Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-10-Speech-1-072"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030210.7.1-072"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, those who have taken part in our debate this evening cannot, I believe, fail to be struck by the similarities between the views of the Members speaking on both Davos and Porto Alegre. The first are Mr Karas and Mr Obiols i Germà, who both, in a way, asked us the same question: is it possible to seek, on a global scale, this domestication, this capitalist government that Europe has cultivated on its own soil for over 200 years? Could this social market economy with which you all, with very few exceptions, credit Europe, be a project for the world?
I believe that the response could be affirmative. This could be our response, with a certain number of conditions. The first is accepting that sustainability in the economic, social and environmental sense can be a genuine common project, and it is that sustainability that is the real basis for stability and security. If we agree on the first point, the second condition to be met is undoubtedly to form alliances on this subject with other parties in the world, and I find the concept of global public goods mentioned by Mrs Zrihen and Mr Désir interesting in that respect. Then, clearly, the third condition is to succeed in providing our planet with the system of governance it needs. Undoubtedly that system will have to be more comprehensive than the measure available to us today, which is both partial and unbalanced. On this point, I agree with what both Mr Miranda and Mr Moreira Da Silva said.
It is clear from the wording of all these conditions that this is unlikely to take place without a Europe that is more solid, more united and more involved than today’s Europe. In any case, that is what I think I understood on hearing Mrs Frassoni’s statements and, on this point, the Commission agrees. Much remains to be done, as Mr Désir said with regard to the IMF proposal, and I agree with him on that point, even if his interpretation of the WTO’s General Agreement on Trade in Services continues to pose us a few problems here or there. However, that is a discussion that I will also have to have with Mrs Auroi and a number of others. Much clearly remains to be done, and I believe that the consideration of the current geopolitical situation, whether in terms of Iraq or the Middle East, reminds us, if this were necessary, that the objective of a common foreign and security policy – which is inextricably linked to the projects that you would like Europe to implement in the field of globalisation – is still a long way off.
I shall now speak on a number of more specific points. I agree with Mrs Sanders-ten Holte and Mrs Korhola about the importance of companies’ social responsibility. Private initiatives might come from the world of business to achieve better management of globalisation, just as, furthermore, there might be citizens’ initiatives on what President Suarez called citizen and social mobilisation. This is proven, in particular, by fair trade and by consumer movements in favour of labelling that is environmentally friendly or promotes better social conditions for production. We are quite aware that, in these areas, nothing will be done without mobilising society itself.
As regards the role and intervention of the parliaments and democratic control, Mrs Frassoni, you are aware of the Commission’s position on the place that this House, this Parliament, should occupy in this kind of debate, particularly where multilateral trade issues are concerned. We would refer you to the Convention, which once again must rule on this point. Let us hope that, on this point as on others, the Convention will be more productive than the last intergovernmental conference.
I shall not dwell on agricultural issues. We will come back to them in the debate that is to follow.
With regard to the technological gap to be overcome, Mr Wijkman, you are correct, and I believe that we in the Commission agree on the fact that our public aid to development should, in a number of cases, be reoriented or reviewed.
As regards the service industry, the Commission’s proposals are now on the table. Your Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy may take them up under the conditions of our institutional agreement. These same proposals are also on the table of the Council of Ministers. Thus, the time for public debate has begun, and I personally am delighted."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples