Search Result(s)

Ongoing negotiations on countries domestic regulations under the GATS Article 1:4 mandate.

The GATS already contains disciplines on barriers to trade in services in the form of restrictions on https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/26-gats_01_e.htm#art16">market access (Article XVI) and on https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/26-gats_01_e.htm#art17 national treatment</a> (Article XVII). Market access restrictions encompass quantitative restrictions such as limitations on the number of services suppliers, total value of services transactions or assets, total number of services operations, the total quantity of services output, the total number of persons that may be employed, as well as measures restricting or requiring specific types of legal entity or joint venture, and foreign equity limitations. <p> The obligation of national treatment prohibits the discriminatory treatment of foreign services and services suppliers when compared to domestic services and services suppliers. In drafting the GATS, negotiators recognized that non-quantitative, non-discriminatory measures relating to licensing and qualification requirements and procedures, and technical standards could also adversely affect trade in services. For example, excessively lengthy, complex and opaque licensing procedures may discourage foreign services providers from doing business in the market of another WTO member. By the same token, lack of objective and transparent criteria, on the basis of which authorities would grant a qualification, may disguise protectionist intentions. Article VI:4 is not intended to start a deregulatory process, but rather to lead to better regulation that has the potential to address and prevent undesirable regulatory practices. In more general terms, WTO negotiations on domestic regulation disciplines seek to boost good regulatory practices and to enhance regulatory quality, with a view to boosting economic growth and development. </p> Evolution of the negotiations Between 1995 and 1998, WTO members negotiated in the Working Party on Professional Services the <a href="http://docsonline.wto.org/imrd/directdoc.asp?DDFDocuments/t/s/l/63.doc" target="_blank">Disciplines on Domestic Regulation in the Accountancy Sector</a> (<u>S/L/64</u>) and adopted the Guidelines for Mutual Recognition Agreements or Arrangements in the Accountancy Sector (S/L/38). The Accountancy Disciplines were intended to be integrated into the GATS at the end of the Doha Round of trade negotiations (S/L/63). Therefore, they have not yet entered into force. Subsequently, a <a href="https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/s_coun_e.htm#domestic">Working Party on Domestic Regulation</a> was established in 1999 for the continuation of the negotiations, replacing the earlier Working Party on Professional Services. The mandate of the Working Party is to develop generally applicable disciplines and to develop disciplines as appropriate for individual sectors.</p> <p> WTO members have focused on negotiating general disciplines on domestic regulation applicable to any services sectors within the scope of the GATS. Members felt that work on general disciplines would be more efficient than negotiating specific disciplines for each sector. </p> <p> In December 2005, the WTO Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration called on members to intensify negotiations and to develop a text for adoption before the end of the Doha Round.&nbsp; </p> <p> In the Working Party on Domestic Regulation, more than 60 WTO members have submitted drafting proposals. These were consolidated into a number of texts issued by the chair of the working party. &nbsp;The most recent was contained in a 2011 <a href="http://docsonline.wto.org/imrd/directdoc.asp?DDFDocuments/t/s/wpdr/w45.doc" target="_blank" title="MS word format; opens in a new window">Progress Report</a> reflecting progress in the negotiations up to 2011 and containing possible options for disciplines on domestic regulation.&nbsp;</p> <p>Following a slowdown in negotiations between 2012 and 2015, activities were revived in 2016, with a number of text proposals submitted by members in the hope of securing an outcome by the 11th Ministerial Conference (MC11) in Buenos Aires in December 2017. However, no outcome was achieved at MC11. </p> The Working Party on Domestic Regulation met most recently in March 2019 to discuss a revised proposal for disciplines on domestic regulation.</p>

The Draft GATS Domestic Regulation Disciplines – Potential Conflicts With Developing Country Regulations

(This is really a must read to understand what kinds of new destructions of democracy are in the pipeline, and what they mean.) "The most recent draft by the WPDR chairperson would impose seventy-one separate disciplines on domestic regulation that could be used separately or in combination to challenge services regulations through the WTO dispute process. The South Centre’s 2006 Analytical Note identified a number of common themes in the submissions developing countries have made to the WPDR. These themes are used below to organize discussion of key disciplines. A. Necessity tests"

FDI and the right to regulate: Lessons from trade law

The problem of domestic regulation versus international trade and international investment. Note: This is part of a larger PDF - THE DEVELOPMENT DIMENSION OF FDI: POLICY AND RULE MAKING PERSPECTIVES Proceedings of the Expert Meeting held in Geneva from 6 to 8 November 2002

11 National Associations of Healthcare Workers Issue Letter demanding More protections for Health Workers.

To raise the "standard of care" (of how we treat) all professionals we need to stop the agenda that is embedding a trade agreement agenda of forcing all domestic regulations to the global least common denominator as a precursor to globalizing them. It aims to increase profits greatly by replacing our domestically grown professionals with ones from the developing world (taking them from countries that desperately need them) - One of the reasons they want to do this is is precisely to prevent them from having input on all sorts of things- including things like this.

Some analyses of domestic regulation disciplines – compilation for MC11 (2017)

This is a recent analysis of proposed (by a number of countries) Disciplines on Domestic Regulation from Sanya Reid Smith of TWN, an NGO that has been involved in WTO matters for a long time. It was made before the recent WTO Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires. You can see that its the WTO which is disciplining the countries domestic regulations. ------------------------------------------ Introduction Domestic regulation disciplines on services are being negotiated in a number of trade agreements including at the World Trade Organization (WTO), in the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) 1 and in other free trade agreements (FTAs) such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) 2 and those being negotiated by the European Union (EU) 3 . It seems that domestic regulation disciplines (DRD) will also be negotiated at the Eleventh WTO Ministerial Conference (MC11) from 10-13 December 2017 in Buenos Aires, Argentina. 4 The European Union, Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland etc (‘EU et al’) released their DRD proposed text on 1 December 2017. 5 "These proposed DRD would restrict laws and regulations re services licensing etc, even non-discriminatory laws which apply to domestic and foreign companies equally. Yet, as United Nations Conference on Trade And Development (UNCTAD) staff note, services regulation is important for a number of reasons including: protecting consumers, ensuring universal access to essential services cultural diversity, quality, safety, correcting market failures (eg: information asymmetry where the service provider has more information than the consumer, natural monopolies, negative externalities (eg environmental degradation from transport) where those not directly involved suffer costs). 6 After highlighting that many regulatory frameworks are still at an emerging stage in developing countries the UNCTAD staff conclude that ‘it is key for developing countries that international rules for services trade preserve the right to regulate (RtR) and grant the necessary policy space to experiment in the search for those policies that best suit individual countries’ specific, developmental needs.’ Given this, the UNCTAD staff note that ‘one would expect developing countries to take a cautious, rather than an offensive approach towards the development of these disciplines, with their main goal to preserve the RtR.’ 7 This compilation includes excerpts from existing analyses of the same DRD proposed in the WTO or in TISA." ----------------------------------- Compiled by Sanya Reid Smith, Third World Network

Troubled Relationships under the GATS: Tensions between Market Access (Article XVI), National Treatment (Article XVII), and Domestic Regulation (Article VI)

"The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) was adopted in order to establish meaningful liberalization rules, while preserving the right of Members to regulate. To that end, three provisions form the centerpiece of liberalization: market access (Article XVI GATS), national treatment (Article XVII GATS), and domestic regulation (Article VI GATS). Although these provisions contain different obligations, in certain conditions they can overlap. How this issue is resolved could undermine the delicate balance between liberalization and the right to regulate. As the GATS provides no guidance, the task of determining the applicable rules has been delegated to the World Trade Organization (WTO) adjudicating bodies. This paper examines how the three provisions have been interpreted, and analyzes the most applicable way to address the diversity of barriers to trade in services."

Track 2 of the GATS

The GATS is a scheme to remake society and the world of work, lowering wages and increasing competitive pressures to make business more profitable for trans-national corporations globally. Part of this scheme is recognition of professional qualifications so that professionals can be treated like interchangeable parts in a machine.