Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-20-Speech-3-750"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101020.28.3-750"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, first of all, I would like to present very clearly the figures we are speaking about. We are talking about a trade volume of EUR 900 million. The effect will be EUR 100 million of additional exports to the European market by Pakistan, but the overall balance for the European Union will only be EUR 50 million because, as a result of the more favourable position of Pakistan to export on the European market, there will also be a certain amount of trade diversion, which means that other importers will lose some opportunities on the European markets. So, the overall impact will be about EUR 50 million on a yearly basis.
I am saying this because I heard again in this debate that 120 000 jobs would be lost. Now you all have a calculator tool on your mobile phone; if Europe is to lose 120 000 jobs because of an additional EUR 50 million of imports on the European market, then there is really a serious problem with the European textile industry, regardless of what happens with Pakistan. It is simply not serious to put that argument forward.
That is my first remark. Secondly, we have duly taken into account the sensitivities of the European textile industry and the somewhat difficult position this industry might be in. Bed linen is not part of the tariff lines that we are proposing, and neither are apparel or household linen, which are three of the most sensitive product lines for Europe.
On the contrary, a lot of semi-finished products are included. If they are semi-finished, it means that they will be finished in Europe, which should, in fact, generate cheaper imports for those companies which give the final treatment to such products. So this is not immediately harming us. I would even say the opposite. We have really been studying very carefully what would be a good proposal for Pakistan without harming European industry too much at a time when we are also coming out of an economic crisis that is certainly not easy to manage.
A comment was also raised concerning cotton exports. There is a scarcity on the worldwide cotton market, and it is true that Pakistan is one of the main cotton producers. What I have in mind is that once we have this agreement, once we see that we are really getting somewhere, we should also ask Pakistan to make sure that our own textile industry gets enough cotton to be able to produce what the market is asking for. As there is such a worldwide scarcity of cotton, or at least certain varieties of cotton, you might ask why we do not import those cotton varieties from Africa. Well, because they do not produce the right varieties of cotton we need, and it is not easy to switch to a different kind of cotton production from one day to another, so we will have to pay special attention to that problem.
Let me just conclude by saying that when you look at the situation with respect to Pakistan, what we need is more aid and more trade; we need both. The European Union has contributed EUR 320 million already, 60% of what the United Nations initially asked for. We will continue to do so; that is more aid.
Trade is not aid, as has been said in this plenary. Trade is about giving opportunities to the Pakistani economy to produce and to export and to give jobs to the people that need those jobs. I think it is an essential tool in economic recovery that we should give additional trading opportunities to Pakistan. But it is not about aid, which means that you cannot direct those who will be, let us say, the beneficiaries. It is much easier to direct the process in the case of trade, but we also know that while trade has its frailties we are not going to recover an economy by aid.
I think you need both elements, aid and trade, and that is why we are working on both possibilities. It is true that we should also bear in mind, as I have been saying in this plenary, that we are talking about a region that has been severely devastated. Many Members of Parliament from Italy have spoken, and I understand that the territory of Pakistan which is flooded is about the size of the territory of the whole of Italy. That is what we are talking about, so I think we should help them, but we should also bear in mind that this is a very sensitive region which is geo-strategically very important. It is also very important to us and to our security. It would be very dangerous for Europe if this region became unstable, so we should do everything we can to make sure that the stability of the region is not affected by what happens in Pakistan.
So this is an overall array of measures which we are employing. We have political discussions with Pakistan; we had a summit with them recently, and we will continue to have such discussions. Several EU officials have been going there, as well as Commissioner Georgieva, for example, with respect to humanitarian aid. We have the aid package, which is considerable, and we also have an economic approach in terms of more trade. I think, and I hope, that this will really mean something considerable for Pakistan. I am also convinced that by helping Pakistan, we also, to a certain extent, help ourselves."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples