Joint presentation by_delegates_of_india_and_pakistan


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • S/CSS/W/13 24 November 2000
  • Joint presentation by_delegates_of_india_and_pakistan

    1. 1. <ul><li>GATS negotiations in the WTO </li></ul><ul><li>Common interest of SAARC countries </li></ul><ul><li>Presentation by India and Pakistan </li></ul>
    2. 2. WHY GATS IS IMPORTANT FOR SAARC <ul><li>Services contributes over 50% of GDP in SAARC countries (except Bhutan and Nepal) </li></ul><ul><li>The share of Services trade in total trade (including intra-regional) is very low. </li></ul><ul><li>Production capacities in goods sectors are close to full exhaustion due to resource endowments while the resources required for Services are much less and available in SAARC members. </li></ul>
    3. 3. PLACEMENT OF SAARC MEMBERS IN GATS <ul><li>India and Pakistan have largely offensive stance in Services both in Market Access and Domestic Regulations </li></ul><ul><li>Bangladesh and Nepal have interest in LDC modalities (MFN waiver) </li></ul><ul><li>Maldives depends on tourism largely thus interested in Tourism Services. </li></ul>
    4. 4. INDIA AND PAKISTAN IN GATS <ul><li>Both members share common interest in Services (MA & DR). </li></ul><ul><li>They have taken joint positions and submitted proposals in various areas. </li></ul><ul><li>It has worked well to take a common stance and creating a “regional” aspect in the Services issues which is more valuable than asking as an individual member. </li></ul>
    5. 5. COMMON INTERESTS <ul><li>Mode 4 </li></ul><ul><li>Cross border supply </li></ul><ul><li>Effective Domestic Regulation </li></ul><ul><li>S & D Provisions </li></ul>
    6. 6. ISSUES IN MODE 4 <ul><li>Commitments </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mostly horizontal in nature with inadequate sectoral coverage </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lack of clear sectoral listing and definitions of categories </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Commitments in categories linked to commercial presence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wage parity, quantitative limits, restriction on duration of stay, strict eligibility conditions, ENT </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Problem with recognition of qualification and experience </li></ul><ul><li>Payment of social security tax without corresponding benefits </li></ul>
    7. 7. JOINT PAPERS BY INDIA PAK WITH OTHER MEMBERS - I <ul><li>S/CSS/W/13 dated 24.11.2000 titled Elements for Negotiating Guidelines and Procedures </li></ul><ul><li>TN/S/W/14 dated 3 July 2003 titled Proposed Liberalisation of Mode 4 under GATS Negotiations </li></ul><ul><li>TN/S/W/19 dated 31.03.2004 titled Review of Progress as Established in Paragraph 15 of the Guidelines and Procedures for the Negotiations on Trade in Services </li></ul>
    8. 8. JOINT PAPERS BY INDIA PAK WITH OTHER MEMBERS - II <ul><li>Job(04)/142 dated 29.09.04 titled Mode 4 Transparency Issues </li></ul><ul><li>Job(05)/131 dated 30.06.2005 titled Assessment of Mode 4 offers of Members. </li></ul>
    9. 9. JOINT PAPERS BY INDIA PAK WITH OTHER MEMBERS – III (WPDR) <ul><li>Job 05/(50) dated 30.03.05 titled Proposed Elements for Disciplines on Qualification Requirements and Procedures </li></ul><ul><li>Job 06/(60) dated  30.05.2006 titled Proposed Disciplines on Qualification Requirements and Procedures </li></ul><ul><li>Both papers jointly filed by Chile, India, Mexico, Pakistan and Thailand </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul>
    10. 10. PLURILATERAL REQUEST – MODE 4 <ul><li>Co-sponsored by Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Egypt, India, Mexico, Pakistan, Peru, Thailand. </li></ul><ul><li>Identifies specfic objectives for liberalisation of Mode 4. </li></ul><ul><li>Consideration for common categories of CSS and IP </li></ul><ul><li>Indicative list of sectors/sub-sectors </li></ul><ul><li>Wage parity not to be a pre-condition </li></ul><ul><li>ENT to be removed or substantially reduced </li></ul><ul><li>Duration of stay </li></ul><ul><li>National Treatment </li></ul><ul><li>Issues of transparency </li></ul>
    11. 11. PLURILATERAL REQUEST – CROSS BORDER SUPPLY <ul><li>Co-sponsored by Chile, Hong Kong China, India, Mexico, New Zealand, Pakistan, Switzerland, Singapore, Thailand, The Separate customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu. </li></ul><ul><li>Identifies specific objectives for liberalisation of cross border supply </li></ul><ul><li>Full MA and NT in sectors/sub-sectors of interest without linking to commercial presence/citizenship/residency requirement. </li></ul><ul><li>Similar level of commitments for Mode 1 and Mode 2. </li></ul><ul><li>Commitments for CRS at two digit level </li></ul><ul><li>Use of CPC 1.1 for ‘other business services’ </li></ul>
    12. 12. PLURILATERAL REQUEST – COMPUTER RELATED SERVICES <ul><li>Co-sponsored by Australia, Canada, Chile, the European Communities, Hong Kong China, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Singapore, the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, and the United States* </li></ul><ul><li>Commitment at two digit level </li></ul><ul><li>Full MA and NT in Mode 1-3 with no limitation </li></ul><ul><li>No exclusion of CRS from horizontal commitment under Mode 4 </li></ul><ul><li>Model schedule attached </li></ul>
    13. 13. HOW TO APPROACH COLLECTIVELY <ul><li>There are no competing interest of SAARC members in the current GATS negotiations, therefore a collective approach that compliments each other would yield more productively. </li></ul><ul><li>Members may support the offensive stance in Market Access, especially the mode-4, Domestic Regulations and LDC waiver modalities. </li></ul>