Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-17-Speech-3-068"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991117.3.3-068"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I am very pleased that, as Mr Schwaiger’s report shows, there is broad consensus among us in the Union on the aims of the forthcoming WTO round. We want a broadly based round, increased liberalisation of world trade and, in particular, strengthening of the rule-based system. We want to take the interests of developing countries into account and pay special attention to environmental issues and the fundamental rights of workers.
It is also very important for the Commission and the Council to have the support of Parliament for these aims. I would also like to say here that the Commission and Mr Lamy have done much excellent work to prepare us for the WTO round. However, in this connection, I do think that it would be most appropriate to attempt to offer a brief explanation on the current situation in Geneva.
The actual drafting of the ministerial decision for Seattle has at last got under way. The various sections of the decision are being examined daily in Geneva. Each subject is discussed at the Directors’ meeting chaired by Mr Mchumo, Chairman of the WTO General Council, and at the restricted ‘green room’ meetings chaired by Director-General Moore. To speed up the preparations, meetings of technical experts have also begun. The EU, under the leadership of the Commission, for its part, has had talks in a smaller group which has produced texts as alternatives to the main points in the ministerial decision. This is a decisive time for the preparations. There are twelve days left until the commencement of the Seattle meeting. We only have until Friday or the weekend to work on the decision. The aim is to have a Seattle draft decision with as few points as possible in parentheses or open for discussion. It is to be supposed, however, that many decisions will remain to be taken at the Ministerial Conference itself. No significant breakthroughs have yet been made regarding the wording of the decision. The Ministerial Conference at Lausanne and the meeting between Mr Clinton and Mr Prodi a couple of weeks ago did not provide the political impetus for the preparations that was hoped for. It must be admitted that, although in general a crisis is needed in trade talks before any significant breakthroughs are achieved, the situation in Geneva is, at present, more difficult than anticipated. I must say that I am genuinely concerned about the situation as it is at present.
There are still very great differences of opinion regarding the main question: the overall extent of the round. The EU and ten or so other WTO members are still very much alone in their call for a broadly based round of talks. Most of the WTO members seem to be satisfied with a more condensed agenda, to include, in addition to issues of agriculture and services, access to the markets for industrial products, and one or two other matters. Agriculture will be the most difficult area in the talks, and the one that is most likely to end in deadlock. The Cairns countries and the USA are calling on the EU to show greater flexibility in agriculture for them to agree to a mandate for a broadly based round. To make headway in the debate on this subject we require flexibility on all sides – including ourselves in the Union.
The second matter that has proved a difficult area of negotiation concerns the implementation of the agreements made at the Uruguay round. There would seem to be even greater consensus among the WTO members that the proposals on implementation should be divided, on the one hand, into those questions that can be resolved at Seattle and, on the other, those for which a post-Seattle agenda is necessary. At present the broadest consensus would appear to be on the issue of least developed countries. Likewise, consensus among the Member States is growing in the areas of trade in services and intellectual property. Regarding the so-called new subject areas, the negotiation position is still completely open. There has been an attempt not to totally exclude talks on investment and competition, but instead the working parties set up should, by the next meeting of ministers, determine what opportunities there will be to discuss these subjects. New subjects would not, however, be included in the negotiations package.
The EU’s proposal for standards for working life did not receive the backing of the WTO members in the General Council. Only the USA supported it. A good number of the members want to keep to the decisions of the meeting of ministers at Singapore. It remains to be seen how the issue at Geneva will progress, and what sort of decision, if any, can be expected at Seattle. The EU has not finally made up its mind whether to include workers’ standards in the decision or in a separate decision at Seattle. We shall continue with our efforts to convince developing countries in this matter.
Something of key importance to the success of the preparations is how the EU and the USA can achieve better mutual understanding with regard to each other’s goals. As I have already said, the meeting a couple of weeks ago between Mr Prodi and Mr Clinton cannot be regarded as a breakthrough, although it did show a desire on both sides to try and reach solutions. What was important for the Union was the wording of the common declaration whereby agriculture and services alone will not guarantee the success of the round.
The work being done at Geneva thus continues at breakneck speed. The EU is still pressing ahead with a broadly based agenda. Bargaining over aims and goals in all matters we shall leave for Seattle. It is important that we maintain communications with the other parties – in particular, the United States. The country to hold the Presidency and the Member States support the work of the Commission to enhance the Geneva process.
Mr President, on Monday the General Affairs Council adopted the short, separate conclusions concerning preparations by the Ministerial Conference. In the Council, ministers expressed their concerns regarding the state of the Geneva talks and urged the Commission to continue with its efforts to ensure that there is a broadly based round. In the conclusions of the Council there is a reference to the WTO conclusions adopted on 26 October and a reiteration of support for our aim to have a broadly based round. Only a broadly based round will guarantee a fair outcome for all members. In addition, the Council stressed the need to be open to the proposals of other countries, especially those from developing countries. The Member States also gave their support to the Commission in the last-minute preparations."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples