13. The representative of the United States said that the intention was not to discriminate among implementation issues. In her view, paragraph 18 was not analogous to paragraph 19 because it explicitly provided that issues related to GI extension would be addressed in the TRIPS Council pursuant to paragraph 12 of the Declaration. Paragraph 12 in turn specified how the two types of implementation proposals should be treated – one was under paragraph 12(a) where there was already some treatment in existing negotiations, and the other under paragraph 12(b) concerning all of these implementation issues. It was clear that GI extension appeared under paragraph 12(b) because there had already been some deliberation in the TNC and consultations on the GIs extension implementation issue as part of the paragraph 12(b) discussions. On the other hand, paragraph 19 provided for a specific work programme for the issues in question and the TRIPS Council had been proceeding that way. Paragraph 19 indicated that these issues would be discussed as part of the Council's work programme and the work foreseen pursuant to paragraph 12. This gave an indication of the overlap, and, as far as the overlap portion was concerned, the Chair had said very clearly that those aspects would not be discussed at the present meeting.
14. Her view on all the implementation issues was that each of them should be treated on a case-by-case basis, and that each one might require different action. Until the TNC Chair was able to give some guidance on appropriate action, her delegation would not take a position on the substance of any of them. If there was a desire to have a discussion on GIs extension, continuing work in the relevant body under enhanced TNC supervision may be a way of addressing some of the concerns.
