Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-04-Speech-4-207"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011004.11.4-207"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would first like to express my great satisfaction at being able to speak for the first time in this House on the issue of the Overseas Countries and Territories. These twenty territories benefit from a particular association arrangement with the European Union, which, when described in simple terms, is less favourable than the status reserved for the outermost regions, which are integral parts of the Union, but more advantageous than the agreements made with third countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific.
As a French overseas member of this Parliament my attention is naturally drawn to the fate of the French territories and administrative authorities concerned, which are, and I am pleased to list them here, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, the French Southern and Antarctic Territories, Wallis and Futuna, Mayotte and Saint-Pierre and Miquelon. In his excellent report, Mr Fruteau welcomes the progress in relations between the European Union and the OCTs from an institutional, economic and financial point of view, even though there remain many questions on the Commission’s proposals having to respond to the objectives included in declaration 36 with regard to the OCTs annexed to the Treaty of Amsterdam.
With regard to trade relations, the rapporteur emphasises the low level of trade with the Union. In 1998, imports from OCTs amounted to 0.21 % of Community imports, with exports to OCTs amounting to 0.43 % of Community exports as a whole. A liberalisation of trade with OCTs could fulfil the objectives we have set ourselves. We should be particularly careful, however, that this liberalisation does not result in some kind of diversion from our current objectives. For several years, imports have been increasing from a particular OCT (which happens to be Aruba but this is not the time to hold it up as an example), which runs counter to the spirit of this association agreement with the European Union. These products exported to the Union do not come from the OCT, but are imported there from ACP countries for minor processing such as the whitening of rice, sifting, packaging or mixing. These simple operations only require very low levels of investment, and are therefore in no way a development factor as the Court of Justice in Luxembourg highlighted in its ruling on the "Emesa sugar" case in 1998, as the only interest is providing easy added value for international operators.
The increase in this type of inefficiency is all the more intolerable given that it goes against the interests of the other OCTs, the outermost regions and the ACP countries. In this context, without questioning the objectives proposed by the rapporteur, which I willingly support, it is essential that we establish strict original rules to prevent these breaches , which are detrimental to the economies of all overseas territories. In this respect, the measures for prohibiting cumulation of origin for certain products, increasing the list of inadequate processes or the systematic implementation of safeguard clauses in no way provide a suitable response to this problem."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples