European Union-Latin America and Caribbean Summit (debate)
The next item is the Council and Commission statements on the European Union-Latin America and Caribbean Summit.
President-in-Office of the Council. - (SL) The Council welcomes the interest shown by the European Parliament in the strengthening of the strategic partnership between the European Union and Latin America and the Caribbean. We are equally pleased with the active role Parliament has had in encouraging concrete commitments towards this region, which would bring considerable benefits to citizens on both sides.
First I should like to congratulate you for establishing the EuroLat joint Parliamentary Assembly, which will play a crucial role in bringing the citizens of both sides together. The Resolutions that EuroLat adopted during its session in December were a valuable and stimulating contribution to the objectives of the Heads of State or Government from countries on both sides at the summit meeting which is to be held next month. We are equally pleased, Mr President, that you have expressed your interest in participating in the May EU-LAC Summit. In this way, with your participation, the good practice introduced at the summit meeting in Vienna in 2006 will be continued.
The European Union and the Latin American and Caribbean countries have agreed that their summit meeting in Lima, under the title 'Addressing our People's Priorities Together', will focus on two key chapters. Firstly: on poverty, inequality and exclusion, three of the topics representing the key challenges for social cohesion. And secondly: on environment, climate change and energy - under the title of Sustainable Development. Regarding the first of the two chapters, poverty, inequality and exclusion, I should like to emphasise that for the European Union social cohesion is of key importance and also an objective which is in line with long-term European traditions. Social cohesion means all three, it means fighting poverty, inequality and exclusion. All three components are inextricably connected. We agree with the Latin American and Caribbean countries that our cooperation should be strengthened in all three areas mentioned. This is why we intend to devote our attention to the following subjects: social security, taxation policies and their efficiency, productive investments for more jobs and for better jobs, a policy to fight against all forms of discrimination, sexual, ethical, religious or any other, the improvement of basic social services and social security networks, and the quality of education.
A significant aspect of social progress is the provision of suitable jobs. As you know, all the agreements between the European Union and the Latin American countries and regions contain articles on cooperation in the field of social policy and commitments to respect the so-called primary labour standards, as defined by the International Labour Organization. During the preparations for the Lima summit meeting, both sides have been looking for ways to encourage jobs which have been defined in this way, especially in small and medium-sized undertakings. At the same time the Slovenian Presidency has been emphasising that greater investment in education, particularly at elementary and vocational level, is of key importance in improving our countries' competitiveness both in the European Union and in the Latin American and Caribbean countries.
The second key chapter of the approaching summit meeting: sustainable development and environment, climate change and energy. We emphasise that poverty is closely related with these issues. Climate change will seriously affect our economies, growth and our policy to reduce poverty. We already know that the most vulnerable groups will probably suffer the most. We are aware, both in the European Union and in the Latin American and Caribbean countries, of the safety risks that will be caused by climate change. We know that failure to act means that the consequences will be much graver than the costs of preventative measures. From the current discussions concerning the statement that is to be adopted at the summit, it is clearly evident that we shall be jointly addressing numerous aspects of the global challenge.
We shall both have to change examples of unsustainable manufacturing and consumption. Provisions for concrete and urgent measures for the sustainable management of forests and the use of resources have to be put in place in order to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, to stimulate investments in manufacturing with low carbon dioxide emissions, to preserve biodiversity, for the management of water resources, and the like.
Of course, the European Union and the Latin American and Caribbean countries will also give priority to further cooperation in this field within the framework of the United Nations. And in conclusion to this introduction, I would like to thank you for your attention.
Vice-President of the Commission. - (FR) Mr President, ladies and gentleman, I should like to join the Minister in thanking Parliament for having included this European Union-Latin America and Caribbean Summit on the agenda for its plenary sitting. This will be the fifth top-level meeting between our regions since our strategic partnership was launched at the Rio Summit in 1999.
The Lima Summit will place particular emphasis on two specific topics: firstly, the fight against poverty, inequality and exclusion, and secondly, climate change and energy. The Summit is taking place in a very stimulating climate.
The Latin America-Caribbean region is changing very fast. For the first time, the gross domestic product of the region has increased by an average of 5% over the past five years. Hence public budgets have increased and that is enabling the region to address the risks of social equality, which are still significant. It must not be forgotten that over 200 million people still live in poverty there. The region is also becoming increasingly important internationally as a producer of agricultural products and biofuels.
These developments are part of a political context divided between democracy, which is still the most common system in the region, and a growing trend towards populism, indeed, in some cases, the strengthening of executive power at the expense of parliamentary government and the primacy of law.
As you know, Europe is involved at very many levels. With the region, it has committed itself to resolving those structural problems. Europe is still the main donor for development cooperation, the biggest foreign employer. As the second trading partner for the region, Europe leads the field in investment, which is considerably higher than investment by China. Our general association agreements with Chile and Mexico have had a significant impact on the growth in our trade since they were first introduced. We are now at the third stage of the negotiations for the signature of association agreements with the Andean Community and Central America, which there is every indication will happen in the near future. We are working on promoting and supporting regional integration, sharing the positive experience of Europe in that respect.
Similarly, we are currently negotiating with Mercosur on the possibilities for getting things moving again in the present situation. We have recently signed a strategic partnership with Brazil, which should lead to the initiation of a first joint action plan by the end of this year. The Caribbean region is the first, and so far the only one, to have successfully negotiated an economic partnership agreement with the Union under the Cotonou Agreement.
We are, of course, continuing to support democracy and human rights throughout the region, both through cooperation programmes and also, where necessary and only when requested, through election observation missions.
Finally, I shall outline the priorities for the Summit and the immediate future. Social cohesion and regional integration, in view of their importance for economic and political stability, and multilateralism, since the values of the two regions are very similar, must remain the political priorities for the European Union-Latin America-Caribbean partnership. The main objective of the European Union for the Lima Summit is to consolidate the existing strategic partnership and move it forward in two areas, social cohesion and sustainable development, which will be of crucial importance to our relationship with the region in the immediate future.
As regards social cohesion, the European Commission has been implementing major aid and cooperation programmes to reduce poverty in the region. Forty per cent of the EUR 2.6 billion cooperation and development allocation for the next six years is being used to resolve social cohesion problems.
As regard the environment and climate change, we want to cooperate more with the region in order to meet this global challenge. On the initiative of the Commission, the first European Union-Latin America-Caribbean ministerial dialogue on the environment was opened in March 2008, as a prelude to the Lima Summit. We need to seize the opportunity that is open to us to ratify with our partners the existing relationship between sustainable development and climate change, even if many countries in Latin America still devote very little attention to the problems of climate change, in spite of its negative and sometimes disastrous impact on the region.
Finally, the European Union must emphasise the important role that it continues to play in promoting this regional integration and the positive effect of the integration on the economic and political stability of the sub-regions.
That is the information that I have for Parliament and I shall obviously be very interested in the speeches that follow.
on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (ES) Mr President, beyond mere rhetoric, what the EP wants from the ambitious resolution it intends to adopt tomorrow is to match its words with actions, supporting the Lima agenda in terms of poverty and social exclusion as well as protecting the environment and fighting climate change with a raft of measures.
Mr President, we also wish to expand on the arrangements for the association agreements - in which we must have faith and believe - with the Mercosur Customs Union, with the Andean Community and with Central America, so that they can b concluded as quickly as possible, and especially within this parliamentary term, to allow the House to issue its mandatory consent.
We also wish to express our solidarity with all those who have been kidnapped in Colombia, including, of course, Ingrid Betancourt, and again call for their unconditional and immediate release.
Mr President, Latin America has a population of 600 million, it accounts for 10% of the world's GDP, it is home to 40% of the planet's vegetable species and has a wealth of exceptional human resources.
For the EU, however, Latin America is not just a market, it is a continent with a shared history and common values, which, not without some difficulty, are apparently becoming consolidated, if not everywhere: freedom, democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law.
This is the message we wish to send from the European Parliament, which we will repeat at the EuroLat Assembly in Lima next week: we want to see the establishment of a regional strategic association based on values, a bi-regional strategic association with a soul.
Mr President, I feel that this is a wonderful occasion to ask the President-in-Office of the Council and the Commission to make every effort. Indeed, the EP will see to it that the Lima Summit is a resounding success, and you, Mr President, will have the opportunity, on behalf of the House, to send out a clear and well-defined message of the EU's new commitment to Latin America.
on behalf of the PSE Group. - (DE) Mr President, distinguished empty Chamber, ladies and gentlemen, on 16 and 17 May the heads of state and government of the European Union and the Latin American countries will meet in Lima. That will be an opportunity for them to achieve an historic breakthrough in the bi-regional dialogue between Europe and Latin America and develop a new dimension in relations between our two continents.
One third of the member states of the United Nations are European and Latin American countries. That figure alone should indicate to the Europeans that the transatlantic relationship means more than just Europe's relations with the United States of America. Transatlantic relations mean Europe and Latin America, above all! On almost all the important issues that we debate in this House, the Latin American countries' views dovetail with those of the European Union.
In our resolution, we talk about our ideas on social cohesion, and these ideas are shared in their entirety by all the Latin American governments, whether they are led by the right or the left. We talk about the measures that are essential to protect the environment and the climate, and this meets with great resonance on the Latin American side. Let me point out in passing that none of the climate goals - not one - can be achieved unless the Latin American countries are on board with us.
When we talk about the reform of the international institutions, the reform of the United Nations, about Security Council reform, when we Europeans talk about multilateral policies being the solution to conflicts in the 21st century, all our Latin American partners give us wholehearted support. When we talk about the need to reform the financial systems and bring the international financial markets under control, then nowhere do we meet with greater understanding than in Latin America. Speak to any Argentine politician, whether from the left or the right, and they will tell you exactly what havoc international finance policy can wreak in a country!
When we talk about the food crisis, as we did yesterday, and about the increasing scarcity of food and farmland for food-growing as a result of the production of biomass, and how this is a consequence of environmental policy, we should talk to the Brazilians, and to Latin American politicians. We will find a clear focus on these problems. The increasing scarcity of food is causing price rises and hitting our consumers hard, but they are hitting consumers in Latin America even harder. Nowhere is there stronger backing for Europe, and stronger resonance when it comes to solving current problems, than in Latin America.
In Vienna, at the last Summit, Chancellor Schüssel, as the then President of the Council, said: 'It was marvellous, everyone was able to talk to each other!' That is great, but we cannot afford that to be the only outcome in Lima. We must now achieve tangible agreements with Mercosur, with the Andean Community and with the Central American countries and bring the negotiations to a conclusion.
I do not want to draw a veil over the many problems which exist and which have to be resolved; these have to be addressed as well. What are we going to do about Cuba? Do we want to maintain the sanctions for much longer? The vast majority of the EU Member States want to lift these useless sanctions. There are some who are not in favour, however. What is interesting is that some of the countries which do not want to lift the sanctions are, nonetheless, massively expanding their trade relations with Cuba at present. That will be hard to explain to anyone in the long run. Let us put an end to this policy. Let us remember that bringing about change by fostering closer relations is always a better approach than the isolation championed by George W. Bush.
Of course, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra is right to say that FARC must release the hostages. Colombia, as a country, is a hostage to terrorism, more than any other, and Ingrid Betancourt must be released, and all the other hostages must be released as well.
Relations between the European Union and Latin America could be the key to cooperation between two major world regions. Making the world a more peaceful place, adapting its institutions to the needs of the 21st century, tackling environmental and food problems, developing better financial controls: all these issues are on the agenda in Lima. My Group attaches great importance to encouraging the European Parliament to give far more priority to this policy in future than we have done in the past.
on behalf of the ALDE Group. - (ES) Mr President, a community such as the Latin-Caribbean community, whose entire population on the American continent resembles our own, whom we can speak to in its own languages - Portuguese, French and Spanish, among others - merits special consideration and treatment by the European institutions.
In additional to historical links, we share Christian roots, principles, values and many interests, and so we must continue to elaborate on the bi-regional strategic association already announced at the four Summits of Heads of State and Government preceding the Lima Summit we are discussing today.
This means we can continue to propitiate social, cultural and political rapprochement between our societies, and also in terms of trade, economics, security and the fight against climate change and in favour of sustainable development.
I agree we ought to give this association a full strategic perspective, which, on the heels of those already in place with Mexico and Chile, should lead as soon as possible to negotiations with Mercosur, the Andean Community and Central America and, on the basis of a multicultural vision, allow us to create a global interregional EuroLat zone as a WTO-compatible model envisaging freedom of movement of persons and free commercial and regional trade facilities.
To this end, Europe must make its contribution to the diversification and modernisation of production processes in Latin America with plans for technology transfer and capacity-building, creating the best possible context for investment within a comparable framework of legal certainty, towards Latin American integration and, as the culmination of all this, the eradication of poverty, inequality and exclusion.
We must make intelligent use of the Community funding instruments relating to development cooperation, promotion of democracy and human rights and other programmes in relation to training, education, scientific and technical cooperation, health, emigration, etc.
We ought to create a bi-regional solidarity fund, a conflict prevention centre, a foundation to encourage dialogue, an emigration observatory, and immediately add Mercosur to the EuroLat Parliamentary Assembly.
The future will not wait, Mr President, and uniting both sides of the Atlantic is the West's challenge in the context of globalisation and the 21st century.
on behalf of the UEN Group. - (LV) Ladies and gentlemen, although relations between the European Union and Latin America could be described as dynamic, our potential for cooperation is nowhere near being fully exploited. Now to some practical matters: Latin America is generally rich in energy resources, but demand will increase and it will require the necessary major investments. It is mutually advantageous that there should be equal opportunities in the different Latin American states for our investment - including those in which restrictions have been laid down. For its part, the European Union ought to lend a helping hand in the sphere of renewable energy technologies, since climate change is a shared concern. The reality of the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean region is such that the benefits of democracy on some occasions do not reach society as a whole. It is therefore very important to pass on our experience in reinforcing democratic institutions. A stable and secure region with sustainable socio-economic development is in our interests. A transition from donor policy to cooperation between equal partners is both the objective and the result hoped for from our joint work. Thank you.
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. - (ES) Mr President, firstly I wish to remind the House that here we are discussing a summit with a dubious process, the results of which are certainly unpredictable. Nobody entertains any doubts, in my opinion, as to the importance of improving relations between two of the world's most populated regions boasting high levels of progress, Europe and Latin America.
It is also true, however, at least at present, judging by the results of previous summits, that there are many unknown factors within this process. For example, beyond the rhetoric, the truth of the matter is that the context of relations between the EU and Latin America, to date at least, has produced little success in terms of regional integration or in reducing poverty levels there.
We all know that it is no easy process to secure specific agreements at such a varied forum with such a wide spectrum of political views as the Lima Summit. Nevertheless, this is why I feel it is relevant to pay close attention to social and political movements in the region moving towards changes in the erstwhile majorities on the American continent. I also wish to take this opportunity to congratulate President Lugo on the results obtained in Paraguay, as an example of these changing trends of which we ought to take due note.
I admit that I am highly sceptical about what may emerge from the meeting of the Heads of State in May beyond reiteration of the three commitments already made in the past; the fight against poverty and in favour of social cohesion and sustainable development.
Be that as it may, I still believe it is important not to miss out on this new opportunity as we did in the past. Specifically, I feel two essential aspects here ought to form part of both the discussions and their conclusions. Firstly, we must bear in mind that not only should association agreements between the EU and Latin America be comprehensive, ambitious and balanced, but it is of paramount importance that they make a contribution to people's human rights and social and economic rights, and to mutual sustainable development and to the reduction of inequalities. This means that, secondly, the current asymmetries between both regions ought to be taken into account, with a specific goal: not to move us closer to what some parties apparently wish to see, a European-style Americas Free Trade Area.
I would also call for the summit to take note of a call made in this House recently to combat the murder of women, feminicides, since I hold this as one of the world's main challenges at the present time, including in the region concerned.
I also wish to call upon the organisers of the summit, in this case the Peruvian authorities, and more specifically the authorities in Lima, to guarantee participation by civil society. Among other measures, this means that the Enlazando Alternativas civil organisations can obtain the space and facilities they need to arrange their work and debates within the framework of the summit, and actually open up dialogue which has been called for on so many occasions.
Lastly, in relation to Colombia, major measures and, I would say in some cases, even drastic measures, must be implemented in all urgency. However, I am one of those who think - and there are many of us who think the same - that any action in this context must be taken as part of an attempt to find a negotiated end to armed conflict. If this is not the case, I fear there can be no solution or positive results, especially for those whose immediate release we are calling for today, but also for groups of people who are now clearly under threat and in danger due to a large number of factors, not only the guerrilla factions, but other elements, too.
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. - (ES) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, Minister, the Fifth Summit certainly has a specific agenda to discuss social exclusion and poverty.
The reality of the situation, ladies and gentlemen, is that a popular response has now emerged to all the policies that have impoverished one of the richest regions on the planet.
The new stance of the people of Paraguay in their election of President Fernando Lugo is the clearest indication of this on the ground in opposition to neo-liberal policies that have impoverished the continent.
The EU must therefore take account of this reality. This is why we feel there must be a new EU position with respect to the Republic of Cuba as part of that new reality.
Minister, in June we will have the opportunity to do away with the old policy of exceptional status that the EU has maintained with the Republic of Cuba, the only country in the world - in the entire world - with which the EU has maintained this exceptional status.
It is now true, with the bilateral state of affairs of the Member States' relations with Cuba, that this position no longer exists. It has been destroyed, and thus we have a magnificent opportunity to become part of the new reality now being introduced by Latin America and the Caribbean.
Thus we intend to support the joint resolution. I feel that all the EP groups have reached a major compromise to secure this agreement. We will doubtless maintain two amendments. One of these concerns Colombia since, in accordance with the United Nations' approach, we feel the conflict in Colombia must be solved by agreed negotiation, political negotiation. There is no other solution to the conflict. Here we should also state our opinion that civil society must be an active participant as an alternative to the Summit of Heads of State and Government in Lima.
We likewise intend to call on the Peruvian Government to do all in its power to allow civil society's Enlazando Alternativas encounters to be held also, thereby offering criticism and alternatives.
on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. - Mr President, Commissioner Barroso was on a sales mission the other day in Ireland. He regretted that President Bush had met 16 different Council presidents during his eight years and praised the Lisbon Treaty for establishing a joint president.
We are currently following the battles between candidates for each competing party, from state to state, on television channels until the American president is elected. How will we choose our president? He will not be elected! There is no election campaign to follow on TV; there are no candidates for primary selection; there are no individuals we can vote for. In Europe, we are leaving it to 27 prime ministers to meet behind closed doors and select a politician from the past: a politician like Mr Blair, who cannot be elected any longer in his own country, or the former Austrian Chancellor, who was voted out of his job in Austria and who may be a candidate of compromise for Chancellor Merkel, Prime Minister Brown and President Sarkozy - the three European leaders who will elect the president for all of us.
They will meet privately behind closed doors and appoint the president whom we shall send to the US and Latin America. Our non-elected president will go to China and Russia and criticise their failing democracy. He - there are no plans for a she - can be accompanied by a Commission president, who is not elected either, and a foreign minister, also hand-picked by a super-qualified majority of 20 of the 27 prime ministers in the Lisbon Treaty Union.
Democracy was born in Europe, 2 500 years ago in Greece. How can a Commission president praise a Treaty in which all the executive functions are hand-picked behind closed doors instead of being the result of the voters' choice? Too many countries have too often sent to Brussels people they wanted to get rid of at home.
Instead of the lack of democracy in the Lisbon Treaty, we should opt for a Europe of democracies and a democratic Europe where the voters elect all the people who will serve the European citizens in negotiations with other countries.
Commissioner Barroso said in Cork that the Lisbon Treaty would bring the EU closer to its citizens. No, it will not! It will erase parliamentary democracy in 49 new areas and give us legislation and representation mainly by people we cannot elect or select. We, the elected, can be heard in foreign policy, but no one needs to listen. We, the elected, can send proposals, via amendments, to the non-elected in the Commission. We, the elected, can vote for or against Commissioner Barroso, if he is reappointed by 20 of the 27 prime ministers. It is not the recipe for democracy we shall represent in a non-democratic world.
Mr President, thank you for allowing the expression of both critical and constructive views for 29 years in this assembly - the least bad institution in the EU. This may be my last debate with the Commission and the Council. After 29 years I will leave this place to my successor, Hanne Dahl, and I will not be a Member during the coming asparagus season in May. Bye, bye, asparagus, Alsace wine, Munster cheese and the monster travelling circus between Strasbourg and Brussels.
(SK) The forthcoming European Union-Latin America and Caribbean Summit will be the fifth meeting of senior officials from both regions. The Summit participants will focus on the priorities that require greater attention: fighting poverty, inequality and discrimination, sustainable development, climate change, environment and energy.
As Vice-Chairman of EuroLat, I would like to speak on the environment, and water issues in particular. I have prepared a working paper for the meeting in Lima in which I analyse the present state of this important natural source in the European Union. In the paper I also evaluate the European Union's assistance to Latin America in relation to water issues, through a survey listing many projects within the scope of this help in areas such as water supply and sanitation, integrated management, research, monitoring and prevention of natural catastrophes.
In conclusion I emphasise the need for a global approach to this issue, through institutional and legislative changes and innovations in the water sector. Access to clean water, and proper solutions to sewage water disposal and sanitation are important preconditions for public health.
(DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, of course, I too would like to wish Mr Bonde personally all the best for the future. Nonetheless, I think it is rather a pity that he felt compelled to repeat his frequent comments about the institutions during this important debate on Latin America, because the subject of Latin America is important in itself. That is borne out by the figures quoted by Mr Schulz. One third of the members of the United Nations will be meeting in Lima. Between us, we represent a billion people and if we can reach agreement, we can have a positive influence on the world's development. In light of globalisation and the challenges we face, notably in relation to China or indeed other countries, it is essential for Latin America and Europe to work together.
Climate change will be an important topic, and the resolutions rightly state that it is the poor who will be hardest hit by climate change. I can speak from experience here: I myself am involved in the work of a small NGO in Central America, and what the people suffered there as a result of Hurricane Mitch and Hurricane Stan is just a small foretaste of what we can expect if we do not get climate change under control. It is good that we agree on so many points here.
There are some points, however, on which we do not yet agree. Here in the House, we voted by a large majority in favour of the inclusion of aviation in emissions trading. Vice-President Barrot is aware of this and has expressed himself in very critical terms on this subject. The rest of the world has attempted to block this move via the ICAO, and unfortunately that includes Latin America. I think this must be a topic for discussion in Lima. If we want to work together to combat climate change, the Latin American countries must also play a constructive role.
Finally, may I say a few words about Cuba. Mr Schulz has said that we should not pursue the same policy as Mr Bush, but we have never done that. We have never applied the kind of economic sanctions - sanctions that affect the Cuban people - that America has imposed. What we have done, in the past, is to make it a priority to ensure that our partners, the democratic opposition, feature in the dialogue.
Oswaldo Payá and the Damas de Blanco have been awarded the Sakharov Prize and we cannot simply revert to 'business as usual' if the Damas de Blanco have still not been able to receive it and, as occurred only last weekend, some of them have been arrested again. We should not forget about our partners in the dialogue with Cuba.
(ES) Mr President, firstly I wish to express my support for our group chairman and spokesman on this issue, Martin Schulz. In my opinion, EU relations with Latin America are our most important relations and have the greatest future potential, in view of the dimensions involved, as has already been said here, our shared values in the multilateral system of the UN, and the evolution of Latin America, which is showing economic growth and a reduction in poverty.
They are all democratic countries, with the exception of Cuba. The Lima Summit is a good opportunity for the other 49 countries to call on the Cuban authorities to launch a peaceful process of transition to democracy through dialogue, and it is also a wonderful opportunity to establish a genuine strategic and sustainable alliance.
Lastly, to prevent us from falling into some rather typically European romantic temptations with respect to terrorism or organisations which, like the FARC, are now drug-dealing guerrillas, not the romantic paramilitary groups of the 70s, they could also be called upon to abandon violence once and for all, unilaterally and unconditionally.
Mr President, I think that human rights and women's rights should also be a high priority in the relationship between the European Union and Latin America. I would like to draw your attention to a specific situation in Nicaragua. The ban on therapeutic abortion, which was legally imposed in 2006, has already had tragic consequences on women's health, with all victims of rape, such as a nine-year-old girl or a paraplegic twelve-year-old girl, obliged to go through with their pregnancies although their own lives are at stake.
Moreover, lawyers and human rights defenders are themselves under criminal investigation for incitement to commit crimes, merely because they challenge this inhuman legislation or because they defend doctors. This is unacceptable and the European Union cannot afford to be silent.
Last week, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted a resolution on access to safe and legal abortion in Europe, which means that we care about women in Europe. But, if we want to convince our citizens that human rights are values that we genuinely treasure, we must prove that we do not apply double standards with regard to partners with whom agreements negotiations are ongoing.
Mr President, the strategic importance of the partnership between the European Union and Latin America and the Caribbean is a very important one. Ever since the 1960s, the European Union, Latin America and the Caribbean region have been building closer political and economic ties.
The EU is now the largest donor of aid to these countries, and the EU is the second largest trading partner of Latin America and the Caribbean region. A large element of these EU monies goes to projects which promote social cohesion and combat poverty. Together as political democratic bodies we are working on a range of issues of mutual importance, including the following: addressing the increasing importance of energy and environmental issues, including climate change via the EU Rio Group, working together on many projects to promote conflict resolution, the rule of law, democracy, good governance and human rights, and putting in place a stronger level of third level education links between our two groupings.
Our political, economic and social links must continue to grow. That said, however, we still have our clear differences. I believe that the EU has made the right decision with regard to Brazilian beef imports, and that all food imports into the European Union in the future must accord at all times to the same exact standards which apply to the European farm and food sectors. There must be a level playing pitch at all times with regard to the rules which apply to EU food imports - regardless of where they come from - and to EU-manufactured products.
(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I have already stated on another occasion how strategically important it is for Europe to conclude a special partnership with Latin America, given our obvious sharing of principles, values, culture and interests.
In an effort to go beyond the numerous redundancies contained in the resolution, I believe it must be stressed at the forthcoming meeting that the two continents have an interest in stepping up trade in semi-processed high-tech goods, for the sake of both partners, without an asymmetrical relationship ultimately putting other possible trade partners at an advantage.
This will be useful for both continents, I believe, thanks in part to the fact that Europe's approach undoubtedly demonstrates greater sensitivity towards sustainable development than for example those of the United States and China. Europe's considerable experience with social organisation and development can also contribute significant added value to bilateral trade. Hence the need, in my opinion, to bolster our commitment to creating the EULAC.
(SL) The events that will take place in Lima in April and May on the parliamentary and governmental line must strengthen the southern dimension of the transatlantic cooperation. It is essential for the development of the strategic partnership between Latin America and the European Union that it takes place in a stable economic, social and political situation. That is why I believe it is of the utmost importance that, given the numerous objectives that accompany our efforts, our efforts are directed primarily towards two crucial objectives. Firstly, towards supporting sustainable economic growth - I am glad that for several years now Latin America has been experiencing economic growth; secondly, towards strengthening regional and inter-regional cooperation.
I think that Latin America is now facing the same challenges as the European Union did during the first years of implementing the common methodology. Thus, I am convinced that the European Union's experience would actually be very applicable in their Continent's attempts to achieve a new quality in regional and inter-regional cooperation, including the achievement of new dynamics. I believe that the word dynamics is very appropriate - we know what difficulties Mercosur encountered in the beginning and, in fact, still does.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have had the opportunity to see the disappearing glaciers of Patagonia. It is a process that is well known also in the European north, and I believe that there could be some unforeseeable developments and/or consequences of these accelerating events that would demand much more cooperation and considerable solidarity, and I hope that the summit meeting in Lima will also pay attention to such possible events.
(PT) Mr President, the cooperation between the European Union and Latin America has been a success story. It now has its own particular framework with the creation of the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly which will give fresh impetus and incentive. I would say that this is the first stage in the integration of Members of Parliament of Latin America and this House. I hope that we in the European Parliament will shoulder this responsibility and adopt the Joint Declaration in question so that this can serve as a roadmap for the Summit of Heads of State and Government.
I do not have much time to set out my reasons which is why I will endorse what the Chairman of my political group, Martin Schulz, has said. Although I fully agree with him, I must just make a couple of minor points: the first is that Europe has particular responsibility for solving the problems in Colombia. Europe must fully commit to the Colombia issue and help to ensure stability in that country. It must also quickly find a solution in order to normalise relations between the European Union and Cuba. It makes no sense for the current situation to continue. We must move forward in a spirit of progress and cooperation.
(ES) Mr President, Latin America shares many principles and values with the European Union as a result of their close historical, human and cultural links. You might even say we are natural partners.
The Lima Summit ought to enhance our bi-regional association with Latin America and the Caribbean in all areas, and encourage agreement to take on global challenges together, from climate change to drug trafficking or terrorism.
One of the most predominant problems in Latin America is social inequality. We must assist the countries in this regard, and it is my hope that the Lima poverty eradication agenda is an ambitious one, although obviously there is no substitute for the political will of the governments concerned.
A key factor in the fight against poverty is economic growth, which is facilitated by private investment. Investment, however, requires stable legal frameworks, and I would like to see an undertaking at the Lima Summit in relation to legal certainty. Foreign investors must not be scared away from Latin America, for in this age of globalisation they will have no difficulty finding other regions for their investment.
To strengthen bi-regional relations, including economic and trade relations, the negotiations on the association agreements with the Central American countries and the Andean Community must be speeded up. Hopefully the Lima Summit will also help to overcome the impasse in the negotiations with Mercosur. The agreements with Chile and Mexico ought to push things forward. While we are on the subject, I should say that consideration ought to be given to elevating Mexico's association with the EU to strategic status.
With a view to forging closer human and educational links, ladies and gentlemen, I also hope that Lima encourages what is now known as the Area of Higher Education, the Common Area of Higher Education, and that we continue to make progress in terms of cooperation between universities and the recognition of studies and qualifications.
This Summit also ought to approve the Euro-Latin American Foundation, a type of think tank for the development of bi-regional relations, and give our relationship some much-needed visibility, since regrettably it is not well known in Europe.
Finally, I hope that the Summit will deliver a renewed commitment to pluralist democracy and respect for human rights in accordance with the profound concept of human dignity, which we support on both sides of the Atlantic. The idea of the political prisoner, Mr President, must be totally eliminated in Latin America, and in Cuba, and violence against dissidents must be stamped out.
(PL) Mr President, European Union-Latin America and Caribbean summits play a significant role in defining and strengthening the direction of the strategic partnership between our regions. The forthcoming Lima Summit provides a further opportunity to deepen dialogue on matters of crucial importance to both areas. I am therefore pleased to note that the main focus of the Summit will be on issues that are vital in terms of ensuring the ongoing well-being of our societies and contributing to stable economic growth.
On the one hand, the Summit will deal with issues pertaining to social cohesion, notably poverty, inequality, discrimination and social exclusion. I should like to point out that according to estimates by the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean in 2007, 36.5% of the population of the region is living in poverty, whilst 13.5% is living in extreme poverty. The figures have improved in recent years, but the problem still calls for commitment from many partners: Member States of the European Union are numbered among the latter.
On the other hand, issues pertaining to sustainable development, environmental protection, climate change and energy represent challenges that are having an increasing impact on the way both continents function. Unquestionably, therefore, there is a need to establish common priorities and ways of working together in order to respond effectively to the forthcoming changes. Reconciling economic growth with the principles of sustainable development is particularly important. This is a very difficult challenge indeed, particularly in the case of developing economies and of those undergoing change.
It should also be borne in mind that cooperation between the EU and Latin America and the Caribbean transcends the two main areas to be dealt with at the Lima Summit.
I should like to point out too that the second ordinary session of the European-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly is to be held in Lima on the eve of the Summit. The European Parliament's involvement will certainly strengthen the strategic partnership between our regions. Accordingly, I await the results and final declaration of the Fifth European Union-Latin America and Caribbean Summit with great interest.
(DE) Mr President, I welcome the fact that the governments will enter into dialogue on key issues at the European Union-Latin America and Caribbean Summit. Małgorzata Handzlik has just made the point that it is very important that the parliaments should also be increasingly involved in this intercontinental dialogue and contribute to the process.
In my view, it is especially important that there should be stronger contacts between Europeans and the people of South or Latin America and the Caribbean. It is not only business people and tourists but young people, above all, who have an important role to play. We need them if we are genuinely to establish better relations.
In the European Union, we have gained valuable experience with student exchange programmes among the Member States, and this system should now be intensified in our relations with Latin America and the Caribbean as well.
We need young people so that we can find viable and sustainable solutions in future to many of the important issues we face.
(ES) Mr President, Latin America is a changing continent. Changes are occurring on a constant basis, and specifically there have been two major changes in recent months or weeks or days.
The first is Cuba's policy in terms of how it treats its citizens from an economic and a social perspective; the second change has been brought about by the elections in Paraguay, which would seem to promise a completely different government.
In view of these situations and these changes, how have the Council and Commission reacted to take account of these changes and the possibility of influencing these two countries?
(PL) Mr President, the countries of Latin America have undertaken far-reaching pension reforms with significant involvement by the World Bank. Europe's demographic crisis suggests that we should consider whether we are satisfied with legal provisions that promise a relatively good deal despite uncertainty as to the existence of sufficient financial backing to enable those promises to be met. In view of the different experiences of both continents in this regard, it may be worth working together as we consider how to deal with the problem. We need to find a way of enabling people of an advanced age to lead a dignified life, even though they are often in poor health and therefore unable to continue working despite the economic impact of the demographic crisis.
(PT) The parliaments of Latin America and Europe are fundamental to the success of this Summit. They are also fundamental to achieving the two main objectives, which are the integration of Latin America and cooperation between the European Union and Latin America, based on the values defended in this House and in particular on those highlighted by the Chairman of my political group.
However, Mr President, I must point out another aspect, which is that this cooperation and its effectiveness are important not only for the two continents of Latin America and Europe but also, due to the values defended by these two groups throughout the world, for the global context. Through this cooperation, those results not achieved through the Millennium Development Goals, through multilateralism and through the pursuit of those values guiding European integration and the European project can be achieved throughout the world. It is this global aspect that in my view justifies a greater commitment from us all, in particular the parliaments.
(RO) The historical, social and political conditions in Latin America have put women in a doubly difficult position: on the one hand, they are mostly responsible for the economic production, especially in the rural environment.
On the other hand, they are the favourite victims of forced relocation and dispossession, human trafficking, violence, sexual exploitation and public control over their reproductive capacities.
Under these conditions, taking a gender approach is not only desirable but necessary. For this reason, we request your support for an oral amendment that would support the strengthening of women's positions and respect for their rights.
President-in-Office of the Council. - (SL) I have listened very carefully to the debate on the preparations for the EU-LAC Summit, and I believe that it will be of great help for the preparation and conduct of the summit meeting. Mr Salafranca said that the cooperation between the European Union and Latin American and Caribbean countries must move from words to actions. I could not agree more; however, I would add that this is actually happening. The EU-LAC summit meetings are not just events where eloquent statements are made and grand designs are announced but never materialise. These meetings are events where commitments are made that do actually come true.
In this connection I should like to mention several points. The report on bi-regional cooperation between the European Union and the Latin American and Caribbean countries, which the joint presidency presented at the previous, fourth summit meeting in Vienna, is proof of the substantial progress which has been achieved so far in the actual implementation of the commitments made. I should also like to mention almost 400 bi-regional measures for the implementation of the commitments made in Guadalajara, as well as the new list that has been prepared concerning the implementation of commitments made at the Vienna Summit in 2006. We hope that the Lima Summit will achieve a further step towards the acceptance and implementation of commitments undertaken.
A number of Members of the European Parliament, amongst others Mr Schulz, Mr Meyer-Pleite, Mr Liese, Mr dos Santos and several others, regretfully I cannot mention them all, have mentioned the Cuban issue. I should like to say that the Lima Summit will not be the EU-Cuba Summit, neither will it be a summit on Cuba. However, as so many opinions have been voiced, I should like to make just a couple of important points.
For the time being the policy of the European Union, and that of the EU Council and the EU Presidency, towards Cuba is being regulated by the following documents: the common platform of the European Union for 2006, and the General Affairs and External Relations Council's conclusions last year. The two documents represent the basic guidelines for all the Member States and their attitude to Cuba, and also for their talks on Cuba with third countries. I should like to add that the core of the European Union's policy toward Cuba is human rights.
The session of the General Affairs and External Relations Council in June will be another opportunity to discuss Cuba. I should like to say that the Slovenian Presidency is making efforts for a new common platform to be adopted at this session. We hope that our efforts will be successful. However, as I mentioned earlier, this will not be a subject of discussion at the Lima Summit in May, which will be a meeting between the EU and the Latin American and Caribbean countries as a whole.
In conclusion, I should like to say that it is the wish of the Slovenian Presidency that the summit meeting provide a further impetus, or to paraphrase Mr dos Santos, would generate new dynamism in the relationship between the European Union and Latin America and the Caribbean, and I am convinced that with debates such as this one the European Parliament can contribute to the achievement of this aim.
Vice-President of the Commission. - (FR) Mr President, Mr Salafranca, I can say that the Commission has put every possible effort into making this Summit a real success. As Mr Schulz has pointed out, and the Minister has just said, Lima really has to be an opportunity to give a strong impetus to relations between Latin America and Europe.
As many of you, including Mr Schulz, have stressed, we have many shared values. There is joint support for multilateralism and there is an undoubted need for close cooperation between the European Union and the Latin American countries if we want our influence to be felt in an improved global organisation. If we want reforms in the major international institutions, we shall only achieve that through a fairly far-reaching agreement between Latin America and the European Union. There is no other region in the world with which we are working as closely as Latin America at a multilateral level.
Mr President, I should now like to reply briefly to a few questions. The first relates to the hostages. Obviously the Commission has systematically supported all efforts to reach a humanitarian agreement on the release of all hostages. The Commission is, of course, very sensitive to the speeches that have raised this problem.
I should like to say a word about Cuba. Certainly, as the Minister has said, Cuba will not be the central issue at this Lima meeting, but all the same I want to say that the policy of the European Union is one of constructive engagement. We are not in favour of a policy of isolation or sanctions. Our Commissioner, Louis Michel, was in Cuba recently. We are prepared to cooperate with Cuba on areas of common interest, but obviously our dialogue with Cuba includes the human rights issue.
We also want to make progress on the association agreements. We intend to make progress with Mercosur. We also want to reach a conclusion in 2009 with the Andean Community.
I am going to talk about a few points that have been raised in this very interesting debate. The point raised by Madame Belohorská, access to water, is very important and the issue has been included in the draft statement for the Lima Summit. The Commission is backing water access projects and programmes in several countries.
Participation by civil society has also been mentioned. Civil society will be organising two events in preparation for the Lima Summit: the organised civil society conference, ESOSOC, and the conference of NGOs, non-organised societies. The Commission has provided financial backing for those conferences and a report will be presented on them at the Lima Summit.
The question of food prices has been raised and it is true that the rise in food prices will certainly affect Latin America, where over a third of the population is already living in poverty. In some countries, such as El Salvador, people are heavily dependent on food. The increased food prices will obviously have a profound effect on a population that is already very vulnerable. This issue is of course linked to the strategy on biofuels. That is a delicate issue, which it will certainly be worth discussing.
The position of women in Latin America has been mentioned. The Commission is extremely worried about the situation in Latin America, especially in Mexico and Guatemala. We are fully aware of the position and are trying to combat the problem. We are grateful to the European Parliament for its work on the subject.
My replies are not comprehensive, but the debate has been very useful and it will certainly add clarification to the Lima Summit. The Summit will enable us to step up the dialogue with the region and coordinate our efforts better on important international deadlines, especially for the environment. It is also an opportunity for us to see how we can support democratic responses to the structural problems inherent in social cohesion. Certainly the European institutions need to coordinate their efforts to differentiate their approach, to adapt it to the problems of each of the states in the region.
Finally, I should like to welcome the work of EuroLat. EuroLat, the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly, was set up after the 2006 Vienna Summit. It has already made a valuable contribution to cooperation with the region, whilst strengthening the democratic will on both sides. In that connection, we are sure that, with the special links it has with the region through EuroLat, the European Parliament will act decisively in ensuring that the association between the European Union and the countries in the region plays an increasingly important strategic role.
Once again I should like to thank all the Members who have spoken and provided clarification in preparation for the Lima Summit.
To conclude the debate I have received six motions for a resolution pursuant to Rule 103(2) of the Rules of Procedure.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Thursday, 24 April 2008.
Written statements (Rule 142)
in writing. - (HU) It is no accident that the Latin American rain forests are called the lungs of the world. Our climate and with it our future depends on how well we retain the original extent of these life-giving rain forests in Brazil, Columbia, Ecuador, Venezuela and other South American countries, along with their biodiversity and richness of fauna and flora. It is therefore important that environmental protection and a proper climate policy are given heightened emphasis in our cooperation between the European Union and the Latin American countries. The voracious greed for profit, the clearing of the rain forests and the planting of crops for biofuels are contrary to the fundamental interests of humanity. We must therefore motivate our Latin American friends to call an end to these destructive actions. The best way to protect these original natural assets, if we are not to upset the indigenous communities, is to leave the people in ownership of their land and leave them to continue their own way of life. An essential of our development and support policy must be to mutually uphold the requirements for environmental protection.


Impact assessment of the compromises reached in the Doha negotiations on NAMA and services at the end of July 2008 (debate)
The next item is the Commission statement on the impact assessment of the compromises reached in the Doha negotiations on NAMA and services at the end of July 2008.
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, we are facing the greatest economic challenge for a generation, and in that challenge both developed and developing countries face difficult and very important decisions.
We need a positive effect from globalisation to respond to the negative effects of globalisation. It is my strong belief that, wherever we begin to look at what we need to do, we will end in the conclusion that completing the multilateral trade round - the Doha Round - is of vital importance to us.
I probably do not need to remind honourable Members of what history teaches us about protectionism, the importance of keeping our markets open and the possibility for our businesses to be able to trade across the world. I probably do not need to tell all honourable Members that, simply within the rules of the World Trade Organisation, if countries moved from applying their tariffs the way that they do at the present time to applying them in the way they are allowed to do under the rules, then the cost to trade would be something of the order of EUR 260 billion. I am sure I do not need to remind honourable Members that, as the developing nations consider the future, they are deeply concerned about what will happen to some of the aid that has been available to them so far.
So, in terms of where we are: we know the value of a deal that is now 80% complete and that in July 2008 80% of what needed to be done was done. Within that agreement, the value is of the following order: the gains in the developing countries would be of the order of EUR 12-14 billion annually; there would be new access to emerging markets in emerging countries, such as China; we would have the opportunity in the European Union for new exports, diversified in new ways - for example, in chemicals and textiles - and in services there is a potential for EUR 14 billion of trade. Another fact at the present time is that the non-tariff barriers - the non-tax barriers - in China alone in 2007 cost European Union companies EUR 20 billion. This is a hugely important round.
I have just returned from Davos, where discussions between trade ministers reinforced the need to get back to the negotiating table and, of course, the technical discussions are continuing in Geneva.
We all wait for the new American Administration to review its trade policies, as it currently plans to do, and to reach the same conclusion that we have reached. We look forward to the G20 on 2 April 2009 and the opportunity it affords world leaders in terms of looking to resolve the financial and economic crisis and having the opportunity to discuss again the need to complete the round. Then there are the Indian elections in April or May, which of themselves will be the moment for an existing or a new government to return to this subject.
Of the outstanding issues that were left on the table, there is the special support mechanism, which, in the end, was the issue that prevented the talks from continuing between India and the United States. There are new proposals being considered. A decision is still to be taken on cotton, but again there are proposals on the table. For the United States there are real issues about particular sectors.
There is no doubt there is still much to do, but it is my strong belief that, with political will, all these issues can be resolved, and the alternative is not an option. For us, issues around services are very important and will follow on.
In conclusion, we are at the moment at a particular point where the need to complete this round is very obvious and very clear, and I look forward, on your behalf - as well as that of the Commission - to continuing my efforts to ensure that we do.
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the trade in industrial goods and services is indeed of strategic importance to the European economy. The European Union is, as we all know, the biggest exporter in the world and the main source of direct foreign investment. The European Union is one of the most open markets, while eminent partners of ours maintain high trade barriers. We are seeking a substantial reduction in the tariffs applied and for unjustified, non-tariff barriers to be addressed. In addition to industrially advanced third countries, there are also emerging economies which need to make concessions in proportion to their degree of development and their sectoral competitiveness. However, Commissioner, the problem is not only one of removing barriers: differences in regulatory systems are generating additional costs for exports, putting European products at a competitive disadvantage compared with imports from countries with more flexible standards and, in many cases, are raising the question of the safety and protection of European consumers. The prolonged failure to reach agreement is exacerbating the climate of economic uncertainty and is damaging the credibility of the multilateral trade system. Bilateral and interregional agreements can only be supplementary in nature. Furthermore, the economic crisis may trigger the erection of unilateral, restrictive or distorting trade barriers. There are already examples of this, of limited scope at present, as the relevant report by the Director-General of the World Trade Organization, Mr Lamy, testifies. The protection clause for US products adopted by the House of Representatives is a step in the same worrying direction. I would say that to return to unilateral approaches is not a solution. Today more than ever we need to manage the challenges jointly, with more positive integration and by establishing or strengthening international regulatory systems with systemic convergence. We need a new international economic architecture. We need more transparent and balanced global trade governance and, on this point, Commissioner, we await an integrated proposal for 'globalisation with a European face' which will take account of the changes already made and of the link between the commercial and economic dimension for a transparent, democratic and efficient Europe in the world at this time of crisis.
on behalf of the PSE Group. - Madam President, we in the Party of European Socialists are committed to a successful outcome of the Doha Development Round, yet the ticking of the political clock has created a situation where, if you like, progress is on hold. Commissioner Ashton made the point that in the United States we have a new, and from my point of view, very welcome, administration in that of President Obama, but we are waiting for a review of trade policy, which may take some time.
In April or May there will be elections in India. The one place Commissioner Ashton did not mention was the European Union itself, where we have our own European Parliament elections in June, and following that a new incoming Commission, in which I hope Commissioner Ashton will continue to serve as Trade Commissioner. Yet that does not mean that there is nothing to do in the interim. Europe must continue to emphasise its commitment to development and free trade within the context of ensuring an end to exploitation and meeting the need for sustainable development.
I agree with Mr Papastamkos: free trade on this basis can be a win-win situation for all participants. The current financial and economic crisis is a reason to move forward and not to retreat.
Commissioner Ashton and the Commission can try to prepare the ground for a compromise between the United States and India. It was obstinacy on both sides, in my view, that acted to scupper a successful conclusion at the last time of asking. Matters may be 80% agreed, but we need the other 20%. We have one new administration in the United States. The outcome of the Indian election may give us another.
In the mean time, we have no choice but to continue to pursue bilateral agreements. I welcome the progress made in last week's negotiations on the free trade agreement with the Republic of Korea, where I understand we are close to reaching an agreement which, again, will benefit both sides.
I am the rapporteur on the free trade agreement with ASEAN, and have to say that the negotiating basis is creating an institutional road block. We need to consider the possibility of looking at a coalition of the willing and able among ASEAN who can, if you like, sign off on an agreement. As with India, there is in my view currently no governmental will to achieve an outcome. After the election, Delhi's incoming administration, whether new or old, must put up, or we the EU must move on to those who want not just to talk, but to arrive at a conclusion.
Finally, I welcome Mr Pannella, the next speaker, who is the new ALDE spokesman on trade. Maybe a visit to the Committee on International Trade would prove appropriate. We would welcome him.
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that to some extent we could start - given that these terms have been rather widely circulated over the last few days - what we have to do, Commissioner, with a strange kind of comparison between the man of Doha, or ex-Doha - as we hoped - and the man of Davos. I do not feel that this is an adequate distinction, clearly, but it is interesting.
We now find ourselves, as you told us Commissioner, somewhat dependent on events that are not happening in Europe: events in the United States, events in India, and Mr Ford also just reminded us of important areas such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations or South Korea. The real problem, however, is to what extent we, today, the Commission and the European Union, are capable of withstanding that outbreak of nationalism, which was mentioned a moment ago, and of autarchic ideas and new protectionist illusions, which is liable to make your work, Commissioner, and the work of our European Union too, very difficult.
I believe that, in this electoral campaign, it will be extremely important to understand how far the Socialist Group in the European Parliament, the Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, and the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe can manage, together with other participants, to find a way to develop our proposal, the proposal for which you were made spokesman, Commissioner, and to what extent we can really manage to make it a European proposal and not just a proposal, or I should say, our centre of Brussels against a series of capitals that are each already doing their own thing, as unfortunately happened many times in the last century.
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. - (FR) Madam President, there is no point in denying it: during the July negotiations, the Bush Administration and the European Union were caught in their own trap by India and China. What is more, contrary to the hypocritical assertions of liberal economists, for whom the failure of Doha would have been a disaster for poor countries, it was no such thing.
On the contrary, for these countries in difficulty it represented an historic opportunity, in a context marked by significant fluctuations in the prices of raw materials. Even the experts admit, the gains that the poorest countries could have hoped for were well below the tax losses caused by the demise of customs duties in these same countries, duties that would have reached the sum of USD 60 billion.
During these negotiations, the Commission, tangled up as it is in its liberal dogmas, displayed a total lack of responsibility towards the people of Europe, going so far as to propose damaging, even sacrificing, car manufacturing on EU territory in order to succeed in reaching an agreement.
As far as the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Commission are concerned, there are only consumers and never wealth creators. It is this take on matters that is at the root of the current crisis since, by making competition the be-all and end-all of everything, it is pushing us in the direction of yet more salary deflation, and hence the absolute impoverishment of workers and the methodical destruction of all social protection.
Were the Doha Round to be concluded, it would be a disaster for all nations. Moreover, what is particularly painful in the current context is the fact that, in spite of the considerable damage recorded having been taken on board, there is a desire to continue in the wrong direction, no matter what the cost. There is an urgent need to revolutionise the WTO so that democracy may be established there.
(NL) The Doha negotiations have been ongoing for some considerable time now and it is to be applauded that Europe has made real progress towards drawing our positions closer together. Europe has put forward a far-reaching proposal on agriculture but, unfortunately, our efforts have not been reciprocated by other countries. This is another reason why it is so important to look at the package as a whole, which means including NAMA (Non-Agricultural Market Access) and services.
You can be assured of my whole-hearted support in your efforts to reach a rapid agreement. As Europeans, we need to guard against protectionist practices, which are increasingly rearing their heads, mainly due to the poor situation with the world economy, but also under the banner of protecting food safety. As Europeans, we need to reiterate our unwavering commitment to the concept of reciprocity. If we are open, then they need to be open too.
What should we be expecting in this respect from the new US President and the package of measures he has just announced? What can we expect from China? It is, in fact, primarily in this regard that we look to you to act, since, in these times of economic and financial crisis with mass redundancies and shrinking economies, it is precisely this market opening that has the potential to further our interests.
Madam President, our questions have been framed with the intention of highlighting the benefits our citizens can expect from such a package of measures and what we are able to offer in such a package. I fully understand that you cannot respond to these questions in the short time available here, but I want to challenge you, in the coming weeks and months, to be transparent when communicating with citizens about the issues on the table and what these mean for them. This is of particular importance as the European elections approach, and I hope we can count on you to keep this matter high on the agenda.
(PT) In the context of this very serious financial and economic crisis, it is absolutely essential to make progress in concluding the Doha negotiations.
At a time of crisis, there is always a tendency to give way to the temptation of protectionism. Protectionism is actually a kind of neurosis which tends to affect societies and states at times when they are faced with serious crises, such as the one we are experiencing. We must therefore clearly fight against the possible emergence of this protectionist temptation, because we know from history where that leads us. It leads to the general impoverishment of the world community and in no way contributes to solving the grave problems that confront us. One thing, however, is protectionism, which is to be criticised absolutely and should be resisted, and another, quite different thing is the need to guarantee the protection of legitimate interests in the various areas of the world into which we are divided. That is where the European Union also has an obligation to uphold the interests of Europeans, and not just the interests of Europeans as consumers, but also the interests of Europeans as producers.
That is why it is important to proceed with the multilateral Doha negotiations. Whilst we know that protectionism is in fact a mistake, we also know that uncontrolled liberalisation of international trade inevitably leads to very serious disasters from an economic and social point of view. The only way to avoid such uncontrolled liberalisation is by possibly establishing an agreement in the appropriate forum, that is, the World Trade Organization, a multilateral agreement that establishes rules to safeguard the legitimate interests of all the parties concerned. The role of the European Commission and of the European Union, in this case too, is precisely to restore Europeans' confidence.
There is also a crisis of confidence in Europe today in terms of the capacity for defence and political regulation of those who represent it, whether the Member States, the European Commission or the European Union as a whole. Therefore, the challenge we face is precisely that of helping to put an end to this crisis of representation and confidence by ensuring that we are advancing along the right path. The right path, in this case, is to guarantee a multilateral agreement which safeguards all our legitimate interests.
(EL) Madam President, a strategic choice of the European Union and of the bourgeois governments, in the middle of the deep capitalist crisis - a crisis in the accumulation of capital and overproduction which is also infesting the Member States of the European Union - is to use the World Trade Organization as an important prop with an active role in imposing the full liberalisation of trade and commerce, privatisations and takeovers and the penetration of the European monopolies into new markets. The aim of the Doha Round talks is to coordinate an all-out attack by capital, so that the multinational companies can plunder the raw materials of third countries and increase the exploitation of the workers throughout the capitalist world. The anti-grassroots common agricultural policy is the consideration for promoting the objectives of the European Union to liberalise the markets in non-agricultural goods and services in order to safeguard jobs in the imperialist pyramid. Obviously, we are interested in international trade and its development on the basis of mutual benefit. However, it is impossible, under capitalist conditions, for global trade to be equal and based on mutual benefit. That is why the fight by the workers in an anti-imperialist, anti-monopoly direction urgently needs to be stepped up, in order to bring about radical change both at international level and in each individual country.
Madam President, the Doha Round broke down last year. This is an extremely serious state of affairs. Progress towards global free trade over the last few decades has lifted an incredible number of people out of poverty on a scale that has actually changed the world. Now, however, the world's economy is in a very deep crisis. This is not a result of free trade and this form of globalisation, but a result of a global financial crisis. In this way, the situation is similar to the one we experienced at the end of the 1920s.
This sort of financial crisis results in a global depression. The last time, it brought Hitler to power. It led to the horrors of the Second World War and to 50 years of communist slavery throughout half of Europe and half of Asia. These are important issues that we are talking about here. The most important cause of the global depression at that time was a resurgence of protectionism. Country after country introduced duties, quantitative restrictions, 'buy domestic' rules and competing devaluations.
There is actually a high risk of this state of affairs being repeated this time round. There are many worrying signs. President Obama actually won the election from a protectionist platform. We are seeing the first signs. There is now a large package on the table which does, in fact, include a 'buy American' clause relating to steel for the construction industry. This may be the beginning.
If the door has been opened, other countries will discover that they can do something similar, given how bad things look. Those countries that are currently badly affected around the world and within the EU will be tempted to promise their workers and their undertakings protection against foreign competition. The trends are clear to see. If this process starts it will not be possible to stop it. This really will be disastrous.
The EU is the largest trading bloc in the world and therefore has considerable responsibility. In the area of commercial policy, the EU speaks with one voice, and, for once, that is a good thing, but what will that voice actually say now? There are grounds for pessimism.
The key to success lies in the agricultural sector. However, the campaigning by France and Germany to get the EU to buy in milk powder and butter and to start subsidising the export of dairy products does not bode well. This is the politics of small-minded self-interest instead of statesmanship.
Therefore, the Council and Parliament should immediately issue clear statements to the effect that the EU will defend free trade throughout the world and open up the way for progress in the trade in agricultural products. Nothing can be more important than that. Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
(SV) I would like to begin by agreeing with the previous speaker that the Doha Round is extremely important, but I would like to add that it has probably never been more important than it is right now. I believe that, precisely in the midst of this financial crisis, we have a greater need than ever before to show that the global trade system actually works.
To put the Doha Round behind us and say that we cannot achieve global agreements on trade would, I believe, be a disaster that could undermine the whole of the global trade system. The failure of the Doha Round will probably never be more costly than it is right now.
The fact that the Doha Round is more important now than ever before is precisely due to the financial crisis. As I see it, the greatest risk that we face with this financial crisis is not the lack of capital for the lending market; the greatest risk is that it triggers protectionist trends. We have seen this throughout history. It happened during the 1930s and literally resulted in disaster for the world's economy, and it also happened in the 1970s.
I believe we can already see signs that the world thinks it can solve these fundamental problems by means of greater protectionism, despite the fact that there is a risk of the protectionism spreading and creating an even greater crisis in the world economy. This is happening in the area of services, financial services and the trade in services, in particular. In the financial services sector we are seeing protectionism increase very rapidly.
Returning to the Doha Round as it looks today, the main criticism that I had during the entire period that we were negotiating in the Doha Round is probably that it began to be about agriculture, agriculture and more agriculture. I think that this is an extremely narrow agenda, and I actually think that world trade deserves a very much broader approach, particularly in light of the fact that agriculture is a relatively small part of world trade if we compare it with industrial goods and services combined, for example. I also believe that it accounts for a relatively small part of the growth potential, particularly, perhaps, here in Europe. New opportunities for access to markets and new market openings globally, in particular for the trade in services, but also for industrial goods, are, I believe, most important for setting the wheels in motion and reviving global growth.
I would therefore like to ask the Commission a question. What does the Commission intend to do and what initiatives does it have underway to enable the broadening of the Doha Round in order to get us away from this tiresome situation in which we are all sitting around and reproaching everyone over agricultural trade, agricultural trade and only agricultural trade, when we know that what the world economy needs is a very much broader trading agenda that also includes trade in services and industrial trade. Thank you very much.
Madam President, I should like to welcome the Commissioner. Her predecessor, Mr Mandelson, was well known in Ireland, for reasons with which I am sure she is very familiar.
The issue of the Doha Round is not being talked about amongst the people of Europe. It is being discussed in places like this, but when I meet people who have lost a job, for example, they do not say, 'Let's do Doha'. So I think there is no connection between Doha and economic development, despite all of the theory that is advanced here.
On the globalisation of financial markets, I could suggest that this is a case where globalisation has failed us - although perhaps it would be fairer to say that it is the regulation of financial markets, or the lack thereof, that has failed us. I am interested in Commissioner McCreevy's recent comments to the effect that some of the problems in this area have been caused by Member States' regulators building empires. That is perhaps for another debate, but it exemplifies how, though we talk of globalisation as being a great thing, that has not been true in the financial sector.
On agriculture - which was addressed by the other speakers just prior to me - I gathered that agriculture was not the sticking point at Doha. But it is a very serious issue and one that I have huge concerns about. Maybe it is because I am older than the last speaker - who is in my political group - that I regard agriculture as rather important, because it produces food and is therefore higher up the scale than he placed it. I think we should remember that. We voted in this House on a report that I produced about global food security. We are concerned about it, as we should be. It should be an issue that is discussed at the Doha level.
Another issue is how European producers - farmers - can be competitive when in the European Union we have different, higher, standards of animal welfare in relation to the environment, which are not addressed at the WTO. You will only bring our citizens with you on this journey if those issues are addressed at the WTO. Quite frankly, I think there was never an occasion when we needed direct discussion of these things in this Chamber, and in Geneva, more than we do now.
I would ask you if, in your concluding comments, you could address some of those very real issues, so that people realise that they are being discussed. I do not see the Doha Round developing at the speed that you are suggesting. Perhaps I am wrong.
(DE) Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in the context of the Doha Round, it would interest me to know how the Directorate-General for Trade intends to safeguard the tariff quota that underpins the competitiveness of the European fermentation industry. The tariff quota serves a very important function, because the fermentation industry must remain internationally competitive.
Secondly, how will you respond to the steel clause that the US Congress has just adopted, which would prohibit the use of EU steel in the United States?
(PL) Madam President, the objective of the Doha Round was to help the poorest countries with their development, to lift them out of poverty. On one hand therefore, we must do everything to help, but on the other hand we must not forget our own businesses or farmers.
I would therefore like to ask a question: how can we protect our small and medium-sized enterprises from bankruptcy, and how can we protect our small farms from competition from China, India or Brazil? Let us say loudly and clearly that, in order to import any kind of product to the EU, irrespective of whether this is shoes or beef, specific standards must be met. Then we will be able to speak of equal competition.
Completing the negotiations in the coming months will be extremely difficult, because there is a lack of political will on the part of the leaders who really count in the negotiations. There is a danger that protectionism will increase because of the current world economic crisis.
(PL) I would like to say that, while listening to the last debate in Doha in Qatar, I had the impression that the developing countries have a grievance against us, the developed countries. Perhaps it is a kind of echo of former colonialism, or that they are accustomed to receiving direct aid, and so to receiving a kind of charity. It seems to me that wealthy countries can help through good trade, good standards, and training. Nothing is more essential than to make local enterprise independent, and build horizontal relations between the countries of Africa, Asia and also Latin America. I also think that it is precisely providing services that teaches management, cooperation and good standards. In connection with this, the accent on opening the market to services is very important for both sides.
Madam President, thank you for providing me with another minute, because it is important for my comments about agriculture. There is an impression that European farmers are the only ones with concerns. However, the truth is that at Doha the Indian negotiators are concerned about their small farmers and the dire consequences that a move to free trade would have not only for individual farmers but also for social stability in their country. So the issue of agriculture is across all of the negotiating partners and we need a little bit of honesty about that. Commissioner, perhaps, again, in your concluding comments you might address that.
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, I shall try to address briefly the concerns that Members have raised.
Mr Papastamkos, I agree with you on the legal and regulatory burdens. It is very important that these are addressed properly. It is important to resolve them, and I also agree on the importance of safety in that context.
A number of Members, notably Mr Lundgren and Mr Rübig, as well as Mr Papastamkos, talked about the 'Buy American' provision that is currently going through Congress. Members will know that this is based on the 1979 Trade Act. We already have that provision, but through the Government Procurement Agreement we have reciprocal arrangements whereby nations which sign up to it can bid for those projects. What we are hoping - and we have been talking to the Americans about this - is that we end up where we were before. I have read the legislation. I too am very concerned about it.
I am going to America at the end of February to meet the new United States Trade Representative, who, we hope, will have been through his confirmation by then, and Members can rest assured that these are very important issues to be raised.
Mr Ford raised some of the issues about bilateral relations. Korea is progressing, and on ASEAN I am looking for the flexibility which Mr Ford and I have discussed before, in order to try and move forward on that, but I agree too that there is no substitute in terms of value and importance for the multilateral arrangements.
On what we said about India, Prime Minister Singh has made it clear he is very committed. I agree with Mrs McGuinness that the question of agriculture for India, which I shall also return to, is very important. I was with Kamal Nath in London last week, debating Doha, and he as Trade Minister for India raised exactly same the point as Mrs McGuinness about the incredible importance of low-level subsistence farmers. I fully agree with her comments and indeed with what the Minister was saying.
Mr Pannella, I do not think that we are quite at the mercy of events. I think we as Europe have to push forward, use our influence and make it absolutely clear that we agree with what you said about the critical importance of battling against protectionism. It is a big challenge and one of the challenges contained within it is communication, making sure people understand.
Mr Hénin has not stayed for my response, unfortunately, but it is not a matter of sacrificing industry for consumers. This is about industrial growth and development. It is about protecting workers' jobs, because we know the importance of trade and export to doing precisely that. As for institutional change at the WTO, we could spend our time on that, but I want to spend my time on finding practical ways through this difficult economic period.
Mrs Wortmann-Kool talked about services. I agree this is very important. It is very important too to be transparent. I could not agree more with that.
Mr Assis, protecting our interests, not protectionism, is absolutely right. There is a fundamental difference that we have to be clear about, and we have to make sure of protecting the work force in all of this.
On agriculture, as I said, it is critically important to make sure that we are able to develop our industries. This is about food production, and it is very important in the Doha round. My colleague Mariann Fischer Boel has worked very hard to make sure that the European position on agriculture is secure. It forms a fundamental basis for all the work that I do in our bilateral, regional and multilateral talks to make sure that the best opportunities are provided to protect all of our agriculture in the future.
As for the fermentation industry, Mr Rübig, I understand these issues are currently being discussed, but I will be more than happy to come back to you with specifics.
Finally, on small and medium-sized enterprises, Mr Siekierski, it is very important that we are protecting our small businesses. I am working closely with Günter Verheugen to get enterprise and trade collaborating effectively to make sure that we provide opportunities for small businesses to tell us where they need markets to open, to support them in helping those markets to open, and to support them in trade.
The debate is closed.


Oral questions and written declarations (submission): see Minutes


17. Council's approach to revision of the OLAF Regulation (vote)


Membership of Parliament: see Minutes


6. EU research and innovation funding (


5. Structural business statistics (vote)
- Before the vote:
rapporteur. - (PT) It would perhaps not be popular for me to speak, but I should like to take this opportunity to make two points. Firstly, I should like to thank the shadow rapporteurs and the Members of the Commission for their cooperation and the three presidencies involved in this codecision procedure, namely the Austrian, Finnish and German, for their close collaboration. I should also give a special mention to the German Presidency for helping to resolve a final comitology problem. Secondly, I wish to say that the 170 amendments reflect well on Parliament's role as they reduce the administrative burden on companies in various ways: by eliminating less relevant variables, by exempting some small and medium-sized companies from having to respond to surveys and by encouraging the use of administrative sources.
This is just one of the points that, to my mind, could and should lead Parliament to adopt this proposal at first reading.
- Following the vote on Amendment 142:
(DE) Mr President, you were right to point out that we have a very large number of votes to get through, and it is evident that we now have votes that will, on a permanent basis, yield virtually unanimous approval. Who was it who insisted on us having separate votes today, or to put it another way, could we not vote en bloc?
If the Socialist Group in the European Parliament agrees, we could vote on the amendments jointly, but we need that group's agreement.
(DE) Mr President, we can agree to that, but I would suggest that, if it is the case that these are amendments on which we have reached agreement with the Council, the committee should call a short meeting to adopt them accordingly, which will take only a minute to sort the matter out. We cannot do the committee's work for it.
Are you requesting an interruption of one minute?
(DE) Mr President, although we can agree to voting en bloc, the next time, the committee needs to discuss and decide the matter before the plenary, so that we can then do the business in a matter of a minute. I ask that this be communicated to the chairmen of committees.
(Parliament agreed to Mr Rack's request)
(Applause)


Agenda: see Minutes
Mr President, I would like to address a very brief request to you as President of this House. I should like you to ask the Mayor of Moscow, Mr Luzhkov, for clarification on the treatment of two MEPs - Mr Cappato and myself; a member of the German Bundestag, Mr Volker Beck, and a member of the Italian Parliament, Ms Vladimir Luxuria, on 27 May.
On the occasion of a peaceful action for equal rights for gay people, we wanted to hand over a letter to the Mayor of Moscow signed by nearly 50 Members of this House. Mr Cappato, Mr Beck and an ALDE Group official were violently attacked by hooligans and then arrested by the Russian police. Two of the Russian activists who were arrested are here today - Mr Nikolaj Aleksejev and Mr Nikolaj Khramov. The police equally failed to protect Ms Luxuria and myself from an angry crowd and the police stood by watching as other activists were beaten up by thugs, skinheads and even priests.
As Members of Parliament not engaged in any illegal activity, we would expect the Russian authorities to protect us against violent criminals, and certainly not to arrest us on dubious grounds. Freedom of assembly is a basic human right that must be observed by Russia as well, being a Member of the Council of Europe and present at the G8 Summit today.
Mr President, I trust you will ask Mr Luzhkov and Mr Putin for an explanation on the way that Members of this House were treated.
(Applause)
Many thanks, Mrs in 't Veld. We shall take the steps you propose and do what is necessary. I declare our solidarity with you.


Verification of credentials: see Minutes


Passenger Name Record (PNR) (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes