RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE S/NGMTS/6
3August 1995
ORGANIZATION(95-2321)
Original: English Negotiating Group onMaritime Transport Services
NOTE OFTHE MEETING OF17-19 JULY 1995
1. TheNegotiating Group onMaritime Transport Services helditssixthmeeting on17-19 July
1995. Brazil andMauritius announced theirintention tobecome fullparticipants, bringing thetotal
number ofparticipants toforty-two. There werenowfifteen governments andthreeorganizations with
observer status intheGroup.
2. Theagenda ofthemeeting wascontained inAirgram WTO/AIR/123 of30June1995. The
Chairman saidthatthismeeting wasgoing tobethelastonetofocus mainly onquestionnaire replies
astheGroup wasentering thenegotiating phase ofitswork. Ninenewsetsofquestionnaire replies
andtwoconditional offers, onefrom theEC(S/NGMTS/W/3) andanother from Norway
(S/NGMTS/W/4), hadbeenreceived since thelastmeeting oftheGroup.
3. There were norequests forobserver status.
4. Under itemBoftheagenda -responses tothequestionnaire onmaritime transport services,
theChairman saidthatninefullparticipants hadnotyetsubmitted theirreplies andonlyoneobserver
government haddoneso.Heencouraged participants andobservers aliketosubmit theirreplies since
theGroup needed toengage inthenewphase ofnegotiations from aslarge aninformation baseas
possible. Hesaidthatacompilation ofquestionnaire replies hadbeenprepared andcirculated bythe
Secretariat, asareference document toassist delegations intheircommitment negotiations. Hethen
opened thefloor fortheexamination ofnewsetsofquestionnaire replies.
5. The first setofquestionnaire replies tobeexamined was that ofMorocco
(S/NGMTS/W/2/Add.26).OnthereplytoQuestion7ofPartI,therepresentativeofMoroccoconfirmed
thatthedifference between 1,630,000 tonsoftotalMoroccan international trade and250,000 tonsof
volume oflinershipping carried byconferences referred indeed tothevolume carried bynon-conference
carriers. Onthereply toQuestion 8ofPartI,hesaidthatMorocco wasasignatory oftheLiner Code
butthatthegovernment leftthemanagement ofconferences tomember shipping companies, not
interfering atallwithmatters suchascargo-sharing. OnthereplytoQuestion 13ofPartI,heexplained
thattheMinistry ofPublic Works hadamonopoly onthesupply ofmaritime cargo handling services,
applied onanon-discriminatory basistobothforeign andnational suppliers. OnthereplytoQuestion 14
ofPartI,heconfirmed thatwholly-owned foreign suppliers werepresent intheMoroccan market but
onlyintheinland transport bytrucks.
6. Onthereply toQuestion 9ofPartII,therepresentative ofMorocco saidthat, although
maintenance wasentrusted tothePortDevelopment andOperation Office (ODEP) inMorocco, roughly
ninety percentofallmaintenance actually tookplace overseas. Onthereply toQuestions 27and28,
heconfirmed thatmuch ofthegovernment 'sstrategic cargoes wasallowed tobetransported byforeign-
flagships onanon-discriminatory basis.
7. Thenextsetofquestionnaire replies tobeexamined wasthatoftheDominican Republic
(S/NGMTS/W/Add.27). Therepresentative oftheDominican Republic saidthatclarifications topoints
raised atthemeeting would beprovided inwriting inthenearfuture.S/NGMTS/6
Page2
8. The next setofquestionnaire replies tobeexamined was that ofThailand
(S/NGMTS/W/2/Add.29). Onthereply toQuestion 13ofPartI,therepresentative ofThailand
confirmed thatforeign suppliers ofmaritime auxiliary services could onlybepresent intheThaimarket
through jointventures withlocalpartners. Onthereply toQuestion 9ofPartII,heconfirmed that
except forinland clearance depot andcontainer freight station services where theequity ratioapplied
was60/40, forallother forms ofcommercial presence foreign suppliers were limited toaminority
equity participation notexceeding 49percent. OnQuestion 12,hesaidthatthereply given reflected
thefactthattherewerenosubsidies noranyformofpreferential treatment suchastaxbenefits granted
tonational shipping enterprises. Onthereply toQuestion 20,hesaidthatanm.f.n. exemption had
beensought formeasures based onbilateral agreements withChina andVietnam butconfirmed that
theseagreements hadnever beenimplemented andshould berepealed oramended induecourse: cargo-
sharing provisions would beeliminated andtrade would beopentoallonanon-discriminatory basis.
Onthereply toQuestion 27,heexplained thatgovernment procurement waslimited toimport cargo
andthatexceptions existed suchasforthetransportation ofcrude oil.Theshare orvolume of
government cargoes required tobetransported byThai-flag ships wasverysmall. Thegovernment
procured import cargo asspecified bylawsandregulations onlyincertain routes -e.g.,U.S./Thailand,
Europe/Thailand, Japan/Thailand, Korea/Thailand, Hong Kong/Thailand.
9. The next setofquestionnaire replies tobeexamined was that ofTunisia
(S/NGMTS/W/2/Add.18). Onthereply toQuestion 14ofPartI,therepresentative ofTunisia said
thatthere were norestrictions applied totheinland transport bytrucks ofinternational waterborne
trade cargoes. Onother clarifications requested atthemeeting, hesaidhewould provide theminthe
nearfuture.
10. There were noquestions onthesetsofquestionnaire replies submitted byColombia
(S/NGMTS/W/2/Add.30) andMauritius (S/NGMTS/W/2/Add.31).
11. The next setofquestionnaire replies tobeexamined was that ofNigeria
(S/NGMTS/W/2/Add.32). Onageneral question from thefloor, therepresentative ofNigeria said
thatNigeria applied a50/50 cargo-sharing formula based onreciprocity tocountries thathadnotacceded
totheLiner Code. Ontheapplication oftheBrussels Package, hesuggested thatadiscussion onthe
subject could beusefully heldatlaterstages ofthenegotiations. Onthereplies toQuestions 3and
8.(b)ofPartII,hesaidthattheNational Shipping Policy Decree No.10of1987wasapplied insuch
awaythatthechartering offoreign-flag vessels forthetransportation ofcargo otherwise reserved for
national-flag vessels waspermitted; there wassimply anotification requirement inthatrespect. On
acomment made byadelegation regarding theunacceptability ofthenotion ofa"right" granted to
Nigerian carriers toparticipate inthecarriage ofcargo, hesaidthatasnegotiations progressed such
issues could beusefully addressed andclarified.
12. ThenextsetofquestionnairerepliestobeexaminedwasthatofCuba(S/NGMTS/W/2/Add.33).
Theexaminationwaspreliminarygiventhat,duetolatesubmission,onlyanoriginalversion(inSpanish)
oftheCuban replies hadbeencirculated informally totheGroup. Onthereplies given toQuestions 8
and20-21 ofPartII,therepresentative ofCuba confirmed thatapart from cargo-sharing provisions
pursuant toafewbilateral agreements therewerenorestrictions applied toCuba'sinternational shipping.
13. ThenextsetofquestionnairerepliestobeexaminedwasthatofBrazil(S/NGMTS/W/2/Add.34).
Onthereply toQuestion 7ofPartI,therepresentative ofBrazil saidthattherewasnoformal gathering
ofstatistical information onconference trade. Onthereply toQuestion 8ofPartIandQuestion 3
ofPartII,heconfirmed thatBrazil didnotratify theLiner Code butthatshipping conferences had
tocomply withtherequirement thatatleasteighty percentofaparticular trade should beshared by
national-flag carriers ofthecountries ateachendofthattrade. Negotiations onsuchcargo-sharing
were, however, lefttoconference members. Therelevant lawonthismatter wascurrently under
consideration intheNational Congress. Onthereply toQuestion 4ofPartII,heconfirmed thatS/NGMTS/6
Page3
companies involved inthetransportation ofunitized cargo hadtobecontrolled byBrazilian citizens;
theterm"unitized cargo" referred toavariety ofcargo types andtransportation modes, asemployed
atthetimeoftheentry intoforce ofthelawgoverning thematter -i.e.,roughly twenty years. This
lawwascurrently being modified toreflect anincreasingly moreflexible approach toforeign investment.
14. Onthereply toQuestion 8ofPartII,therepresentative ofBrazil saidthatforeign companies,
subject toaminimum national equity participation requirement, were permitted tosupply anykind
ofmaritime-related services, whether ornotatports. Anational shipping company bycurrent rules
hadtohavesixtypercentshareholdingbyBrazilianpersons;insomecases,equityparticipationfollowed
a51/49 percentguideline between national andforeign companies. Onthereply toQuestion 12,he
explained thatalighthouse feeofUS$1,500 percallwasapplied toforeign-flag vessels fromcountries
thathadnoagreement withBrazil onthematter. Related lawsandregulations were alsoexpected
tobeaffected bythecurrent legislative reform being undertaken byCongress. Onthereply to
Question 27,heclarified thatnon-military cargoes were those involving purchases bytheBrazilian
government forusebygovernment entities.
15. TheChairman thenopened thefloor foranyclarifications onthepartofdelegations whose
replies hadbeenexamined atthelastmeeting oftheGroup.
16. Therepresentative ofSingapore confirmed thatthenumber ofvessels indicated inthereply
toQuestion 1ofPartIreferred tonational-flag vessels; Singapore didnotkeeprecords offoreign-flag
vessels owned bynationals. Onthereply toQuestion 13ofPartI,hesaidthatcoreservices referred
totheoperation ofkeyportequipment andtheoperation andtugandpilotage services, bothofwhich
wereonlyundertaken bythePortofSingapore Authority anditsemployees. Stillonthesamequestion,
heclarified thatcustoms clearance services didnotexistassuchinSingapore since customs clearance
permits wereobtained directly byimporters orfreight forwarders, through anEDIsystem linked to
theTrade andDevelopment Board. HesaidthattheUrban Redevelopment Authority, agovernment
agency under theMinistry ofNational Development wastheplanning authority ontheallocation of
landandwaterfront space inSingapore. Waterfront space forportfacilities wasallocated directly to
theportwhowould thenbefreetodevelop thespace aswished. Waterfront space forindustrial,
residential, recreational orother purposes wassubject tocommercial tender onanon-discriminatory
basis.
17. Onthereply toQuestion 27ofPartII,therepresentative ofSingapore saidthattheterm
"directly" referred topurchases made bythegovernment itselfwhereas theterm"indirectly" referred
topurchases made byacontracting firmonbehalf ofthegovernment. Stillonthesame question, he
explainedthatthefourshippingcompaniesapprovedundertheshippingnominationclausehadtocompete
forservices procured bythegovernment: aninvitation foratender waspublished inthenewspaper
toallshipping companies, bothnational andforeign, andanyofthefourapproved lineswould only
getthejobiftheyprovided thebestprice forthebestquality service.
18. Therepresentative ofTurkey saidthatcommercial lawsandregulations wereapplied tobulk
shipping, linershipping andmultimodal transport. Onthereply toQuestion 8.(a)-(c) ofPartII,he
saidthataccordingtotheCabotageLawNo.815allmaritimetransportandpassengerservices,cabotage,
andportservices hadtobeundertaken byTurkish-flag ships. Onthereply toQuestion 8.(b), he
explained thatuptofortypercentofthecrewinTurkish-flag shipscould beforeign, except incabotage
trades; shipmasters, however, hadtobeofTurkish nationality. Onthereply toQuestion 9,he
confirmed thatthere were norestrictions. Onthereply toQuestions 10and11,hesaidthatin
accordance withArticle 823,Code 6726, Turkish-flag ships mustbeowned byTurkish persons, with
amajority ofpersons ofTurkish nationality intheadministrative legalentities ofthecompany. On
thereply toQuestion 12,hesaidthatanewlawhadentered intoforce on1July1995which provided
fornon-discrimination atports between foreign- andTurkish-flag ships, created special porttariffs
foreachindividual portandprovided thepossibility fordiscounts onportduesandcharges based onS/NGMTS/6
Page4
thefrequency ofcallintothesame portinagiven period oftime. Onthereply toQuestion 15,he
saidthatthere wasnodefinition ofwhatconstituted "important" ships andthatpilotage, towing and
tugassistance, provisioning, fuelling andwatering, andnavigation aidswere available onanon-
discrimination basis.
19. Onthereply toQuestion 18,therepresentative ofTurkey confirmed thatthere wasno
discrimination between national- andforeign-flag vessels withrespect totheaccess toanduseofport
facilities. Onthereply toQuestion 19,heconfirmed thatthere werenosuchmeasures imposed by
non-government entities inTurkey. Onthereply toQuestion 20,hesaidthatalthough several bilateral
andother commerce andnavigation agreements negotiated inthepastbyTurkey contained anm.f.n.
clause, Turkey wascurrently inaposition toselect and/or eliminate suchclauses through negotiations
withcountries concerned. OnQuestion 21,hesaidthattherewasnocurrent application ofsuchclauses.
Thereplies toQuestions 23and24should be"none". OnQuestion 25,hesaidthatthere were no
counter-measures inforce, imposed orapplied onbehalf oftheTurkish shipping sector. Thereply
toQuestion 26should be"none".
20. OnQuestion 27,therepresentative ofTurkey saidthattherewerenomeasures relating toaccess
tonon-commercial cargoes, thedefinition ofwhich included military, strategic, andother types of
cargoes. OnQuestion 28,there werenomeasures relating totheprocurement ofmaritime transport
auxiliary services. OnQuestion 29,hesaidthatalawontheprotection ofcompetition hadbeenin
force since December 1994which applied toallsectors andrelated services; therewasnorelationship
between suchlawandtheregulation ofmultimodal transport services ortheregulation ofshippers '
councils, bothofwhich weregoverned bycommercial laws. Onthereply toQuestion 30,heclarified
thatConturcon wasnotanenterprise butaconference. OnQuestions 31and32,hesaidthatnosuch
measures wereapplied tolinerconferences. OnQuestions 33and34,hesaidthatTurkey complied
inlarge measure withrelated ECrules andregulations.
21. BeforeconcludingitemBoftheagenda,theChairmangavethefloortothosedelegationswishing
toaddress thesubject ofconditional offers andthenegotiation ofspecific commitments. The
representatives oftheEC,Norway, Canada, Australia, Japan, Morocco andNewZealand spoke on
theconditional offers theyhadsubmitted, orwould besubmitting shortly, totheGroup.
22. Thethirditemoftheagenda wastheconsideration ofthedraftschedule onmaritime transport
services.TheChairmansaidthathavingsubstantiallycompletedtheexaminationofquestionnairereplies
theGroup wasclearly moving tothenegotiating phase ofitswork. Theexamination process had
contributedsignificantlytoimprovingthefactualbasisoftheNGMTSnegotiationsashadthecompilation
ofquestionnaire replies prepared bytheSecretariat. Hesaidthatitwasalsoclearthatthemodel schedule
constituted anacceptable framework forreflecting commitments inthemaritime sector. Inhisfurther
consultations onthemodel schedule hehadaddressed anumber ofissues including: whether there
wereaspects ofmultimodal transport which could orshould beaddressed interms ofmarket access
andnational treatment commitments -or,alternatively, whether thediscussion should belimited to
aspectsrelatingtotheaccesstoanduseofmultimodaltransportfacilities;whetherthereweredefinitional
issues which needed tobeaddressed inthecontext ofadiscussion onmultimodal transport services;
whether themandate embodied intheDecision onNegotiations onMaritime Transport Services was
broad enough tocover multimodal activities ormultimodal transport assuch-and,ifso,whatwere
theimplications forthenegotiations ofcommitments andexemptions attheendofournegotiations.
23. TheChairman saidthatheexpected tocontinue suchconsultations afterthesummer break
ontheunderstanding thatcommitments inmaritime transport services must cover allaspects ofthe
model schedule: access toportfacilities, thesupply ofinternational shipping services, thesupply of
auxiliary services andanyoftheadditional elements thathadbeenthesubject ofhisconsultations.
Heproposed afurther process inmid-October, comprising onceagain multilateral meetings andbilateral
contacts. Heexpected thattheaccent inthepostsummer process would beincreasingly uponbilateralS/NGMTS/6
Page5
contacts andnegotiations asopposed tothemultilateral discussions suchastheonescharacteristic of
theexamination ofquestionnaire replies. Heexpressed hopethatallthose countries thathadnotyet
submitted comprehensive offers would attempt todosointhenearfuture, preferably intimeforthe
nextmeeting oftheGroup.
24. Therepresentative oftheUnited States saidthathisdelegation didnotintend toproduce an
offerinthenearfuture butfavoured further bilateral contacts inOctober withaviewtogaining abetter
understanding oftheliberalization intentions ofothers. Therepresentative ofJapan saidthathis
delegation needed timetoreflect onproposals toaddress multimodal transshipments intheNGMTS
negotiations.
25. Thenextitemoftheagendawasotherbusiness.TherepresentativeoftheEuropeanCommunities
introduceddocumentS/NGMTS/W/5whichbroughttotheattentionoftheNGMTSapieceoflegislation
about tobeenacted intheUnited States which hisdelegation considered tobeinbreach ofparagraph 7
oftheDecision onNegotiations onMaritime Transport Services; thedraftlegislation concerned lifting
thebanontheexport ofAlaskan North Slope Oilonthebasis ofaunilateral cargo reservation. The
representative oftheUnited States denied thatthemeasure about tobetaken improved thenegotiating
position ofhisdelegation. Estimates byexperts indicated thatatmostfivenewU.S.-flagvessels would
enterthetradewhile theimportation ofoilintothewestern partoftheUnited States should bring with
itgreater access totheregional trade forforeign-flag ships. Themeasure aimed tocontribute toa
better energy policy andnotnecessarily tobenefit national-flag vessels byincreasing theirparticipation
inthetradeinquestion. Therepresentative ofJapan welcomed thedecision toliftthebanontheexport
ofAlaskan oilbutvoiced concern overthebreach ofparagraph 7oftheDecision. TheChairman said
thattheissue would beputontheagenda ofthenextmeeting oftheGroup.
26. Regarding datesoffuture meetings, theGroup agreed onhaving thenextmeeting oftheGroup
starton16October 1995 andrunfortwoorthree days, asnecessary.