1.1. The Chairman recalled that, as foreseen in the work programme circulated on 13 December 2010, he had held a series of drafting group consultations with a number of sponsors of the proposals on the table, namely the joint proposal, the proposal contained in TN/C/W/52, as well as the one by Hong Kong, China. The Least Developed Countries (LDC) Group had been added to this small drafting group for the last round of consultations in February. Since January, following the TNC's call to develop text in all negotiating groups before Easter 2011, this drafting group had worked through the list of six possible elements1 for a Register for Geographical Indications (GIs) for Wines and Spirits that the Chair had suggested on 7 December 2010. With respect to the organization of meetings, each series of drafting consultations in the small group had been followed by an open-ended informal meeting for the purposes of transparency and inclusiveness, at which the draft composite text had been shared with Members as it developed. Such open-ended meetings had been held on 13 January, 27 January and 11 February.
1.2. With respect to the composition of the drafting group, the Chair said he had applied the formula that Members themselves had chosen to use in the so-called "small brainstorming group" that had met outside the WTO. That formula was a balanced representation of the two sides to which Hong Kong, China had been added as a third proponent. After the LDC Group – together with other delegations – had made a textual proposal on the element of special and differential treatment it was also invited to join the small drafting group.
1.3. The Chair emphasized that the small drafting group process should not be seen to preclude Members from discussing, coordinating or developing text among themselves and, on that basis, to table such agreed proposals in the consultations. In fact, he said, this process would still benefit if that could occur not only within the existing camps, but even across both sides of the debate, and he continued to encourage Members and group coordinators to create and utilize any such opportunity where possible. Regarding the mandate to produce a negotiating text, the Chair reiterated that any text should emerge – as much as possible – from Members themselves, in line with the general directions laid out for this phase of the overall negotiations. In the group consultations, delegations had the opportunity to make textual proposals or comments that built on all of the past experiences and achievements of the Special Session, including the so-called "3 4 5 approach" and previous textual proposals, as well as taking a fresh constructive look at the issues.
1.4. He said that since mid-January the drafting group had managed to follow the above methodology and completed the exercise by putting text on paper on all the six elements. In view of the Special Session's track record this was no small measure of success, and he thanked all delegations for their patience and engagement. The state-of-play of the drafting group's work was reflected in the paper that had been circulated to delegations on 28 February 2011. With regard to the drafting group's paper, he recalled the two important points of principle of this organization that applied in particular to the work the group had undertaken. First, the composite text had emanated exclusively from Members themselves, not from the Chair. Second, the draft composite text represented work in progress and was without prejudice to Members' positions on the overall outcome of the negotiations. Members were working on the understanding that nothing was agreed until everything is agreed, and that Members could revert to any issue of the text at any time.
1.5. He said that, although this process had progressed quite far, it still remained fragile and delicate, which was why he suggested to maintain the format of small group meetings for the time being. Seeking Members' indulgence and understanding in that respect, he said that it continued to be his intention to open the text up to drafting suggestions from the entire membership once that stage had been reached before the Easter deadline. However, looking at the number of square brackets in the current text, he did not believe this would be constructive at the present stage, and he therefore did not intend to open the text for amendments in this session. Furthermore, the purpose of this formal meeting was for delegations – particularly those not present in the drafting group – to be able to put on record their views on the progress of the consultations and the current composite text.
1.6. In view of past experience he reminded delegations that the mandate in this Special Session was for negotiations on the establishment of a multilateral system of notification and registration of GIs for wines and spirits. He said that, despite having received repeated assurances from all sides that this would be respected, Members had still spent considerable time talking about whether or not the composite text should be neutral with respect to possible GI extension or not. This was very unfortunate. Against that background – and although this issue has found its way implicitly into the draft composite text – he would like to ask delegations to keep this particular discussion outside this forum. He further suggested that delegations refrained from repeating known positions and focussed their comments on the current state-of-play and the composite text. To quote the TNC's Chairman, "please keep your answering machines turned off".
