<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>As far as I see it this simply lets banks and financial institutions hire a company in, say, India to process data that earlier could not be exported out or the USA or EU.  Such data can be and is already subject to regulation in countries around the world.  I am sorry if I am missing an igov angle to all this that you evidently see.<br><br>--srs (iPad)</div><div><br>On 21-Jun-2014, at 13:59, parminder <<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
  

    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
  
  
    <br>
    <div class="moz-forward-container">See below a leaked document about
      secret negotiations in WTO on data transfer... US and EU regularly
      wax eloquence on multistakeholderism, openness and transparency
      for global IG forums, basically to block development of effective
      globally representative forums that in their view will needlessly
      meddle with their plans of employing the control/ governance of
      the Internet as the new means of global economic extraction. At
      the same time, these countries carry on with the real business of
      Internet governance in such forums as WTO through tightly
      controlled and completely non transparent means.  <br>
      <br>
      Whereas rich countries have forums like OECD to discuss norms
      about data and privacy, developing countries have none. (No, human
      rights council doesnt suffice, it by nature being a rearguard
      action corrective instrument rather than a positive, norms
      developing and social architecture shaping one - as, for instance,
      OECD's Internet Policy Principles are.) One keeps wondering why
      the civil society in IG space does not get the gross injustice of
      such an arrangement. <br>
      <br>
      Rather than allow Internet related issues be dealt *only* in a
      piece- meal manner in different sectoral policy spaces, like the
      example of WTO below, we need an '*in addition* Internet centric
      treatment of such issues, centred on the new thinking, principles
      and norms that the Internet, in its social impact,  has
      contributed to our world. We need a OECD's CCICP like body at the
      global level. <br>
      <br>
      parminder <br>
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
        charset=ISO-8859-1">
      <br>
      <div class="moz-forward-container"><br>
        <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
          charset=ISO-8859-1">
        <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
          medium)">
        <style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
        {font-family:"Cambria Math";
        panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Calibri;
        panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
        {margin:0in;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        font-size:11.0pt;
        font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
h1
        {mso-style-priority:9;
        mso-style-link:"Heading 1 Char";
        mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
        margin-right:0in;
        mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
        margin-left:0in;
        font-size:24.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
        font-weight:bold;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:blue;
        text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:purple;
        text-decoration:underline;}
p
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
        margin-right:0in;
        mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
        margin-left:0in;
        font-size:12.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.Heading1Char
        {mso-style-name:"Heading 1 Char";
        mso-style-priority:9;
        mso-style-link:"Heading 1";
        font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
        font-weight:bold;}
span.EmailStyle19
        {mso-style-type:personal;
        font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
        color:windowtext;}
span.apple-converted-space
        {mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.articleseparator
        {mso-style-name:article_separator;}
span.EmailStyle22
        {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
        font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
        color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
        {mso-style-type:export-only;
        font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
        {size:8.5in 11.0in;
        margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
        {page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
        <div class="WordSection1">
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.2pt"><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#CC0000">Inside

                U.S. Trade - 06/20/2014<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:3.0pt;line-height:16.5pt"><b><span style="font-size:15.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">Leaked

                TISA Text Shows Clash On Data Transfer, Regulatory
                Transparency<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.2pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">Posted:

              June 19, 2014<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.2pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:15.0pt;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">The

              anti-secrecy group Wikileaks yesterday (June 19) released
              what it says is the draft text for a financial services
              annex to the Trade In Services Agreement (TISA), which is
              now being negotiated among selected members of the World
              Trade Organization.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">The

              draft financial services annex, which is dated April 14,
              is a compilation of proposals, including from the United
              States, Panama, Japan and Switzerland.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">A
              USTR spokesman declined to comment on the legitimacy or
              content of the leaked document. "Our goal in the TISA
              negotiations is to level the playing field for American
              workers and businesses by breaking down overseas barriers
              to our services exports. We are focused on creating jobs
              in a sector where the U.S. is the world leader," he said.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">The

              heavily bracketed text reveals different approaches to the
              controversial issue of data transfers and insurance
              offered by postal insurance entities, as well as
              obligations regarding a party's right to impose prudential
              measures. It also reveals disagreements over which
              services can be offered across borders.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">The

              April 14 date would put the drafting of this text just
              before the sixth round of TISA negotiations held from
              April 28 to May 2 in Geneva. The goal of that round was to
              move from proposals to fully bracketed negotiating texts
              in five sectoral annexes, including financial services,
              telecommunications and e-commerce, and competitive
              delivery services. The others are transportation services
              and domestic regulation and transparency.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">The

              text reveals the parties even disagree over what the title
              should be for the section on data transfer rules. The U.S.
              proposes calling the section "Transfer of Information,"
              while the EU proposes the heading of "Transfers of
              Information and Processing of Information." Panama seeks
              the heading "Data Processing and Treatment of Certain
              Information," according to the draft.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">The

              U.S. is proposing an absolute right to transfer
              information in electronic and other forms for data
              processing where such processing is "required in the
              financial service supplier's ordinary course of business."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">As

              an alternative, the EU and Panama are proposing language
              that states no party shall prevent transfers of
              information or the processing of information, including
              transfers of data by electronic means for data processing
              or prevent transfers of equipment, subject to rules
              consistent with international agreements.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">But

              the proposed paragraph backed by the EU and Panama also
              says that nothing in the deal shall restrict the right of
              a party to protect personal data, personal privacy or the
              confidentiality of individual records and accounts, so
              long as such right is not used to circumvent the
              agreement.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">Regarding

              the draft's section on prudential measures aimed at
              ensuring the soundness of the financial system, parties
              disagree over how to describe the obligations. The EU and
              Panama want the text to read that parties are not
              prevented from "taking" measures for prudential reasons,
              while the U.S. proposes they shall not be prevented from
              "adopting or maintaining" measures for prudential reasons.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">The

              text also shows there is some disagreement over for whom
              governments may invoke prudential safeguards that may
              otherwise be in breach of the deal. Parties agree the
              carveout should apply to the protection of investors and
              depositors, policy holders or persons to whom a fiduciary
              duty is owed by a financial service supplier. But Panama
              and the U.S. want this expanded to "financial market
              users," according to the text.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">According

              to the leaked draft, the U.S. and EU are proposing making
              this prudential carveout subject to dispute settlement.
              Their proposal, which is bracketed, shows they want a
              panel dealing with prudential issues and other financial
              matters to have "the necessary expertise relevant to the
              specific financial service under dispute."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">The

              U.S. has also proposed language on a remedy in such
              disputes, which is bracketed. It states that where a panel
              finds a measure inconsistent with the agreement, but the
              impact is outside of the financial services sector, the
              wronged party cannot suspend benefits in the financial
              services sector.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">If

              a ruling on an inconsistent measure affects the financial
              services sector and any other sector, however, the
              complaining party may suspend benefits in the financial
              services sector that have "an effect equivalent to the
              effect of the measure in the Party's financial services
              sector," according to the draft.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">The

              draft also shows countries disagree on which financial
              services can be allowed to be offered across borders. It
              shows Norway is pushing for the cross-border supply of
              insurance on the exploration, development, and production
              of energy, as well as offshore energy properties. This
              proposal is backed by the American Insurance Association (<i>Inside

                U.S. Trade</i>, June 13).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">But

              that wording is bracketed, showing opposition to that
              proposal, as are Norway's proposals on allowing the
              cross-border provision of insurance for ocean-going
              fishing vessels as well as passengers, not just goods, in
              terms of maritime shipping, commercial aviation and space
              launches.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:1.5pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:15.0pt;margin-left:0in;line-height:11.25pt"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black">The

              cross-border sale of insurance can raise objections by
              regulators because consumers under their jurisdiction buy
              policies from foreign companies that are outside of their
              purview. This could pose a problem in terms of consumer
              protections if a company fails to make good o</span></p></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>____________________________________________________________</span><br><span>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:</span><br><span>     <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a></span><br><span>To be removed from the list, visit:</span><br><span>     <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a></span><br><span></span><br><span>For all other list information and functions, see:</span><br><span>     <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a></span><br><span>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:</span><br><span>     <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a></span><br><span></span><br><span>Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>