Comptes rendus ‒ Session extraordinaire du Conseil des ADPIC ‒ Afficher les détails de l'intervention /la déclaration

Ambassador Eui-yong Chung (Korea, Republic of)
38. The representative of Australia stated, in reply to certain questions that had been implicitly posed by some delegations, that his country was fully committed to fulfilling the decision of Ministers to complete negotiations envisaged under Article 23.4 on a multilateral system by the Fifth Ministerial Conference. Australia's approach would be based on the following considerations: (i) that any system should genuinely facilitate international trade as opposed to protecting national markets or distorting international trade; (ii) that it would facilitate the protection of geographical indications provided for in the TRIPS Agreement; (iii) that it would not impose new obligations in relation to the protection of geographical indications; (iv) that the system would accommodate the diversity of national systems which WTO Members utilised to give effect to their obligations under the TRIPS Agreement; (v) that the system be capable of attracting broad support from all Members; and (vi) that the system be administratively simple and cost-effective. Australia was not able to accept the proposal put forward by one delegation because that proposal failed to meet most, if not all, of the above-mentioned considerations. 39. He said that most of the wine producing country Members were well aware of the significant differences of view which had emerged in recent years regarding the degree of government intervention and regulation in almost all areas of the production, distribution, labelling and marketing of wine in some major consuming countries. Those countries who were members of the OIV (Office International de la Vigne et du Vin) were aware of the significant differences of view which had emerged within their industries on the approach to international trade. New world wine producers had endeavoured to remove themselves from the yoke of intervention and regulation by formulating new approaches to standards and compliance systems which would help to facilitate trade, encourage innovation and investment, stimulate competition and bring to consumers a wider diversity of wines at competitive prices. Many countries had witnessed the substantial investments which European wine companies had made in new world countries in the last years. As one of those wine countries, Australia was not interested in seeking to adopt at a multilateral level a bureaucratic and costly regime of compulsory registration adopted by one albeit very large group of traditional wine producers whose approach to wine production, trade and marketing was steeped in a culture, tradition and custom very different from that which prevailed in Australia. Nor was it ready in the area of intellectual property rights to adopt an approach which would force substantial new obligations on Members and create a new form of unqualified intellectual protection. Australia was prepared to look at an approach based on the so-called "Joint Proposal" but only if it met the above mentioned tests. He complimented the delegation of the United States for the two papers it had circulated and said that Australia would like to reflect on them.