WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  RESTRICTED 
TN/S/M/42 
21 June 2011 
 (11-3041) 
Council for Trade in Services 
Special Session  
 
 
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 15 APRIL 2011 
 
Note by the Secretariat1 
 
 
1. The Special Session of the Council for Trade in  Services held a formal meeting on 15 April 
2011, chaired by Ambassador Ferna ndo de Mateo of Mexico.  The ag enda for the meeting, contained 
in document WTO/AIR/3730, was adopted.  To facilitate discussion, the Council agreed to the 
Chairman's proposal to deal concurrently  with the three main agenda items.   
A. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MODALITIES FOR THE SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR LEAST -
DEVELOPED COUNTRY MEMBERS IN THE TRADE IN SERVICES NEGOTIATIONS  
B. WORK OF THE SUBSIDIARY BODIES – REPORTS BY THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE WORKING 
PARTY ON DOMESTIC REGULATION AND THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE WORKING PARTY ON 
GATS  RULES  
C. REVIEW OF PROGRESS IN NEGOTIATIONS , INCLUDING PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 15 OF THE 
GUIDELINES FOR NEGOTIATIONS ; AND ORGANIZATION OF FUTURE WORK 
2. The Chairman said that it was a particularly important meeting of the Special Session.  Since 
last November, when the TNC had directed Member s to redouble their efforts to conclude the DDA, 
services negotiators had engaged intensively a series of negotiating clusters.  Taking advantage of the 
'window of opportunity' in the first half of this year, they had devoted much time and energy in 
attempting to the bridge the remaining gaps.  Th ree separate weeks of bilateral and plurilateral 
request/offer negotiations (14 February, 14 March and 12 April) had taken place. 
3. It was now time to assess whether Members had met their services objectives in the DDA.  
The TNC Chair had requested the Chairs of all negotiating groups to circulate the following week 
documents representing the product of the work in their areas.  In the light of these documents, 
delegations would meet for an informal TNC on 29 April, giving them the opportunity to consider 
overall what next steps should be taken in the Round. 
4. For his part, the Chairman said he would be responding to the TNC Chair's request by 
producing a Report on the status of the services negotia tions.  It would be circulated, along with those 
of the Chairs of the other negotiating groups, on 21 April.  His Report, submitted under his own 
responsibility, would be based on views expressed at  the present meeting, and would incorporate the 
written reports submitted by the WPDR and WPGR Chairs .  In this way, the Report would attempt to 
represent fairly and accurately the state of play in the services negotiations. 
                                                      
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/42 
Page 2 
 
 
  5. Since the Report would be based on views expre ssed at the current meeting, the Chairman 
hoped to hear comments on the state of the negoti ations on the LDC waiver, domestic regulation, 
GATS rules, and market access.  He also wished to hear any ideas on the best way forward for the 
services negotiations. 
6. The Chairman wished to give the floor the Am bassador of Norway to report on her small 
group consultations on the LDC waiver, followed by the WPDR and WPGR Chairs, to present their 
reports.   
7. The ambassador of Norway said that informal  consultations on the LDC waiver had been 
resumed between LDC Members and Members from key markets.  The basis for the discussions was 
the proposed draft text (2009), the draft LDC text  (June 2010), and the room documents containing 
text proposals from Colombia and Pakistan (June 2 010) and the EU (September 2010).  The talks had 
been constructive, although not intensive, and ai med to resolve remaining issues.  On scope, new 
ideas had been explored in order to find a compromise between a market-access-only approach and a 
wider approach that would include rules and regulati ons.  On rules of origin, useful work had been 
done, and the main players were now very close to  a proposed text that could be discussed in the 
wider membership.  It would hopefully be possible to benefit from the successful resolution of this 
issue in the LDC waiver for goods.  The question of  whether Members could be committed to provide 
market access also to non-Member LDCs was still unresolved.  The same we nt for the question of 
duration. 
8. All Members appreciated that the Doha Development Agenda was at a critical juncture.  
Despite intensive work, there was very little progr ess made lately, across negotiating areas.  The 
atmospherics were not conducive to real negotiati ons and compromise, which was also the case on 
this issue.  Members would have some time to re flect over the following weeks.  In the discussion on 
where to go from here, the LDC waiver would no doubt  be an element in nearly any alternative way 
forward.  This would hopefully lead Members to agreement on all remaining points. 
9. The Chairperson for the Working Party on Do mestic Regulation said that, since the last 
Special Session held on 18 March, he had con tinued with intensive drafting sessions on domestic 
regulation disciplines, culminating in a final session from 4-8 April.  The progress registered in these sessions, as well as any outstanding issues, was re flected in the Chairman's Progress Report 
(S/WPDR/W/45) circulated the previous day.  This document constituted his report to the Special 
Session, and would also be reported to the Working Party. 
10. Following the call by Members at the General Council meeting of December 2010 for 
renewed engagement across all areas of the DD A, and in accordance with the wish expressed by 
Members for a Chair-driven "bottom-up" process, th e Working Party had been in an intensified 
drafting phase since the beginning of the year.   
11. At the informal meeting of the Working Party on Domestic Regulation on 18 January 2011, 
Members called for work to be intensified with a view to producing a revised bracketed text by 
Easter.  Based on that call, consultations had been conducted on an "opt-in" basis - Members 
interested in joining, made their interest known and were invited. 
12. The key steps had begun with a preliminary "s weep" of the Chair's March 2009 text on 10-11 
February.  This identified parts of the Chair's Ma rch 2009 text that were st abilized, reduced language 
options for a number of paragraphs, and highlighted  areas on which further work was required.  The 
results of this exercise were reported to the Workin g Party at its formal meeting on 18 February, and 
circulated in the Chairman's Consultative Note (RD/SERV/46).  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 3 
 
 
  13. Members confirmed that work should continue with drafting sessions on an "opt-in" basis.  
Capital based officials were encouraged to join  the sessions, and three weeklong intensive drafting 
sessions were organised.  The first session was held  from 28 February to 4 March, the second from 7-
10 March and the third from 4-8 April.  During these weeklong sessions, two separate dedicated 
discussions where held on the subject of the "necessity test" and on the language proposals submitted. 
14.  Considerable efforts were made in the in tensive drafting sessions to identify areas where 
differences could be isolated, by introducing bracket s into either the paragraphs of the Chair's March 
2009 text or in an alternative language proposal.  A ll language proposals, submitted either in a written 
form or introduced orally during the intensive phase of negotiations, were reflected in successive 
revisions of the Chairman's Consultative Note and circulated to all Members. 
15. Overall, Members had held constructive and e ngaged discussions.  It was evident however by 
the end of the week of 4 April that some distance  still needed to be covered in order to produce a 
revised text.  More time was also needed, as not a ll the provisions of the draft disciplines were given a 
final consideration during that week.  If Members had not been able to close gaps, it was certainly not 
due to the lack of effort.  
16. In terms of the results from the intensificati on of the process, and without prejudice to the 
working assumption that nothing was agreed until ev erything was agreed, the draft disciplines could 
now be said to be at different stages of progress.   
(a) Agreement reached ad referendum:  Paragraphs  in this category had been agreed on 
an ad referendum basis.  In these situations , the paragraph in the Chair's March 2009 
text had either been maintained or repl aced by a corresponding paragraph.  In one 
instance there was ad referendum  agreement on including an a dditional paragraph.  In 
two other instances ad referendum  agreement had been reached on deleting 
paragraphs from the Chair's March 2009 text. 
(b) Single alternative: Paragraphs in this ca tegory had not yet been agreed, but progress 
had been achieved and alternative language proposals had been reduced to one single 
negotiating text, with remaining differences captured in brackets.  In some cases, 
language proposals, which shared the same b asis, had been consolidated into a single 
alternative with brackets reflecting the differences.  
(c) Multiple alternatives: Paragraphs in this  category had shown only limited progress, 
and multiple alternatives and language options remained.  
17. The detailed review of the state of play regard ing the textual elements for a revised text under 
each of these categories was contained in the Progr ess Report.  If Members shared this assessment of 
the current state of play, the task ahead for the Wo rking Party would be to convert all the remaining 
paragraphs under category 3 into category 2 or, better still, into category 1.  This would provide the 
basis for the formulation of a revised text with brackets. 
18. The Chair of the Working Party on GATS Rules, reported that, following a formal meeting on 
24 March, the WPGR had held further informal open-ended consultations on 30 March.  Based on 
these consultations, as well as on past meetings of th e Working Party, the Chair had produced a report 
(S/WPGR/21) which described the state of play an d the progress achieved under emergency safeguard 
measures, subsidies, and government procurement in services.  The report also outlined possible 
future work.  
19. Members had continued to engage in focussed di scussions and extensive technical work on all 
three issues in line with the instruction in Anne x C of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration.  TN/S/M/42 
Page 4 
 
 
  However, despite constructive enga gement and extensive technical work, the respective proponents of 
each of the three issues had found it difficult to co nvince the broader Membership of the need to 
develop disciplines beyond those currently existin g under the GATS.  Political differences remained 
wide in each area, and discussions had remained conc eptual, not text-based.  This had made it difficult 
to identify concrete areas of convergence on any elem ent of substance.  Technical work alone would 
not resolve the main obstacles in GATS Rules.  Political guidance might be required to address 
fundamental divergences over the objectives a nd expected outcome of these negotiations. 
20. The report provided details on the work already undertaken on technical issues.  Regarding 
possible future work, on emergency safeguard measur es, the Working Party had recently turned to the 
question of the availability and adequacy of rele vant services statistics.  Proponents of ESM hoped 
that presentations already given by the Secretar iat on statistical issues could be followed by 
presentations from Members of their national expe riences and best practices, and on how current 
statistical deficiencies could be overcome.  Mo re focused discussions on sector- and mode-specific 
data were deemed potentially useful.  But in add ition to particular concerns about the quality of 
statistics, Members' views still differed widely on the desirability and feasibility of any safeguard 
mechanism in services.   
21. Regarding government procurement, in the coming months, delegations' focus would be on 
completing the series of dedicated discussions proposed by the European Union (RD/SERV/23).  
Members also seemed open to further presentations and discussions that could flow from these.  
Finally, in the area of subsidies, despite an enc ouraging start on the work programme on information 
exchange (JOB/SERV/1), delegations generally acknowl edged that there was great variety in the level 
of detail contained in the submissions received, a nd that more Members should join in this mandated 
exchange of information.  Regarding the possible way forward, overall, there seemed to be broad 
agreement on the desirability of obtaining more and better information on the potential or actual trade-
distortive effects of subsidies.  But one unresolved  question was whether any such identification of 
trade-distortive effects should be undertaken before Members embark upon further technical work or 
negotiations.  The Chair indicated that she would continue to consult informally with Members on 
these matters.    
22. The delegation of South Africa was encouraged  by efforts to forg e consensus in the 
negotiations on the LDC waiver, a nd reiterated its support for a comp rehensive LDC waiver covering 
both market access and regulatory elements.  Regarding domestic regulation, the delegation 
welcomed progress made, but recognized that there were areas of difficulty, as evidenced by the 
significant divide among Members on a range of issues, including the necessity test.  For South 
Africa, the basis for the negotiations was the Chai r text of March 2009, which remained the landing 
zone for a significant number of Members.  The delegation was therefore extremely concerned by the 
latest report by the Chair of the WPDR.  The report did help move forward.  The focus should rather 
have been on areas of convergence within  the framework of the March 2009 text.  
23. The delegation thought that this was a critical time for the DDA.  Earlier in the week, the 
Director General had provided a frank assessment of the impasse.  Like other elements of the DDA, 
the services negotiations took place within the confin es of a mandate, which were clearly outlined in 
Annex C of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration,  the Negotiating Guidelines as well as various 
flexibilities accorded to developing countries under the GATS.  However, the demand to bind current 
levels of market opening, as was called for in Australia's proposal, was inconsistent with these 
mandates.  South Africa, therefore, could not support such proposal.  The delegation was committed 
to a services outcome that was fair, balanced and in  accordance with the relevant mandates.  At the 
BRICS Summit during the week, the South African Minister had made it clear that he wanted to see a 
successful conclusion of the Round, and that "successf ul" was to be defined in terms of giving effect 
to the developmental mandate of Doha.   TN/S/M/42 
 Page 5 
 
 
  24. In assessing the outcomes of the week, the dele gation noted with disappointment that some 
demandeurs had not led by example.  Some of them  had given no signals of flexibility, while others 
had said nothing at all.  The dele gation recalled that co-sponsors of plurilateral requests were also 
deemed recipients.  Some demandeurs continued to ma intain limitations that they requested others to 
remove.  The delegation reiterated its commitment to a balanced and fair outcome in the services 
negotiations.  However, given that the Round was in an unprecedented impasse, the Special Session 
would have to await direction from the TNC on next steps.  
25. The delegation of Chile referred to a communi cation entitled Assessment on Services Market 
Access Negotiations (JOB/SERV/54) from the 'Friends  of Services' Group.  This group of Members 
thought it very relevant at this point to present a general assessment on the current state of the market 
access negotiations in services.  In that regard, th e group expressed its deep concern that the current 
situation did not differ from the one prevailing in 20 08 and at the 2010 stocktaking exercise.  Little or 
no significant progress had been made since July 2008.   Despite the intensification of the process 
undertaken since February, it had not always been possible to engage in substantive negotiations, 
where give and take could lead to a positive outcome.  The efforts made to provide clarity on the real 
difficulty that recipient Members faced in meeting th e different requests had not been successful.  As 
had been perceived since July 2008, remaining ga ps between offers or signals and bilateral and 
plurilateral requests were still substantial.  In that  regard, Chile encouraged Members to reflect on the 
current situation and consider the way forward.  
26. As coordinator of plurilateral request on co mputer services, Chile circulated a report 
contained in JOB/SERV/67.  For the co-sponsors, plurilateral discussions in this sector, as indicated at 
the 2010 stocktaking exercise, had showed constructiv e engagement and yielded promising results.   
However, co-sponsors believed that ga ps in coverage remained.  For example, out of the 14 recipients 
and all co-sponsors, three recipients with large gaps  in coverage had reflecte d none or only marginal 
elements of the request in their signals for the next of fer.  Most of the recipients indicated their intent 
to take further commitments in terms of new sub-sectors and modes of supply.  The co-sponsors 
believed that additional efforts were required in order to bridge these gaps  and make substantive 
commitments in this sector.   
27. More generally, Chile recognized that the nego tiations were at a very crucial phase, and 
trusted that the Chairman's report would provide a clear reflection of the state of play in the 
negotiations.  Chile had no certainty on how the pr ocess would continue after April, but in any case 
the negotiations on services – especially those on mark et access – needed to continue playing a very 
important role within the overall negotiations. 
28. Finally, Chile wished to underscore the high quality of the report from the Chair of the 
WPDR.  The drafting contained in it would provide  the basis on which Members could advance their 
work.  For the delegation, the development of disciplines in the WPDR was very important. 
29. The delegation of Australia stressed that this was an important moment in the services 
negotiations given the TNC meeting of 29 April.  A successful conclusion of the Round was a very 
high priority for Australia.  This had been reaffirm ed during the week by the government in a major 
trade policy statement setting out the principles a nd disciplines by which Australia would implement 
its trade strategy; services were seen as a very important part of any outcome. 
30. On market access negotiations, Australia subscr ibed to the assessment made by Chile on 
behalf of a large group of demandeurs.  Market  access negotiations on services were lagging behind 
other negotiations.  While the process had intensif ied and there had been some encouraging signs, 
concrete improvements had been lim ited.  As coordinator of the pl urilateral requests on legal services 
and on accounting services, Australia circulated tw o reports (JOB/SERV/48 and JOB/SERV/47).  In 
sum, significant gaps remained between those request s and the willingness of Members to meet them.   TN/S/M/42 
Page 6 
 
 
  31. On accounting services, following two plurilatera l meetings since November 2010, the co-
sponsors of the request observed that two of the 20  recipients intended to increase the existing foreign 
equity limitations in mode 3, and to make bi nding commitments in mode 1, in addition to new 
commitments on taxation services.  The remainder of recipients referred to the improvements in their 
Doha Round offers as the extent of their ability to m eet the request.  Two recipients generally met the 
majority of the request.  Further, a number of reci pients did not attend one or  both of the plurilateral 
meetings.  The eight co-sponsors generally me t most of the request and two had offered 
improvements.  One, to remove remaining province-based commercial presence limitations for auditing services, and the other to bind autonomous liberalization in all services covered by the 
request, including binding modes 1 and 2. 
32. Coverage continued to be the major gap.  For example, six of the 20 recipients had not made 
any commitments or offers in any of the sub-sector s covered by the request, and seven recipients only 
had partial sectoral coverage.  For the co-sponsors, fu rther effort to meet the level of ambition of this 
request was required.  The co-sponsors were request ing that full market acces s and national treatment 
commitments be taken to the greatest extent possible with the widest possible sectoral coverage at the 
three-digit level and with no limitations.  Acc ounting services were understood to include auditing 
and bookkeeping services.  Similar commitments were  also requested on taxation services given the 
close relationship between suppliers of accounting and taxation services.  Mode 4 commitments cover 
all categories, with an emphasis on contractual servi ce suppliers and independe nt professionals to the 
greatest extent possible.  Co-sponsors also requ ested the removal of any current MFN exemption 
covering accounting services, to the greatest extent possible.  Co-sponsors recalled that accounting 
was one of the most widely traded business servi ces, and that accounting services formed an essential 
pillar of the infrastructure supporting business transactions of both goods and services. 
33. On legal services, the co-sponsors considered that  the state of play had changed little since the 
submission of a progress report in December 2007.  Du ring the plurilateral negotiations in the lead-up 
to that report, only two of the 16 recipients ha d indicated possible minor improvements.  At the 
Signalling Conference in July 2008, neither of these two Members had included legal services in their 
signalled improvements, and only one other Member  had foreshadowed unspecified improvements in 
legal services.  Since the Signalling Conference, no fu rther positive indications were made in bilateral 
meetings between co-sponsors and recipients.  At the plurilateral meeting he ld in March 2011, one 
Member had indicated that it would make an offer meeting part of the request.  A co-sponsor had also offered to bind its liberalization in the sector, thereby moving to fully meet the request.  
34. Coverage continued to be the major gap.  For ex ample, four of the 16 recipients had not made 
any commitments or offers in the sector.  Further e ffort to meet the level of ambition of this request 
would be required.  A majority of co-sponsors met al l or most of the elements of the request.  The co-
sponsors believed that legal servi ces was an essential pillar of the in frastructure that supported and 
facilitated commercial transactions in all sector, and helped better integrate into the global economy.  
The primary objective of the request was to liberaliz e trade so as to facilitate the international supply 
of comprehensive legal services covering multiple jurisdictions.  The focus of the request was 
therefore not on domestic law, but home country , third country, and international law.   
35. Australia also subscribed to the reports written by the coordinators on the 11 other plurilateral 
requests that it co-sponsored.  On plurilateral request s received, Australia had done its best to meet 
them and had submitted a strong offer.  To the larg est extent possible, Australia had proposed to bind 
a high level of market openness.   
36. 
Regarding next steps, Australia had set out in JOB/SERV/43/Rev.1 a framework for the way 
forward on market access both in terms of substance and process.  It met and built on the objectives 
set out in Annex C of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration, with appropriate flexibility for 
developing countries.  Australia was looking forwar d to further discussing the flexibility required to  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 7 
 
 
  meet the common objectives.  In terms of process, Me mbers needed to engage in a negotiation leading 
to concrete outcomes.  This included putting the ne gotiating results in writing.  The results could be 
reported to senior officials so as to assess progress.  This was a difficult time, but there was a lot of 
value in what was already on the table.  This should not be lost.    
37. On domestic regulation, the delegation commended the Chair of the WPDR for his efforts in 
steering a constructive path through the negotiati ons.  As a demandeur, Australia had continuously 
reviewed its position and sought to develop new proposals responding to concerns of others.  Finally, 
on the LDC waiver, Australia continued to support an  outcome that clearly reflected the interests of 
LDCs.  This was an important element of  the development outcome of the Round.  
38. As coordinator of the plurilateral requests on m ode 3, energy, environmental, air transport, 
and distribution services, the delegation of the European Union submitted reports summarizing the 
progress made in market access discussions in these areas (JOB/SERV/49, JOB/SERV/50, 
JOB/SERV/51, JOB/SERV/52, and JOB/SERV/53).  Overall, those assessments reflected the one 
presented by Chile on overall market access negotiati ons, namely that insufficient progress had been 
made towards achieving the objectiv es of the plurilateral requests. 
39.  On air transport services, the co-sponsors c onsidered that some improvements of existing 
offers had been indicated at the plurilateral mee ting in March 2011, notably in the sub-sectors of 
aircraft maintenance and repair, selling and mark eting, and computer reservation services.  Two 
Members signalled that they would make new m ode 1 commitments in ai rcraft maintenance and 
repair.  On ground handling services and airport opera tion services, some Members indicated that they 
would take commitments.  Two Members considered that legal clarity was needed on the status of 
ground handling services and airport operation servic es in the Annex on Air Transport and that such 
clarity should be sought in the context of the revi ew of the Annex.  Some Members considered that 
these two sub-sectors were not covered by the Annex a nd, therefore, they would not consider offering 
any commitments.  In sum, gaps still remained betw een the request and the offers tabled and signals 
given.  In light of the expected growth in ai r transport worldwide over the next decade, the co-
sponsors felt that further liberalization of air transport auxiliary services could underpin growth 
prospects and create new employment and business opportunities in many countries.   
40. On mode 3, the co-sponsors said that only fi ve of the 14 recipien ts had provided positive 
indications that, although sometimes vague, could be  counted towards meeting the objectives of the 
request.  One Member indicated that it could ra ise its limitation on foreign equity ownership and 
reduce other horizontal limitations.  Two Members were in a position to eliminate all horizontal 
economic needs tests.  One Member signalled that it could possibly align its future offer with new 
legislation that was less restrictive than specified in its current offer.  Two Members signalled that 
unspecified improvements could be made in  their horizontal mode 3 limitations.   
41. While welcoming these signals, the co-sponsors wanted to see further progress towards 
removing horizontal mode 3 limitations as well as  clarifying and simplifying scheduling language.  
The co-sponsors emphasized that mode 3 was the primary way in which many services were traded, 
but noted that GATS commitments in this mode were  generally limited in scope and characterized by 
the greatest number of limitations.  The request on mode 3 complemented the various sectoral requests by focusing exclusively on the removal of certain horizontal limitations.   
42. On environmental services, the co-sponsors felt that the state of play had changed little since 
the submission of a progress report on environmenta l services during the stocktaking of March 2010.  
In addition to the indications of improvements made until then, mostly at the 2008 Signalling 
Conference, some recipient Members and co-sponsor s indicated further improvements in bilateral 
negotiations and at a plurilateral meeting held in  April 2011.  While welcoming these signals, co-
sponsors wished to see further flexibility to remo ve limitations, increase sectoral coverage, and TN/S/M/42 
Page 8 
 
 
  simplify scheduling language.  They also urged those recipients that had not yet offered any 
commitments to reconsider committing environmen tal services.  Co-sponsors recalled the negotiating 
mandate to liberalize environmental services under Article 31(iii) of the Doha Declaration; commitments made in the services negotiations would c ontribute to the fulfilment of that mandate.    
43. On energy services, the co-sponsors considered that the overall response to the plurilateral 
request had thus far been disappointing.  Alt hough some indications of new commitments and 
important improvements in some areas covered by the request had been provided, major gaps still 
existed.  Few Members other than co-sponsors current ly came close to satisfying the entire request.  
All modes of supply were important for this sect or, but the co-sponsors were in particular seeking 
improvements with regard to the removal of restricti ons on mode 3, notably foreign equity limitations.  
44. Despite the positive indications received from r ecipients, this limited progress still needed to 
be translated into firm commitments .  Much work therefore remained to  be done in order to meet the 
request.  The request covered a range of services cons idered to be essential to  the chain of activities 
relating to the supply of energy services.  The absence of certain elements in a Member's 
commitments may, due to interrelatedness, unde rmine the overall value of these commitments. 
45. On distribution services, the co-sponsors recalled that in the lead-up to the 2008 Signalling 
Conference, 12 of the 27 recipients (including the eight co-sponsors) had indicated that they would consider further improvement to their offers in r esponse to the request.  At subsequent plurilateral 
meetings, 11 Members signalled improvements, including seven Members who had not initially 
tabled improvements in offers.  Further, four Members indicated that they were consulting on 
possibilities to improve their offers.  However, some  Members subsequently indicated that they might 
withdraw their offers or signals due  to changed circumstances from 2008.  
46. A sizable gap remained between the request's ambition as well as autonomous market 
openings and the offers and signals of recipients.  On ly five recipients would, if offers and signals 
were bound, have commitments in all sub-sectors ac ross all modes of supply, with four additional 
Members having commitments in all sub-sectors but not across all modes of supply.  Five recipients 
neither had commitments nor made any offer or pr ovided signals in any sub-sector of distribution 
services.  Furthermore, no recipient had offered commitments for all sub-sectors included in the 
request.  Regarding the specific request for the re moval or easing of foreign equity caps, only 12 
recipients had indicated that they maintained no equity caps and only one recipient signalled easing of 
existing caps.  While welcoming progress, co-sponsors believed that it was important to at least bind 
current autonomous liberalization.     
47. The European Union also had coordinated a communication contained in JOB/SERV/60, co-
sponsored by Albania, Chile, Japan, Korea, New Z ealand, Norway, The Former Yugoslav Republic of 
Macedonia and the United States.  The communicati on expressed support for the Australian proposal 
on the way forward. 
48. With respect to the European Union's ow n assessment of progress in the DDA services 
negotiations, the delegation was encouraged by the in creased engagement of most of its counterparts 
during the last months, but disappointed about the li mited concrete results ac hieved.  Engagement had 
not translated into specific signals of new commitmen ts.  In that regard, the delegation had been one 
of the co-sponsors of the overall assessment introdu ced by Chile.  If the situation did not change 
quickly, Members were going to miss a valuable – and possibly ultimate – opportunity to deliver the 
results that business and consumers around the worl d were waiting for.  This would be extremely 
unfortunate, especially because the improvements needed to achieve a balanced DDA services 
package were within reach, provided there was suffici ent will.  Such a balanced package would need 
to include: significantly improved commitments in  a non-discriminatory fashion for market access 
across all modes of supply; an LDC waiver; and sa tisfactory disciplines on domestic regulation.  For  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 9 
 
 
  GATS Rules, the mandates provided for somewhat more  time to conclude negotiations.  Nonetheless, 
progress also needed to be made in these areas. 
49. On market access, a number of positive indications had been heard from some Members since 
January, but, altogether, these were neither suffi ciently numerous nor concrete.  Many such 
indications were just repetitions of earlier signa ls.  Nonetheless, the delegation believed that a 
satisfactory market access outcome would be achie vable with sufficient will, as many Members had 
not yet exhausted their margins of flexibility.  Th e main areas where progress fell short of potential 
were, first, the binding of autonomous  liberalization to the extent possible.  This was a key deliverable 
of the Round.  Updating Uruguay Round commitments was important for providing legal certainty to 
economic operators.  The second area related to new ma rket access in mode 3.  Members should make 
an effort to remove the most restrictive ba rriers, which reduced the potential for economic 
development.  Third, on mode 4, the European Un ion had consistently stated that a balanced DDA 
outcome required a robust mode 4 component.  The delegation encouraged Members to look for 
pragmatic and creative solutions to improve their co mmitments and the proponents to be as realistic 
and specific as possible.    
50. Regarding domestic regulation, the delega tion welcomed the progress made during the 
informal consultations of the last months.  Delegati ons now needed to build on this work in order to 
address the remaining outstanding issues, in particul ar a horizontal mechanism to address protectionist 
use of regulation, the so-called necessity test, a nd special and differential treatment.  The delegation 
thought that the Chair's report (S/WPDR/W/45) contained a fair and factual assessment of the progress achieved.  However, it regretted that Me mbers had failed to show enough flexibility during 
the drafting sessions; this had prevented the Chair to formally present a revision of the March 2009 
text.  The Chair's report should be the basis to  continue negotiations on domestic regulation 
disciplines. 
51. The European Union attached much importanc e to the creation of a mechanism allowing 
members to grant preferential treatment to LDCs in services, and stood ready to continue working 
with the LDC group to find a satisfactory solution fo r the two outstanding issues of the draft waiver 
(scope of the waiver and rules of origin).  With  respect to the scope, the EU was open to consider 
different options on the basis of specific examples of future preferential treatment.  On GATS Rules, 
the Chair's report summarized well the work done over the last two years and provided an outlook for 
the work ahead.  On government procurement, the Eu ropean Union was particularly satisfied with the 
dedicated discussions on the importance of procuremen t in services, and looked forward to continuing 
the work programme and also to discussing again the EU proposal for an Annex to the GATS on 
government procurement.     
52. The delegation of Mexico agreed with the assessments of state of play given by the 
coordinator of the informal group on LDC modalities,  and the Chairs of the WPDR and WPGR.  With 
respect to the plurilateral negotiations, Mexico had pa rticipated as a recipient to meetings held during 
the week on energy and environmental services, a nd as a co-sponsor to the meetings on construction 
services and mode 4.  In March, Mexico had pa rticipated in meetings on professional services, 
education, and logistics and supply chain services.  In  that context, Mexico had confirmed the signals 
made at the 2008 Signalling Conference.  These u nderscored Mexico's willingness to extend the 
treatment provided to its FTA part ners to all other WTO Members, insofar as they extended similar 
concessions. 
53. As coordinator of the plurilateral request on audiovisual services, Mexico circulated a 
progress report on behalf of the co-sponsors, contained in JOB/SERV/55.  At a plurilateral meeting in 
February 2011, the co-sponsors had stressed the impor tance of new signals in view of the lack of 
positive indications since the Signalling Confer ence in 2008, where there were no potential 
commitments expressed by recipients in any sub-sector.  Current commitments on audiovisual TN/S/M/42 
Page 10 
 
 
  services did not reflect market realities or autonomou s liberalization, and the sector was also the one 
with the largest number of MFN exemptions.  
54. Only two out of the 29 recipients had expressed  some positive indications regarding potential 
commitments to be introduced in their next offers, and one recipient Member indicated its compliance 
with almost the totality of the request.  The re mainder of the recipient Members expressed their 
cultural and political sensitivities in this sector.  These Members were not in a position to schedule 
any additional commitment or to eliminate MFN exemptions, even though they recognized the 
openness of their markets.  Other Members with sch eduled commitments expressed their cautiousness 
to include new commitments.  Co-s ponsors wished to bridge the significant gaps existing between the 
current legal regimes and the existing practice in Members' markets.  Identifying differences in the 
level of sensitivity within this sector would have to be considered by each recipient.    
55. For Mexico, the plurilateral and bilateral meetings held over the last months had provided 
transparency and allowed Members to express thei r flexibilities and sensitivities in different services 
sub-sectors.  The process had demonstrated that th ere were many gaps betw een potential offers and 
signals provided by recipient countries, on the one hand, and the plurilateral requests, on the other 
hand.  Discussions had also revealed gaps between po tential offers and applie d regimes.  However, it 
had not been possible to close these gaps.   
56. The process had also revealed asymmetries acros s services sectors and modes of supply in 
terms of the levels of commitments contemplated.  The reports submitted by the coordinators of the 
different plurilateral groups also showed that onl y very limited progress had been made despite the 
recent efforts in bilateral and plur ilateral settings.  In this respect, Mexico agreed with the views 
expressed by Chile on behalf of a number of other delegations.  Mexico was also disappointed with 
the lack of substantive progress in disciplines on domestic regulation, since it supported a very 
ambitious result in this area.  A balance needed to be struck between access granted and the rules 
governing this access. 
57. Notwithstanding the very poor results, Mexico was convinced that the services negotiations 
would not constitute an obstacle to the conclusi on of the Round, provided agreement was reached on 
agriculture and NAMA.  The proposal that Mexico  had circulated as JOB/SERV/45 on 5 April aimed 
to provide a mechanism leading to an overall result  in the DDA.  Unfortuna tely, the proposal could 
not be discussed in the horizontal context, since the horizontal process of the Round never got off the 
ground.  The Mexican proposal took account of the f act that plurilateral requests currently covered 
some 120 sub-sectors.  On this basis, it suggested that all Members taking part in the 2008 Signalling 
Conference, and any other interested Members, commit to consolidating at current levels of 
liberalization the sub-sectors covered in the plurila teral requests.  At the same time, the proposal 
granted some flexibility to Members, in that they could exempt certain sub-sectors.  The exemptions 
for developing countries would be greater than for developed countries.  The proposal also suggested 
that a Member wishing to obtain more ambitious  commitments could nego tiate with any other 
Member by offering an equivalent concession.  In  this respect, the proposal would encompass the 
Round's four areas of market access – the payment for greater concessions could take place entirely 
within the framework of the services negotiati ons, or across other areas of market access.   
58. Mexico noted that other proposals had been made , each of which had its merits.  The Swiss 
proposal recalled the basis and guidelines for the ser vices negotiations.  Mexico agreed generally with 
Switzerland on the continuing importance of these para meters.  However, Mexico was convinced that 
a solution in the area of market access in services coul d only be possible within the framework of an 
overall horizontal process covering all aspects of mark et access, as suggested by Mexico's proposal.  
The proposal would not exclude from the negotiations  any particular sector, nor would it raise the 
issue of the relative ambition with respect to one or  other of the modes of supply.  In this regard, 
Mexico had doubts about some aspects of the proposal put forward by Australia in  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 11 
 
 
  JOB/SERV/43/Rev.1 especially when it came to the emphasis placed on a higher level of ambition for 
mode 3.  This made Australia's proposal unbalanced.   
59. The delegation of Korea wished to draw attention to the communication it circulated under 
JOB/SERV/56.  This document was in fact a re-circulation of a roadmap for the completion of the 
services market access negotiations which Korea had previously circulated as a room document in 
January.  The roadmap aimed to suggest an effective and efficient organization of work in the Special 
Session and also to propose ways to organize the b ilateral and plurilateral market access negotiations 
with a view to complete the negotiations.   
60.  The delegation noted that Members had engage d in intensive market access negotiations over 
the last months.  However, Korea shared Chile's general assessment, as well as the status reports on 
the relevant plurilateral requests.  Korea had part icipated actively in almost all the plurilateral 
meetings, either as co-sponsor or recipient, but th e delegation believed that much still remained to be 
done and it supported Australia's proposal on the way forward.  Korea still felt that Members needed 
to do as suggested in paragraph 4 of the roadmap, na mely to exchange revised offers or portions of 
offers in an informal or provisional format.  On  domestic regulation, the delegation hoped that the 
momentum would not be lost, and urged Members for further flexibilities in trying to move the 
negotiations forward.  The delegation asked that the Chair of the WPDR bring forward a bracketed 
text to form the basis for further negotiations.  
61. The delegation of Switzerland observed that the negotiating situation was critical, as reflected 
in the statements made in document JOB/SERV/46, submitted by Switzerland and Chinese Taipei.  It 
was now time to focus on crucial issues.  There were many other proposals on the table, and Members 
now had all the necessary ingredients to move forward in the services negotiations.  Document 
JOB/SERV/46 reiterated the usefulness and importance of the services negotiations.  It emphasized the fundamental importance of the negotiating mandate  agreed by Members, especially Annex C.  On 
the content of the negotiations, it was clear that subs tantially improved offers were needed.  In terms 
of negotiating procedures, much had been agreed te n years previously in the negotiating guidelines.  
These provided notably that modes and sectors of interest to developing country Members were of 
crucial importance.  With respect to transparency, Members had critic ized the lack of readability in 
the outcome of services negotiations.  The exam ple of what had been done in government 
procurement needed to be considered, as reflect ed in the Australian and Korean proposals.  
Switzerland suggested also that discussions on the resu lts of the bilateral and plurilateral negotiations 
should take place in the framework of the Special Session of the Council, as set forth in the Korean 
and Australian proposals.  It was crucial at this stage to consider principles, and not just the details of 
the negotiations.  Document JOB/SERV/46 aimed at  a positive outcome in the services negotiations, 
and Switzerland hoped that this contribution would be  reflected in the Chairman's report to the TNC. 
62. Switzerland found the proposals submitted recentl y by other delegations interesting and 
constructive.  Switzerland subscribed to them desp ite some reservations, which it had mentioned in 
other meetings.  Switzerland noted that its bilatera l requests had not always been taken up with the 
necessary seriousness.  It had made a request under m ode 4, and progress still had to be made.  It also 
made a request on finance – portfolio management, pa rticularly supplied cross-border – and this also 
needed further serious consideration.  A num ber of countries wanted further progress on the 
elimination of ENTs.  Switzerland had participated in half of the plur ilaterals, and this issue had been 
dealt with very precisely in the various reports.  Sw itzerland was not satisfied with the results of the 
negotiations on the elimination MFN exemptions, where practically no progress has been made.  It 
had particular concern about the excessively dive rgent gaps between offers, leading to free-rider 
issues.  
63. The work done on the LDC waiver was to be a pplauded, although amendments were needed 
to the current draft text with respect to rules of or igin.   Excellent work had also been carried out in TN/S/M/42 
Page 12 
 
 
  the WPDR.  However, a report was not a substitute for a new bracketed text, and Switzerland wished 
to have such a text in the longer term.  The discip lines that had been negotiated were still insufficient.  
Switzerland regretted the lack of progress in the WPGR. 
64. The delegation of Argentina said that the m eetings held since the beginning of 2011 had 
showed a renewed commitment on the part of all Me mbers.  However, the meetings also revealed 
clearly a number of important differenc es.  In light of this, Argentina,  as coordinator of the plurilateral 
request on services related to agriculture, along with the other co-sponsors, held a plurilateral meeting 
with the aim of evaluating progress.  The resulting report was circulated as JOB/SERV/68.  The aim 
of the meeting had been to review the objectives of the plurilateral request and the progress that Members had made or wished to make in order to ach ieve these objectives.  In particular, recipients of 
the request were asked to indicate whether they were in a position to schedule commitments over and 
above their revised offers and whether they coul d specify the sensitivities or flexibilities required in 
order to go beyond their revised offers. 
65. Dialogue during the meeting had been open and detailed discussions proved feasible in some 
instances.  In a few isolated cases, two Members co nfirmed that they were considering scheduling 
commitments going beyond their revised offers.  Ge nerally speaking, although with a few exceptions, 
the response to the request did not live up to the co -sponsors' expectations.  For example, recipients 
had not undertaken full commitments with no li mitations in the sector "Services incidental to 
agriculture, hunting and forestry" (CPC 881).  Furt hermore, in general, no commitments had been 
made in respect of "Veterinary services" or "Research and development services on natural sciences".  
Likewise, several of the commitments offered incl uded exceptions related to certain products or 
within the territory of certain Members. 
66. The co-sponsors believed that a positive response to this request would not only lead to 
greater market access in the areas of interest to the co-sponsors, but would also be conducive to the 
implementation of Article IV of the General Agreem ent on Trade in Services.  This Article provided 
that the increasing participation of developing c ountry Members in world trade shall be facilitated 
through negotiated specific commitments by different Members relating to, inter alia , "… the 
liberalization of market access in sectors and m odes of supply of export interest to them". 
67. Regarding the market access negotiations more  generally, Argentina observed that some 
Members had suggested new focuses in order to overcome the existing gaps.  The delegation was 
open to considering different alternatives, so long as they fell within the agreed negotiating mandate, 
particularly Annex C.  Although Argentina welcom ed Australia's proposal, it was concerned that the 
paper's focus was not consistent with the terms of  the negotiating mandate.  For example, Argentina 
observed that, according to Annex C, the binding of  the current level of market access was only an 
objective in modes 1 and 2.  Likewise, the Minister ial Declaration made no reference to priority in 
sectors, but rather to sectors of interest.  Sec ondly, on mode 4, the Australian proposal reduced 
significantly the level of ambition established in th e mandate.  Third, regarding the proposal for a 
written exchange on the results of the negotiations, it was of some concern that this focus was not 
being applied in other areas of the Doha Round negotiations.  Finally, Australia proposed that 
Members should inform others of the results of  the negotiations, so that progress on market access 
could be assessed alongside progress on agriculture and NAMA.  For Argentina, the assessment on 
services needed to take place once Members were awar e of the results for agriculture and NAMA.   
68. In terms of domestic regulation, very intense work had been carried out, and Argentina was 
still examining the recently circulated report from th e Chair of the WPDR.  However, discrepancies 
remained in terms of the focus and the level of amb ition for future disciplines.  The Chair text of 2009 
had a level of ambition and a balance that coul d not be undermined.  As for the forthcoming 
Chairman's report to the TNC, Argentina thought it should reflect the status of the negotiations in a  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 13 
 
 
  very factual and balanced manner, including the diffe rent points of view expressed.  In terms of future 
work, it was important to stress that the services nego tiations were not being ca rried out in a vacuum.  
69. On behalf of the LDC Group, the delegati on of Bangladesh expressed satisfaction with 
respect to the work undertaken on the LDC waiver in the small group discussions facilitated by the 
Ambassador of Norway.  The existing gaps were bridgeable and an early agreement on the services 
waiver for LDCs was very much within reach.  The Ambassador from Norway had mentioned two 
outstanding issues – the scope of the waiver and th e rules of origin.  The LDC group maintained that 
limiting the scope of the instrument to market acces s would not fully capture the spirit of the decisions 
made at the Hong Kong Ministerial.   
70.  The delegation appreciated the growing numbe r of delegations that had expressed their 
support for a LDC waiver. The LDC group had demonstrated flexibility in the course of the discussions on different issues, and remained ready to  engage constructively to  close the gaps on the 
outstanding matters.  With respect to the nego tiations on domestic regulation, the LDC group had 
submitted textual suggestions, especially in re lation to the development provisions, and looked 
forward to further discussions on these texts when appropriate.   
71. The delegation of Colombia atta ched great importance to the negotiations on the LDC waiver, 
and hoped that other areas of negotiations could also  promptly be brought to fruition.  The delegation 
hoped that Colombia's contribution on the examinati on of the preferential treatment granted through a 
waiver would be taken into account by the group led by Norway.  Regarding review of progress in the 
negotiations, Colombia considered that Members found themselves at a watershed.  It was important to take account of the fact that the services negotiati ons were part and parcel of the Doha package.  
Colombia considered that, during the Doha Round,  difficulties in the services negotiations had been 
linked to the positive-list approach of the GATS, the subordination of services to other areas of negotiations, and the domestic regul ation limitations of Members. 
72. Colombia appreciated the intensification of negotiations since January, but thought it was 
possible to further improve offers.  Colombia agreed with the statement made by Chile on behalf of a 
group of Members.  The services sector accounted for a high percentage of GDP in most of Members, 
and was very important for development.  Colomb ia wanted to have satisfactory progress in the 
services negotiations, and was worried to see that it was still not being made.  Colombia called upon 
the Members to reconsider their positions, and look beyond negotiating tactics.  For Colombia, market 
access in services needed to be concluded in a ba lanced and far-reaching way.  The delegation was 
therefore in favour of the statements made by Aust ralia and Switzerland regarding the way forward.  
It was fundamental to keep in mind the work done since the decision to intensify negotiations.  A lot 
of progress had been made.   
73. As coordinator of the plurilateral request on t ourism services, Colombia submitted a report on 
behalf of the co-sponsors (JOB/SERV/66). Two pluril ateral meetings had been held, one in 2007 and 
the other in 2011.  The sector had also been di scussed in the 2008 Signalling Conference.  The co-
sponsors believed that none of these discussions ha d yielded a satisfactory response to the request.  
Little had changed with respect to indications of improvements of the offers since the progress report 
made in 2007 (JOB(07)/202) and the 2010 stocktaking.   
74. Even though there was a perception that the leve l of current commitments in this sector was 
greater than for any other, recipients were still not  offering the scope and lib eralization sought in the 
request.  Regarding scope, some recipients excluded complete sub-sectors, especially travel agencies 
and tour operators and tourist guides; or, upon including them, the sub-sectors remained unbound.  
Regarding treatment, market access and national tr eatment restrictions could still be found in the 
offers of several recipients.  Regarding additio nal commitments, which were also an important TN/S/M/42 
Page 14 
 
 
  component of the request, these had not been included  in any of the recipients' offers.  This was 
probably an area where more work was needed. 
75. In general, recipients had ac knowledged the importance of this sector in their economies and 
indicated that their tourism markets were relativel y open.  However, none of them had expressed its 
ability to completely meet the request, despite indicati ons by some of them that they too had offensive 
interests in this sector.  Having listened to the reasons stated by recipient Members for not being able 
to meet specific elements of th e request, the co-sponsors believe d much ground still needed to be 
covered in order to reach a co mmon understanding of the objectives,  purpose and elements of the 
request, with a view to achieving a significant improvement of the offers. 
76.  Regarding the market access negotiations more generally, Colombia pointed out that the 
offers made in 2005 did not reflect what Members had been saying in recent meetings.  It was 
therefore necessary to have updated information in  writing.  Such update exercise would make it 
possible to have a real panorama of the liberaliza tion to be achieved, and the flexibilities required by 
Members.  The negotiations had of course to respec t the objectives expressed in Annex C.  Australia 
had properly identified the main goals to be achieved in the Round.  Colombia wanted new 
commitments in mode 4, in the categories of indepe ndent professionals and contract service providers.  
It was necessary to have the involvement of Gene va-based Heads of Missions and senior officials in 
order to assess the progress made in market access in services, in parallel to th at made in agriculture 
and NAMA.   
77. In conclusion, Colombia said it attached great importance to the conclusion of the 
negotiations on domestic regulation.  These discip lines were a guarantee that the liberalization 
achieved would not be subject to protectionism.  
78. The delegation of Hong Kong China felt that the Round was now in a very critical situation.  
It was therefore encouraging to see that services ne gotiators had engaged intensively to try to achieve 
as much progress as possible on the market access and rule-making fronts. 
79. As coordinator of the plurilateral requests on logistics services and MFN exemptions, Hong 
Kong China had circulated two reports, contained in JOB/SERV/58 and JOB/SERV/59.  On these two 
requests, there had been no significant progress si nce the Signalling Conference of July 2008.  The 
situation remained stagnant as compared to the stoc ktaking exercise in 2010.  Significant gaps existed 
between the requests and the willingness of recipients to improve their commitments.  Far more work 
was needed to close these gaps.  In this connection,  the delegation wished to associate itself with the 
overall assessment on the market access negotiations contained in JOB/SERV/54. 
80. On logistics services, the co-sponsors considered that about one half of the 41 recipients of 
the request (including co-sponsors) had given positive signals in respect of certain logistics services at 
the Signalling Conference in 2008.  While there were relatively more positive signals on "other 
related services", few were given in "core freight logistics services" and "management consulting and 
related services", and only a few positive indicatio ns were provided regarding rail and road freight 
transportation services.  Some signals lacked the necessary clarity, which impeded constructive 
dialogue between the co-sponsors and recipients.  The situation remained unchanged from that 
prevailing at the time of the 2010 stocktaking exercise.   Significant gaps persisted between recipients' 
offers or indications and the request.  The co -sponsors emphasized that logistics services were 
essential backbone infrastructure services vital to the expansion of global trade and economic 
development.   
81. On MFN exemptions, the co-sponsors felt that th e recipients' response to their plurilateral 
requests had been limited.  These requests target ed a total of 165 specific MFN exemptions, and 
called for the removal, reduction or clarification of  these exemptions by 38 recipients, including the  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 15 
 
 
  co-sponsors.  Taking into account the Signalling Conf erence of 2008, so far 6 recipients had provided 
very limited positive indications, translating into si gnals of improvements on a total of 11 targeted 
exemptions.   The situation had remained unchange d since the 2010 stocktaking exercise.  The Third 
MFN Exemption Review conducted by the Council for Trade in Services in November 2010 and 
March 2011 had similarly yielded no new indication of  removal or reduction of exemptions.   The 
situation reflected a significant gap between the re quests and recipients' offers and indications.   
82. Hong Kong China also welcomed the contributio ns of Australia, Mexico, and Switzerland.  
Despite some differences, these contributions all fo cused on what Members intended to achieve in the 
market access negotiations, and some proposed prac tical steps that might be conducive to those 
outcomes.  For Hong Kong China, targets were not numerical outcomes in terms of sectoral coverage, 
but market opportunities of real commercial value. 
83. On domestic regulation, the dele gation welcomed the progress report provided by the Chair.  
Although there had been less progress than expected , Members had shown intensive engagement and 
some genuine flexibility.  The delegation would fu rther study the Chair's progress report carefully and 
continue to engage constr uctively to ensure the negotiations move  forward.  The report from the Chair 
of the Working Party on GATS Rules was also ve ry useful.   Hong Kong China hoped to see further 
discussion among Members, in particular in the ar ea of subsidies, regarding any trade-distortive 
effects these might have, and the need for multilateral disciplines to address such effects.  Finally, on 
LDC modalities, the delegation believed that the differences in positions of Members on the two 
outstanding issues were bridgeable if Members co uld bring themselves to exercise the required 
flexibility.   
84. The delegation of Uruguay observed that Memb ers found themselves facing a very serious 
situation in the multilateral trading system.  Such situation was not unavoidable; the gaps were not 
unbridgeable.  However, the delegation did not thin k that calling for high levels of ambition on 
market access for services was the way to reduce gaps.  Rather, delegations needed to find the 
appropriate level of ambition.  Problems in the negoti ations were not the result of a lack of ambition, 
but of a lack of realism and balance in demands.  It was important to go beyond the search for national 
interest and focus on the value of the multilateral trading system.   
85. Uruguay said that the contributions by Mexico and Australia were important.  Members now 
needed to close the gap betw een various positions and arrive  at an understanding through the 
negotiation of a balanced outcome.  Unfortunately, th e negotiations were imbalanced to the detriment 
of developing countries.  Some Members were cl aiming that there was not enough ambition in the 
offers.  However, developing countries could not subs tantially improve their offers if there was not a 
counterpart on the other side when it came to domest ic regulation, safeguard, and market access in the 
sectors and modes of supply of interest to them.  Services related to agriculture and mode 4 needed 
more attention.  The Chairman's report needed  to be as objective as possible.  The Signalling 
Conference of 2008 had yielded very positive r esults.  Since then, there had not been any 
backtracking on the signals given.  It was not ser vices that held the key to the conclusion of the 
negotiations.  This was not the case in 2008, and was not the case now. 
86.  The delegation of China thought that the ove rall DDA negotiations were in a very difficult 
situation.  For some Members, the gap in the le vel of ambition remained very important and it now 
seemed less and less likely that the negotiations coul d be finished this year.  Despite this, Members 
should not lose hope.  It might be necessary to pause for a while, reflect, and draw some lessons, but 
after that, Members should move on.  The hard work of the last 10 years had not been in vain.  To a 
certain extent, it was fair to say that more consen suses had been achieved in the services negotiations 
than in NAMA and agriculture.  What was curren tly on the table in the services negotiations was the 
result of the collective effort of the entire Memb ership.  These results represented what Members 
could best achieve in the current international political and economic setting.  When the time was TN/S/M/42 
Page 16 
 
 
  ripe, work would continue and, given sufficient time  and input, Members would be able to finish the 
Round.   
87. On the Australian paper, China welcomed the notions of "enhancing market access for mode 
4 through new or improved commitments" and "gr eater flexibility will be accorded to developing 
Members".  However, other elements of the paper had a higher level of ambition − and yet less clarity 
− than Annex C of the Hong Kong Ministerial Decl aration.  Annex C should remain as the overall 
guideline for the services negotiations.  
88. On the way forward, services were an impor tant pillar of the Round and the delegation 
regretted that the services negotiation had now lost momentum due to the difficult situation of the 
overall DDA negotiations.  It hoped that the next TNC meeting would provide some guidance on how 
to move forward.  At the BRICS meeting held  in China during the week, trade ministers had 
acknowledged that "the delicate balance of trad e-offs achieved over 10 years of negotiations 
contained in the draft texts of December 2008 risked being upset".  Yet they had also "reiterated their 
commitment to the conclusion of the negotiations  and stressed the need for a comprehensive and 
balanced outcome of the Doha Round, in a manner th at fulfilled its mandate as  a development round". 
They also emphasized that outcomes meeting the interests and concerns of the poorest countries, 
especially the LDCs, should not be further delayed.   China believed that whether the Round could be 
successfully concluded soon depended largely on Me mbers' willingness to continue engaging in the 
negotiations.   
89. On domestic regulation, divergences remained, but Members had managed bridge gaps in 
some parts of the text.  China was glad to see that  progress made in the last weeks had been reflected 
in the Chair's progress report.  Regarding next step s, negotiations on domestic regulation should move 
forward, regardless of whether Members met the deadlines set for the DDA negotiation.  On LDC 
modalities, China had consistently supported the early conclusion of the negotiation on the LDC 
waiver mechanism.  In support of LDC Members, China was prepared to accept a broad scope of 
application of the waiver, as set out in the current draft text.  LDCs needed to be accorded as much 
flexibility as possible to address their developmental needs.  
90. As co-ordinator of the plurilateral request on private education services, the delegation of 
New Zealand submitted a report reflecting the assess ment of the co-sponsors (JOB/SERV/65).  These 
considered that the state of play had changed onl y incrementally since the submission of a progress 
report in 2007 and the stocktaking of March 2010.  Since the stocktaking, one Member had indicated 
its intention to move from having neither commitments nor an offer in the sector to binding its current 
level of liberalization in all of the sub-sectors c overed by the request.  Two Members indicated or 
confirmed their willingness to further improve their offers by removing limitations in modes 1 or 2, 
three Members by removing or clarifying the sc ope of mode 3 limitations, and two Members by 
expanding or clarifying their coverage of the sub-sect or "other education services" (CPC 929).  On the 
other hand, three Members indicated that they would not go beyond their current offer.   
91. Coverage was still considered to be the major gap,  with six of the 21 recipients (excluding the 
co-sponsors, which all had offered or scheduled  commitments) continuing to indicate no firm 
intention to take commitments in any education s ub-sector.  A further three Members had offered or 
indicated commitments in only one of the two request ed sub-sectors.  Overall, five Members were 
assessed as fully or substantially meeting the scope  of the request.  A further 15 partially met the 
scope, while six Members did not meet any aspect of the request.  Despite some progress, it was felt 
that significant gaps remained and more work was needed before Members' schedules began to reflect 
current market realities.  Education continued to be one of the least-committed sectors, despite the 
prevalence and success of private education services traded internationally, and their undeniable link 
to development.    TN/S/M/42 
 Page 17 
 
 
  92. Regarding the overall state of play in the services negotiations, New Zealand had 
continuously stressed the importance of an ambiti ous services outcome as part of the Doha Round.  
Recently, New Zealand had been frank and upfront about the barriers it faced in improving its commitments and had sought the same from negotia ting partners, but with limited reciprocity.  The 
delegation was disappointed that, despite intensified efforts over the past few months, it had not been 
possible to move forward in a substantial manner.   Engagement did not necessarily equate with 
progress.  There had been little or no discernible progress since July 2008 in sectors of priority 
interest to New Zealand, particularly in edu cation, environmental, and professional services.  
Accordingly, the delegation fully concurred with the assessment circulated in JOB/SERV/54.  That 
said, New Zealand did not accept that su ch state of play should be the fait accompli  for the services 
market access package, and it th erefore supported Australia's communication on the way forward.  
The approach outlined by Australia was ambitious a nd at the same time pragmatic and flexible.   
93. On domestic regulation, New Zealand consider ed that robust disciplines were essential to 
ensure that market access commitments translat ed into something commercially meaningful for 
services exporters.  The Chair's report on the state of play in these negotiations was comprehensive 
and accurate.  It clearly demonstrated that some useful progress had been made over the past months 
towards bridging the gaps.  However, it similarly illustrated clearly that numerous and significant 
gaps remained to be bridged before arriving at a set of robust and comprehensive disciplines that all 
Members could agree to.   
94. The delegation of Brazil expressed appreciation fo r the constructive participation of Members 
during the last two weeks.  Brazil had been fully engaged in the process, as part of its broader 
commitment to a strong, fair and balanced out come in the services negotiations.  Regarding the 
progress report on domestic regulation, the delegati on acknowledged the Chair's efforts to capture the 
essence of the intense discussions that had been held .  However, the second part of the report, entitled 
"state of play", did not adequately reflect all the viewpoints expressed during recent debates.  Brazil 
did not consider, for example, that discussions on several paragraphs we re exhaustive enough to 
support the view that only one single alterna tive of language remained on the table.  
95. Brazil agreed with other delegations that the Doha Round was at a crucial juncture.  The 
delegation's overall participation in the Round ha d always been construc tive and guided by the 
multilaterally agreed mandates, including its fundamental development component.  The same 
approach applied to negotiations in services.  For Br azil, the Round already had a substantial "acquis" 
in the services chapter, which represented one decad e of tireless efforts and contributions by many 
Members.  In the area of market access, Brazil and other developing countries had provided a 
significant contribution despite the fact that their participation in services trade was limited and that 
this trend could not realistically be expected to ch ange fundamentally in the short run.  Against this 
backdrop, Brazil had tabled offers  that adequately addressed the ma in concerns of demandeurs.  
However, Brazil's requests, as well as those of other developing countries, which were quite limited in 
number, had received a response that was well below expectations.  
96. Brazil also found it relevant to stress that mark et access in services must not carry the burden 
of creating momentum for the conclusion of the Ro und.  All areas had to provide their contribution 
and, regarding services, Brazil had alre ady contributed its fair share, in fact, more than what should be 
reasonably expected.  Regarding the way forward, th e delegation thought clarity was first needed with 
respect to the overall process of the DDA.  The TNC meeting of 29 April should provide clearer 
indications of what lied ahead.  Discussions on a possible way forward in services should therefore 
wait in order to benefit from these debates. 
97.  The delegation of Chinese Taipei generally conc urred with the assessment of the Chair of the 
WPDR.  Although the report fell short of the original  expectation of having a revised text before 
Easter, the Consultative Note attached to it could serve as a solid basis for future discussions.  The TN/S/M/42 
Page 18 
 
 
  delegation urged Members to conti nue in the same constructive spir it and respond to the calls of the 
Chair by converting the remaining 18 paragraphs curr ently designated as "category 3" into "category 
2", or even better into "category 1".  Regarding negotiations in the WPGR, Chinese Taipei remained 
engaged and was open to any suggestions  for further work under the mandates. 
98. On market access, Chinese Taipei agreed w ith the overall assessment presented by the 
delegation of Chile.  Regarding the way forward,  the delegation drew attention to its joint 
communication with Switzerland (JOB/SERV/46).  There was some merit in each of the submissions 
by Australia, Mexico, and Korea.  Members had to continue engaging in more focused and intensive 
negotiations. 
99.  On behalf of the Group of Recently Acceded  Members (RAMs), the delegation referred to 
paragraph 12 of the Annex entitled "Elements required for the completion of the services 
negotiations" contained the report of the Chair of the Special Session (TN/S/34, July 2008), which 
stated that: "Members recognize the special situ ation of the recently-acceded Members who have 
undertaken extensive market access commitments at the time of accession.  This situation will be 
taken into account in the DDA negotiations".  In  fact, these extensive and higher commitments 
undertaken by the RAMs had been mentioned in most  of the Secretariat's recent sectoral background 
notes.   In spite of the high level of commitments that they had already made, some of the RAMs, including Chinese Taipei, had nevertheless given further positive signals.      
100. The delegation of Turkey recalled that it att ached great importance to the LDC waiver and 
hoped that an early consensus could be reached.  On domestic regulation, Turkey welcomed the 
factual assessment in the Chair's report.  Turkey had moved out of its comfort zone to address the 
concerns of some Members.  The necessity test had been discussed, even though this constituted a 
possible threat to Members' right to regulate, if not  formulated correctly.  Turkey considered Japan's 
proposal very important in this respect and hoped to  further work on it.  The delegation was also open 
to discuss any other alternative that placed importa nce on the reasonability of the measure.  On the 
development chapter, there had not been sufficient time to discuss the provisi ons that were vital for 
developing countries.  Positive responses had been received on the drafting alternative for paragraph 
42 that had been put forward by a group of devel oping country Members, including Turkey. With 
regard to licensing and qualification chapters, th e delegation would not accept different levels of 
ambition.  Turkey had also found the workshop on best  regulatory practices very useful for Members, 
as it had provided an opportunity to hear different point of views.  
101. On GATS rules, the delegation was willing to fu rther discuss the issues being put forward by 
the Philippines to explore the feasibility of safe guard disciplines.  On government procurement, 
Turkey could share its experience in developing its re gulatory framework in this area.  On subsidies, it 
was flexible on how to move forward. 
102. Regarding market access, the S-30 meeting held  during the week had permitted to learn the 
expectations of Members.  Turkey participated in  four plurilateral meetings , one as co-sponsor and the 
rest as recipient.  In the latter cases, the delegati on confirmed the signals that it had earlier provided.  
Turkey was open to discussing any proposal that ga ve particular importance to sectors and modes of 
supply of export interest to developing countri es.  The proposals by Korea, Mexico, Australia, 
Switzerland and Chinese Taipei all contained valuable elements.  At this point, the delegation agreed 
with the European Union and others that th e way forward proposed in document JOB/SERV/43 
offered a good basis for the way ahead.  At the sa me time, not all elements  in this paper seemed 
consensual.  For instance, there appeared to be no consensus among the Membership on paragraph 
2(b) (i).  However, that proposal, when complete d with elements from the others, was a constructive 
and promising text.  The delegation emphasized pa ragraph 2(d) of the proposal contained in the 
communication from Switzerland and Chinese Taipei (JOB/SERV/46).  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 19 
 
 
  103. The delegation of Croatia strongly supported the conclusion of the Doha Round as well as 
further liberalization of trade in services because this would benefit all Members.  The Membership 
now found itself at a critical milestone in the DDA and Croatia fully supported Australia's 
communication on the way forward in services market access, which was why it co-sponsored the 
communication contained in JOB/SERV/60. 
104.  The delegation of Panama wished to focus its  remarks on Australia's proposal in document 
JOB/SERV/43/Rev.1.  Mainly because of constituti onal limitations relating to mode 4 in some 
sectors, Panama had not yet been able to subscrib e to the document presented by the European Union 
supporting the Australian proposal.  That said, the delegation supported the overall goal of the EU 
document, and to a certain extent the process suggest ed for the way forward.  Members' efforts and 
future work needed to ensure th at specific and ambitious results were achieved in market access.  
Panama wanted for instance to see substantial progress on the elimination of obstacles to mode 3.  It 
had a particular interest in sectors such as financial services, insurance and re-insurance, tourism, 
shipping and auxiliary maritime services, and port services.   
105. In the context of negotiations, delegations also needed to respect the need for some Members 
to obtain special and differential treatment.  Pana ma agreed that Members needed to work on the 
goals identified in Annex C of the Hong Kong D eclaration, and other guiding documents on treatment 
regarding developing countries.  It was now time fo r work to be carried out on the basis of bilateral 
and plurilateral requests, some of which had been on  the table for many years.  Panama supported the 
achievement of ambitious results.  In conclusion, Panama wished to see early results to the services 
negotiations, together with a balanced  outcome in other areas of the Round. 
106. The delegation of the United States believe d that the general assessment found in 
JOB/SERV/54, which it co-sponsored, provided an accu rate depiction of the overall status of the 
market access negotiations.  The United States wa s the coordinator of the plurilateral requests on 
telecommunication services and on postal and cour ier services, including express delivery.  The joint 
assessments in these areas were found in JOB/SERV/61 and JOB/SERV/62.   
107. On telecommunications, the co-sponsors believed th at very little had been achieved since the 
2010 stocktaking exercise in terms of positive signal s towards meeting the plurilateral request.  The 
Signalling Conference held in 2008 had yielded little evidence that commercially meaningful results 
would be reached in this sector.  Key aspects of the plurilateral request remained unmet by most of the 
22 recipients.  For example, out of the ten recipi ents making signals at the Signalling Conference, 
only two were positive about meeting the majority of the request; six fell well short of the request;  
and the remaining two made signals that were considered too vague to qualify as meeting much of the 
request.  The most prominent shortcomings were  the lack of full sectoral coverage and the 
perpetuation of highly restrictive FDI levels , primarily in basic telecommunications.   
108. On the other hand, most of the co-sponsors had met the majority of the request and most of 
those that had not yet done so had signalled a w illingness to improve their commitments.  Despite its 
importance, the sector remained plagued by weak  commitments, and signals for improvement had 
been disappointing.  Many Members had failed to  reflect autonomous liberalization in their own 
offers.   The co-sponsors stressed that a robus t telecommunications sector was vital for economic 
development. 
109.  On postal and courier services, the co-sponsors indicated that, at the time of the 2010 
stocktaking exercise, less than one half of the 20 recipients of the request had indicated a willingness 
to undertake improved commitments.  The scope of these improvements was modest, addressing only 
one or a few areas of the request.  Five of the recipi ents had no commitments at all in this sector, and 
of these only two had indicated a willingness to make an offer.  Only one targeted recipient had TN/S/M/42 
Page 20 
 
 
  expressed willingness to bind current levels of ma rket access or significantly augment its existing 
commitments.  
110. The four co-sponsors had all made offers based on the request.  In addition, two of the co-
sponsors had also indicated in their offers their willingness to adopt additional commitments if others 
did the same.  Thus far, none of the recipients ha d clearly indicated that they would offer additional 
commitments.  At the plurilateral meeting held in March 2011, co-sponsors received confirmation of 
previous signals.  Five recipients were consid ering expanding or clarifying the scope of their 
commitments.  One recipient was willing to bind current levels of liberalization.  However, co-
sponsors were disappointed to see no movement si nce 2008 from others, and one recipient appeared 
to walk back from prior positive signals.  In sum, the majority of recipients had not signalled any 
improvement.  In a number of cases, offers did not correspond to current levels of liberalization.  
Consequently, both the level and quality of response to the request had yet to meet the co-sponsors' 
expectations.  Significantly more work needed to be done to achieve a meaningful outcome. 
111. The United States felt it was fair to say that little if any progress had been made on market 
access since 2008, and that significantly more progress would be needed in order to reach a successful 
conclusion.  Clearly, efforts of the past few months  to intensify the negotiations had not succeeded in 
closing gaps.  Regarding the process for the futu re, the United States joined others in supporting 
Australia's paper (JOB/SERV/43/Rev.1).   The pape r identified the major elements of the services 
negotiations and described the kind of process that should take place in order to reach a conclusion.  
The delegation also appreciated the constructiv e proposals from Switzerland and Chinese Taipei, 
Korea, and Mexico.  Unfortunately, the difficulty was not a matter of process, but one of substance.  If 
Members could find a way to close gaps in substance, the process would fall into place.  The 
delegation was committed to continue work ing with others to find a way forward. 
112. On domestic regulation, although Members ha d not accomplished as much as hoped, there 
had been a high level of engageme nt and a good degree of progress.  Whether or not a draft text was 
produced, given the recent intensification, the United States needed to carry out internal consultations 
with the large number of state regulatory agenci es and other entities potentially affected by these 
disciplines.  The urgency of these consultations w ould be influenced by the next steps on market 
access and the overall discussion on the way forwar d.  On LDC modalities, work on a waiver had 
made reasonable progress and only a few outstanding issues remained.  The delegation believed that 
these differences were not insurmountable.   
113. Noting that it had co-sponsored the joint assess ment in JOB/SERV/54, the delegation of 
Japan stressed that the gap to be bridged on ma rket access remained wide.  Even though the DDA 
process as a whole was in difficulty, Members s hould make further efforts towards successful 
conclusion of the service market access negotiati ons.  On the way forward, Japan supported the 
proposal by Australia.   
114. Regarding plurilateral negotiations, Japan express ed gratitude to the recipient Members that 
had assured the participation of experts from their ca pitals.  However, in most cases, the involvement 
of capital experts, as well as advance preparations, had been insufficient for substantial and detailed 
discussions leading to improvements to commitments.   This aspect needed to be improved.  As 
coordinator for the plurilateral requests on constr uction services and maritime transport services, 
Japan has circulated assessments in JOB/SERV/57 and JOB/SERV/69.  In sum, some limited progress 
had been seen, but gaps remained.   
115. On maritime transport, the co-sponsors indicated that 13 of the 25 recipients had made 
positive indications at the Signalling Conference or dur ing bilateral and plurila teral meetings, but no 
recipient had fully met the plurilateral request.  Some indications were vague, with wording like 
"subject to domestic law".  In addition, while international freight transport (less cabotage) under  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 21 
 
 
  mode 1 was emphasized in the request, 16 recipi ents had made no offers nor expressed positive 
indications.  Moreover, eight recipients had neit her commitments nor offers at all in maritime 
transport services, and four of them had not given any positive indications.  The 14 co-sponsors, also 
deemed recipients, had all made offers based on the plurilateral request.  In addition, some co-
sponsors had indicated at the Signalling Conference or  in bilateral and plur ilateral meetings their 
willingness to make further commitments.  Ma ny of the recently-acceded Members also had 
undertaken comprehensive commitments on maritime transport.  Although some recipients and co-
sponsors had taken positive steps towards meeting th e plurilateral request, it was felt that significant 
gaps remained and further efforts to meet the le vel of ambition of the request were needed.   
116. On construction services, the co-sponsors indicat ed that no further positive indications had 
been made since the 2008 Signalling Conference.  A lthough some encouraging statements had been 
given during the plurilateral meeting held in Apr il 2011, no new significant improvement to current 
offers was signalled.  Hence, the situation rema ined the same as had been reported during the 2010 
stocktaking exercise.  
117. About three quarters of the recipients did not cover all sub-sectors and about one third had not 
offered nor had indicated satisfactory commitments in the two most important sub-sectors, namely 
general construction work for buildings (CPC 512) and general construction work for civil 
engineering (CPC 513).  About one half of the recipients had not indicated a willingness to eliminate 
existing restrictions in mode 3.  In addition, some  recipients had neither commitments nor offers in 
any construction service.  The co-sponsors were also deemed recipients and had all made efforts to 
meet the plurilateral request.  In addition, some  co-sponsors had also indicated their willingness to 
undertake further commitments. 
118.  On domestic regulation, Japan believed that, while constructive, the drafting session held the 
previous week had not produced satisfactory results .  Divergences in terms of level of ambition as 
well as legal accuracy still remained to be bridged.  That said, substantive progress had at least been 
achieved in such chapters as definition, general pr ovisions, and transparency.  Once more clarity was 
achieved on the DDA, work should continue on the paragraphs that had not been sufficiently 
discussed in the previous week. 
119. Regarding LDC modalities, Japan recognized that th e issues remaining to be solved were now 
rather limited.  The delegation thought that the sc ope of the waiver should be clear; it was therefore 
desirable that the scope be limited to such areas as  market access.  Regarding the definition of service 
supplier, the proposal by the European Union would permit to exclude free riding by companies that 
were not substantially recognized as LDC companies.  
120. The delegation of Singapore said that it had pa rticipated in several plurilateral meetings 
during the week, half of which as co-sponsor and the ot her half as recipient, in addition to a number of 
bilateral meetings.  These meetings had been useful, but it was clear that gaps remained.  A difficult 
and critical point had been reached in the negotiatio ns.  Ideas on next steps suggested by Australia, 
Switzerland, Mexico, and Korea were useful.  More importantly, they showed a desire to engage and 
move forward.  The question was how to translate these ideas into something doable for everyone.  It 
was obvious that some distance needed to be trave lled before Members could collectively agree on the 
way forward.  Members needed to reflect on the various ideas on the table and examine the elements 
of each proposal that were of value. 
121. The delegation of Indonesia observed that all Members were well aware of the instructions 
given by leaders to attempt to conclude the Round this year, but Members also recognized how 
challenging it was to bridge the remaining gaps in the services negotiations.  For that reason, 
Indonesia had been constructively engaged in the ne gotiations, both on rules and market access.  On 
the latter, the delegation was concerned that negot iations were being pushed beyond the mandate TN/S/M/42 
Page 22 
 
 
  contained in Annex C of the Hong Kong Ministerial D eclaration.  This would run against the interest 
of the majority of the Membership.  Services negotia tions could not be seen in isolation.  Progress in 
services was basically interlinked with the progress achi eved in other areas.  With regard to some of 
the proposals on the way forward, Indonesia woul d find it difficult to accept any proposal denying 
flexibility for developing countries, such as suggesting to bind existing access in mode 3.  Domestic 
suppliers needed to be safeguarded.   
122. Indonesia appreciated the reports from the Chairs of the WPDR and WPGR.  On domestic 
regulation, more work needed to be undertaken to bridge the gaps.  The delegation was of the view 
that the draft text should reflect the principle of  the right to regulate and the special needs of 
developing countries.  Concerning the work of the WPGR, Indonesia saw the discussion on ESM-
related statistical data as useful.  This could provide guidance for future discussions on emergency 
safeguards.   
123. The delegation of Malaysia said that it had par ticipated actively in all of the plurilateral 
sessions in which it was a recipient, including professional services, construction, maritime transport, 
air transport, logistics, distribution, postal and c ourier, environment, energy and finance, as well as 
those sectors in which it was a co-sponsor.  The sessions had been useful, as both recipients and co-
sponsors exchanged views on the difficulties and flex ibilities needed in sectors and modes of supply.  
124. Malaysia had also held numerous bilateral mee tings over the past few months with its major 
trading partners.  These had served to clarify the si gnals made in July 2008 a nd to gain indications on 
new areas of improvements.  Malaysia had been specific in its explanations, and had provided as 
much clarity as possible on the offers that would be  part of its Doha package.  Malaysia had made 
great efforts towards liberalizing the services sector and, in this regard, ha d undertaken continuous 
consultations with its stakeholde rs to improve its DDA offer beyond what had been indicated during 
the 2008 Signalling Conference.  Improvements includ ed new market access for its trading partners in 
mode 3.  Although Malaysia was not a major demande ur in the negotiations, it was making efforts to 
liberalize its services sectors progressively, particul arly in areas where it was competitive.  While 
Malaysia had demonstrated its w illingness to engage, and further im prove its offers, some Members 
had not been able to indicate any further improveme nts since 2008.  It was evident that there remained 
gaps in the negotiations. 
125. Services was an important component of the overall DDA negotiations and, as mentioned by 
Australia, Malaysia was one of the Members that had emphasised the need to conclude the Round as 
soon as possible.  On the way forward, the delega tion was open and flexible.  It took note of the 
various proposals on the table as part of its effort s to develop a path in ensuring a positive and 
balanced outcome in the market access negotiations . The proposals by Mexico, Korea, Australia and 
Switzerland were very interesting, constructive a nd deserved further discussion.  Services being a new 
growth sector for Malaysia, it posed a number of challenges, including the need to upgrade domestic 
capacity.  Taking this into consideration, as a deve loping country, Malaysia fully subscribed to the 
existing flexibilities provided for under Article XIX of the GATS, the 2001 Negotiating Guidelines as 
well as Annex C.  
126. Malaysia considered that domestic regulation was an important part of the negotiations, and 
had to be balanced with the results in market acce ss.  The consultations on a bracketed text had been 
difficult.  Malaysia said that work on domestic regulation should continue to develop the necessary 
disciplines to achieve a balanced outcome in the services negotiations. 
127. The delegation of Canada said that it had res ponded with optimism and enthusiasm when the 
market access negotiations bega n with renewed vigour earlier in the year.  A Doha deal was 
indispensable for global economic prosperity.  In particular, Canada recognized the immense value 
that a more liberal global trade regime in services represented.  Such regime should go significantly  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 23 
 
 
  beyond Uruguay Round commitments by binding, as closely as possible, existing market access and 
should provide new and meaningful market access in  key areas.  This would create new opportunities 
for exporters, greater choice for c onsumers, and improvement in the livelihoods of billions of people. 
128. Canada noted that more energy had been visi ble since January 2011 than at any time since 
2009, and it acknowledged the important  contributions of those Members that had treated market 
access negotiations with seriousness, and had come fo rward with new signals that went beyond those 
made in the 2008 Signalling Conference.  However, th e level of engagement ha d been uneven, and the 
gaps were still very wide in key areas.  It appear ed as though the clock had st opped in 2008.  In order 
to have an acceptable services outcome, Members ha d to move beyond the clarifying signals sent long 
ago and empower officials to negotiate improvements. 
129. As coordinator of the plurilateral requests on fina ncial services and architecture, engineering, 
and integrated engineering services, Canada subm itted two progress reports  on behalf of the co-
sponsors (JOB/SERV/63 and JOB/SERV/64).   
130. On 15 March, 2011, the co-sponsors held a plurilateral meeting on architecture, engineering, 
and integrated engineering services.  The co-sponsor s observed that none of the recipients fully met 
the request.  However, recipients had made va rying degrees of progress in terms of enhanced 
commitments.  Recipients could be divided into thr ee categories.  First, some had made considerable 
progress in improving their existing commitments, but a lack of robust commitments in mode 3 and 
on integrated engineering meant that further commitments from this group was required to reach a 
satisfactory outcome.   
131. Second, some Members had made only minimal progress towards meeting the request.  While 
these recipients had made small improvements over their existing commitments, modes 1 and 2 
remained largely unbound and substantial mode 3 limitations persisted.  The current level of 
commitments in this group was weak and required substantial improvement.  Third, some Members 
had yet to make any commitments in the sector.  Signals from this group, when there were any, 
remained weak and vague, making it impossible to c onsider them as improvements.  Overall, the co-
sponsors felt that progress fell significantly short of what would be required to  conclude negotiations 
on this sector.  
132. On financial services, at the 2010 stocktak ing, the co-sponsors had identified limited 
affirmative responses with respect to the removal or easing of significant restrictions on mode 3, 
including with respect to foreign equity participa tion, juridical form, and economic needs tests.  In 
addition, the offers submitted fell well below current levels of liberalization.  The scope of coverage 
also continued to be problematic.  A sizeable ga p remained between the level of openness signalled by 
targeted recipients and that of co-sponsors. 
133. At the plurilateral meeting held in April 201 1, three Members confirmed their 2008 signals, 
two Members offered new flexibilities, and two Me mbers signalled that while liberalization was 
occurring in practice, they would not be able to bi nd this autonomous libera lization in their revised 
offers.  To date, most recipients had signalled no fl exibility to remove foreign equity caps, juridical 
form restrictions, quantitative/numer ical restrictions, or economic n eeds test requirements.  Only a 
few recipients had signalled some flexibility rega rding the cross-border supply of reinsurance and 
large-scale commercial risk insura nce services.  Co-sponsors believed th at offers from recipients were 
in need of substantial improvement to ach ieve the request's liberalization objectives. 
134. Canada believed that one encouraging area in the market access negotiations worthy of note 
was mode 4, where there had been some momentum , or at least more open and frank discussion from 
all sides than had been seen in a long while.  Canada recognized the importance, but also the 
sensitivities, of mode 4 to both de veloped and developing countries; this was why it had been very TN/S/M/42 
Page 24 
 
 
  pleased with the engagement on its mode 4 elements  paper.  This paper was intended to facilitate 
progress on this important topic, and not to replace bilateral requests or the plurilateral request on 
mode 4.  As reported in March,  Canada had been taking into account comments received, and would 
circulate a revised version to Members who had attended the 17 March meeting, as well as to any 
other interested Member.  Canada looked forward to continuing to work with co-sponsors of the 
plurilateral request, recipients, and other inte rested Members it as refined the elements. 
135. Just as in 2008, Members had to recognize that something new had to be brought forward; 
what was on the table was not enough.  Members could not proceed as they had in the past and expect different results.  Canada associated itself with the assessment given by Chile on behalf of the 
demandeurs.  On the way forward, Canada believed that the Australian paper in particular contained 
valuable ideas on how to move to the next ph ase of negotiations.  These ideas needed further 
discussion. 
136. In addition to market access, Canada had activel y participated over the past two months in the 
discussions on the draft text on domestic regul ation.  Canada supported a Member-driven, 
convergence-based text in these negotiations. It not ed that recent Chair-led discussions on the 2009 
text had achieved consensus on several relativel y uncontroversial elements.  These discussions did 
not, however, see any breakthroughs on major areas of  contention in the text, and indeed seemed to be 
leading in the opposite direction. 
137. Unfortunately, the report submitted by the Chai r of the WPDR appeared to take matters 
backwards rather than forward.  There had to be  consensus to have convergence on a paragraph, and 
in many areas there was not.  Canada had repeated ly cautioned the Chair over the past week against 
reflecting the results of the drafting sessions in an y formal record for future negotiations.  While 
Canada did not object to the Chair providing a progr ess report, as he did in paragraphs 1 to 7, it was 
deeply disappointed that the Chair chose to go furt her and incorporate the working results of these 
informal discussions.  On this basis, Canada could not accept the Chair's report from paragraph 8 
onwards as the basis for continuing negotiations.  In  particular, Canada fundamentally disagreed with 
paragraph 9 of the report, which suggested that th e text now advanced by the Chair could serve as a 
basis for discussions on domestic regulation moving forward.  This was not a consensus position. 
138. Going forward, it was not clear to Canada how simply continuing as before would help to 
reduce any of the still formidable gaps, unless ther e was a true commitment to work on areas of 
convergence.  Members would need to be more ope n to finding realistic compromises on the level of 
obligation in key paragraphs of the text.  Canada al so wanted to emphasize that, if there was progress 
on domestic regulation, there would need to be commensurate progress on market access. 
139. On GATS Rules negotiations, Canada agreed w ith the Chair's report to the Council that 
Members had constructively engaged and further explored the issues at  stake.  Nevertheless, in each 
of the three areas, there needed to be a clear dem onstration that there was indeed a problem and that 
there would be benefits to what  was being proposed.  Canada agreed with the WPGR Chair's view 
that, as a result of not having such evidence, discussions in the WPGR remained essentially 
conceptual in nature. 
140. On LDC modalities, Canada remained committed to  working with the Membership to develop 
an effective waiver, and was ready to engage in  any necessary discussions, whether multilaterally or 
in small group consultations to resolve the remaining issues. 
141. Overall, given the indispensable importance of  the Doha Round to all, Members needed to 
make a realistic assessment of wher e matters stood at the moment, and work together to find a way to 
overcome the difficulties so that they could de liver on the promise of this Round for all.  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 25 
 
 
  142. The delegation of India said that the discu ssions on disciplines on domestic regulation had 
been useful, though further discussi on was necessary.  On market access,  intense activity had taken 
place in bilateral and plurilateral meetings.  On th e positive side, there had been greater engagement, 
and discussions had been constructive and useful.  
143. Overall, however, there had been no forward movement from Members, specifically in areas 
and sectors of export interest to developing country Members.  This was a significant gap in the aim 
to realize the development mandate of the Round.  India had earlier pointed out the imbalance in the 
Round between what had been put on table by developing and devel oped country Members. 
Developing country Members had already offered mu ch more in terms of movement from their 
Uruguay Round commitments as compared to developed country Members.  On top of that, some 
developed country Members were still asking for more .  Some had hardly made any contribution in 
the Round, and had not been very forthcoming in indicating what they would be offering.   
144. As coordinator of the plurilateral request s on cross-border supply and mode 4, India 
circulated two reports on behalf of co-sponsors,  contained in JOB/SERV/70 and JOB/SERV/71.   
145. On cross-border supply, the co-sponsors felt that  the plurilateral meeting held in March 2011 
had showed constructive e ngagement and increasing recognition that  liberalizing trade in cross-border 
supply was a win-win situation for both developing  and developed countries.  Since some services 
which previously had been considered technologi cally infeasible were now traded commercially, 
participants agreed that it should be possible to review and identify those services for improvements 
in offers.  It was also agreed that in almost all sectors it was possible to provide consultancy and 
advisory services through mode 1.  Participants di d show interest in reviewing their commitments 
accordingly. Issues of regulatory concern and cons umer safety were expressed by certain Members, 
and some solutions were discussed.   
146. Many of the co-sponsors and some of the recipi ents indicated that they were planning to 
improve their offers in the area.  However, on th e whole, the co-sponsors had not heard in concrete 
terms what improvements were being planned, particularly from many of the key recipients that had 
major gaps vis-à-vis the plurilateral request.  The co -sponsors were concerned that the offers of many 
Members on mode 1 were still linked to commercial presence, nationality and residency requirements, 
along with geographical and regional carve-outs.  Ma ny of the sub-sectors were not covered and no 
new specific improvements had been indicated since the Signalling Conference.  Therefore, more 
work was needed in this area to furt her improve offers in specific terms. 
147. With respect to mode 4, the co-sponsors had hos ted two plurilateral mee tings in 2011.  Since 
many recipients had recently stressed the need for a robust outcome on mode 4, the co-sponsors had 
expected some real movement forward.  However,  despite constructive engagement, there were no 
concrete signals of improvements from many of the key recipients who still had major gaps vis-à-vis 
the plurilateral request.  In general, recipien ts had reiterated their existing positions.   
148. According to the co-sponsors, the sectoral coverage  of offers remained insufficient.  Many of 
the sub-sectors of interest to developing countries were still not covered and in many cases there were 
important geographical carve-outs from the sectors indicated horizontally.   The offers by many 
Members were still linked to commercial presence and made subject to nationality and residency 
requirements.  Numerical ceilings and economic need s tests remained a significant cause of concern.  
149. Another major issue for the co-sponsors was the st ability of commitments.  In some cases, the 
commitments had been linked to some domestic  list, act or guidelines which diminished the 
predictability of commitments.  This was a majo r systemic concern, though one Member expressed 
willingness to address this issue.  TN/S/M/42 
Page 26 
 
 
  150. The co-sponsors' overall assessment was that mode  4 commitments and offers continued to be 
insufficient.  Much more work needed to be done to  bridge the gaps and reach a satisfactory outcome.  
The extent to which this request was met also co nstituted an indicator of the fulfilment of the 
development dimension of the Round.  A positive outco me in Mode 4 was very important to achieve a 
balance in market access negotiations in services.   
151. With respect to Canada's contribution on mode 4, India disagreed on the extent of movement 
observed.  One could not equate discussions in meetings with forward movement.  The mode 4 
plurilateral request was one of the few requests made  exclusively by developing countries.  How far 
this request was met was therefore an indicator of the fulfilment of the deve lopment dimension of the 
Round.  While mode 4 accounted for less than 5 pe r cent of world services trade, the proportion was 
more important when looking at developing countri es' total services trade.  The co-sponsors of the 
request had repeatedly stated that developing count ries had offered much more in the Round in terms 
of movement from their commitments, compared to developed countries.  Mode 4 was one area where 
developed countries could compensate since thei r present commitments for contractual services 
suppliers and indepe ndent professionals were quite limited.  A satisfactory outcome in mode 4 was 
very important to achieve a balance in the market access negotiations in services.  
152. In terms of next steps, India had examined  new proposal from some Members.  In this 
respect, Members had to be guided by the objectiv es for market access as outlined for the various 
modes in Annex C.  This was an agreed mandate , and any approach that changed these objectives was 
unhelpful and would further complicate an already diffi cult situation.  From this perspective, India 
found that the Australian paper deviated significantly from the mandate in Annex C, particularly with 
respect to its objectives for mode 3.  The proposal  introduced additional elements such as binding 
market access in priority sectors, and adherence to  the Reference Paper on telecommunications.  India 
was therefore not able to support the Australian paper.  
153. The paper by Switzerland, in terms of substance, reiterated some of the agreed principles of 
the negotiations, such as a reaffirmation of a co mmitment to the objectives and approaches of Annex 
C, and recognition of the need to give special attention to sectors and modes of supply of export 
interest to developing countries.  However, India had some differences of view on some of the points.  
On the issue of process, it was not sure if Memb ers had reached a stage where they could exchange 
possible wording to be included in the schedules.  Se rvices negotiations were an important part of the 
Doha Round, and India attached importance to a ro bust and balanced outcome.  At the same time, 
however, India was aware that the negotiations had to proceed in the overall context of the Doha 
Round.  India agreed with the statement by the United States that the difficulty in the services 
negotiations was not one of process but of substance.  
154.  The Chairman faced a difficult task in draf ting his report and assessment.  The report had to 
factually represent all viewpoints and all interests.  Any measure of progress in the Round had to take 
account of the contribution made by each Member from its Uruguay Round commitments.  Most of 
the coordinators of the plurilateral requests had submitted their reports as JOB documents.  However, 
India was not sure whether annexing these documents to the Chairman's report would be a good idea 
as they all, including India's, represented the coordinators' points of view.   
155. On LDC modalities, India was prepared to wo rk constructively toward an expeditious 
resolution. 
156. Summarizing India's approach to the Round, its Prime Minister had recently affirmed a 
"commitment to a balanced and ambitious outcome to the Doha Round of WTO negotiations" and that 
India would "continue to engage with its partners to facilitate a rule based multilateral trade regime, 
which is fair, equitable and addresses th e development agenda effectively".  TN/S/M/42 
 Page 27 
 
 
  157. The delegation of Norway said that it had four priority sectors in the services market access 
negotiations:  maritime transport, telecommunicatio ns, energy-related services, and financial services.  
158. In maritime transport, Norway had emphasized that this sector was treated very differently 
from other sectors insofar that as it was not norma lized within the GATS and the MFN principle had 
not entered into force.  Normalizing this impor tant sector and bridging the still significant gaps − 
highlighted in the progress report on Maritime Transport Services − remained key priorities for 
Norway.  With regard to energy-related services, telecommunications services and financial services, 
although Norway welcomed indications of new a nd improved commitments, it had not seen as much 
progress as it had hoped for.  
159. As a general assessment, Norway agreed with the description contained in the communication 
from the Group of Friends of Services, in documen t JOB/SERV/54, and the progress reports from the 
coordinators of the plurilateral requests for whic h it was a co-sponsor.  Norway's assessment of the 
situation highlighted the gap between what was on the table, and the ambitious result that it aspired to 
achieve as an outcome of the services negotiatio ns.  Norway supported the communication from 
Australia, which encompassed all the necessary elem ents for a final services package that would 
ensure a balanced outcome, taking into account i ndividual Members' different priorities across 
services sectors and modes of supply .  Norway remained committed to ensuring a true development 
Round, both through granting greater flexibility to de veloping Members in their priority sectors, and 
enhancing market access for mode 4 through new or improved commitments.  
160. On domestic regulation, Norway regretted that  Members had not been able to make much 
progress, despite intensive efforts.  The Chair's appr eciation of the state of play, as reflected in his 
report, did not sufficiently reflect the position of a ll Members.  The only way forward was to focus on 
the Chair's text of 2009, which provided a good and balanced basis for future  negotiations.  On GATS 
rules, Norway appreciated the WPGR Chair's re port on the status of work in that body.  
161. Norway looked forward to receiving the Chairman 's report, which needed to be factual and 
based on input from the Membership.  The report s hould give Members an overall picture of where 
services negotiations stood, and the way forward.   The situation in which Members now found 
themselves was very serious.  It was difficult to see exactly how to proceed given the overall state of 
the negotiations.  For Norway, the services negotiati ons and the DDA in general were too important 
for Members to give up.  There was a need to reflect  further to find a way out of the current impasse.  
162. The delegation of Barbados, on be half of SVE delegations, recogni zed the distinct nature and 
dynamic of the services negotiations, compared with the other market access negotiations.  It was 
clear that progress in services would rely heavily on the degree of movement taking place in the other 
key areas of the Round.  This continued to be the political reality that framed the  negotiations.  
Against this backdrop, it was perhaps not surprisi ng to note the assessment s of progress recorded by 
various delegations. 
163. With respect to the Australian proposal on ho w to advance the services negotiations, and that 
of Switzerland and Chinese Taipei, Barbados observe d that Annex C remained the cornerstone of 
Members' work in services.  Annex C carefully  charted the objectives and approaches to be 
undertaken. This was further consolidated in the July 2008 Chair's Report (TN/S/34), which a significant number of delegations considered as an ad equate basis to guide disc ussions.  In both these 
frameworks, SVEs attached specific importance to their trade-related concerns, and requested that 
these be taken into account by Members.  SVEs reiter ated that any further liberalization should be in 
accordance with development needs.  Moreover, the special situation SVEs needed to be considered 
by those Members seeking a high level of ambiti on in the context of the services negotiations. TN/S/M/42 
Page 28 
 
 
  164. The SVEs supported a positive outcome on the LDC waiver.  On GATS Rules negotiations, 
they acknowledged that all three areas remained at a conceptual level of discussion, and wanted the 
technical discussions continue. With respect to domestic regulation, SVE de legations participated 
actively and constructively in the drafting exercise.  While SVEs supported a general report to capture 
the progress attained in the negotiations to date, in light of the fact that Members did not conclude 
discussions in all areas, SVEs would have prefer red that all proposals, including those pending for 
discussion, be reflected in the "state of play" document.  Inclusion of all proposals would have 
ensured that all interests were reflec ted in order to guide future work. 
165. Finally, the Chairman's Report to the TNC needed to be fact-based,  balanced, and to take into 
account the views of all Members, particularly  where mention was made to the plurilateral 
negotiations. 
166. The delegation of the Philippines observed that a delicate horizontal balance had been struck 
by Members at the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference.   Annex C, together with obligations already 
provided for in the GATS and the Negotiating Guidelin es had formed the basis of ongoing work.  In 
intensifying the services negotiations in 2011, Member s had agreed that the objective of the exercise 
was to gain greater clarity on the flexibilities a nd sensitivities of each Member, without disturbing the 
delicate balance achieved through Annex C, pr ogress in the 2008 Signalling Conference, and the 2009 
Chair's text on domestic regulation.  
167.  While negotiations since January had been intens ive, the delicate balance had been disturbed.  
Probing into others' limitations and sensitivities, introducing new elements, and insisting on a higher 
level of ambition, had put the focus on the ne gative rather than on consolidating the positive 
convergences so far achieved.  This was like usi ng a magnifying glass to investigate the gaps and 
constraints.  While the gaps and constraints had b ecome clearer, they had al so appeared to become 
bigger.  
168.  The Philippines pointed out that it was a young country engaged in the early stages of nation-
building and progressive liberalization, and with a very defensive position in services market access 
negotiations.  In this context, the delegation's di fficulties in acceding to the significant requests by 
demandeurs beyond the Annex C manda te were easy to understand.  
169. Furthermore, some Members needed to exercise  leadership in the negotiations by granting 
genuine market access to developing countries in secto rs of interest to them.  Those who demanded 
greater access had to take the lead in offeri ng possible compromises.  The Philippines, like many 
developing Members, also wanted an  ambitious outcome in services.  This ambition, however, needed 
to be tempered by realism and by the flexibilities enjoyed, particularly by  developing Members, under 
the GATS.  Ambition could not be imposed by some Members on the many.  
170. During the 2008 Signalling Conference and in th e intensified meeti ngs during 2011, the 
Philippines had indicated substantia l improvements in a possible revised offer.  This included possible 
improvements in certain sectors, if the Philippines'  concerns in other negotiating areas, such as the 
special safeguard mechanism in  agriculture, were addressed.  
171.  On GATS rules, the importance of emergenc y safeguard measures to address the political 
sensitivities and concerns of developing countries had to be emphasized.  This was an issue of 
fundamental economic and political importance to proponents.  Market access and rules had to go 
together.  The Philippines would work closely with all proponents, the Chair, the Secretariat, and 
other Members on the way forward on the proposed  presentations on ESM.  It welcomed the openness 
expressed by other Members in moving forward with the discussions.   TN/S/M/42 
 Page 29 
 
 
  172. The Philippines supported the inclusion of development-friendly elements in domestic 
regulation and GATS rules, and hoped that other Me mbers would give developing countries greater 
leeway in articulating special and differential treatment provisions in the disciplines.  Developing countries were in the best position to understand th eir own needs towards the goal of participating 
more meaningfully in the multilateral trading system.  
173. The Philippines supported the early conclusi on of the LDC waiver negotiations, which 
constituted "low-hanging fruit".  
174. In conclusion, the Philippines noted that all w as not lost.  Moving forward, Members needed 
to retrace the steps that led to th e workable balance already achieve d in the past, and work with a 
spirit of compromise and with realistic and reasonable expectations of others.  
175. The Chairman indicated that he would take in to account the various interventions made by 
delegations when preparing his report to the TNC.  He would do his utmost to be fair, balanced, and 
factual.   
176. The Council took note of the statements made, and d ecided to revert to this item at the next 
meeting. 
D. O THER BUSINESS  
177. Since there was no other business, th e Chairman adjourned the meeting. 
 
__________