Item 4
The UK joins others in welcoming the new PRs and in saying a fond and heartfelt farewell to the excellent PRs and DPRs that are departing. Sadly, the UK adds to the number of departing DPRs. Rebecca Fisher Lamb, the UK’s DPR and backbone of the UK Mission for the last few years, will sadly be leaving us in September. This will be her last General Council. Personally, she has been a rock. She is a phenomenal asset to the UK Mission and hugely knowledgeable. I know she is very popular and she is good company. I know she will be extremely missed. Thank you, Rebecca.
Regarding item 4, the UK supports all 4 propositions, and we thank the LDC Group for showing pragmatism in separating the 4 items for decision. We think that there are a number of important items here, not least the EIF. The UK has been a longstanding supporter and donor of the EIF and we believe it adds excellent value to the WTO ecosystem. Where conversations continue beyond today, the UK stands ready to engage with the LDC Group and all other Members on continuing conversations.
Item 6
Listening and reflecting on the chorus on the disappointment that we are hearing on past MCs, I can only hope that we can look, hopefully not in vain, ahead to MC15 and have a bit of positive momentum. I hope that is not a hope too far. Like others, and to save time, the UK joins that chorus of disappointment. Like Chile, Korea and others we are disappointed at where we got to on the IFDA. As Australia, Canada and others have said, we are disappointed at where we have got to on the E-Commerce moratorium. What I will add though, in the conversations that I’ve had with businesses since then, at multiple different sizes, the costs of the WTO are growing. The benefits are not staying the same. The benefits are shrinking and I think we all know what happens when that equation overlaps, I do not think that forms for a sustainable organisation and I think that is something we all need to reflect upon. At the end of the day, it is us that makes the decisions and right now we are not heading in a good direction.
Item 7
Whilst being disappointed at MC14 I think I am possibly weirdly optimistic still about WTO reform. Largely because I think that change is inevitable. The choice is it is either orderly or disorderedly, but I don’t think that that status quo is going to be suitable. I think that it is good that we have started on an orderly path and we really thank and welcome the appointment of the Facilitators. We thank them for their time in this process. The challenge is going to be, as ever, the trade-off between pace and inclusivity. In that regard we welcome the balance that you are trying to strike in the updated programme that you have issued. It is now 13% of the time that has passed since MC14 between the last Ministerial Conference and the next one. That is going to go at some pace. I draw attention to the cost and benefits that I spoke about before – there is a real urgency to our actions. We also need to agree that this is a Member-led process with Member submissions coming through to that extend.
On that note, the UK has submitted a paper on the Level Playing Field. This is in addition to the general paper that we submitted prior to MC14 and we look forward to submitting further papers going forward. Our paper on Level Playing Field repeats on what we said before on the rules and they have not kept pace with the changes in the global economy. We highlight three areas where we are keen to engage members on. Options to incentivise monitoring. Options to address gaps in the disciplines and that includes by building on existing rules and disciplines but also considering cumulative impacts from industrial policy. Lastly to look at how we might modernise the enforcement toolbox.
We welcome thoughts about how we might engage the business community more systematically in this reform process.
Item 9
The UK fully supports the ECA interim arrangement, like the other 66 signatories, and, as set out by Singapore and our previous speaker, Canada, to avoid repetition I think it suffices to say that we consider it a valid way to proceed on the journey to Annex 4, for all the reasons already set out.
That said, we recognise the deliberative function of the General Council as a forum for Members to raise questions. We welcome the discussion that India and Pakistan have started in this respect.
We intend to review the questions raised fully and to contribute to the responses in a constructive spirit.
