Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-06-Speech-3-201"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991006.6.3-201"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, firstly, I would like to thank everyone for this lively exchange of views. I would also like to thank Parliament’s large groups for the positive attitude they have of both Council and Commission policy.
In my opinion, Commissioner Lamy asked the essential question in his excellent speech: is the liberalisation of world trade of any benefit to us? In the opinion of the Council, it most definitely is. It offers us economies of scale, which means obviously cheaper products for consumers. In addition, it offers the opportunity for economic transparency, and it can be clearly shown that in open economies, democracy and human rights fare better. It also furnishes trade with clearer rules and transparency to prevent bureaucracy, malpractice and bribery. We could say on the whole that we are not at the moment working for prosperity, democracy, human rights or integrity.
Here in Parliament, there is also cause to remind everyone that the basic idea behind the Union was to create a common market. We have a single market, whose objective is peace and the creation of prosperity. For that reason, it is quite natural that the Union should want a more open market for the world economy also. Central to the round of talks will obviously be the question of democracy, human rights and the environment. It is important that we try to find positive incentives for less developed countries to develop their own systems. I have to say that the Union’s own generalised Preference system is an excellent tool. But these incentives can be created outside the information system, for example, for the World Bank system and elsewhere, where they can function effectively.
When transparency and democracy is spoken of in the WTO, I would like to remind you that decisions are taken unanimously in the WTO. Consequently, it is certain and clear that democracy is also established there. I would also like to stress that cultural diversity will be a very important issue for Europe in the talks. In questions of agriculture, the fundamental principle will obviously be the Agenda 2000 solution that we achieved, and that solution has to be defended. We have been asked here to predict its outcome, but it would be quite wrong to assess the outcome in any way at this stage, or at least to say anything about Agenda 2000 that might be off the track. But it is important for us to remember that a broad-based round is also, for this reason, of benefit to the Union. I would also like to remind everyone that the Union enjoys important benefits in the area of agricultural exports. I believe that if we develop our own production, the agricultural produce of the EU Member States will become competitive, not necessarily with regard to just price: we also have to bear in mind quality, and especially the fact that we are taking responsibility in our own area for food safety, whose importance to consumers will essentially increase in the future.
The role of Parliament has also been discussed here. The Council also wishes in future to have an exchange of opinion with Parliament – here in the part-session, and, likewise, on the Committee. We will try our best to take account of the opinions that have been expressed in Parliament while formulating our own positions. As for the documents discussed in the 133 Committee in the Council, we will furnish Parliament with all the information it requires as well as the documents insofar as the Union’s own acts allow. I wish to refer to the fact that during the previous parliamentary term a written question was presented on these procedures and a written reply was issued on the subject also.
As for the number of Members of Parliament to be present at the talks in Seattle, it has to be said that what is most important is that we have a body of people that can work in close cooperation with one another and between whose Members information can freely circulate. My experiences of other rounds and the number of MEPs present were positive, so this could serve as a basis for estimates of the number of Members required."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples