Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-03-11-Speech-2-369"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080311.33.2-369"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Question No 42 by Bart Staes ()
The Commission has recently agreed a full Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the Caribbean, as well as a series of interim deals meant to eventually lead to full EPAs with other countries or regions. The progress made so far was presented very clearly to the European Parliament Development Committee this January, and we acknowledge the hard work which has been put in from the Commissioner´s side.
You also pointed out the tasks ahead, however. Among others, you mentioned that it will be vital to find ways to monitor the implementation and impact of new agreements.
Does the Commission have any rough estimates at this point of the positive impact of the latest agreements on the income of African farmers, as well as on the final prices for European consumers? How does the Commission plan to go about the development of techniques to monitor and measure implementation and impact?
Question No 45 by David Martin ()
Can the Commission provide the latest information on EPAs?
Question No 46 by Sarah Ludford ()
Why have you not managed to convince critics that EPAs are fair to developing countries?
Question No 47 by Hélène Goudin ()
Most ACP countries have signed economic partnership agreement (EPAs) with the EU. A whole series of voluntary organisations do not consider that the agreements will attain the stated objectives, i.e. promoting economic development in the contracting countries. The Commission's spokesperson has stated that EPAs could in future be put up for debate and thus be renegotiated. On the other hand, the Trade Commissioner has distanced himself from the possibility of renegotiating the existing agreements.
Can the Commission clarify the situation in this regard? Will developing countries which have signed partnership agreements with the EU be able to renegotiate them?
ACP governments which have agreed to liberalise trade in goods have insufficient negotiating power on matters of real concern to them. While they have to make major concessions in the EPAs, Europe is not entering into any binding commitments on important issues such as improving the rules of origin, the allocation of subsidies or the extension of development aid.
Does the Commission agree that these countries should be given more time to arrive at properly negotiated EPAs, that they should have better support in boosting their negotiating capacity, and that an in-depth evaluation and review on the existing agreements – which are still far from being the ‘development instruments’ they should be – is therefore necessary!
Question No 43 by Thijs Berman ()
The expiry of the 1 January 2008 deadline regarding Economic Partnership Agreements with ACP countries has given rise to considerable uncertainty in these countries. Agreements concluded on exemption clauses for exports, safeguard clauses, improved rules of origin, the allocation of subsidies or the extension of development aid are often inadequate and therefore enjoy little support in the countries concerned. Is the Commission prepared to carry out an in-depth evaluation of the existing agreements? What specific measures will it undertake to that end, and within what time-framework?
Question No 44 by Claude Moraes ()"@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Subject: EPAs"1
"Subject: Economic Partnership Agreements"1
"Subject: Impact measurement of Economic Partnership Agreements"1
"Subject: In-depth evaluation of Economic Partnership Agreements"1
"Subject: Partnership agreements with developing countries"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples