Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-07-06-Speech-4-188"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060706.30.4-188"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, it is clear that the WTO crisis is deepening. There is a risk that the failure at the WTO ministerial meeting last week to bring members closer to trade deals represents another step towards the final betrayal of the very idea of a Development Round. Some have even said that the meeting was counterproductive, with an atmosphere even more difficult than before, but perhaps the silver lining is that developing countries are united in insisting that rich countries put development at the heart of the process as a matter of course and deliver on their extremely long-standing promises.
More than two thirds of the WTO membership – developing and least-developed countries – declared that they were prepared to make a deal, but that industrial countries have to make the greatest contribution to show real leadership. I am glad the EU signalled that it was prepared to move closer to the G20 position, particularly by lowering domestic support, but there are still loopholes in the EU offer that would undermine the potential of a true development deal. The US offer is of course still far removed from what is necessary to stop dumping and protect food security.
As regards the special and differential treatment in agriculture, the Development Box, it is not clear whether the Commission will support the G33 request for a significant percentage of products to be covered in order to guarantee food security. I would be grateful if Commissioner Mandelson could set out the EU position and hopefully distinguish it from the extremely damaging proposals from the US.
On NAMA, the Commission is still demanding too much extreme liberalisation, which will threaten the very survival of some developing countries’ local manufacturing and it is hardly in the spirit of the Development Round to demand action on applied tariff levels rather than, as usual, bound tariff levels.
It looks very unlikely that we will have an agreement in July and the timetable is too hurried. We should have a reflection period on the reasons for the failure of the Doha Round. We must learn lessons from this and ensure things are better processed through a much reformed WTO and obtain a clear understanding of the role of trade and delivering sustainable development. Perhaps in that way we can devise a Development Round generally worthy of the name."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples