188. The representative of Argentina said that her delegation had no difficulties with the Chair's suggestions as to the way forward. Members needed to take into account all the points discussed and made in this Special Session, including the general comments made at this meeting. In this regard, she noted that in his concluding remarks the Chair had identified points about which delegations were still apart, a point about which there could be some common ground, and other points where more clarification was needed. Her delegation believed that the current situation would not enable Members to use any paper other than the document under which they had been conducting their negotiations, i.e. the side-by-side paper (TN/IP/W/12). Therefore, future consultations should be based on that document and it looked likely that this would not change for the formal meeting in June. This would have been different if there were consensus among Members that would enable them to move on. In principle, any working document within the meaning of the guidelines of the TNC should be a consensus document, i.e. one emanating from the Members themselves. Any consultation should therefore continue on the basis of what Members already had on the table and it was not the right time to request a compromise proposal. In this regard, she recalled an attempt made by the previous Chairman to come forward with a compromise text including options, with which her delegation had had difficulties. Noting that the side-by-side document already showed the options, she suggested that, given the support expressed for the joint proposal at this meeting, the EC delegation come to the consultations and to the June meeting with a revised proposal that would better take account of the interests of all Members.
