to the LDCs.  Such a mechanism did not add to or 
remove any existing obligations.  Members offering preferential treatment to LDCs had full autonomy 
in determining the specific parameters of the preferential treatments and defining their scope.  The delegation did not think, therefore, that Members should limit the scope of the waiver.  China, in 
support of the LDC Members, was prepared to acce pt a broad scope of application.  Members who 
argued otherwise had to specify the systemic concer ns that they had invoked.  LDCs had to be 
accorded as much flexibility as possible to  address their developmental needs.  
8. The delegation of the European Union
 attached particular importance to the development 
component of the Round and saw the LDC modalities as a key element that would help to deliver that 
objective.  The European Union stood ready to continue working with the LDC group.  The  TN/S/M/41 
 Page 3 
 
 
  delegation had tabled a text proposal on rules of origin.  The intention was to make it easier for 
Members to grant preferential treatment once th e waiver was adopted.  But the delegation was 
prepared to look into that text with the LDC group and adapt it as appropriate.  On the question of the 
scope, the delegation was open and the different options on the tabl e would be possibly acceptable, 
provided that they would accommodate specific exampl es of future preferential treatment that could 
be granted to LDCs. 
9. The delegation of Hong Kong China  said that as part of the market access focus of the 
services week it had participated in the collectiv e meeting hosted by the EU, as well as plurilateral 
meetings hosted in various sectors.  The meetings ha d been generally useful, and the reinvigoration of 
the plurilateral negotiations was an important step  to achieve greater clarity of the negotiating 
outcome. 
10.  Hong Kong China had coordinated a plurilateral session that focused on core freight logistic 
services, and rail and road transportation services.  Confirmation from a few Members had been obtained on their previously-signalled offers.  Howe ver, overall there had not been much movement 
in substance as compared to the situation in 2007.  Significant gaps remained.  In most cases, the level 
of commitments by Members fell well short of matching the actual market openness in these areas.  
Some Members had quoted regulatory concerns and lack of sufficient legislation as the reason for 
their inability to improve offers.  Others had sensitiv ities in certain modes of transport, and tended to 
bundle such sensitivities with the logistics services that  were auxiliary to those modes of transport.  
Further useful plurilateral and bilate ral discussions had also been held. 
11. Hong Kong China looked forward to discussions in April on services sectors that had not yet 
been covered in previous plurila teral meetings.  Members needed also to address more actively the 
important issues of flexibility and clarity in mark et access negotiations, but there was a need to be 
realistic since each Member had its priorities a nd sensitivities.  The key was to reach the highest 
achievable ambition, with sufficient flexibilities to  cater for individual sensitivities, and Hong Kong 
China remained supportive of any initiatives that might achieve this objective. 
12. With respect to the recent MFN review c onducted by the Council, Hong Kong China was 
disappointed that most Members had not indicated an y plans to reduce or eliminate exemptions.  The 
delegation continued to have syst emic concerns about the many MFN exemptions that were for an 
indefinite period, contrary to fundamental princi ples of the GATS.  On the rule-making front, Hong 
Kong China was pleased to see the much intensif ied discussions on domestic regulation, carried out 
through informal consultations held in early March.  It looked forward to another round of intensive 
drafting the following week, and would continue to contribute substantively to the discussion with a 
view to producing a new text in April.  
13. Hong Kong China reiterated the importance of th e early conclusion of the negotiation on the 
proposed LDC waiver.  Norway continued its prai seworthy efforts to coordinate and focus the 
discussion in a small group configuration.  It was to be hoped that further fruitful discussions would 
continue in that and other formats. 
14. The delegation of Switzerland
 was grateful for the report by Norway on progress in the 
negotiation of a proposed LDC waiver text.  Switzerla nd wished to see a conclusion of this extremely 
important work.   It was vital that LDCs increase th eir participation in trade in services.  As to the 
content of the proposed waiver, one point of pa rticular importance concerned rules of origin.  
Switzerland was flexible and could consider pro posals such as that of the EU.  However, the 
delegation thought that the second clause in paragra ph 5 of the draft waiver text needed to be 
eliminated, for reasons it had explained previously. TN/S/M/41 
Page 4  
 
  15. The delegation of Japan
 recognized that the LDC modalities were one of the most important 
elements in the end-game of the DDA negotiation.   Japan wished to contribute actively to the 
introduction of an appropriate mechanism to help the economic development of the LDCs.  The delegation hoped that intensive discussion would continue, and Japan was ready to make its 
contribution in that regard. 
16. The delegation of Colombia
 accorded great importance to the LDC waiver, and hoped that a 
text could be issued soon in this area.  The examination of preferences by the Council was important for those Members that were neither LDCs nor th ese countries' key markets.  Colombia had made 
proposals on this issue in the past and the delegati on hoped that this would be  taken into account by 
the group led by Norway.  Regarding market a ccess, the DDA, including its services component, 
constituted an opportunity for Colombia to prom ote its economic growth and insertion into world 
trade.  For that reason, great importance had b een put on plurilateral discussions during week.  The 
delegation had participated c onstructively and provided clear and precise information on its 
intentions, taking into account the co-sponsors' conc erns.  Information had been provided on existing 
measures, and indications given on Colombia's intenti ons to reserve the right to use certain measures 
in the future.  Overall, the results of the week's discussions were positive because up-to-date 
information had been obtained on Members' signals, intentions, and interests.  On mode 4, the 
meeting held during the week provided a good basis fo r future discussions in this area.  Concerning 
next steps, the delegation thought that informa tion on Members' future offers should improve 
significantly by the time the Chairs of negotiating groups had to present new texts.  This should 
permit Members to see with clarity the work accomplis hed.  Members could then go to the following 
stage, which was to negotiate on the basis of new offers.  To reach these objectives, the pace of work 
had to accelerate.  Members had to make the ne cessary reciprocal concessions and abandon extreme 
positions.  The delegation hoped that leadership from relevant Members would permit a move to such 
a stage.  The good atmosphere in which the market access negotiations had been held during the week 
should also be reflected in the negotiations on domestic regulation, where, under the pretext of 
protecting regulators, the essence of the proposed di sciplines had been diluted to the point of taking 
away all value. 
17. The delegation of Chile
 hoped that progress on LDC modalities would continue and that 
remaining gaps could be narrowed.  Regarding ma rket access, the week of negotiations had been 
foreseen as an opportunity to inject greater intens ity into the negotiating process, with a view to 
obtaining more information on new commitments in forthcoming offers.  In sum, the objective had 
been to get greater clarity on what would be the services component of the final market access 
package.  Chile had participated in all relevant m eetings and had confirmed the signals provided in the 
past, which pointed toward substan tial improvements to the offer.  At the conclusion of the week, the 
formal objective of addressing the relevant sectors ha d been met.  Participation had generally been 
good.  However, in many cases, the interventions a nd signals of participants were not sufficiently 
detailed and precise.  There had been many repetiti ons of information already known.  Substance had 
been lacking.  Notwithstanding this overall negativ e picture, some positive elements were that, in 
certain cases, signals given in 2008 had been confir med and, in other cases, new information had been 
provided on some sub-sectors.  Clearly, the plurilate ral setting made it difficult to discuss at a greater 
level of specificity, but the process should neverthe less continue in April to address the remaining 
sectors.  This should help provide a general pictur e by Easter.  But it would also be necessary to 
introduce some adjustments to the format of meeti ngs at the next cluster.  Concerning the mode 4 
meeting organized by Canada, the delegation thought that this had been a very useful initiative.  
Among other things, it served to confirm that mark et access interests in this area cut across North-
South lines.  Finally, on domestic regulation, whic h was a fundamental issue for Chile, good work had 
been accomplished in recent meetings, and the delega tion hoped to continue in this vein in order to 
produce a text by Easter.  TN/S/M/41 
 Page 5 
 
 
  18. The delegation of Australia  believed it was essential that progress be achieved on services 
during this period of renewed focus on the Doha Round.  The services negotiations had been at a 
standstill far too long.  Much more work needed  to be done.  On LDC modalities, the delegation 
continued to support a waiver mechanism.  It also recognized also the point raised by the delegation 
of Bangladesh on the broader LDC modalities.  On  domestic regulation, Au stralia welcomed the 
intensification of negotiations.  This was an integral  part of the Doha Round, and a lot of work still 
had to be done.  The delegation tr usted that delegations would take a constructive path to produce a 
consolidated text in the coming weeks.     
19. On market access, there had been good participati on in the plurilateral meetings on education, 
professional services, and supply chain services.  These represented some of Australia's key sectoral interests.  Australia led the plurilateral discussi on on accountancy and legal services, and chaired the 
meeting covering logistics and supply chain service s.  For accountancy, the meeting had served to 
confirm the information provided by recipients at the first plurilateral meeting in November last year.  
For legal services, this was the first meeting in a number of years.  Australia was pleased that a 
number of Members had foreshadowed new commitm ents to bind autonomous liberalization or 
incremental improvements to existing offers.  This  was a welcome start, but far from where Members 
needed to be to conclude the negotiations.  In  market access negotiations more generally, Members 
had been asked two questions: where did they have  difficulty meeting the plurilateral request and 
where did they need to mainta in some flexibility to address sen sibilities?  Some encouraging 
responses and some new signals had been heard, bu t in some cases the clarifications seemed to be 
going in the wrong direction.   
20. Australia's overall assessment was that Memb ers had worked in a constructive spirit of 
engagement, but there had been no satisfactory ne gotiation.  Some Members had said that they had 
some flexibility, but when pressed th ey declined to elaborate on where that flexibility might be.  The 
delegation was not sure what these delegations were  waiting for.  If significant progress was to be 
made within the window of opportunity, Members need ed to start negotiating now.  Australia's view 
was that Members should be aiming to at least bind current levels of market access in priority sectors.  
There was also a need to  listen to what the industry was sayi ng, and work towards the removal of 
mode 3 limitations such as foreign equity caps and limitations on forms of commercial presence.  
Members also had to look at ways of making new or  improved commitments in mode 4.  It was time 
to get into the details.  For that reason, Australia suggested that the week of 11 April, aside from the 
workshop on domestic regulation, shoul d be dedicated to market access discussions in the remaining 
plurilateral areas so delegations could bring sectoral experts, including on financial, energy, 
environmental and tourism services.  Members sh ould be ready to exchange with each other the 
results of the negotiations in writing.  In the wrap  up to the week of 11 April, Members would have 
completed a round of sectoral discussions, and should  in a position to make a clear assessment of 
what had been accomplished.   
21. The delegation of Switzerland
 said it was necessary to focus on market access, without 
neglecting other areas.  On market access, Switzerland had participated usefully in many meetings in different formats, in which the presence of many  sectoral experts from capitals was invaluable.  
Ideally, there needed to be more time for b ilateral discussions, achievable perhaps through 
modification of the organization of plurilatera l meetings.  Switzerland was pleased to receive 
additional or complementary information from delega tions during the bilateral and some plurilateral 
meetings.  Some, but not all, Members were ma king serious efforts to improve their offers.  
Switzerland was still concerned at the imbalance th at could be seen within groupings of countries, 
taking into account levels of development.  Th is was simply free-riding.  Around Easter, all 
delegations needed to be in a position to analyze th e situation in market access.  This would require 
much work by delegations, but would en able further negotiations after Easter. TN/S/M/41 
Page 6  
 
  22. With respect to the other issues, delegations were all aware that there were linkages with 
market access.  It was good theref ore to see work on domestic regulation move forward.  It was vital 
at this point to have, if possible, a new documen t for Easter enabling each delegation to know where 
the obstacles lay, and to see the state of play paragra ph by paragraph.  On rules, there were concerns 
about the pace of work.  With respect to subsidies,  there was a need to move into a substantive mode 
of work, looking at each of the questions that had to be analyzed in order to determine whether there 
was convergence.  Export subsidies were of pa rticular importance to Switzerland, for it was 
inconceivable to discipline market access without pr oviding legal certainty in this respect.  On mode 
4, Switzerland wished to acknowledge the timely a nd useful exercise carried out by Canada, which 
had to continue in the future. 
23. The delegation of Turkey
 recalled that it favoured a broad scope for the LDC waiver and 
supported an early conclusion of the negotiations.  On market access, plurilateral meetings had 
produced a good exchange of views.  Turkey seeme d to be one of the few Members whose Uruguay 
Round commitments had bound the legislation in force.   This had been done even in very sensitive 
sectors such as education services.  In order to c onclude the Round, Members should seek a balance 
between requests and offers.  It was not legitimate to make requests that went beyond the mandate set 
in the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration.  On mode 4, the delegation appreciated the meeting 
convened by Canada.  The proposal made at that  meeting contained some necessary elements for a 
successful outcome.  Turkey shared the view that mode 4 was not a North-South issue, but 
underscored that this was the only mode of supply  where developing countries had major interests, 
while developed Members had interests in almost each mode.  Apart from schedulable market access barriers, service suppliers of developing countries were already in a disadvantageous position due to 
visa requirements and problems posed by qualification requirements.   
24. On domestic regulation, the de legation thought that some common ground had been reached 
on certain paragraphs, but divergences remained on im portant issues.  On the development chapter, 
Turkey was in favour of plain and operational articles.   This part of the disciplines was far from being 
satisfactory.  Recognition of the limited instituti onal capacity and degree of development of services 
regulations in developing countries was vital, but this had not been reflect ed in disciplines.  In 
developing countries, regulators' e xperience and knowledge varied widely among sectors.  It was not 
legitimate to expect them to meet the same regulatory standards as those from developed countries. 
Discussions on the development chapter would certainly  have an impact on Turkey's final position on 
the necessity test.  Finally, as suggested by Aust ralia, the delegation wished to propose that the 
subsidiary bodies other than the WPDR and the WPGR convene after the April cluster, where 
Members should focus on market access matters. 
25. The delegation of Pakistan
 placed great importance on the successful conclusion of the 
negotiations on LDC modalities, and looked forward to  the expansion of the small group to include 
other delegations.  Overall, during the past we ek there had been positive engagement with 
confirmation of previous signals, in cluding for mode 4.  On mode 4, Canada's initiative was greatly 
appreciated, and could revitalize the discussion of this important issue.  By Easter, some sort of outcome was needed in the services negotiations.  Pa kistan was open as to the type of output to be 
expected – individual Members' assessments, plurilateral group assessments, or the Chair's 
assessment.  If the Chair chose to make his own assessment, the question then arose as to how the 
plurilateral assessments would be incorporated.  Something more than individual assessments would 
probably be required.  Pakistan felt that clarity was needed on how the Chair would deal with this 
issue.  On domestic regulation, although longsta nding divergences still existed, all the delegations 
were now participating in the discussions.  The wo rk during the week of 4 April would be very 
important.  The Chair would need to base a text on the final positions of de legations, with as few 
brackets as possible.  TN/S/M/41 
 Page 7 
 
 
  26. The delegation of New Zealand  appreciated the efforts of Members who, during the week, 
had engaged frankly and in varying levels of detail on the cha llenges and sensitivities they faced in 
making further commitments.  The plurilateral format had been useful to some extent in clarifying 
where Members stood, and such meetings were a transparent and efficient way of doing business.  
However, activity and engagement did not always mean progress.  The necessary level of detail to 
know what exactly would be in final offers was still lack ing.  More remained to be done to arrive at an 
adequate services package.  The negotiations were not a zero-sum game.  A comprehensive outcome 
in services would benefit a range of Members, de veloped and developing, bi g and small, near to 
markets and distant from them.  In order to reach an ambitious outcome, the delegation supported the 
approach outlined by Australia.  Annex C recognized  that not all Members would reach in full the 
goal of binding autonomous liberalization, so it was a ppropriate to focus on where the gaps would be.  
It was important to have the greatest possible degr ee of specificity and certainty on the shape and 
content of an outcome.   
27. As co-ordinator of the plurilateral request on education services, New Zealand welcomed the 
opportunity to refresh its understanding of how r ecipients and co-sponsors intended to meet the 
objectives.  While the delegation was disappointed that  a number of recipients had continued to signal 
no intent whatsoever to make commitments in this  area, it acknowledged the pa rticular contribution of 
Chile, whose positive signals reduced the number of  non-respondents from 7 to 6.  The delegation 
also thanked those Members that had confirmed or clarified the signals given in 2008.  Encouraging 
signs had also been heard from some other Members who appeared willing to at least re-examine the 
limitations in their applied legislative and regulat ory regimes or in their FTA commitments, with a 
view to exploring multilateralization.  On domestic regulation, the delegation highlighted the progress 
made in recent text-based negotiations.  For New Zeal and, robust domestic regulation disciplines were 
essential to ensure that market access commitment s became commercially meaningful for services 
exporters.  Regarding the cluster of meetings in Apr il, work should be organized so as to provide for 
further intensified focus on market access  in a range of appropriate formats.   
28. The delegation of Korea  welcomed the hard work on LDC modalities and domestic regulation 
disciplines.  Korea also engaged very actively in the plurilateral and bilate ral negotiations over the 
week.  The assessment was still mixed: some positive signals were heard for improvement but they 
still remained vague and conditional, which made it difficult to have a concrete and objective 
assessment.  In the sectors discussed during the week, Korea believed that its offer had been improved 
to reflect the current regime, in particular with re gard to education services, international courier and 
legal professions, where Korea had offered new commitments.  Korea was also willing to examine any possible improvements to reflect, where po ssible, changes in the current regime.   
29. In the same vein, the delegation also wanted othe rs to respond in Korea's areas of interest.  
Firstly, there should be further improvements in mode 1 and 2 to the level of current liberalization.  
Computer-related services and other business services provided better room for further improvements.  
Secondly, Korea wished to see improved commitm ents in maritime transport and distribution 
services.  While many made new or improved offers , some had not yet fully reflected their current 
regime, which was open to foreign suppliers.  Fu rther liberalization of commercial presence, in 
particular, was key.  In these areas, opening the markets and making them transparent and stable 
through further commitments would provide a win- win situation to both home and host countries and 
have great spill-over effects on other sectors.  Th ese were so-called back-b one services that enabled 
cross-border trade of goods and services and that permitted small and medium enterprises to compete 
better in international markets.  The recent wo rkshop in the APEC group of services held in 
Washington provided real life evidence of the importance of further liberalizing and de-regulating 
government barriers in business, telecom and logistics services sectors.  Korea in particular emphasized the importance of maritime transport, which was the major means of transport for goods 
trade.  The elimination of MFN exemptions on cargo sharing and cargo reservations was a very 
important issue in the Doha negotiations.  Korea l ooked forward to further negotiations in April on the TN/S/M/41 
Page 8  
 
  remaining sectors, but, so as to intensify negotiati ons, it urged Members to bring their capital experts 
and engage in the follow-up negotiations on areas already discussed.  At the same time, Korea was ready to engage further in how to assess obj ectively the current status of negotiations. 
30. The delegation of Brazil
 expressed its appreciation for fru itful discussions held during the 
week in bilateral and plurilateral formats.  The dele gation had been fully engaged in spite of fact that 
it was not possible to count on capital-based experts due to significant budgetary cuts.  For Brazil, the 
engine of the Doha Round was agriculture, which di d not mean that it did not attach importance to 
services. An ambitious outcome in the services p illar was to be achieved and the delegation had 
significantly contributed to this goal by making substa ntial improvements to its original offer.  Other 
developing countries had done the same, and therefor e the flexibility to liberalize fewer sectors and 
transactions had not really been used by developing  countries in this Round.  At the various meetings 
in which Brazil took part during this week, th e demandeurs had reiterated their requests with 
insistence.  They had also acknowledged the exis tence of sensitivities and showed willingness to 
consider flexibilities in order to allow new commit ments or improvements to existing commitments.  
The delegation appreciated such an approach.  It was important to bear in mind that the demandeurs 
also had their sensitivities and red zones in a consid erable number of areas.  Nevertheless, Brazil still 
had not heard from the demandeurs on the flexibilities they would need, such as transitional periods, 
to improve or make new commitments.  Hopefully their own approach would help them to give a 
positive response to at least some of the requests they had received.   
31. As the Easter deadline was approaching, a high level of uncertainty prevailed and there were 
attempts to undermine the development component in the other pillars of the Round.  Inevitably, this 
situation would continue interfe ring with the services negotiations.  Requests for further clarity 
regarding Brazil's offer would be cons idered in light of the level of pr ogress in those pillars.  In trying 
to conclude the Round this year, Members had to stick to the multilaterally-agreed mandates for the 
services negotiations.  This should not be done in a selective way, but rather by giving due 
consideration to the development component.  Concerning domestic regulation, Brazil was 
participating constructively in the discussions with  a view to the production of a revised bracketed 
text by Easter.  Significant gaps remained and effo rts toward more convergence should be undertaken.  
However, this could not be achieved if some Members thought that flexibility meant the acceptance 
by others of whatever they proposed.  For Brazil, even though it recognized the legitimacy of other 
proposals, the Chair’s text of March 2009 remained  the basis for negotiations.  Regarding the LDC 
waiver, the delegation reiterated its strong support fo r an early conclusion, and encouraged greater 
transparency in the process . 
32. The delegation of Canada  had engaged over the past two clus ters with renewed energy in the 
market access negotiations.  The EU-hosted meeting in February had led to sector- and modal-specific 
plurilateral meetings, complemented  by bilateral discussions.  In the meetings, Canada had attempted 
to outline where its sensitivities and flexibilities lay.  In  reality, market access results had been mixed. 
Many signals from July 2008 had been clarified, a nd there had been some indications of flexibilities 
from a few Members.  But not all Members had come to  the meetings prepared to contribute in this 
way.  Canada had also hosted a meeting of 27 Memb ers to consult on an elements paper on mode 4 
that it was drafting.  There was very good partic ipation both by demandeurs and recipients.  The 
meeting showed that Members' interests in mode  4 went far beyond a north-south dynamic.  Canada 
would consider the comments received on its paper,  with a view to providing clarifications.  The 
delegation was also engaging with other Members on negotiating a text on disciplines on domestic 
regulation.  The focus needed to continue on fi nding areas of convergence.  Canada also supported 
continued work on resolving the issue of LDC modal ities.  Time was very short, and only one cluster 
remained before delegations woul d need to give an assessment to senior officials on what was on the 
table.  The fate of the Round would soon need to be decided.  Canada encouraged all Members to 
commit themselves to the services negotiations, especially on market access.  TN/S/M/41 
 Page 9 
 
 
  33. On market access, the delegation of the European Union  perceived, overall, a better level of 
engagement during the week.  However, during th e plurilateral meetings, only a few signals were 
heard and most of them were essentially a repetition of signals already made at the Signalling 
Conference of 2008.  The delegation sensed better engagement in bilateral meetings as several 
Members indicated that they were seriously expl oring flexibilities in different sectors.  However, 
these flexibilities remained undisclo sed.  Members did not seem to be prepared to reveal any 
significant flexibility until progress was made in other areas.  The delegation considered that the DDA 
negotiations were at a critical juncture and that Me mbers should be prepared to  disclose flexibility, at 
least on a "what if" basis.  Very little time remained before the important Easter deadline and 
Members would need to make some collective assess ment of progress.  Unless negotiating dynamics 
changed and Members engaged in a more determined fashion, no material progress could be shown.   
34. For the European Union, it was important th at the Round produce commitments reflecting 
autonomous liberalization and the removal of remaining obstacles to establishment through commercial presence.  This could be done using fl exibilities.  Some areas were more difficult; 
creative and flexible approaches would need to be  explored, for example transitional periods.  A 
balanced package at the end of the Round should also include a robust component on mode 4.  
Canada's efforts in trying to find consensus on th is mode were therefore welcomed even though the 
delegation would like to see some elements of the paper modified.  Any consensus-based approach on 
mode 4 should come with the support of the co-spon sors of the plurilateral request on mode 4.  It 
should avoid expanding the disciplines contained in th at request and remain as specific and focused as 
possible.   
35. The European Union had acted as coordinator of  several plurilateral meetings over the week.  
The S30 meeting had showed the persistence of diff erent views of how to reach a balanced package 
on market access at the end of the Round.  At the plur ilateral meeting on air transport, some signals of 
improvements were heard, in particular on aircraft  maintenance and repair, selling and marketing, and 
computer reservation systems.  On ground handling and airport operation services, some Members 
indicated that they would be prepared to take  commitments in these two sub-sectors, two Members 
considered that legal clarity was needed on the status  of these two services in the Annex and that this 
clarity should be sought in the context of the Revi ew of the Annex and not in the DDA, and finally 
some Members thought that these two sub-sectors were not covered by the scope of the Annex.  At 
the plurilateral meeting on distribution services, the sector's importance in linking producers and 
consumers and for the general efficiency of the economy, including its impact on job creation, had 
been discussed.  Seven Members indicated new firm  or tentative flexibilities, but a significant number 
of recipients did not show any flexibility.  Many  Members had no commitments in this sector and the 
EU urged them to take commitments , considering that the plurilateral request contained such elements 
of flexibility as the possibility to take product-specifi c exclusions or to have ENTs.  On domestic 
regulation, the delegation welcomed  the engagement showed by Members and the Chair.  Finally, for 
the organization of the next cluster, it would be b est not to schedule regular meetings during the week 
of the 11 April so as to devote enough time to market access issues.  Concerning the format for 
reporting on progress, the EU was open.  Any report would have to reflect the assessment of progress 
made by Members either individually or as part of groups. 
36. The delegation of Chinese Taipei
 said that services was one of the three market access pillars 
of the Round, and that there was a need to ensure, by Easter, that services had the same clarity and 
maturity as the other areas of the negotiations.  Th e S30, plurilateral and bilateral meetings held 
during the week had been constructive in movi ng Members toward their objective.  However, 
progress had been very slow and below expectatio ns.  Co-sponsors and recipients had exchanged 
candid views, and recipients had been asked to i ndicate specific difficulties in binding current levels 
of market access.  Chinese Taipei looked fo rward to further engagement in April. TN/S/M/41 
Page 10  
 
  37. Chinese Taipei had bound a very large number of sub-sectors when it joined the WTO.  Over 
the years, this liberalization had greatly enhan ced the competitive environment in services, and had 
enabled industry in Chinese Taipei to develop furt her.  The output of the service industry had grown 
by 25 per cent and employment in the services sector  by over 14 per cent.  The experience of Chinese 
Taipei had shown that, although some had initially b een sceptical, liberalization of trade in services 
was very rewarding.  The delegation encouraged Members to consider commitments reflecting the 
liberalization contained in the Chair's July 2008 roadmap.  On domestic regulation, Chinese Taipei 
said that progress in the negotiations would give comfort to Members in taking market access commitments.  Recent work in the WPDR had ma naged to narrow differences between Members.  
Chinese Taipei expected a new text with a minimum of brackets before Easter.  
38. The delegation of Norway
 underscored its level of particip ation in the week's plurilateral 
market access negotiations.  The ge neral impression was both encourag ing and not encouraging.  The 
discussions had been frank and constructive.  The main focus had been on flexibilities or possibilities 
to improve commitments, but also on sensitivities as impediments to commitments or the need for transitional arrangements.  These discussions had b een useful, but further clarity and progress was 
necessary.   Norway was also grateful for the meeting organized by Canada on mode 4, which was a 
key component of the services negotiations.  
 
39. The delegation also wished to underline that m eetings in various formats had taken place on 
maritime transport, which was an area of particular importance.  This was a basic infrastructure service that facilitated world trade, economic activity  and economic development.  It was also the 
most environmental friendly means of transporta tion. Maritime transport services were to a large 
extent open, and binding such openness would grea tly strengthen the multilateral trading system.  
Norway invited all Members that had not done so  to take commitments on international freight 
transportation in Mode 1 and to limit the numbers  and scope of MFN exemptions to the extent 
possible.  The delegation had received some signals to that end, but would like to see more progress.  
Norway was looking forward to the discussions of the remaining areas during the April cluster, where 
two of the country's main priority areas would be  on the agenda (energy a nd financial services).  
However, a lot of work remained if Members we re to assess progress around Easter.  While next steps 
also depended on progress in other areas, services negotiations were equally  important and parallel 
progress was necessary.  Norway was fully co mmitted to concluding a services package 
commensurate with the level of ambition in other areas of the DDA. 
 
40. The delegation of South Africa  said it was encouraged by the Chair's efforts to forge 
consensus in the negotiations on the LDC waiver, but was acutely aware of the work that remained to 
reach agreement.  It supported a comprehensiv e waiver that encompass ed market access and 
regulatory elements.  On domestic regulation, So uth Africa welcomed progress made and emphasized 
that, although Members had the right to introdu ce new proposals, the Chair text of March 2009 
remained the basis for negotiations.  The delegation also urged the Chair of the WPDR to be sensitive 
to small delegations that were not able to a ttend the drafting sessions.  Regarding market access 
negotiations, South Africa had been an active par ticipant and was committed to a services outcome 
that was fair, balanced, and in accordance with manda tes.  This approach had been glaringly evident 
in the Signalling Conference in terms of the scope, depth and extent of signals that South Africa had 
made.  Unfortunately this constructive approach ha d not been reciprocated by some of the largest 
demandeurs, whose signals were very limited and of minimal co mmercial value to developing 
countries.   
41. The mandate for the services negotiations was clearly set out in Annex C, the Negotiating 
Guidelines, and GATS provisions on flexibility for developing countries.  But the demand to bind current levels of market opening was inconsistent  with the parameters of  the mandate.  Demandeurs 
had asked what prevented South Africa from undertaki ng commitments that reflected current levels of 
openness.  Looking at the Round holistically, the de legation rather asked what prevented many from  TN/S/M/41 
 Page 11 
 
 
  making real reductions in overall trade-distor ting domestic support (OTD S)?  Some demandeurs 
continued to maintain limitations in services that they demanded that others remove.  Yet, these 
demandeurs had not indicated any willingness to rem ove such limitations.  Many demandeurs were 
willing to remove insignificant limitations, but mainta ined restrictive horizontal limitations.  Finally, 
the delegation observed that some  developed countries without any commitments in certain sectors 
had been excluded from the plurilateral requests, while South Africa, a developing country with 
existing commitments in those sectors, had been requ ested to improve its commitments.  This was not 
a balanced approach.  South Africa was committed to  a balanced and fair outcome in the services 
negotiations, and stood ready to  make its contribution. 
42. The delegation of Singapore  said that it had been engaged in all the plurilateral and bilateral 
meetings held during the week, and had participated  as a recipient in all but one of the plurilateral 
requests.  The discussions had been useful.  The inte raction in the plurilatera l meetings had facilitated 
transparency and provided a better understanding  of Members' flexibilities and sensitivities in 
services.  While no substantive movement had been achieved, Singapore appreciated the confirmation 
of signals from some Members, and was encourag ed to see constructive participation generally.  
Singapore was also heartened to see the renewed en ergy in the plurilateral process carried over into 
the current cluster.  It hoped that this would conti nue in the next cluster, where sectors of interest to 
Singapore would be discussed.  On domestic regu lation, Singapore welcomed the constructive 
engagement, which it hoped would lead to a produc t in which there was a balance struck between 
developed and developing country interests.  Overall, with r espect to negotiations after the April 
cluster, Singapore was open-minded. 
43. On overall progress and next steps in th e negotiations, the delegation of China  said that the 
last few weeks of meeting had been very intensiv e.  Members were fully engaged and committed to 
an early conclusion of the Round.  China hoped that this momentum could continue until a satisfactory result was reached.  Plurilateral meetings  had been helpful in further clarifying positions 
and China welcomed the flexibilities shown by Memb ers.  The delegation encouraged Members to 
show more flexibility in mode 4 and thanked Canada  for hosting a discussion on that issue.  Elements 
contained in the Canadian paper were important issues, and Chin a hoped that Members would make 
efforts to improve their offers along those lines.  On domestic regulation, the small group drafting 
process had been efficient and fruitful.  China was co nstructively engaged in this exercise.  Significant 
gaps still existed between Members seeking different levels of ambition.  Th e delegation was looking 
forward to the early distribution of the revised draft text for further study.  
44. The delegation of India
 appreciated Norway's efforts to facilitate the discussion on LDC 
modalities.  India supported Bangladesh's call, as LDC coordinator, for the full and expeditious 
implementation of LDC modalities as  per Annex C of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration.  Not 
many issues remained unresolved and it was possibl e to reach convergence given the political will.  
Concerning domestic regulation, small group mee tings had been useful and some progress had 
occurred at the technical level.  However, a lot of work remained, especially on the main issues.  India 
looked forward to continued engage ment to develop effective discip lines.  Regarding market access, 
the delegation had earlier expressed its strong concer ns at the attempt to redefine the mandate 
contained in the Hong Kong Ministerial Declara tion.  India was guided by the market access 
objectives outlined for various modes in Annex C.  An important benchmark for assessing offers 
would be the movement made by each Member fr om its Uruguay Round commitments.  During the 
week, the delegation had convened th e plurilateral meeting on cross-border supply.  The view of the 
majority of Members was that liberalization of cross-border supply amounted to a win-win situation 
for both developing and developed countries.  The delegation had noticed some movement regarding 
those services which were earlier considered t echnically infeasible and whose supply had now 
become possible with technological developments.  Some Members had expre ssed concerns regarding 
consumer protection and regulatory issues, and possible solutions to address these concerns had been 
discussed.  Certain flexibility had also been shown by Members.  However, major issues, like the TN/S/M/41 
Page 12  
 
  removal of nationality, residency, and commercia l presence requirements remained.  Cross-border 
supply was still unbound in several sectors in many Members' schedules.  More needed to be done 
and India would continue to engage with Members bilaterally and in other formats to make further 
progress. 
45. On mode 4, the delegation welcomed Canada 's contribution and would come back with 
concrete comments after discussing with co-sponsors of the plurilateral request.  In a preliminary 
manner, India noted that the Canadian paper had ma ny similarities with its plurilateral request, but 
there were some crucial differences.  The plurilate ral request was much more detailed and specific in 
terms of the interests of demandeurs.  The lack of movement on mode 4 so far was not due to a lack of 
submissions or to a lack of knowle dge of the various elem ents required to make a good offer.  Mode 4 
demandeurs had been quite active in making submissions and addressing the various issues.  More 
submissions had been made on mode 4 than on other modes.  These covered the entire array of issues, 
including a number of innovative solutions including suggestions for a GATS visa or service provider 
visa.  Rather, the real issue was the lack of substa ntial movement in areas of export interest for the 
demandeurs.  In bilaterals held during the week, ot her trading partners had made general statements 
on the importance of mode 4, but there had been no clear signs of movement.  While it was mentioned 
that mode 4 was not a North-South issue, developing countries had a special interest in this mode of supply.  It was one area where developed countries could do a lot more as their commitments and 
offers were limited, particularly for categories delinked from commercial presence.  It was paradoxical that some Members continued to menti on concerns about the confusion between mode 4 
and permanent migration.  This was nothing more th an a smoke screen to deflect attention from core 
issues.  Over the years, it had been continuous ly and clearly outlined that mode 4 was about 
temporary movement and not about attempts to permanently enter the employment market.  The 
GATS Annex on Movement of Natural Persons was very clear in that regard.  On future work, India 
was ready to engage constructively and would co nsult with co-sponsors in Mode 4 on holding a 
meeting based on the plurilateral request during the next cluster.    
46. On the market access negotiations, the delegation of Japan
 welcomed the fact that the process, 
composed of the S30 meeting as well as plurilatera l and bilateral meetings, was well established and 
that Members were having frank discussions on sensitiv ities and flexibilities.  In addition, the signals 
of further improvements by some Members were a good contribution.  However, the discussions had 
also highlighted the large gaps remaining to be bridge d.  Time left was very limited.  By the end of 
April, more tangible achievements were needed in orde r to move to the next step.  In that context, 
Japan supported the suggestion made by Australia.  Japan also supported Ca nada's initiative on mode 
4.  At the next cluster of meetings, delegations  should focus on market access negotiations, and other 
regular meetings might best be held the following week.  Japan also expected more participation by 
experts from capitals at meetings in April.  To deal  with the regulatory issues in depth, the presence of 
experts in each sector was vital.  Consultations be tween capitals' relevant authorities were also key.  
This was difficult, but it was important to try to help each other by, for example, presenting not only 
requests but also their related background informa tion and possible benefits in writing.  Members now 
had to involve senior officials and political aut horities in capitals in intense consultations.   
47. During the week, Japan had convened a plurilatera l meeting on maritime transport.  Some co-
sponsors had emphasized the importance of the entry into force of the MFN requirement and the need 
to prevent Members from withdrawing their commitment s.  Some recipients had showed flexibility in 
areas such as foreign capital participation in ma ritime transport services and maritime auxiliary 
services.  Other recipients explained their sensitivit y in areas such as interna tional freight reservations 
in mode 1 or foreign capital participation in mariti me transport services due to national legislation or 
policies to promote maritime industries.  With re gard to domestic regulation, the drafting process had 
yielded certain progress, but huge gaps remained  on such major issues as the necessity test, 
development, as well as licensing and qualifications.  In order to obtain a text with as few brackets as  TN/S/M/41 
 Page 13 
 
 
  possible by Easter, key Members should focus on seek ing areas of convergence, rather than sticking 
to their zone of comfort.    
48. The delegation of the United States  remained committed to creatin g an effective LDC waiver 
mechanism.  The remaining issues were not insurmo untable.  However, since this involved waiving a 
fundamental principle of the WTO, Members had to  be cautious not to cause harm.  The delegation 
saw the possibility of some unintended consequences as a result of a waiver, including effects on third 
parties.  There were precedents in other sectors, su ch as re-mail in the postal sector and arbitrage of 
accounting rates in telecommunications.  In that c ontext, it was important to further consider the 
issues of scope and rules of origin.  Regarding mark et access, the delegation had a sense of déjà vu in 
preparing its present intervention.  The United Stat es' assessment had not changed over the past few 
months, or even the past few years.  The delega tion appreciated the engagement of Members, but 
movement should not be confused with progress.  It had not heard anything significantly different 
from July 2008.   
49. Since January, delegations had worked their way th rough over half of the issues of interest to 
Members.  The United States had tried to focus objectives on key areas, like ICT services, and key 
objectives, like achieving substantial sector coverage  and removing foreign equity limitations.  With 
respect to ICT services, the delegation found that, of the 34 Members taking part in the plurilateral 
group of either computer or telecommunications, 9 offers were strong, 14 offers had some significant 
gaps, and 11 offers had severe limitations.  So three-quarters of offers had serious weaknesses and 
one-third had grave problems.  In audiovisual services,  an area of particular interest to the United 
States, no notable progress could be observed.  In lo gistics, the delegation's interests were principally 
focused on distribution, express delivery, ground tran sport and certain auxiliary services.  The story 
was also unpleasant: of 35 Members participating, only  4 offers were strong, 10 had some gaps, and 
21 had severe weaknesses.  This meant that almost 90 per cent of offers in this area were weak.    
50. During the week's meetings, the delegation had tried to explore "what-if" scenarios to see how 
concessions in one area might influence commitment s from other Members, or to see if flexibility 
tools like phase-ins could enable taking stronger co mmitments.  In so doing, the United States had 
moved outside of its comfort zone to address areas of  greatest sensitivity.  Unfortunately, those efforts 
had not had a significant effect on other Members' offe rs so far.  In mode 4, for example, there had 
been no indications that, should the United States move  in a positive way, this would be reciprocated 
by enhanced market access in areas of interest.  While this was the delegation's own assessment, it 
hoped to hear more positive views from others.  Mu ch work still had to be done, and the delegation 
hoped that the next few weeks would yield more progress.  Otherwise, it did not see how it could 
recommend to senior officials that services negotiati ons were in a position to move into the final 
phase. 
51. The delegation of Egypt  said that it had participated in the plurilateral meetings held during 
the week.  These had been useful to  exchange information and to push  the negotiations forward.  As a 
co-sponsor of the plurilateral request on mode 4, Egypt thanked Canada for organizing a discussion 
on elements for improved commitments in this mode – an important issue for all Members.  On domestic regulation, Egypt observed th at gaps among Members still remained. 
52. The Chair
 concluded the discussion by remarking that the delegate of Pakistan had asked him 
how he would assess the negotiations.  He replie d that he could not assess anything unless Members 
provided him their own assessments of the state of th e negotiations.  In evaluating the previous week's 
negotiation, he had taken note of a number of e xpressions such as "frank exchanges", "constructive 
participation", "constructive spirit" , "busy week", "interesting week",  "positive engagement", "better 
level of engagement", and "useful meetings".  But he had also heard expressions such as "limited 
progress", "mixed progress", and "lack of clarity on offers".  So his overall assessment was both 
"good" and "not good".  Members had to recognize that the Easter deadline was near, and that the TN/S/M/41 
Page 14  
 
  opportunity to bridge remaining gaps was during the week of 11 April.  If negotiations were to be 
concluded by the end of the year, a final package would have to be decided before the end of the 
summer break.  The scheduling of commitments t ook time, involving many skills and hours of hard 
work.  The window of opportunity was closing rapidl y, and Members needed to take advantage of it 
while there was still time. 
53. On domestic regulation, the Chair said that very good work had been done so far in the 
WPDR, but that further effort by Members was n eeded to bridge the remaining gaps.  On LDC 
modalities, the Chair agreed with the ambassador of Norway that delegations were not that far apart 
on the remaining issues and that agreement was w ithin reach.  A clean text by Easter on LDC 
modalities would be a great achievement. 
54. The Council
 took note of the statements made, and decide d to revert to this item at the next 
meeting. 
C. OTHER BUSINESS  
55. Since there was no other business, the Chair  adjourned the meeting. 
 
__________