279. The representative of Brazil said that, in fact, Members could disagree with all four sentences. Members could not consider sentences agreed to by all the other Members merely because they liked them. The wording "taken up" seemed to indicate a decision by the Council that this item had become an integral part of the Council's agenda and work programme. He asked the Secretariat to provide a more factual wording to reflect the fact that the item was included on the Council's agenda at meetings in question and, at each case, this had occurred at the request of the EC delegation. No decision had ever been taken to "take up" the issue. Similarly, the language "continued its discussions of earlier communications from the European Communities", did not reflect the full picture of what had actually happened. In fact, there had been lengthy discussions on whether this subject should constitute an issue for the Council on its own right. This matter had taken most of the debate and his delegation had made lengthy interventions on it. He said that it would be useful if the Secretariat could read the minutes of the meeting, and the interventions made, not only by those who had proposed the issue, but also by those who had opposed discussing this issue in the Council. Referring to the wording "the Council had further exchanges", he said that it was important not to mislead the General Council, which might get the impression that all Members were in agreement, there was no opposition, the issue was "taken up", and all Members agreed that it should become a permanent part of the TRIPS Council's debate, since that would not be factual.