RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  S/WPDR/M/33 
24 February 2006 
 (06-0786) 
Working Party on Domestic Regulation  
  
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 6 FEBRUARY 2006 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
  
1. The Working Party on Domestic Regulation (WPDR) held its thirty-third meeting on 
6 February 2006.  The meeting was chaired by Mr. Peter Govindasamy of Singapore.  The agenda for 
the meeting was contained in Airgra m WTO/AIR/2741, dated 20 January 2006. 
2. Under other business, the representative of UNCTAD
 wished to make a short statement. 
A. REPORT FROM THE CHAIRPERSON ON INFORMAL MEETINGS 
3. The Chairman  recalled that the Working Party had held an informal meeting on 
17 January 2006.  At that meeting Members had he ld a fourth round of thematic discussions on the 
elements contained in their proposals on the development of regulatory disciplines under Article VI:4 of the GATS.  These discussions were based on a framework the Chairman had put forward in 
document JOB(05)/169.  Members also discussed issues relating to the organization of work on the Article VI:4 disciplines for the coming months.  He informed delegations that a summary of the 
discussions held at the informal meeting on 17 Jan uary 2006 was contained in document JOB(06)/16 
dated 3 February 2006. 
B. DEVELOPMENT OF REGULATORY DISCIPLINES UNDER GATS ARTICLE VI:4 
Proposals by Members on Regulatory Disciplines under GATS Article VI:4
 
4. Members held a fifth round of thematic discussions in informal mode on the elements 
contained in their proposals on the development of  regulatory disciplines under Article VI:4 of the 
GATS.  In informal mode, Members also discussed some organizational issues concerning the next 
steps of the Working Party.  As in previous occasi ons, the Chairman is circulating a summary of these 
discussions, which is contained in documen t JOB(06)/32, dated 24 February 2006. 
Secretariat's Note on Domestic Regulatory Pr ovisions in Economic Integration Agreements  
5. The Chairman  recalled that at the meeting held on 20 September 2005, the Secretariat had 
introduced an Informal Note providing an overvie w of regulatory provisions  contained in economic 
integration agreements (EIAs) covering services, no tified to the WTO under Article V of the GATS.  
This Note had been circulated to Members as document JOB(05)/ 175, dated 12 September 2005.  He 
invited delegations to comment on the Note by the Secretariat. 
6. The representative of Hong Kong, China  noted that all notified FTAs featured provisions on 
regulatory disciplines and that horizontal provisi ons on transparency, licensing, qualifications, 
standards, recognition and equivale ncy appeared to be rather common across the spectrum of FTAs.  
                                                      
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/WPDR/M/33 
Page 2  
 
  He pointed out that sectoral or mode specific provisions also appeared in most of the FTAs notified, 
but that the interests in sectors varied from one FTA to another and that a few FTAs made reference to 
Article VI:4 negotiations.  He commented that at fi rst glance, some provisions in the FTAs were very 
similar in nature to the elements that were bei ng considered in WPDR for regulatory disciplines under 
Article VI:4.  He added that while some of th e FTA provisions were more specific and ambitious, 
others went beyond the scope of VI:4 into areas such as mutual recognition. 
7. He argued that the FTAs provided a sort of reality check for the WPDR negotiations, and 
pointed out to three preliminary conclusions which could be drawn by looking at domestic regulatory 
provisions in FTAs.  First, he said that it seemed that that in most cases all the aspects of regulatory 
disciplines were addressed, that is, licensing, qualif ications, and standards, recognition, equivalency 
and transparency.  He noted that while the exact c ontent and provisions varied  from one agreement to 
another, only in very few instances did FTAs si ngle out one particular aspect in isolation. 
8. Second, he argued that, to the extent that Members who were parties to FTAs already had 
regulatory provisions, the practical feasibility of those provisions under Article VI:4 should not be an issue. In particular, in the cases where Members already had horizontal provisions relating to 
licensing, qualifications, standards, recognition and equivalency it would be inconceivable that 
regulators would be able to implement such discip lines in the FTA context but not in the multilateral 
context.  He noted that it might have been inter esting to know if regulators actually differentiated in 
their implementation of regulatory provisions stemming from FTAs.  In the view of his delegation, 
therefore, while the exact provisions in FTAs might not  be exactly the same as the elements that were 
being considered in the WPDR, the question about feasibility of horizontal disciplines was a matter of 
degree rather than something fundamentally objectionabl e.  He added that given the fact that many of 
the disciplines in FTAs were even more substa ntial and ambitious than the elements under 
consideration in the WPDR, the questions about th e feasibility of horizontal disciplines was perhaps 
unfounded. 
9. Third, he pointed out that the divergent inte rests of Members in different sectors cast doubts 
on whether it would have been feasible within th e timeframe available to the WPDR to develop a 
package of sectoral disciplines for different sector s that would address the wide-ranging interests of 
all Members. 
10. He concluded by pointing out that it would have  been desirable to have some more time to 
study the Secretariat's paper and the specific provi sions contained therein, in order to see what 
examples or lessons could be drawn for the work of the WPDR.  He said, therefore, that his delegation 
would have liked to come back to this paper at  a later stage, particularly during the stage of 
development of the disciplines, to consider whethe r there were any useful experiences the Working 
Party could draw upon. 
11. The representative of the United States
 said that regulators looked at FTAs with a different 
mind than the WTO, as the former normally involve d two parties, a different negotiating context and 
different results for regulators.  He added that regulators were very sensitive about transposing FTA 
results in the WTO as FTAs tended to be much more ambitious in reach than the WTO.  He suggested 
that while the Secretariat informal paper was a usef ul background document, it should not be used as 
a road-map for the development of disciplines under Article VI:4 of the GATS.  Regarding 
paragraph 2 of the introduction to the Secretariat's in formal paper, this delegation stressed that it was 
their understanding there was no presumption that what had been selected by the Secretariat as a 
domestic regulatory provisions in this paper was also understood to be a domestic regulatory 
provision by the parties to the relevant FTA.  In ge neral, the representative of this delegation pointed 
out that the terms used in this paper did not re present relevant definitions or categories for the 
examined FTAs, as this should be left to the parties of each FTA.  S/WPDR/M/33 
 Page 3 
 
 
  12. The representative of Mexico  also agreed that the Secretariat's paper contained many 
elements and experiences which were useful to the Article VI:4 negotiations.  He noted that all the 
five elements of Article VI:4 we re generally covered in most notif ied FTAs.  In responding to a point 
made by Hong Kong, China, he said that Mexico generally implemented FTAs through changes to its 
legislation which made no specific reference to FTA parties.  However, although the amended 
legislation generally did not distinguish between  FTA and non-FTA parties, authorities had the 
discretion to deny the FTA treatment non-FTA parties. 
13. The representative of Pakistan  said that her delegation also found the document to be very 
useful and that it showed that the various FTAs c ontained similar provisions on domestic regulation.  
She also noted that many agreements referred to an y future disciplines to be agreed at the WTO level 
and that, unlike the Accountancy Disciplines, which did not apply to measures subject to scheduling 
under Article XVI and XVII, FTAs provisions on dom estic regulation applied to all sectors covered 
by the relevant agreement. 
14. The representative of Brazil  said that the informal paper by the Secretariat constituted a good 
source of information.  He said that his delegation would study it to identify relevant elements for the 
Article VI:4 disciplines.  He said that his delegation shared the point made by Hong Kong, China 
about the relevance of the FTA experiences to the WPDR negotiations, but also cautioned about 
automatically transposing FTA rules at the mu ltilateral level, considering the difference in 
membership and scope of such agreements.  He al so suggested that relationship between FTAs and 
GATS on domestic regulation should be of a reciprocal type, in that not only Members could learn from FTA experiences in developing Article VI:4 di sciplines, but future FTA experiences could also 
benefit from Members' work on the Article VI:4 disciplines. 
C. DATE OF NEXT MEETING 
15. Regarding the date for the next formal meeting, the Chairman
 suggested that the Working 
Party hold its next meeting during the next cluster of services meetings.  He said that the exact date of 
this meeting would be announced in due course.  He also said that he would consider convening the 
next informal meeting of the Working Party in early March 2006. 
D. OTHER BUSINESS 
16. The representative of UNCTAD  invited the Members of the Working Party to a meeting of 
UNCTAD Commission on International Trade in Goods Services and Commodities, which under 
agenda item V would address trade in se rvices and development implications. 
E. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRPERSON 
17. The Chairman  informed delegations that Chairpers on of the Council Trade in Services had 
started consulting delegations on the appointment of the Chairpersons of the su bsidiary bodies for this 
year.  As her consultations were still on-going, he  suggested that the Memb ers postpone the election 
of the Chairperson of the WPDR to the beginning of its next formal meeting. 
 
___________