Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-16-Speech-3-026"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000216.2.3-026"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I too should like to thank the Council and the Commission for their reports and, in common with others, express my regret at the fact that coherence policy has not been given more prominence. But we who sit here in Parliament do not doubt for a second what the reason is. I should therefore like to discuss something more general and begin with a couple of, in my view, useful figures. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, real per capita income in the world’s richest countries was three times higher than in the poorest countries. In 1900 it was ten times higher and in the year 2000 it is 60 times higher. And there is no sign of this trend’s being reversed. On the contrary, it looks as if we have entered an exponential curve which is widening the gap still further. This is shown by the following figures: the income gap between the richest and poorest fifths was 30:1 in 1960, 60:1 in 1990 and 74:1 in 1997. These figures are from before the Internet revolution took off. In other words, there will have to be a quantum leap in development policy if the rich countries, including the EU countries, are not to surround themselves with barriers to prevent immigration on a massive scale. In a global village, major discrepancies in the world will not, in the longer term, be tolerated by the poorest section of the village. At some time or another, there will be a revolt, and it will be fully justified.
I would therefore urge the Council’s Presidency to set the promised debate in motion as quickly as possible and, above all, to conclude it in such a way that we all of us, including the people of Europe, realise what globalisation means and understand that a central element will have to be radical changes in the nature and the level of the development aid we provide. The EU on average is far from providing the pledged 0.7%. It may well be that others are worse, but that does not place us in any better a light. Above all, however, we should give the countries concerned the opportunity to trade with us. As far as I could hear – but I may have missed something – the President-in-Office of the Council did not mention the word “trade” at all. I would just say to the Commissioner that I hope his proposal will be successfully adopted by the Commission and the Member States. I would also ask the Commissioner to give some concrete examples of sectoral interests which are holding matters up, not only in the Commission but also in the Member States. I should also like to say that, in my view, what would be most effective would be for Parliament to call for proposals from, respectively, the Development Council and the Commissioner for Development. In that way, we should perhaps have a basis for discussion, instead of receiving proposals from all the governments and from all over the Commission, which is scarcely likely to produce results. I shall conclude with a few words about the Internet revolution. As Commissioner Liikanen keeps saying on his travels, we have a head start here in Europe in the area of mobile telecommunications. Let us use this not only for the benefit of our own populations but also for that of the developing countries. This technology can facilitate that necessary quantum leap forward in development policy to which I referred and, in this connection, the EU can set the agenda, leave its mark on development and honour its global responsibilities."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples