Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-17-Speech-3-179"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991117.6.3-179"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Commissioner, Mr President, I think that Europe must state three main principles in this Millennium Round.
The first is that the aim of this round must be to reduce inequalities in development, unlike what has happened after previous rounds. Today, the African continent has a less than 3% share of world trade. The rules of the multilateral trade system must take account of the differences in countries’ situations, resources and levels of development. Free trade which does not take any other factors into account just makes the strong stronger and the weak weaker. This is why we would not be able to accept a challenge to the principles of our cooperation with the countries of the south, particularly with ACP countries, and of course in this context I am thinking of the Lomé Convention.
I think, on the contrary, that we should restate the commitments that we made at the ACP-EU Joint Assembly which was held a few weeks ago. Europe must go to Seattle with a concept of globalisation that is opposed to that of a unilateral world dominated by just one power. Europe must, on the contrary, promote a concept based on a multipolar world and encourage the establishment of economically and politically integrated regional groups, as we have ourselves been trying to do for the last forty years. How can we refuse others what we granted ourselves after the war, to reconstruct our industry, agriculture and economy?
Secondly, we must confine the WTO, strictly limit its role and keep isolated from the WTO’s sphere of competence those sectors which jeopardise society’s very identity and which must continue to remain the sovereignty of the citizens and of their elected institutions. Education, health, public and social services, public transport and culture are all examples of sectors which cannot be brought into trade negotiations and cannot be dealt with by an international trade court. We must refuse to join the race to make every sector subject to the market.
Thirdly, we must defend the principle of a hierarchy of norms. The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the conventions of the International Labour Organisation, and those on the environment are, by their very nature, superior to the standards that govern trade. We should not condemn a State on the grounds that it is applying the precautionary principle, that it is protecting its environment or that it is refusing imports which are proven to have been produced by child labour. On the contrary, we must be able to bring an appeal against a decision by the WTO before the International Labour Organisation or before the competent bodies at the United Nations. On the eve of this new round, we are struck by the way society at large and international public opinion have forced their way into the debate. I think that this is an excellent development, because it is the best guarantee that it will not be possible to drop these issues during these negotiations."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples