Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-02-18-Speech-1-207"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080218.27.1-207"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to start by thanking the Commissioner for his account and also for his honesty in setting out the dilemmas with which he is confronted when he speaks to his colleagues and with the Member States about reforming the trade defence mechanism of the European Union. That is one thing, and I am also pleased that you are open in saying why you cannot come up with proposals right now, because it is simply very difficult to reach agreement in the European Union about what is the best way forward now.
What the Commissioner also emphasised is that it is important to find a way to build a bridge between those countries that mainly earn their money from trade and those which have to get most of it from production. I myself come from a trading country, the Netherlands, but I understand very well the concerns that countries like France and Germany, which have a large production base, have about the development of global trade and protection. For them there is also the need to protect their own industry. It is thus very important to find that bridge and it is also important that the Commissioner wants to make a particular effort on this.
I think that this is a discussion that we need to have. We must not be afraid to talk about the need for reform of those trade defence instruments because we are facing rapid changes in the international economy. What do we need to discuss then? I specifically say ‘discuss’, because I do not have all the answers yet either. We need to discuss transparency in the system, the greater flexibility that is necessary, a better definition of what a European company is, and the social and environmental aspects in terms of determining the interests of the European Community. These are a number of points that we as Parliament should discuss and on which we should try to come to conclusions that we can then exchange again with the Commissioner.
I think that it is too soon, even from my own group, to come up with very concrete proposals about how this should go. I am willing to start the discussion about the need for reform and then to think about how we can define a number of areas on which we would like to do more work. That will take a huge amount of discussion in my group too, just as it will in the Council and the Commission. Let us give it a try. I agree with the Commissioner. Whether it takes six months, twelve months or two years, let us at least get the debate going. We cannot simply ignore the fact that changes are afoot in the world, including in the global economy, and our trade defence system has to be adapted to meet those changes. That seems to me an important starting point for a discussion and I am pleased that the Commissioner has been so candid about the problems that he himself faces."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples