Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-04-Speech-3-189"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080604.22.3-189"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I am impressed by the intriguing questions of the honourable Members, especially the fact that nearly every one is critically constructive. All are involved in the whole procedure and doing their utmost to make it a good proposal.
Mrs Mann asked how the application for the GSP+ will be assessed. The monitoring and evaluation of compliance with the eligibility requirements of the GSP+ arrangement is based on the findings of the monitoring mechanisms established under the auspices of the relevant international organisation, such as the UN and ILO and other agencies, as well as on the monetary mechanism emphasised in the conventions themselves and made publicly available by these agencies. This provides for unambiguous and impartial review processes.
I would like to answer Mr Arif’s question on the situation of the Commission in GSP+ beneficiary countries in terms of the implementation of human rights conventions and the correlative standards. I can assure you that the Commission is following closely the developments of the current GSP+ beneficiaries in respect to their compliance with the GSP+ relevant international conventions.
I shall just mention the example of El Salvador (which is a GSP+ beneficiary country, as you are aware), with regard to which the Commission, in consultation with EU Member States, has recently launched an investigation into its compliance with GSP+ obligations. I can assure you that the proper implementation of the EU trade arrangements is one of the Commission’s priorities. We pay close attention to the GSP+ beneficiaries’ compliance, and these issues are regularly raised in our bilateral contacts with those countries.
Concerning the new GSP rules of origin and how they will contribute to the GSP objectives: they are currently being discussed in the context of a general broad reform of the rules of origin. The Taxation and Customs Union DG is
so that concerns my colleague Mr Kovács. The aim is to render them more development-friendly, and that process is governed in consultation with the developing countries.
The last point concerns shoes in Vietnam, which was one of the examples. The exclusion – or graduation, for it is fair to use that word of Vietnamese products falling under section 12 (I am now talking about the footwear of the combined nomenclature from the benefits under the proposed GSP regulation for the years 2009-2011) – is being given full attention by all the relevant Commission services. The Commission has also been in close contact with Vietnam on this issue in order to provide all necessary assistance and expertise.
Concerning the graduation of Vietnam in relation to Section 12, this results from the technical and objective application of the GSP provisions and reflects the fact that Vietnamese exports of these products are more competitive on the Community market. In addition, Vietnam has successfully diversified its export base. That is a positive point and means that footwear is no longer so dominant. That is another, significant sign of increasing competitiveness. So the COM proposal for the graduation of Vietnam is based on extensive objectives and statistical analyses applied in the same way to all GSP+ beneficiaries.
I can assure you that Peter Mandelson will pay attention to your input – there is no doubt about that – and that he will take the amendments seriously and not ignore them. I know Peter a bit better. He is not the kind of person who would ignore such proposals and such thoughts, but he would like to look at it from both sides – helping developing countries (especially the least developed, as Mr Kaczmarek mentioned) is what he has in mind. However, the aim is to be both objective and predictable.
Regarding Mrs Mann’s invitation to come back (and I am sure she is asking for Peter Mandelson to come back, although I would be delighted to come back), I am sure he will take up the invitation.
Mr Ó Neachtain put it in a wider perspective, and I am pleased with the Geneva WTO discussions. Peter Mandelson will not be surprised at the views of the honourable Member. And Mr Kamall urged that we do our utmost and be a friend to those who want to work. I thank you again for all the proposals.
The draft is in Council, where the Member States will reflect on Parliament’s amendments to ensure that stability guidelines for the GSP are established for 2005-2015.
What is the reason leading the Commission not to introduce significant changes? After one year of operations it is too early to make conclusive observations, but this is something we will no doubt come back to.
Concerning the questions by Mr Kaczmarek and Mr Audy: the ultimate objectives of the scheme are indeed education and the eradication of poverty. At the same time, the EU provides an incentive for sustainable development, good governance and human rights, as well as labour standards and child labour in particular.
Concerning aid: the GSP tariff preferences provide market access to developed countries. Aid programmes are governed under the EU Joint Aid for Trade strategy which, among other objectives, claims to enable developing countries to benefit from the GSP.
Mrs Mann and Mr Fjellner mentioned Sri Lanka. At the moment Sri Lanka benefits from the GSP+. There are no indications that it would stop benefiting from GSP arrangements in the future. Each and every country’s situation is assessed carefully, transparently and following the provisions of the regulations. One question asked that the application process of the GSP+ scheme be more frequent than once every three years – I have already touched upon this – so let us make a deal that it should be flexible but we should not just stick to one year."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples