Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-03-Speech-3-247"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030903.10.3-247"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we have before us the motion for a resolution adopted by the Committee on Development and Cooperation on the Commission communication on water management in developing countries and priorities for EU development cooperation, and on the establishment of an EU water fund, which the plenary is to vote on at noon tomorrow. In practice we are considering two related motions.
Lastly, I would like to offer the various political groups my views about the amendments that have been tabled. Amendment No 1, tabled by the Socialist Group, complements the existing proposals very well, even if the report was adopted unanimously in committee. As regards Amendment No 2, which relates to recital L, I would prefer it if the Socialist Group would eliminate certain terms that weaken the text. I also find Amendment No 11, tabled by the Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and the European Democrats, perfectly acceptable. Furthermore, I myself tabled Amendment No 5 on behalf of the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance, and this amendment seems very important to me on the eve of the Cancún Summit: in line with what I have just said, my group invites the Commission to withdraw the demand, made in the context of the GATS Agreement, that water distribution and purification services should be liberalised. We regard this demand as running counter to the essential objective of providing access to water for all in poor countries. If it is adopted, this amendment will strengthen the European Parliament's political message. I therefore urge you to support it.
I would firstly like to recall the situation in which a substantial minority of our fellow humans on this planet find themselves as regards access to water. In all, 1.7 billion people do not have access to drinking water. Three billion people have no access to sanitation. The number of people who die each day from diseases linked to a lack of drinking water and of sanitation is put at 30 000. Water is an essential natural resource for life, health, food and general well-being. The United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has enshrined access to water as a fundamental human right. The 145 countries that have ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights have an obligation to ensure that everyone has access to water, equitably and without discrimination. The issue that is therefore becoming ever more pressing is this: what sort of cooperation policy is needed to help poor countries to meet the vital challenge of making drinking water available to everyone?
Back in 1991, at the end of the World Water Decade, an international commitment was declared to provide safe drinking water for all by 2000. Two years after that deadline, it had to be recognised at Johannesburg in 2002 that this commitment was a long way from having been met, despite the efforts of the World Bank in particular. The situation could even be said to have deteriorated somewhat. A new, scaled-down objective was agreed at Johannesburg: to halve the number of people without access to safe drinking water and sanitation by 2015. The European Union wishes to play an active part in achieving this objective and the Commission has set out its priorities in the communication before us.
In the motion for a resolution to be voted upon at noon tomorrow, the Committee on Development and Cooperation suggests that the following priorities should be adopted, aware as it is that it would scarcely be credible to continue along the path mapped out by the World Bank in 1993 in its report on Water Resources Management. It has in fact become apparent that the privatisation of water services in accordance with the ‘full cost recovery’ principle has generally led to an increase in charges, preventing the poorest communities in the poorest countries from having access to drinking water. This means that the solution identified in no way solves the problem, and if anything exacerbates it. We therefore think it is essential for water distribution to be regarded as a public service. The public-private partnership system may be one means of improving access to water, but it should not be viewed as a panacea.
We also believe that a pricing system should be adopted which allows everyone access to the water required to cover essential needs and ensures efficient use of water by giving users responsibility.
As regards management, the countries concerned have both the right and the duty to adopt a policy that clearly involves local populations in management.
Given that the Committee on Development and Cooperation believes that significant financial resources need to be devoted to achieving the necessary investment in the countries concerned, it welcomes the establishment of a European Water Fund. Nevertheless, it considers that the main aim of this fund should be to support the beneficiary countries' water policy, which should be based on democratic management and fair distribution. We therefore propose that the management of the fund should be based on an EU-ACP partnership. Furthermore, the Committee on Development and Cooperation is of the view that the success of the fund depends on participation by its beneficiaries, who must be involved in the processes of design, implementation, monitoring and assessment, as well as in the management and control of the fund, as I have already said.
We also believe that it is important to devise new categories of financial instrument, based on international solidarity. The first thing that comes to mind here is to call for the ACP countries’ debt to be cancelled. The money thus released would allow these countries to fund basic water supply and purification infrastructures.
We would also like the Commission to study – and please note that I am saying ‘study’, we are not talking about a proposal as such – the scope for introducing a tax on bottled mineral water in the EU countries and in the relevant ACP countries, a very low tax, about half a euro cent, which would make an important contribution to the fund."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples