Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-05-11-Speech-3-020"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050511.3.3-020"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the most pressing problem we face with regard to the World Bank’s policies is its policy on structural adjustment. The World Bank has supported structural adjustment programmes for many decades, and yet these have often had grotesque results, for example in the case of the privatisation of services.
A good example of this is water supplies, in that, even though these have been privatised and infrastructure put in place, the price of water has risen so rapidly that the poorest groups in society can no longer afford it. Another example is trade policy, as making the granting of loans conditional upon forced liberalisation and the opening up of markets means that the negotiating position of developing countries in the WTO rounds is weakened. All this stands in stark contrast to the EU’s development policy goals, which, for example, give water supplies a key role in the fight against poverty and strengthen the negotiating capacity of developing countries in WTO rounds. This is therefore a key line of attack to take in changing the World Bank’s policies.
The reform that is now in its initial stages will change absolutely nothing. What is termed the new selection policy for loans, which is meant to be about to be introduced, is essentially an admission of defeat for over 30 years of World Bank policies; it means, in short, that those countries that have participated in the World Bank’s structural adjustment programmes over recent years or decades without having achieved good results and without having gained anything will now get money to tackle their most urgent social problems. Those countries that did not participate properly will receive less money. This distinction between good performers and bad performers is extremely questionable, and in my opinion the Commission and the Council have a duty to insist that it is made according to clear, transparent and easy-to-understand criteria, if nothing else. I believe that they also have a duty to urge the World Bank to make far-reaching changes to its poverty reduction strategy, in the framework of UN reform and the Millennium Development Goals."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples