Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-01-12-Speech-3-227"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050112.11.3-227"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, the Council is able to concur with a good portion of what has been said. We have all understood the urgency and the exceptional nature of the situation confronted by a number of countries, particularly those affected by the natural disaster. Where Iraq is concerned, I do not believe that anyone doubts the necessity of helping with the reconstruction of that country. That being said, there does arise the issue of what is to be done for all the other developing countries.
First of all – and I rather concur with what the Commissioner said – we cannot be content to proceed in the same way where everyone is concerned. Developing countries are not all alike. There are very different situations. I therefore believe that we must concentrate firstly, and crucially, upon the poorest and least advanced countries and ask what we can do specifically for them.
In the first place, we can relieve, or indeed cancel, their debts. I believe that this is an initiative that must be supported and promoted. Within which frameworks are we to act? There is the debate to be conducted within the framework of the forthcoming European Councils; I mentioned in particular the April European Council which is to concentrate upon analysing and, if need be, revising the European Union’s undertakings when it comes to achieving the Millennium Objectives. There is the European Union’s support for the initiatives taken within the G8, particularly those of the G8 Presidency at the forthcoming summit in the United Kingdom. Europe must therefore promote this idea of debt relief or, indeed, cancellation. It cannot, however, do so indiscriminately as, by proceeding in that way, its action would lose credibility.
Secondly, cancelling or relieving the debt only makes sense if the rich countries increase their development aid. The European Union has entered into undertakings in this regard, and they should be implemented.
Thirdly and finally, the debt – large though it may be – must be placed within a broader political framework for development cooperation. There is no point in cancelling the debt if, at the same time, our borders are closed to certain imports from developing countries. There is no point in cancelling the debt if we then subsidise certain products in our own countries and thereby hinder the development of these same products in the developing countries.
To summarise, I believe that cancellation is an important factor, though not the only one, in a development strategy, or genuine development partnership, which the European Union must buckle down to."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples