membership, one possible option would be to elaborate on the modalities and form of the POA within the context of the new OEWG. We would like to see discussions on the POA become an important workstream in the new OEWG. 8 We would also like to express support for the numerous mentions of the important role of regional organisations in supporting the cyber normative framework, in particular norms implementation, confidence building measures and capacity-building, as well as references to a multi-stakeholder approach. 9 There were also several discussions on the importance of protecting cross-border Critical Information Infrastructure (CIIs) and we would like to thank the Chair for incorporating this point in paragraph 50. However, there may be concerns with the current language which may call into question who has jurisdiction over these CIIs. The Chair may wish to consider a formulation that focuses on the impact that damage to these CIIs could cause, as well as the desired outcomes. We will follow-up with suggested textual edits to this paragraph in writing after this meeting. 10 On a broader note, recent cyber breaches that have affected both government and industry alike and these underscore the salience of ongoing discussions. More importantly, there is a need to make progress and cooperate on areas of convergence so that we can collectively work towards a rules-based order in cyberspace. To this end, we reiterate our support for the Chair’s efforts in achieving a consensus outcome and urge Member States to remain flexible towards this end. 11 Given that we are in our final stages of producing the OEWG consensus report, in-person meetings, whether represented by Mission or capital, would be the best modality to achieve positive outcomes. To this end, we are inclined to