Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-03-09-Speech-2-504"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-03-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Regulation applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20100309.27.2-504"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-03-09-Speech-2-5052
lpv:speaker	lp:Syed Kamall2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, I think we all understand that one of the aims of the GSP system was to integrate the poorer countries into the global trading system. Granting preferential treatment was seen as a positive way of tackling some of the trade imbalances between the richer countries and the poorer countries. As someone who has many friends and relatives in many of these poorer countries, I think we have to look no further than the governments of many of these countries: poor governance issues; state monopolies and corrupt governments that are preventing entrepreneurs in these countries from creating wealth; the fact that they find it difficult to import the materials that they need to add value and create wealth; also the fact that many citizens of the countries are denied access to goods and services that we take for granted here in the EU and in many richer countries. Let us also recognise that the best way to help people out of poverty is to help the entrepreneurs. The entrepreneurs will create the jobs, they will create the wealth and they will take poor people out of poverty. During recent negotiations on the economic partnership agreements, many Members right across the political spectrum were concerned about the Commission’s one-size-fits-all approach to the EPAs. In one case in which I was concerned, the Commission official, when questioned in committee, said that the EPAs are not only about trade; they are also about regional integration and exporting the EU model. But when we asked whether some of the ACP countries that had specific concerns could be given GSP+ as an alternative, we were told this was not possible because they violate certain of the conventions and therefore do not qualify for GSP+. Going forward, surely we should look to be more flexible in our application of GSP+, perhaps as an alternative to the EPAs. We can treat this in a number of ways. We can either impose sanctions on countries that do not meet standards or we can engage in ongoing dialogue to ensure that conditions in these countries are improved, and understand that Rome was not built in a day and neither were Europe’s superior high standards. It is time to engage and to help entrepreneurs in developing countries rather than to over-politicise the issue."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; AFCO (2009-07-20--2011-02-01)3 substitute; INTA (2009-07-21--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2009-10-08--2011-07-31)3 member; PECH (2009-07-14--2013-11-18)3 substitute; ECON (2009-07-21--2011-06-07)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with Switzerland and Norway and to the EU-Iceland Joint Parliamentary Committee and the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2012-02-01)3 unknown; Conservative Party (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Syed Kamall,"1 "deputising for the author."1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph