Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-18-Speech-4-160"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.19991118.7.4-160"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"The new round of negotiations of the World Trade Organisation, due to open in Seattle on 30 November, should provide an opportunity to establish better control of the liberalisation of trade. But I doubt that this will be the case. The doubt concerns our capacity, and our real determination, to make the WTO an instrument of regulation in order to make the transition from globalisation sought by the few and inflicted on all to truly regulated world trade which is of benefit to the whole planet. Indeed it is this doubt which gives rise to my concern that if we do not succeed on this point, then we shall be forced to renege on longstanding commitments to developing countries, particularly towards ACP countries, to which we have been linked for 20 years by the Lomé Conventions. At the risk of denting our clear conscience, I would at this point like to mention the example of the banana dispute, or the multinationals (Del Monte, Dole and Chiquita) which, with the support of the United States, are flooding the European market with bananas which are the product of slavery, produced, what is more, in conditions of the most dubious food safety and have managed to force us to our knees; a matter in which we are on the verge of unconditional surrender, abandoning hundreds of thousands of growers, not only in ACP countries, but also the farmers of our own Community in Guadeloupe and Martinique, to bankruptcy! And recent statements by the Commission are not such as to allay this concern, saying, for example, that it is necessary to put an end to the banana conflict since it is poisoning transatlantic relations and because the Union would be sending an unfavourable message to the world as the new trade negotiations are dawning. Who could possibly be against putting an end to the conflict? No one, of course, but not at just any price, not by surrendering unconditionally. The same applies to rum, since we have signed a unilateral agreement with the United States on the import of colourless spirits, and that includes rum, which will inevitably lead in the short term to the economic destabilisation of the entire Caribbean! What will happen tomorrow, unless we are particularly vigilant, in the case of sugar, which is a crucial element in the economic balance of ACP countries such as Mauritius or a European region, such as Réunion, which I know well? The truth is, I am afraid, that whatever our fine statements, often with a touch of paternalism, we are on the verge of writing off our policy with regard to the poorest countries and to ACP countries, in particular, abandoning the farmers in our own outermost regions in the process. And yet we have historic links with these countries. Let me tell you, it is not just a matter of generosity. For many of our countries, which are in fact former colonising powers, it is a very powerful moral commitment which we are honour-bound to respect! Therefore, even though the resolution put to the vote this morning is a text which is perfectly acceptable in terms of the general objective which we have set ourselves, particularly thanks to the many amendments proposed by the members of my group, I did not vote in favour of this text, so as to fulfil the commitments which I have undertaken with regard to the voters in the French Overseas Departments."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph