EU Statement at the General Council, 24-25 July 2023
- REPORT BY THE CHAIR OF THE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE AND REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL
- THIRTEENTH SESSION OF THE MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE – ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
- FOLLOW-UP TO OUTCOMES OF MINISTERIAL CONFERENCES MC12 - WTO REFORM
A. 1st Intervention on EU paper on enhanced deliberation
Since tabling our Communication in March, the European Union has engaged in many discussions with Members on how to take these work streams forward.
Let me start with deliberation on trade and state intervention in support of industrial sectors. Few topics are more challenging for the global trading system than the impact of subsidies on both trade and the achievement of legitimate public policy objectives. While the WTO has mandates to negotiate on trade distortive support in the agriculture sector and to complete disciplines on fisheries subsidies, there is no structured discussion on industrial subsidies and other forms of support in the industrial sectors, including its development dimension. We look forward to launching discussions on this topic in the retreat in September. The retreat should explore the challenges and opportunities of industrial subsidies and policy tools in support of industrialisation in developing countries based on evidence-based discussions.
On the second topic of trade and global environmental challenges, deliberation is ongoing already in the CTE, with active engagement and interest by many members on various topics. It is essential now for enhanced deliberation for members to agree on a balanced list of topics for thematic sessions that encompass the interests of all members.
On the third area of trade and inclusiveness, we believe this is a topic of interest for all members and merits a ministerial discussion at MC13. Inclusiveness covers four dimensions in our view. First, how the WTO can support integration of vulnerable developing countries into global value chains. Second, how to do we enhance the participation of women and of SMEs in global trade. Third, how can we make the trade-policy making process more inclusive including by enhancing stakeholder engagement in the WTO. Fourthly, to exchange experiences on how Members can ensure that the benefits of trade are shared more broadly and that those negatively affected receive the necessary support. A Ministerial discussion on these topics would help us to identify how to take the inclusiveness agenda forward in the WTO.
We further note that a number of WTO reform papers also address the need to enhance engagement with external stakeholders. The Director General’s recently establishment of the Civil Society and Business Advisory Groups to the Secretariat is a further welcome contribution to making the WTO more inclusive and bringing in broader perspectives.
2nd intervention on general EU views on way forward towards MC13/SOM
MC13 is just around the corner and it is time for the Membership to shift gears after the summer break and prepare effectively for Abu Dhabi. In this regard, we welcome the roadmap, which was presented by the General Council Chair this morning.
We believe that there is a certain convergence on the list of issues that should compose the package of multilateral outcomes at MC13.
I have already expanded on the issues at the TCN/informal HoDs on the 20 July, and therefore will not repeat them today. However, one issue deserves particular attention: For the European Union a well and fully functioning dispute settlement system in the WTO is a key priority.
We treat very seriously the commitment made at MC12 “to conduct discussions with the view to having a fully and well-functioning dispute settlement system accessible to all Members by 2024”. This is the key defining issue for the credibility and legitimacy of the WTO.
While we acknowledge that the ongoing discussions are challenging, the European Union fully supports an ambitious schedule. If we are to have a fully functioning dispute settlement system “by 2024”, these discussions must pave the way for agreement on dispute settlement reform at MC13.
We wish to underscore that the ongoing discussions are open to all Members and the European Union indeed appreciates the efforts to ensure that the process is transparent and inclusive. It is already a multilateral process! We value the broad participation in the meetings, which contributes to the quality of the exchanges, and enhances the understanding of the positions of Members on particular issues.
We support the process as set up at the moment and we thank the facilitator for his efforts. The process of informal discussions and reporting to the DSB every other month strikes a good balance between the need for transparency and accountability, and that of progressing in a quick manner.
At MC13, we should also allow time for Ministers to deliberate on critical issues for the multilateral trading system, as mentioned in my previous intervention and in particularly subsidies and other state intervention. The Ministerial Conference should represent a steppingstone to launch a process of enhanced deliberation on these issues.
The Senior Officials meeting in October is a key milestone that requires proper preparation, and that should help put us on track for a successful MC13. I welcome the roadmap outlined by the General Council Chair at the beginning of the meeting.
The European Union believes that the Senior Officials Meeting should serve four main purposes. It should provide guidance on the key outcomes for decision at MC13, with a particular focus on four issues: dispute settlement reform, agriculture, phase 2 of the fisheries subsidies agreement, and enhanced deliberation. Secondly, it should provide a steer on the MC13 Ministerial Declaration, for which drafting should start immediately after the meeting. The European Union prefers a short and streamlined Declaration with focus on WTO reform, with some issues addressed through specific Decisions. We welcome the ten crosscutting improvements identified by the General Council chair for subsidiary bodies and look forward to their implementation.
It should also pave the way for the adoption of a decision on the LDC Graduation Annex 1 proposal ahead of MC13. The European Union would support accelerating a decision on this matter.
If we want to deliver these concrete outputs at the Senior Officials Meeting, the European Union strongly advocates for a facilitator on improvements for the TNC, General Council and Ministerial Conferences.
We look forward to further consultations with Members, and reenergising our discussions after the summer break.
B. WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE
The European Union welcomes the interest among Members to implement the MC12 decision on e-commerce and in particular, the intensified engagement we have seen on the development- and digital trade- related issues. We are glad to see the Work Programme truly reinvigorated, particularly in line with its development dimension.
The dedicated discussions on the moratorium - related issues have also been very useful. The European Union notes the clear support for the extension of the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions. We have heard numerous members, both developed and developing, arguing that the moratorium must be maintained due to its key importance to development of digital economy and trade. The European Union fully shares this view.
The extension of the moratorium remains one of the EU’s key objectives. We stand ready to engage further in the Work Programme on this topic with a view of reaching an agreement on the extension of the moratorium and the Work Programme at MC13.
We welcome the communication by the African group regarding the development approach to the Work Programme in order to ensure inclusivity and broaden the benefits of e-commerce, especially to developing countries. This highlights the need for further work on many other topics already broached in Work Programme meetings. In this relation, we do not see the need to have the Work programme as a standing item in the GC agenda; it can be raised whenever there are news or progress to report.
We also believe that we should bring together relevant stakeholders into our discussions, including businesses and academia.
Let me use this opportunity to thank the Mauritius’ Ambassador for her efforts in facilitating our Work Programme discussions. We look forward to working with all the Members in identifying a way forward on both the Work Programme and the multilateral e-commerce moratorium ahead of MC13.
C. MC12 – PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE MINISTERIAL DECISION ON THE TRIPS AGREEMENT – DURATION OF THE EXTENDED DEADLINE
D. MC12 – PARAGRAPH 24 OF THE MINISTERIAL DECLARATION ON THE WTO RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND PREPAREDNESS FOR FUTURE PANDEMICS – STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRPERSON
First, the European Union thanks the UK for their constructive contribution to the ongoing discussions.
The European Union also thanks the African Group for this Communication.
The Communication rightly recognises that the MC12 Declaration on the response to the pandemic identified a number of challenges facing Members during the pandemic, as well as the importance of a stable and predictable trading environment.
We are encouraged by the fact that a number of WTO bodies across the Organisation have considered how best to take the work forward on that basis. The European Union has been actively engaged in these processes and will continue to do so in accordance with the MC12 Declaration.
According to that Declaration, “relevant WTO bodies will, within their field of competence and on the basis of proposals by Members, continue or initiate work as soon as possible”. The European Union is therefore ready to consider any proposals that Members may submit in the context of these WTO bodies to further the implementation of the MC12 Declaration.
E. BUENOS AIRES (MC11), NAIROBI (MC10) AND BALI (MC9)
The European Union recalls the need to ensure correct implementation of the Bali decision and in particular, highlights the transparency aspects as part of the review in regular Committee on Agriculture.
The European Union was part of the group of members who held consultations with India on the basis on Article 6 of the Bali decision on public stockholding. We see these consultations as a useful way to increase transparency on the stockholding programmes, in particular as to the level of state level support and look forward to further discussions.
The European Union has previously spoken on the need for more transparency on the PSH programmes in place, so we see this initiative could improve our common understanding of these policies and help find solutions.
The European Union will continue to engage in a constructive spirit with all the Members on finding a permanent solution on public stockholding as part of the work on agricultural reform. The solution needs to take account of the food security context and the trade distortion element.
Although, the European Union did not co-sponsor the counter-notification of India’s domestic support for wheat and rice market price support, we expressed our support of the questions raised by the co-sponsors and are looking forward to receiving India’s comments and replies.
- WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIR OF THE DEDICATED SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT
- COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION – REPORTS ON MEETINGS OF MARCH AND MAY 2023 (WT/BFA/211, WT/BFA/212)
- TRADE RELATED CHALLENGES OF THE LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES AND WAY FORWARD: PROPOSAL FOR WTO SMOOTH TRANSITION MEASURES IN FAVOUR OF COUNTRIES GRADUATED FROM THE LDC CATEGORY – COMMUNICATION FROM DJIBOUTI ON BEHALF OF THE LDC GROUP (WT/GC/W/807/REV.2)
The European Union is ready to continue engaging on Annex 1 and on Annex 2 of the LDC proposal. We are ready to support a decision on a transition period for LDC preferences in Annex 1 as soon as possible, with some adjustment. We understand that informal discussions on such adjustments are still ongoing.
The European Union also considers that analytical work on Annex 2 of the proposal could preferably start as soon as possible in the LDC Subcommittee, in coordination with other relevant WTO bodies and stakeholders, on each of the “specific measures” that are listed in Annex 2.
The challenges involved in LDC graduation merit a specific response from the WTO Membership. Work should continue in the limited time left before our Senior Officials meet in October and our Ministers gather at MC13.
- FOOD SECURITY THROUGH AGRICULTURAL REFORM: TOWARDS AGRICULTURE OUTCOMES AT THE 13TH MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE - COMMUNICATION FROM ARGENTINA; THE PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA; BRAZIL; CHILE; COLOMBIA; COSTA RICA; ECUADOR; EL SALVADOR; GUATEMALA; HONDURAS; PANAMA; PARAGUAY; PERU; THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC; AND URUGUAY (WT/GC/W/893)
The European Union would first, point out that the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine has severely worsened global food security. The most effective way to ease the dramatic global food security situation is for Russia to end its war of aggression against Ukraine. The European Union condemns unequivocally Russia’s decision to terminate the Black Sea Grain Initiative. With its decision, Russia is further exacerbating the global food security crisis it created by its war of aggression and its blockade of Ukrainian and destructions seaports. The info we have from the Joint Coordination Centre in Istanbul is that 2/3 of Ukrainian grain have been exported to Developing countries.
In this context, the EU would like to underline that the EU sanctions against Russia are not the cause of the food insecurity situation in many parts of the world. Our sanctions do not cover agricultural products from Russia, or fertilisers or the payment systems of such goods. Russian flagged vessels transporting these foods have access to EU ports.
The EU will continue to stand by Ukraine and provide support in all forms, together with other like-minded countries.
On the document that was presented by Ecuador and is cosponsored by a number of members, the EU welcomes this submission and fully shares the view that given the current food security context and the needs of many vulnerable countries there is a clear need to advance with the WTO reform also in the field of agriculture.
Given the latest state of the discussions taking place in the framework of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session, the EU considers that MC13 could provide the opportunity to adopt a food security package, which could include at least a minimum advancement on export restrictions work and improvements in transparency across all pillars.
On transparency, the EU is in favour of pursuing ideas on streamlining and modernising the notification obligations in particular in the areas of export subsidies, export restrictions and food aid, which could positively contribute to responding to the food security challenges.
On export restrictions, now more than ever, the membership should look into a firm commitment to avoid their unjustified use. Clarification and streamlining of disciplines in Article 12 of the Agreement on Agriculture (advance notification of measures) are more urgent than ever now.
At the same time, it is critical to make progress both on the issues of the trade distorting domestic support as well as the public stockholding policies. The goal for the membership should be to reform policies towards less trade distortion as well as providing the right incentives in terms of food security and environmental sustainability targets.
The EU remains fully engaged in the ongoing discussions in the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session and encourages the Members to step up their engagement with a view to deliver on the agricultural reform in the current food security context.
We are faced with global environmental challenges. Just last week, the south of Europe experienced an unprecedented heatwave with record temperatures and devastating fires. Many countries in the room are facing even bigger consequences due to climate change. This requires all of us to step up efforts, internationally and through national policies, to put our commitments into action. Non-action is not an option. The WTO cannot stand on the side-lines and watch our planet being destroyed.
I welcome the presentation of the paper by Cameron and would like to make a few initial observations on the African Group paper.
First, let me outline our support for the idea of having transparency and dialogue on trade-related environmental policies that members are implementing to fulfil their international commitments.
The European Union sees the CTE as a valuable forum for exchanges on trade-related environmental measures, both during the design stage and once the measures are in force. This includes identifying means to support developing countries in complying with such measures and facilitating trade.
This is exactly what the European Union has done. We have ensured that our policies are consistent with Multilateral Environmental Agreements, including the UNFCCC, as well as in compliance with WTO rules.
As many of our Green Deal policies are moving towards implementation, we continue to work together with our trading partners. We are facilitating implementation through various tools and mechanisms: providing guidelines to operators, recognizing efforts made by third countries (or companies). We are also involving third-country stakeholders in the development of implementation tools, for example through the Deforestation Platform or the CBAM methodologies expert group.
This reflects our commitment to transparency and an enhanced role for the CTE on trade related environmental measures.
Let me stress that the European Union has addressed most of the elements for engagement, without the need to change WTO the rules. We do not believe that prescriptive principles for engagement outlined in an African Group paper are necessary or indeed useful. Nor they would be enticing the WTO Members to engage. Probably rather the contrary.
Moreover, the principles referred to in the paper belong to different legal regimes, and in some cases, they lack an international legal basis, nor do they necessarily apply to every environmental policy being implemented. Having said this, we fully agree that in national policymaking, compliance with international commitments must be ensured, even if they stem from different legal regimes.
Second, let remind that the CTE has a very broad mandate asking to ‘identify the relationship between trade measures and environmental measures, in order to promote sustainable development’.
Every conversation we are having on the impact of trade and trade policies on the environment and vice versa is therefore relevant for our discussions, including the work that is being done by the subgroup of Members in the plurilateral initiatives (TESSD, IDP and FFSR) and which is reported back to the CTE. In addition, please note, that all these initiatives give serious consideration to the sustainable development dimension for the trade and environmental intersection.
Thirdly, we also agree with the proposal for back-to-back thematic discussions in the CTE, including topics of interest for developing countries. Additionally, we believe that each thematic discussion should address the development dimension.
To conclude, we agree that trade and environment issues present both challenges and opportunities for all members, including developing countries. We look forward to working with all to ensure that the WTO plays a supportive role in addressing the climate challenge and environmental degradation.
- POLICY SPACE FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT - A CASE FOR REBALANCING TRADE RULES TO PROMOTE INDUSTRIALISATION AND TO ADDRESS EMERGING CHALLENGES SUCH AS CLIMATE CHANGE, CONCENTRATION OF PRODUCTION AND DIGITAL INDUSTRIALISATION – COMMUNICATION FROM THE AFRICAN GROUP (WT/GC/W/868)
The European Union welcomes the proposals from the African Group on policy space for industrial development and is already engaging on them.
As you know, the EU’s communication on reinforcing the deliberative function has a clear development dimension and also focuses on the nexus between trade and subsidies and other forms of state support in industrial sectors policies as one of the areas where we would like to see enhanced deliberation at the WTO.
As already indicated under the agenda item on WTO reform, we look forward to launching discussions on state support for industrial sectors in the retreat in September. The retreat should explore the challenges and opportunities of industrial subsidies and other policy tools in support of industrialisation in developing countries based on factual evidence-based discussions.
It is important that we deepen our understanding of industrial policies of Members, including on different types of subsidies and other forms of interventions, and of their effects on trade. It is also important that Members exchange views on how industrial policies can impact on and contribute to development objectives.
The overall aim of this deliberation should be to reach a consensus on what are the acceptable parameters for countries’ interventions in support of industrial sectors and their impact on trade. In the context of that work programme, we will be ready to discuss the effectiveness of current WTO subsidy disciplines, detect gaps, and explore ways to address them, while also considering the development dimension.
On subsidies in industrial sectors, the European Union takes note of the African Group’s views. We agree that there is a need to deliberate on such important issues taking into account the development angle of industrialisation and helping developing countries to better integrate into global value chains - without prejudging the outcome as regards any specific proposals - as part of the work programme that we would like to see launched at MC13.
The European Union will further analyse the recently presented paper by the African Group on TRIMs and revert to it at a future meeting.
Finally, on reinvigorating the discussions on trade and technology transfer, the European Union has already started engaging with the African Group in the relevant working group. We agree that it is important to share experiences on this issue, and to understand what works and what does not. The European Union is examining the African Group’s submission and is open to discuss the individual papers in relevant WTO bodies.
- STRENGTHENING THE RESILIENCE AND STABILITY OF GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL AND SUPPLY CHAINS – COMMUNICATIONS FROM CHINA (WT/GC/W/891)
The European Union would like to thank China for its paper, which addresses a very topical issue.
Trade openness and international partnerships help secure more diversified supply chains. In turn, open supply chains are key to help ensure the global long-term competitiveness and prosperity, notably by allowing to access critical supplies, which are necessary for the green and digital transitions.
The European Union is still in the process of analysing the submission, but we would be interested in knowing more from China about its expectations for this work going forward.
and
- BRIEFING ON THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS IN THE ACCESSION OF TIMOR-LESTE – REQUEST FROM PORTUGAL
I would like to thank both ambassadors for their reports. The European Union fully supports the accession of the both countries to the WTO.
I would like to congratulate both countries for the advancement of the work on the accessions. We welcome further progress this autumn in order for both countries to join at MC13.
- WAIVERS UNDER ARTICLE IX OF THE WTO AGREEMENT
- WTO PENSION PLAN