Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-30-Speech-3-058"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051130.10.3-058"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Several speakers have already mentioned the huge significance of agricultural issues in view of the Doha Round. The European Union cannot sacrifice agriculture for the sake of WTO negotiations, and that the European Union has already done a lot for developing countries – for instance, 85% of African food exports arrive in the European Union. However, we must also add that the European Union must have an active approach to agricultural negotiations too, because it cannot restrict itself to a defensive position. We must try to ensure that regulations concerning animal welfare, environmental protection and geographical origin protection are built into the WTO agricultural trade regulation system, as this is in the interest of both European farmers and European consumers. Mr Peter Mandelson does not have an easy task when leading negotiations, as he must try to ensure that the results of the negotiations are favourable to all 25 Member States, and the various benefits given to our various Member States are kept in balance. The Doha Round is a development round, and it would be unacceptable if the results were to benefit only those Member States with the most developed industry, and the less developed, poorer Member States relying mostly on agricultural activities would suffer, meaning that the rich would become richer and the poor would become poorer. This would be particularly unacceptable now, when the British Presidency has made a proposal to reduce cohesion funds by 10%."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples