REPORT (2014) OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT

1  INTRODUCTION

1.1.  This report covers the period since the Committee's previous Annual Report^[1], that is mid‑October 2013 through November 2014. It is issued pursuant to Article XXIV:7(a) of the 1994 Agreement on Government Procurement ("the 1994 Agreement" or "the GPA 1994") and Article XXI:3 of the Agreement as amended by the Protocol Amending the Agreement on Government Procurement, done at Geneva on 30 March 2012 (the "revised Agreement").^[2] This reflects the entry into force of the revised Agreement on 6 April 2014. The revised Agreement is now in force for 12 of the Agreement's 15 Parties.^[3]

1.2.  Since the date of circulation of its last Annual Report (24 October 2013), the Committee has held five formal meetings in Geneva: on 20 November 2013, on 12 March 2014, on 25 June 2014, on 29 October 2014, and on 25 November 2014.^[4] An additional formal meeting of the Committee was held at Ministerial level in Bali, Indonesia, on 3 December 2013, on the margins of the WTO's Ninth Ministerial Conference (MC9).^[5] The meetings were chaired by Mr Bruce Christie (Canada)^[6] and, beginning on 1 August 2014 and continuing through the rest of the year, by Mr Krzysztof Trepczyński (Poland).^[7]

1.3.  The Committee has also held a series of informal meetings, also chaired by Mr Christie and, subsequently, by Mr Trepczyński, focusing on the entry into force of the revised Agreement, accessions to the Agreement; and other matters, in the weeks beginning 18 November 2013, 10 March 2014, 14 April 2014, 23 June 2014, 28 July 2014, and 27 October 2014, respectively.

1.4.  The following WTO Members are covered by the Agreement: Armenia; Canada; the European Union, including its 28 member States; Hong Kong, China; Iceland; Israel; Japan; Korea; Liechtenstein; the Kingdom of the Netherlands with respect to Aruba; Norway; Singapore; Switzerland; the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu ("Chinese Taipei"); and the United States. The Committee is pleased to note that, during the period under review, Montenegro and New Zealand were invited to accede to the Agreement on Government Procurement. They will become Parties to the Agreement upon submission of instruments of accession incorporating the terms that have been agreed.^[8]

1.5.  Twenty-eight WTO Members have observer status in the Committee on Government Procurement: Albania, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Cameroon, Chile, China, Colombia, Georgia, India, Indonesia, Jordan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Malaysia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, New Zealand, Oman, Panama, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan^[9], the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine and Viet Nam. Four intergovernmental organizations, namely the International Monetary Fund (IMF), International Trade Centre (ITC), the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the United Nations Conference on Trade And Development (UNCTAD), also have observer status.

1.6.  The observership of Tajikistan was approved, on request by its delegation, during the reporting period, and was warmly welcomed by the Committee^[10] as a first step toward its hoped-for eventual accession to the Agreement, pursuant to commitments made in its WTO accession protocol.^[11]

1.7.  The remaining sections of this Report deal with the work done by the Committee during the year, with particular reference to: (i) the Committee's Ministerial-level meeting in Bali and the subsequent entry into force of the revised Agreement on Government Procurement; (ii) accessions to the Agreement; and (iii) the implementation of the Agreement.

2  MINISTERIAL-LEVEL MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE AND entry INTO force OF THE Revised AGREEMENT on government procurement

2.1.  As set out in the Committee's 2012 Annual Report, on 15 December 2011, just prior to the Eighth WTO Ministerial Conference, the Parties to the GPA reached political agreement on the conclusion of the renegotiation of the Agreement that they had conducted over a period of more than a decade.^[12] The results of the renegotiation comprised: (i) the revised text of the Agreement; (ii) a significant expansion of the Parties' market access commitments under the Agreement, valued at USD 80-100 billion annually^[13]; and (iii) a set of agreed Work Programmes relating to the administration and possible further evolution of the Agreement, to be conducted by the WTO Committee on Government Procurement following the coming into force of the revised Agreement.^[14] Subsequently, on 30 March 2012, after the completion of a legal review and verification process, Parties formally adopted the results of the renegotiation.^[15]

2.2.  The entry into force of the revised Agreement, for which the submission of formal instruments of acceptance by two thirds of the Parties was required, was an important focus of the Committee during the reporting period. On 3 December 2013, at their formal meeting in Bali, Indonesia, GPA Ministers confirmed the Parties' shared objective of bringing the revised Agreement into force, pursuant to paragraph 3 of the Protocol Amending the Agreement, as soon as possible.^[16] This resolution took account of the seven instruments accepting the Protocol that had been submitted at the time, and of assurances that other instruments of acceptance would be deposited shortly thereafter. In their statement adopted at the meeting, Ministers also recognized the crucial importance of government procurement as an element of economic activity and world trade and development; and the important role of the Agreement as an instrument of market access and good governance (see attachment A). In a related statement at the same meeting, the Director-General of the WTO, Mr Roberto Azevêdo, noted that the GPA is in the process of becoming a pillar of the global economy, responding directly to key challenges that WTO Members face concerning the maintenance of open markets and the promotion of good governance in the aftermath of the global economic crisis.

2.3.  The revised Agreement entered into force on 6 April 2014, 30 days after the submission of formal acceptances of the "Protocol Amending the Agreement on Government Procurement" by two thirds of the Parties to the Agreement.^[17] Subsequently, two additional Parties have submitted their respective instruments of acceptance.^[18]

2.4.  At the Committee's formal meeting on 12 March 2014, the then Chairman, Mr Bruce Christie of Canada, said that the timely coming into force of the revised Agreement demonstrated Parties' firm commitment to it and augured well for its future as an increasingly important element of the framework for global trade. It clearly fulfilled the call that Parties' Ministers had issued at Bali. At the same time, the coming into force of the revised Agreement represented a new beginning rather than an end. He reminded Parties, in that context, that a great deal of important work lay ahead, including with respect to the implementation of the revised Agreement and the Committee's agreed new Work Programmes, together with work on pending and future accessions of new Parties which was vital to the future of the Agreement. The WTO's wider membership was watching developments in the Committee, and this should not be overlooked.^[19]

2.5.  Subsequent to the formal coming into force of the revised Agreement, updated loose-leaf schedules were prepared for each of the Parties that have accepted it. The new loose-leaf schedules, which have been/are being certified pursuant to Article XIX of the revised Agreement, involved significant work by both the Parties and the Secretariat (see, for relevant details, Part 4 below).

2.6.  In the course of the meetings held on 12 March 2014, 25 June 2014, and 29 October 2014, Parties sought to advance their work on the draft decisions on arbitration procedures and on indicative criteria relating to the elimination of government control over listed entities which are called for in the revised Agreement. Significant progress was achieved on the draft decision on arbitration procedures. With regard to the draft decision on indicative criteria, there seems to be a consensus that work on this issue in plurilateral format can be deferred for some time, while bilateral consultations will continue. In line with priorities set by the Committee in 2012, work on the Committee's mandate to develop for adoption a draft decision on criteria for compensatory adjustment will be taken up at a later stage.

2.7.  In the course of the Committee's formal meeting on 25 June 2014, the Chairman, on behalf of the Committee, noted for the record that the Decisions set out in Appendix 2 of the Committee's Decision of 30 March 2012 on the Outcomes of the Negotiations^[20] (regarding notification requirements under Articles XIX and XXII of the Agreement and the Committee's new Work Programmes) were in effect as of 6 April 2014. He also noted that the Committee's agreed Work Programmes relating to the administration and possible further evolution of the Agreement, set out in Annexes C, D, E, F and G of Appendix 2 of the decision, had been formally initiated.^[21]

2.8.  In the course of the informal meetings held on 25 June 2014, a first, organizational discussion took place on the new Work Programmes. On 29 October 2014, a first substantive discussion took place. Exchanges were held on a number of aspects, with particular emphasis on the Work Programme on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and the Work Programme on Exclusions and Restrictions in Parties' Annexes. The Work Programmes are expected to be an important focus for the Committee in 2015 and subsequently.

3  Accessions to the agreement

3.1.  The Committee attaches considerable importance to its work on currently pending and future accessions to the Agreement, which it expects to further enhance both the extent of market access commitments under, and the systemic relevance of, the Agreement. Significant progress was made with respect to related work during the review period. Notable developments included: (i) the conclusion of Montenegro's accession negotiations; (ii) the conclusion of New Zealand's accession negotiations; (iii) further deliberations on China's accession; and (iv) ongoing discussions on the accessions of Moldova and Ukraine.

3.2.  Overall, eight WTO Members are in the process of negotiating their accessions to the Agreement: Albania, China, Georgia, Jordan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, Oman and Ukraine. As already noted, the accession negotiations of Montenegro and New Zealand were concluded at the Committee's meeting of 29 October 2014. Their status as Parties to the Agreement will become effective on the 30^th day following the deposit of their respective instruments of accession, which are expected to be submitted to the WTO in the coming months.

3.3.  A further five WTO Members have provisions regarding accession to the Agreement in their respective Protocols of Accession to the WTO: Mongolia^[22], the Russian Federation^[23], Saudi Arabia^[24], Tajikistan^[25] and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.^[26] The Committee notes that some of these commitments have been outstanding for a considerable period, and hopes to see an acceleration of work toward their fulfilment in 2015.

3.4.  The following provides additional details regarding particular WTO Members whose accessions were the subject of substantive discussions or other developments during the year.

3.1  The Accessions of Montenegro and New Zealand

3.1.1  Montenegro

3.5.  Montenegro submitted its application for accession and its Replies to the Checklist of Issues, together with additional documentation on its legislative framework, on 4 October 2013.^[27] The first discussion of its accession was held at the Committee's meeting on 9 October 2013, in which Montenegro made a substantive statement regarding the reforms that have been made to its procurement system and the system's deliberate alignment with both the EU's relevant directives and the GPA.^[28]

3.6.  Montenegro circulated its initial Appendix I offer on 4 November 2013. Subsequently, its accession was discussed at the Committee's informal meetings on 20 November 2013 and at its Ministerial-level meeting on 3 December 2013. A first revised version of the offer was circulated on 27 November 2013.^[29] In a communication dated 23 January 2014, Montenegro asked for Parties' comments on its offer.^[30] Comments and questions were then submitted by Japan and the European Union, and Montenegro circulated its replies on 7 March 2014.^[31] Further discussions on the offer were held at the Committee's informal meetings on 12 March 2014. In the course of the discussions, Parties recognized the good quality of Montenegro's offer in terms of the overall breadth and scope of market access opportunities proposed. Nevertheless, some Parties signalled concerns of a systemic nature regarding the approach adopted by Montenegro in order to take account of its hoped-for future accession to the European Union. To address the concerns voiced by these Parties, Montenegro circulated its second revised coverage offer on 18 June 2014^[32], which eliminated the previous "two-stage" approach and approximated, as closely as possible, the coverage Montenegro would provide when it joined the European Union. This offer was subsequently discussed in the informal meeting on 25 June 2014 and no Parties raised substantive outstanding issues.

3.7.  On 18 July 2014, Montenegro circulated its final offer.^[33] This final offer received the support of all Parties at the Committee's meeting held on 31 July 2014.^[34] At the same time, the European Union indicated that more time would be needed for internal consultations before formal assent could be given. With the finalisation of the EU's internal approval, the Committee, at its formal meeting on 29 October 2014, adopted a draft decision on the terms of Montenegro's accession to the Agreement^[35] and the negotiation was thus concluded. The formal decision was circulated on 3 November 2014.^[36]

3.1.2  New Zealand

3.8.  New Zealand applied for accession to the Agreement on 28 September 2012.^[37] Subsequently, in 2012 and 2013, discussions on New Zealand's accession took place in the Committee on multiple occasions based on: (i) its initial offer circulated on 1 October 2012^[38]; (ii) its replies to the checklist of issues circulated on 4 October 2012^[39]; and (iii) its first revised offer circulated on 24 September 2013.^[40]

3.9.  Dedicated discussions on New Zealand's accession were held at the Committee's Ministerial‑level meeting at Bali on 3 December 2013 and at the Committee's informal meetings on 20 November 2013, as well as on 12 March 2014 and 25 June 2014. In the course of the discussions, Parties recognized the overall high quality of the second revised offer in commercial terms. At the same time, several delegations expressed systemic concerns regarding New Zealand's proposed coverage of sub-central government entities and "other" entities in Annexes 2 and 3 of its offer.

3.10.  In addressing these concerns, New Zealand emphasized what it believed to be an important distinguishing feature of its procurement system as compared to those of other Parties and accession candidates, namely the exceptional concentration of New Zealand's procurement activities at the central government level. It, nonetheless, outlined, at the informal meeting of 25 June 2014, a number of additional improvements that it was prepared to make to its proposed coverage offer to address the concerns that had been articulated. On this basis, the majority of Parties indicated at that meeting that they were ready, or close to being ready, to settle with New Zealand.^[41] The Chairman encouraged Parties with remaining concerns to work intersessionally with New Zealand to settle the remaining issues.

3.11.  On 21 July 2014, New Zealand circulated its final offer.^[42] Subsequently, at the Committee's meeting on 31 July 2014, the majority of Parties confirmed their readiness to conclude New Zealand's accession on the basis of this final offer. The EU indicated that additional time would be needed both to clarify, in discussions with New Zealand, related terms to be applied by the EU and to carry out its relevant internal procedures. Switzerland also signalled a need for time for further reflection. Subsequently, the EU reached agreement with New Zealand on its own final terms vis-à-vis the latter's accession and completed the relevant internal procedures. Switzerland indicated that it could agree to New Zealand's accession on the basis of the terms proposed in its final offer, without related reservations.

3.12.  Subsequently, at the Committee's meeting of 29 October 2014, the Committee adopted a draft decision on the terms of New Zealand's accession to the Agreement^[43] and the negotiation was thus concluded. The Committee's formal decision was circulated on 3 November 2014.^[44]

3.1.3  Significance of the two accessions

3.13.  At the Committee's meeting of 29 October 2014, WTO Deputy Director-General Yi congratulated both Montenegro and New Zealand, saying that the two accessions that had been gavelled that day highlighted both the growing interest in the GPA on the part of a diverse set of WTO Members, and the increasing importance of the Agreement as an underpinning of global trade and development.^[45] The Chairman, Mr Trepczyński, also congratulated Montenegro and New Zealand, saying that each had shown courage, persistence and skill throughout the process. He predicted that other accessions to the Agreement will follow, noting that the GPA is increasingly at the centre of efforts to promote trade, value for money and fair competition in markets for the procurement of goods and services worldwide.

3.2  China

3.14.  China applied for accession to the GPA on 28 December 2007 and its initial offer was circulated to Parties on 7 January 2008.^[46] Discussions dedicated to China's accession have taken place on multiple occasions since then.^[47]

3.15.  With regard to developments during the reporting period, China's fourth revised coverage offer was circulated to Parties on 6 January 2014.^[48] Substantive discussions on this offer were held on 12 March 2014, on 25 June 2014 and on 29 October 2014. In the course of discussions, Parties, while recognising the improvements contained in the new offer, also expressed disappointment that their previous requests had not been fully reflected in the offer and indicated that their outstanding requests remain on the table.^[49]

3.16.  Further to the above, in their various statements the representatives of the United States, the European Union, Japan, Canada, Korea and Switzerland requested China to provide additional coverage of central and sub-central government entities; more coverage of services; and full coverage of construction services. They also asked China to include coverage of state-owned enterprises; to lower its proposed thresholds; and to simplify or eliminate a good number of its general notes. In addition, they urged China to make use of the momentum of its domestic reform to accelerate the accession process, and vice versa. A number of Parties also emphasized the necessity for China to pursue work, in parallel with improving the market access offer, on the alignment of China's domestic legislation with the GPA's rules.

3.17.  In the Committee's meeting held on 12 March 2014, China informed the Committee of its commitment, undertaken in the context of the 24th China-US Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade in December 2013, to circulate a further revised offer later in 2014, which would provide coverage commensurate, on the whole, with that of existing GPA Parties. China reconfirmed this at the Committee's meetings on 25 June 2014 and on 29 October 2014. Parties requested that China submit its further revised offer as early as possible and certainly before the end of 2014, in order to enable the Committee to give appropriate consideration to it at the Committee's meeting scheduled for February 2015.

3.18.  As noted also in its 2013 Annual Report, the Committee considers that China's GPA accession, on the appropriate terms, is a matter of great significance for the Agreement, for the WTO, and for the world economy; and a very important signal for other emerging economies. Essentially, to conclude the accession it is looking for terms of participation on China's part that are comparable to those of the existing Parties. The alignment of China's relevant legislation with GPA norms is also vital to conclude the accession. The Committee hopes for significant progress toward a conclusion of China's accession in the remainder of 2014 and in 2015.

3.3  Moldova, Republic of

3.19.  Moldova applied for accession to the GPA on 7 January 2002.^[50] Its initial replies to the Checklist of Issues were circulated on 9 January 2002.^[51] Questions and comments by Parties and updated documentation by Moldova were circulated in 2002/2003; in 2008; and in 2010.^[52] Moldova's second revised replies to the checklist of issues and revised coverage offer were circulated on 13 September 2012.^[53] Subsequently, comments and requests for improvement were circulated by various Parties.^[54] During the reporting period, Moldova's accession was further addressed by the Committee on several occasions.

3.20.  Moldova's second revised offer was circulated to the Committee on 16 January 2014.^[55] This offer received positive appraisals from a number of Parties at the Committee's meeting on 12 March 2014. On 24 June 2014, Moldova circulated a third revised offer which was the subject of discussions on 25 June 2014 and on 29 October 2014.^[56] In the course of the discussions, most Parties indicated that they were pleased with the overall level of ambition reflected in the offer, notwithstanding that additional adjustments would likely still be needed before Moldova could be invited to accede to the GPA. Written comments concerning the offer were circulated by Japan, the European Union and the United States.^[57]

3.21.  With regard to its relevant legislation, Moldova circulated, on 17 March 2014, its draft amendment to its Law on Public Procurement which is intended to bring the law into line with the revised GPA.^[58] Subsequently, questions from the United States regarding Moldova's draft law were circulated on 23 April 2014.^[59] Moldova's replies to those questions were circulated on 24 June 2014.^[60] At the meeting on 29 October 2014, Parties commented positively on the draft legislation. Parties were asked to send follow-up questions to Moldova before the end of the year.

3.22.  On the basis of these developments, in the Committee's informal sessions on 29 October 2014, several Parties suggested that Moldova could well be the next WTO Member to complete its accession to the GPA, following Montenegro and New Zealand. The Chairman proposed that the Committee make every effort to bring this possibility to fruition in the first half of 2015.

3.4  Ukraine

3.23.  Ukraine submitted its application for GPA accession on 8 February 2011.^[61] Its Replies to the Checklist of Issues and initial offer were circulated on 2 August 2011 and 13 December 2012, respectively.^[62] In the discussions held in 2013, Parties expressed their appreciation to Ukraine for its initial offer, which they considered as a good basis for further negotiations, while also identifying a number of issues that would require discussion and clarification.

3.24.  Ukraine circulated its first revised offer on 7 March 2014.^[63] The revised offer was discussed at the Committee's meetings on 12 March 2014 and on 25 June 2014. While recognizing the improvements contained in the revised offer and appreciating the initiative taken, Parties expressed concerns about the thresholds, the General Notes and some other aspects of the offer. Related comments on the offer were circulated by the United States and Chinese Taipei on 12 June 2014, and by Japan on 21 July 2014.^[64]

3.25.  On 28 October 2014, Ukraine circulated its second revised offer.^[65] In the course of the discussions that took place the following day, while making clear that more time would be needed to assess the new offer and that follow-up questions/requests should be expected, some Parties also shared very positive first impressions regarding the offer. The Chairman asked Parties to submit any related comments or requests before the end of 2014.

3.26.  Concerning its relevant legislation, Ukraine informed the Committee at its meeting on 25 June 2014 that it has brought into force a new public procurement law which takes into account the rules of relevant EU directives and the GPA requirements. The new legislation will, Ukraine expects, enable it to lower its proposed thresholds and to eliminate some of its general notes. At the discussions on 29 October 2014, Ukraine was asked to provide, as soon as possible, an English translation of its relevant legislation and, if possible, updated responses to the Checklist of Issues.

3.27.  The Committee notes that the accession of Ukraine to the GPA would represent a significant addition to the market access commitments under the Agreement. Furthermore, it considers that the GPA's principles and requirements can play a significant role in strengthening relevant institutions in Ukraine. On this basis, and subject to further discussions, it is hoped that Ukraine's accession can be concluded in the first half of 2015.

3.5  Other pending accessions

3.28.  During the reporting period, the Committee also kept under review the situation regarding other pending GPA accessions and accession commitments. In June 2014, the Chairman wrote to a number of observers with outstanding accession commitments, to inform them that the revised GPA had entered into force on 6 April 2014 and to encourage them to take up/make renewed efforts to carry forward their respective accessions.^[66] In responding, Oman indicated its interest in obtaining technical assistance from the WTO Secretariat regarding the revised GPA and its accession process. Saudi Arabia reported, at the Committee's meeting on 29 October 2014, that it was in the process of translating relevant documents into Arabic and completing other preparatory steps, which would enable it to carry forward discussions with relevant Ministries.

3.6  Secretariat technical assistance and other activities relevant to GPA accessions

3.29.  Pursuant to a standing request by the Committee^[67], the Secretariat, in the course of the meetings held in March, June and October 2014, provided brief reports on its relevant technical assistance activities during the review period. These comprised regional workshops, national seminars and related activities. The regional workshops delivered since the Committee's last report comprised three 3-day activities respectively for the benefit of: (i) Central and Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the Caucasus countries, held in October 2013 in Vienna, in cooperation with the Joint Vienna Institute; (ii) Latin American countries, held in July 2014 in Buenos Aires, Argentina, in cooperation with the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB); and (iii) the Arab and Middle East countries, held in Abu Dhabi, in September 2014, in cooperation with the Arab Monetary Fund (AMF). As regards national seminars, these comprised: one in December 2013 in Kuala Lumpur, at the request and for the benefit of Malaysia; and three activities in 2014, respectively at the request and for the benefit of Armenia, Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic. These latter activities were organised in cooperation with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and, in the case of Armenia, also with the Commercial Law Development Program (CDLP) of the United States' Department of Commerce.

3.30.  Beyond the foregoing activities organized or co-organized by the Secretariat, Secretariat representatives also participated, by invitation, in a number of relevant activities organised by other international organisations. These included: (i) an APEC Procurement Seminar in Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam in January 2014; (ii) a national seminar organised by the EBRD in Tunis, Tunisia in May 2014; and (iii) a workshop organized by the EBRD in Vienna, for the benefit of the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan, in September 2014.

3.31.  As foreseen in the Committee's last Annual Report^[68], in early 2014, the Secretariat and the EBRD completed an exchange of letters between their respective heads for the purpose of facilitating their cooperation. Subsequently, the EBRD established a "GPA Technical Cooperation Facility", with an overall budget (requested for 2014-2017) of EUR 1,250,000, to finance technical assistance related to GPA accession and/or ratification of the revised GPA to the extent required by relevant countries in the EBRD's catchment area. Drawing on this facility, the first Joint EBRD/WTO Capacity Building Session for Observers from Eastern Europe/Central Asia to the GPA was organised for Georgia, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Montenegro, Tajikistan, Turkey and Ukraine in Geneva, Switzerland, back-to-back with the Committee's meeting in June 2014. The programme allowed participants to have direct exposure to the Committee's proceedings at the time.

3.32.  Meanwhile, as also reported in the Committee's 2013 Annual Report^[69], the Secretariat pursued its ongoing background discussions aimed at fostering greater cooperation and synergies with the World Bank on government procurement issues. Furthermore, the Secretariat participated in a multi-agency public procurement seminar in Istanbul, Turkey in May 2014.^[70] Hosted by the Turkish Public Procurement Authority, the seminar focused on measuring and improving procurement performance. In its contribution, the Secretariat highlighted the potential relevance of GPA principles and disciplines to realising the noted objectives.

3.33.  In a further development, the Secretariat in early October organised a session in the 2014 WTO Public Forum focusing on issues concerning government procurement, international trade disciplines and developing countries. The session was well attended by representatives of non-governmental organizations and relevant WTO Members.

3.34.  The Committee welcomes these developments and considers that the Secretariat's technical assistance activities are important to promote a better understanding of the GPA among WTO Members that are not yet Parties to it, and thereby to realize the vision that Parties' Ministers set out at Bali. The enhanced cooperation between the Secretariat and other organisations active in the area of government procurement further enhances the impact and cost-effectiveness of the technical assistance provided. Recognizing this, and in light of the entry into force of the revised Agreement earlier this year and consistent with the mandate provided by Ministers in related ministerial sessions^[71], the Committee encourages the Secretariat to continue and intensify such work to the full extent possible.

4  Implementation of the Agreement and notifications

4.1.  This part of the report considers issues related to the implementation of the Agreement on Government Procurement, including: (i) the thresholds; (ii) the notification and review of national implementing legislation; (iii) statistical reporting; (iv) consultations and dispute settlement; and (v) modifications to the Appendices to the Agreement. A final sub-section deals with the "e-GPA project" which has been initiated to create an integrated market access information tool regarding Parties' government procurement markets, for the use of businesses and governments.

4.1  Thresholds

4.2.  In accordance with the Decision on Modalities for Notifying Threshold Figures in National Currencies^[72], since the last annual report, Hong Kong, China; the United States; Switzerland; Canada; Singapore; the European Union; Japan; Israel; Norway; Iceland and Chinese Taipei have provided information on their respective threshold figures expressed in national currencies for the relevant periods.^[73]

4.2  Notification and review of national implementing legislation

4.3.  Pursuant to Article XXIV:5(b) of the 1994 Agreement, notifications were received from Japan.^[74]

4.4.  In the course of the review period, on two occasions in the Committee's formal meetings, Canada made detailed statements regarding the use of "Buy American" or similar clauses in procurement-related legislation and legislative proposals in the United States.^[75] In addition to other comments, the point was made that a perceived lack of clarity regarding the scope and application of such measures inherently favoured domestic suppliers at the expense of suppliers from other GPA Parties. Canada also inquired as to what steps the United States had taken, in regard to the referenced measures, to fulfil its commitment in Article XXII:6 of the revised Agreement, requiring that "Each Party shall seek to avoid introducing or continuing discriminatory measures that distort open procurement". Related points were made/concerns expressed by the European Union; Hong Kong, China; Israel; Japan; Norway; Singapore; Switzerland and Chinese Taipei.^[76]

4.5.  In response, the United States emphasized that it takes its international obligations seriously and ensures its covered procurements are in compliance with its international obligations. The United States further pointed out that its buy America requirements are transparent and provide for implementation in a manner consistent with international obligations.

4.3  Statistical reporting

4.6.  Article XIX:5 of the 1994 Agreement requires Parties to collect and provide, on an annual basis, statistics on their procurements covered by the Agreement.^[77] During the period under review, Liechtenstein provided its reports for 2012 and 2013^[78]; Hong Kong, China provided its reports for 2012 and 2013^[79]; the European Union provided its reports for 2009, 2010 and 2011^[80]; Norway provided its reports for 2010, 2011 and 2012^[81]; and Chinese Taipei provided its report for 2013.^[82]

4.4  Consultations and dispute settlement

4.7.  No matters were raised during the reporting period under Article XXII of the 1994 Agreement on Government Procurement or under Article XX of the revised Agreement (Consultations and Dispute Settlement).

4.5  Notifications relating to the Appendices to the Agreement^[83]

4.5.1  Modifications to Appendix I that have been certified since the Committee's meeting of 10 October 2013

4.8.  During the reporting period, the following proposed modifications have been certified:

a.      Modifications by the United States:

·         GPA/MOD/USA/14^[84], effective as of 8 January 2014^[85], given that no objections were made within 30 days.

·         GPA/MOD/USA/15^[86], effective as of 7 June 2014^[87], given that no objections were made within 45 days (the period of objections specified in the revised Agreement).

b.     Modifications by Japan:

·         GPA/MOD/JPN/70^[88], effective as of 16 March 2014^[89], given that no objections were made within 30 days.

·         GPA/MOD/JPN/71^[90], effective as of 12 June 2014^[91], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

·         GPA/MOD/JPN/72^[92], effective as of 25 June 2014^[93], given that no objections were made within 30 days.

·         GPA/MOD/JPN/73^[94], effective as of 4 August 2014^[95], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

·         GPA/W/144, GPA/W/145 and GPA/W/146^[96], effective as of 28 October 2014^[97], given that the European Union withdrew its objection to these modifications.^[98] In the formal meeting held on 29 October 2014, the representatives of the European Union and Japan noted that this would also fulfil the purpose set out in Note 5 to Appendix I, Annex 3 of Japan under the revised Agreement. The Committee took note of this as an important development which had been outstanding for an extended period.

c.      Modifications by Hong Kong, China:

·         GPA/MOD/HKG/5^[99], effective as of 23 March 2014^[100], given that no objections were made within 30 days.

·         GPA/MOD/HKG/6^[101], effective as of 26 May 2014^[102], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

d.     Modifications by Liechtenstein:

·         GPA/MOD/LIE/1^[103], effective as of 26 May 2014^[104], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

e.     Modifications by Israel:

·         GPA/MOD/ISR/12^[105], effective as of 11 May 2014^[106], given that no objections were made within 30 days.

·         GPA/MOD/ISR/13^[107], effective as of 26 May 2014^[108], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

f.       Modifications by Singapore:

·         GPA/MOD/SGP/3^[109], effective as of 9 June 2014^[110], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

g.     Modifications by Canada:

·         GPA/MOD/CAN/13^[111], effective as of 23 June 2014^[112], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

h.     Modifications by the European Union:

·         GPA/MOD/EEC/26^[113], effective as of 7 July 2014^[114], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

i.        Modifications by Chinese Taipei:

·         GPA/MOD/TPKM/2^[115], effective as of 10 July 2014^[116], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

j.       Modifications by the Kingdom of the Netherlands with respect to Aruba:

·         GPA/MOD/ABW/1^[117], effective as of 21 August 2014^[118], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

k.      Modifications by Iceland:

·         GPA/MOD/ISL/1^[119], effective as of 28 August 2014^[120], given that no objections were made within 45 days.

4.5.2  Proposed modifications to Appendix I that remain outstanding

4.9.  As to outstanding proposed modifications, the following are the developments, if any, that have taken place during the reporting period:

a.      Notification by Canada^[121]:

·         There were no developments during the reporting period.^[122]

b.     Notifications by the European Union concerning proposed modifications relating to the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Spain and Sweden:

·         In April and July 2010, the EU submitted communications^[123] containing proposed modifications to its Schedules with regard to Spain and Ireland pursuant to Article XXIV:6(a) of the Agreement. Canada objected to both of these proposed modifications.^[124] There have been no new developments during this reporting period;

·         In November 2010, the EU submitted communications^[125] containing proposed modifications to its Schedules with regard to the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Sweden pursuant to Article XXIV:6(a) of the Agreement on Government Procurement. Canada objected to the proposed modifications to Sweden, France, Poland, Romania and Finland^[126]; and the United States objected to each of these proposed modifications.^[127] There have been no new developments during this reporting period; and

·         In March 2011, the EU submitted a communication^[128] containing proposed modifications to its Schedules with regard to Hungary pursuant to Article XXIV:6(a) of the Agreement on Government Procurement. The United States objected to these proposed modifications.^[129] There have been no new developments during this reporting period.

c.      Notifications by Japan concerning proposed modifications relating to:

·         Railway Construction Public Corporation and Corporation for Advanced Transport and Technology^[130]:

No developments during the reporting period.^[131]

·         National Aerospace Laboratory^[132]:

No developments during the reporting period.^[133]

·         Japan Small and Medium Enterprise Corporation, Japan Regional Development Corporation, Urban Development Corporation^[134]:

No developments during the reporting period.^[135]

d.     Notifications by Norway:

·         In November 2014, Norway submitted proposed modifications to its Appendix I pursuant to Article XIX:1(b) under the revised Agreement on Government Procurement.^[136] The end of the objection period will be on 18 December 2014.

·         In January 2011, Norway sent a communication with proposed modifications to its Annex 1 of Appendix I pursuant to Article XXIV:6(a) of the Agreement on Government Procurement.^[137] Canada and the United States submitted objections to these proposed modifications.^[138] In February 2013, Canada withdrew its objection.^[139]

No developments during the reporting period.^[140]

e.     Notifications by the United States:

·         In September 2001, the US notified proposed modifications to reflect changes in the administrative structure of the Federal Government^[141], as regards the Uranium Enrichment Corporation.

No developments during the reporting period.^[142]

·         In November 2010, the US notified proposed modifications to Annex 2 of Appendix I.^[143] The EU and Canada submitted objections to these proposed modifications.^[144] In February 2013, Canada withdrew its objection.^[145]

No developments during the reporting period.^[146]

4.5.3  Notifications of Appendices II to IV of the Agreement

4.10.  During the reporting period, Liechtenstein^[147]; Norway^[148]; Hong Kong, China^[149]; Canada^[150]; the United States^[151]; Chinese Taipei^[152]; the European Union^[153]; Israel^[154]; Singapore^[155]; and Iceland^[156] notified their Appendices II to IV. These were certified on 29 April 2014 and are effective as of 18 April 2014.^[157]

4.11.  Japan notified its Appendices II to IV on 14 March 2014^[158] and submitted a revised notification on 15 May 2014.^[159] These were certified on 4 June 2014 and are effective as of 15 May 2014.^[160]

4.6  The "e-GPA project"

4.12.  During the reporting period, significant progress occurred with respect to the project that is being carried out by the Secretariat, with the support of the Committee, to create a more integrated and interactive GPA website of the Parties' coverage commitments than presently exists (the so-called e-GPA project). The e-GPA project aims to create an integrated database comprising information on the GPA Parties' market access schedules under the revised Agreement, the statistical reports of the Parties and links to the GPA Parties' own relevant websites, to serve as a market access information tool for governments, businesses and other interested parties.

4.13.  This project, which is being implemented with the support and collaboration of the Secretariat's Information Technology Solutions Division (ITSD), is consistent with and builds upon key thrusts of the revised GPA, as well as with an overall drive in the Secretariat to make better use of electronic tools in making information available in formats that are helpful both to Member governments and, where feasible, their suppliers. The importance of the project is also referenced in the Ministerial Declaration issued by the Committee, at its meeting at Bali in 2013.^[161]

4.14.  In the course of the meetings held in March and June 2014, the Secretariat updated the Committee on the progress achieved and demonstrated a working model of the e-GPA. As foreshadowed in these meetings, on 7 July 2014, an initial version of the e-GPA portal was released for trial and feedback by the Parties. A public version of the Portal, incorporating further enhancements, was released on 17 November 2014. This version of the e-GPA is fully integrated into the traditional GPA website and is also accessible via the WTO's Integrated Trade Intelligence Portal (i-TIP).^[162] This version, nonetheless, represents only Phase I of the project. It is a work in progress and many additional features are expected to be added over time.

ATTACHMENT A

Ministerial-level meeting of the committee on Government Procurement
(3 DECEMBER 2013, AT bali, indonesia)

DECLARATION

1.  We, the Parties to the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement ("the Agreement"), meeting at Ministerial level at Bali, note with satisfaction that already seven instruments of acceptance have been deposited regarding the Protocol Amending the Agreement on Government Procurement ("the Protocol"), adopted at Geneva on 30 March 2012. On the basis of these and other instruments of acceptance that are expected to be deposited in the near future, we declare our shared objective of bringing the revised Agreement into force, pursuant to paragraph 3 of the Protocol, as soon as possible, and in any event not later than 31 March 2014. We undertake to do our utmost to facilitate this outcome, bearing in mind the requirements of our respective domestic processes.

2.  The entry into force of the revised Agreement recognizes the crucial importance of government procurement as a dimension of economic activity, and its significance for world trade, prosperity and development. It effectively modernizes the Agreement; expands access to government procurement markets by an estimated USD 80-100 billion annually; promotes good governance and deters corruption; and facilitates the effective management of public resources.

3.  We acknowledge the efforts that some WTO Members are making to accede to the Agreement on mutually satisfactory terms, in particular New Zealand, Montenegro and China, and shall continue to work with them to this end.

4.  We invite and encourage all WTO Members that are not yet Parties to the Agreement to consider the possibility of accession, noting that developing and least developed Members can, subject to negotiations, benefit from the improved transitional measures incorporated in the revised Agreement. We particularly ask the delegations whose accession negotiations have remained inactive for an extended period of time to renew their efforts to complete the accession process. Equally, we invite all interested WTO Members to become Observers to the Committee on Government Procurement ("the Committee"), in order to gain familiarity with the opportunities that accession to the Agreement can provide.

5.  We recognize and support the efforts of the WTO Secretariat, with the support of GPA Parties where appropriate, to provide technical assistance, upon request, in particular for developing and least developed WTO Members considering joining the revised Agreement.

6.  We, equally, recognize and support the ongoing work, to be completed by the Secretariat in consultation with the Committee, to create an integrated web portal on government procurement based on Parties' market access schedules, notifications and other information, as a market access information tool for governments and businesses.

7.  We commit ourselves to the early finalization of the ongoing work by Parties on decisions to be adopted by the Committee pursuant to Article XIX:8 of the revised Agreement with respect to modifications and rectifications to coverage, in a way that is satisfactory to all Parties.

8.  We call for the prompt initiation of work, following the coming into force of the revised Agreement, on the Committee's Future Work Programmes set out in Appendix 2 of the Decision on the Outcomes of the Negotiations under Article XXIV:7 of the Agreement that was adopted on 30 March 2012 (GPA/113), noting that the Work Programmes are important to facilitate mutual understanding of Parties' approaches to the implementation of the revised Agreement, and to improve its administration over time.

__________