Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-13-Speech-3-148"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001213.5.3-148"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, apart from the benefit to those who voted us into office, we must also think of the benefit to the whole of the EU and even the world at large. The benefit to the whole and the individual will become one in the long run. The banana issue is a test, in a way, as to whether we want to continue with consultation, which will mean continued punishing customs tariffs for EU companies, which are the basis of our prosperity. Are we prepared to ignore the benefit to consumers, if we do not agree to import cheap and tasty bananas? Are we also prepared to discriminate against the poor banana producers of Latin America, because these countries do not have such a strong commitment to a transitional period? It is time we sought compromises and recognised that free trade and prosperity are not each other’s enemies, not even with regard to the issue of bananas.
I am absolutely in favour of banana producers in ACP countries and our own producers being supported with taxpayers’ money to make it possible to end activities that distort trade. The Commission’s proposal is based on the notion that a third tariff quota should be introduced where the tariff preference for ACP countries would be EUR 300 per tonne. In 2006 the tariff quota would be abandoned and the system based on normal tariffs would take over. The tariff system will be simpler to administer, clearer for the parties involved, and will lead to greater prosperity, according to economic theory. The transitional period, as outlined by the Commission, is sufficiently long to introduce an appropriate aid scheme.
Mr Dary’s report shows due concern both for the banana producers in the Community and the ACP countries. For that reason, I would like to express my support, in something of a conciliatory manner, for most of the amendments. There are, however, some which cannot be supported under any circumstances. Amendments Nos 11 and 13 propose that the quota scheme should not be re-examined until ten years have passed and that there should be no commitment now to the tariff system proposed by the Commission and demanded by several of our trading partners. In their place I have tabled Amendment No 36, which requires the shift to the customs tariff system in 2006. At the same time, it stresses how important it is for the Commission to listen to the European Parliament and consider the interests of all parties at every stage. I therefore want to safeguard in particular the interests of our own farmers and those in the ACP countries. There must be a balance as a whole. I oppose Amendment No 27 as it would water down the transitional period system totally and, in practice, would deprive Latin America of its opportunity to sell bananas under the new quota ‘C’. Commissioner Lamy has made a morally responsible and courageous proposal regarding the exemption from duty in respect of products from less developed countries. The plan goes under the name ‘EBA’ – ‘Everything but Arms’. Ladies and gentlemen, let us not have occasion to change the name."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples