WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  RESTRICTED 
S/C/M/106 
14 July 2011 
 (11-3513) 
Council for Trade in Services  
  
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 24 JUNE 2011 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
  
1. On 24 June 2011, the Council for Trade in Serv ices held a meeting under the Chairmanship of 
Ambassador Erwidodo (Indonesia).  The agenda  was contained in document WTO/AIR/3772. 
2. The representative of Australia said that his de legation wished to add an item of Other 
Business concerning the entry into forc e of the certified EC-25 schedule.  
3. The agenda was adopted, as modified. 
A. NOTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO ARTICLES III:3  AND V:7 OF THE GATS 
4. Starting with the notifications made pursuant to Article III:3 of the GATS, the Chairperson 
drew delegations' attention to th e notifications received from Togo,  in documents S/C/N/580 to 593. 
5. The Council took note of the notifications made. 
6. The Chairperson subsequently pointed to th e notifications pursuant to GATS Article V:7 
received from the Republic of Korea and the member countri es of the Association of Southeast 
Asian Nations (ASEAN), i.e. Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People's Democratic 
Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singa pore, Thailand and Viet Nam, in documents 
S/C/N/559/Add.1 and S/C/N/560/Add.1. 
7. The Council took note of the notifications , and referred the agreement notified to the 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements for consideration. 
B. SECTORAL AND MODAL DISCUSSIONS  
8. The Chairman recalled that the Council had c oncluded its examination of the Background 
Notes produced by the Secretariat on a range of service sectors, the modes of supply, and on statistics 
on trade flows in services.   
9. In May, the Secretariat had provided the Council with an overview of the limited information 
it had been able to gather on the role of small a nd medium-sized enterprises in services trade.  This 
was in response to an initial request by the dele gation of Switzerland for the Secretariat to undertake 
work on the issue.  The Secretariat had also solic ited any additional information or analysis Members 
might have undertaken on SMEs in services trade, in  order to complement its own research and be in 
a position to produce a meaningful piece of work. 
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and without prejudice to 
the positions of Members and to their rights and obligations under the WTO. S/C/M/106 
Page 2  
 
  10. Further, the delegation of the United States had suggested that, under the "Sectoral and modal 
discussions" agenda item, the Council might usefully explore thematic, cross- cutting issues, and that 
the role of SMEs in services trade might be a case in point. 
11. A representative of the Secretariat recalled that, in May, it had updated the Council on its 
internal thinking on this issue.  As indicated, it had reviewed available information and literature, 
including by other international organizations (UNCTAD, World Bank, ITC, OECD).  However, 
relatively little material proved re levant in the current context.  Further, continued research had 
revealed that available empirical work was focused almost exclusivel y on North America and Europe.  
In light of these considerations, the Secretariat was reluctant to pursue work on such a limited basis, 
with an inevitable focus on developed countries.  The representative thus reiterated its invitation to 
delegations to contribute any na tional perspective they might have on the experience of SMEs in 
services trade, particularly in developing countri es.  Such additional information would be necessary 
in order for the Secretariat to produce a meaningful piece of work.  
12. The Chairman reiterated the need for the Secret ariat to obtain additional information in order 
to produce relevant work.  He said that the Council would take note of the statements made and revert 
to this item at its next meeting. 
13. It was so agreed. 
C. DEDICATED DISCUSSION ON INTERNATIONAL MOBILE ROAMING  
14. The Chairman recalled that, in May, the Council had agreed that it would hold a dedicated 
discussion on international mobile roaming at its June  meeting.  It had also been decided that the 
Secretariat would produce a Note on the issue, as a basis for the Council's discussion.  The Secretariat 
Note, titled "International Mobile Roaming: Possi ble Implications for GATS", was contained in 
document JOB/SERV/77. 
15. A representative of the Secretariat explained th at the Note briefly summarized some of the 
recent trends in international mobile roaming (IMR)  and the issues which, in some cases, had led to 
questions concerning the possible GATS implications.  It also provided links to further, more detailed 
accounts of developments with respect to IMR.  Am ong the trends observed ha d been the persistence 
for several years of high mobile roaming rates, which did not seem to have responded to competitive 
forces.  The Note also reviewed the possibly relevant GATS elements, including the Annex on 
Telecommunications, the Reference Paper, GATS Article II on MFN as well as Article V on Economic Integration. 
16. The representative of Australia said that IMR was a very important issue for trade in services 
and for the CTS.  It was an example of precisely th e type of work the Council should be undertaking.  
It demonstrated the relevance of th e CTS for the international community. 
17. IMR costs had become so high that the term "bill shock" was increasingly synonymous 
with that particular telecommunications service.  The OECD had found that it could be up to 20 times 
more expensive for an international roamer to make a call home than for a local mobile user, in that 
country, to make an international call to the roam er's home country.  In 200 9, Australia had conducted 
its own Parliamentary inquiry into the matter, which had found prices for IMR for Australians travelling abroad to be relatively high.  Australia was concerned that excessive IMR charges adversely 
impacted on international trade in services. 
18. IMR was one of those pockets within teleco mmunication markets in which there appeared 
to be an absence of effective levels of competiti on.  Lack of information on pricing and lack of 
transparency to consumers had also contributed to  what could amount to market failure.  IMR was a  S/C/M/106 
 Page 3 
 
 
  special case because IMR services were fundamentally cross-jurisdictional in nature.  No one 
regulator would have oversight over both the retail prices charged to end-users in its jurisdiction and 
the wholesale price that was a key determining factor in the level of the retail price. 
19. The policy dilemma facing governments was how to  allow for effective regulation of IMR, 
which was likely to require reciprocal arrangements, and avoid the 'free rider' problem associated with 
extending the benefit of such arrangements on an MFN basis.  The answer had to be that governments 
needed to find a way to accommodate govern ment responses on roaming within the WTO.  
20. The WTO was the organisation with the core  competency and mandate to assist its 
Members to address the issue of excessive IMR pr ices.  Telecommunication services fell within the 
ambit of the GATS.  As the Secretariat Note point ed out, Members had existing obligations under the 
GATS that related to IMR.  Mobile telecommunicat ions services fell within most Members' specific 
commitments for 'voice telephone services', 'data tran smission services' and/or other 'cellular', 'mobile' 
or similar services'.   
21. Mobile telecommunications services, in cluding IMR services, were 'public 
telecommunications transport services' with in the meaning of the GATS Annex on 
Telecommunications.  This meant that Members were  required to ensure that service suppliers of 
other Members be accorded access to and use of IMR services on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions (paragraph 5(a)).  This commitme nt appeared to be particularly relevant for the 
provision of wholesale IMR services by the visited network operator to home network operators of 
other Members. 
22. In addition, mobile telecommunications  services were likely to be 'basic 
telecommunications services' within the meaning of the Reference Paper.  This meant that 
interconnection (i.e. linking) with a major supplier must be on a non-discriminatory and cost-oriented 
basis (paragraph 2.2(b)).  However, the extent  to which IMR services constituted or relied on 
"interconnection" and whether a supplier was a "major  supplier" within the meaning of the Reference 
Paper was not completely clear and might require further detailed consideration. 
23. Unless concerted, cooperative in ternational action was taken, it would appear highly likely 
that the status quo  would prevail or that the GATS rules would be not be observed in the search for 
effective policy responses.  There was a need to fi nd a solution that allowed Members to address high 
IMR charges effectively, prevented free-riding by providing for reciprocity, and did so in a manner 
consistent with WTO rules. 
24. Australia therefore proposed that a work progra mme be started within the CTS.  The work 
programme would allow to better understand IMR by  reviewing those questions contained in the 
workshop proposal in Australia's joint submission (document S/C/W/335) and to investigate options 
with a view to addressing the issue of high IMR ch arges within the WTO framework.  The objective 
of the work programme would be to consider th e implications of GATS rules for IMR and possible 
responses by the WTO Membership to the problem. 
25. As a first step, Australia proposed inviting tec hnical experts, as the EU had helpfully done 
for that meeting, to a technical discussion at the ne xt CTS meeting in September.  This would help 
build an effective base of information on IMR, in addition to the Secretariat's Paper on GATS 
implications. 
26. It was premature to speculate on the possi ble outcomes of such a work programme.  
However, if there was going to be a successful in ternational response to the problem of excessive 
roaming charges, which cost the global economy billi ons of dollars annually, Members would need at S/C/M/106 
Page 4  
 
  the very least a common understanding of how potential responses fitted within WTO rules.  Australia 
would welcome Members' views on its proposal. 
27. The representative of the United States said that hi s delegation welcomed the inclusion of this 
topic on the agenda.  IMR was an issue being taken up in various fora, notably the OECD, ITU, and 
bilateral FTAs.  As trade rules were being invoked in some of these fora, it was only appropriate that 
WTO Members take up the IMR issue. 
28. If discussions on this topic were to be con tinued, a work programme, workshop or other 
format might be useful where operators could par ticipate and offer insights into the dynamics of the 
roaming market and how trade commitments related to them. 
29. Mobile roaming rates affected global busin ess, global tourism, and even government 
employees travelling abroad.  As a city which attract ed so many visitors, Geneva was a particularly 
apt location for that discussion.  The high roam ing rates US visitors encountered, many from 
government -- typically paying over US$1 per minute,  significantly constrained their use of mobile 
technology in Geneva.  This was not a theoretical issue. 
30. The question before the Council was how trade rules were relevant.  That might not be an 
easy question, given the technical and commercial arrangements which made roaming possible.  It 
would appear that both mode 1 and mode 2 services were implicated:  mode 2, given that the service was consumed abroad; and mode 1, as the home supp lier offered to its customer a service in that 
foreign territory (based on contracts it had with the foreign operator).  
31. For a start, his delegation was of the view that  the most useful focus from a trade perspective 
was not on retail rates in a foreign market, since t hose were not the rate a foreign operator or its 
customers saw, but, rather the wholesale rates the fo reign operator obtained, which that operator paid 
in order to offer its customers the roaming ser vice.  Thus, for trade purposes the United States 
believed it would be most useful to focus on the fact ors that affected the availability and rate of that 
wholesale service.  
32. The Secretariat’s Note, as well as Australia, suggested that the WTO Reference Paper 
commitment for interconnection was relevant.  His delegation disagreed.  In the US view 
interconnection had little if any relevance, as roam ing issues did not turn on the ability of two 
networks to transfer calls between them.  In many  instances, calls would both originate and terminate 
on the same foreign network.  The United States be lieved that the interacti on between operators for 
roaming was more akin to resale than interconnection.   
33. As the WTO was not a regulatory body, its job was not to prescribe rates, but it could help 
promote competition through increased market access, which could be relevant in that case.  Where 
there was competition in a market, a foreign opera tor seeking roaming arrangements could bargain for 
better prices.  Thus, WTO rules which promoted a dditional mobile market entry, both on a facilities 
basis and resale basis, could help put market pr essure on wholesale rates.  Conversely, countries that 
failed to make market access commitments, restricted  the number of suppliers, or prohibited resale, 
limited such competitive effects. 
34. Even where a market did not offer competitiv e options for the purchase of wholesale roaming 
services, Members with GATS commitments that covered mobile telecommunication services might still be obliged to ensure reasonable and non-discrim inatory access to and use of the mobile network, 
as articulated in the GATS Telecommunications Annex.  
35. The United States did not regulate the rates of e ither retail or wholesale roaming, as evidence 
supporting the need or likely effectiveness of such in tervention in the US market had not emerged.   S/C/M/106 
 Page 5 
 
 
  The United States would like to hear the views of delegations regarding the trade implications of 
cases where a Member regulated wholesale mobile roaming rates domestically, but the Member’s operators declined to make such ra tes available to foreign operators. 
36. Finally, there was an additional question to cons ider:  was there any basis for thinking that the 
service a foreign consumer obtained when roaming abroad was not “like” the service a consumer in 
that territory obtained when roaming between different operators there? 
37. The United States was open on how best to  continue work on the IMR issue. 
38. The representative of the European Union said that his delegation was supportive of 
undertaking further work on the IMR issue.  The EU wished to contribute by sharing its own 
experience with IMR.   
39. The EU has employed two temporary legal instruments to deal with intra-EU roaming 
problems.  The EU had decided to act on roaming sin ce prices were too high for consumers.  Both in 
2007 and in 2009, the Commission had tried to avoid the need for regulation, and called on operators to voluntarily bring prices down.  However, they remained too high.  To solve this problem, the 
Commission decided to propose a regulation (first in 2007, second in 2009) and to afterwards amend 
it, extending its scope to cover SMS and data.   
40. Regulatory intervention at the EU level was re quired since the internal market and cross-
border nature of EU roaming meant that the na tional regulatory authorities could not tackle the 
problem of very high retail prices at the nationa l level.  Roaming was a pa n-EU service and national 
regulators only had the tools to tackle the problem  of wholesale prices at the national level.  As 
individual Member States had no incentive to regul ate in a way that took into account the possible 
cross-country externalities of their regulation on the other Member States, a centralized intervention at 
the European level was deemed necessary as this wo uld better take into account the general interest.  
A common approach for the whole of the EU would also prevent a situation where individual Member 
States took divergent approaches for dealing with the problem of high prices, which would create obstacles to the EU internal market. 
41. The Roaming Regulation applied to the charge s levied on operators with a public mobile 
telephone network located in a Member State by opera tors with a similar netw ork in another Member 
State when one of their customers roamed on the ot her’s network.  The Regulation covered only intra-
Union roaming, and not international roaming.  The Regulation did not prevent non-EU operators 
from freely negotiating tariffs for "international" (out side Union) roaming tariffs with their European 
counterparts.   
42. Roaming was one of the key initiatives for 2011 in the European Dig ital Agenda aiming at 
achieving a single market for telecom services.  The Regulation had protected consumers from excessive prices for voice and SMS, but it had failed to deliver competition and downward 
momentum in retail prices - especially for data.  While the Regulation regulated wholesale prices for roaming data services, it did not include caps for retail data services.  A downward trend was 
observed for wholesale prices, but retail prices had not declined at the same speed, and in practice the 
spread between wholesale and reta il prices had actually increased, wh ich suggested that competition 
had not fully developed.   
43. The roaming Regulations were currently temporar y instruments, due to expire in 2012.  The 
Commission had recently held public consultations with stakeholders.  These, and the data from the 
roaming market, had revealed quite general agreem ent that further action was needed and that not 
enough competition existed in the market.  The curre nt Regulation had 'contained' the problem by 
ensuring that consumers were not charged excessive prices.  But despite these gains, true competition S/C/M/106 
Page 6  
 
  for roaming services had not yet materialised.  Prices  tended to be clustered around the regulated caps 
both for retail and wholesale, and a big gap existed be tween competitive domestic and roaming prices.   
44. The Commission's consultative paper suggested a wide range of possible options for market 
regulation.  Those included various types of price regulation, like linking the price to the visited network or to the domestic prices of the domestic ne twork.  It also suggested structural measures, 
which included the unbundling of domestic from roam ing services at the retail level, with customers 
buying the two services separately.   At the wholesale level, it proposed granting access to small 
operators at the regulated price.  Innovative pro posals included the creation of a spot market for 
trading wholesale roaming services.   
45. The responses to the consultations had revealed that consumers preferred a simple retail-price 
regulation.  However, a new approach needed to go beyond simply perpetuating retail price regulation 
and should address the root of the problem.  The forthcoming Commission's proposal aimed to tackle the source of the problem, i.e. the lack of competition and of consumer choice that lied at the heart of 
high roaming prices.  This would enable the Commission to meet one of its own targets, i.e. to achieve the single market for telecom services and to have roaming prices start approach domestic 
competitive prices.   
46. Without prejudice to the final proposal, the Commission was thinking of a hybrid approach 
embracing two types of measures:  the introduction of  structural changes that would give consumer 
the ability to choose the best roaming offer and w ould also increase the number of competitive offers 
available on the market; and the preservation of safe guard limits on consumer prices for a transitional 
period until the structural solutions became effectiv e.  The Commission would finalise and publish its 
review over the following two weeks and could sh are additional information at that stage. 
47. The representative of Japan said that the Note by the Secretariat was still being examined 
comprehensively in terms of the possible implic ations of GATS obligations on IMR.  The Note 
usefully highlighted trends with regard to IMR bot h at the national level as well as in international 
organizations.  In particular, Japan believed that, as indicated in the Note's “Concluding 
Observations”, IMR agreements could be better u nderstood through detailed information-sharing.  
Thus, the representative would encourage Members to provide information on their IMR arrangements. 
48. Specifically regarding the Note by the Secr etariat, the representative asked how the 
Secretariat had calculated the number of Members with commitments on mobile services.  According 
to paragraph 20 of the Note, there were 98 such Members.  According to the “Notes for Scheduling 
Basic Telecom Services Commitments”, as a general rule services described in the Schedule also 
included services provided by wireless and satellite technology.  From this perspective, Japan 
considered that international roaming servi ces in the W/120 corresponded to (a) Voice telephone 
services”,”(h) Electronic mail “and ”(o) Other”. 
49. Second, the Note discussed the relevance of Members’ measures to cut IMR rates and the 
MFN implications.  At that point, Japan did not have  any specific regulations or agreements on IMR.  
However, it would like to exchange opinions with other Members on the issue.    
50. Third, Japan would like to comment on the sco pe of Reference Paper.  According to 
Article 2.1 of Reference Paper, interconnection was defined as “ linking with suppliers providing 
public telecommunication transport networks or services”.   It could be considered that the definition 
included electronic connection to provide roaming ser vices.  However, as the informal Note by the 
Secretariat pointed out, the scope of the Referenc e Paper was limited to interconnection with major 
suppliers which had substantial power  in the market.  Hence, it was unclear whether the obligation of 
cost-oriented rates described in the Article 2. 2 of Reference Paper would be quite narrow.   S/C/M/106 
 Page 7 
 
 
  51. Fourthly, Members needed to give further c onsideration to how much difference there was 
between interconnection rates and roaming tariffs, especially at the wholesale level.  
52. Finally, Japan viewed as quite meaningful and could support the Australian proposal for a 
work programme on IMR.   
53. The representative of Turkey believed that a de dicated discussion offered an opportunity to 
examine all the pros and cons of regulated prici ng and could facilitate the identification of common 
ground to improve roaming rates.  From Turkey's pe rspective, one of the items to be discussed was 
General Packet Radio Services (GPRS) Inter-Opera tor Tariffs (IOTs), where the non-negotiated and 
negotiated price difference was at its maximum and which was the main cause for "bill shocks".   
54. Article (9) of the By-Law on Consumer Rights in the Electronic Communications Sector 
stated that “in case international roaming service is used, international tariff information which 
includes at least voice and short message service shal l be notified to subscribers via short message.” 
This article was in line with the aim of protecti ng consumers against “bill shocks” due to mobile 
roaming.  
55. Both wholesale and retail price regulations, as pointed out in the Secretariat Note, were well 
known tools for regulating the mobile market.  Reta il maximum price limit regulations, in particular, 
were directly related with the prevention of excessi ve charging of consumers.  However, within the 
scope of powers given by law to Turkey's regul atory authority BTK (Information and Communication 
Technologies Authority), it was authorized only to regulate operator and services at national level.  
56. Turkey had one specific comment on paragraph 4 of  the Secretariat Note, relating to regulated 
price caps.  Turkey's industry had been compla ining about arrangements to address roaming by 
regional groups among their respective members, as the operators in such regional groups did request 
similar lowered rates also from Turkey and this  had significant negative implications on the net 
earnings of Turkish operators. 
57. In Turkey there were three mobile operator s, whose market shares were 54 per cent, 27 
per cent and 19 per cent, respectively.  Turkey's statement was mainly derived from the responses it 
had received from its industry.  
58. The ability of customers to use IMR effectively had a crucial impact on the facilitation of 
social and economic interactions, especially in areas such as tourism and trade.  Hence, it was of 
utmost importance that these services were provided continuously at reasonable rates, which was possible only if all operators were  able to compete effectively. 
59. IMR was a service that enabled customers to benefit from mobile services by using their 
existing mobile accounts based on agreements concl uded between mobile operators.  Indeed, in order 
to provide these services, mobile operators in di fferent countries needed to agree on technical and 
commercial issues and sign an international roaming ag reement.  Rates applied to the customers were 
actually shaped as a result of the prices agreed upon by the operators and of market conditions.   
60. In fact, wholesale prices agreed upon by the opera tors appeared as the most important cost 
item when setting IMR rates for final users.  Acco rdingly, the key factor determining the wholesale 
prices was the “amount of traffic”.  In other words, operators that had more traffic abroad due to their 
position in the market might be able to get advantageous discounts for mobile roaming.  
Consequently, incumbent operators could offer roami ng services to final users at lower rates.  This 
was also true for group operators having global ope rations as they might enjoy cost advantages.  
Furthermore, IMR gained more and more importance in the formulation of customer offers in the S/C/M/106 
Page 8  
 
  local market, as international roaming services had indeed turned into an important item shaping 
customers’ preferences. 
61. As it was important to provide exact and accu rate information to final users about IMR 
services and rates, all Turkish mobile operators had indicated that they paid utmost attention to the 
disclosure of information about IMR services and rates to their customers, and abided by the 
transparency rules with regard to  these services.  Hence, international roaming rates were available on 
their official websites.  They also sent “welcom e” SMSs to their customers travelling abroad, which 
included information about the roaming rates in the country the customers were travelling to.  Users 
were also able to get information about IMR services and rates through customer services and 
“inquiry through SMS” services.  Such transparency did not need to be supported by governments 
unless specifically required (which might happen in  countries with strictly regulated information 
prescriptions).  If there were obstacles for commercia l entities to market or advertise their products, 
government might play a role in eliminating those ob stacles instead of financing consumer awareness.  
Turkish consumers were well aware of possible substitutes due to the availability of many information 
channels (internet, social network and so forth).  
62. A competitive environment existed in the Turk ish market both at the wholesale and retail 
level that resulted in commercially reasona ble prices.  However, in markets where 
monopolistic/oligopolistic forces were at play, operators  were able to resist discount requests, thus 
creating a high-cost environment for the home public mobile network. 
63. The competitive environment in the Turkish roami ng market indirectly forced the operators to 
apply lower prices and better services to consumers.  This was born out also in the dropping retail 
price observed in the past few years.   
64. The representative of Argentina said that his de legation was very interested in the Council's 
discussion of IMR.  He had not yet received detailed comments from his authorities on the Secretariat 
Note.  By way of preliminary comments, he noted that IMR was a priority theme on the ITU agenda, 
with regard to both tariffs and quality of service an d information supplied to users.  Argentina was 
currently involved in activities linked to IMR both at the bilateral and regional level.  In this regard, 
further discussion of the issue would be very u seful to better understand how the GATS obligations 
applied to IMR, to ensure that such ser vices were supplied in a competitive manner. 
65. The representative of Norway thanked the Secr etariat for an excellent Note.  Norway 
welcomed it as a very useful contribution to th e understanding of important telecommunications 
provisions and hoped that the Note would stimul ate further, interesting debates on how IMR was 
covered by the GATS.  The Secretariat had provid ed useful information and highlighted potential 
pitfalls in the possible interpretation of roaming issues within GATS. 
66. IMR services played an important role in inte rnational trade and travel.  Norway recognized 
the challenges regarding high international roaming ch arges.  They were obstacles to an efficient use 
of mobile communications and might have a negative effect on international trade relations.  It was 
therefore of utmost importance that roaming services could be used efficiently.  The inefficiencies of 
roaming markets should be an issue of concern for governments and international organisations.  The 
representative welcomed the work done by the OECD  in the area.  Available reports showed, as 
mentioned by other delegations, costs up to 20 tim es more for international roaming than for local 
users.   
67. As explained by the EU delegation, within  the European Economic Area, the roaming 
regulation of 2007 had substantiall y reduced the prices of using mobile telephones in the area.  
Roaming in countries outside the EEA was still very expensive and gave customers “bill shocks”, as 
mentioned by Australia.  S/C/M/106 
 Page 9 
 
 
  68. She then offered some concrete examples based  on the experience of  Norwegian delegates 
coming to meetings in Geneva, keeping in mind th at mobile roaming was underpinned by agreements 
between the traveller’s mobile provider and providers  in the visiting country.  First, mobile calls 
abroad from Switzerland, with the services of a No rwegian operator were 80 per cent more expensive 
than from a country within the EEA.  Second, for mobile calls received, that price was 168 per cent 
higher.  Finally, the charges for receipt of data vi a mobile phone were 60 per cent higher than in the 
EEA. 
69. Turning to the Secretariat Note , she said that, as concerned transparency obligations, it was 
important to ensure transparency for roaming charge s, both at the retail and at the wholesale level.  
Norway would therefore agree with an interpretation of the Annex to include an obligation to ensure 
that companies do publish such information.  
70. The discussion regarding the interconnection provis ions of the Reference Paper had also been 
of interest.  While the types of roaming agreem ents and arrangements might vary from company to 
company and Member to Member, Norway believed th at there was nothing that inherently excluded 
such agreements from being covere d by the interconnection provisions of the Reference Paper.  This 
would mean, inter alia , that host country telecommunication suppliers would be subject to the 
requirement to have reasonable, cost-oriented and transparent rates.  
71. She acknowledged that not very many of the pr ovisions of the Annex and of the Reference 
Paper had been the subject of Appellate Body deci sions so far.  The interpretation of relevant 
provisions was not cast in stone.  Norway looked forward to hearing other Members’ views on how these might apply to international roaming. 
72. There were many issues in need of further cons ideration regarding the possible application of 
GATS to roaming charges.  The dedicated discu ssion at that meeting of the Council was a good 
starting point.  Australia had proposed a work pr ogramme within the CTS to better understand the 
issues being raised in the proposal co-sponsored by  Norway (document S/C/W/335).  She agreed that 
further analysis and discussions were necessary a nd therefore supported the Australian proposal for a 
work programme. 
73. The representative of Pakistan said that high IM R charges were an obstacle to international 
trade and travel for countries at all levels of deve lopment.  The price for IMR services could be up to 
ten times higher than the cost of providing them.  He was not sure whether this differential was 
necessarily due to lack of competition.  Even in  competitive markets, very high rates were still 
possible.   
74. He was supportive of Australia's proposal to have a work programme within the CTS to 
further discuss the IMR issue.  Nevertheless, he wi shed to register a point.  Paragraph 7 of the 
Secretariat Note discussed the scope of the GATS and he urged caution in this regard, as pricing 
issues in other services, such as health and educati on, were very sensitive.  He stressed that the 
discussion of IMR charges should not cr eate a precedent for other services. 
75. The representative of Chile welcomed the discussi on of IMR, but was not fully convinced that 
the issue fell within the scope of the GATS.  He had found the point just raised by Pakistan very 
relevant.  His delegation would like to revert to the issue, as his authorities were still engaged in 
domestic consultations. 
76. The representative of New Zealand thanked the co-sponsors and said that the IMR dedicated 
discussion was a good example of the WTO taking up issues which posed a clear and present 
challenge to service suppliers operating in internati onalised markets.  She said that the Secretariat S/C/M/106 
Page 10  
 
  Note summarised a set of highly complex concepts and issues in a clear way that even uninformed 
users of IMR could understand.   
77. She shared some of New Zealand’s recent expe rience in considering IMR in a trans-Tasman 
context.  On May 2010, New Zealand’s Ministry of Economic Development and Australia's Department of Broadband, Communications a nd the Digital Economy had jointly released a 
discussion document on trans-Tasman roaming, the ai m of which was to determine whether a market 
investigation (necessitating significant resour ces from both the governments and the operators 
concerned) was warranted.  Amongst other things, the document had benchmarked prices for roaming 
between the two countries against relevant comparator s, including EU regulated rates and various cost 
estimates.  Prices had been found to be so high as to justify subjecting stakeholders to a market 
investigation. 
78. Accordingly, an investigation had been launche d in April 2011, and was currently underway.  
A market investigation involved the definition of a market and the analysis of whether competition 
was limited in that market, in a manner not dissimilar to that undertaken by many national telecommunication regulators around the world.  Sin ce this was an ex ante, rather than ex post, 
process, there was no suggestion of anti-competitive be haviour that might draw financial penalties.   
79. The investigation would primarily examine the wholesale markets in which New Zealand 
operators sold IMR services to Australian operators  and in which Australian operators sold IMR 
services to New Zealand operators, and seek to dete rmine whether there was market failure justifying 
regulatory intervention.  If regulatory interventio n took place, this could possibly be through a 
legislative vehicle on each side of the Tasman, perhap s subsequent to agreement set forth in a protocol 
to the CER Agreement.  However, the market i nvestigation was on-going a nd it would be premature 
to draw any conclusions.   
80. Furthermore, earlier that month, New Zealand's Communications Minister had released the 
results of a Government survey which had helped inform the Government's decision to launch a joint 
investigation with Australia into whether the rates needed to be regulated.  The survey had collected 
responses from 281 business people having travelled across the Tasman between July 2010 and 
January 2011.  It found that 72 per cent of sma ll businesses and 59 per cent of large firms had told 
workers to call or text while in Australia "only if they  really needed to".  It also revealed that three-
quarters of small and large businesses had told st aff they should only access mobile internet if 
absolutely necessary.  She understood that a pa rallel survey had been conducted of Australian 
businesses.  The reason given by New Zealand businesses for discouraging use of mobile phones was 
the expenses associated with using a mobile phone wh ile roaming.  So it was clear that the cost of 
roaming presented a significant constraint on business productivity.   
81. Since the publication of the discussion document in May 2010, the rates that New Zealand 
operators charged when their customers used data roaming services in Australia had reduced.  In the 
case of one operator, this reduction was quite signifi cant.  Voice and SMS prices had not changed as 
much, but were arguably of less concern.  This sugg ested that the threat of regulation had helped the 
market to improve.   
82. Turning to the Secretariat Note and to questions (a)-(e) posed in the orig inal joint proposal by 
Australia, Norway and the United States, her delega tion and was generally in agreement, with some 
exceptions, that the classifications and provisi ons of the GATS Annex and the Reference Paper 
identified in those documents applied to IMR services .  Her delegation still remained to be convinced 
on the application of some specific points, for ex ample, whether paragraph 5(a) of the Annex was 
designed to apply to IMR charges and conditions at retail level;  and whether the concept of 
‘interconnection’ in paragraph 2.2(b) of the Refere nce Paper was intended to apply to IMR, or more 
narrowly to the termination of voice calls, SMS/MMS, and data.    S/C/M/106 
 Page 11 
 
 
  83. Leaving aside details, several things were clea r to her delegation.  Firstly, there was a 
problem in many markets with high IMR charges;  this was not only an issue in terms of competition 
in a particular sector, but had a knock-on effect fo r a range of businesses, including service suppliers, 
and was a drag on business productivity and the global economy.  Secondly, it was encouraging that a 
number of Members were making efforts to address the issue on a bilateral or regional basis.  There 
were a number of WTO disciplines that could be app licable to high IMR rates, but at the same time 
also others that could constrain Members attempti ng to be pro-active in identifying solutions to the 
problem.  For example, and as noted in the Secretariat Note, under GATS MFN obligation and non-discrimination provisions, if a country signed an agreement on IMR wholesale rates, it potentially 
expose its operators to the risk of having to offer regulated wholesale rates not just to the operators of 
other countries signing the agreement, but also to  operators from all other WTO Members, without 
any requirement on those operators to offer reci procal rates.  Yet Ne w Zealand recognised, as 
observed in the Secretariat Note, that Article  V might provide cover in some cases.  
84. New Zealand would be very interested in c onsidering the issues further and supported the 
proponents’ proposal for further work on IMR, incl uding through a work programme.  As has been 
suggested, the most logical first step was to wo rk towards a common understanding of how both IMR 
and potential interventions fitted within WTO rules.   
85. The representative of the Republic of Korea said that the proposal for a dedicated discussion 
on IMR was timely, given the increasing number of inte rnational travellers around the world either for 
business or travel.  IMR was costly, and there wa s a real need for international cooperation or 
coordination by national regulators to deal with the issue.  Korea considered mobile telecom services 
to fall under the category of basic telecommunicati ons and, thus, be subject to the GATS Annex on 
Telecommunications.  Thus, GATS principles of non-discrimination and reasonable access to the 
PTTNS would apply to IMR.  
86. Yet, Korea believed that further study was ne eded on whether and how the pricing aspect of 
IMR could be dealt with in the context of WTO ru les.  More specifically, IMR consisted of several 
components and it was not clear how the cost-based  principles of interconnection were applied to 
IMR.  Were IMR service providers considered as ma jor suppliers, subject to the principles of the 
Reference Paper?  To what component of the servi ce would the Reference Paper be applied?  IMR 
involved not only a wholesale component between operators but also a retail component, where consumers roamed between foreign networks.  If the notion of interconnection could be applied, then 
what would be the extent of a national regulator's regulatory jurisdiction?   In Korea, IMR was not 
regulated as it was considered a commercial arrangement between domestic and foreign mobile 
operators.  If the wholesale price among operators was the issue, then, were the costs of IMR solely 
due to unreasonable or costly interconnection fees, or were other commercial factors involved, which 
could contribute to high IMR prices, such as traffi c volume-based pricing, pricing structure unrelated 
to interconnection, and asymmetric negotiating power between operators? 
87. If improving competition was the answer to th ese problems, it appeared to be working in 
Korea.  Recently, increasing demand for better inte rnational roaming services had led Korean mobile 
operators to offer international text messages free of  charge, thus, if consumers did not want to be 
charged for high voice service, they could simply use text messages.  
88. Clearly, one way to deal with the issue was to improve transparency and provide better 
information on the price of IMR services to consumer s or users.  The GATS transparency obligations 
were clearly applicable.  This effort had been pursued elsewhere as well, for example in the APEC 
setting, where Korea with other member economi es contributed toward producing the APEC TEL 
guidelines on the Provision of Consumer Informa tion on International Mobile Roaming.  The WTO 
might be another appropriate forum to discuss these issues to help national regulators that were 
searching for effective policy responses.  S/C/M/106 
Page 12  
 
  89. Against this backdrop, Korea was supportive of  efforts to better understand IMR and the 
applicability of GATS rules and was willing to work  closely with Australia on the proposed work 
programme.   
90. The representative of Switzerland said that th e Secretariat Note showed the pertinence and 
applicability of the GATS to IMR.  The link between  the Telecom Annex and the wholesale side of 
IMR with regard to transparency and the access oblig ations was clear.  However, the link with retail 
IMR was less obvious to his delegati on.  Paragraph 12 of the Note re ferred to access and use of public 
telecom networks to supply committed services while abroad.  Retail roaming agreements of country 
X would be relevant for users and suppliers of X wh en they offered services in country Y.  But the 
commitments taken by X and the retail arrangements of  X did not seem to be linked with the problem 
abroad.  Further clarity on this issue would be we lcome.  He felt that Table 1 in the Note was not 
clear, in particular in its reference to th e application of disciplines and commitments. 
91. The representative of Israel said that he had not received detailed comments from his 
authorities, but that his delegation was pleased to discuss IMR.  In Israel, consumers accessed the 
internet through mobile devices more than throug h regular connections, with a resulting significant 
use of data services.  Israeli, who were increasingl y accustomed to using mobile data services, were 
travelling more frequently, and the issue of excessi ve roaming charges had taken on great importance 
and should be investigated further.  Given technol ogical possibilities available to consumers through 
smart phones, mobile telecom services enabled them to buy applications, videos, etcetera, from many 
different suppliers.   
92. His delegation was in favour of having further discussion of IMR, including by focusing on 
technological developments and supported the Austra lian proposal to have a work programme.  He 
recognised that addressing the cost of a service was a delicate issue, but the trade implications of IMR 
were so important that it could not be neglected. 
93. The representative of Indonesia said that the Secretariat Note provided a useful background to 
the discussion of IMR.  The current practice was to  leave roaming pricing to the market under the 
assumption that the industry was competitive.  Howeve r, market forces did not appear to be working 
very well, as IMR charges were high.  His delegation was also concerned by the lack of transparency 
and the effect it had on consumers.  With regard to  the Secretariat Note, he said that it usefully 
approached IMR from a GATS perspective but that, gi ven the complexity of the issue, his authorities 
were still studying it and he would revert to it in mo re detail.  He was thankful to those delegations 
that had shared their national experiences and offere d some information on the situation in Indonesia.  
IMR was not currently regulated:  the traffic route a nd pricing were left to the operators to decide 
freely. 
94. The representative of India said that the Secret ariat Note was informative and concise and 
raised very pertinent and important points.  His delegation was still consulting with relevant 
Ministries, the Regulator, industry and stakeholders concerned about the issues raised in the Note.  
India was yet to arrive at a firm view on the a pplicability of the Annex and various provisions of 
GATS in the context of IMR, so his delegation would revert with more detailed comments.  
95. On a preliminary basis, his delegation agreed with Switzerland that, as a first step, it was 
important to respond to the questions  regarding the applicability of GATS.  Accordingly, with regard 
to paragraph 12 of the Secretariat Note, he felt that more clarity was needed on the implications of the 
applicability of the Annex to retail roaming arra ngements.  Was it being suggested that these 
arrangements were to be treated differently if the mobile user was a services supplier and was 
engaging in mobile roaming for supply of committe d services while abroad?  What if the service 
supplier was not supplying services while engaging in mobile roaming or the user of mobile roaming 
was not a service supplier?  Would there be separat e retail roaming arrangement in these situations?   S/C/M/106 
 Page 13 
 
 
  Similarly, would the transparency obligations of Anne x, as referred to in the last line of paragraph 10 
of the Secretariat Note, apply differently?   
96. Further, the Note referred to the appli cability of Article VIII of GATS on monopoly and 
exclusive suppliers.  Some more clarity was needed  on what exactly a Member’s obligations would be 
with reference to this Article.  What would be the interplay of a Member’s obligations under MFN 
and Article VIII in the context of mobile roaming in case of agreements entered by suppliers with 
suppliers of a different country or different supp liers from the same country?  How would regulations 
that distinguished between suppliers on the basis of ow nership or country of origin be viewed in this 
context? 
97. With regard to the application of the Refere nce Paper, paragraph 13 of the Note tended to 
imply that the obligations and the benefits might not be applicable in case of en d-users.  This needed a 
little more clarity, as the Scope of the Reference Pape r did not seem to make any such distinction.  
The Article on interconnection did make reference to users.  Further, in the context of the Reference 
Paper, it would also be interesting to explore the applicability of various provisions, like anti-
competitive cross subsidization or cost-oriented ra tes to mobile roaming, where higher prices of 
roaming were justified to recover general and overall fixed costs of the network.  This was important 
as international mobile services were frequently sold in a bundle including domestic mobile access 
and the market for international mobile roaming w as far from perfect.  The views of new entrants and 
small mobile operators would also be relevant in  the context of anti-competitive practices such as 
diversion of traffic to alliance members.   
98. Additionally, paragraph 18 of the Secretariat Note made interesting observations about free 
standing government-to-government agreements on ro aming that would cover favourable treatment to 
some Members while excluding others.  India wished  to know more about such agreements and the 
role of MFN exemptions.  The representative also  noted the divergence of views between the co-
sponsors on the applicability of interconnection under paragraph 2.2 of the Reference Paper. 
99. Those were preliminary views and authorities in  capital were having detailed consultations 
with relevant stakeholders.  In terms of next st eps, Australia had suggested a work programme, while 
the United States had proposed a workshop;  India w ould await further details from the co-sponsors.   
100. The representative of China said that the S ecretariat Note provided comprehensive and 
thought-provoking descriptions of the relations hip between the GATS and IMR.  High mobile 
roaming charges had caught attention of China' s consumers and regulators, as well as government 
colleagues while roaming in Geneva.  Thus, China ge nerally shared the interest in discussing IMR and 
hoped that this would help to bring down fees.  
101. He had not received detailed feedback from China's telecom regulators on the specific issues 
raised by the proponents and in the Secretariat No te.  Nevertheless, pre liminary comments from the 
regulators focused on two aspects.  First, the focu s in the proponents’ paper seemed to be on the 
definitions and regulatory framework.  More explan ation might be needed with respect to how those 
were linked to the goal of lowering roaming fees.  Second, in most countries roaming charges were set 
by market forces, and agreed among operators.  While the GATS regulated the measures by Members’ governments, more discussion might be needed as to identify what role governments 
played in setting roaming fees and how to est ablish the link between commercial rates and 
governments’ obligations under the GATS. 
102. China was willing to pursue further discussions on this subject with other Members.  By the 
following meeting, he hoped to have received mo re comments from the telecom regulator to share 
views and practices on this issue.  As to the format of further discussions and a possible work 
programme proposed by Australia, his delegation was flexible. S/C/M/106 
Page 14  
 
  103. The representative of Chinese Taipei stressed th e importance of the IMR issue, which had 
caught the attention of the authorities.  He had no specific comments to offer at that stage but looked 
forward to future discussions on IMR.   As to  the format of these discussions, his delegation was 
open.  It would be useful to encourage the pa rticipation of experts from those international 
organisations that had conducted work on IMR,  such as the ITU and the OECD, which were 
mentioned in paragraph 21 of the Secretariat Note, so as to avoid unnecessary duplication.  
104. The representative of Hong Kong, China highlig hted his delegation's interest in the IMR 
discussions.  The Secretariat Note usefully highlig hted a number of pertinent issues that Members 
needed to think about and discuss further.  He wa s yet to receive detailed comments from Hong Kong 
China's telecommunication authorities on the Secretaria t Note, but wished to share some preliminary 
comments.  First, with regard to the applicability of  the Telecom Annex, he had a similar query to that 
raised by Switzerland on the analysis provided in pa ragraph 12.  He was not sure whether the Annex 
was equally applicable to wholesale and retail services.  He was quite confident that wholesale services would come under the Annex, but for the re tail level more analysis was needed.  Second, 
regarding the applicability of the Reference Paper,  he shared the reading of the Secretariat in 
paragraph 13 that the Reference Paper concerned mainly  wholesale IMR rates, rather than retail rates.  
Of course, the very high prices of internationa l roaming services came mainly from the margin 
between retail and wholesale prices, and existing WT O instruments might not suffice to lower retail 
prices.  Moreover, as many had already mentioned, it  was not the role of the WTO to regulate specific 
prices.   
105. He then shared with Members some info rmation on how Hong Kong, China regulated 
international roaming prices.  In reality, it did not.  Hong Kong, China had adopted a market-based, 
light-handed approach.  Telecom market had been fully liberalized and there was no ex-ante price 
regulation on retail services and only minimal control of the wholesale interconnection prices.  Therefore, instead of regulating prices, Hong Kong  China's approach was to enhance competition.  
This was achieved in two ways.  First, by maintaini ng an open market for more operators to come to 
compete specifically on IMR, Hong Kong, China paid  a lot of attention to enable various roaming 
substitute services.  These could allow users to make  substantial savings, alt hough some limitations in 
the features offered might exist.  He would be happ y to share more information in this regard, if 
Members were interested.  The second way was that   a lot of emphasis was placed on enhancing the 
transparency of international roaming tariffs.  Operat ors were encouraged to make easily available to 
consumers very detailed tariff information.  Clearly , as had been mentioned, prices were still on the 
high side.  Thus, a continuous discussion of this issu e would be very relevant.  He then expressed his 
delegation's support for further dedicated discussions  on IMR, by way of a workshop or any other 
format. 
106. The representative of Australia said that the discussion had been very valuable.  He was 
pleased to see the level of support for continued dial ogue on this issue in the Council.  His delegation 
had taken careful note of all the interventions, on both the legal and policy issues.  Some very 
interesting comments had been made on the policy responses.  For instance, the EU experience had shown that, while the Roaming Regul ations had had some very consid erable impact on the market, the 
Commission would hope for more competition.   Similarly, New Zealand's point that the threat of regulation itself had had an impact was interesting a nd telling.  The results of the survey quoted also 
provided a particularly vivid example of employers telling their employees not to call home unless 
absolutely necessary.   
107. On the legal side, a variety of issues had been raised which warranted further exploration.  
While the United States disagreed, Australia and others  considered that interconnection was relevant.  
Such legal issues would be very worthy of furt her exploration in a dedicated discussion in the 
Council.  S/C/M/106 
 Page 15 
 
 
  108. On next steps, in his delegations' view there we re two areas worthy of attention.  First, a 
common legal understanding of the implications of  the GATS regime for IMR.  Members should 
continue their deliberations to achieve a co mmon understanding, with the ultimate goal of 
accommodating policy responses with regard to IMR within the GATS.  The second area was the 
sharing of experience and information, where Members could learn from each others' policy 
responses.  The IMR discussion would offer an oppor tunity to work towards common principles or 
policy responses generally.  He thus encouraged dele gations to bring technical experts to the Council's 
next discussion on the IMR issue in September.  This would add to a body of information on responses to high IMR charges and usefully comple ment the Council's discussion of legal aspects. 
109. A representative of the Secretariat thanked all delegations for their comments and questions.  
He said that the Secretariat considered the Note to be a starting point and would be ready to produce 
more analysis if Members considered it useful.  Th ere was clearly a need to discuss further some of 
the issues raised, possibly in a more informal setting. 
110. The Secretariat had left a lot of questions open in its Note, including whether or not IMR 
related to interconnection.  As for the technologi cal means of connecting networks and consumers, 
there was no single model in which this connection took place.  Traditionally, interconnection implied 
an actual connection between the home network, where the call was being initiated, and the host 
network, where it was being terminated.  But more recently  there were situations in which the 
consumer was handed over completely from the home  network to the host network when roaming.  
Such questions would benefit from further discussion.   
111. The question of the participation of other intern ational organizations rested with Members.  
The ITU was an observer to the Council, but other organizations which were not, such as the OECD, 
had also done relevant work on IMR and it was up to Members whether and how they wished to 
involve them in those discussions.  
112. The Chairman concluded that the Council would ta ke note of the statements made and revert 
to this item at its next meeting.  
113. It was so agreed. 
D. WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE  
114. The Chairman recalled that the Work Progra mme on Electronic Commerce had been placed 
on the Council's agenda in May at the request of th e delegation of the United States.  There had been 
wide support in the Council for resuming deliberatio ns under the work programme.  It had therefore 
been agreed that, as a basis for a first discussion,  the Secretariat would produce a compilation of 
elements related to the electronic supply of services drawn from the Background Notes issued on a 
number of sectors and modes of supply.  Accord ingly, the Secretariat had produced a Note, titled 
"Electronic Commerce:  Related Elements in Secr etariat Background Notes", which was contained in 
document JOB/SERV/78 (and Corrigendum 1).   
115. A representative of the Secretariat explained that the Secretariat just had compiled sections of 
the Background Notes that related to the electroni c supply of services.  As such, the Note did not 
reflect any comments delegations might have made in  the course of the Council's discussions of those 
Notes. 
116. The representative of the United States said that his delegation was pleased to see the 
reinvigoration of the Work Programme on Elec tronic Commerce, which also included earlier 
discussions on IMR, as Israel's intervention about the downloading of applica tions, videos and data 
services over mobile networks had highlighted.  His delegations was still looking through the S/C/M/106 
Page 16  
 
  Secretariat Note and would revert to this item at  the next meeting of the Council, when it also 
intended to make a submission on e-commerce, includi ng on the basis of the Secretariat compilation. 
117. The representative of Pakistan said that the Secretariat compilation showed how closely e-
commerce and services were related and how much wo rk Members could usefully do on this issue in 
the Council.  Ministers at the 7th WTO Ministerial Conference had instructed delegations to pursue 
the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce and report back to the 8th Ministerial Conference.  It 
was therefore Members' duty to take the e-co mmerce issue seriously.  His delegation supported 
continued work in that regard and looked forw ard to the submission by the US delegation. 
118. The representative of Cuba said that e-commer ce was a very important issue for developing 
countries.  In this regard, his delegation would presen t, jointly with Ecuador, the Plurinational State of 
Bolivia and Nicaragua, a communication to th e General Council, the Committee on Trade and 
Development and the Council for Trade in Goods, to gether with a proposal for a Ministerial Decision 
to be adopted during the 8th Ministerial Conference titled "The e ffective participation of developing 
countries in electronic commerce as a means to combat poverty". 
119. This proposal, based on the 2009 Ministerial Decisi on to "intensively reinvigorate" the Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce and the 1998 guidelines, aimed to examine some of the 
difficulties and barriers that limited the participation of developing countries in commerce.  It also put 
forward a series of recommendations for action rela ted to access, on a non-discriminatory basis, to 
information technology and telecommunications, w ith a view to expanding e-commerce in the co-
sponsors' economies.  Moreover, the proposal aimed to  facilitate the participation of micro-, small- 
and medium-sized enterprises in electronic commer ce, and thus to promot e the participation of 
developing countries in e-commerce, and as a means to  support development and poverty reduction.   
120. The Chairman recalled that the Ministerial Decision on the E-Commerce Work Programme of 
December 2009 instructed the General Council to periodically review progress on the work 
programme.  The next such review was scheduled fo r July 2011.  Therefore, he would be producing, 
under his own responsibility, a Chairman's Repor t to the General Council of the discussion the 
Services Council just had under the work progra mme, in time for the General Council meeting 
scheduled for the end of July.   
121. It was so agreed. 
122. The Chairman said that the Council would take note  of the statements made and revert to this 
item at its next meeting.   
E. OTHER BUSINESS  
123. The representative of Australia expressed his de legation's on-going concern about the lengthy 
delay in the entry into force of the certified EC-25 schedule.  He recalled that it had been more than 
three years since Australia had first raised th ese concerns.  The delay posed both systemic and 
commercial concerns for Australia, and went against the spirit of the Article XXI procedures, if not 
the letter.  He urged once again the European Union and its Member States to expedite the entry into 
force of the amended schedule of commitments, a nd sought an update on progress to that end. 
124. The representatives of Brazil, India and Colombia echoed the statement made by Australia.  
125. The representative of the European Union indi cated that 17 Member States had concluded 
their national ratification processes.  In another three Member States the ratification process was on-
going and in a further three the ratification papers were ready to be discussed.  Ratification did raise  S/C/M/106 
 Page 17 
 
 
  particular issues for one Member State, and the EU  was looking at the issue internally.  The EU had 
taken careful note of the statements made and stood ready to continue to discuss the issue soon. 
126. The Council took note of the statements made. 
127. The meeting was adjourned. 
__________