Mr President, the gap between the rich, the poor and the poorest countries of all has been growing since the 1990s. Removing the barriers to trade on products from developing countries on the part of the EU has not visibly improved the situation in third countries, although the EU is the largest export market for agricultural products from the developing countries. One drawback of the European Union’s policy on developing countries has been the promotion in many places of autonomous production in those countries. At the same time the export of heavily subsidised European agricultural products is harming or destroying local production. Besides removing barriers to trade we also have to promote the spread of fair trade products in the Union. The Commission has supported information campaigns for fair trade products, but at the same time has said their high prices will only fall if demand for them grows. The EU should calculate the threshold price for fair trade products and raise the threshold prices for other products from developing countries. A drop in fair trade threshold prices would help them to sell in the EU. That in turn would increase the volume of production in the developing countries. Then production would move more in the direction of fair trade. At the same time the Developing Countries Fund should be used to support in particular the farms that go over to operating under the fair trade sign. Low-interest loans and development aid should be granted to develop these farms so as to organise training and education programmes for those who are left jobless, especially women. We make donations and organise collections to prevent famine, but often forget that it is we who cause those famines with the import duties we impose. Member States should also favour fair trade products in public procurement, with increasing demand resulting in lower costs and lower retail prices. Global crop production cannot be increased by making the amount of land available for cultivation greater. Scarcer water resources also have an impact. Increased large-scale irrigation is no longer possible. If food production cannot be increased we must change the basis for its distribution as well as our trading relations. Apart from the uneven distribution of food, one of the reasons for famine that might be mentioned is often an unstable political situation. At present the seriousness of the famine in Sub-Saharan Africa is specifically due to the fact that conventional humanitarian aid can no longer be used to prevent a catastrophe owing to political instability in the region. The capacity of governments for confronting this crisis is totally non-existent. Famine must be averted through social remedies as well as political and economic ones. Often it is mainly women who suffer from famine. Although women produce more than half the world’s food, according to an estimate by the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation, they nevertheless have the poorest prospects of owning land, being granted credit, studying and enjoying their social rights. Parliament’s political groups have drafted a joint motion for a resolution on the statement by the Commission. There is therefore very firm political backing for aid for the victims of famine and for financial support for the developing countries. This should also be visible in the policies of the Commission and the Council. My worst fear is that once again in issues relating to the developing countries there will be fewer deeds than words. That must not be. Behind theoretical speech there is a whole real world. They are real people, not dummies. They have a pain threshold. This must not be forgotten.

Political group: PPE-DE