Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-07-06-Speech-4-211"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20060706.31.4-211"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
". Mr President, I am glad that almost every Member who has contributed to this debate has supported the original proposal made by the Commission. Very properly, some important questions have been raised about our ability to meet new customs codes, etc. These are important technical issues that we shall continue to address and to discuss with Members of this House. However, overwhelmingly, there is support for the essence – the principle – of our proposal. If we can overcome our disagreement about the method or manner or channel of depositing this proposal with Parliament, we would benefit from concentrating subsequently on the substance of this proposal. Very simply, it seeks to re-establish a level playing field with our trading partners, many of whom have already instituted forms of origin marking. It creates transparency about the origin of goods and establishes a single standard by which origin is determined. It permits informed consumer decisions. It reduces the incidence potentially of fraudulent or misleading origin marking and it contributes to improved competitiveness. For the consumer to be king – or queen – the consumer needs full information, or as much information as possible. I do not think it is unreasonable that amongst the information that consumers receive is the place of origin of the production or supply of particular goods. Let me just stress that it is not a ‘buy Europe’ campaign. Products will not be stamped ‘This is foreign – do not buy it’! That is not part of my or the Commission’s motivation. Indeed, the more people know about the origin of goods and come to associate that origin with particular features or the quality of those goods, it may encourage them to buy those goods from those sources and places of origin. Why not? However, that is not the point. The point is not whether we want to encourage people to buy goods from particular places of origin or discourage them from doing so, but to give them the information to enable them to make an objective judgement about where they purchase goods. I hope that Members of this House will see the ‘origin marking’ proposal as an alternative to protectionist instincts and measures and not as paving the way for them. I do not believe that we run the risk of putting up new non-tariff barriers to trade. I would certainly be very resistant to that. People in Europe are entitled to express or to demonstrate whatever preferences they have. Those preferences will include the origin or source of production of those goods. This is no more than a simple way of enabling them to do so."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph