Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-10-Speech-1-079"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20030210.8.1-079"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Mr President, this evening we will identify what are probably the two make-or-break issues for the next WTO round in Cancun – TRIPS and public health and agriculture. Developing countries' perception of our good faith, good will and sincerity towards them will be tested by our attitude to these two issues. As we know, binding agreement was reached in the form of the Doha Declaration, paragraph 6 of which highlighted the difficult issue of WTO members with insufficient or no manufacturing capacities in the pharmaceutical sector, who could face difficulties in making effective use of compulsory licensing under the TRIPS agreement. The Council for TRIPS was asked to find an expeditious solution to this problem. Commissioner, we welcome the efforts you have made and the backing you have had to get this implemented. In an innovative and welcome suggestion you enlist the aid of the World Health Organisation. If the intention is not honoured, the new constraints would violate the spirit of the Doha Declaration and would show bad faith. I am sure you are right – and we have had discussions about this – to reject a moratorium on disputes or, indeed, a derogation. Neither is an adequate solution. The behaviour of the United States, not just on this issue but also - and far more seriously in some ways - on the issue of Iraq, is becoming increasingly difficult to understand. Indeed, the only possible explanation is its politicians paying undue attention to the financial interests of pharmaceutical companies who paid for their election. They have come up with only a unilateral solution and a narrow list. This is inadequate! Two deadlines have been missed already, and there is a real risk of deadlock if the efforts which we have channelled through you come to nothing. Concerns which have been raised, for example on the diversion trade in generic medicines, are being tackled. Hence the regulation by the Council of Ministers. Let us welcome your proposal of 7 January. It is a multilateral solution which enlists a reputable and widely trusted agency, the World Health Organisation. As you said, the solution must be lasting, fair and legally viable. The conflict should be examined on the basis of the guideline that public health has primacy over patents. We cannot overestimate the importance of finding a solution to this issue. I wish you very good luck, Commissioner."@en1
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph