Posėdžio stenograma

Antradienis, 2006 m. lapkričio 14 d. - Strasbūras

20. Europos Sąjungos bendrųjų tarifų lengvatų sistema (diskusijos)

  Le Président. – L'ordre du jour appelle la déclaration de la Commission sur le système de préférences généralisées de l'Union européenne.

  Peter Mandelson, Member of the Commission. Mr President, I am happy to share with you further reflections on the GSP+ scheme and the philosophy behind it. It is an important EU development tool: it contributes to economic progress in developing countries and the reduction of poverty, while taking on board the enduring need for promoting core human and labour rights, as well as sustainable development and governance principles.

One of the key priorities of EU trade policy is to be consistent with and to consolidate the objectives of development policy, in particular the promotion of sustainable development and good governance. This goal has been given greater prominence in the GSP+ scheme, which aims at encouraging developing countries to comply with international standards relating to social rights, environmental protection and governance, including the fight against drugs.

It is worth recalling that the criteria on which the granting of GSP+ is based are objective and transparent and have been made public in the regulation itself – this is in line with our WTO obligations. The success of the GSP+ scheme is that it provides an incentive for the applicant countries to ratify key ILO conventions in order to comply with the criteria of the GSP+.

It has played an instrumental role in the case of El Salvador, which deposited the ratification instruments of the missing ILO conventions on 6 September 2006. The ILO supervisory committees reported that most of the GSP+ applicant countries have made substantial changes to their legal systems in order to comply fully with the rights enshrined in the ILO conventions, which was the precondition for being granted GSP+ trade preferences in the first place.

The GSP+ system is an instrument of encouragement and support. It cannot solve everything at once; its role is to give an incentive, as I say, not to punish, and to maintain the momentum of reform. The aim is also to integrate the GSP+ beneficiaries into the world trading system. I am convinced that integration into the world trading system will further help these countries to advance towards greater respect for the principles enshrined in the conventions and to lock in essential reforms.

Following the ratification of these conventions, it is clear that actual implementation then needs to be monitored. Progress in the implementation of the GSP+ conditionality is assessed in relation to developments in government policy, to administrative capacity and other institutional, legal and budgetary constraints. Some of these can only improve over time.

Regarding monitoring, the EU relies in its judgments, in particular with regard to the initiation of any withdrawal procedure, on the monitoring procedures and expertise of relevant specialised monitoring bodies, such as the ILO, for which the EU itself cannot be a substitute.

However, we also have our own role to play in the proper application of the GSP system. Therefore, whenever the Commission receives information from trade unions or other stakeholders about serious and systemic systematic violations of relevant international standards, it thoroughly examines whether appropriate action in line with the GSP regulation may be taken. This is well coordinated, with relevant monitoring bodies, and Parliament should be regularly updated on developments.

I would like to stress the important role the European Parliament and parliaments in the relevant countries can play, both in monitoring the situation and in helping to bring forward implementing legislation in the countries concerned and ensuring its effective implementation.

Let me say to Members of this House: your interparliamentary contacts are very valuable for sending this important message and I am ready to engage in an even closer cooperation with you with a view to this end.

  Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl, im Namen der PPE-DE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Das System der allgemeinen Präferenzen hat sich bewährt, da es die Staaten in ihren Bemühungen um nachhaltige Entwicklung und good governance tatkräftig unterstützt. Mit diesen Staaten treiben wir Handel und verhandeln auch auf Augenhöhe. Ihnen eröffnen wir unsere Märkte, das heißt auch, es entsteht dadurch, und zwar gegebenenfalls erst mittelfristig, eine Wettbewerbssituation. Mit anderen Worten: Es liegt auch in unserem eigenen Interesse, wenn wir darauf achten, dass das Regelwerk und die Konventionen der Vereinten Nationen und der Internationalen Arbeitsorganisation befolgt werden. Insofern unterstützen wir voll die Kommission in diesem Bemühen.

Wir verlangen allerdings auch – und der Kommissar hat bereits angedeutet, dass er dazu bereit ist –, dass die Kommission uns regelmäßig informiert. Erstens über ihre Beobachtungen bei der Implementierung der verschiedenen Regelungen in den Empfängerstaaten, zweitens über eventuelle Sanktionen nach Artikel 16, drittens über eine Halbzeitbewertung der Effizienz bei den GSP+Regeln. GSP+ soll uns in die Lage versetzen, sowohl Unterstützung zu geben, als auch gleichzeitig vom Handel mit diesen Staaten zu profitieren. Dabei sollen wir auch die berechtigten Interessen unserer Wirtschaft und unseres Arbeitsmarkts berücksichtigen und eine Balance zwischen diesen beiden Zielen finden.

  Antolín Sánchez Presedo, en nombre del Grupo PSE. – Señor Presidente, queridos colegas, comparto plenamente la declaración del Comisario Mandelson y, como ponente del informe del sistema de preferencias generalizadas, subrayo también la importancia del SPG plus como incentivo para comprometer a los países en desarrollo más vulnerables con el desarrollo sostenible y la buena gobernanza.

Valoro positivamente la decisión de la Comisión, de 21 de diciembre, de conceder sus beneficios a quince países que lo solicitaron y los pasos dados posteriormente por países como Colombia, Venezuela y El Salvador, al ratificar importantes convenciones de la OIT.

Sobre el funcionamiento del sistema, quisiera señalar tres cuestiones fundamentales. En primer lugar, la finalidad del SPG plus es impulsar, entre otros aspectos, los derechos humanos y laborales a través del comercio. Esta asociación es esencial y no debe perderse. El comercio debe ser un incentivo para los derechos humanos y laborales; es necesario evitar desviaciones proteccionistas que desvirtúen esta finalidad.

En segundo lugar, el éxito del sistema exige incrementar el número de países beneficiarios. Una de las prioridades de la Comisión debe consistir en lograr que aumente significativamente, ya que en la actualidad dichos países representan tan sólo el 3 % de la población mundial.

En tercer lugar, es necesario garantizar la efectividad del sistema, mediante una aplicación inteligente, en la que participe el Parlamento Europeo. Es importante que la Comisión colabore con los países beneficiarios en el cumplimiento de sus compromisos, mediante diversas iniciativas y, en particular, mediante el fortalecimiento del control y la evaluación de su ejecución, de forma rigurosa y regular, con transparencia y participación de los principales actores sociales y los países beneficiarios, tal y como se señala en el informe del Parlamento.

Asimismo, deberán aplicarse las sanciones previstas cuando se produzcan serias y sistemáticas violaciones de los principios, castigándose así a los infractores, pero no a los operadores que cumplan adecuadamente sus compromisos.

Por último, la Comisión, tal y como se reitera en la propuesta de resolución, debe elaborar antes de la próxima revisión del Reglamento, un estudio que evalúe el impacto del sistema, analice su funcionamiento y fundamente las reformas que se lleven a cabo.

  Sajjad Karim, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, the GSP scheme was designed to help the poorest and most vulnerable in the world trade their way out of poverty. There is not a fixed list of countries that fit into that category. Where the GSP is a success, a country may graduate to a new relationship with the EU. However, not all movement is upward: some countries, through circumstances entirely beyond their control, may now be in a worse position than when the scheme was renewed.

Pakistan is such a country. Despite the backing of this House, Pakistan was denied GSP+ status by the Council, at a cost of 300 000 jobs and GBP 40 million a year. Tragically, less than six months after the GSP scheme came into force, Pakistan and much of Pakistan-administered Kashmir was devastated by an earthquake that the World Health Organisation claims eclipsed the tsunami in terms of destruction and human suffering.

The major impact of the earthquake in the north-east of the region caused large-scale displacement of Pakistan’s skilled and unskilled labour force. They have traditionally provided a significant part of the workforce for the whole of Pakistani industry, notably in textiles. Many were left homeless, without spouses and with children to care for. Over one year later, they have been unable to return to paid work because they have been waiting for financial grants to rebuild their homes. As a result industrial wages have increased, driving up the cost of production and dramatically effecting Pakistan’s competitiveness.

Whilst the EU is always very generous in terms of the aid we offer to those countries in need, our pockets are not bottomless. We must revise the GPS in order to make sure that we not only help the poor trade their way out of poverty, but also help the hopeless trade their way out of the rubble of disaster.

  Caroline Lucas, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, in order to be credible and genuinely effective, we have to demonstrate that the GSP+ scheme is working properly. In other words, the EU must act swiftly and decisively when there are infringements of the social or environmental standards in question. This is not merely a theoretical or academic discussion, but a very real discussion about real countries.

The case of El Salvador has already been raised. In fact, El Salvadorian workers have for years seen incredible resistance by their own Government, company owners and the right-wing media to try to avoid, or at least delay, the implementation of core labour conventions, and it is very unfortunate that an EU Member State, Spain, has seemingly supported them in that attempt.

However, the fact that the El Salvadorian Government has recently ratified four key ILO conventions is not the real victory it might seem, because by reforming its civil service laws the Government has actually succeeded in removing large numbers of workers from any possible benefits of those ILO conventions. That is totally unacceptable, and I therefore formally ask the Commission to initiate without delay an investigation into the situation in El Salvador and to consider a temporary withdrawal of GSP preferences. I would be happy to furnish the Commissioner with further details from the trade union groups and civil societies in El Salvador.

Colombia is another case of blatant violation of workers’ rights, despite the window dressing of official enshrinement of ILO conventions. The monthly and often weekly reports of trade union members ‘disappearing’ and being killed tell the true story of the blood toll paid by those who dare to assume that ILO rights officially adopted in theory will actually be respected in practice. We cannot wait until December 2008 before we review these cases. I ask the Commission to review them now.

  Jan Andersson (PSE). – Herr talman, herr kommissionsledamot! Det allmänna preferenssystemet, GSP+, är ett bra system som ger fördelar för länder i tredje världen vad gäller deras tillträde till marknaderna i Europa, vilket är oerhört positivt. Det finns dock ett antal villkor för detta. Det är riktigt som kommissionsledamot Mandelson säger att dessa länder först och främst skall uppmuntras och stödjas. Det kan emellertid uppkomma lägen, då det inte räcker med att uppmuntra och stödja, utan då man faktiskt också måste stärka övervakningen och kanske använda de medel som står till förfogande om villkoren i överenskommelser om arbetstagarnas rättigheter m.m. inte uppfylls. Vi vet att det sker överträdelser idag och vill därför att kommissionen stärker övervakningen och vid behov använder de medel som finns för att tillfälligt avstänga ett land.

När sådana åtgärder vidtas vill vi dessutom att parlamentet skall vara involverat i processen, så att vi kan ge våra synpunkter och arbeta tillsammans för att systemet skall fungera. Detta måste ske nu. Liksom flera andra talare har påpekat, är det dessutom viktigt att noggrant se över vissa saker inför utvärderingen av systemet 2008. Har det fungerat full ut, vilka brister finns, vad måste vi tänka på när vi förnyar systemet?

  Kader Arif (PSE). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, en adoptant le règlement du Conseil du 27 juin 2005 réformant le système de préférences en vigueur depuis 1971, l'Union européenne a fait le choix de simplifier et de renforcer son principal instrument commercial de soutien aux pays en développement.

Ainsi, trois régimes sont désormais applicables: le système général, le système Tout sauf les armes, qui est un outil adapté aux spécificités des pays les moins avancés, et, enfin, le SPG+. Les préférences supplémentaires accordées dans le cadre de ce dernier volet sont nées de la conviction que le développement ne peut être envisagé qu'en étroite relation avec le processus de démocratisation et le respect des droits humains, du droit du travail et de l'environnement. Quinze pays bénéficient à l'heure actuelle de ce mécanisme à la fois incitateur et récompensant les pays en développement qui sont les plus vulnérables et qui font le plus d'efforts dans ces domaines.

Mais pour que le SPG+ contribue véritablement à une meilleure gouvernance et à un plus grand respect de l'environnement, des droits de l'homme et du travail, il doit être géré efficacement, ce qui implique d'abord d'avertir les pays encore nombreux qui ne respectent pas leurs engagements et, surtout, de sortir des menaces incantatoires pour passer à la suppression effective des préférences octroyées à ceux qui violent de façon sérieuse et systématique des conventions de l'OIT et n'honorent pas leurs obligations.

Ensuite une évaluation régulière du respect de leurs engagements par chacun des pays bénéficiaires du SPG+ est indispensable. Elle doit être particulièrement exhaustive en vue du renouvellement de cet instrument fin 2008. Notre crédibilité et l'efficacité de cet instrument passent par ce que les juristes appellent le parallélisme des formes. On ne peut continuer à octroyer ces préférences à des pays qui sont dans l'incapacité politique de respecter ces engagements. Il en va de l'avenir de cette politique.

  Peter Mandelson, Member of the Commission. Mr President, I shall try to save you some money by making three points. First of all the Commissioner certainly agrees that we need to maintain high standards of surveillance and invigilation and we intend to do so. We have done so in the case of Belarus and have submitted proposals to the Council accordingly.

As regards Pakistan, granting privileges in trade requires us to keep within the rules that create those privileges and that is what we are doing and what we have done in respect of Pakistan, but I entirely accept the honourable Member’s view that we must do everything we can within those rules to give assistance to Pakistan.

As far as El Salvador is concerned, yes, I entirely accept that having granted GSP+ status, we must now monitor, on the basis of reports of international bodies, the effective implementation of the two ILO Conventions in El Salvador, and it is our clear intention to do so.

  Le Président. – J'ai reçu, conformément à l'article 103, paragraphe 2, six propositions de résolution⁽¹⁾.

Le débat est clos.

Le vote aura lieu demain, à 11h30.

(1) Voir procès-verbal