Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-16-Speech-3-043"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010516.2.3-043"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – I just want to try to answer three questions that were put during the debate by honourable Members and I hope I can do so in a way which is moderately satisfactory.
First of all, Mrs van der Laan asked about the rules of origin, and if there are points which I do not cover in what I am going to say, I will take them up in correspondence with the honourable Member. What I would like to do is rehearse exactly what has happened so far. The issue of rules of origin was raised in the Commission communication to the Council and the European Parliament to which I referred earlier. The General Affairs Council at the end of June 1998 took note of our communication and asked the Commission to resolve these issues on a technical level. A great deal has happened since then. Technical contacts at different levels with Israel took place immediately after the communication. On 16 December 1999 the Commission informed COREPER on the outcome of these meetings.
In early 2000 concrete information on specific imports from Israeli settlements was supplied to the Commission. On the basis of this information, at the Customs Code Committee meeting on 6 April last year, the Commission reminded Member States of their obligation in this respect, namely to apply the provisions of Article 32 of the Protocol on Customs of the Association Agreement to consignments for which information had been received that they originated in the settlements. After this meeting Member States returned around 2000 EUR1 certificates to Israel for verification. In some cases, goods were only released for free circulation in the European Union subject to the payment of a guarantee against liability for customs duties. Replies to the letters of verification are coming in as the ten month deadline for Israel's reply is expiring.
All along there has been a notice to importers which was first published in the Community Official Journal of 8 November 1997 warning exporters of doubts regarding EUR1 certificates from Israel. The notice is still in force, although of course references to the orange juice case, which honourable Members will recall, no longer apply. That is all the information that I have at hand on the history of rules of origin. I am determined, as I said earlier, to conduct this issue by the Agreement and entirely according to the law.
Mr Lagendijk asked what we would be saying to the Israeli side next week at our meeting on 21 May and he said that what we sought, or should seek, in the Middle East was a balanced approach. I do not think, and I do not think he thinks either, that means we should search for some point on the political agenda where neither side will disagree with us. That is not what is meant by a balanced approach. I happen to think that the Mitchell Commission report was an extremely balanced and sensible document. The Mitchell Commission – and I hope we will do much the same – in my judgment supports those who are still committed to working for peace on both sides of the argument. That is a sensible, balanced approach. As for what we will say on 21 May, we can discuss human rights under the essential elements clause of our Agreement, we will certainly discuss for the first time this summer rules of origin – that is already on the agenda – but I want to be scrupulous in sticking to the letter and the spirit of our Agreement. To go beyond that would risk putting us on a very slippery slope indeed. So as far as I am concerned we stick to the letter of the Agreement and do not go beyond it with any other political gestures.
Mr Belder asked about the remarks of our colleague and friend the Dutch Foreign Minister about the Palestinian Authority in particular and the importance of ensuring that it operates in a more transparent and democratic way. I have to say that what our colleague Mr van Aartsen said during his visit to the Middle East was not just wholly in line with our views on the development of democracy in the Palestinian territories, but an extremely eloquent and effective exposition of our view, as one would expect from him. Even in these less than perfect circumstances we need to press the Palestinian Authority to be more open, to be more transparent, to be more pluralistic, to protect people's civil liberties and human rights and to become increasingly democratic. That is, I think, what the Minister was saying and he has our total support."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples