Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-17-Speech-2-181"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060117.20.2-181"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
".
Madam President, I thank the Commissioner and Mr Fruteau for dealing so well with what is an extremely contentious and difficult issue.
Clearly the reform of the sugar sector is essential, but I cannot agree that the collateral damage of what is an internal European Union reform should be felt by some of the small, vulnerable economies with whom we have very special relationships and partnerships.
Throughout the discussions the ACP countries have made the case for a gradual price cut, an end to dumping and for additional long-term funding to help them deal with what is a drastic reform. By and large, their pleas have been rejected. It is the view of the ACP countries, as Mr Fruteau has intimated, that they have been abandoned and betrayed by what is on the table now. They have no guarantee of where the money is to come from in the long term to help them restructure and to diversify both within and outside of sugar. In the Caribbean alone the losses as a result of the cuts are expected to be in the region of EUR 125 million.
The ACP Sugar Protocol countries supplied tropical sugar when Europe needed it. Now they are asking that we understand the inevitable dependence they have on that commodity, one upon which they depend for foreign exchange earnings which have brought stability to them and have ensured that they maintain democracies.
Compensation amounting to EUR 7.5 billion is on the table for European farmers. So far the ACP has EUR 40 million, which is to be divided between 18 countries, and it is not even clear how it is going to be divided. In addition, Commissioner Mandelson warned last night in the WTO debate that the figure of EUR 190 million, which the Commission has proposed, is now threatened by a 20% cut agreed in the EU’s budget negotiations.
Commissioner, where exactly is that money going to come from? Is it yet again the intention of the Commission to raid the development budget to cover the cost of these accompanying measures for the ACP? I hope that the Commissioner for Development, Mr Michel, will stand firm and that, in the spirit of what you said about your interest in developing countries, you will give your support for new and additional money to cover the accompanying measures.
Another concern relates to the effects of the regulation on LDCs. I refer you to the amendments that I have submitted on that issue. Almost all of the world’s least developed countries are members of the ACP group. Therefore they have an enormous interest in the appalling suggestion that we should pull back on our commitments to Everything But Arms. From 2009 all least developed countries should benefit from the same guaranteed price as that provided for in the ACP Sugar Protocol. There should be no delay in the fulfilment of Europe’s commitments to provide duty-free, quota-free access on a stable and long-term basis to LDCs.
The safeguard clause that was agreed by the Council calls for an upper limit of a 25% increase per year on LDC imports. That makes an absolute mockery of EBA. LDCs are set to lose EUR 783 million of potential earnings in the first year alone. I hope that this Parliament will not accept a situation which jeopardises a European initiative of which we have been justifiably proud. We must not vote for any delay on the implementation or indeed for a safeguard clause, which would limit the promise offered by EBA.
In line with the objective of having coherence between agriculture and development priorities, I would recommend support for amendments on the elimination of export subsidies and the abolition of C sugar exports. If we fail to act we will be giving absolutely the wrong signal to millions of the world’s poorest people, at a time when Europe is meant to be focusing on making poverty history."@en1
|
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples