Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-01-19-Speech-2-178"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100119.8.2-178"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"First of all, with respect to the GSP and GSP+, we have nothing in principle against these being included in the Cotonou Agreement, but we should realise that GSP and GSP+ are unilateral and Cotonou is contractual. I think it is therefore very difficult to put them in the Cotonou Agreement, but maybe we can find formulas that make the link more intricate.
Democratic scrutiny: several speakers have requested that the practice of holding two annual plenary meetings be maintained. The Commission is prepared to reconsider its point of view in this respect, but perhaps we could nevertheless agree to let the regional meetings coincide, as far as possible, with one or two of the plenary meetings, since it seems to me that all the meetings of the European Parliament, together with those of the other institutions, create an awful lot of meetings. I therefore agree in principle with the idea of having two plenary meetings, but let us try to bring them closer to the regional meetings.
Several speakers also spoke of the nature of the Economic Partnership Agreements. This is the term we agreed on, but in fact we should really talk in terms of development partnership agreements, and I think that this would also make the discussion with the ACP countries easier. I think that this would be liable to make the debate a little more open. In any case, if the European Parliament should agree at some point to a new Commission, of which I am a member, I will do everything possible, within my remit, to make these agreements a success and to be present at the sessions of the Joint Parliamentary Assembly.
There were some questions on fiscal matters. I think that I have already dealt with this point in my introduction, and I really believe that it is important that this becomes a crucial subject in our discussions with the ACP countries, but also among ourselves, since, let us be serious – and I know that the Spanish Presidency also has a keen interest in this subject – if we really want to do something, we also have to have the courage to intervene with our societies in these developing countries. The problem does not only arise there, the problem arises in particular, and I would even say above all, in the relationship between Europe and its own societies and industries in developing countries. This is a process that is under way and I understand that the Spanish Presidency will also take initiatives in this respect.
Migration.
With respect to Article 13, both sides want to update migration. On Article 13, the Commission has put forward a balanced and coherent proposal that builds on the three pillars of cooperation in the areas of migration and development, legal migration and illegal migration and readmission. The aspects put forward by the report are duly taken into account. All areas deserve equal attention. Negotiations are ongoing, and we are optimistic about finding an agreement provided the balance between the three pillars is kept.
Mr Cashman made a remark with respect to discrimination. Mr Cashman is not here at the moment, but I think he is completely right. Sexual orientation was part of the elements proposed by the Commission and we attach a lot of importance to it, but you should also be aware, as the Commission is, that in some ACP countries, homosexuality is forbidden by law. We recently made representations to the Burundian President and also to the Ugandan President because they have introduced discriminatory laws, but this is a very touchy subject and I think, at a certain moment in time, you will have to come to grips with it. Either you insist that the text is very clear, and probably we will not get an agreement on it: that is the first possibility; or another possibility is perhaps that we have some language which is less specific. UN language is less specific but would also cover sexual orientation. That is something that should be further discussed in the course of the negotiations. I think I have reacted to most of the points, even if it meant that I have spoken for too long."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples