Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-06-11-Speech-1-060-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120611.19.1-060-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, on Wednesday, we are to vote on the scheme of generalised tariff preferences, or the ‘GSP’ for short. As rapporteur, I would like to start by taking the opportunity to thank the Commission, the Danish Presidency and, in particular, all the shadow rapporteurs I have had the privilege of working with on this matter. We worked extremely well together, and I believe this is also evident when we look at the results.
I would like to finish by thanking those of you who were involved in this work and to say that it will now be many years – another 10 years – before we need to discuss this matter again. I hope that, in 10 years’ time, even fewer countries will be included in the scheme of generalised tariff preferences – partly because many will have concluded more favourable agreements with the EU, but, above all, because we will have fewer poor developing countries as a consequence of the trade to promote development that we are concerned with here.
The scheme of generalised tariff preferences is the EU’s most important trade policy instrument, in particular, when it comes to trade with developing countries. No other instrument encompasses so many countries. By using this scheme of generalised tariff preferences, we can help developing countries in their efforts to acquire basic human rights, to reduce poverty and to achieve sustainable development in general. We do this by reducing or completely abolishing duties on their goods.
This is the first time that the European Parliament has been involved in legislating on the scheme of generalised tariff preferences, despite the fact that it has been in existence for more than 40 years, and I would like to start by saying that I think the fact that we can stand here in plenary today and discuss a proposal that already comes with an agreement one year after the proposal was presented is an achievement in itself.
Early on in this work, I met many people who thought that things would be more complicated and difficult now that Parliament was involved in the decision-making process, and it has perhaps been a little bit more complicated, but no one can say that we are not working in a determined and efficient way. We put pressure on the Council to reach a decision, and instead of us following their lead, they have been forced to adopt a position on the basis of our positions.
The new proposal and what we have now negotiated with the Danish Presidency means that those countries which have succeeded in making economic progress, or which have other, more favourable agreements with the EU, are no longer included in the scheme of generalised tariff preferences and may no longer make use of this particular scheme. I have to be honest and say that, when I started work on this matter and saw some of the countries that were considered to be developing countries, I personally found it difficult to understand how some of the Gulf States, for example, could be viewed as developing countries.
It is also very clear to us, however, that we should safeguard and retain that part of the scheme of generalised tariff preferences that ensures that the poorest countries in the world do not need to pay duties to Europe on any products other than weapons. This is probably the particular part of the EU’s trade policy of which I think we have most reason to be proud.
Our work in the European Parliament has sought to make the scheme of generalised tariff preferences transparent, predictable and more generous to those who remain in the scheme. The most important debate and the most difficult discussion we had was, I believe, that relating to the selection criteria. We knew that we needed stable and internationally recognised criteria that were also able to stand up to the scrutiny of the World Trade Organisation, and therefore we concluded that the Commission’s original proposal of USD 4 000 was probably the most reasonable one. We have made some adjustments with regard to the transitional period, however.
In order to make the scheme more generous to those who remain in it, we have also included more products that may be of significance for poor countries and will increase their opportunity to trade their way to prosperity. We have also tightened up the requirements for joining the EU’s flagship arrangement for human rights, GSP+, while, at the same time, making membership of the scheme more attractive.
I would just like to mention GSP+, as it is the EU’s system for providing additional trade preferences in exchange for countries undertaking and committing themselves to comply with the 27 different conventions on human rights and sustainable development."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples