Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-07-07-Speech-4-034"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050707.5.4-034"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, firstly, I should, however, like to say that if Peter Mandelson is not here, it is precisely for very good reasons that are, I might add, related to the matter in hand. He was keen to take part in bilateral meetings in Great Britain, where he had the opportunity to meet a number of extremely important ministers, particularly in the context of the WTO negotiations that will be taking place in Hong Kong. His absence from these meetings would have deprived us of certain opportunities to defend the priorities that you outline here. As you know, these negotiations have a direct bearing on the textile sector. I would therefore earnestly request that you excuse his absence; it really is for urgent reasons. It was genuinely worthwhile for him to attend these meetings.
Conclusions: the Member States overwhelmingly supported the agreement reached with China; the industry obtained an additional transitional period to improve its competitiveness both at international level and within the Union, and the Commission is going to monitor the programme of positive actions regularly and thoroughly with a view to securing the future of the European textile and clothing sector.
With regard to your request for regular updates, the Commission will keep Parliament regularly informed of the implementation of its initiatives. That said, I am not going to go so far as to promise you a report every three months, but I believe that it would indeed be quite reasonable for reports to be made to Parliament on a regular basis.
That said, I would like to thank Mrs Saïfi for her excellent report and I welcome the draft resolution. It supports the efforts already made by the Commission to assist the European textile and clothing sector in also taking up the challenges set by the abolition of quotas since January 2005. Our objective is clearly to lessen the impact of a historic agreement on trade liberalisation, which was finalised exactly 10 years ago. We all recognise that the European Union’s trade policy should guarantee the best environment and the best possible conditions for the sector so as to enable it to face the competition on equal terms. The shake-up of the regulatory and trading environment ought to encourage us to turn to the future and go on the offensive, to find new commercial outlets and to create markets, rather than to seek only to protect ourselves from competition on the internal market.
I am now going to address the principal trade issues raised in the draft resolution. Firstly, with regard to Chinese imports, I will speak about the EU-China agreement of 10 June 2005. Following months of negotiations, we are pleased to have reached an agreement with China, which guarantees a more moderate growth in imports in the main categories of products. This gives European industry an additional two and a half years in which to continue the process of reorganisation and adaptation.
The broad support given to the Commission’s approach by the Member States indicates that a negotiated agreement was certainly the best means of confronting the influx of Chinese imports, and this for various reasons. Firstly, most EU products are covered, that is to say around half of the imported products that were liberalised in January 2005. Secondly, there is only a slight difference between the quantities agreed and what would have resulted from the mechanical application of the safeguard clause if it had been implemented. It must be well understood that there was really no alternative solution. Implementing the safeguard measures on a case-by-case basis would have been economically destabilising and politically very difficult. The agreement will provide more clarity, certainty and credibility for businesses on both sides (producers, exporters, importers and retailers) and will promote textiles exports from developing countries and Mediterranean countries to Europe. This agreement is therefore in everyone’s interests.
The question of whether we will refrain from taking safeguard actions in the future and on other products remains. The European Union has not relinquished its legal rights, but it is clear that we have entered into a transaction. We do not rule out possible future actions if they are really justified. Careful monitoring will therefore continue. From now on, we have to focus our attention on the interests of the European Union, interests that we are going to defend forcefully, in the textile sector: market access; intellectual property, the Euro-Mediterranean zone, rules of origin and origin marking.
The action plan on market access, debated by the High-Level Group on 14 June 2005, should be officially adopted and implemented with the emphasis on intellectual property issues. Increased convergence of market access conditions in the textile and clothing sector is also required. It would be advisable to reduce customs duties within the context of the WTO. They should be set at the lowest possible level for LDCs and vulnerable developing countries. Non-tariff barriers need to be tackled effectively: that is a key objective of the WTO negotiations on market access for non-agricultural products
the tariff reductions envisaged by the European Union would be acceptable if a significant number of countries, in order ideally to attain a critical mass, made comparable offers in return in terms of market access. The Commission is considering putting forward proposals on origin marking and labelling. These proposals will enable both appropriate information and guarantees on the origin of clothing items to be provided, whilst avoiding placing an unnecessary burden on businesses.
The new system of generalised preferences, which offers preferential access to developing countries, was adopted on 27 June and will enter into force on 1 January 2006. A specific safeguard clause for clothing products has been introduced. It excludes any country recording an annual growth in exports greater than 20%. That clause is the only concession in a global stability agreement that will remain in force until the end of 2008. China has been excluded from it and the status quo is maintained for India.
As regards the reform of preferential rules of origin, the Commission is going to carry out an impact study in the most sensitive sectors, including the textile and clothing sector. We have to measure the effects of change on EU industry and on developing partner countries.
I now come to the Euro-Mediterranean zone. We share your desire to establish a genuine Euro-Mediterranean zone in which goods can move freely and are exempt from customs duties. Since the 1970s, textile products have entered the EU market exempt from customs duties and, in parallel, the Mediterranean countries have progressively abolished customs duties on EU exports. The competitiveness of the Euromed textile industry depends less on customs duties than on competition from Asia, on the preferences granted by the European Union to Asian countries, through the GSP, on the relaxing of the preferential rules of origin and on unfair competition caused by China’s lax compliance with employment law. Although the cumulation of origin has been delayed at the Council, every effort is being made to speed up the procedure and to ensure its entry into force in autumn 2005."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples