Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-09-14-Speech-1-207"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090914.27.1-207"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"− Mr President, yes, a crisis has hit the poorest countries the hardest and there is in fact not much that we can do about it. We can only talk about the remedies to get them back on track, and obviously this will take more time than it will take in the developed world because the mechanisms to produce new economic growth are much less developed in those countries.
The London Summit of 2 April 2009 will go down in the history of the G20 as one where development issues were handled in their own right and in the presence of developing countries’ representatives. In preparation for the next G20, these last months have seen intense activity by the institution tasked with following up.
In August, the IMF Board of Governors approved a USD 250 billion general allocation of IMF special drawing rights, of which USD 18 billion will go to low income countries, and the IMF will be called to account in Pittsburgh on other measures for low income countries. So this is, I think, a positive evolution.
Louis Michel, my predecessor, has also insisted on the flexibility, claiming that the budgetary support mechanism is the most flexible we have, and this is obviously true but, of course, this also means that we need a counterpart with the developing countries and we need to be in a position to have political dialogue with them and also monitoring mechanisms, so it presupposes a minimum cooperation on their behalf, but, once that is in place, I also believe that, especially, sectoral budgetary support is a very adequate procedure.
I do not quite understand why this resolution that has been introduced by the Committee on Development and refers to the G20 meeting of Pittsburgh is not being voted on before the G20 meeting. I do not grasp that. There will probably be one or another technical explanation for that but I think it gives the wrong signal from this newly elected Parliament that we are going to debate such a resolution after the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh, which is due to happen, if I remember correctly, from 22 to 24 September, before our next meeting in Strasbourg in October.
This is not within my discretion but I must say that, together with Members who have advocated this, I very much deplore that we have not been able to vote upon this resolution during this part-session.
One of the remarks that have been made by several members is about the fact that a lot of Member States are in fact backtracking on their Official Development Assistance (ODA) engagements. The EU Member States agreed in 2005 individual minimum aid targets of 0.51% for EU-15 and 0.17% for EU-12, for the new Member States to be reached by 2010 and respectively 0.7% and 0.33% by 2015.
The countries that had already achieved aid levels higher than these targets promised to maintain. Based on these confirmations and higher national pledges of some Member States, the EU should collectively reach 0.56% of ODA by 2010.
I believe that the crisis should not be an excuse to water down donors’ aid promises, and I will insist on remaining committed to delivering the promised aid levels, both for EU Member States as well as other donors.
In 2008, the EU ODA has increased by around EUR 4 billion to a level of 0.40% of ODA and the collective EU ODA is forecast to continue increasing.
On the basis of the information gathered from Member States, we foresee the EU collective ODA increasing to EUR 53.4 billion in 2009, which represents 0.44%, and EUR 58.7 billion, representing 0.48%, in 2010.
This also means that, without additional steps by Member States to fulfil their individual targets, the collective targets for 2010 will not be achieved. The forecasted trend of a continuing increase in EU ODA relies on those Member States that are trying to respect their commitments, but efforts are required by all Member States, and I will continue to insist on that with the respective Member Sates. It is their responsibility. This is an engagement that they have taken up, and the crisis should not be an excuse to water down their engagements. I would even say, to the contrary.
Several Members have also insisted on the reform of the international financial institutions. This is a target that I can fully subscribe to. The G20 has set out a precise timetable for governance reforms of the Bretton Woods institutions urging them to accelerate the implementation of their own plans for reform which predate the London Summit. Some deliverables are expected as early as April next year and I am confident that solutions can be found on outstanding issues.
Given the current momentum in IMF reform created by the G20, the Commission underlines the importance of advancing the second phase of reform at the World Bank with a view to concluding it by spring 2010."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples