EU Statement at the General Council, 5-6 October 2026

3. Follow-Up to Outcomes of Ministerial Conferences: MC14 (Yaoundé); MC13 (Abu Dhabi); MC12 (Geneva, co-hosted by Kazakhstan); MC11 (Buenos Aires); MC10 (Nairobi); and MC9 (Bali) – Statement by the Chairperson 

We join in wishing farewell to those permanent representatives, DPRs and colleagues that are leaving us, and welcome those that are joining us, asking them not for their patience, but for their impatience, to help us focus our discussions and help getting to a situation where we can have meaningful progress, including on the urgent matter of reform.

I will only talk about one specific point that has now been raised in the last couple of interventions but was otherwise absent from the interventions so far. That is the e-commerce moratorium.

We have heard a number of delegates regretting that we do not have a forum for discussion of the very important matter of digital trade, and the lapse of the e-commerce work programme. We do agree with the importance of having such a forum and such a work programme, but equally, we should all recognise the importance of a multilateral moratorium on the issue of customs duties on digital transmissions.

The moratorium is something that has provided predictability, a stable environment for business and consumers, and businesses are asking us to ensure it. And it was one of the top priorities identified during the Public Forum. We cannot ignore such calls, and we cannot ignore that we have a pending task to try to revive that multilateral agreement. Certainty is needed, not just for a few, but for all of us.

So, our position is clear: we need the urgent restoration of the e-commerce moratorium at the multilateral level. And we are very happy to work as well on a continuation of the work programme and in the discussions going forward on digital trade.

We therefore will call again for your efforts, Madam Chair, and offer our engagement to work in finding a solution and support an outcome that strengthens digital trade and responds to the concerns of all the members, including on development.

Thank you very much.

4. WTO Reform – Statement by the Chairperson

Thank you, Madam Chair.

In the interest of time, I will be brief and will not repeat the different points we made in our intervention last week at the Heads of Delegation transparency meeting. Just two brief general points, and then some remarks on process.

On the general points, we do welcome the strong engagement shown by members in the discussions. This is encouraging, even if we still must address important differences in the assessment of the different issues on the table. Nevertheless, there appears to be a growing recognition of the need for reform if the WTO is to remain relevant and effective. We welcome this and hope now to be able to also converge as to the need to engage in that reform as a matter of urgency.

We would also like to thank the four facilitators for their valuable work, and this we are doing again because we think it is important. Their inclusive approach has helped advance discussions in a constructive manner and has provided a solid basis for continued engagement by all members. They can count on our support in the work going forward.

On process, Madam Chair, we believe that we must evolve now. The general exchanges of views held so far have been useful in allowing members to articulate their priorities and gain a better understanding of the wide range of perspectives around the table. Now, we need to move towards more focused, structured and issue-specific discussions.

For the EU, meaningful progress will require greater precision and prioritization. We see merit, therefore, in organizing discussions in a manner that enables members to concentrate on clearly defined topics, with a view to progressively identifying practical avenues for action. This will help ensure that engagement is not only broad and inclusive, but also conducive to concrete outcomes.

We also see value in moving beyond the plenary format used so far and towards open-ended thematic discussions. We do remain fully committed to inclusiveness and transparency and are open to practical suggestions on how best to ensure adequate preparation time and broad participation, including for smaller delegations.

6. Cameroon's Contribution to the Reflection on Ways to Optimize the Outcomes of WTO Ministerial Conferences: Lessons Learned from the Organization of MC14 – Communication from Cameroon (WT/GC/W/1007 – WT/GC/REFORM/W/15)

Let me start by thanking Cameroon for their generosity and hospitality in the hosting of MC 14. We do welcome Cameroon’s communication on reflections aimed at optimising the outcomes of WTO Ministerial Conferences. 

Like many before this intervention, the EU believes that WTO Ministerial Conferences must deliver more effectively and that this requires a serious reflection, within the broader WTO reform process, on how they are prepared, structured and sequenced.

Ministerial engagement should take place at the right political moment — when Ministers can genuinely help unlock progress, provide direction, and drive balanced, consensus-based outcomes.

If we want Ministerial Conferences to succeed, preparation in Geneva must be stronger, clearer and more disciplined by identifying realistic deliverables much earlier.

We also need better sequencing between technical work and political engagement. 

The EU is convinced that a better prepared and better structured Ministerial process is not a procedural luxury — it is a condition for a more effective WTO.

This brings me to the EU’s proposal for annual, shorter, and more focused WTO Ministerial Meetings, which would strengthen ministerial engagement in several mutually reinforcing ways. A more predictable annual rhythm and a lighter organisational burden would make participation easier for ministers, who often face crowded political calendars and competing domestic priorities.

Annual meetings would help sustain political attention and momentum from one year to the next. Instead of allowing issues to drift over long gaps between ministerial gatherings, ministers would have regular opportunities to review progress, give political guidance, and maintain pressure for follow-through. 

Lastly, a more focused ministerial format would encourage more accountable, responsive, and results-driven decision-making. Concentrating each meeting on a limited set of priorities would help ministers engage more substantively, assess where progress has or has not been made, and provide clearer direction on next steps.

In short, we need a different approach to how Ministerial Conferences are organised.

7. Responses to Questions regarding the Agreement on E-Commerce Interim Arrangements – Communication from Australia, Japan and Singapore (WT/GC/W/1006)

8. Institutional and Legal Questions Arising from the Interim Arrangements on the Agreement on Electronic Commerce –Request from Pakistan 

Thank you, Madam Chair. I will address items 7 and 8 in my intervention.

The European Union would like to join the many delegations that have expressed their support for the interim application of the E-commerce Agreement.

The E-commerce Agreement is a major achievement for the multilateral trading system. It will bring more predictability, more legal certainty and more trust for businesses and consumers engaging in digital trade across borders.

This agreement is too important to remain unused. Digital economies need these rules in force. And this is the message that industry has conveyed loud and clear during the recent Public Forum.

Allow me to address, in a constructive spirit, a few points that have been raised regarding its interim application.

First, nothing in the WTO Agreement prevents members from bringing into force an agreement negotiated at the WTO prior to its incorporation into Annex 4.

Second, the agreement creates no obligations for non-participants and in no way diminishes their rights. On the contrary, it remains open to all, and its baseline of basic rules generates predictability and trust from which all members stand to benefit, and in particular developing and least-developed members, for whom it can open new opportunities in digital trade.

Third, plurilateral agreements are an integral part of the WTO architecture. Interim implementation preserves and revitalizes the rule-making function of the WTO and keeps it relevant to current trade realities. It does not replace consensus. It is a stepping stone towards incorporation.

Fourth, nothing precludes the Director-General from serving as a depositary at the request of participating members. The free choice of depositary is well established in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and it is a longstanding role of the Director-General to support agreements among subgroups of members.

Therefore, the European Union is convinced that the interim arrangement is compatible with the WTO’s legal and institutional practice. It is also a pragmatic and legitimate way forward while we continue to pursue our ultimate objective, which is incorporation into the WTO framework.

Moreover, it is a test of the continued relevance of the organization. And this is a key point, Madam Chair. This discussion goes well beyond the specific E-commerce Agreement and its interim application. It is about the capability of the organization to deliver in terms of rulemaking, and it is about the future of plurilaterals as tools linked to the WTO and open to all its members.

In other words, this is a reform discussion and a test of our capability to engage in meaningful discussions and to seek compromises. It pains me to say that we seem to be failing this test so far.

Thank you.

10. Dialogue on Emerging Agricultural Trade Issues – Communication from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Iceland, Liechtenstein, New Zealand, Peru, Switzerland, Ukraine, and Uruguay (WT/MIN(26)/40)

The European Union would like to thank New Zealand and the other co-sponsors that have intervened for the updates on the process of the dialogue on emerging agricultural trade issues. 

We do take note, as well, of the calendar of events to be organised in the months to come, as well as of the upcoming topics. 

The EU is open to continuing to engage with all Members to explore ways in which the multilateral trading system can help tackle shared challenges and support the shift towards sustainable agriculture.

We cherish any opportunity for closer cooperation in support of the commitments made under international environmental agreements and are willing to engage with the co-sponsors going forward.

Thank you.

11. Declaration Marking the 20th Anniversary of the Aid-for-Trade Initiative and 10th Global Review of Aid for Trade – Request from Australia and Barbados WTO/AIR/GC/71

The EU thanks Australia and Barbados and welcomes the draft declaration. The EU agrees on the continued value and relevance of the Aid for Trade initiative. We welcome the opportunity to reflect on how Aid for Trade can better address the realities of global trade as of today, as well as aligning to shifted donor priorities. Moreover, to ensure that Aid for Trade supports trade and development cooperation to its full potential, particularly when it comes to trade facilitation, trade in services and digital trade. 

We look forward to continued engagement in this discussion at the 10^th Global Review and beyond.

12. Recent Developments on the IFD Agreement – Request from the Members parties to the IFDA 

Thank you, Madam Chair. I’ll be brief, as many of us are repeating the same thing.

I thank the coordinators for their leadership and efforts. I reiterate our support for the incorporation of the agreement in Annex 4. I reiterate our regret that this has not happened yet.

We fail to see a reason to block the incorporation of this plurilateral into Annex 4 and remain supportive of further efforts and committed to providing assistance in carrying out needs assessments.

Thank you.