UK and US reportedly fail to sign declaration on making AI ‘safe for all’ at Paris summit – Europe live

In our overnight story, our global technology editor Dan Milmo and deputy political editor Jessica Elgot explained the context of the controversy surrounding the summit declaration:

Criticism of a draft communique has threatened to overshadow the summit’s final day on Tuesday, when Macron will be joined by von der Leyen as well as the US vice-president, JD Vance, and the Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi. Keir Starmer is not attending.

With the US reportedly unhappy about the wording, which includes phrases such as “sustainable and inclusive AI”, Politico reported on Monday that the UK was also minded not to sign the communique.

Speaking in Paris, the UK tech secretary, Peter Kyle, said the government was “in negotiations” over the statement but “that’s something we don’t comment on while the negotiations unfold”.

A government source said they hoped the negotiations would get to a place over the course of the summit where the UK could sign the declaration and said there was still a considerable amount of time left to have those discussions.

But the source suggested that the UK was prepared to walk away, saying the joint declaration had to be “squarely in British interests” or it would not get its backing. “We always want to get to a place of agreement but it needs to work for the UK,” they said.

In his speech, Macron talks about the need for a framework that builds trust to “get out of the risk-opportunity dilemma” without excessive regulation, but enough confidence to proceed with the rollout of the technology.

He warns that “if we break the trust, AI will divide the world,” with people increasingly frustrated by the way it was rolled out.

He lists a number of consideration to its trusted rollout, including fair and open access, focus on quality data and trusted third parties, privacy, security, and dopyright.

He insists that is not a sign of lack of trust or thwarting innovation, but “it is allowing it to happen within an international space, in a way which will avoid fragmentation.”

But his words could now quickly be overshadowed by the controversy around the signatories of the summit declaration (11:39).

The US and the UK have not signed the Paris AI Summit’s declaration, Reuters is reporting.

The communique states among priorities that “ensuring AI is open, inclusive, transparent, ethical, safe, secure and trustworthy, taking into account international frameworks for all” and “making AI sustainable for people and the planet.”

The US and Britain did not immediately explain their reasons for not being signatories.

The Élysée said it was possible that more countries could sign onto the declaration in the hours after the event.

We will bring you more on this shortly.

Macron is now delivering his keynote speech (in French).

You can watch the live stream below and we will bring you the key lines here.

JD Vance’s speech at AI Action Summit in Paris – snap analysis

Dan Milmo

Global technology editor

This was very much the America First vision for AI. JD Vance’s speech at the Paris AI summit made clear that the Trump administration has no truck with the European approach to artificial intelligence and tech in general – or China’s.

In a wide-ranging and punchy address, the US vice-president started by throwing shade at the original summit held in the UK in 2023. That was badged the AI safety summit and Vance indicated that it was too cautious, referring to gatherings about cutting edge technology that can be “too self-conscious, too risk averse.”

Speaking in front of the head of the EU’s executive arm, Ursula von der Leyen, regulation was repeatedly criticised by Vance. The EU is leading the way in AI regulation with its AI act – and Vance made clear his discomfort with any legislation that could be construed as excessive. The EU’s digital services act – which covers social media – and the privacy-focused GDPR code also received passing criticism.

“We believe that excessive regulation of the AI sector could kill a transformative industry.”

He then added: “We need international regulatory regimes that foster the creation of AI technology rather than strangle it, and we need our European friends in particular to look to this new frontier with optimism rather than trepidation.”

Speaking in front of the Chinese vice premier Zhang Guoqing there was a clear warning to other nations about co-operating with China. Warning that partnering with authoritarian regimes “never pays off”, he said: “Some of us in this room have learned from experience partnering with [authoritarian regimes] means chaining your nation to an authoritarian master that seeks to infiltrate, dig in and seize your information infrastructure. Should a deal seem too good to be true, just remember the old adage that we learned in Silicon Valley, if you aren’t paying for the product, you are the product.”

It was reported overnight that Vance left a leaders’ dinner in Paris on Monday as Guoqing praised trade and the UN. If he went out on his own last night, Vance certainly went out on his own this morning.

European Commission Ursula von der Leyen is up next on stage and the contrast between the two dynamic and the tone of the two speeches could not be bigger.

She says this is “the third summit on AI safety in just one year,” and yet “three new generations of ever more powerful AI models have been released in that time.”

She says she wants Europe to “be one of the leading AI continents,” and dismisses suggestions – including by Macron himself! – that “Europe is late to the race, while the US and China have already got ahead.”

“The AI race is far from over. Truth is, we are only at the beginning. The frontier is constantly moving, and global leadership is still up for grabs,” she says.

She says Europe wants its own “distinctive approach to AI,” focused on collaborative, open-source solutions.

She says the bloc “wants to replicate the success story of the CERN laboratory in Geneva,” with AI Gigafactories used to help and train very large models.

“We provide the infrastructure for large computational power. Researchers, entrepreneurs and investors will be able to join forces,” she says.

She ends by pledging additional €50bn for AI investment in the EU, bringing the total to €200bn.

Very notably, she does not respond to many of Vance’s criticisms of the EU and sticks to her speech.

Vance closes his speech with a reference to French military officer Marquis de Lafayette, who served during the American War of Independence.

He says he was given a chance to hold his sword during his tour of Paris last night, and it made him think about France, the US, and “the beautiful civilisation that we have build together.”

He says that sabres “are dangerous in the wrong hands, but are incredible tools for liberty and prosperity in right hands.”

He adds that “if we choose the wrong approach on other things that could be conceived of as dangerous, things like AI, and choose to hold ourselves back, it will alter not only our GDP or the stock market, but the very future of the project that Lafayette and the American founders set off to create.”

“This does not mean that all concerns about safety go out the window, but focus matters, and we must focus now on the opportunity to catch lightning in a bottle,” he says.

With great confidence, I can say it is an opportunity that the Trump administration will not squander, and we hope everyone convened here today feels exactly the same.

And that’s it.

He then turns back to the issue of protecting workers, saying the “Trump administration will guarantee American workers a seat at the table” when discussing how AI will change our societies.

Continuing his speech, Vance now turns to “hostile foreign adversaries” who he says “have weaponised AI software to rewrite history, surveil users, and censor speech.”

He says the Trump administration “will block such efforts full stop,” and safeguard US technologies from “theft and misuse.”

In a passage likely to be read in the context of China, he says:

I would also remind our international friends here today that partnering with such regimes, it never pays off in the long term, from CCTV to 5G equipment, we’re all familiar with cheap tech in the marketplace that’s been heavily subsidised and exported by authoritarian regimes.

But as I know, and I think some of us in this room have learned from experience, partnering with them means chaining your nation to an authoritarian master that seeks to infiltrate, dig in and seize your information infrastructure.

Should a deal seem too good to be true, just remember the old adage that we learned in Silicon Valley: if you aren’t paying for the product, you are the product.

Vance briefly focuses on energy, saying “AI cannot take off unless the world builds the energy infrastructure to support it.”

But he then returns to the theme of regulation:

We face the extraordinary prospect of a new Industrial Revolution, one on par with the invention of the steam engine or Bessemer steel, but it will never come to pass if over regulation deters innovators from taking the risks necessary to advance the ball. Nor will it occur if we allow AI to become dominated by massive players looking to use the tech to censor or control users thoughts. …

Who is most aggressively demanding that we, meaning political leaders gathered here today, do the most aggressive regulation? It is very often the people who already have an incumbent advantage in the market.

He turns to examples of what he calls “ahistorical social agendas” replicated through AI in the last few years, and says “the Trump administration will ensure that AI systems developed in America are free from ideological bias and never restrict our citizens right to free speech.”

He continues:

The US innovators of all sizes already know what it’s like to deal with onerous international rules. Many of our most productive tech companies are forced to deal with the EU’s Digital Services Act and the massive regulations it created about taking down content and policing so called misinformation.

And of course, we want to ensure the Internet is a safe place, but it is one thing to prevent a predator from preying on a child on the internet, and it is something quite different to preventing a grown man or woman from accessing an opinion that the government thinks is misinformation.

He then turns on to the EU’s data protection rules, the GDPR:

Meanwhile, for smaller firms, navigating the GDPR means paying endless legal compliance costs or otherwise risking massive fines. Now, for some the easiest way to avoid the dilemma has been to simply block EU users in the first place. Is this really the future that we want?

In a stark segment of his speech, JD Vance repeatedly criticises EU regulation of AI and technology.

He says:

America wants to partner with all of you. We want to embark on the AI revolution before us with the spirit of openness and collaboration.

But to create that kind of trust, we need international regulatory regimes that fosters the creation of AI technology rather than strangles it, and we need our European friends in particular, to look to this new frontier with optimism, rather than trepidation.

He picks up Trump’s comments on potential enforcement against US Big Tech companies and says “America cannot and will not accept that.”

However, the Trump administration is troubled by reports that some foreign governments are considering tightening the screws on US tech companies with international footprints.

America cannot and will not accept that, and we think it’s a terrible mistake, not just for the United States of America, but for your own countries.