Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-14-Speech-1-073"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051114.13.1-073"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I first want to thank my colleague, Mr Brejc, for his work on this report and for his efforts to direct it towards the really important issues. I must say, however, that, if there are no changes to it, it will be difficult to support the report in the form it has been drawn up following the committee’s reading of it. In its present form, the report states that globalisation leads to gulfs and imbalances between countries and within societies. That is emphatically not the case. If there is anything at all that globalisation has provided, it is well-being and prosperity for the poor parts of the world. We see today how poverty has been combated in large parts of Asia. We see how people in Taiwan, China, India and ever more other countries are slowly obtaining progressively more dignity and increased prosperity. Globalisation has helped do away with poverty of a kind that, for centuries, characterised large parts of the world in which we now see wealth and well-being increasing, as well as respect for the individual. It is important to state that, directly contrary to what is stated in the report, it is, in actual fact, precisely in those parts of the world not reached by globalisation that we have stagnation and poverty, for example in those parts of Africa and Asia in which free and open trade are not practised and in which people are excluded from globalisation.
It is the lack of globalisation and participation in the global economy that produces indigent people, poor living conditions and undignified working environments. It is also easy to see that this is the case, for where do we find the worst working environments and the worst social conditions? It is not in developing countries, but in those countries that belong to the lost world and that are excluded from the global economy.
It may also be worth asking whether we should be better off if the poor parts of the world were not being developed. Would we be better off if the Chinese or Indian economy had not been developed? For a number of different reasons, the answer to that question is of course ‘no’, partly because it is good that life is progressively improving in these countries and partly because these same countries constitute our growing markets. Europe is a continent that, to the very highest degree, thrives on globalisation. Our well-being, prosperity and high wages depend on our having companies that can operate and develop throughout the world by offering high-quality products and services.
If we try to put a stop to globalisation, we ourselves are affected. If we try to impose our rules on other countries, they, for their part, are then hit. It is free trade that, both historically and in the present time, creates increasing well-being and respect for people. That is the basis on which we must proceed when making policy."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples