40. The representative of Venezuela said that his delegation was greatly interested in an adequate and effective registration system for wines and spirits. Venezuela was aware that negotiations for a multilateral registration system under Article 23.4 were mandated only for wines and, since the Singapore Ministerial Conference, spirits, but hoped that very soon an exercise could be initiated to extend the negotiating mandate on a multilateral register to all sorts of products capable of being identified by their geographical origin. This was because of the importance of this type of industrial property for the development of local industries, in particular food and wine producing businesses. While the EC proposal met many of his delegation's expectations, he wished to highlight the following points, which were of particular interest to Venezuela. As regards costs, it would be opportune to know what the administrative costs of such a multilateral register would be. What would be the costs for applying for the registration of a geographical indication? Should there be "fees" and, if so, what would be done with these revenues? Venezuela would be in favour of international fees for such a register so long as the revenues derived from it were dedicated to technical cooperation for developing and least-developed countries. Notifications of geographical indications, in lists or individually, and the evidence to be presented should include national certificates of registration, information on the original characteristics of the product, statistics of production, national regulations on quality applicable to the product, the existence of producers' associations, etc. Recordings of geographical indications in the future multilateral register should not have automatic effect in Member countries. The multilateral registration system should include a national phase for recording indications which were to be protected without the need for a substantive or technical examination. In Venezuela, geographical indications were private rights, which required them to be recorded in a national register and national fees to be paid, so as to allow enjoyment of protection. Accordingly, the national office would not examine the nature, the international effect, the legal or technical basis of the geographical indication to be recorded; the national phase would only be for recording purposes and merely be of a fiscal nature.
