Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-12-12-Speech-3-095"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-12-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20011212.3.3-095"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-12-12-Speech-3-0962
lpv:speaker	lp:Jean-Claude Fruteau2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia and the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) (1999-07-13--2002-01-14)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (1999-09-14--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Parti socialiste (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Development and Cooperation (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". Ever since 1993, the issue of bananas has been at the heart of trade relations between the European Union and the United States. Some have even gone so far as to say that it has poisoned transatlantic relations and that this conflict should be resolved as quickly as possible. I would even venture to say that it should be resolved at any cost. Those in positions of power, like Louis Vuitton, Hermès and Gucci have had enough! So much so that people all over the world from the West Indies to Brussels and Strasbourg, some individuals have decided to fight back rather than capitulate. But who in Parliament can fail to recognise that by giving in to the diktat of the United States, in the guise of the WTO, the European Union is supporting future unemployment? At some point in the long term, 35 000 people in the Canary Islands will be made unemployed, and 30 000 in the West Indies. Who can fail to recognise that by progressively giving in on this issue, the European Union is disregarding its social model, which it is so keen to export throughout the world? Finally, who can fail to recognise that by giving in now on this issue, in the future we will inevitably have to give in on sugar, and not just on sugar cane but also on sugar beet? Soon we will have to write off our own agricultural model. Mr Dary has not avoided these various issues and I think that this Parliament should be proud of having voted in favour of his report today. Inspired by the strength of our democratic legitimacy, we have chosen the path of resistance, in the face of the intransigence of the European Commission. Our request for ‘cyclone’ licences to be available when crops are destroyed and, particularly, our demand for a transition period prior to the start of a purely tariff-based system in 2006 illustrate our opposition perfectly. This is why I naturally voted in favour of the report by Mr Dary. Overall, I felt it was pertinent to the issues involved, despite having some reservations, which, as I explained to the rapporteur, relate to the distribution within quota C between Caribbean and African producers. Given Africa’s trade links, in which France has been pivotal for historic reasons, I fear that this change will represent a further blow for the European producers of Guadeloupe and Martinique."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph