12:09 PM Jan 16, 1997
TELECOM TALKS "INCREDIBLY ENCOURAGING"
Geneva 15 Jan (Chakravarthi Raghavan) -- The UK official chairing the WTO negotiations on basic telecommunication services, Neil McMillan, exuded an air of confidence Wednesday, and said the new and/or improved offers were "incredibly encouraging" for a successful outcome of the talks due to end 15 February. McMillan, briefing the media after a meeting of the WTO's Group on Basic Telecommunications (GBT), would not say whether this would satisfy the US demand for a "critical mass" of liberalisation to enable that country to join an agreement, saying that it was a for each participant to make a decision. It was the US dissatisfaction that blocked a successful conclusion of the negotiations in April 1996. McMillan, and WTO officials servicing the talks, mentioned the countries that have promised new offers and those who would make revised offers, but it was difficult to make any judgement without seeing the actual schedules of offers (and the small-print conditions that may be attached). But at the meeting of the GBT Wednesday, eight countries pledged offers by the end of January -- Barbados, Bulgaria, Egypt, Ghana, Indonesia, Jamaica, Romania and South Africa. Some like South Africa and Indonesia had indicated they would make offers at the last GBT meeting (before Singapore) in November last (when the US and the EU had improved their existing offers). Revised offers have been made by Canada, Switzerland and Singapore, and revisions have also been promised by the Czech Republic, Hong Kong, South Korea and Poland. The next meeting of the GBT (when the offers on the table would be multilaterally scrutinised) has been set for 31 January, and those promising new or revised offers have been asked to do so before that date. McMillan was also confident that some of the remaining 'technical' problems would also be resolved. One of these relates to the EC 'offer' which has excepted 'visual images' from its liberalised basic telecom service offers -- in line with its GATS schedule that has excepted 'audio-visual services'. Several of the participants though have felt that the EC exception was too wide -- and would for e.g. exclude tele-conferencing and other technology-driven multimedia services. The EC is said to be considering a clarification to distinguish between what would be a 'basic telecom' service between two ends, and that involving supply to 'consumers' (which would come under 'broadcast'). Another issue, raised by the US itself, relates to the plan of Intelsat and Inmarsat (two satellite services set up by intergovernmental treaties) organizations to privatise themselves. And when they do they might emerge as private monopoly or dominant suppliers that would start off at an advantage visavis future competition. How to deal with this -- through provisions in the basic telecom accord, or leaving national authorities to deal with competition issues (which under GATS is now left to national decisions) -- is to be resolved. Also to be resolved are issues relating to satellite or other services, where market-opening 'offers' have been made but subject to availability of radio spectrum (a limited resource). The international allocations of radio spectrum for particular uses, as also of satellite orbits and use of frequencies without interfering with the rights of others is handled by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). The allocation of frequencies within a country for particular operators and services (but without interfering with other operations outside the country) is the responsibility of a government of the country. And given the limitations of the radio spectrum, for e.g. for mobile services, allocating the market-openings made among various applicants, might involve decisions by governments that would in effect limit the scope of their offers scheduled. If they do not specify a limitation in the schedule, they might find themselves involved in a future dispute; and if they do, it might reduce the actual scope of the offers made.