Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-02-02-Speech-1-177"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090202.17.1-177"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are talking about the impact of economic partnership agreements on development. ‘Economic partnership agreements’ really is quite a mouthful, particularly in German. It is a horrible phrase, and no doubt very few people in Germany will concern themselves with this topic, despite the fact that it will be one of the most important topics in coming years. What is it all about?
The Cotonou Agreement states that economic partnership agreements should be concluded between the European Union and the ACP (African, Caribbean Pacific) States by the end of 2007. The background to this was that developing countries that were not, and are not, in the ACP Group of States complained to the World Trade Organization (WTO) that the European Union was according the ACP States special privileges.
We have now managed to set up, at least in part of the Caribbean, an economic partnership agreement of this type, which we hope will be a success. My report states that this agreement will form a new basis for development cooperation: we are helping them to help themselves. We are trying to link together trade and development, by which I mean trade policy and development policy. There has, of course, been a certain amount of friction, in particular here in Parliament between our committee, the Committee on Regional Development, and the Committee on International Trade, relating primarily to the compatibility of this agreement with the rules of the WTO and especially the issue of parliamentary scrutiny.
My report originally included two paragraphs – numbers 5 and 17 – relating to parliamentary scrutiny. At the request and on the advice of the chairman of the Committee on International Trade, I deleted both of those paragraphs completely and submitted an alternative draft report with these paragraphs deleted, on which we will be voting on Thursday. Apart from the two deletions, my draft report is identical to the first draft. It sets out both the opportunities and the risks of the economic partnership agreements, but it particularly emphasises the potential positive effects of these agreements on the people in those countries.
Before I finish, Mr President, I would just like to say one more thing: some of our fellow Members have repeatedly claimed that people in the ACP States had too little time to conclude these agreements. That is not true: they had from 2000 to 2007; then they had another year until 2008; and we still have time. We are not, however, saying to people in these countries that they can do it whenever they like: time is running out. It is in the interests of the people in the ACP States, and I therefore call on all Members of this House to vote in favour of my report on Thursday, including those who originally intended to vote against it. This is not an argument between the left and the right; it is about helping people in the ACP States to become more self-confident and, in the foreseeable future, to become equal partners in international trade."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples