EU Statement at the General Council Meeting, 21-22 March 2024
- Report by the Chairperson of the Trade Negotiations Committee and Report by the Director-General
- Follow-up to Outcomes of Ministerial Conferences
2.1.1 Abu Dhabi (MC13)
The outcomes of MC13 fell short of our expectations. On the process, the setup of the Conference, despite genuine efforts, was not conducive to reaching results. The “convergence building” did not lead to convergence. On Friday, we were running out of time. With a bit more time, we could have perhaps reached better outcomes.
I would also like to react to comments made by the Director General about being open to imagining new formats to bring together a sub-group of Members to help prepare decisions during Ministerial Conferences, if that is what WTO Members want. From the EU side, we did feel during MC13 that the Conference was lacking a format in which a representative group of Ministers could meet daily to review progress across the different subjects. It would have been useful to convene such a daily, cross-sectoral meeting in a smaller format to assess if the Conference was advancing and to steer it in the right direction. Like some other delegations, we regret that in many areas there were only a small number of Members, in some cases only one, which stood in the way of an outcome.
Overall, we think that MC13 showed that the overwhelming majority of Members still strongly believe that WTO reform continues to be central in order to ensure that the Organization can work properly.
We were glad that MC13 reconfirmed the MC12 mandate to restore the dispute settlement system by the end of the year. Indeed, Members are still strongly committed to restoring a fully functioning 2-tier dispute settlement system. In this context, we welcome the consultations by Amb. Ølberg on the way forward on the dispute-settlement reform process, following the unfortunate departure of the facilitator, with a particular focus on the issues of appeal and accessibility.
The European Union believes that another critical component of the WTO reform process is to ensure focus on those topics that are important for the global economy. This is a matter of credibility for the organisation. We felt there was strong support in Abu Dhabi during the two ‘Ministerial Conversations’ to engage on the key challenges facing the multilateral trading system.
It is important for the WTO to dedicate the necessary time and resources to this. We will be reflecting first with our Member States internally and then sharing ideas on how the MC13 ministerial conversations can be taken further. Especially on industrial policy and global environmental challenges.
One area where there were some good results at MC13 was development. The European Union will continue to engage, notably on the remaining elements on LDC graduation and SDT work. The positive outcome at MC13 on how to effectively implement SDT provisions on TBT/SPS shows how a way forward can be found in this important area.
It was unfortunate that, despite the significant work put into it and the real progress that was recorded, MC13 could not reach agreement on fisheries and agriculture.
Plurilateral negotiations represent a useful alternative for the WTO to advance work on important issues. Following the entry into force of the additional commitments on services domestic regulation, we now need to focus on the integration of the agreement on investment facilitation for development, which we will discuss as part of the agenda of this General Council.
To conclude, MC13 confirmed that WTO reform remains vital. The critical question will be how to build upon the work so far to achieve more substantive outcomes at MC14.
We need to identify how to achieve outcomes in advance. One of the lessons of MC13 is that we need to ensure that more can be delivered in Geneva so that Ministers can focus on a limited set of issues that have been well prepared in advance.
2.2 Geneva, co-hosted by Kazakhstan (MC12); Buenos Aires (MC11); Nairobi (MC10) and Bali (MC9)
- Work Programme on Small Economies – Report by the Chairperson of the Dedicated Session of the Committee on Trade and Development
- Ministerial instruction in Paragraph 3 of the Ministerial Decision on WTO Smooth Transition Support Measures in Favour of Countries Graduated from the LDC Category (WT/L/1189; WT/MIN(24)/34) – Request from Djibouti on behalf of the LDC Group
The European Union would like to thank the LDC group for adding this item on the agenda.
We welcome the MC13 decision, allowing recently graduated countries to continue benefiting from the Special Procedures Involving LDCs set out in Article 24 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding, as well as benefiting from LDC-specific technical assistance and capacity building, for three years after graduation.
The European Union will continue to engage constructively on the other items in the LDC proposal and is fully committed to meeting the timelines agreed at MC13.
The European Union takes note of the communication by India, Bangladesh, Colombia and Egypt setting out a series of proposals for the post-MC13 work on the TRIPS-related matters.
The European Union notes the role of the TRIPS Council as the standing forum to address all TRIPS-related matters listed in this communication.
We further note that that the current TRIPS Council agenda already covers a number of items indicated in the communication and invites the delegations to make any relevant proposals in that forum.
- Moving Agriculture Negotiations Forward – Request from Brazil
Fist we would like to thank Brazil for putting on the agenda of the General Council the need to move forward the agricultural negotiations.
It is indeed regrettable that MC13 could not deliver an outcome on agriculture. Nevertheless, a good result of MC13 is the fact that we now have a draft text which offers a structure and a process, as well as a direction of work as regards the agricultural reform.
We do believe we should pick up the CoA-SS negotiations with this text as an anchor considering the work of several delegations which has been invested in it.
The balance across the different agricultural issues remains a crucial point. The European Union acknowledges that it is difficult to find the right balance of priorities considering the large range of the priorities in the membership. The European Union has been open and honest throughout the negotiations at MC13 and we are ready pick up on that work.
The European Union continues to consider that there is need for advancing with priority on the reform of the trade distorting support, while solving the long due issue of the public stockholding. We believe that this approach can help us build a better framework for the new disciplines.
At the same time, we feel the failure at MC13 was unfortunate as Members did not address the needs of the most vulnerable Members. I highlight here the intervention of the C4 in the closing meeting of the Ministerial.
The European Union will keep up its engagement and commitment to the WTO, in the hope that we can gather sufficient inclusivity on the way forward to allow us to finally reach the elusive convergence on the agricultural reform ahead.
There are many challenges to take on in this organisation. The green transformation of our food systems towards sustainability is a long and challenging reform path. We hope to get to discussing these important issues in this house as well.
- 30 Years of WTO: How has Development Dimension Progressed? – Request from India
First, I would like to start by thanking India for putting the WTO’s development dimension on the agenda of the General Council, this time cast as a 30-year historical perspective.
I would therefore start by expressing the European Union’s long held view that the critical contribution that the WTO can make to development is by helping and facilitating the integration of developing countries, LDCs in particular, into global trade. No country can succeed in its development strategy without a proper insertion into global supply chains. Trade is key in support of sustainable development, and specifically also to underpin industrial development and structural transformation. WTO membership has helped the vast majority of developing countries and LDCs hop on this virtuous path.
This recognition, together with the development dimension that is inherent to the Marrakesh Agreement and the rules-based system, is what has defined the engagement of the European Union on matters relevant to development since the establishment of the WTO.
We have helped bring about key outcomes in the past, such as the Trade Facilitation Agreement, which helps developing countries by assisting them in simplifying trade procedures and by linking implementation of the agreement with assistance.
We have also supported a conducive framework for digital trade based on the regular extension of the e-commerce moratorium over the years, while also engaging in a meaningful work programme to help address the interests and concerns of developing countries.
We have also supported key plurilateral initiatives such as on services domestic regulation, which entered into force at MC13, and also worked intensively with the Members participating in the Agreement on Investment Facilitation for Development, which we will discuss later today and which we hope to see soon as part of the WTO rulebook.
But development is not a separate issue in the WTO. It permeates all parts of the WTO agreements. We need to be honest. And we just had a good opportunity in Abu Dhabi to make progress on issues of interest to developing countries, which included agriculture, concluding the fisheries negotiations – which are particularly vital for some developing countries - starting a discussion on industrial policy and policy space, and also on IFD. But on all of this, we failed. And we know the reasons. We should do some introspection and see what is wrong. We cannot come to the General Council and continue these discussions as if nothing happened.
At the same time, MC13 delivered some development results, namely for least-developed Members, small economies, and Members seeking special and differential treatment, specifically on SPS and TBT. The European Union is committed to building on these results, which are not an end point, but rather staging posts in the positive efforts required to support developing countries’ integration into global trade.
- Incorporation of the Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement into Annex 4 of the WTO Agreement – Communication from 124 Members Parties to the IFDA (WT/GC/W/927)
The European Union welcomes the discussions on the legal incorporation of the agreement on investment facilitation for development.
Article X.9 sets a legal path for Members to add a plurilateral agreement to Annex 4 of the WTO Agreement. Article II.3 also sets conditions for plurilateral agreements, notably that they do not create rights or obligations for Members that are not party to it. The IFD Agreement needs to be assessed in light of those provisions, and this should be the objective of the further discussions we will have in the coming weeks.
We are convinced that all those conditions are met, but we note that some Members were not part of the negotiations and may want to engage in deeper discussions and we welcome the suggestions made by some Members in this sense. The European Union welcomes further guidance by the General Council Chair on how those discussions should take place, and the European Union encourages regular updates to the General Council.
Preliminary studies show that the IFD Agreement will benefit directly or indirectly all WTO members, especially developing and least-developed ones. We hope that consensus can be reached on legal incorporation, so that the agreement can quickly deliver on its expected benefits in terms of additional investment and ultimately sustainable development.
- Reducing Cost of Remittances - Communication from India (WT/GC/W/926 – S/C/W/466 – S/FIN/W/100)
First of all we would like to thank India for its communication on the cost of remittance services.
However, we struggls to understand why this item has been added to the agenda of the General Council, given in Abu Dhabi Indian at the highest level clearly told other Ministers discussing the outcome document that it would withdraw this request.
It is also important to recognise that this matter is being addressed already in other international for a, as the US has indicated. For instance, the Global Partnership for Financial Inclusion in the ambit of the G20 has a specific mandate about the cost reduction of money remittances towards the 3% target defined in the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
The G20 itself has also started a long process to improve cross-border payments at global level, including money remittances. A G20 Roadmap was adopted in this respect in 2020, building on the work of the Bank of International Settlement Committee on Payment and Market Infrastructure.
The World Bank and the International Fund for Agricultural Development have also done extensive work on the drivers of remittances costs.
Our shared objective is to promote interoperability of payment systems to make cross-border payments, including remittances, cheaper and faster.
We note that disciplines on e-payments, supporting these same objectives, are also discussed in the context of the e-commerce Joint Initiative.
We would welcome clarifications from India on what they consider would be the added value and relevance of discussions in the WTO framework, in addition to the ongoing work in other for a that I just mentioned.
Recognising the importance and noting the interest of a number of developing countries, the European Union could support further exchanges in the Council for Trade in Financial Services, which is the body responsible, starting with the dedicated seminar that will take place next week, next Monday.
We hope that this seminar will advance our understanding of the challenges related to remittances, in sending and recipient countries. We also look forward to this seminar clarifying Members’ interests in the trade-related aspects of remittances that could be taken forward in our deliberations for future work.
In the meantime, we fail to see the need to have this as a standing item in the Council for Trade in Services, nor for a work programme. But let’s have the seminar on Monday and see how to take this forward.
- WTO Response to COVID-19 Pandemic and Preparedness for Future Pandemics/Pandemic Like Situations: Cross-Border Telemedicine Services and Building Pool of Health Professionals - Post MC13 Work – Communication from India (WT/GC/W/928 – S/C/W/467)
- WTO Accessions: 2023 Annual Report by The Director-General (WT/ACC/45 – WT/GC/265) – Statement by the Director-General
- Appointment of Officers to WTO Bodies
- Election of Chairperson
****