RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONTN/S/M/2
10 July 2002
(02-3854)
Council for Trade in Services
Special Session
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 5 AND 6 JUNE 2002
Note by the Secretariat1
1. The Council for Trade in Services held a Special Session on 5 and 6 June 2002.  The agenda
for the meeting is contained in document WTO/AIR/1814 and Addendum 1.
2. The Chairman indicated that, under Other Business, the Secretariat would make a statement
with regard to technical cooperation activities.  He proposed that the Council adopt the agenda as
circulated, with the addition of the item of Other Business he had just referred to.
3. The Council so agreed.
A. ASSESSMENT OF TRADE IN SERVICES
4. The Chairman recalled that, at its March meeting, the Council had held a rich debate on the
assessment of trade in services.  Most Members ha d referred to the Symposium on the issue, which
had been held on 14 and 15 March, as a timely and very positive contribution to the debate and a good
basis to proceed.  Also, many delegations had reiterated the importance they attached to the
assessment.  At the close of the discussion of this item at the March meeting, he had emphasised that
the assessment was an ongoing exercise, to be seen in the framework of the deadlines for the
negotiations.  While the assessment needed to be conducted at the national level, the exercise was also
a collective responsibility of the Council and should be approached in both qualitative and
quantitative terms, against available data.
5. The representative of Pakistan, speaking also on behalf of the delegations of Cuba, the
Dominican Republic, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal and Zambia, introduced the submission which was
later circulated in document TN/S/W/3.
6. The representative of Venezuela welcomed the contribution by Pakistan and stressed the
importance of the assessment for her delegation.  She recalled that the Guidelines stated that the
Council would continue to carry out an assessment of trade in services in overall terms and on a
sectoral basis with reference to the objectives of the GATS and of Article IV in particular, that the
assessment would be an ongoing activity of the Council and that negotiations would be adjusted in the
light of its results.  She concurred with Pakistan that the Council should arrive at preliminary results
on the assessment on the basis of qualitative and quantitative information, which would be a usefulbasis to adjust the negotiations.  She called upon Members to take into account the assessment in the
course of the negotiations, especially when developing countries were presenting their requests.
                                                     
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and without prejudice to
the positions of Members and to their rights and obligations under the WTO.TN/S/M/2
Page 2
7. The representative of Cuba said that, at the March meeting, several delegations had expressed
disappointment at the lack of willingness on the part of the Council to get results from the assessment,
recognizing the asymmetries that existed between developed and developing countries in services
trade, especially in light of the low share that developing countries had in world services exports.  The
mandate on the assessment in Article XIX was still incomplete, and with the deadline for thesubmission of requests fast approaching, lack of conclusions on the assessment was making the
situation critical.  The representative said that the submission introduced by Pakistan presented initial
results on the assessment, based on available information, which should be taken into account in the
conduct of the negotiations.
8. The representative of the European Communities said that she would study and revert to the
submission orally introduced by Pakistan.  The representative of Canada would also revert to the
submission once the document was made available.  She added that, at the March symposium on the
assessment, Canada had given a presentation outlining the methods used and basic research carried
out to assess trade in services.  Three research papers had now been published and could be obtained
from the web-site of Canada's Department of Foreign Affairs.2
9. The representative of Zimbabwe supported and associated his delegation to the submission
introduced by Pakistan.  He stressed the importance and need to continue with the assessment of
services trade at a stage in the negotiations when Members were finalizing their requests.  Until then,
the results from the assessment had been unsatisfactory, and the negotiations could only start after
conclusions had been reached on the assessment.  This would allow developing countries to
participate satisfactorily in the negotiations.  He said that preliminary results were a long way from
allowing developing countries to take part effectively in the request-offer phase of the negotiations.For instance, how could they table requests withou t knowing if they had the capacity to supply the
relevant services?  The absence of a prior assessment made it difficult to submit requests and provided
room for manipulation.  He therefore called for the assessment to be a continued exercise.
Preliminary conclusions showed that developing countries liberalization had not been reciprocated in
terms of better market access for their products, resulting in developing countries registering only asmall increase in their share of world services exports.  Hence, developing countries had not
benefitted much from services trade liberalization under GATS, and the objectives of Article IV had
not been met.  It was on the basis of this outcome of the assessment conducted until then that his
delegation felt that more had to be done in terms of assessment to review imbalances and find ways of
addressing them properly.  It was also in light of these results that he supported the idea of developing
countries indicating in their requests and offers measures that they planned to adopt to ensure the
effective implementation of Articles IV and XIX:2.  It was only after a meaningful assessment hadbeen carried out that could developing countries participate fully and effectively in the negotiations.
10. The representative of the United States said that he would revert to the submission introduced
by Pakistan, but, in a preliminary manner, welcomed  the identification of specific restrictions that
these delegation wanted to see eliminated and of their negotiating objectives.  He also said, however,
that the description of the commitments undertaken by developed countries and of their economicvalue might have been understated.
11. The representative of India underscored the importance of the assessment, both for the
negotiations and in order to prepare domestic constituencies for liberalization and the scheduling of
new commitments.  At the March meeting, his delegation had expressed an interest in sectoral studies;
he had noted the ones that the Secretariat had produced a few years earlier as part of the InformationExchange Programme, but wondered if the papers in sectors of interest to developing countries could
be updated, also on the basis of contributions fr om UNCTAD and other studies.  He sought Members'
views in this respect.
                                                     
2 At the following address:  http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/eet/TPR_Summary-e.asp.TN/S/M/2
Page 3
12. The representative of Nigeria supported the interventions of Pakistan and Zimbabwe.  He said
that the assessment was important, as it would establish the level of implementation of Articles XIX
and IV and paragraph 14 of the Guidelines, reveal impediments to their implementation and point to
possible solutions to these implementation problems.
13. The representative of Uruguay said that WTO statistics showed that the participation of
developing countries in world services trade had not changed greatly.  The position of developing
countries in services trade, which had been highlighted by Argentina in document S/CSS/W/44,
needed to be considered in the negotiations, both through the negotiating proposals and the actual
requests, to better implement Article IV of the GATS.  Developing countries' requests in sectors and
modes of supply of export interest to them had to be taken into account.
14. The representative of Switzerland expressed his delegation's commitment to the assessment
mandated by the GATS.  This had to be an objective exercise, which would show the way towards a
more open and balanced services trade regime that would benefit all participants.  He welcomed the
submission introduced by Pakistan as showing th eir commitment to the assessment and said that he
would revert to it.  By way of preliminary reactions to that submission, he first welcomed the
identification of specific obstacles that these delegations would like to see removed and encouraged
similar efforts.  Second, he said that any assessment could only be preliminary as the exercise was toogeneral:  more concrete information on sectors and activities was necessary, rather than general
statements.  He stressed that the GATS could not be held responsible for the present imbalance in
services trade, as until then it had not generated actual liberalization.  Third, the fact that the
assessment was ongoing should not be used as a reason not to progress in the negotiations
15. The representative of Egypt supported the statement by Pakistan, which attached the same
importance to the assessment as Egypt did.  The assessment was not only about data, but about
evaluating this data to adjust the negotiations accordingly.  For example, the assessment could
indicate a need for more investment, or for capacity building, or the impact of services liberalization;
this would allow Members to adjust the negotiations accordingly.  The representative of Djibouti also
echoed the intervention by Pakistan, which helped to assess what had and had not been achieved until
then with services trade liberalization and how to arrive at a balanced outcome in the negotiations.
16. The representative of Malaysia said that the fact that the assessment was ongoing should not
mean that no conclusions should be drawn or that it should merely be an academic exercise.  The
submission presented by Pakistan was helpful in drawing conclusions from the assessment.  He had
taken note of the Chairman's opening remarks that Members should try for a multilateral approach in
terms of coming to conclusions on the assessment.  Even if difficulties had been encountered in the
Council in drawing such conclusions, the submission presented by Pakistan showed that this could bedone, even though it was only on a plurilateral basis by a group of developing countries.  He stressed
that data existed and that it had improved over time, and that, as the submission by Argentina had
shown, the asymmetry in the share of developed and developing countries in services trade was
glaring.  Whilst this could not be ascribed to  the GATS, the question was to know how the GATS
could remedy it.  As Pakistan had said, developing countries could submit requests, but what wascrucial was whether these would be met in sectors and modes of export interest to them.  This had not
happened in the Uruguay Round;  hence, the importance of the assessment.  If few or no requests
were submitted by developing countries, this asymmetry would persist.  Domestic capacity constraints
were a problem, but Articles IV and XIX could help to deal with such constraints.  In his view, some
conclusions could be derived from the assessment, such as that an asymmetry did exist in theparticipation of developed and developing countries in services trade, which had to be taken into
account and on the basis of which the negotiations had to be adjusted.  He could not share
Switzerland's point that commitments had to be undertaken before an assessment could be carried out.
Responding to Malaysia's comment, the delegation of Switzerland explained that what he was saying
was that when few commitments had been scheduled, it was not possible to argue that theTN/S/M/2
Page 4
consequences of liberalization were due to the GATS;  he did not mean to say that commitments
should be undertaken first and an assessment only carried out subsequently.  He shared the general
thrust of the statement by Malaysia and concurred with Egypt that the main purpose of the assessment
was to identify opportunities and possible problems of services trade liberalization.
17. The representative of China welcomed the submission presented by Pakistan and said that his
delegation would revert to it.
18. The representative of Indonesia associated himself with the statement by Pakistan, which
reflected the situation that existed in practice, namely that liberalization also entailed adjustment
costs.  He called for a more concrete and focused assessment so as to increase the participation of
developing countries in services trade, particularly in light of what Malaysia had highlighted about the
difficulty encountered by developing countries with requests due to differences in the playing field.
19. The representative of Australia called upon Members to conduct their own assessment to
know how best to address the negotiations.  She agreed with Zimbabwe that only with an assessment
could all Members, and not just developing countries, participate effectively in the negotiations.  She
echoed Malaysia's comment that the glaring asymmetry in the participation of developed and
developing countries in services trade had to be addressed.  In her view, the next step in the collective
assessment was the sharing of national experiences in the process of elaborating requests, which couldcontribute to the identification of how the GATS could help to redress this asymmetry.  She also
noted that the Guidelines provided for technical assessment with the assessment.
20. The representative of Thailand informed the Council that her delegation would table,
hopefully for the July meeting, a submission on its national assessment and experience with
liberalization in some services sectors, such as distribution services, where liberalization had beenundertaken unilaterally, and financial services, where it had been mainly WTO-related.  Thailand was
preparing requests, but had found it difficult to identify sectors where it possessed a competitive
advantage and export capacity.  Those activities which it had identified were commercially not very
meaningful or had been committed to with a large number of economic needs tests with vague or
without criteria.  She encouraged other developing countries to make requests.
21. The representative of Pakistan thanked the many delegations who had spoken and said that
this testified to their keen interest in carryin g out the assessment mandated by the GATS.  Several
comments had been made on the submission he had introduced on behalf of some other developing
countries, pointing to the fact that the assessment was not new and that a symposium had been held on
the issue.  He said that the time was ripe to carry out an initial assessment, on the basis of all the
documents tabled and oral contributions made.  Their submission was a contribution in that sense, so
that the assessment could give direction to the market access negotiations and help adjust the request-offer process accordingly.  He agreed that their paper was general and that more specificity was
needed, but was encouraged by Thailand's forthcoming submission and said that more national and
sectoral experiences would be important contributions for the assessment.
22. Concluding the discussion on this item, the Chairman said many interventions had been made,
and that substantive discussion had been particularly stimulated by the submission introduced by
Pakistan, which several delegations would analyse and to which they would revert.  The delegation of
Canada had drawn Members' attention to their newly published research papers on the assessment of
trade in services and the delegation of Thailand had indicated that they would soon be submitting
papers on their own experience with services liberalization.  It was reiterated that the assessment,
which would continue to be an on-going activity of the Council, was an important exercise whichneeded to move beyond generalities.  He said that the Council would take note of the statements made
and revert to this item at its next meeting.TN/S/M/2
Page 5
B. TREATMENT OF AUTONOMOUS LIBERALIZATION
23. The Chairman said that, pursuant to what had been agreed at the previous meeting of the
Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services, two open-ended informal meetings were held on
1 and 28 May in order to address the draft modalities for the treatment of autonomous liberalization.
Discussions took place on the basis of two successive notes prepared under his responsibility, andcontained in documents JOB(02)/35 and Rev.1.
24. Many comments were made on both drafts.  He was grateful to delegations for their
contributions in those two meetings.  In that resp ect, he would focus on the main substantive issues
raised, and suggested that delegations also focus on them for the time being.  He was convinced that
Members should first try to reach an agreement on the substance, and then look at the drafting details.
25. One could think of credit for autonomous liberalization as a currency.  In one sense, that
currency could be used to ask other Members to detract from requests they had made.  In other words,there would be recognition of the extensive liberalization undertaken by making less requests to the
liberalizing Member.  The other way in which this currency could be used was that other Members to
whom requests for credit were made should be more  forthcoming in their response to those requests.
One would be talking of the same currency, that could be used in a defensive or offensive way.  It was
his view that most delegations were thinking in terms of the defensive mode.  If that were the case,then one could only expect very poor results from the negotiations.
26. It was his view that the main outstanding issues raised in the discussions were:  first, the
situation of recently acceded Members;  second, the scope of the modalities, particularly with
reference to developing country Members;  third, the possibility of obtaining credit through
concessions on trade in goods;  and, fourth, the relationship between autonomous liberalization andbindings.
27. One of the most difficult issues was the treatment to be given to measures already bound in
the context of accession negotiations.  In other words, whether specific commitments undertaken in
that context should be considered as measures eligible for credit.  Members were all aware of the wide
divergences of views regarding this issue.  His own impression was that these modalities were for thetreatment of autonomous liberalization and, as was stated in an earlier note by the Secretariat in
JOB(01)/65, which obviously did not commit anyone, the expression "liberalization undertaken
autonomously" meant "liberalization undertaken by individual Members unilaterally, outside a
negotiating context".  The schedules of specif ic commitments submitted by recently acceded
Members represented the outcome of a negotiation carried out in the WTO context.  In fact,
Article XII of the Agreement Establishing the WTO was clear when it stated that accession to the
WTO would take place "on terms to be agreed between" the acceding separate customs territory andthe WTO.  Moreover, the "agreement on the terms of accession", as referred to in Article XII, was
formalized through a Protocol, which was in fact the legal instrument used to conclude the
negotiations.
28. Having said that, it was a fact that recently acceded Members had a point:  they claimed to
have undertaken extensive commitments.  In this regard, he recalled paragraph 9 of the DohaDeclaration, where Ministers had noted " the extensive market-access commitments already made by
these countries on accession".  That was, in his view , the real substance of this issue.  The question
was whether the modalities for the treatment of autonomous liberalization were the right context to
address it.  He was not suggesting that recently acceded Members should compromise on their
substantive interests but his invitation to them was to exercise flexibility regarding the context inwhich to pursue their interests.  The main concern was to ensure that these Members' situation, as they
claimed it, would be addressed in the course of negotiations.  On that, he believed that further
consultations were needed.  Members could work on the basis of paragraph 7 of the present text inTN/S/M/2
Page 6
JOB(02)/35 and Rev.1.  They could also consider a separate text or even to deal with the issue
through a statement by the Chair.
29. The second substantive issue related to the scope of the modalities:  whether the possibility of
gaining credit for autonomous liberalization was equally open to all WTO Members, or whether
developed country Members would be prevented from requesting credit for autonomous liberalizationmeasures to developing country Members.  The fact was that the GATS was silent on this issue.  The
relevant provision, i.e. Article XIX:3, stipulated that modalities be established "for the treatment of
liberalization undertaken autonomously by Members since previous negotiations".  Therefore, as far
as the text of the Agreement was concerned, Members did not have any further guidance.
30. However, no one disagreed that special consideration should be given to developing country
Members.  That should be clearly reflected in the modalities.  The question was how to do so in a way
that did not alter the balance of rights and obligations under the GATS.  He had nothing specific topropose on this issue at that stage, but that was how he saw it at that point in time.
31. The third substantive issue was whether credit for autonomous liberalization on services
could take the form of concessions on trade in goods.  While some Members supported the idea of
credit for autonomous liberalization on services being granted by way of concessions on trade in
goods, others were of the view that it was inappropriate for the Services Council to refer to issuesfalling under other sectoral negotiations in the WTO.  In his view, whether there was a clear reference
to this possibility in the text was not the issue.  At the end of the day, the possibility of exchanging
concessions in different areas was always available to Members.  The negotiations' dynamic would in
fact determine whether Members went down that road and how.  Besides, one did have to bear in
mind that, as decided by Ministers in Doha, all negotiations currently under way in the WTO fellunder the so-called "single undertaking".  Therefore, at the end of the day, Members would have to
assess the overall balance of concessions before the final package was agreed upon.  So, perhaps one
way of dealing with the issue was to recognize the fact that Members were free to seek concessions in
other areas, but it might not be essential to refer to one area of trade specifically.
32. The fourth substantive issue was the relationship between autonomous liberalization and
bindings.  While some Members would like the modalities to clearly indicate that favourable
consideration would be given to requests for credit for measures of autonomous liberalisation if and to
the extent that such measures were bound as part of the final outcome of the negotiations;  other
Members considered that this was an unacceptable pre-requisite to engage in discussions on credit for
autonomous liberalization.
33. In his view, it had to be recognized that a measure's legal certainty and predictability would
be greatly enhanced with a Member's readiness to bind it at the conclusion of the current round ofnegotiations.  And the willingness to bind a measure at the end of the negotiations enhanced its value
for trading partners and the marketplace.  After all, bindings were the essence when Members
engaged in negotiations in the WTO.  That was th e nature of WTO negotiations and the contract that
everybody had signed.  It seemed to him that the current text had achieved a balance in that regard.
However, that would not prevent Members from granting credits for autonomous liberalization thatmight remain totally or partially unbound at the end of the exercise.  That was up to Members to deal
with in the context of their bilateral negotiations.  The only point he wanted to make in that regard
was that all the possibilities were open and the question was how much of this Members needed to
write in the text of the modalities.  The question then was still open.
34. As he had said at the last informal meeting, in view of the discussions until then, it seemed to
him that it would not be essential to have an extensive debate on the draft at that meeting, unless some
delegations wanted to provide the Council with further ideas.  It was not his intention to produce a
new draft for the time being, because he did not think that the Council had enough inputs to do that.TN/S/M/2
Page 7
He thought that it would be much better if Members carried on consultations in different formats
before attempting to produce a revised draft.  In addition to the open-ended informal meetings
delegations had had, and at the invitation of some delegations, he had held some other consultations
on various aspects of the draft.  He was more than willing to continue these discussions with any
interested Members.  When more elements were available, Members should have another open-endedinformal meeting to see whether a consensus could be reached.
35. At the same time, he encouraged delegations to consult among themselves on these and other
issues.  He stressed that the earlier Members agreed on the modalities, the better.  Having these
modalities in place would provide many delegations with a greater degree of certainty and comfort to
embark on the bilateral negotiations due to start soon.  He underlined the sense of urgency on the
matter.  His invitation was for all Members to exercise the necessary flexibility in order to reach
agreement on the matter as soon as possible.
36. The Council took note of the statement and agreed to proceed as suggested.
C. MODALITIES FOR THE SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR LEAST -DEVELOPED COUNTRY MEMBERS
37. The Chairman stated that Article XIX of the GATS mandates the Council for Trade in
Services to establish modalities for the special treatment for least-developed country Members
(LDCs) under the provisions of paragraph 3 of Article IV.  At the March meeting, the delegation ofUganda, speaking on behalf of the least-developed country Members, had introduced a proposal for
the establishment of such modalities, circulated in document JOB(02)/30, and had requested that a
corresponding item be inscribed in the agenda of the Special Session.
38. The representative of Senegal, speaking as the coordinator of least-developed country
Members , asked that this item be inscribed as a standing item on the agenda of the Special Session.
He recalled that Article XIX:3 mandated that the negotiating guidelines establish modalities for the
special treatment for least-developed country Members, in parallel with modalities for the treatment
of autonomous liberalization.  He noted that Members were making progress on the work on
modalities for the treatment of autonomous liberalization and that it was possible that a successful
outcome be arrived at in the near future.  On the other hand, the establishment of modalities for thespecial treatment of least-developed country Members had been overlooked in the Guidelines, which
did not contain any reference to these modalities.  He noted that document
WT/COMTD/W/77/Rev.1/Add.1/ Corr.1 of February 2002 recognized the mandatory nature of GATS
Articles IV:3 and XIX:3.  On the whole, under both these Articles, special treatment rhymed with
special priority for least-developed countries and these GATS provisions should find their way of
implementation in the form of special modalities under paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article IV and
Article XIX:3.  That was the purpose of the proposal made by the group.
39. Without dwelling into detailed comments, he stressed that a preliminary list of modalities
should comprise the following elements.  First, a limited number of sectors to be opened by LDCs.
He noted that Article XIX already applied, but that their proposal set a specific framework.  Second,
commitments by developed countries to invest in those sectors where LDCs had liberalized, in line
with Article IV:1(a) and (b).  Third, extension of full market access and national treatment to servicesof export interest to LDCs, as stipulated in Articl e IV:1(c).  Fourth, a monitoring mechanism, so as to
ensure full and effective implementation of commitments made.
40. Furthermore, implementation of the modalities would also impact on Article IV:2, dealing
with the establishment of enquiry points.  One wa y forward could be to ask developed countries to
establish supplementary focal points in LDCs themselves, or at least in those LDCs to which they hadrequested specific commitments.  Further modalities on Article IV:2 would be elaborated on.TN/S/M/2
Page 8
41. LDCs concurred that the right channel to get those benefits was in the negotiations of specific
commitments, as stated in Article IV.  They were therefore poised to negotiate, but wanted to do so in
light of the full extent possible of the special priority and treatment catered for LDCs in the GATS.
Since these modalities were linked to the specific commitments, as stated in Article IV, they would be
tabling, as appropriate, further proposals on modalities regarding market access, national treatment,additional commitments, MFN exemptions and other elements.
42. He noted that nothing in the GATS forced LDCs to participate in the negotiations without
special treatment being granted to them, and underlined the development friendly status of the GATS.
The interpretation by the LDCs group was that the establishment of these modalities was a pre-
requisite for entering into any negotiations, especially in their request-offer phase.  They were asking
for nothing more than what was already provided  for in the GATS and called upon all Members to
take the development dimension into account.
43. The representative of Djibouti said that Senegal's proposal amounted to ensuring that least-
developed countries could participate effectively in the negotiations.  The modalities for the special
treatment for least-developed country Members were needed to ensure that LDCs would benefit from
the negotiations.  He said that the capacity of least-developed countries in the services area was
limited, and that there was a need to consider how they could best participate in the negotiatingprocess.
44. The representative of Morocco welcomed the submission in JOB(02)/30 in light of the
mandate contained in Article XIX of the GATS.  The request that modalities for the special treatment
for least-developed country Members be established was legitimate.  When trying to raise their
productivity, LDCs faced the challenge of trying to find resources to increase their capacity.  She saidthat the negotiations should promote a balanced trading system, and that this would only be
achievable if special consideration was given to LDCs.  Least-developed countries needed help and
capacity in order to participate effectively in services trade.
45. The representative of Switzerland said that his delegation recognized and took into account
the special situation of least-developed countries.  Senegal's intervention testified to the interest that
LDCs had in the GATS.  The Agreement was sufficiently flexible to bring substantial benefits to
LDCs and he added that his delegation was ready to put in place what was necessary for LDCs to
participate effectively in the negotiations.  Switzerland was taking into account the level of
development of WTO Members when drafting its requests, which were more ambitious for more
advanced countries and which might not even be submitted to least-advanced ones.  Given that there
were only two weeks before the deadline for the subm ission of initial requests, he was of the view that
the preparation of modalities might only be an academic exercise.  He felt that it might be better tolook at requests first, before drafting modalities which might not even be necessary.  He shared the
spirit of Senegal's request, but felt that the modalities might possibly not be needed.  Whilst nothing
would prevent WTO Members from entering into discussions with least-developed countries, he
stressed that LDCs concerns would be taken into account to see where they had export interests and
where commitments might be undertaken that would increase their capacity in the services area.
46. The representative of Pakistan said that his delegation had always been very sympathetic to
the cause of LDCs and believed that, for the success of the multilateral trading system, it was
important that all participants played an effective role.  He believed that LDCs had pointed to certain
of the difficulties they faced in terms of realizing their development objectives.  His delegation looked
favourably at the proposal contained in JOB(02)/30 and would participate actively and constructivelyin the establishment of the modalities.
47. The representative of India said that his delegation fully understood the case presented by
least-developed countries and was supportive of the proposal contained in JOB(02)/30, whichTN/S/M/2
Page 9
contained useful elements that would be of value in the course of negotiations.  He concurred with the
need to establish modalities for the special treatment for least-developed countries, and could support
what the delegation of Senegal had said LDCs expected these modalities to contain.  He looked
forward to substantive discussions with a view to finalizing the modalities very soon.
48. The representative of Norway expressed his delegation's understanding of the motives of
least-developed countries and its readiness to cooperate to meet their concerns.  In a preliminary
manner, he said that the interests of developing and least-developed countries would indeed be taken
into account in the negotiations and that LDCs would be granted special treatment.  Particular
attention would be given in qualitative, rather than quantitative terms.  He added that empirical
evidence, including that presented by Norway, showed that greater trade in services and liberalization
could help modernize the world economy and promote development.  For instance, liberalization of
transport services had been shown to lower prices, telecommunications liberalization had resulted inconsiderable growth effects, and energy services liberalization could lead to similar results under
appropriate conditions.  Similarly the education sector had an enormous potential, as reflected in the
World Bank "education for all" programme, as did the financial services sector, for instance by
improving insurance coverage.  All of these sector s had development potential.  He therefore felt that
limiting the number of sectors in which LDCs would be invited to make commitments mightcompromise development goals.  He understood th e concerns of LDCs, but noted that investment
decisions were not in the government sphere.  Still, governments should seek coherence between the
trade policy efforts and negotiations in Geneva and efforts in other fora that were aiming to improve
conditions for LDCs, both in transfer of technology, training and other activities.  The negotiations
were not a "zero-sum" game, but an opportunity to seek synergies between all countries in the worldeconomy.  As such, the services negotiations were a modernization project where the aim was that
modernization and globalization would work to the benefit of all Members.
49. The representative of Cuba welcomed the proposal by least-developed countries.  She said
that the Guidelines contained a series of references to development and that the Council had to
recognize development concerns and objectives and implement them.  Her delegation could supportthe LDCs proposal in JOB(02)/30 and the early establishment of modalities for their special treatment,
to which it was prepared to contribute.
50. The representative of the United States recalled that his delegation had addressed this topic in
its first GATS negotiating proposal in July 2000.  He said that modalities for least-developed
countries under Article XIX should provide for their effective participation in the services
negotiations.  Turning to their submission in JOB(02)/30, and in particular to the items in paragraph 6,
he welcomed the opportunity to discuss them w ith LDCs from this perspective, among others.
51. The representative of the European Communities concurred that least-developed countries
should participate effectively in the negotiations and expressed his delegation's willingness to work
constructively to accommodate their concerns and take account of their difficulties.  Paragraph 6 of
their submission in JOB(02)/30 contained a number of suggestions.  Without going into the details, he
said that limiting the number of sectors in which requests should be made might be a way of grantingspecial treatment, but felt that the GATS already contained enough flexibility to accommodate these
concerns.  He also noted that any requests by developed countries to LDCs would obviously be based
on commercial interests, but that governments could not commit the private sector to investment
decisions;  what they could do as governments was to create opportunities.  His delegation was ready
to discuss LDCs requests and ready to provide assistance in the course of the negotiations.  He addedthat services were important for all Members and that his delegation was ready to work for the benefit
of all, including least-developed countries.
52. The representative of Brazil said that least-developed countries had to be given special
treatment.  A legal obligation to that effect existed in Article XIX of the GATS and modalities had toTN/S/M/2
Page 10
be established.  He added that, given that this was a legal obligation under the Agreement, a deadline
for the establishment of these modalities should be set;  he suggested that this be before the
submission of initial offers on 31 March 2003.
53. The representative of Djibouti suggested that Members take into account those sectors of
priority interest to least-developed countries and start focusing on those.
54. The representative of Canada noted the importance of services trade for least-developed
countries in their development process.  She concurred that the negotiations should benefit least-
developed countries, that their special situation should be taken into account and their participation in
the negotiations should be encouraged.  She would revert to their proposal in JOB(02)/30.  As to how
to operationalize Articles XIX and IV, Canada's view was that this should be done in the request-offer
phase, on an individual basis.  For example, sectors and modes of interest to LDCs could be identified
and presented to trading partners.  This could also be done with the negotiating proposals, as withCanada's proposals on mode 4, calling for more commitments in this mode not linked to mode 3, on
small and medium-sized enterprises and on financial and distribution services, suggesting the possible
development of a mechanism to phase-in commitments.  She said that Canada would take the special
needs of least-developed countries into account in bilateral negotiations, and urged all Members to do
likewise.
55. The representative of China supported the effective participation of least-developed countries
in the negotiations and the early establishment of modalities for their special treatment.
56. The representative of Zambia said that it was unfortunate that one of the few paragraphs in
the GATS meant to assist least-developed countries had not received Members' full backing.  He had
taken note of those delegations that were ready to support LDCs, but stressed that, in addition toArticle IV, which still remained unimplemented, th e only other provision that was LDC-specific was
the provision in Article XIX for the establishment of modalities for the special treatment for least-
developed countries.  This provision was mandatory and required fulfilling;  if no modalities were
established, this would go against the principles of WTO work.  He supported Brazil's suggestion that
a deadline for agreeing on those modalities should be set.  He added that the political will had to existto implement the commitment made in the WTO to  address the problems of LDCs in a special
manner.  He said that the negotiations should not marginalize least-developed countries.  If the Doha
Agenda was something that their constituencies could embrace and support, then practical steps
should be included, including in negotiations, where LDCs felt that they had something meaningful to
present to their constituencies.  LDCs saw negotiating opportunities in these modalities, were looking
for the implementation of all GATS provisions addressing their special situation, and considered it
important to agree on modalities before initial requests were made to LDCs.  It would not make senseto elaborate modalities relating to specific commitments after requests had been presented to LDCs by
their trading partners.  He therefore supported the statement made by Senegal when introducing the
proposal submitted by Uganda.
57. By way of preliminary comments, the representative of Australia said that she had found the
interventions by Senegal and others very useful.  She agreed with the concerns expressed by some
delegations that rigid modalities, and also a fixed deadline, might be counterproductive for LDCs.  At
that stage, it was difficult to predict how requests might look like.  She therefore considered it more
appropriate to give least-developed countries the necessary assistance to identify sectors of export
interest to them, so as to enable them to submit requests.  The situation of least-developed countries
was a global issue, and she felt that it would be useful  for LDCs to look at the whole picture at the end
of the negotiations in light of the balance of rights and obligations contained in the single undertaking.
58. The representative of Uruguay stated that Article XIX contained a legal requirement that
modalities for the special treatment for least-developed countries be established and hence concurredTN/S/M/2
Page 11
with Brazil that these had to be drawn up.  As to thei r possible content, he felt that that was where the
discussion in the Council should focus on.
59. The representative of New Zealand agreed that modalities for least-developed countries had
to be established, as this was a legal requirement in the GATS, that they should be drawn up as early
as possible and that a deadline should be set.  New Zealand would participate constructively in theprocess.
60. The representative of Japan said that, in preparing for the request-offer phase, Members
should take the special situation of least-developed countries into account, but he concurred with
Australia that rigid modalities might be counterproductive.  He fully recognized the need for special
treatment for LDCs as stated in the GATS, and, while noting that the Guidelines were not modalities
for least-developed countries as such, stressed that in paragraph 12 they contained a reference to
LDCs.  He added that his delegation would give further thought to what could be constructively
elaborated in the request-offer phase so as to give special attention to least-developed countries.
61. The representative of the Republic of Korea  said that his delegation recognized the situation
of least-developed countries and the urgent need for modalities for their special treatment.  He offered
his delegation's fully support to LDCs in the course of the development of these modalities and in the
negotiations.
62. The representative of Nigeria agreed that m odalities for the special treatment for least-
developed countries had to be established and endorsed the statement by Senegal.  The Council
should put the same emphasis as on those modalities for the treatment of autonomous liberalization.
He added that many African countries, who were  not least-developed countries, were however in
similar situation, and that also needed to be taken into account.
63. The representative of Senegal was thankful for the interest expressed by delegations in the
cause of least-developed countries.  By way of preliminary remarks, he said that modalities should be
established to give justice to the GATS mandate in Article XIX.  As a corollary, he concurred that the
modalities should not be too rigid, but at the same time stressed the importance of having the juridical
security that these modalities existed.  He was aware that the negotiations were a bilateral process, butas with autonomous liberalization, LDCs wanted the multilateral comfort that they would be granted
special treatment.  He recognized the developmenta l role of services, but stressed that it was up to
each LDC, on the basis of its own assessment, to choose where to undertake liberalization.  He added
that least-developed countries should not be pressured into more liberalization than what they felt was
appropriate.  While recognizing that governments could not force private sector investment, he
underscored the importance that the benefits of the GATS be fully realized.  He called upon Members
to read the negotiations through the prism of these modalities.  Concretely, he felt that setting adeadline of 31 March 2003 for their establishment was realistic, and added that the Council had a
juridical and moral obligation to give least-developed countries the possibility of effectively
participating in the negotiations.
64. By way of concluding comments, the Chairman said that the Council had held a good
discussion, with many interventions and expressions of interest.  The proposal by least-developed
countries testified to their willingness to participate in the services negotiations, which were based on
the GATS, a flexible and pro-development Agreement.  He stated that the establishment of these
modalities was a legal obligation under the GATS, which should be fulfilled as soon as possible.  As
the Council has only held a first debate on this issue, at least another round of discussion would be
necessary before Members could move to a more concrete drafting stage.  He encouraged allMembers, and in particular least-developed country ones, to consult with those delegations who had
shown to be interested in order to speed up the pr ocess.  The representative of Senegal said that they
would undertake consultations, but asked the Chairman, and the Secretariat, to help with the process.TN/S/M/2
Page 12
The representative of Djibouti concurred.  The Chairman  assured delegations that he stood ready to
assist with the establishment of the modalities.
D. WORK OF SUBSIDIARY BODIES – REPORTS BY CHAIRPERSONS
65. In keeping with what had been agreed concerning the regular reporting from the subsidiary
bodies to the Special Session, the Chairman invited the chairpersons of those bodies to present their
oral reports.
66. The Chairperson of the Committee on Trade in Financial Services, Mr. Syed Habib Ahmed of
Pakistan, reported that the Committee had met on 4 June and addressed the following issues:
Acceptance of the Fifth Protocol to the GATS;  Technical Issues;  Recent Developments in Financial
Services Trade;  Preparations in connection with pa ragraph 18 of the Protocol on the Accession of the
People's Republic of China;  and Other Business.
67. Under the item on the acceptance of the Fifth Protocol, the Committee heard updates on the
status of domestic procedures from the delegations of Bolivia, the Dominican Republic, the
Philippines, and Uruguay.  In most of the cases, delays in the ratification process seemed to be due to
procedural matters.
68. Under the item on technical issues, the delegations of Switzerland and Canada provided
replies to questions raised by Thailand regarding classification issues raised in those Members'negotiating proposals.  Thailand's questions had been recently circulated as document Job(02)/47.
Switzerland answered the third question posed by Thailand regarding examples of convergence
between banking and insurance activities.  In that  regard, the Swiss delegation pointed out that long-
term savings, such as pension schemes, were probably the best known example.  Financial institutions
could offer a whole range of products, from pure life insurance to long-term savings account, the firstone being an insurance product, the latter a banking product.  This corresponded perfectly with the
sectoral classification contained in the Annex on Financial Services.  Modern financial products,
however, combined those products into single mixed products, such as investment funds linked to life
insurance.  He finally said that Switzerland intende d to raise those issues in the context of bilateral
negotiations, in the hope of clarifying the issues at stake;  they would then turn to the Committee withconcrete problems that might need to be discussed.
69. On the other hand, Canada indicated that, although the classification in the Annex on
Financial Services was comprehensive, new financial activities had emerged since the conclusion of
the Uruguay Round and it was not clear in all cases where these activities were captured in the
existing classification.  Examples put forward by Canada included the following:  trading systems;
venture capital;  electronic bill presentment;  and securitization.  In Canada's view, further refinement
of the classification in the Annex might  be warranted.  Thailand shared Switzerland and Canada'sconcerns.
70. The Committee decided to revert to this agenda item at its next meeting.  In his view, the
discussion prompted by Thailand's initiative had turned out to be very useful, although of a
preliminary nature.  He thought that an important contribution could be made by the Committee if
these technical issues regarding the classification of financial services could be further discussed andanalyzed in the Committee for the benefit of the whole Membership.  Additionally, it was worth
noting that, at the request of one delegation, the Committee had confirmed that, given the broad scope
of this agenda item, delegations would be free to raise in this context any technical issue arising from
the requests that would be submitted soon.
71. Under the item on recent developments in financial services trade, the United States,
following up on a presentation made at previous meetings, emphasized the importance of developingTN/S/M/2
Page 13
transparent regulatory frameworks for financial services.  In this delegation's view, the existence of a
discrete regulatory community and a highly regulated sector, as well as a substantial history in
developing transparent procedures, that the Committee was the best place to start sharing ideas about
regulatory transparency.
72. Additionally, the delegations of Canada, Mexico and Chinese Taipei announced their
intention to contribute to the discussion, by providing the Committee with further information on how
the process of regulatory reform had been conducted, with particular reference to transparency in
regulatory making procedures.
73. An item on the preparations in connection with paragraph 18 of the Protocol on the Accession
of the People's Republic of China was included in the agenda at the request of the United States
delegation.  After an exchange of views among some delegations, it was decided that he would
conduct consultations on matters related to the prepar ation of this review, keeping in view the need to
ensure consistency with organizational decisions that might be taken by the Council for Trade in
Services, and to coordinate activities with the Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Services.
74. Under Other Business, he informed the Committee that he had been conducting some
informal consultations on the organization of future work.  His impression was that delegations' views
had not changed since the previous meeting, and that most delegations were focusing on thepreparation of initial bilateral requests.  Therefore, he had considered it appropriate to announce that
he would continue with his consultations in the co ming weeks and, in light of the outcome, he might
include an agenda item on the organization of future work at the following meeting.
75. Additionally, he had announced that the briefing session on the Financial Sector Assessment
Programme to be conducted by the IMF would be held on 22 July in the morning.  The programmeand relevant documentation would be circulated to Members four weeks in advance of the meeting.  It
was also worth noting that the IMF had informed the Committee about the preparations envisaged for
the briefing session.
76. Finally, it was agreed that the Committee would meet again in the afternoon of 22 July 2002.
77. The Chairperson of the Committee on Specific Commitments, Mr. Niklas Bergström of
Sweden, reported that, since the previous report in March, the Committee had held one formal
meeting on 3 June to address two substantive items:  Classification Issues;  and Matters Relating to
the Scheduling of Commitments.
78. Regarding classification issues, the Committee had received two new classification proposals
in March:  one on legal services from the delegation of Australia, and one on postal and courier
services from the delegations of MERCOSUR and Bo livia.  At that week's meeting, delegations
reiterated their interest in further clarifying individual positions on the various classification problemsthat had been identified until then.  To that ef fect, it was suggested that the Secretariat prepare a
compilation of all classification proposals that had been submitted to the Committee and to the
Special Session.  The Committee was currently reflecting on the suggestion.  It was widely recognized
that the Committee might usefully be used as a forum to discuss classification problems and attempt
to reach a common understanding of the solutions put forward, as delegations approached the requestand offer phase.
79. Under the item of matters relating to the scheduling of commitments, two issues were
addressed in the Committee's deliberations:  how to incorporate new commitments resulting from
current negotiations into Members' GATS schedules, and approaches to the scheduling of additional
commitments under Article XVIII of the GATS.TN/S/M/2
Page 14
80. As to the former, the Committee was currently considering two options that had emerged
from discussions, without prejudice to any other approach that Members might wish to consider.  The
first option would consist of each Member submitting a schedule reflecting only the new
commitments resulting from the negotiations, which would be linked to pre-existing schedules
containing all other unmodified commitments.  Under the second option, a Member would submit a
single schedule, i.e. a consolidated schedule, reflecting all existing commitments, including the ones
resulting from the present negotiations, which woul d replace pre-existing schedules.  Following a
request in March, the Secretariat had prepared a note to assist Members in exploring both options.  As
in the previous meeting, those delegations that voiced their views on this matter preferred the second
option.  However, further reflection on the practical implications of both approaches was deemed
necessary at that stage.  The need for an early resolution to this question, possibly well in advance of
the submission of initial offers in March next year, was also emphasised.  He would be conducting
informal consultations on these questions before the next formal meeting of the Committee.  As to the
second matter, in March the Committee had agreed on conducting an examination of the various
approaches that had been followed until then in  undertaking additional commitments.  This exercise
would provide an opportunity to enhance awareness of the issues covered to date by additional
commitments, and the methods used, and to explore possible options.  Discussion on this matterwould be initiated on the basis of a note by the Secretariat to be issued soon.
81. The Chairperson of the Working Party on GATS Rules, Mr. Thomas Chan of Hong Kong,
China, reported that, since the previous meeting of the Special Session, the Working Party had held a
formal meeting on 3 June, which had continued on 4 June, and that, since the Working Party had not
yet completed its agenda in full, the meeting would be resumed on 7 June.  At the formal meeting, theWorking Party addressed the three issues on its agenda, i.e. emergency safeguard measures, subsidies
and government procurement.
82. On emergency safeguard measures, he recalled the communication from the Chairperson of
the Working Party transmitting the draft Fourth Decision on Negotiations on Emergency Safeguard
Measures.  It stipulated that "the Chairman will carry out consultations to establish a programmestructuring future work of the Working Party".  With the concurrence of the former Chairperson of the
Working Party, he had been holding consultations on this matter since April, including an open-ended
informal consultation on 29 April.  On Monday, he had reported to the Working Party that these
consultations had revealed a great deal of convergence in views and showed that Members shared a
common wish to arrive at a simple, broad and flexible work programme as early as possible, to enable
the Working Party to move ahead with substantive work.  Different views remained, however, on
some of the suggested elements.  With Members’ agreement, he would continue his consultations inthe weeks to come, and would present, under his own responsibility, a proposal for a work programme
before the following formal meeting of the Working Party.
83. Moreover, Members continued their general discussion on the substantive aspects of a
possible emergency safeguard mechanism.  They gave further consideration to the Communication
from the European Communities and their Member States on modal application of an emergencysafeguard measure, as well as to the Communication from Australia on elements for a possible "core
mechanism" for temporary suspension or modification of commitments.  In addition, there was an
initial exchange of views on possible common elements and main differences in the various
approaches that had emerged from existing proposals for an emergency safeguard mechanism.
84. On subsidies, several delegations proposed that a work programme be established for
negotiations under Article XV, and suggested some elements for the work programme.  On the basis
of these suggestions, and with Members’ agreement, he would include in his consultations and further
work a work programme for subsidies.  On Members’ requests, he would also have informal
discussions on certain suggestions raised by Members for further background work on this item.TN/S/M/2
Page 15
85. On government procurement, a delegation proposed that a work programme be established in
order to structure work under this agenda item.  Subject to further discussion on resumption of the
formal meeting on this agenda item the following day,  he also intended to include in his consultations
and further work a work programme on government procurement.
86. The Chairperson of the Working Party on Domestic Regulation, Mr. Sergio Santos of Brazil,
reported that, since the previous report to the March meeting of the Special Session, the Working
Party had held one formal meeting, on 4 June.  Discussion during the meeting focused primarily on
the organization of future work, based on a Chairperson’s Note in Job (02)/46.  To enable Members to
complete discussions, the meeting would be continued on 7 June.
87. As for the appointment of the Chairperson, he said that at the time of the previous meeting the
new Chairperson of the Working Party had not yet been decided.  Subsequently, he had been
confirmed as the new Chairperson, and had assumed the chair at the beginning of the meeting on4 June.
88. With regard to the organization of future work, Members supported the suggestions in the
Chairperson’s Note regarding a methodology for the examination of regulatory measures.  There was,
however, no consensus regarding the setting of a best-endeavours timeframe for completing the initial
stages of the examination.  It was fully agreed that the examination of regulatory measures would inno way prejudice the final outcome of the work mandated under GATS Article VI:4.  Members also
agreed on the Chairperson’s suggestion to circulate a listing of all the formal and informal documents
circulated to date in the Working Party and th e previous Working Party on Professional Services.
89. As for the development of regulatory disciplines under GATS Article VI:4, the discussion of
concepts relating to the development of disciplines focused on the issue of concrete examples of thetypes of regulatory measures which might be covered under the regulatory disciplines that could be
developed by Members under GATS Article VI:4.  Si nce the previous meeting, new papers regarding
regulatory examples were submitted by two delegations, and introduced in the meeting.  The first was
a paper from Thailand, circulated as JOB(02)/48, and the second was a paper from Hong Kong,
China, circulated as JOB(02)/50.  During the discussions, a number of delegations indicated that theywere also preparing to submit examples of regulatory measures.  There was no consensus on the idea
of updating the list of examples compiled by the Secretariat on the basis of these contributions,
particularly Hong Kong, China’s.  He would consult on this matter with the delegations concerned.
90. The discussion of the development of disciplines for professional services was postponed
until 7 June.
91. As for the date of the next meeting, Members were expected to agree to hold the meeting in
the week of 15 July, as part of the following “Services week”.
92. The representative of Canada noted that, as part of the new procedures for the de-restriction
of documents, minutes and reports of meetings woul d be de-restricted within 45 days.  She wondered
if this would include the reports just presented by the Chairpersons of the subsidiary bodies and added
that this would be important to increase transparency.
93. The Chairman confirmed that, given that the reports were included in the minutes of the
meetings of the Special Session, they would also be de-restricted under the new procedures.  He
suggested that the Council take note of the reports and the statements made.
94. The Council took note.TN/S/M/2
Page 16
E. PROPOSALS RELATING TO THE NEGOTIATIONS UNDER ARTICLE XIX OF THE GATS
95. The Chairman recalled that at the March meeting it had been decided that this item on the
negotiating proposals submitted under Article XIX of the GATS should continue to figure on the
agenda of the Special Session.  This allowed Members to submit new proposals and revert to existing
ones, to either seek or provide additional clarifications.  At the same time, it was also decided that thediscussion under this item would not be further sub-divided by sectors and issues raised, but
organized in a looser fashion.
96. He noted that, since the March meeting, two new proposals had been submitted by the
delegation of Cuba, on tourism and related services and telecommunications services, and circulated
in documents TN/S/W/1 and 2, respectively.  He also took the occasion to remind Members that, as a
result of the establishment of the Trade Negotiations Committee, the symbol of the document series
for the Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services had been changed from S/CSS/* toTN/S/*.  In addition, he drew Members' attention to the Secretariat compilation of further sets of
questions and responses with respect to Members' proposals, which were contained in document
JOB(01)/96/Add.20 and 21.
97. The representative of Cuba said that his delegation had submitted four proposals, in
documents S/CSS/W/142 to 145, which had already been presented.  He would now introduce the
main issues of their two new proposals, contained in documents TN/S/W/1 and 2.
98. The first new proposal was on tourism and related services and was contained in document
TN/S/W/1.  Cuba was submitting this negotiating proposal as an initial contribution to the discussion
on the tourism and travel-related services sector, an industry which was of great importance to
developing countries and significantly contribut ed to the goal of sustainable development by
generating employment, preserving natural resources, developing infrastructure and attracting foreign
direct investment.  The international tourism scene had undergone a complete change and there was
now an urgent need to remove barriers which hindered the recovery and expansion of tourism
activities in developing countries and ensure that no new discriminatory practices ensued.  For
example, trade liberalization in this sector required the elimination of discriminatory measures, suchas those applied by the United States of America to Cuba for more than 40 years, which had
represented a loss to the Cuban tourism industry of 16 billion dollars, corresponding to the revenue
which Cuban entities would have received for the provision of tourism services to United States
citizens.
99. Their submission proposed that the negotiation promote the elimination and prevention of
anti-competitive practices of tourism enterprises as a whole, such as warnings of bans on tourism for
certain destinations and lack of transparency of information which could favour other destinations, aswell as discriminatory use of information networks and related services.  Second, developed countries
should make commitments which allowed for the effective implementation of Article IV of the
GATS.  Third, when developing countries made commitments, developed countries should guarantee
implementation of Article XIX:2 without requiring any further obligations other than those stemming
from their national policy objectives and development targets.  Fourth, existing barriers andtransparent regulation of administrative procedures which hindered or delayed the issuing of licences
and work permits to foreigners, particularly with regard to aspects of the service provision which
could not be handled by the local workforce, should be eliminated.  Finally, negotiations on market
access and national treatment should be established on the basis of the outcome of the assessment of
trade in services which demonstrated to developing countries that they would directly benefit fromany commitments to be made.
100. The second proposal was on telecommunications services and was contained in document
TN/S/W/2.  It was intended to promote measures to facilitate the growing participation of developingTN/S/M/2
Page 17
countries in telecommunications trade, by having regard for their economic situation and
development, trade and financial needs.  The proposal explained and took into account the profound
technological changes which had taken place in the telecommunications sector in the 1990s, with the
gradual disappearance of state-owned enterprises and the emergence of the current situation in which
private enterprises prevailed.  Although private sector participation in telecommunications sector
financing in certain developing countries in the 1990s had reflected the increasing coverage of
telephony in these countries, the technological divide which separated them from the developed world
had not been bridged, adequate access to information and communication technologies had not been
provided, particularly in rural and remote areas, and this continued to present a barrier to the potential
of these countries to participate in world trade on an equal footing.  This was demonstrated by the
chart contained in the proposal, which showed that, at the beginning of 2001, high-income countries,
which were home to only 15 per cent of the world's population, accounted for 55 per cent of fixedtelephone lines, and an even higher share of mobile telephones.  This demonstrated why developing
countries needed satisfactory regulation of the sector in order to ensure harmonious national
development.  In addition, when Members acquired foreign capital, they sought to strengthen national
capacities with new technologies guaranteeing their development.  He stated that the right of
Members to regulate and introduce new regulations was reaffirmed by Ministers in paragraph 7 of theDoha Declaration.
101. The negotiations had to take into account the development disparities between the various
Members, granting differential treatment to developing countries pursuant to Articles IV and XIX:2.
The aim of the negotiations should be to seek a balance whereby developed countries fulfilled their
commitments, application of which would mean improved access for developing countries to newinformation and communication technologies, with a view to strengthening their national capacity in
the sector and participating in trade on a more eq ual footing.  Cuba recognized the importance of
global telecommunications trade to the economic and social development of developing countries and
proposed that the negotiations take this into account by applying Article XIX:2 of the GATS to the
letter.
102. The representative of Bolivia informed the Council that her delegation was co-sponsoring the
following submissions tabled by the delega tions of the MERCOSUR countries:  document
S/CSS/W/95 on computer and related services;  document S/CSS/W/108 on postal services;
document S/CSS/W/125 on tourism services;  and document S/CSS/W/139 on economic needs tests.
103. The representative of Barbados provided initial comments on some of Cuba's negotiating
proposals.  With regard to their submission on tourism and related services in document TN/S/W/1,
she agreed with the developmental thrust of the proposal.  In paragraph 3, she had noted that in 2001there had been a global decline in tourist arrivals and that the Caribbean had experienced a 5 per cent
decline.  Barbados had registered a 6.9 per cent fall in tourist arrivals, a 1.1 per cent decline in cruise
arrivals and a 3.3 per cent fall in tourist expenditure.  These were significant declines in an economy
that was dependant on tourism.  Tourism contributed 11.5 per cent of GDP and 11.4 per cent of
Barbados labour force.  The post-September 11 figures demonstrated the vulnerability of smalleconomies dependent on volatile external markets.   She welcomed the reference to multilateral
negotiations in paragraph 6, as unilateral or plurilateral measures in any sector were
counterproductive.  She supported the call, in paragraph 7, developed countries grant market access in
modes of supply of export interest to developing countries.  Barbados agreed with the need to
preserve the environment, as sustainable development was integral to the industry itself, andwelcomed the protection and promotion of local culture.  She concurred with paragraph 12 that the
assessment should be undertaken, especially to assist developing countries in appreciating any
benefits that further liberalization in the sector would bring.  She noted in this regard that Barbados'
tourism sector was already quite liberal.  Finally, she supported the call in paragraph 13 for the
elimination of discriminatory practices by major tour operators.TN/S/M/2
Page 18
104. Turning to the Cuban proposal on environmental services, in document S/CSS/W/142, she
supported the need, stated in paragraph 6, for differential treatment to domestic service suppliers,
especially in light of the technological gaps which existed.  She recalled paragraph 12 of the
Guidelines, stating that "there shall be appropriate flexibility for individual developing country
Members ….. and, when making access to their markets available to foreign service suppliers,attaching to such access conditions aimed at achiev ing the objectives referred to in Article IV", as
well as paragraph 15, linking the implementation of Article IV with the needs of small service
suppliers of developing countries.  She could also support their objectives for the negotiations, as
stated in paragraph 11, which would result in transfer of technology and know-how in this area.
105. With respect to the proposal Cuba had submitted on financial services in document
S/CSS/W/143, she agreed that the financial sector was important and that regulations should take the
level of development and size of the economy into account, as stated in paragraph 4.  Barbados'prudential measures had ensured a relatively stable national financial market.  She added that
multilateral negotiations in this area should also ensure the stability of the negotiating environment
and avoid any unilateral or plurilateral standard-setting .  Given the volatility of this services sector, as
well as the viability of it as a generator of needed foreign exchange, it was important that negotiations
take account of the level of development and size of the economy and allow for the granting of certainincentives to maintain a presence in a highly competitive market.
106. The representative of Thailand supported the submission by MERCOSUR on economic needs
tests (ENTs).  She said that in many of the s ectors where Thailand had an interest, ENTs had been
scheduled, particularly by developed countries.  Her delegation could therefore support the proposal
that Members eliminate economic needs tests as far as  possible, or at least that they attach clear
criteria to them.  She agreed that they were mainly present in sectors such as tourism, distribution
services, professional services, telecommunication and financial services.  With regard to the Cuban
proposal on tourism services, she could support a number of points and said that her delegation was
ready to participate in future discussions on this sector, adding that 54% of Thailand's export revenue
was accounted for by the tourism sector.
107. Commenting on the proposals submitted by Cuba, the representative of Canada sought a
clarification with regard to the fourth bullet point of paragraph 12 of the proposal on tourism.  She
was unclear about whether the reference to requirements with regard to sustainable development was
about tourists or about the host government and wondered what types of commitments Cuba would be
seeking.  Turning to the fifth bullet of paragraph 12, she wondered if the reference to the movement of
personnel and the calls for the elimination of barr iers to this movement referred to in-coming or
outgoing movement, and if this reflected an offensive interest with regard to the movement of Cubanpersonnel abroad.
108. With regard to the Cuban proposal on energy services, and the reference to negotiations not
impairing the right of governments to regulate, she st ressed that in her delegation's view liberalization
in a sector did not imply an unregulated sector.  She recalled that the GATS Preamble explicitly
recognized the right of Members to regulate to meet national policy objectives.  As for the Cubanproposal on construction and related services, she wondered if Cuba had any concrete suggestions
with regard to its proposal that Members examine possible definitions which would enable
professional services related to this sector to be more comprehensive and focussed.
109. Turning to the proposal by India in document S/CSS/W/141, she noted that this was the
fourth submission on computer and related services, which was a vital sector for all economies,requiring particular attention in the negotiations.  She agreed with India that mode 4 delivery was
important for developing countries.  Like India, Canada encouraged Members to look at the
possibility of undertaking mode 4 commitments not linked to mode 3.TN/S/M/2
Page 19
110. Reacting to Canada's questions, the representative of Cuba asked if they could be passed on in
writing.  With regard to the question on construction and professional services, he said that
construction and related services were closely linked to architecture and engineering and other similar
services and that this had been recognized in many proposals.  Hence, he said that the negotiations
should permit the commercial presence and temporary movement of natural persons for the provisionof specific services, favouring access to developed country markets under modes 3 and 4, in design
services, architectural services, engineering services, integrated engineering services, construction and
related engineering services, urban planning and landscape architectural services, and other related
consulting services.  Increasingly, these services required multidisciplinary teams, and the
involvement of small, medium and large design firm s, because of the extent of investment required,
therefore being closely linked to mode 3.  His de legation was therefore suggesting incorporating in
the construction services sector a category for "general design work on construction", given the wayin which all these types of services were closely related to construction from the beginning.
111. The representative of Pakistan supported the Cuban proposals on tourism and
telecommunications in their focus on the concerns of developing countries.  He would revert to them,
but said that he could back the proposal that disparities in these sectors should be redressed.  As for
the MERCOSUR submission on economic needs tests,  he welcomed the identification of problems
and fully supported the suggested solutions.  ENTs were prevalent in schedules, implied discretion
and were a major impediment in sectors and modes, particularly mode 4, of export interest to
developing countries.
112. Commenting on the submissions tabled by Cuba, the representative of the European
Communities noted, first, that construction services were a sector which many developing countries
had identified as of interest to them.  He encouraged as many Members as possible to undertake
commitments in this sector, given its importance for development and stressed the importance of
keeping government procurement practices in mind.  With regard to the Cuban submission on energy
services, he concurred that an appropriate regulatory framework had to be in place to accompany
liberalization in order to establish a well-functio ning system, promote efficiency and allow the
achievement of public policy objectives.  He said that their suggestions on classification for energy
services were in line with other proposals on the sector.  As concerned the submission Cuba had
tabled on environmental services, he noted that liberalization in this sector was important for
sustainable development.  He sought a clarification with regard to the statement that developing
countries did not have "the same capacity to adjust to the new rules imposed by this type of trade",
and wondered what these were.  Turning to the submission by Costa Rica on aircraft repair and
maintenance, he welcomed the proposal, which was very focused and provided examples of how goodcompetence in a specific services sector could be used to generate trade in services.  His delegation
largely shared the analysis of Costa Rica in this sector, including the particular relevance of modes 2
and 3 and also the barriers listed therein.
113. The representative of Brazil said that his delegation could broadly support the proposal
submitted by Cuba on construction and related services.  This sector was important for developing
countries, as this was an area where they had a comparative advantage.  He concurred that a close
relationship existed between construction and related professional services, such as engineering,
architectural and urban planning services.  He also agreed with the importance of recognition of
qualifications, the need to strengthen Article VII and the fact that economic needs tests represented an
important barrier to the full implementation of Article IV.
114. By way of preliminary comments on the proposals by Cuba on tourism and
telecommunications, the representative of Mexico said that he could share many elements.  First, he
supported the statement that developed countries should make commitments which allowed for theeffective implementation of Article IV.  Second, that developed countries should implement
Article XIX:2 when developing countries were undertaking commitments, by not requiring anyTN/S/M/2
Page 20
further obligations other than those which stemmed from their national policy objectives and
development targets.  Third, that negotiations on market access and national treatment should be
established on the basis of the outcome of the assessment of trade in services which demonstrated to
developing countries that they would directly benefit from any commitments to be made.
115. The representative of Costa Rica said that the proposals introduced by Cuba were very
positive.  Turning to the comments made by the European Communities on his delegation's proposal,
he said that aircraft repair and maintenance was a sector where benefits existed for developing
countries, particularly thanks to the high-labour component of this activity.  He could support the
proposal by MERCOSUR that economic needs tests be  eliminated;  many ENTs had been scheduled
in the aircraft repair and maintenance sector, resulting in high levels of discretion and representing an
important barrier.
116. Commenting on the proposal by Cuba on tourism services first, the representative of Poland
said that her delegation shared the view that commitments should ensure sustainable development of
this sector and that monopolistic practices by tourism enterprises which prevented the proper
functioning of the sector in developed and developing countries should be eliminated.  She added that
the negotiations had to take into account the interests of both developed and developing countries in
this sector.  Turning to maritime transport services, she recalled the Chairman's introductorystatements at the March meeting.  She agreed that the negotiations should be re-opened multilaterally
on the basis of the model schedule and suggested that the Secretariat prepare a compilation of the best
offers tabled in accordance with the 1996 Decision stating that "the negotiations will be resumed on
the basis of existing or improved offers", and not on the basis of commitments undertaken.  As for the
question of small and medium-sized enterprises, she recognized that there were barriers faced bySMEs and that these should be eliminated, but said that, in light of the equal legal treatment of
entities, not all barriers could be removed.  She also noted the importance of electronic commerce, but
added that e-commerce was not easily accessible for all Polish firms.
117. The representative of Djibouti said that the submissions tabled by Cuba were important and
that it was essential to achieve a balance in both the telecommunications and tourism sector.
Developed countries had to bear this mind so that developing countries could be given every
possibility of training and developing in these areas.  He also supported the proposal by MERCOSUR
on economic needs tests.  He said that there should be fewer requirements laid on developing
countries to enable them to achieve better market access.
118. The representative of New Zealand said that her delegation would revert to the Cuban
proposals.  With regard to the submission on education services tabled by Japan in document
S/CSS/W/137, she welcomed the proposal, which wa s broadly consistent with New Zealand's own
proposal in the sector.  As Japan's paper acknowledged, private sector participation in education, and
in particular trade in education services, was entirely consistent with a strong or predominant role for
the state in the provision of a country's education sector.  Furthermore, such private sector
participation, whether domestic of foreign in origin, might assist governments in responding to
changing national education needs and in meeting their domestic education policy objectives.  Japan'spaper also usefully pointed to a range of regulatory measures that countries might consider for the
maintenance of the quality and individual character of their education sector.
119. The representative of Indonesia said that the Cuban submissions reflected the real situation
that developing countries were facing.  He also expressed his delegation's support for the
MERCOSUR proposal on economic needs tests.
120. The representative of Hong Kong, China welc omed the proposal by India on computer and
related services, circulated as document S/CSS/W/141, and added that his own delegation also had an
interest in this sector.  He sought a clarification with regard to the Indian proposal that the ILO ISCO-TN/S/M/2
Page 21
88 classification be superimposed to the W/120.  He noted that the ILO classification was based on
types of service personnel considered as professionals, whereas the W/120 was based on the type of
service being delivered.  He therefore wondered how India planned to reconcile the two classifications
in order to arrive at a clear classification which would help schedule commitments according to the
type of service, rather than the type of personnel.  He then supported Poland's comments andsuggestions on maritime transport services.  By way of preliminary response to the question posed by
Hong Kong, China, the representative of India explained that their suggestion was to superimpose the
ISCO classification to W/120.  As ISCO referred to professional categories, their suggestion was thatMembers' commitments in given sectors and sub-sectors such as contained in W/120 would be
buttressed by specific occupational categories relevant to these sectors as contained in ISCO-88.
121. The representative of China welcomed the Cuban submissions.  The tourism sector in China
accounted for more than half of total services exports and was therefore very important to his
delegation.  He then expressed support for the proposal by MERCOSUR on economic needs tests.
122. The representative of Australia welcomed the proposals tabled by Cuba and looked forward to
working with them.  She said that construction services was a sector of interest to her delegation and
she agreed that a link existed with professional services.  She also informed Members that Australia's
responses to the questions that the European Communities had posed on their proposal on legalservices had been circulated in writing in JOB(01)/16/Add.21.  Her delegation stood ready to discuss
these further.
123. The representative of Saint Lucia supported the submissions by Cuba.  She had found the
questions raised by Canada on tourism services very interesting.  With regard to sustainable social,
ecological as well as economic development, she said that problems were encountered with thepractices of multinationals, such as cruise ship liners and the transit of hazardous material.  With
respect to the fourth bullet point of paragraph 12 of the Cuban submission in document TN/S/W/1,
she stressed the importance of taking into account the difference in size between suppliers from the
North and small developing countries' governments.  She drew attention to problems such as the
maintenance of coral reefs and other ecological issues, and called upon Members to address the issuesraised by Cuba and supported more discussion on this topic.
124. The representative of Ecuador thanked Cuba in particular for the reference to Articles IV and
XIX in its submissions.  She could support the proposal on tourism services, and in particular the
suggestion that the prohibition of certain tourist areas as destinations areas be eliminated.  Her
delegation also believed that market access and national treatment should be promoted pursuant to
Articles XIX and IV of the GATS to bring real benefits to developing countries.  As for the Cuban
proposal on energy services, she underscored the right to liberalize with due respect for nationalpolicy objectives. She also supported the MERC OSUR proposal on economic needs tests, and
particularly the suggestion that developed countries eliminated ENTs in sectors and modes where
developing countries had an export interest.
125. The representative of Malaysia thanked Cuba for its proposals, said that his delegation would
revert to them but already noted that Malaysia could support their underpinnings, particularly in
paragraphs 11 and 12 of the proposal on telecommunications.  His delegation was not looking at this
round just in a mercantilist fashion, but also from a development standpoint.  The economic and social
development of developing countries, which Cuba was highlighting in its proposals, was an obligation
that had to be taken into account in the negotiations.
126. The representative of the Dominican Republic supported Cuba's proposal on tourism services,
and in particular paragraph 9 and the first and last bullet points in paragraph 12.  She added that their
proposal shared many of the elements in the submission co-sponsored by her delegation on tourism
services.TN/S/M/2
Page 22
127. The representative of Cuba thanked Members for their comments and questions and said that
his delegation would revert and reply to them.  He also informed Members that in major tourist
destinations in Cuba, the Euro was now accepted.
128. By way of concluding comments on this item, the Chairman said that two new submissions
had been tabled by the delegation of Cuba which had generated a good deal of interest.  Members had
also raised questions and provided clarifications on previously submitted proposals and it had been
agreed that the Secretariat would prepare a compilation of offers made in the negotiations on maritime
transport services to assist the negotiations in this sector.  While the number of new negotiating
proposals being tabled to the Special Session was dwindling, the possibility of submitting new
proposals and of reverting to existing ones should not be foreclosed.  Therefore, he said that this item
on negotiating proposals would continue to figure  on the Council's agenda and suggested that the
discussion be organized in the same loose format adopted for this meeting.
129. It was so agreed.
F. SUBMISSION OF INITIAL REQUESTS – STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN
130. The Chairman said that, with the deadline for the submission of initial requests fast
approaching, he had thought that it might be useful to offer delegations a few thoughts on the
procedural side of the submission of requests, to dissipate any possible doubts and questions.  He did
not intend to generate any discussion on this issue, but he imagined that it would be useful if he
highlighted the basic technical aspects of the submission of initial requests.
131. First, initial requests were to be submitted by 30 June 2002.  As Members knew, this date was
the outcome of a political agreement reached by Ministers in Doha.  It was the date for the submission
of "initial" requests, and the word "initial" was indicative of the reality of the negotiating processbeing a succession of requests and offers.  The date only marked the start of the process.  However,
this should in no way reduce its importance.  He thought that Members would agree that it was in
every delegation's interest to engage in the negotiations as early as possible.
132. Second, with respect to format, the exercise was very straightforward.  Requests were usually
presented in the format of a simple letter, in which a participant would state what it requested ofanother.
133. As for content, requests could essentially focus on any, or all, of four items.  These were:  (1)
the addition of a sector that was not included in a trading partners' schedule;  (2) the removal of
limitations on market access and/or national treatment, or a reduction of their trade restrictiveness;
(3) the scheduling of additional commitments;  and (4) the removal of MFN exemptions.
134. Finally, with respect to process, the exchan ge of requests had traditionally been purely
bilateral.  It was simply a process of letters being addressed from the requesting participant to therelevant negotiating partners.  The Secretariat did not normally have any role to play, save for its
traditional function of providing any technical advice that might be requested.
135. That was all there was to know about the submission of initial requests from a purely
technical point of view.  He hoped that Members would find this information useful.
136. The representative of the Republic of Korea  asked if the Chairman's statement could be
circulated in writing.  He then made three comments.  First, he wondered if, as Members were
entering a more formal request-offer stage of the negotiations, more official or detailed guidelines
might be needed on the procedures to be followed.  He felt that some official guidelines would help
Members' work and minimize confusion.  He added that the task of preparing requests was not easyTN/S/M/2
Page 23
given the short time-frame.  Second, he had taken note that the request-offer phase was purely
bilateral and that the Secretariat had no official role to play, but he wondered whether the Secretariat
could help facilitate the smooth running of the process, particularly with regard to technical aspects.
Third, he wondered to what extent Members had to keep their requests confidential.
137. The Chairman said that his statement would be made available in writing.  As for more
official guidelines, he said that it would be difficult to make an open and flexible negotiating process
official, but that what had been circulated by the WTO Secretariat at the GATS seminar for
delegations in early 2002 might offer some guidance.  The representative of the WTO Secretariat
recalled that the presentation made at the GATS seminar for delegations had been circulated inwriting.  It offered a factual picture of previous experience in the negotiations, but was without
prejudice to what Members decided.  With regard to confidentiality, for instance, he said that there
was no obligation to either keep requests secret or to make them public, and that it was essentially upto each Member.  As for the Secretariat's involvemen t, he confirmed that the Secretariat was available
to provide advice on technical issues, but that requests would be addressed directly to Members.  The
Chairman added that, with regard to confidentiality, from a tactical point of view it might be in
Members' interest to keep requests secret, but that there might be other cases, or domestic procedures,where Members would prefer to make their request public.
138. The representative of Mexico stressed that his delegation's interpretation was that the 30 June
benchmark was indicative and reserved the possibility of Mexico continuing with domestic
consultations and submitting requests after the 30 June 2002 date.  The representative of Venezuela
sought the Chairman's assurance that requests submitted after 30 June 2002 would not be considereduntimely.
139. The Chairman said that the 30 June date only marked the start of the process and that, while it
was in Members' interest to submit their initial requests as early as possible, any requests submitted
subsequently would also be taken into account.  He then suggested that the Council take note of the
statements made.
140. The Council took note.
G. ORGANIZATION OF FUTURE WORK
141. The Chairman recalled that, at the previous Special Session, it had been agreed that the
organization of the July meeting would be decided upon in June, so as to retain maximum flexibility
in organizing the Council's work.  Members' discussion under that agenda item in March had revealed
a high degree of convergence.  All Members agreed that the negotiations were entering a new phase
which would imply more time being devoted to bilateral consultations;  these, however, should not
detract attention from multilateral work.  It was stressed that some of the standing items on theCouncil agenda, such as assessment and autonomous liberalization, were of particular importance.
142. Given the heavy workload, both in Geneva and in capitals, in connection with the preparation
of initial requests, it had been decided to compress the June cluster of services meetings in one week.
Members now had to decide how to best organize our next cluster of meetings, scheduled for the
second half of July.
143. In light of the discussion at the March meeting, his suggestion was the following.  He noted
that the next Special Session would be held after the date for the submission of initial offers.  Also,
the Negotiating Guidelines and Procedures agreed in March 2001 stated that "the main method of
negotiations shall be the request-offer approach".  He therefore did not consider it advisable to try to
compress all services meetings, of the Special Session, the regular Council and the subsidiary bodies,in one week, as had been done for this cluster, but preferred to spread meetings over a two-weekTN/S/M/2
Page 24
period.  This allowed space for bilateral and plurilateral consultations, and at the same time provided
sufficient time for multilateral discussions, thereby preventing any risk of "crowding-out" discussion
of important horizontal issues.  His proposal for a two-week cluster was also motivated by the fact
that in July Members had to factor in an additional activity, namely the briefing session on the IMF
financial sector assessment programme, scheduled for 22 July.  He stressed, however, that whilst inJuly Members would be returning to a cluster of meetings spread over a two-week period, delegations
would not be in meetings for two weeks.  His suggestion was that meetings be spread out over two
weeks, with "meetings-free" days in-between, when delegations, and any capital-based experts present
in Geneva, would have time to consult bilaterally.  As usual, the Secretariat would be issuing in due
course a detailed programme of meetings for the two weeks.  He hoped that delegations could find his
suggestion acceptable.
144. The representative of Thailand appealed to other Members who wished to have bilateral
meetings with her delegation to inform them of dates and sectors of interest as early as possible.
145. The representative of Australia asked what the dates for the two weeks of meeting in July
were.  She also wondered whether a "book-end" a pproach, with the Special Session meeting at the
beginning and at the end of the week, would also be  a possible way of organizing work.  Finally, she
drew delegations' attention to the fact that in the morning of 18 July the International Union ofArchitects would be holding a symposium in the WTO on issues related to domestic regulation, on
19 July the International Bar Association would also hold an event and that the IMF briefing session
would take place on 22 July.  She therefore felt that this might be an opportunity for experts from the
professional and financial services sectors to hold discussions.  She suggested that events in and
around Geneva might be used as catalysts for sectoral consultations and mentioned the ITU meetingin December as another example.  The Chairman said that the services cluster would meet during the
last two weeks of July, and that, rather then organized with the "book-ends" approach, in July theSpecial Session would be held  towards the end of the two-week cluster, with days in-between when
delegations could organize bilateral meetings.  He said that having an early warning of events taking
place around Geneva could facilitate the participation of sectoral experts.
146. The representative of the Republic of Korea said that, while the organization of bilateral
meetings would be settled by individual delegations, he called upon delegations not to block-book all
meeting rooms in the WTO building and wondered if the Secretariat could provide some guidance
with regard to the booking of rooms.  He also asked if, in order to facilitate bilateral negotiations, the
Secretariat could provide contact points for all delegations in Geneva as well as in capitals.  He felt
that these could help facilitate the participation of sectoral experts.  As for the venue of meetings, the
Chairman said that finding rooms in the WTO building was generally difficult.  He called upon
delegations to inform each other of desired bilatera l meetings well in advance, so as to allow for
adequate planning, including of the venue.  He added that the Secretariat could coordinate contact
points, but noted that delegations usually preferred communications to be channelled through their
missions in Geneva.  The representative of the WTO Secretariat added that, whilst rooms could be
booked through the Conference Office, space was generally very scarce and invited delegations not to
rely on the WTO building as the main venue for their bilateral consultations.  As for contact and
enquiry points, he drew delegations' attention to the Secretariat compilation which contained all the
relevant references and had been ci rculated as document S/ENQ/78/Rev.2.
147. The representative of Israel asked that the dates for the July Special Session be communicated
to delegations as early as possible.  The Chairman said that they would be decided in the following
two weeks.
148. The representative of Saint Lucia drew Members' attention to the problems faced by non-
resident delegations and said that any requests tabled to non-resident delegations should be
accompanied by funding for travel and accommodation.TN/S/M/2
Page 25
149. The representative of Canada said that it might be preferable to concentrate all bilateral
meetings in one week, in view of the cost of having experts in Geneva over a two-week period.
Whilst this might not be possible for the July cluster, he suggested that it might be taken into account
for subsequent meetings.  With regard to facilitating the presence of capital-based experts, he
wondered if the Chairman could not perform a kind of depository or "clearing-house" function,providing guidance on when given sectoral experts might be best brought to Geneva.  He had found
Australia' suggestion that other sectoral events in and around Geneva be also taken into account very
useful.
150. The Chairman said that all suggestions raised were sensible and assured delegations that he
stood ready, with the help of the Secretariat, to coordinate and facilitate action.  The representative of
the WTO Secretariat added that, based on expressions of interest by delegations, the Chairman could
suggest which sectoral experts might be brought to Geneva for given meetings.
151. The representative of Mexico said that bilaterals might best be held in the first week of the
Special Session, so that any doubts arising from such meetings could be subsequently multilaterally
discussed in the Special Session or the relevant subsidiary body.  Otherwise, any questions would
only be addressed in the following cluster of meetings.  As for the choice of sectors, he felt that this
would be influenced by the content of requests.  The Chairman concurred, but noted that it might be
expensive to keep experts in Geneva for two whole weeks.
152. The representative of Brazil said that some order and predictability would be useful at this
stage of the negotiations and that he  had found Canada's suggestions useful.
153. By way of concluding comments, the Chairman said that delegations should keep him and the
Secretariat informed and that they would try to provide as much assistance as possible in coordinating
the presence of sectoral experts in Geneva and ensuring early circulation of the final schedule of the
July cluster of meetings.
H. OUTLINE OF THE CHAIRMAN 'S REPORT TO THE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE
154. Based on Members' discussion over the previous two days, the Chairman indicated that, in his
report to the Trade Negotiations Committee, he would state that the Special Session of the Council for
Trade in Services had met from 5 to 6 June 2002.
155. Under the item on the assessment of trade in services, he would report that Members had held
extensive discussions, particularly stimulated by a new contribution introduced orally at the meeting
by the delegation of Pakistan on behalf of some other developing country Members.  The delegation
of Canada had drawn Members' attention to their newly published research papers on the assessment
of trade in services and the delegation of Thailand had indicated that they would soon be submitting
papers on their own experience with services liberalization.  It was reiterated that the assessment,which would continue to be an on-going activity of the Council, was an important exercise which
needed to move beyond generalities.
156. On the treatment of autonomous liberalisation, he had reported to the Council on informal
consultations that he had held on two occasions, on the basis of two successive draft texts prepared
under his own responsibility.  Consultations had s hown that, in spite of the progress made on the
matter thus far, views still differed on a few important substantive issues.  Consultations would
continue, with a view to adopting the modalities as soon as possible, so as to provide Members with
an important negotiating tool for the request-offer phase due to start soon.
157. Under the item on modalities for the special treatment for least-developed country Members,
the Council had held a good discussion, with many interventions and expressions of interest.  It wasTN/S/M/2
Page 26
stressed that the establishment of these modalities was a legal obligation under the GATS, which
should be fulfilled as soon as possible.  As the Council had only held a first debate on this issue, at
least another round of discussion was necessary before  Members could move to a drafting stage, but
he had assured delegations that he stood ready to assist with the establishment of these modalities.
158. As for the discussion of negotiating proposals, two new submissions had been tabled by the
delegation of Cuba and Members had raised questions and provided clarifications on previously
submitted proposals.  The Council had also agreed that the Secretariat would prepare a compilation of
offers made in the negotiations on maritime transport services.  While the number of new negotiating
proposals being tabled to the Special Session was dwindling, the possibility of submitting new
proposals and of reverting to existing ones should not be foreclosed.  Therefore, the item on
negotiating proposals would continue to figure on th e Council's agenda, with the discussion organized
in the same loose format adopted for that meeting.
159. As the submission of initial requests was fast approaching, he had highlighted to delegations a
few basic points on the procedural side of the submi ssion of requests.  These reflected past negotiating
practice and were without prejudice to what individual Members might decide.  The point was made
that the date of 30 June 2002 referred to the submission of initial requests and that those submitted
thereafter would not be considered untimely.
160. As for the organization of future work, he would make a brief reference to his concluding
remarks under item G.
161. The Council took note.
I. OTHER BUSINESS
162. The representative of the WTO Secretariat drew delegations' attention to the fact that the
planning of technical assistance activities was coordinated by the Committee on Trade and
Development and that an announcement had been made inviting all delegations to communicate their
technical assistance needs for 2003 to the Secretariat.  The deadline for this communication was
31 July 2002, but he was raising this issue early as technical assistance was linked to the negotiations
and different negotiations had different needs at different times.  For the services negotiations, dateshad been agreed for the submission of initial requests and offers, making it likely that demands for
technical assistance would increase.  He therefore wished to remind delegations of this deadline to
ensure that they communicated their technical assi stance needs in time so that a plan of activities
could be circulated after the summer.
163. The representative of Thailand said that the organization of a workshop on the scheduling of
specific commitments in Geneva around the deadline for the submission of offers would be useful.
The representative of the European Communities said that submissions to the Committee on Trade
and Development were for assistance in capital and that the need for technical assistance in Geneva
might increase;  she therefore called for a balance to be struck between activities in capitals and in
Geneva.
__________