Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-05-22-Speech-2-044"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070522.6.2-044"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to point out a few fundamental principles and express some concerns about the new trade strategy being advocated today by the Commission and taken up in the report by our fellow Member, Mr Caspary.
The first principle to point out is that priority must always be given to multilateralism. We know that the excessive proliferation of bilateral agreements seriously harms the regulated multilateral structure, to which we adhere. The second principle is that we should not undermine the Union’s commitment to a trade policy that promotes development, a policy integrating non-commercial dimensions, such as decent work, access to medicines, the environment and the eradication of poverty.
As for my concerns, they relate to three points. The first is that priority is no longer given to the pro-development dimension of the Doha Round in the future free trade agreements and the new EU trade agenda, even though the EU’s trade policy objectives should always be compatible with its development policy and should usefully supplement it, particularly where social and environmental issues are concerned.
My second object of concern is the scope of these agreements, which go far beyond the current WTO provisions. For example, the principle of full reciprocity to which we aim to give priority, including for emerging countries faced with large-scale poverty, is unacceptable. We must enable developing countries temporarily to protect the fragile and sensitive sectors of their economies. In short, we must not impose on others that which we do not know how to impose on ourselves.
My last concern, to conclude, relates to the provisions aimed at negotiating on the so-called Singapore issues. These very controversial issues were excluded from the Doha Round following widespread opposition from developing and emerging countries. The controversy had previously resulted in the failure of Cancún.
We know that these issues, which are as complex for the Union as they are for our partners, raise sensitive questions, relating to internal policy and, therefore, to the very sovereignty of the Member States. These issues could, moreover, have a considerable impact on the economic and social models and, therefore, on the very development of our partners.
It is vital that the Union does not push for these issues to be included in the negotiations. Nothing could justify that which has been thrown out the door of a multilateral round coming back in through the narrow window of a bilateral agreement. What is at stake here is our consistency, our credibility and a certain development model that we have always sought to promote."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples