174. The representative of New Zealand said that his delegation had found the discussion on notification and registration in the March Special Session very useful. One particular element of interest had been the exchange between the Swiss and Australian delegations concerning opposition procedures. As a significant exporter of wines and spirits, New Zealand shared the Australian preference for a discussion on whether, and if so on what basis, Members' domestic procedures provided for opposition procedures. According to New Zealand's practical experience, it was important for third countries and industries with a legitimate interest to have standing to provide input to relevant authorities considering the protection of GIs. This was just one of the many examples demonstrating why it was important for Members to discuss in detail how the EC's latest new ideas would play out in practice, particularly in those Members which were now major traders in wines and spirits. If one Member decided to protect a term for a wine that the vast majority of other Members producing or exporting a wine considered to be generic, then what means did they have to object to the registration of the GI? Would producers of the generic product have standing under the registering Member's processes? What obligation would the registering Member have to consider information, assertions, or opposition provided by others? While it was easy to respond that this was up to Members to decide, an important part of understanding the impact of the various proposals would be to have the opportunity to discuss them in detail. His delegation would therefore welcome the opportunity to do so at a future meeting of the Special Session and would suggest that the Chair direct a set of questions to that end.
