Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-06-Speech-3-122"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991006.3.3-122"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
This agreement with South Africa is part of Community policy on cooperation and development, which aims to guarantee vital solidarity with developing countries. But we must analyse the economic and social consequences resulting from the liberalisation of trade for both contracting parties.
Apart from the fact that this would eliminate customs duties on products of concern to Portugal, such as textiles and clothes, we are also concerned about the specific case of the Davos Agreement on wines and spirits. The matter of the “Port” official designation of origin is vital to the Portuguese wine-producing sector. It would be a very positive thing if South Africa took steps to resolve the problem of its use of this designation, which is both unfair and illegal. In spite of the very long deadlines provided for in the Davos Agreement and of the concessions made in the area of agriculture, the latest available information shows that South Africa is delaying its fulfilment of this commitment.
On the other hand, it would be an extremely serious matter if this agreement were to be separated from the overall negotiations on the general agreement, as this would cause it to be postponed, with all the damaging consequences that that would entail. This would set a dangerous precedent from the point of view of defending Community designations of origin at the WTO, particularly as far as the “Port” designation is concerned. This is why I am abstaining from voting."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples