Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-03-Speech-3-258"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030903.10.3-258"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, this debate on Mrs Morgantini's report is about the link that we need to make between trade liberalisation, economic growth and poverty. It is about whether trade and development run in one direction. Often there are no unequivocal conclusions about whether or not that is the case.
However, I would argue, as I am sure many speakers in the debate would argue, that trade liberalisation is not a panacea for generating the kind of self-sustaining growth and poverty reduction that we want to see as a result of our policies – we are talking about coherence here – let alone the objective that we have of promoting human development.
If developing countries are to benefit from trade then the first thing that has to happen, as the report makes very clear, is that developing country producers have to get a fair price for what they produce for their exports, and that those prices reflect the value of their exports.
Since the 1970s deteriorating trade terms have cost developing countries a great deal. Many ACP countries have lost more than seven times the amount they get in development aid. For them, as the Commissioner knows, the central problem is the shortage of competitively-priced exports. But in cases where export capacity exists, in countries like South Africa, Mauritius, Ghana, Botswana and certain Caribbean countries, then one does see export growth as a result.
But they also insist – and this is the case not just with Cancún, which most people will talk about, but in the EPA negotiations – that duty-free access to EU markets is simply not a sufficient spur to increase exports. They are aware, as we are, of the importance of addressing supply-side constraints, the need for adjustments and the need to meet the associated costs for developing countries.
We need to understand – and I want to make a strong case for this – that capacity constraints are an essential part of how we deal with the ability of developing countries to tackle the trade issues that they face at this time, in bilateral, regional, and multilateral negotiations. They have a huge number of negotiations to deal with. Again, Commissioner Nielson is as aware of this, as am I, insofar as ACP countries are concerned.
In all of these negotiations there is a substantial and obvious imbalance between the parties negotiating in terms of economic size, political power and the sheer capacity to deal with the issue. I saw that insofar as the South African negotiations were concerned.
Agricultural subsidies have an enormous, crushing effect on developing country producers and markets. I hope that at Cancún, although Commissioner Lamy denies that it is a central issue, we will realise that for developing countries it certainly is.
We are a long way from achieving the millennium development goals. Two years after the declaration of a Doha development round, next week in Cancún we have an opportunity to make globalisation work for the many rather than the few. I am sure you will agree with me, Commissioner, that we cannot afford to fail."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples