Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-07-07-Speech-1-108"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080707.17.1-108"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
". −
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the trade dispute between the European Union and the United States about large aircraft is no ordinary controversy like others that are taken to the WTO for resolution. This dispute has led to by far the largest and most complicated proceedings that have ever been instituted. It involves an enormous conflict of interest.
Seventh: it is time the United States and the EU came to an understanding that it must remain possible to take measures for political management of developments in the national economy, including the awarding of public contracts and financial support. In addition, however, there is a need for transparency mechanisms and democratic control to ensure that everyone keeps to the existing rules.
Eighth: the Boeing case shows us that a government should avoid becoming entrenched behind the argument of alleged national defence interests in order to support its own national industry, or rather the interests of a few strong lobby groups with which it is closely associated.
Ninth: this controversy represents more than just a dispute between the EU and the United States. This is yet another case in which those who portray themselves as the champions of free trade give in to protectionist national temptations out of self-interest. We should distance ourselves from both, because that kind of behaviour does not lead to better conditions for our citizens but only to discrimination and unfair competition based on dumping.
The United States has criticised the way in which the EU and the Member States involved in the EADS consortium have subsidised the introduction of new large aircraft over the last 20 years. For its part, the EU has accused the United States of granting hidden subsidies to Boeing as part of defence and aerospace projects in which it is involved. We do not yet know which way the WTO Dispute Settlement Body will decide. I assume that the decision will be that both parties have violated applicable WTO rules. Whatever the outcome of the case, it is still possible to make some recommendations.
Firstly, perhaps it is time both Boeing and Airbus relied much more on their own resources instead of being able to fall back on comprehensive state subsidies, then keeping the support and profit for themselves but avoiding risk by means of the company structure. Better functioning and greater transparency in the aviation sector would certainly benefit all aspects of the industry and also customers.
This does not mean that large aircraft manufacturers should no longer receive any financial support at all. I should simply like to emphasise that a balanced, appropriate system is needed that does not favour the interests of large companies but also takes into account important issues such as, for example, the creation of jobs and the protection of the environment, together with the improvement of passenger safety.
Secondly, in this regard it is significant that, in 2007, thousands of Airbus employees lost their jobs as a result of a restructuring that, in my opinion, was not necessary – after years of huge profits for this European consortium. This is not an appropriate way for management to deal with crises, especially as it was not the employees who were at fault but the managers, who had failed dismally.
Third, the existence of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body is a considerable step forward in the international trade regime, because it delivers reliable directions in the event that differences of opinion arise from different interpretations of the Uruguay Round agreements. We shall also be given its decision, but is that enough of a solution?
Fourth, it is regrettable that the 1992 EU-US Agreement on Large Civil Aircraft was not sufficient to achieve a negotiated solution instead of a court ruling.
Fifth, the aviation industry is currently being confronted with new challenges. The economic crisis and the rise in the price of oil are having more drastic effects on the air transport system than we have ever experienced before. A solution must be found quickly, and perhaps it is time to start thinking about cooperation instead of confrontation.
Sixth, as far as matters of public procurement are concerned, my personal opinion is that it would be more appropriate not to include this important sector of the economy fully in the WTO system. In almost all national economies, public procurement is an important catalyst for economic development. Politicians must also have a certain degree of influence in some areas key to shaping the way society develops."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples