Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-30-Speech-3-030"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051130.10.3-030"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, we are on the eve of a WTO conference that was supposed to see a real step forward in the implementation of the Doha development agenda, which was adopted in 2001 and was to enable the trade rules to be put at the service of development.
Finally, our Group believes that sensitive issues like social and environmental questions cannot be kept out of the WTO talks. Otherwise, public opinion will not support the multilateral system; it will only survive if it is reformed.
As you have just said, Commissioner, it is unfortunately now clear that the Hong Kong conference will not bring the results hoped for in the main areas of negotiation. The progress made following the framework agreement concluded at the WTO on 1 August 2004 has been insufficient, and sometimes almost invisible. A lot of precious time has been lost and the sights for the Hong Kong meeting have now been lowered with the real decisions postponed to a later conference in 2006.
On behalf of the Socialist Group in the European Parliament, I would like to stress from the outset that this must not be allowed to result in the development aims of the Doha Round itself being downgraded. Any reduction in the developed countries’ commitments concerning the implementation of the Doha agenda would bring a substantial reduction in the possible gains for the developing countries.
As you know, Commissioner, the World Bank has produced a study showing that, if the likely scenario based on the United States’ and the European Union’s present proposals comes about, the main beneficiaries of the Doha Round, as with previous rounds, will again be the major trading powers, the developed countries, while the developing countries will gain by less than 0.2 euro centimes per capita per day; that would cut the number of poor people in the world by scarcely 1%.
I also believe that insisting that the developing countries make reciprocal commitments in exchange for the efforts made by the developed countries, in terms of opening their markets in particular, is likely to result in deadlock and from that point of view we must not forget what happened in Cancún. We are convinced that if the Doha Round development talks succeed, maintaining the priority of shifting the balance in favour of the developing countries instead of reciprocity, they will ultimately bring tangible advantages for all, including the European Union, which will share the benefits of renewed world economic growth and the development of new markets for European goods. It is therefore essential that the Doha Round is a success.
If that is to be the case, the rules and agreements negotiated in Hong Kong must make for a more equitable sharing of the benefits of globalisation; they must take better account of the different levels of development; they must offer improved market access for the developing countries without forcing them to open their own markets at any price, and on this subject I support the Council’s vision, which seems to me to be slightly different from the Commission’s; they must not weaken the most sensitive economic sectors, nascent industries, but instead contribute to economic diversification; they must recognise the right of the developing countries to control the rate of their commercial opening and their national development strategies.
We call on the various players, including the European Union, to be more flexible, Commissioner. I believe you still have room for manoeuvre in agriculture. For example, our Group has tabled an amendment seeking a commitment, with a timetable, to abolish export subsidies by 2010. We are asking that a formula of the ‘Swiss formula’ type, which you are advocating today and which does not respect the principle of ‘less than full reciprocity’, not be applied in the field of industrial tariffs. We must accept the maintenance of a certain level of protection for the developing countries in the industrial field.
When it comes to services, we want the European Union’s demands concerning market access for service providers to preserve the rights of all WTO member countries, especially the developing countries, to regulate their services, their public services in particular. We want health, education and audiovisual services to be clearly excluded from the talks, and we do not want public services such as water and energy to be dismantled or weakened in the GATS negotiations. Finally, you have noted the great reticence of the developing countries towards your benchmarking proposal, and it would be more reasonable to withdraw it.
We support you on the ‘development aid’ package. There needs to be a sustainable solution for access to medicines that includes a revision of the intellectual property agreement itself. The rules for special and differential treatment must be strengthened. Finally, there really is a need for a financial facility to underpin technical assistance and the strengthening of the poor countries’ capacities."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples