Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-03-Speech-3-150"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000503.9.3-150"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Mrs Schierhuber, you have already mentioned the resolution on Ethiopia. Well, it is an outstanding example of how topical and necessary food aid is, even today. As such, we can hardly deny this Food Aid Convention review our approval. But we will not only lend our approval for the sake of international solidarity to relieve famine, but because this review encompasses a number of improvements compared to previous versions. After all, the nature and way in which food aid is being granted within the framework of this Convention to this day, has been, and is being, heavily criticised, and rightly so.
Under the terms of the Convention, cereal surpluses from Europe and the United States can be converted into cash and removed from our market. In this way, local food production is often thrown off balance and deeply discouraged. The Convention is used as a lubricant for commercial transactions and often clashes with social and cultural traditions. For example, our rapporteur already mentioned the important role of women in the supply of food. Big bucks are often made on the back of the poor by making huge charges for transport and operational services. The European Union has codes of conduct which deviate from this and which it tries to apply to its own aid. These rules are now also incorporated in this international food aid agreement. The Convention has changed significantly for the better, in our view, due to the fact that not only cereals, but also other products, including local products, fish and vegetables, can qualify, transport and operational costs must be proportionate to the value and the least developed countries, in particular, will be able to apply for this aid. In my view, the intention to promote local agricultural development is vital. Despite this, there is still a blemish on the new Convention. The European negotiators have succeeded in cutting mixed aid in the form of loans down to 20%. But the United States remain determined to use this type of aid, which permanently saddles the most needy countries with a debt burden, even if this is at a reduced interest rate and if it does not have to be paid off for another 30 years. But what is 30 years in the life of a nation?
We fully endorse the agreements which should prevent a great deal of malpractice, by detaching aid from commercial transactions, for example, and by warning against disrupting the local markets. This can happen very easily, both in buying products and selling food aid within the local market, because speculations and price rises are just round the corner. The example of Ethiopia illustrates that not only the purchase but also that the transport, distribution and preservation must be monitored very carefully and, Mr President, given that we were in Ethiopia, the orders had been placed, there were plenty of foodstocks, yet none of it was there at the right place or time of the famine, I do wonder whether we should not fine-tune our instruments."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples