Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-10-Speech-1-059"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030310.4.1-059"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, today we are discussing the European Commission's offers on GATS, and these are very important offers, because we must remember that the service sector in the European Union is a key sector for our economy. The Commissioner rightly points out that this is the most dynamic sector. The European Union is also one of the biggest exporters of services in the world, so it is also an important matter of self-interest. We must provide access to the services markets. Not only in our own interest but also in the interest of developing countries. After all, the development agenda is what the Doha WTO round is about. I think that we must see the practical results in the light of the economies of the developing countries, so I am very pleased that 50% of the requests have come from developing countries.
Our experience in the EU also tells us that the liberalisation of services, both in the energy and telecom sector and in the financial services sector, should normally deliver a better quality and more efficient services market with a broader range of products and better prices, as long as it goes hand in hand with properly established rules and guarantees for citizens. I therefore think that the Commission is setting a great deal of store by the concept of general services, and I would like to call on it to take a closer look at the so-called universal service obligations that can also be delivered by private service providers instead of solely by the public sector.
My group can support the Commission's offer to exclude the health sector, the social sector and the education sector from an offer, but I would also like clarification on the situation with regard to universities. The Commissioner has mentioned the Erasmus project, but does this mean that only individual Member States can make an offer on this point and that nothing is happening at all with regard to universities throughout the whole of the EU? Commissioner Reding provided a very convincing argument for not making a new proposal for the audio-visual sector. I do not have to go into that in any more detail.
I would, however, like to say something about computer-related services. On the one hand, we must naturally ensure that we do not cause a massive brain drain towards the West from countries like India. We must also provide our own training. On the other hand, we must also avoid a situation in which people work under other conditions in the European Union, because this could result in social dumping. I therefore think that it is important to create a good balance, and since September 11 we have naturally also had to look at security aspects.
It is of course a good thing that we are doing more to include the environment in this. Sustainability is not just a matter for the West, it is a matter for the whole world. I therefore think that it should also benefit developing countries. Excluding water treatment and distribution for the time being seems to me to be a wise policy. GATS directly affects the interests of many EU citizens, and I appreciate Commissioner Lamy’s efforts to broaden communication and provide more information. This is still a matter involving ambassadors, closed doors and a lack of transparency, and I am of the opinion that there should be much stronger parliamentary representation in this regard. Bearing Cancun in mind, I therefore also hope that the Commissioner will put forward new proposals to make this process even more transparent.
We cannot turn our backs on current events, however, and Iraq is of course putting us into a situation in which the world community is split right down the middle. How can we now prevent the Iraq question from resulting in serious trade conflicts between the European Union and the United States which may obstruct the results of Cancun? I would like to ask the Commissioner what initiatives she has taken in this area and what results they have produced. In this context, there are of course two essential problems with the United States that have not yet been resolved. On the one hand, the so-called FSC arrangement, the favourable tax legislation for American exporters which must now be reviewed thanks to the WTO statement, and on the other hand, the alarming reports that American draft legislation is being prepared that will limit the tax benefits of subsidiaries of non-US companies. I should like to ask the Commissioner what the situation is in this regard. Can we expect something like this from the Americans?
Then there is the pressure we are under to agree to the American proposals regarding genetically modified food. I think that it is very important to set this issue right and to hear what is happening about it. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Commissioner Lamy speaks about the fact that 2003 will be the year in which the WTO must deliver. What does he mean by this, and what can we expect in this regard?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples