Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-16-Speech-1-136"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060116.17.1-136"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, we already knew that there were not really any good intentions behind the trade negotiations, but it must be acknowledged that being at the Hong Kong Conference meant sitting in on a summit characterised by hypocrisy! I say this because, to be perfectly frank, the developing countries were totally cheated: practically no progress at all with regard to cotton, a sugar and banana reform that continues to be extremely problematic and catastrophic – particularly for the ACP States – and access to the market for LDCs, which, despite everything, is still not completely unrestricted and which has been delayed. The only compensation for all that comes in the form of very strong pressure aimed at liberalising services and manufactured products, something that jeopardises extremely weak economies.
With regard to agriculture, therefore, one might say that, despite an apparent clash between the European Union and the United States, the policy carried out by both blocs has practically been the same, that is to say the ongoing protection of a type of agriculture. This clearly shows that the ‘lowest price’ policy does not work and that it is not viable in the long run. Little or no consideration has been given to social and environmental rules, to small-scale farming, to the peasant farmers of the South who are very threatened by the agreements, to the small farmers of the North or to the interests of small and medium-sized farms.
We were therefore expecting the European Union to show a real, coherent interest in the poorest countries. We were expecting it to promote sustainable development and the harmonisation of trade rules with social and environmental rules. We did not see any of that happen and we are all the more disappointed as a result. What next, then, for the negotiations? We are very anxious about the new approach that seems to owe more to ‘top-down’ than to so-called ‘bottom up’ thinking and that marks a retreat to small group negotiations, which are less transparent and less democratic. We are particularly anxious about this matter at a time when many of our fellow citizens are deeply concerned about, and doubt, the European Union’s ability to control economic globalisation, given the way in which it is being managed at the moment."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples