PRINT

EU Statement at the General Council Meeting, 10-11 March 2026

11.03.2026
Geneva
EU mission to the WTO in Geneva - Press and information team

Statement Delivered by Ambassador João Aguiar Machado

1. Report by the Chairperson of the Trade Negotiations Committee and Report by the Director-General

Fisheries 

  • The EU thanks the chair for his report. The EU can accept the text in document 196 but regrets that the first paragraph has been substantially diluted.

Trade and development

  • Considering the productive ongoing work in the TRIPS Council, where Members have been welcome to bring topics regarding effective implementation of Art. 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement, there is no need for a decision of the Ministerial Conference regarding this proposal.

Agriculture

  • On agriculture, we welcome the balanced, inclusive, realistic drafting of the current Chair’s text of a Declaration on Agriculture, Trade and Global Food Security which reaffirms the need to uphold the global trading, emphasizes the importance of food security and recognizes the need to move forward the agricultural discussions. We remain open to engage further during the ministerial conference, to reach an outcome on agriculture, while fully considering the overall results to be achieved at MC14. 

2. Reports by the General Council Chairperson, the Facilitator on WTO Reform, the Facilitator of the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, as well as Other Chairpersons  

            2.1 Report by the Facilitator on WTO Reform

WTO Reform – statement & work plan

  • I would first like to thank the Facilitator, Ambassador Olberg, for his tireless efforts and work in carrying out the challenging but critical task on WTO reform for the organisation. As the EU has been underscoring over the past months, we stand at a cliff. 

  • The EU appreciates the detailed report which reflects the past months of intense work of the membership to identify priority topics and a path forward on WTO Reform.  

  • Throughout this process, the EU has underlined that the deep crisis of the multilateral trading system needs ambitious and bold Reform.  

  • We agree with the Ambassador Olberg’s assessment that the greatest risk is not doing too much but doing too little and support his recommendation to bring the draft Yaoundé Ministerial Statement on WTO Reform and the draft WTO Reform Work Plan for ministers’ consideration at MC14.  

  • While the draft text annexed to the Report is far below the level of ambition that the European Union is aiming for, we appreciate the Facilitator’s attempt to capture a middle ground to reflect the reform conversations that members have had on decision-making, development, LPF and foundational issues.

  • Unfortunately, the latest version of the draft is disappointing and diluted. It is a pale reflection of the rich discussions and work done on WTO reform and the serious engagement by the membership since June last year.

  • However, the draft is what it is – at this stage, we would encourage Members to engage on this basis in a constructive spirit. We are ready to engage and get more clarity on some aspects of the Work Plan.

  • It is absolutely vital that a clear message comes out of Yaoundé that Members are willing to engage on deep and comprehensive reform.

  • A message on reform that is both specific and credible in the eyes of stakeholders is what is needed in our view.

  • The current situation - where some Members refuse a work plan - is deplorable. After months of very hard work, how can we explain to business and stakeholders that there is no common sense of direction?

  • The EU is determined to carry on and do what is necessary to ensure that there will be a pathway and credible steps towards a reformed WTO.

  • We believe that in light of the planning of the ministerial sessions in Yaoundé, it is important to bring to the ministers all the substantive elements of the WTO Reform work.

2.2 Reports by the General Council Chairperson, the Facilitator of the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, as well as Other Chairpersons

The EU is very pleased that we can agree on a ministerial decision under the Work Programme on Small Economies. This is a good example of the “Geneva-first” principle.

E-commerce

  • Turning to another priority under the “Geneva-never” principle, the EU welcomes the discussions in the E-commerce Work Programme under the leadership of Ambassador Brown of Jamaica 

  • We see the Work Programme and the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions together as an important contribution to achieving an inclusive, predictable and rules-based international digital trading environment.  

  • To this end, the EU welcomes the support by the large majority of members for their continuation, and we welcome the fact that the discussions have given rise to the constructive proposals put forward by the United States and by Barbados on behalf of the ACP group.  

  • The EU supports finding a permanent solution for the moratorium.  

  • In this regard, the EU is also open to discuss the proposal on the establishment of a Committee on Digital Trade, incorporating development-focussed discussions. For the EU, such commitment is linked to finding a permanent solution for the moratorium on customs duties for electronic transmissions.  

  • It is critical to find a solution in advance of MC14. 

  • The EU will engage further with Members and the Facilitator to prepare concrete outcomes for MC14 and beyond.

 Possible draft MC14 ministerial declaration

  • The EU would first like to thank the GC Chairperson for his efforts to find convergence on a text for an eventual MC14 Ministerial Declaration.

  • The EU does not see the necessity of such a text, and we should rather focus on other work that is pending and more substantial.

  • But if we need such a text, the EU supported the zero draft without any changes to facilitate a positive result.

  • Unfortunately, it is clear that there is no consensus on the zero draft or any of the amendments and in our view, there are no real prospects for convergence.

  • Given this context, we believe that it would not be productive to bring this text to ministers at MC14, as they will have plenty of other things to do. 

  • It is time to consider a Chair’s Statement as an alternative.

3. Views and Updates on Ongoing Efforts by Members 

Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement

  • Among the topics mentioned for MC 14, the Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement stands out for the EU as the most mature for a decision, compared to others mentioned.

  • It has reached a stage where decisive action can be taken through a political decision.

  • We fully support the statement made by the IFD Coordinator in this respect.

  • We agree that The Marrakesh Agreement envisions plurilateral agreements as integral to our framework.

  • 128 Members have a right – enshrined in Article X:9 – to seek a decision by the Ministerial Conference to add the IFDA to Annex 4 of WTO Agreement.

  • It is time to put this matter in the hands of our ministers.

  • This is clearly a political decision that must on the table at the Ministerial Conference in two weeks.

 LDC graduation

  • The European Union takes note that the LDC Group has made progress in identifying LDC priorities. We are still examining the ‘LDC package’ that arrived yesterday.

  • While there is currently no consensus on the LDC graduation proposal, there is still scope for members to examine and address specific concerns of graduating LDCs post-MC14.

  • In the run-up to MC14, the EU remains ready to engage constructively to see if a process-oriented outcome could still be agreed before the ministerial conference.

 Technology Transfer

  • We take note of India’s proposal which came late, and Members did not have time for necessary deliberations at technical level, therefore the proposal is not ready for discussion at Ministerial level.

  • We would like to underline that there is already intense work on technology transfer ongoing in various WTO bodies. We are committed to contributing to the ongoing work in this area but we do not support another Ministerial Declaration on transfer of technology.

Cross-border remittances

  • The EU is fully committed to reducing the costs of remittances, but as discussed in the Committee for Trade in Financial Services meetings in December and February, the role of the WTO in this process remains unclear to us and the issue is clearly not ripe for decision at MC 14.

 Emerging agricultural issues

  • The European Union would like to thank the co-sponsors for the Communication on a Draft ministerial decision for a dialogue on emerging agricultural trade issues.

  • We understand this is inspired from the “dialogue on sustainable agriculture”, which the EU has actively supported. The dialogue was about considering how the multilateral trading system can better support agriculture and food systems towards sustainability and resilience. 

  • The exchanges in the dialogue demonstrated different solutions to the challenges, considering the different context of each member.

  • The EU recognises the value of a Dialogue that fosters trust among Members on all aspects of sustainable agriculture policy, aiming to exchange best practices and explore opportunities for closer cooperation on sustainability, following as a basis the international environmental agreements.

  • The strength of this dialogue lies in its informal, inclusive, and open-ended deliberations approach, and such format can only exist if it is separate from discussion on LPF under the WTO reform. Suggestions for predetermined outcomes at this stage would be undermining the overall objective. 

  • The EU is willing to engage in such open-ended format to discuss and exchange on how the multilateral trading system can help us address common challenges and support transition to sustainable agriculture.

  • However, certain adjustments would be needed, including suggestion to revert the title back to “sustainable agriculture” which gives a clearer focus of what we are trying to do, as well as ensuring an inclusive and open frame to consider a broad range of possible solutions. We are therefore happy to continue working with the co-sponsors and all interested Members before and after MC14.

5. Decision on G-90 Proposal on SPS and TBT – Communication from the G-90 (WT/GC/W/974/Rev.1 – TN/C/W/92/Rev.1 – JOB/TN/CTD/19/Rev.1) –Request from South Africa 

  • The EU welcomes the revised version of the draft Decision by the G90 which we can support.

  • The pragmatic approach taken on improving the implementation of the special and differential treatment provisions of the TBT and SPS agreements has led to useful insights on how to better use the available flexibilities.

  • We agree that the specialised technical committees are best placed to carry out further work on this issue.

6. WTO Accessions: 2025 Annual Report by the Director-General (WT/ACC/49 – WT/GC/281) – Statement by the Director-General 

  • The EU welcomes the advancement of the work on accessions for several countries during 2025.

  • In 2025, the EU engaged and negotiated bilaterally and multilaterally in various Working Party meetings with Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ethiopia, and Uzbekistan and signed a bilateral deal on market access on goods and services with Uzbekistan in order to push for Uzbekistan’s accession at MC14.

  • We also strongly support the WTO accession request by the Faroe Islands (submitted on 20 November 2025) and would welcome if the application for accession request could be placed on the agenda for the next General Council meeting.

 7. Contribution of Paraguay to the Discussions on WTO Reform – Request from Paraguay 

  • The EU thanks Paraguay for its revised version of a ministerial decision

  • Paraguay has asked whether any Members has any problem with putting it on the table.

  • The EU cannot live with the type of procedural or process approach only that you propose.

  • The membership has over the past months been engaging intensively on reform and cannot accept such a modest outcome and not the approach. It does not reflect the in-depth discussions that we have had and would send a very worrying signal indeed to the outside world at this critical juncture for the global trading system. As it would imply recognising the incapacity of the organisation and the membership that we have common sense direction.

  • The EU can therefore not accept a process-only work plan as proposed in the Paraguay paper. It lacks the necessary credibility that we need to demonstrate at this juncture.

8. WTO Reform – More Relevant, More Flexible, More Accessible – Request from the United Kingdom 

  • We thank the UK for putting forward a proposal on WTO Reform.

  • We are pleased to see quite some common ground in the analysis and priorities in the UK’s proposal and the content of the EU’s proposal on WTO Reform, notably in the area of level playing field and governance issues.

  • The EU also welcomes the UK’s willingness to enter into discussions on the fundamental principles of the WTO, including the functioning of the MFN principle and its connection to a level playing field.

  • We look forward to continuing to work with other Members towards WTO Reform.