Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-07-05-Speech-2-323"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050705.33.2-323"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, the communication of 16 March 2005 defines general orientations for the future of the rules of origin in preferential arrangements. It is a three-pronged approach, which should be seen as a package: firstly, simplification and appropriate relaxation of the substance of the rules; secondly, improved procedures for their implementation and enforcement; thirdly, a secure environment for legitimate trade, in particular through a targeted monitoring of the functioning of the arrangements. While the orientations should be applied progressively to all arrangements, their priority focus is firstly on the arrangements devoted to the development of each GSP.
The Commission remains at the disposal of Parliament to keep it informed of the further development of this important file. I should like to say to the Chairman of the Committee on International Trade: I am at your disposal and the disposal of your committee whenever you invite me to participate in your proceedings.
The Commission considers that formal simplification could be achieved by placing the current numerous and complex rules for determining the origin of products that are not wholly obtained in a country by a single, across-the-board method based on value criteria. That method also offers the flexibility, through the setting of the value threshold, to adjust the origin requirements according to the desired results in terms of market access and development for beneficiary countries. It would apply both for determining what sufficient processing is when materials not originating in a country or in a cumulation zone are used, and for allocating origin, but in the context of cumulation, using different value thresholds.
Let me take the opportunity to address your second question. The need for relaxation has, taking into account my preliminary remarks, to be considered against its desired effect, not only in terms of growth of exports under the GSP, but mainly on the actual development of the beneficiary countries. In that context the criteria to be taken into account in order to define the value thresholds lie in the impact of the new rules on development.
The use of a value-added method is therefore a starting point. The Commission is launching studies to measure its impact on certain products that are key commodities for developing countries, such as textiles, agriculture and fisheries –until now the determination of their origin has not been based on value – and which are sensitive for the Community in tariff and market terms. The study will help in defining the criteria and in verifying whether a value-added method with the appropriate thresholds for both sufficient processing and cumulation is actually in line with the principles of simplification and development-friendliness. Should this study demonstrate that the value-added approach would not deliver the expected results for certain sectors, the Commission will adopt another approach to better achieve these objectives.
Referring to your first question, the Commission is ready to explain in more detail to representatives of Parliament. However, the terms of reference of the study are how the products and countries will be selected for the simulations and the steps to be followed in evaluating its results.
With regard to the definition of thresholds, that will be part of the process of drawing up and adopting the Commission regulation to amend GSP rules of origin. Parliament will be involved, in accordance with the comitology procedure. However, once the Commission is in a position to formally start the examination of the draft regulation within the Customs Code Committee, the draft will be made available to Parliament.
With regard to your third question, the Commission has carefully considered the idea of allowing global cumulation between all GSP beneficiary countries. That goes far beyond the cross-regional cumulation. Cumulation of origin, to have a real impact, should be an additional opportunity to source materials from countries that are real economic partners, with lower constraints than from other countries.
Expanding sourcing possibilities to all developing countries would result in denying the very concept of cumulation, assuming that most of the supplies used by developing countries to manufacture products to be exported to the EU under the GSP come from other developing countries. Such a global cumulation would, in fact, replace the normal origin requirements. The main beneficiaries of such a situation would again be the biggest exporting countries and not the poorest and more vulnerable ones, whose interests would be better served by appropriate value thresholds.
To make an impact, cumulation and its facilitation must remain targeted in groups of countries with mutual and balanced economic interests. As highlighted by the communication, that does not exclude extending existing cumulation zones or merging existing groups such as ASEAN and SAARC. However, that must correspond to needs expressed by the groups of countries themselves and it must be supported by the necessary instruments for administrative cooperation in origin matters."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples