Debate: The outcome of the EU-US Trade and Technology Council
Date: THURSDAY, 11 NOVEMBER 2021
Speaker: Margrethe Vestager
Language: EN

One of the main questions, of course, is what actually is the Trade and Technology Council? Because it cannot be a place where we sort of prejudge what will be the opinions of this House. I think that must be absolutely clear. But that doesn’t mean that it can be without effect. Just as a side remark, I’d say that actually I’m quite happy that we can shake hands again because I think that shows that we have moved quite some lines, both in terms of the pandemic, but also in getting to a better relationship with colleagues in the US.  I think what was said by Anna—Michelle Asimakopoulou was very precise as a description of what the TTC is. Because what we can do is we can exchange information, we can discuss things that we disagree on. We can align points of view and – I think very importantly – we can be specific. Let me take the question of semiconductors. Here what we have agreed is to collect information on both sides and then to establish a common analysis as to what are the reasons for the chip shortage that we are faced with right now. Obviously, it’s really, really difficult to do something about it on short—term notice, but we can make our future, mid— and long—term actions, be informed by the causes for the short—term shortage that we are faced with right now. I think that those important insights will make our work also for the European Chips Act and for a European Chips Strategy so much more solid.  The ten working groups are indeed different because they have a different focus. Working groups, for instance, on standards, will not only be focusing on setting EU—US standards, but also on working together in multilateral standard—setting forums. I think it is not to be underestimated how important it is to have such early warning cooperation to know what is being brought up, what is at stake. Because we know that there are others who want to set their standards also in multilateral standards—setting organisations. So, we can coordinate our approaches to key global technology, to economic issues, to trade issues, and because of that we can deepen transatlantic trade and economic relations, basing this on politics where our shared values get a specific concrete expression in real life.  I think the second example of that is the work that we are doing on artificial intelligence. The first result was to align our point of view that the critical thing here is to have a risk—based approach, so that when AI is used in cases where fundamental values might be at stake, this is where we should focus. In order to make sure that we have an innovation—prone approach to artificial intelligence so that we can use it as much as possible.  So the first step is to align our way of thinking. The next step is to see if we can develop common tools in order actually to see if common principles are being upheld. Because there are thousands and thousands of producers, of coders, of programmers, of future users of AI, who would want to know how to make sure that they are on the right side of our principles. Here, of course, we have an obligation to develop tools that will allow that to happen.  As you’ll also see, we have a working group as to how to enable small and medium—sized businesses to be part of the technological development. I think that is really important, because the work we do here is actually to open the market so that small and medium—sized businesses will have a much bigger chance based on their merits, on their talent, on their ideas, on their work ethics, actually to get to their customers – which also, of course, chips into the question of platforms that I mentioned in my introduction.  One of the things that I will mention to bridge into how the European Parliament can be involved is the One—Stop Shop that Valdis Dombrovskis mentioned in his introduction, because outreach to stakeholders and the scrutiny of the European Parliament is part of what can make the TTC a success. So, we have this website where one can both interact with us, but where also papers become available as soon as possible so that it is open as to what it is that we’re doing. I think that is very important. I hope that you will promote this in your constituencies for the different stakeholders for whom it is important.  The meeting that we had under the leadership of a Member of this Parliament, Bernd Lange, with a number of other committee chairs being invited, is part of the answer to the question as to how the European Parliament can be involved. I think this debate is also part of how the European Parliament can be involved. And, of course, for us to prepare the next meeting, we will discuss in the set—up chosen by Parliament as to how Parliament can be involved in the preparation of the next meeting.  Last but not least, I share some of the remarks made about China. If you look at our AI proposal, you will see that there are use cases where we find it really crucial to say these uses are forbidden in the European Union, because this is not a place of surveillance. This is a place where data belongs to people and not to the state.  But I think the key to success of the TTC is that we want something with the Americans and they want something with us, because we have something really strong in common: old democracies, strong fundamental values, the respect of the individual with the integrity of their dignity as the starting point.  I think the only way to excel in this world is not to try to answer what other people are doing. It is to find our own way to excel, to over go, to show what we really are about. I think the TTC is part of that puzzle, next to all the many other things that this House is initiating, that this House is pushing the Commission to do, that this House enables Member States to do. Only in that respect can we deliver to European voters what has been promised. Thank you very much for the strong support and for this important debate.