Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-06-15-Speech-2-548"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100615.31.2-548"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr Davies, your question raises the important issue of the effectiveness of European Union diplomacy in international environmental negotiations, against the background of the disappointing results of the meetings in Copenhagen on Climate Change and in Doha on Trade in Endangered Species.
The European Parliament shall, of course, be immediately and fully involved at all stages of the procedure.
The Commission is currently discussing with Member States in the Council how to implement this framework. In those discussions, the Commission is very vigilant that the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty effectively results in reinforcing the unity and the coherence of EU representation in multilateral negotiations. Any other interpretation of the Lisbon Treaty simply risks and, in fact, weakens the EU’s standing on the international arena, which is certainly not what the Lisbon Treaty was meant to bring about.
What is at stake is the future of the EU organisation and efficiency in global environment negotiations, and the Commission counts on the support of Parliament on this issue.
We obviously need to learn a number of lessons from these experiences, against the background of the relevant provisions in the Lisbon Treaty. Having said that, in order to draw a balanced set of conclusions for the future, I think we must recognise that the reasons for the outcomes of these meetings are manifold and need to be analysed on a case-by-case basis.
It is, obviously, not an easy task to agree on a common position among 27 Member States, representing 500 million citizens, for international negotiations on complex issues that have a direct impact on the economy and society of the European Union. Nonetheless, both for the CITES and the climate change negotiations, this did not prevent the EU from agreeing on a common line and carrying out a range of outreach activities towards its international partners.
For the CITES Conference of Parties, the EU position on many issues had been established more than six months before the meeting, outreach activities have been undertaken by EU and Member State delegations all around the world on important EU proposals on sharks and tigers, and internal EU discussions before and during the CoP on those topics ran smoothly. But I fully recognise that, in the case of bluefin tuna, these conditions were, unfortunately, not met to the same extent.
On a more general note, the Commission considers that the EU will be able to act more effectively within CITES once it is a full party. The Commission will, therefore, step up its efforts to convince third countries, which have not yet done so, to ratify the Gaborone amendment to CITES, which allows the EU to join the convention.
With respect to the climate change negotiations, the EU’s internal debate in the context of Copenhagen was not excessive and the EU has significantly improved the coordination of its diplomatic sources across the world.
The EU had an intensive outreach schedule to third countries in the run-up to Copenhagen and prepared and presented a common position across all key issues during the Copenhagen meeting. In the run-up to Copenhagen, the EU used multiple coordinated EU Troika demarches in more than 40 countries, effected a range of joint Troika outreach missions, as well as attending various bilateral and multilateral informal dialogues. Its technical negotiating teams discussed and further developed EU positions during various bilateral visits to third countries.
Looking beyond the examples of the Copenhagen and Doha meetings, it is important to see that one of the key objectives of the Lisbon Treaty is to strengthen the Union’s voice in the world. The implementation of the Lisbon Treaty will notably reinforce the EU’s external representation in international environmental affairs.
In this field, the treaty tasks the Commission with ensuring the Union’s external representation. In case the Council considers it politically opportune that the Union engages in negotiations on international agreements, the treaty obliges the Council to authorise the Commission to conduct such negotiations on behalf of the Union for matters falling under Union competence. The Council may complement such authorisation by negotiating directives."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples