|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Oct22/11) Geneva, 18 Oct (D. Ravi Kanth) — The chair of the World Trade Organization’s Council for Trade in Services, Ambassador Kemvichet Long of Cambodia, has urged members to “reach out to each other on possible next steps” in advancing the WTO’s 12th ministerial conference (MC12) mandates that have a bearing on trade in services. However, developing and least-developed countries (LDCs) are apparently finding it difficult to engage in serious discussions with their developed-country counterparts due to the lack of data on the movement of short-term services providers under Mode 4 of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). At the last Council for Trade in Services (CTS) meeting on 14 October, India and several LDCs asked the WTO Secretariat to provide the latest data and information on Mode 4. However, the Secretariat appears to have kept silent on this long-pending demand, said people, who asked not to be quoted. In his restricted report issued on 17 October, seen by the SUNS, the chair provided an account of his consultations with members on the four major mandates stemming from MC12 held in Geneva in June. They include: (1) the LDC services waiver; (2) the e-commerce Work Programme and Moratorium; (3) the pandemic response; and (4) WTO reform. Surprisingly, the chair’s report appears to have glossed over this major demand on Mode 4 data, knowing full well that the Secretariat remained silent at the meeting when India raised the issue, said people who asked not to be quoted. LDC SERVICES WAIVER As regards the LDC services waiver, while WTO members adopted a waiver at the WTO’s eighth ministerial conference in Geneva in 2011 to allow preferential treatment for services and services suppliers from the least-developed countries until 2030, progress on its operationalization has been limited because of the apparent indifference to Mode 4 requests raised by the LDCs, said people, preferring not to be quoted. In paragraph eight of the MC12 Outcome Document, ministers reaffirmed their “decision at the Tenth Ministerial Conference in Nairobi on implementation of preferential treatment in favour of services and services suppliers of least-developed countries and increasing LDC participation in services trade, and instruct the Council for Trade in Services to review and promote the operationalization of the waiver including to explore improvements in LDC services export data; to review information on LDC services suppliers and consumers of LDC services in preference providing Member markets; and to assess best practices in facilitating the use of the preferences. On this matter, we instruct the General Council to report to our next session on progress.” The LDCs made a brief statement on the LDC services waiver at the CTS meeting on 14 October, stating that “the MC12 Outcome Document paragraph 8 provides in part, an affirmation of the decision at the Tenth Ministerial Conference in Nairobi on implementation of preferential treatment in favour of services and services suppliers of least-developed countries and increasing LDC participation in services trade.” The MC12 mandate contains language instructing “the Council for Trade in Services to: (1) review and promote the operationalization of the waiver including exploring improvements in LDC services export data; (2) review information on LDC services suppliers and consumers of LDC services in preference providing Member markets; and (3) assess best practices in facilitating the use of the preferences.” The LDCs argued that these elements were part of the LDC Group assessment from the workshop that they co- sponsored with the CTS in early 2021. They said that “the ministers also instructed the General Council to report to the next ministerial conference on progress.” The poorest countries, who are suffering due to the Mode 4 barriers erected by major developed countries, pressed for “more information from the preference-providing countries on their consumers receiving or contracting LDC services. The exercise in March 2021 included our desire to hear from LDC services suppliers and consumers from preference-providing countries having notified the WTO themselves. The Secretariat could collect more information on such entities in advance of the next workshop. In addition, for workshops and seminars, invite them to share information.” It is against this backdrop that the chair said, “members generally underscored the importance of the LDC services Waiver and expressed support for continued engagement on this issue.” He said that “several delegations noted that the Council’s work was starting from a good basis, in light of the useful discussions in the Dedicated Session of 2019 and the webinar organized in 2021. The suggestion was made to consider organising an informal brainstorming session on this issue, focusing on specific steps and proposals.” He said members apparently “highlighted the importance of hearing from LDCs about their needs and expectations, and how they saw the work of the Council unfolding with regard to the Waiver,” and also “calls were made for concrete and specific proposals from the LDC Group, to be submitted ideally in writing. Delegations indicated their openness to consider the LDCs’ suggestions.” The chair said that according to several members, who are not numbered and named in the chair’s report, “one key takeaway from the deliberations held thus far was the existence of data gaps with regard to LDC services trade.” Ambassador Long said “these delegations indicated their readiness to undertake follow-up work in this regard, including with the assistance of the Secretariat, but wished to hear from the LDCs about their specific necessities and priorities,” adding that “the possibility of complementing statistical information with anecdotal evidence was also mentioned.” WORK PROGRAM ON E-COMMERCE & MORATORIUM As regards the “work program on Electronic Commerce and Moratorium”, the chair said that “many delegations welcomed the reinvigoration of the Work Programme, including its development dimension, and the extension of the Moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions.” The Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) group on digital trade, including the US, wants the moratorium to be made permanent. The US and other members of the Group of 7 industrialized countries have recently also called for making the moratorium permanent. It is clear that the supporters of the moratorium want the issue to be clinched in the General Council, said a person, who asked not to be quoted. The chair said that these countries want “the Chairman of the General Council to organize dedicated discussions on e-commerce in the General Council, which they saw as the appropriate locus for engagement.” Ambassador Long observed that “delegations were currently considering the most useful issues to address in that context, particularly from the perspective of developing countries,” suggesting that “one delegation called on Members to develop a work plan with indicative timelines, concrete and pragmatic proposals and problem-solving initiatives.” According to the chair, “several delegations underlined that it was for the General Council to address cross-cutting issues related to electronic commerce, and notably the Moratorium, and that the Council for Trade in Services was not the place to do so and should not duplicate discussions.” These delegations said that “the CTS (Council for Trade in Services) could play a complementary role by focusing on any services-specific issues that might not be adequately addressed in the General Council’s deliberations; these Members indicated their openness to engaging in such discussions.” In contrast, the chair said that “other delegations recalled that the CTS had been assigned a specific mandate by the 1998 Work Programme and called on the Council to focus on the issues it had been tasked to examine, including in relation to scope, definition, increasing the participation of developing countries and customs duties.” THE PANDEMIC RESPONSE On the pandemic response, Ambassador Long said that “all Members indicated that, while they had no specific proposals to put forward, they were open to discussing ideas that other Members may wish to bring under this issue, as long as these did not go beyond the WTO’s core mandate, were forward-looking and relevant to services trade.” Without naming these delegations, the chair said that “a few delegations referred to topics that they might engage in if these were proposed by Members. One area mentioned by various delegations was the transport and logistics chain, and maritime transport services in particular.” WTO REFORM On the much-debated issue of WTO reform, the chair said that “several delegations referred to the need for relevant discussions to be transparent, open, inclusive, pragmatic and Member-driven. Different views were expressed as to how deliberations should proceed, and about the sequencing of work between the General Council and its subsidiary bodies, and notably the CTS monitoring and deliberative function.” In conclusion, the chair outlined the way forward, “to further build on and develop those ideas into concrete proposals that the Council could take up.” He concluded by saying that “I would also appeal to delegations to reach out to each other on possible next steps.” +
|
||
