Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-07-02-Speech-3-146"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030702.4.3-146"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, long before the summit in Doha, where the present trade talks have started, my group, that of the Party of European Socialists, emphasised the special nature of these negotiations and the special responsibility that they entail. On the one hand, there are, of course, the regular agenda items about opening up the markets, which receives my group's unqualified support. After all, we are aware of trade’s capacity for bringing prosperity to our citizens and our trading partners. On the other hand – as, in fact, the resolution emphasises – these negotiations are, above all, a test of the WTO's capacity to correct a great imbalance in the trade system, to distribute the benefits of trade more evenly and to support sustainable development. They are a test of our capacity for putting globalisation to work in the interest of all people.
This is why we put to you the following key questions: will the negotiations lead to a considerably fairer distribution of trade profits, particularly between north and south? Will the negotiations prove that the trade system
our citizens’ desire for ecological and social progress rather than
it to the same? Will the negotiations strengthen the WTO's transparency and liability towards integration into the wider system of Global Governance? The mandate that we would like to give Commissioners Lamy and Fischler in Cancun is to ensure that the answer to these questions is affirmative. My group has set the following four tests in this connection.
First of all, EU negotiators must move more in the direction of the developing countries' requirements in the areas of industrial market access, implementation, special and differentiating treatment and, above all, the trade in agricultural products, but must also demand the same commitment from the United States and other developed countries. The United Nations recently asked the industrialised countries to cut back considerably in trade-distorting agricultural subsidies and to phase them out eventually, without a
from developing countries. We support this request and would ask the EU negotiators to do likewise.
Secondly – and in Cancun, if not sooner – the WTO must at long last deliver on the Doha promise in order to widen the benefits of the TRIPS in public healthcare to countries with a modest, or no, pharmaceutical industry, which the United States has stood alone in blocking since December 2002.
Thirdly, Cancun must convey the right message concerning relations between trade and non-trade affairs. In the agricultural modalities, this means safeguarding the right of WTO members to determine food standards and to promote public goods, such as rural development, environmental protection and animal welfare. This also means that clear progress must be made in the trade and environmental agenda of Doha. Cancun must give the current TRIPS review new impetus and must focus more clearly on the interests of developing countries, and it must break through the impasse of the fundamental labour standards.
Finally, strengthening the WTO's transparency and democratic liability, where Doha only made a tentative step, must be firmly placed on the negotiating agenda. We want a strong EU initiative in line with the proposals that Parliament adopted by a large majority in October 2001.
People across the world have two objections to the WTO as it stands now: a lack of honesty and a lack of democracy. We should listen to our citizens; we should make them our priorities. Commissioner, we know that at the moment in West Africa, cotton is a specific example of proposals and negotiations where Europe could make a considerable difference. If you could make a contribution to this in the next few months, this would be a useful leg up. We would like to hear a concrete reaction from you on that score."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"serves"1
"subjecting"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples