Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-15-Speech-1-095"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000515.6.1-095"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, it has taken a year, but we have finally reached the point where we can discuss the regulation on development cooperation with South Africa at second reading. This is not a day too soon, because the European Programme for the Reconstruction and Development of South Africa has been without a legal basis since late 1999. In the light of this, the continuity of the development connection has been in the balance.
Accordingly, I would like to thank the rapporteur for the drive he has displayed in dealing with this subject matter. I share his criticism regarding the eight months which the Council deemed necessary to formulate its position. He is right in claiming that a distinction must be drawn between this regulation and the Trade, Development and Cooperation Agreement between Europe and South Africa. Although development cooperation and trade are very much interrelated, they should not be played off against each other. The deliberate delay in approving these regulations would seem to suggest that there is little real involvement with South Africa. This is irrespective of how fair the European negotiating position is in terms of trade.
Moreover, such a stance does not fit in with the Commission’s strategy in terms of South Africa which it has outlined in its 2000-2002 Country Strategy. This document addresses both the fight against poverty and improvement in infrastructure. I did wonder, however, why it only mentions the European Union’s development instrument in passing. Would the Commission be able to answer that? I would also like to know from the Commission to what extent South Africa’s qualified Lomé membership overlaps with the European Programme for Reconstruction and Development. I am, by the way, very grateful to the Commission for the large amount of information on South Africa which is available on the Internet and which has been laid out in a readily understood format. This is an example to draw on when it comes to determining the strategy for other countries!
I would like to finish off with just one remark for the rapporteur. I can imagine that he is intent on keeping the EUR 910 million budget for development cooperation with South Africa. I, however, attach less importance to this, given the limited financial resources for foreign policy and the major challenges in other parts of the world. What counts is the quality of cooperation with South Africa, which, in my opinion, is sound at present, particularly on account of the regional projects which have been financed over the past couple of years. This is why South Africa’s neighbouring countries can also benefit from European development projects. It seems that coherence and consistency are gradually gaining ground in the EU’s development policy."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples