Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-03-Speech-2-145"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030603.5.2-145"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Recalling what could be called the ‘relevance’ of trade agreements concluded in recent years, the rapporteur emphasises that these are also driven by the desire to promote political stability, which consequently makes them an integral part of the Union’s external policy.
Although the benefits of these free trade areas are undeniable, because the WTO has not clarified the situation, these areas are developing in a framework which lacks legal certainty. Furthermore, we must bear in mind the potentially damaging consequences of a ‘harmonising’ strategy in the least-developed countries, whose ability to participate in trade negotiations is sometimes limited and cannot be overstretched, if we really want to see fair results. Consequently, although I broadly agree, I feel that more prudent and gradualist guidelines needed to be defined and this is why I was inclining towards abstaining from the final vote.
The result of the vote on paragraph 21 of the proposal, however, has persuaded me to vote against the report. In this field, which is so sensitive, it is crucial to uphold the decision-making procedure that was agreed on by consensus in Nice, as proposed in Amendment No 12. By once again imposing the original wording, however, the majority is causing Parliament once again to persist with an approach that I believe to be unrealistic and unacceptable. I therefore voted against the report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples