Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-19-Speech-5-057"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991119.4.5-057"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the shipbuilding industry within the EU Member States has been undergoing an overhaul for many years now. This has coincided with a subsidy race at world-market level. Taxpayers and shipyards in various Member States are at the receiving end of this, whilst shipowners who can purchase ships at far below their cost price come out on top. I think that the Commission, the Council and the ladies and gentlemen here present will all agree that this situation must be brought to an end as soon as possible. Opinions on how this should be done vary.
Consequently, this debate should not be restricted to the practice of unfair competition, something that the South Koreans are guilty of. Everyone within the shipbuilding industry knows that there is no level playing field within the European Union either. The Council is therefore right in deciding, for the time being, not to make any changes to the agreement to end the generic support to the shipbuilding industry as of 1 January 2001. This request is mainly expressed by the Member States that have been paying out most of the support per order for years now. As far as tangible support is concerned, this amounts to 3.5 times the amount given by the least generous government. Subsidy policy is always bad policy because it sustains bad management and often even rewards it.
A far better alternative would be a well-thought out industrial policy for the shipbuilding industry aimed at innovative production methods, which are intensive in terms of the knowledge involved and which enhance efficiency.
The current shipbuilding directive contains various obscure support schemes in respect of research and development, environment, innovation and regional support policy, which result in the “good” shipyards being punished and the “bad” ones rewarded. Any government should do the opposite in fact.
The OECD agreement, which provides for abolishing order support, in particular, is not a panacea. South Korea and also the EU Member States are clever enough to keep supporting their maritime industries in a non-transparent manner.
The European Commission should lodge a complaint with the WTO against South Korea without delay and at the same time continue the inquiry into the orders placed with South Korean shipyards. If ships are sold at approximately 20% below cost price, then this is a sure case of dumping. Pressure must be exerted at the same time.
The Daewoo shipyard, which has been bankrupt for some time, but is still launching ships, should be dismantled and not resold. I would also ask the Commissioner to institute an inquiry into the actual subsidy level per order within the European Union. The transitional regulation to abolish generic order subsidies should also be reconsidered. Countries that make an unlimited budget available for this create a run on subsidies. The consequence will be that excellent ship yards – these are often the most efficient ones – will go under in the course of 2001-2002 and it will be much harder to compete with Japan, South-East Asia and the United States with the least efficient ship yards which will then be left in the European Union. A possible delay in the discontinuation of generic order subsidies can be considered if the transitional period is abolished. I would appreciate it if Commissioner Liikanen were to take this into serious consideration.
Could the Commissioner ask the IMF to investigate where the subsidies to South Korea eventually ended up?
Finally, I would like to reiterate what I said on 31 March 1998. The strategic significance of the European shipbuilding industry is evident. We want to be able to continue to build our own ships, even if we are forced to help the sector out due to external circumstances. But let us not make a mess of it within the European Union by having all sorts of obscure regulations and by blowing taxpayers’ money in the process. I am sure that that would not do the sector any good whatsoever. The end goal should still be the same: the abolition of all kinds of government subsidies so that each shipyard gets the price it deserves."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples