Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-08-Speech-2-200"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030408.6.2-200"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the Commission is an essentially political institution, in my view at least, and I would like the Commissioner to give me a political reply.
Commissioner, I have listened very carefully to your reply for 6 minutes, but I would like to ask, from a political point of view, whether it can seriously be argued that the removal of these preferences, through the modulation mechanism, is going to benefit a country such as Colombia which has 26 million people living in poverty and in which 30 000 people die as a result of violence each year? Or a country such as Costa Rica, where these products are cultivated in sensitive areas, where there are immigrants, heads of families and women? I frankly believe, Commissioner, that they are not going to benefit these countries, and that no comparison can be made with Mexico or with Chile. You avoided answering the fourth and fifth aspects of my question and I am not going to ask you to reply, but you spoke of flexibility and I would like to know how the Commission measures its flexibility. By being able to hold talks in relation to the entry into force of these measures? Would the Commission be prepared to remove agricultural substitute products from this system? And finally, what does the Commission intend to do when the Drugs system of generalised preferences expires in 2004? Does the Commission intend to renew it?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples