Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-04-Speech-4-205"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011004.11.4-205"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, when I was elected to the European Parliament, it was with a clear mandate, not only to represent Réunion, the island where I come from, or even the outermost regions, but also to try to make the voice of all of the French overseas territories heard.
It is thus high time that we showed effectively that the overseas countries and territories are not the poor relations of our development policy. In other words, it is high time that we proved tangibly to these people that they are right in believing in the European Union.
This is why, to finish, I wish to reiterate the desire that I state several times in my report, that the tenth anniversary of the statute of association should be an opportunity for reaffirming the strong political will towards these territories, that have for too long been left to be blown by the wind, across all the oceans of the world, in order to firmly and resolutely undertake the path of partnership and responsibility, in other words the path of development for all.
This is why I am glad that Parliament charged me with being its spokesperson on the statute of association between the overseas countries and territories, the OCTs, and the European Union. I would also like to commend the spirit of openness that prevailed when this report was being drawn up.
Allow me first to venture a historical and political look at the relations that some Member States have had with their former colonies, relations that have been marked, in my opinion, by the bond of exclusivity and by supervision, which are pillars of the colonial pact.
We should now break with the past and with the feeling of guilt that goes with it, in order to define a true responsible and equal partnership between the overseas countries and territories, the attached Member States and the European Union. This is the path that we should resolutely take, in order for this new decision of association to be the real qualitative leap expected by all of the overseas countries and territories.
This challenge is, however, made difficult by the lack of homogeneity among the OCTs and by the structural handicaps that are physically curbing their development: about twenty countries linked with four Member States – The United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Denmark and France –, mostly small and island countries, with the notable exception of Greenland, very remote from the European continent, characterised by an extreme economic and social diversity (the richest are within the Community average, while the poorest are really under-developed), and also by diversity of status in terms of the relations that the overseas countries and territories have forged during their history with their mainland, relations characterised by considerable independence for some and major State supervision for others.
It has to be said that the Commission’s proposal, as it has been put forward, only partly responds to this challenge and to the legitimate aspirations of these territories found in all four corners of the globe. There are still acute questions in terms of the institutional, economic, financial and commercial problems.
First of all from an institutional point of view, I would like to welcome the establishment of a forum to facilitate partnership between the OCTs, the Member States and the Commission, although it is regrettable that decision making is not more in the hands of the leaders of the overseas countries and territories.
Next, from an economic and financial point of view, the Commission has indeed retained a differentiated strategy, taking into account the extreme diversity among the overseas countries and territories, but I deplore the fact that the amount of aid is essentially fixed based on GNP per inhabitant. I think it would have been more appropriate to add demographic and social criteria to this, which are a fairer reflection of the vulnerability of these territories. I will take this opportunity to call again for the creation of a specific development fund for the overseas countries and territories, separate from the European development fund, which I am convinced would be more in keeping with the spirit and the letter of the association.
Finally, from a commercial point of view, I must stress here that the share of overseas countries and territories in trade with the Community is very low, which makes it difficult to understand the Commission’s defensive position. It is true that it is essential that in certain cases, such as that of sugar, it should be extremely vigilant in order to prevent the original rules, which are necessary for the development of all of the overseas countries and territories, from being abused, with the effect of destabilising some European markets, particularly in outermost regions. However, not only out of a concern for coherence, at a time when the Union is completely opening up its markets to the least advanced countries, but also in view of the common history of the OCTs and the European Union, we do not understand why it is refusing them what it is granting to the least advanced countries. Community solidarity cannot be two-speed."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples