Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-05-17-Speech-1-995"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100517.19.1-995"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I would like to go into more detail concerning recital I and paragraphs 44 and 45 of the present report, the wording of which is highly unfortunate and does not reflect the actual situation. Firstly, it must be made clear that export restitution is a European Union instrument of market control that is used very cautiously by the European Commission and applied only in a few exceptional cases. Export restitutions, which were designed as a kind of safety net, cannot therefore be held responsible for major damage to the agricultural sector in developing countries – as suggested in the recital. Moreover, it must be pointed out that the EU is the world’s biggest importer of agricultural produce from developing countries. The EU is thus not weakening development and the establishment of a viable agricultural sector in developing countries; quite the contrary. The EU undoubtedly has a great responsibility in the area of international trade in the agricultural sector, particularly in respect of developing countries. That is not in question and the Union is fully aware of it. In view of this, I must protest against blanket judgments that have nothing to do with a differentiated and objective approach. I object to recital I as well as to paragraphs 44 and 45, and thus also to the report as a whole."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples