Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-03-22-Speech-3-202"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060322.16.3-202"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, the Economic Partnership Agreements are about trade relations with the ACP countries, which in turn are governed by the Cotonou Agreement. The present arrangements are, however, no longer consonant with the rules agreed within the WTO, in that the special treatment enjoyed by the ACP countries in comparison with other developing countries contravenes WTO rules and must therefore be brought into line with them.
The present system may continue to apply until 2008, and must have been adapted by then at the latest.
There are those in the House who reject EPA’s from the outset; they do not believe that a certain measure of trade liberalisation, in whatever form, can make any contribution to the development of poor countries.
My group, though, is convinced that trade can indeed play a part, certainly that the liberalisation of trade among the ACP countries can do so. We have no objection in principle to EPAs, provided that they are arrived at on the basis of sound agreements, providing for such things as adequate time for the countries in question to adapt to the new circumstances, and support for them in doing so. It is important that EPAs should make provision for that.
So, as far as we are concerned, let there be EPAs, if they stand a chance of helping to fight poverty. The Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats wants them to retain the development goal as a top priority, which means that liberalisation must only be gradual, for the benefit of the ACP countries and adapted to their specific and varied circumstances, with important basic services such as water, education, transport and energy remaining available to all. The PPE wants a realistic timetable, in other words enough time for necessary changes to be made. The PPE-DE Group wants sufficient support measures (for example technical assistance, capacity-building and reforms in such areas as customs and taxation) and it wants to see cooperation on a regional basis promoted between the ACP countries.
There are four areas about which the PPE-DE Group has concerns, and they are as follows.
The first is the limited supply of information from the Commission on the course of the negotiations. Then there is the pressure of time under which these are now being conducted and under which they will also have to be implemented. The negotiations have been in progress since 2002 and still no draft texts have been made available to us.
Finally, there are the financial aspects. The EPAs’ success will depend on a decent sum of money being made available. In the first place, this will have to come from the European Development Fund and then from other sources as well. It is not yet sufficiently clear where the money will come from then. There are emergency rules that make provision for this, and they are necessary. If the system appears not to be working in some places, the process must be capable of being slowed down or stopped for a period of time. Scope for that already exists under current WTO rules. We have as yet no specific proposals to make about this. The Commissioner has already gone some way deeper into this issue, and I look forward with pleasure to closer cooperation and more detailed information."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples