Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-14-Speech-1-124"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051114.16.1-124"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, I should like to thank you for this opportunity to share with you our current thinking on the new import regime for bananas. Needless to say, we are very disappointed at the second arbitration award issued on 22 October 2005.
The current import regime for bananas was agreed at Doha in 2001. On this basis we obtained a waiver from our WTO obligations for granting a preference to our ACP partners. It was also agreed at the time that we would move to a tariff-only system not later than 1 January 2006. For this purpose we opened negotiations with our main trading partners for modifying the concessions in our schedule on bananas and went through arbitration as foreseen in the annex to the Doha waiver. The relevant benchmark set out in the annex to the Doha waiver is whether the rebinding of our tariff on bananas maintains market access for most-favoured-nation suppliers.
Following a first negative award on 1 August 2005, the arbitrator determined in a second award issued on 27 October that the European Community had failed to rectify the matter with its proposal for a new most-favoured-nation tariff rate at EUR 187 per tonne. This was a very disappointing result. Our calculations were done in an objective and transparent manner and were supported by thorough economic and legal analysis.
The aim has always been to ensure a neutral modification of the import regime with a most-favoured-nation tariff that provides equivalent market access conditions to let in American suppliers – as the current quota regime does – and keeps an equivalent level of ACP preference. Throughout this process we had consultations with our trading partners but there were no common positions from their side that could have been the basis for a negotiated solution.
Where does that leave us now? The arbitrator’s award does not indicate what could be an appropriate tariff level. In deciding on the import regime for bananas there are a number of considerations that need to be taken into account: most importantly, our responsibility to all the different stakeholders. We have considered the interests of Community producers and the management of the common market organisation for bananas with a view to its future reform. We have our commitments towards the ACP partners in the Cotonou Agreement to maintain their tariff preferences.
In the light of all the above, we need to move to a tariff-only system from 1 January 2006 and we must move quickly as our operators need legal certainty. At the same time, I am fully aware of our responsibilities towards all stakeholders, which we take very seriously. The Commission will therefore be making a proposal very shortly on the level of the tariff starting from 1 January 2006."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples