23. The representative of Singapore noted the EC's argument that reference to the term "multilateral" as compared to the term "plurilateral" must simply mean that it was intended to apply to all Members. His delegation's understanding in this regard was that the word "multilateral" must be seen as opposite in meaning to "bilateral" (between two countries) and "regional" (among countries of a region). The term "multilateral" was wider and could cover two or more countries. He therefore wondered whether the word "multilateral" must cover all Members. In his view, it was not necessarily so because the term could cover two or more countries. The intention was to set up a new system. All Members would participate in setting up the system so that as and when they decided to become part of it, they would know what was required, and because their inputs would have been integrated into the system, implementation would become an easier process. With regard to the question of GIs "eligible for protection in those Members participating in the system", he said that the EC had unfortunately not given any response. "Participation" meant that a Member could decide to join the system immediately after it had been established or some time later. In that context, words should be given their simple meaning and arrangement of work in the Council should be in accordance with this understanding.
