Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-24-Speech-2-384"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20061024.38.2-384"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
". Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the 2004 annual report on third-country anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguard action, presented by the Commission services, has uncovered a piece of information that has raised a number of concerns within our parliamentary committee. It appears from the report that there has been an abnormal increase in the number of trade protection cases, involving both traditional users of these measures and more recently developed WTO member states. In many cases, WTO rules and case-law have been partially or completely disregarded, causing damage to Community industry. For the developed countries, led by the United States, major problems arise as a result of the unilateral and half-hearted application of WTO rules. For some emerging countries, the application of countervailing duties is not intended to counteract illegal practices, but to give their local industries extra protection against European imports. In many cases, the investigating standards are low and raise a number of questions as to their full compliance with WTO rules. The Commission report relates some of those significant cases, namely the 'Zeroing’ case with the United States, the Indian anti-dumping cases, the South American and Austrian farming cases and, in general, the extensive and unfair use of safeguards. In many of the cases brought against the European Community, the Community has succeeded in obtaining a satisfactory settlement for resolving the disputes within the WTO. Nevertheless, a success such as that often comes too late, and irreparable damage is done to European industry. Faced with the picture presented to us by the Commission in its report, the Committee on International Trade could have acted on instinct and suggested adopting the same methods and behaviour as those trade partners that violate the anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguard rules, but it has not done so. We are in fact convinced that respect for the trade rules established at international level and within a multilateral framework is the mainstay of economic growth and, more generally, of the peaceful relationship between nations. Two wrongs never make a right. Having established that, we should like to reaffirm that the rules must be applied and that, if they are not applied, corresponding sanctions must be swiftly imposed in order to guarantee that the law is upheld. If they are not swiftly applied, the damage will be irreparable. In defence of the law and of that sector of European industry that feels unfairly affected by unlawful measures, we call on the Commission to take a firm stand in pursuing the WTO negotiations, which are aimed at making other WTO members apply trade protection measures in a less arbitrary way, and to act as the promoter of actions aimed at having the decisions of the WTO dispute settlement body applied more swiftly and effectively. These points should be included in the Doha Development Agenda if – as we hope – these negotiations are resumed. We therefore call on the Commission to accord due importance to this matter as part of the initiatives aimed at increasing the external competitiveness of European industry, such as were recently announced by Mr Mandelson before the Committee on International Trade. Finally, we recommend that the Commission refrain from giving preferential or special treatment to those trade partners that repeatedly fail to comply with WTO rules and case-law, giving rise to serious economic consequences for European industry. The Committee on International Trade is of the opinion that, when faced with serious situations, we cannot remain completely passive. If we want to gain the citizens’ support for the new international trade rules, we need to strive for greater transparency, consistency and respect for the law on the part of all the actors, by implementing measures ranging from border controls to the application of common sanctions against those who trade in counterfeit or illegal goods on European soil. We can associate the conclusions of this report with the recent Commission initiative in favour of a reform of the European Community's anti-dumping and anti-subsidy policy. The aim of this reform is to restrict the use of these instruments by the Commission as part of the efforts to ensure that the Community interest is looked at more carefully and more extensively."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph