Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-26-Speech-4-040"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-09-26"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Economic partnership agreements with ACP2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020926.2.4-040"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-09-26-Speech-4-0412
lpv:speaker	lp:Paul A.A.J.G. Lannoye2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; G/EFA (2002-01-08--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Ecolo (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)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) (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, today’s vote is important and fits in very well with our work timetable, as tomorrow negotiations will begin on partnership agreements with the ACP countries. It is therefore important for Parliament to send a loud, clear message to the Commission with regard to these negotiations by means of the recommendations we formulate. I would like to thank our rapporteur warmly and congratulate her. Mrs Boudjenah’s report was unanimously adopted in committee, which is very good. We fully share her point of view on the matter and we support her. In this regard, I was sorry to hear Mr Schwaiger’s statements, which could divide Parliament on the matter at a completely inappropriate time. Perhaps, however, the PPE-DE does not fully share Mr Schwaiger’s position. With regard to the amendments tabled by the PPE-DE, I do not believe they improve the report, but rather that they aim to weaken it or sugar the pill. From a political perspective, there is no real point in presenting a weak or sugared position to the Commission. Basically, when we talk about partnership agreements, the word “partnership” has an eminently pleasant connotation, we all agree on that, as it concerns a relationship between equals, or partners, with the ACP countries. This, however, must not make us forget that we are not equal to the ACP countries. These countries have weak and vulnerable economies. Committing to the concept of absolute free trade, without first assessing the consequences for the social, environmental or economic situation of these countries, is rather like going down a dark tunnel. We therefore think an impact assessment should be carried out first. Two years after Cotonou, this would be welcome. We must also remove the structural and commercial barriers which prevent these countries from being able to benefit fully from the current non-reciprocal preferences. Maintaining them would be suicidal. What are these barriers? Although the matter has already been raised by the rapporteur, I would like to emphasise a factor that we have repeatedly criticised, namely the problem of grants from the European Union for exports, in particular in the agriculture sector. Furthermore, the lack of opportunity for local product processing is one great weakness of these economies. I shall end there, as I see I have exceeded my speaking time and you are being uncompromising today, Mr President. The problem of local processing, which creates added value at local level, is clearly fundamental and the rapporteur has quite rightly emphasised this point."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph