Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-13-Speech-3-239"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001213.9.3-239"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I shall answer both questions at the same time. The Commission’s proposed regulation which we have designated ‘Everything but arms’ is designed to give least and less developed countries access to the Community market, duty-free and quota-free, for all exports except for arms.
This proposal, which follows on from the multiple commitments made by the Community in favour of least and less developed countries, is aimed at promoting the integration of these countries into the world economy. We think that it is, indeed, imperative that the process of globalisation should not cause the poorest developing countries to become marginalised.
This initiative is based upon a Council regulation amending the regulation which defines the current GSP. The Commission’s proposal is based upon Article 133 which, as you know, does not at present lay down any legal obligation to consult Parliament.
I entirely agree that this proposal is an important decision which should be subject to the codecision procedure. That is what the Commission proposed to the Intergovernmental Conference. In tabling its proposal, which was fully supported by Parliament, the Commission envisaged having recourse to the codecision procedure in the case of all standards of general scope, such as this one, defining the essential features of common trade policy.
The result has now been obtained and you know as well as I do that the Intergovernmental Conference has not taken up this suggestion, since no Member State supported it.
The Commission cannot contravene current Treaty rules. Consulting Parliament on this proposal and taking account of arguments which Parliament might be led to put forward is therefore a political decision which, as the texts currently stand, is solely at the Council’s discretion. Out of a concern to ensure effective political scrutiny by Parliament, I have however made efforts to keep the European Parliament informed as far as possible. In particular, I informed your Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy of this initiative on 11 October 2000, and I am of course prepared to appear again before Parliament’s relevant committee in order to discuss this proposal.
Regarding Glenys Kinnock’s question concerning the link between this initiative and the Cotonou agreement, I should like to say again that the Commission entirely respected the spirit and the letter of the provisions of this agreement when it came to informing and consulting the ACP countries. We forwarded our proposal to the ACP countries at practically the same time as to our Member States. We invited the ACP countries to begin consultations. These consultations were conducted within the framework of the ACP sub-committee for commercial cooperation which met on 21 November 2000. The Member States intimated that they would like the Commission to present a more detailed impact assessment before taking a decision. The assessment is under way and the results will be communicated to the ACP countries as soon as they are available. Obviously, the real impact of the initiative in favour of the least and less developed countries will depend upon their ability to respond, something which is extremely difficult to foresee and to model.
We are therefore prepared to monitor the effects of this initiative and its results very carefully and to examine, if need be together with the ACP States, the measures which might be required in order to preserve their competitive position in the Community’s markets."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples