Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-02-Speech-1-081"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-09-02"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Trade and development for poverty eradication and food security2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020902.7.1-081"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-09-02-Speech-1-0822
lpv:speaker	lp:Richard Howitt2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, I begin by congratulating Mr Deva on what I believe is a comprehensive, balanced and meaningful set of proposals. I particularly welcome his resolution because it restates our commitment to the principles of special and differential treatment of developing countries, to the importance of food security and to enhancing the accountability and social responsibility of corporations. The rapporteur's last point, the proposal for a European Forum of Enterprises in paragraphs 61 to 63, is an interesting one. But it should not deflect the Commission from ensuring that the current CSR Forum that it is due to launch in October fully addresses the actions of European enterprises in developing countries. I want to make two substantive arguments in this debate. First, it is right to record in a report by the Committee on Development and Cooperation that we can enunciate all the EU development policies we like, but too often these have been submerged beneath the EU's own trade and commercial interests when it really matters. We remember the hypocrisy of the Commission and Member States in regard to the free trade agreement negotiations with South Africa. Initial responses to Mr Fischler's proposals on CAP reform, limited as they are, and current reports from Johannesburg suggest that Mr Byrne's words about the phasing-out of agricultural export subsidies may well be an empty promise. If only the EU sought reform in the WTO with the same vigour it has won the USD 4 billion trade sanctions against the United States in relation to our steel exports, perhaps the poorest countries would start to believe us when we say we want a development round. Secondly, as other speakers have made clear, we have direct responsibility as the trade negotiations start with our ACP colleagues. Commissioner Byrne, when talking about the economic partnership agreements, should answer the questions that the Commission has refused to answer, before the process begins. Why does the Commission fail to talk now about the alternatives which were written into the Cotonou Agreement? Why does it talk about capacity building but commit only 0.1% of the current NIPs for trade support? How can we have confidence in the sustainability impact assessment when the Commission could not agree amongst itself on the impact of Everything But Arms on the sugar sector? Finally, why does the Commission resist the proposal from the ACP heads of government in Fiji to enter an initial phase of negotiations on principles with the ACP Group as a whole? Is it that the Commission wants to use the old tactic of divide and rule by attacking the solidarity of the ACP Group? That is not what this European Parliament wants."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	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) (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Labour Party (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; EMPL (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2003-06-01)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Howitt (PSE )."1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph