Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-04-Speech-3-178"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2008-06-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Generalised tariff preferences for the period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2011 (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20080604.22.3-178"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2008-06-04-Speech-3-1792
lpv:speaker	lp:Godelieve Quisthoudt-rowohl2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the Korean Peninsula (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the United States (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2007-05-23--2009-07-13)3 vice-chair; INTA (2007-02-01--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AFET (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, the system under debate here serves to combat poverty and backwardness. Three points seem to me to be important here. First, since this is now the continuation: there should be flexibility both on entering the system and on leaving it, if parameters were to be changed in one state. In other words: must a state that was once a beneficiary always remain a beneficiary? This does not appear to be the case to me. We should not forget that the EU also has a duty to its own citizens, workers and consumers. There must be a reciprocal advantage; it should not always be one-sided. Secondly, we welcome the fact that the European Parliament is to be informed during the next term. We would also like an assessment of this system, however. This assessment should provide a comparison with other preferential measures such as the EPA, for example. We would realistically state that statistically, a gap is continually opening up between rich and poor, despite the EU’s diverse measures and despite the measures of the Member States. Are our certainly well-intentioned efforts still leading to the right results? We ought to be asking ourselves this question quite deliberately. Thirdly, preferential measures such as, for example, the GSP system we are discussing here, should be linked to the following criteria. We need a certain strictness here. First, the promotion of democracy and the rule of law. Second, the construction of a minimum framework on social and environmental standards in the beneficiary states. We want to provide assistance with this, which is also clearly stated in the report. We should not be backing down, however, for the sake of our own credibility. My thanks at this point go to the rapporteur for his effective cooperation."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph