Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-03-22-Speech-3-172"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-03-22"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Revision of the Cotonou Agreement and setting of the amount for the 10th EDF (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"it"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060322.14.3-172"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-03-22-Speech-3-1732
lpv:speaker	lp:Luisa Morgantini2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Partito della Rifondazione Comunista - Sinistra Europea (2004-07-20--2007-01-22)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (2004-09-22--2007-01-30)3 member; Conference of Committee Chairs (2004-07-28--2007-01-15)3 substitute; IMCO (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 chair; DEVE (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; FEMM (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; DROI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, 2005 was the year of rhetoric about development and the fight against poverty. Under the UK Presidency, in various institutional and multilateral forums – the European Council, the G8 Summit, the Millennium Summit, 5 September 2005 – the European Union undertook to increase financial support to achieve the millennium development goals, including through an increase in development aid. Not to carry out these undertakings would mean taking a backwards step with regard to all the international undertakings made in recent years for combating poverty – a confirmation that it was all just empty rhetoric. It was a mistake to reduce the 10th EDF, even though the full amount provided under the ninth was not spent. Instead, we ought to have made financial provision for the major structural reforms required of the ACP countries within the framework of the EPA negotiations. How can anyone believe that these countries – and let us remember that we are talking about countries where most of the poorest peoples in the world live – can succeed in making national and regional macroeconomic reforms without European financial aid? How will they mitigate the social impacts and further reforms that will add to the restrictions already imposed by the reforms required by the international financial institutions? Why should further reductions in tariffs be made, leading to a further reduction in the public funds available, as requested within the framework of the EPA negotiations, if on the European side the Member States are not ready to make any effort to increase support for the state budgets of ACP countries? What sort of partnership is this? I also believe that there is not much clarity about the EU’s specific undertaking in the +5 development funding process or about the precise extent of development funding within the framework of the EPA negotiations. How can we keep faith with the commitments we have made if we reduce the European development budget? Thinking about the international geopolitical situation as well, I believe that it would be strategically more far-sighted on our part – as the European Union – to now enter into a relationship of mutual political support with the poorest countries, and thus reinforce the EU-ACP partnership."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph