Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-09-27-Speech-2-473-500"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110927.26.2-473-500"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Although I agree with the rest of this important report on Union trade policy, I voted against two of its points. The first area with which I disagree concerns conceding exceptional trade preferences to third countries as a means of emergency aid in disaster situations. The EU has specific instruments for emergency aid and trade preferences are clearly ill-suited to this purpose, both because they are slow to take effect and because it is hard to focus them on those most in need of aid in these situations.
Secondly, while financial aid comes out of the EU budget, trade preferences will only affect those countries damaged by imports facilitated by exemptions from or reductions in customs duties, which are usually the EU’s less rich countries, as demonstrated by what has happened with the Pakistan case.
I also voted against the reservations expressed in the report regarding the use of ‘trade defence instruments’, or anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures. These are essential to fair trade, as they constitute action that can be taken against unfair and anti-competitive trade practices by certain countries – China, for one – that cause serious harm to European companies within the European market itself."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples