Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-13-Speech-3-172"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-03-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Transatlantic relations including steel import tariffs (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020313.7.3-172"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-03-13-Speech-3-1732
lpv:speaker	lp:W.G. van Velzen2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; EPP-ED (1999-09-30--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Christen Democratisch Appèl (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is extremely disappointing that when we talk about the transatlantic relations between the European Union and the United States, we should also have to mention a steel war. This is extremely disappointing because we assumed that President Bush would be one of the main champions of the market economy, and not that he would belong with the campaigners for protectionist measures. It would, of course, be understandable if he were to take such measures for electoral reasons, but based on his undertaking to act in favour of free trade, this is, naturally, an incomprehensible attitude which we must unreservedly condemn. It is all the more disappointing since we have just started the fourth ministerial meeting in the framework of the Doha world trade talks, now being overshadowed by a measure of that kind. And that is not the last we have heard of it, for if I understand it correctly, the United States wants to adopt the same line for agricultural products too. Mr President, this is completely the wrong route to take. In the case of steel alone, I should like to point out that my country, the Netherlands, has made considerable efforts, together with your country, to restructure the steel industry. This has, both directly and indirectly, led to thousands of job losses in both our countries. This means, therefore, that we would have to pay the price for the lack of restructuring in the United States. In my opinion, the European Union has tabled sound proposals to consider whether a kind of fund could be set up to help restructure the steel industry in the United States. These proposals have, of course, been dismissed, which means, therefore, that we cannot make any more headway, and that the high costs of steel in America – certainly not simply due to the expensive dollar, but also, of course, due to the social security schemes and pensions in the steel industry – have, in fact, been passed on to us. In my view, Barcelona should be used to launch a diplomatic offensive, alongside the normal measures which you, Commissioner Lamy, have to take, obviously, by threatening the United States with countermeasures. However, what matters is that we should also use Barcelona to launch a diplomatic offensive in order to make it clear to the United States that protectionist measures of this kind only lead to major disruption in free trade and with it, to a huge upset in the creation of jobs. It is exactly the opposite signal from the one we need: we all want to create more jobs globally. Yet, what is happening now is the reverse. I would therefore call on the Commission and the Council – and I am pleased that the Council is here today – at least to ensure that initiatives are taken in Barcelona."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph