Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-01-Speech-4-032"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010301.2.4-032"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Marset Campos has already discussed the main points and Parliament’s main demands common to both reports. If I could summarise this debate in just one point, I would say, Commissioner, that Parliament is using these reports to call for the negotiating directives to be revised. Why should it make such a request? Firstly, because it is inconceivable that negotiating directives should not mention the legal basis of the agreement. In the opinion of this Parliament, as Mr Marset Campos has already said, the only possible basis is Article 310 of the Association Agreements. This Parliament acknowledges that these are ‘mixed’ because of the subject matter – in which, that is to say, jurisdiction falls both to the Member States and the Community. Parliament nevertheless feels that the division of the negotiating process into two separate phases is discriminatory and should be corrected. The first of these phases, which has already begun, concerns general trade issues and the second, which will begin on 1 July, concerns negotiations on tariffs and services. I, however, feel that, in practical terms, it would not make a great deal of sense to request the directives to be amended just for this purpose, given the closeness of the date.
What is more serious, Mr President, is the inclusion of a clause making the conclusion of these agreements conditional on the completion of a new round of negotiations at the World Trade Organisation. We are not sure that this round will take place and, if it does, when it will finish. This condition has not been imposed on any other country or bloc of countries and we in Parliament therefore feel, Commissioner, that this obstacle must be overcome. Parliament is therefore calling for a review of the current negotiating directives so that this anomaly can be eliminated and overcome.
I should like to hear the Commission’s opinion on this matter, specifically on the connection between the conclusion of these agreements and the completion of the new round of negotiations at the World Trade Organisation.
During the discussion of the report – in the drafting of which, Mr Patten, we enjoyed an excellent working relationship with the services of the Directorate-General for Latin America and those of the Mercosur and Chile division – we heard that one of your colleagues, Mr Lamy, who is responsible for trade relations, did not support the idea of revising the negotiating directives unless the Council accepted the idea first. Since this agreement is an agreement of political association, economic association and cooperation, which includes trade liberalisation, but in which political will must, and I think does, prevail, I should like to hear what impression the Commissioner responsible has of the political momentum of these negotiations.
I wish to add, Commissioner, that if this aspect of the political dialogue is to have any credibility, there is one essential requirement which must be respected: that of adapting our discourse to the reality of cooperation and of turning words into action so that we move beyond simply rhetorical declarations. Latin America needs support and opportunities, not handouts, and trade relations provide an excellent opportunity to use action to demonstrate political will.
With a view to the forthcoming Summit of Heads of State and Government of the European Union and Latin America, I would like these negotiations with Chile and Mercosur to have reached a sufficiently advanced stage and, if possible, to be concluded. I know that Chile and Mercosur are different cases and I wish to publicly request that each of these sets of negotiations be conducted on its own merits, something we requested in the reports that are to be voted on this morning. This must be done, however, with the aim of ensuring that the negotiations have reached an advanced stage or have been concluded with a view to this Summit, for which we must provide ample material over the next six months.
The European Parliament feels, and has expressed this view on numerous occasions, that the commitments given at the Madrid Summit and these agreements are an urgent imperative and a mark of the European Union’s renewed belief in Latin America. The comments that I have just made about trade apply just as much to cooperation, because even if we acknowledge the size of the contribution we have made to the region, which in absolute terms adds up to a sizeable amount, we feel that there is, to some extent, a degree of unjustified discrimination against the subcontinent compared with the treatment of other parts of the world. I do not think that we can address new priorities with the same resources: the priorities designated by these agreements, such as the renewal of the agreements with the Andean Pact and with Central America and the priorities arising from the Rio Summit. At this time, therefore, before the budget is drafted and presented, and although I understand that the pressures on our budget are great on the eve of the introduction of the euro, I would ask the Commissioner responsible to give an indication, to give a sign different to the one given in last year’s draft budget for the region, with the aim of making the forthcoming Madrid Summit more productive.
Mr President, in Parliament, one of the two branches of budgetary authority, we too are fully aware of the difficulties involved in this exercise, but although in recent budgetary debates we have been able to show that the European Parliament remains supportive of Latin America, it is my view, and I repeat, that significant progress must be made on these agreements.
Lastly, I wish to conclude by expressing my thanks to Mr Patten’s staff for their cooperation in drafting this report, for the exemplary working relationship we have enjoyed with our colleagues in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, as Mr Marset Campos stated, and also for the support provided by the services of this House."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples