RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  S/CSC/M/49 
8 September 2009 
 
 (09-4235) 
Committee on Specific Commitments   
   
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 24 JUNE 2009 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
  
1. The Committee on Specific Commitments (CSC) he ld a meeting on 24 June 2009, chaired by 
Mr. Jean-Marc Mignon from France.  The agenda for the meeting was contained in WTO/AIR/3387.  
2. The Chairman
 informed the Committee that under Othe r Business, he would refer to the 
editorial conventions for the second round of revised  offers and a proposal for the Secretariat to 
organize a briefing on scheduling issues.  He suggested  that the agenda be adopted as circulated with 
the addition he had just mentioned. 
3. It was so agreed .   
A. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OLD AND NEW COMMITMENTS  
4. The Chairman  recalled that this item was the priority of current work in the Committee.  He 
noted that at the informal meeting of 16 June, delegations had interven ed actively, addressing a 
number of outstanding issues under this item.  He  understood that delega tions were willing to 
intensify technical work at this stage.   
5. He noted that Members' major concern with r espect to the relationship between old and new 
commitments was how to ensure that the level of  treatment provided by pre-existing commitments 
would not be undermined, i.e. how to ensure no rollb ack in the new schedules.  Some delegations had 
referred to the verification exercise as the solution.   The issue was whethe r such an exercise was 
sufficient to address the concerns over rollbacks, especially questionabl e or arguable rollbacks.  From 
the discussion at the informal meeting, his perception was that delegations had yet to clarify the nature 
of the verification exercise and decide when and how it should be conducted.   
6. Regarding the method of incorporating new commi tments into the GATS, he recalled that at 
the informal meeting of 16 June, delegations ha d expressed a clear preference for the replacement 
method at the end of the negotiations whereby each Member would have a single final schedule comprising all of its commitments.  Therefore, the next step was to consider how Members' concerns 
could be addressed in the incorporating in strument, i.e. the final protocol.   
7. He recalled the three questions he had raised in the annotated agenda with respect to the final 
protocol: (1) Would the final protocol need to ex plicitly state the incorporating method? (2) Would 
certain language be necessary to ensure that exis ting commitments would not be undermined? If so, to 
what extent would a statement along the lines of th e Canadian paper meet that need?  (3) Would 
certain language be required to specify the legal value of old commitments?  He understood that it 
was of key importance to clarify certain related issu es, in particular the relationship between old and 
new commitments. 
                                                     
 
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and without prejudice to 
the positions of Members and to their rights and obligations under the WTO. S/CSC/M/49 
Page 2  
 
  8. He reminded delegations that it had been agreed at the informal meeting of 16 June that the 
Secretariat would prepare a background note examin ing relevant practice of the GATT, GATS, and 
regional agreements. 
9. The representative of Switzerland
 thanked the Chairman for the annotated agenda, as it 
contained very important observati ons and provided a very good basis for the meeting.  His delegation 
agreed that the relationship between old and new co mmitments should be treated as priority in the 
Committee and appreciated the Chair's initiative to  move the discussion forward.  His delegation 
shared the Chairman's observation that the outsta nding issues connected to the relationship between 
old and new commitments fell within three areas:  the methods to incorporate the new commitments into the GATS; the role of the ve rification exercise; and possible language to be included in the final 
protocol.  He noted that WTO Members' services o ffers currently on the table were consolidated 
offers containing both existing unmodified specifi c commitments and improved or new specific 
commitments.  This showed that WTO Members were currently conducting services negotiations on 
the basis of the replacement method.  Switzerla nd supported the replacement method.  Its crucial 
advantage was that each Member at the end of the Doha Round would have one single instrument 
with legal value which, in principle, contained all its specific commitments.  Nevertheless, errors, 
including rollbacks, could not be excluded.  So me of these errors, including rollbacks, might be 
eliminated during an appropriate verification exerci se.  However, it was uncertain to what extent a 
verification exercise might be relied on to eliminate rollbacks.  It was likely that some cases might not 
be identified during verification and that some questionable or arguable rollbacks might not be 
eliminated.  Therefore, it was important to include language in the Sixth Protocol to the GATS, which 
clearly stated that old commitments could not be un dermined by the new commitments.  In fact, such 
language had already been proposed by Canada in 2006.  Appropriate language of this kind in the 
Sixth Protocol would imply that old commitments retained some legal value.  The replacement 
method did not determine the legal value of old commi tments.  This was clearly set out in paragraphs 
32 and 33 of the Secretariat's Note S/CSC/W/33 of  2002.  His delegation thus agreed with the 
Chairman that clarifying the relationship between the old and new commitments in the Sixth
 Protocol 
was the key.  His delegation was currently working on such language and hoped to finish this work 
soon so as to share it with WTO Members.  His delegation supported the suggestion that the Secretariat provide an overview of how issues rela ted to the incorporation of new commitments had 
been addressed in the past, includi ng in regional agreements.   
10. The representative of Pakistan
 noted that outstanding issues with respect to old and new 
commitments seemed to be taking shape thanks to  the discussion structured by the Chairman.  
Specifically, his delegation agreed that the repl acement method seemed to be a clearer and better 
option than other potential methods some Members ha d mentioned.  Under this method, as a matter of 
fact, due to the negotiating mandate and the GATS Ag reement, old commitments were needed in the 
legal context in order to check rollbacks.  In an y case, by default, old commitments would still be 
legally alive, but it would be just for reference purposes or as benchmark.  On the verification 
exercise, his delegation recognized that it was importa nt but time-consuming, sp ecially for developing 
countries, due to capacity constraints.  Therefore, ample time should be given for verification.  Three 
to six months would be a reasonable time period,  but it depended upon the pace of negotiations, the 
time-line to be followed in the overall context as well as other factors.  He pointed out that 
verification was not a substitute for checking rollb acks, because that could mean discarding certain 
legal options or any options later on.  Concerning the final protocol, his de legation believed it should 
contain appropriate lega l language and that the Canadian pr oposal was quite reasonable.  His 
delegation would be glad to go along with that proposal.   
11. The representative of Chile  noted that the annotated agenda had provided guidance for the 
discussion on outstanding issues under this item.  Regarding the incorporation method, his 
delegation's preference was the replacement method,  as it provided greater legal certainty to the 
commitments Members would undertak e as a result of the Doha Round.  The key question was: what  S/CSC/M/49 
 Page 3 
 
 
  was the value of old commitments?  In this rega rd, he understood that Members would have one 
schedule of commitments at the end of this Round and that their previous schedules would lose legal 
value in terms of the level of liberalization guaran teed.  If there were any conflicts between Members 
in the interpretation of commitments, prior commitm ents would be useful to determine the context 
from which new commitments emerged.  Article XIX of the GATS provided guidance and a legal 
framework for determining the meaning of new commi tments.  In connection with this, the inclusion 
of certain language in the Sixth Protocol to clarify the relationshi p between old and new commitments 
would not necessarily be indispensable, given Article  XIX of the GATS.  His delegation was open to 
the incorporation language if Members considered that the inclusion of certain language could assure 
them that there was no rollback in the commitments.  Regarding the verification exercise, he thought 
that it could take place at the end of the negotiati ng process when the formal negotiations would have 
been completed and the final schedules submitted.  At that time, Members would check and verify 
whether commitments complied with what had be en agreed upon during the negotiations.  The 
conclusion of the verification process would not gu arantee the absence of future problems.  There 
could be some problems arising from rollbacks with  regard to prior commitments.  Nonetheless, a 
verification exercise was still necessary at the end of the process when the final schedules had been 
submitted.  It was important that the Committee keep this item on the agenda so that delegations could 
continue to clarify any doubts or questions with  respect to the relationship between old and new 
commitments.   
12. The representative of Columbia  stated that the annotated agenda provided some useful 
reference for the discussion in the Committee.  His de legation had reviewed the Secretariat's Note of 
2002.  The main issue with respect to old and new commitments was that of preserving the legal 
certainty of the commitments in force.  The re placement method did not necessarily mean that the 
existing schedules with commitments currently in fo rce would become completely irrelevant in the 
future in relation to the commitments they contain.   They could constitute a very important source for 
interpreting commitments in the new consolidated schedules.  In any event, in conformance with the 
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the cha nges contained in the new schedules would prevail 
over the initial entries with respect to the same s ubject matter.  Consensus was that the replacement 
method would contribute to guaranteeing the lega l certainty and clarity of the commitments.  
However, in order to secure Members' rights, it w as indispensable to include certain language in the 
final protocol which provided that specific commit ments contained in the new schedules would not be 
applied in such a way that would be more restric tive than those commitments contained in the prior 
schedules.  The verification process could be very shor t as indicated by the Secretariat in last week's 
consultations, and developi ng countries' capacity to take part in such a process was limited.  
Therefore, to include certain language in the fina l protocol to this effect was appropriate.   
13. The representative of China  stated that his delegation shar ed the view that issues closely 
linked to the conclusion of the current negotiations s hould be the priority of this Committee's future 
work.  As his delegation was still studying the issue of the relationship between old and new 
commitments, he would only make some preliminary comments at this meeting.  With regard to the 
incorporation method, his delegation believed that  accumulation was too complicated and not user-
friendly for business and negotiators.  China was open to discuss any other options Members might 
propose in the future.  In China's view, the verifi cation of services schedules was very important.  He 
suggested that the Secretariat gather and compile  past practice in GATT and GATS negotiations.  The 
same type of materials related to regional trade ag reements was also welcomed.  He also suggested 
that Members start discussing as early as possible issu es relating to the verification exercise such as 
how long it might take, when to conduct it and ho w it should be organized.  He believed that the 
Chairman' consultations after this meet ing would facilitate this discussion.   
14. The representative of Japan  thanked the Chairman for his an notated agenda and for putting 
priority on the issue of the relationship between old and new commitments.  He believed that  
concrete technical discussions needed to be accelerat ed.  He agreed with the Chairman's identification S/CSC/M/49 
Page 4  
 
  of main issues:  verification exercise, the met hod to incorporate new schedules in the GATS, and 
possible language to be included in the final protoc ol.  With respect to the incorporation method and 
possible language in the final protocol, Japan w as willing to participate actively in the discussion, 
which was very useful.  He thought that common unde rstanding was needed as to whether in case of 
an apparent rollback from an old commitment, that old commitment would prevail.  Noting that some 
Members had referred to the Vienna Convention on th e Law of Treaties, in particular Articles 31 and 
32,  he pointed out that the interpretation of  old commitments could not precede that of new 
commitments which had already entered into force.   Therefore, the verification exercise was very 
important; it should take place before the conclusi on of the negotiations.  He also supported the 
proposal that the Secretariat compile the nego tiating history and related examples of regional 
agreements.  
15. The representative of Korea
 reaffirmed the fundamental principle that no rollback should be 
contained in the new schedules and supported the idea that the replacement  method was the best 
option for dealing with the relationship between old and new schedules.  In this regard, his delegation 
approved of any method, including the verification procedure, for checking possible rollbacks in the 
new schedules.  He, however, recalled that the Secret ariat had indicated at the informal meeting last 
week that in some cases the i ssue of rollback might be addressed through bilateral negotiations.  
Korea would consider this aspect as well.  His delegation supported the verification process in this 
Committee provided that it was to be confined to technical discussion and that it would not give any 
indulgence or carte blanche  to the new schedules.  Korea was open to the timing and formality of the 
process, taking into account the horizontal  development of the round.     
16. The representative of the United States  shared the view expressed by many Members that the 
outcome of this Round should be the only operative, legal schedule and that the replacement approach 
was the option.  His delegation also agreed that the prior schedules did not disappear.  As far as their 
legal status was concerned, it would be in terms of  providing context in any subsequent interpretation 
of the current schedules.  Concerning the verifi cation process, more discussion was necessary with 
respect to the timing and relevant approaches, not  only in the context of services but also in the 
context of other negotiating groups.  There should be  sufficient time allocated in order to conduct an 
effective process.  His delegation recognized the resource constraints and difficulties involved.  Noting that the Secretariat might be doing some bac kground work on past practice of  verification, he 
suggested exploring what kind of reporting mechanisms  was used to reflect the process.  For example, 
a Member might be asked to clarify the meaning of its commitments in the verification process.  
Would there be a record of the Member's clarificati on?  Such record could ha ve interpretative value in 
relation to those commitments.  How had this issue been treated in the past?  Regarding the question 
of whether to include appropriate  language in the protocol, his delegation had not taken a solid 
position yet.  Noting that there was some merit to clarifying the relationship of the new to the old schedule, his delegation would like to see what ki nd of language Switzerland or other Members might 
propose and how that might impact on the legal cert ainty of the new schedules.  His delegation was 
open to exploring any proposals along these lines.    
17. The representative of the European Communities
 stated that in order to avoid unnecessary 
confusion, the replacement method should be adopted.  At the end of the Doha Round, each Member 
would then have a single schedule of specific comm itment in operation.  Her delegation supported a 
verification exercise to ensure that there were no ro llbacks.  It also recognized that there should be 
sufficient time to ensure a proper and complete pro cess.  This depended on when the exercise was to 
be completed.  It might also mean that no legal language on the value of old commitment was 
necessary.  The Vienna Convention might be suffici ent to provide the legal certainty that Members 
sought in this respect.  However, further discussi on was needed to identify the precise format, scope 
and timing of the verification.   Her delegation w ould welcome a Note by the Secretariat about past 
practice in incorporating new commitments.  Noting that different approaches had been adopted at  S/CSC/M/49 
 Page 5 
 
 
  various stages,  she thought it would be useful to understand the thinking behind the choices each 
time.   
18. The representative of Guatemala  also spoke on behalf of Salv ador, Guatemala, and Honduras.  
With respect to the relationship between old and ne w commitments, one of the objectives was that the 
schedules resulting from this round of negotiations wo uld be clear and easy to use and understand, not 
only for governmental officials but also for ser vices providers and consumers.  Noting that GATS 
schedules were much more complex than GATT ( goods) schedules, she wished to highlight the 
following principles.  First, the replacement method s hould be applied so that at the end of this round 
each Member would have a single schedule containing all commitments as indicated in paragraph 36 of the Secretariat Note S/CSC/W/33.  There woul d be a single instrument in which the full legal 
situation at the end of the negotiati ons would be reflected.  Upon en try into force, it would replace all 
the previous schedules of Members.  The second prin ciple was that it was not necessary to include the 
reference in the final protocol that old schedules co nstituted interpretation sources.  It was to be taken 
for granted that the Vienna Convention on the Law of  Treaties would be applicable whether or not it 
was explicitly mentioned in the protocol.  She un derstood that in the WTO there was no precedent of 
including such type of language in a legal instru ment.  Third, as to the suggestion that some other 
language be included in the Protocol in order to ensure that new commitments would not undermine 
previous commitments, she said that this was not necessary either because it was presumed that in the 
negotiation process Members with all the necessary fl exibilities would try to achieve a greater degree 
of liberalization.  Problems, including possible ro llbacks, should be resolved during the negotiation 
process.  As to the verification, it should be an  exercise aimed at ensuring that commitments made 
during the negotiations were reflected in the fina l schedules.  Noting that many issues were still 
pending, which required further atten tion, this group of delegations w ould revert to these issues in the 
future. 
19. The representative of Mexico
 stated that regarding the in corporation of new commitments, 
her delegation was inclined to a dopt the replacement approach because it would make commitments 
easier to read and provide greater legal certainty.  As for the verification exercise, she said that this 
was an important process that should take place at the end of the negotiatio ns.  Her delegation was 
prepared to hear other suggestions or observations  from Members.  On the possibility of including 
language in the final protocol, her delegation would be open; it could go along with the lines 
suggested by Canada if Members felt it necessary to  do so.  She, however, emphasized the need that 
rollback be precluded during negotiations.   Her dele gation supported the Secretariat to carry out a 
study on previous experiences in this area.   
20. The representative of Australia  noted that the issue of old and new commitments was vital as 
the round progressed.  Article XIX of the GATS stated  that the purpose of the negotiations on services 
was to achieve a progressive higher level of libera lization.  Along these lines, Australia's position on 
the issue of old and new commitments was that the most liberal commitments would always stand if 
there was any legal uncertainty.  Members must fo llow Article XXI procedures to deal with any 
rollback.  While her delegation's clear preference w as the replacement method,  it considered that 
language would need to be incorporated in the fina l text clarifying the relationship between the two 
schedules.  Her delegation was of the view th at, while the Uruguay Round schedules would cease to 
have legal effect, they would still be relevant, particularly in case of  any uncertainty arising from new 
commitments following verification.  Australia was interested in textual proposals from Members.  
Regarding the issue of verification, Australia rec ognized the importance of the exercise and the need 
to ensure sufficient time for it.  She supported the comments previously made by Pakistan that three to 
six months would be an appropriate time-frame.  
21. The representative of Mauritius  noted with satisfaction that consensus was emerging on the 
main issues under this item.  His delegation had ye t to polish its thoughts on the inclusion of a note to 
specify the status of old commitments and how to avoid rollbacks.  However, as a small vulnerable S/CSC/M/49 
Page 6  
 
  country, Mauritius thought that technical assistance a nd full support would be of critical importance to 
help developing countries prepare their schedules of commitments to avoid shortcomings.  More 
importantly, adequate time was needed, taking in to account the special situation of developing 
countries.   Developing countries needed time not only to prepare their schedules, but also to verify and understand the nature of changes brought by  Members which should in no way undermine the 
existing terms of market opening.  Therefore, he called on other Members to address the concerns of 
LDCs and other vulnerable developing Members.   
22. The representative of Ecuador
 noted that the relationship between old and new commitments 
was of great importance, given the legal implicati ons.  The negotiations should end up with schedules 
which would be easy to work with, easy to understa nd, and particularly easy to verify.  Therefore, 
Ecuador would be inclined to adopt the repla cement method whereby each Member would have a 
single schedule at the end of the negotiations.  As for the protocol, while not having a definite position 
yet, Ecuador thought that there was no need to have language stating that no rollback should be 
allowed, because this could already be inferred from the GATS.   
23. The representative of Norway  noted that the preferred method of incorporation appeared to be 
replacement and that there was consensus on it.   Replacing the old schedule with only one new 
instrument would provide the legal clarity Members were all seeking from the results of this round.  
He noted that delegations, including Norway, paid mu ch attention to the issue of potential rollbacks.  
Rollbacks might be unintentional, but they could certain ly occur in Members' final offers.  Therefore, 
the verification process would be essential to ensure th at there were no rollbacks in the new schedules.  
Further discussion was needed as to the time and the organization of the verification process.  His 
delegation believed that there was no need for any particular language in th e final protocol on the 
relationship between old and new commitments.   
24. The representative of Hong Kong, China  stated that there were some important principles 
concerning the issue of old and new commitme nts,. One was the principle of progressive 
liberalization as Article XIX of the GATS elucidated.  Another principle was that there should be no 
rollback and that any rollback should be treated under Article XXI of the GATS.  Her delegation 
shared the view that there should be one schedule for daily use.  This would provide certainty to 
delegates and users.  But in cases of confusion, th e old schedules should remain of value of reference 
in the context of interpretation.  Wishing to see so me explicit language to th at effect, her delegation 
was also aware of other views on this issue, particul arly in relation to the Vienna Convention.  On the 
issue of verification, her delegation tended to thin k that this exercise should be conducted at the end 
of this Round as it was technically important to ve rify all the commitments and offers Members had 
indicated and actually put in their final schedules.  Looking forward to further discussions under this item, her delegation was open to the suggestion that the Secretariat provide examples of past relevant practice.   
25. The representative of Canada
 stated that his delegation also supported the replacement 
method.  On the issue of verification, he said that the verification process was going to be a function 
of horizontal consideration and that even under the best circumstances, it was not likely to be 
sufficient to prevent rollbacks in a ll cases.  Therefore, Canada continued to see value in explicit and 
appropriate language in the incorporating instrume nt. Canada had made some suggestions in this 
regard, which were still relevant.   
26. The representative of Singapore  made three points.  First, her delegation was in favour of the 
replacement method.  Second, the verification ex ercise was important and should not be conducted 
too late or be allocated too little time as to rende r it meaningless.  Third, her delegation was open to 
the language to be included in the final protocol and looked forward to suggestions from others.    S/CSC/M/49 
 Page 7 
 
 
  27. The representative of South Africa  shared the view that the Vienna Convention on treaty 
interpretation was relevant in this  regard.  His delegation was in c ontact with the government's legal 
department and would have a definitive position in ti me.  He emphasized that the question of Article 
XXI was not only a legal issue, but also a systemic concern in terms of future market access negotiations and possible market access adjustments.   
28. The representative of Chinese Taipei
 appreciated the Chairman's consultation effort and 
encouraged him to continue.  He noted the importance of the three questions raised.  In this regard, he 
thought that a compilation by the Secretariat of previous experiences and regional trade agreements 
might be helpful.   
29. The representative of Australia  noted that a consensus had been achieved around the idea of a 
replacement method for the incorporation of new commitments.  She asked what kind of mechanism 
was available to record that consensus so that the Committee could move on.  
30. The representative of Indonesia  stated that his delegation's preference was to have a schedule 
format that was clear and practical.  His delegati on was flexible on the final instrument and looking 
forward to having further discussion under this item in future meetings.   
31. In responding to Australia's question, the Chairman  suggested that the Committee's work be 
based on the assumption that the replacement me thod would be the method to incorporate new 
commitments.  He also suggested that the Committee take note of statements made and revert to this 
item at its next meeting. 
32. It was so agreed .  
B. SCHEDULING ISSUES  
33. The Chairman  recalled that, at the Committee's last formal meeting, some delegations had 
expressed interest in having further discussion on i ssues related to economic needs tests (ENTs).  
They had suggested that the Committee discuss th e specification of criteria for ENTs and that 
Members exchange information on the application of their scheduled ENTs.  It had also been 
suggested that the Secretariat update the backgrou nd note on this topic, contained in document 
S/CSS/W/118.   
34. The representative of China  recalled that her delegation had expressed interest in this 
important topic.  There had been little progress in th is aspect since the beginning of the negotiations.  
Her delegation had lowered its exp ectations on this issue as after all it was up to Members to fulfil 
their commitments under Article XIX of the GATS.  She reiterated that an economic needs test was a 
market access restriction.  Without eliminati ng ENTs, it would be hard to assess the value of 
Members' specific commitments.  She reiterated the suggestion that the Secretariat update the 
background document S/CSS/W/118 so as to provide Members with useful information on how much work had been done with respect to ENTs. 
35. The representative of the United States
 supported China's call for updating the background 
document S/CSS/W/118.  It might be useful for Members to provide the Secretariat with updated 
information on the removal of ENTs since the circulation of the document.   
36. The representative of the Secretariat  said that the Secretariat would follow the previoius 
working assumption and update the document by ex amining ENTs as registered in Members' 
schedules.  This meant that the Secretariat would l ook at the schedules of all those Members that had 
acceded to the WTO after the circulation of document S/CSS/W/118, i.e. November 2001.  The Secretariat could not take into account ENTs that ha d been abolished at the national level, but had not S/CSC/M/49 
Page 8  
 
  been reflected in the schedules.  He drew delegatio ns' attention to the distinction between the change 
of domestic legislation and the certification of the modification of a schedule.  Commitments 
currently in force might thus not be identical to the actual applied regime.  If Members wished the 
Secretariat to change the previous working assumpti on and capture the actual regulatory situation, the 
Secretariat would need to be provi ded with relevant information.  
37. The representative of China
 asked whether the updating ex ercise could also incorporate 
changes achieved with respect to ENTs during this  round.  She understood that this might impinge on 
the status of the document, for example, a JOB document might be needed.  Her delegation was open 
to this in order to have a full picture of achie vements on ENTs since the beginning of the current 
negotiations and remind Members of their ob ligations under Article XIX of the GATS. 
38. The representative of Chile  stated that he might have reservation on China's suggestion as he 
was not clear about the implications of updating the document.   
39. The Chairman  said that in view of the reservation expressed, he would hold consultations on 
China's suggestion. 
40. The representative of Chile  said that his concern should not be  misconstrued.  He thought that 
updating the document might be useful, and he did not wish to object to China's suggestion if other 
Members did not have problems.  
41. In response to the explanation by the Secr etariat, the representative of South Africa  asked 
whether updating the document could incorporate those scheduled ENTs that had been abolished.    
42. The representative of the Secretariat  reiterated that in order to cover those scheduled ENTs 
that had been abolished, the Secretariat would need re levant information to be provided by Members.   
43. The representative of South Africa  said that his delegation was willing to provide such 
information.   
44. The Chairman  suggested that the Secretariat start to update document S/CSS/W/118 based on 
the previous working assumption and that he hol d consultations on whether the document should 
cover services offers.   He also suggested that the Committee take note of the statements made and 
revert to this agenda item at the next meeting. 
45. It was so agreed . 
C. CLASSIFICATION  ISSUES 
46. The Chairman  recalled that it had been reiterated at th e informal meeting of 16 June that this 
item should be addressed in a Member-driven manne r, as for scheduling issues.  He encouraged 
delegations with interest in discussing particular  classification issues to put these forward at the 
Committee, if possible in written contributions.   
47. The representative of India  noted that Members were using W/120 and Provisional CPC for 
scheduling purposes in this round, though these were  not mandatory.  Referring to the discussion on 
the three sectoral papers at the latest meeting of th e Council for Trade in Services, he pointed out that 
classification issues were important and needed to be dealt with.  He asked whether there was a 
mandate to require Members to use W/120 and Provi sional CPC and whether it would be possible to 
shift to other classification systems.  Noting that th e Secretariat was undertaking extensive research on 
various sectors and modes of supply, he asked whether it would be possible to discuss new services in various sectors in the Committee based on the sector al research undertaken by the Secretariat.  S/CSC/M/49 
 Page 9 
 
 
  48. In response to India's first question, the representative of the Secretariat  stated that there was 
no mandate or legal obligation on the application of any particular classification system under the 
GATS.  W/120 of 1991 represented an effort to stream line and adjust the content of CPC in a way that 
would better suit the negotiating purposes at that time.  A consultative document, W/120 was not 
legally binding, even when it was attached to the Scheduling Guidelines (S/L/92).  What was legally 
binding on a Member was what the Member had entered in the sectoral column of its schedule.  Only 
when a Member entered a CPC number in its sch edule, would the corresponding CPC definition 
become binding on that Member.  A Member might change the classification of a given sector in its schedule as long as this did not undermine the scope  of the sector or subsector that had been 
committed.  When a Member chose to do so, it needed  to ensure that the coverage of the sector or 
subsector was clear, regardless of the version of CP C.  He added there was no need to change W/120, 
since it was up to Members to decide which classi fication approaches they wished to follow.  
Different sectors might follow different approaches.   He recalled that, at the end of the Uruguay 
Round, efforts had been made to clarify the cove rage of various sectors in a way that suited the 
negotiations better.  One example in this re gard was the Annex on Financial Services.   
49. Responding to India's second question, the representative of the Secretariat
 recalled that the 
issue of new services, including the issue of "old " services supplied through new technological means,  
had been addressed back in 1999.  It then had been  recognized that the classification of "new" services 
needed not necessarily be dealt with through a consensus-based decision as each Member had the 
legal option to define the coverage of a given sector, including so-called "new" services which were 
not included in the existing classification systems.    
50. The representative of India  indicated that updating W/120 as a result of the ongoing 
Secretariat research might be useful for Members.  
51. The representative of the Secretariat  stated that it was for Members to decide such an exercise 
was worth doing.  The Secretariat had raised various  questions in the sectoral papers in order to 
generate discussion among Members, hoping that some issues might be clarified.   
52. The Chairman  suggested that he hold consultations  on the issues raised and that the 
Committee take note of the statements made and reve rt to this agenda item at the next meeting. 
53. It was so agreed . 
D. OTHER BUSINESS  
54. The Chairman  recalled that a Chairman's Note (JOB(06)/181) had been circulated in June 
2006, containing suggested conventions to be follo wed by Members wishing to submit second revised 
offers, and that the Committee had taken note of the conventions at its meeting on 22 June 2006.  For 
ease of reference, the Chairman's Note (JOB(06)/181)  was included in the document package for this  
meeting.  He proposed that Members proceed w ith the suggested conventions in preparing their 
second revised offers. 
55. The representative of Chile  supported the Chairman's proposal.  He suggested that the 
conventions contained in the Chairman's Note (JOB (06)/181) be formally adopted at some time so 
that Members could follow them when preparing their second revised offers.   
56. The representative of the Secretariat  confirmed that the Committee had taken note of the 
editorial conventions at the meeting of 22 June 20 06.  He further noted that these conventions were 
only for those Members who would submit second revised offers.   S/CSC/M/49 
Page 10  
 
  57. The Chairman
 recalled his suggestion that the Secretariat organize a briefing on scheduling 
issues for Geneva-based delegates later this year.  This initiative had been  broadly supported by 
delegations at the informal meeting of 16 June, but some delegations felt that they needed more time 
to reflect on the need for such event.   
58. The representative of the Secretariat  recalled that the Secretariat had organized a one-day 
briefing for Geneva-based delegates almost every year  since the beginning of the current negotiations.  
In preparation, a questionnaire was usually circul ated to delegates, asking them to specify their 
priority interests.  Then a draft programme was ci rculated for last comments.  He noted that in 
national and regional technical cooperation ac tivities, background documents were normally 
circulated well in advance of the event so as to allo w participants to get prepared.  This practice might 
also be useful for the briefing in Geneva.      
59. The representative of the United States  stated that the initial concern of his delegation over 
the previous seminar on scheduling issues was that the materials used for the event had not been 
circulated in advance and that participants had not  been able to get prepared.  In view of the 
Secretariat's explanation, his delegation would not  object to the organization of a briefing session on 
scheduling issues as long as delegates were given an opportunity to review related materials before 
the event.   
60. The representative of the Secretariat  asked whether delegates wished to have the briefing 
within the next services cluster, so as to facilitate the participation of capital-based officials, or at 
another time.  
61. The Chairman  suggested that the Secretariat circul ate the questionnaire before the summer 
break, including a question on the timing of the briefing. 
62. The representative of the South Africa  supported the idea to have the briefing within the next 
services cluster. 
63. The representative of Chinese Taipei  asked whether the materials related to the briefing could 
be circulated to delegates as early as possible to help them decide their priority topics. 
64. The representative of the Secretariat  said that delegations might make use of various sources 
of GATS-related materials.  He informed delegates that the Secretariat was currently finalizing an e-
training module containing chapters on the GATS, sc heduling issues, and various service sectors.  He 
suggested that delegates use the questionnaire in order to identify their priority topics.  
65. The Chairman  suggested that the Committee take note of all the comments made.   
__________