GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr Solana, we have recently witnessed a meeting between Castro and the Spanish leadership and we are all aware of the position of the United States of America. I would also conjecture that a leader of a European country went to Belgrade to see Milosevic. What would your comments be on these two events? I am raising this issue not to make things difficult for you, because we do not carry out foreign policy based on conjecture, but to illustrate the context in which you should operate. You must not walk on a tightrope because, as we all know, tightrope-walkers are doomed to fall one day. There are two strategies before us. The first is for preventing tension and the second is for managing tension and crises whenever they arise. The latter involves a Europe which is politically absent but economically present; it is a strategy for simply monitoring crises, which leads nowhere. The former is a strategy for Europe and for peace, security and economic development. Fifty years on, we once again witnessed war on Europe’s doorstep with the recent crisis in Yugoslavia. It was a mistake with indeterminable repercussions. Now we are confronted with a new phase of developments and hostilities in the Caucasus region. I believe that there is a golden opportunity for you now in the Caucasus to prove yourself as a true Prometheus and not an Epimetheus. You are probably familiar with the Ancient Greek tragedies of Aeschylus and the story “Prometheus Bound” which took place in the Caucasus region where Zeus punished Prometheus and tied him up in chains as punishment for stealing fire from the thunderbolt and giving it to Man. I hope, Mr Solana, that you will, in any case, be a Prometheus, both in the Caucasus and in your forthcoming term of office, as that will serve the interests of Europe, of democracy and of human rights. Once again, I wish you every success.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I believe that especially in view of the spread of entirely new diseases and epidemics in East Asia – SARS is sadly only the tip of the iceberg – it is a matter of urgency that Taiwan, a highly industrialised state which is visited by many people and has great experience in politics and administration, should be integrated into the World Health Organisation, something that this House has demanded on various occasions. I think it is very regrettable that this matter – which, in the age of globalisation and world travel, is important not only for Taiwan but for everyone – is not being pursued vigorously enough. Of course, we know that Beijing is blocking this; that stands to reason, but I do think it is very regrettable that whereas the Commission has taken, and continues to take, a clear stance here – and I thank Commissioner Wallström for the Commission's exemplary commitment on this issue – the Council can only be described as faint-hearted. On a serious issue such as health and epidemiology, this faint-heartedness on the part of the Council can cost lives. I therefore appeal to the Council of the European Union, to the governments of our Member States, to act resolutely so that Taiwan can join the World Health Organisation at last, and to ensure that these artificial obstacles are overcome. This is not a question of prestige; people's lives are at stake. (Applause) IN THE CHAIR: MR DIMITRAKOPOULOSVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I have just one question: on Tuesday morning we approved requests for urgent procedure for the items on financial aid for a series of Balkan countries, and I regret that these are obviously not going to be taken until the mini-session, because we would have had sufficient time to deal with this issue in this afternoon's sitting, which has been suspended twice. In the past, of course, anything which we added to the agenda on Tuesday morning was always taken on the Friday. I hope that it will soon be possible to revert to this practice when Friday sittings are reinstated, but I wanted to take this opportunity to ask when these items will be taken in the Brussels sitting because you did not announce this just now.

Political group: PPE-DE
I refused to vote for the joint resolution, which is the product of non-transparent bartering between groups. We cannot discuss EU-Russia relations without mentioning the situation in the Caucasus. Do we need the results of the ad hoc committee to condemn the abuses in Chechnya? Is there any meaning left to the Tacis Democracy Programme when the Russian authorities organised an undemocratic referendum (90% in favour) in Chechnya? The electoral campaign was not pluralist because voting ‘no’ was considered by the federal troops to be supporting the terrorists. The electoral process was marked by numerous failures to comply with democratic rules. Several thousand Russian soldiers voted. Pressure was put on the inhabitants and refugees to force them to vote ‘yes’. We must establish as conditions for political cooperation with Russia a cease-fire, an end to the bloody oppression by the Russian army and a negotiation process with a view to putting an end to military operations and seeking a political solution. Lastly, the European Parliament must stand absolutely firm regarding the fate of the Chechen refugees in Ingushetia. They are being threatened with being forced to return to Chechnya, in violation of the rights recognised by the Geneva Conventions on war refugees. (Explanation of vote abbreviated in accordance with Rule 137(1) of the Rules of Procedure)

Political group: GUE-NGL
I wish to congratulate Mr Di Lello on the quality of his work. The Citizens of the European Union have the right to expect the Union to effectively confront the problem of increasing threats of crime, which does not recognise borders and which attacks their freedom and their rights. What is required is rapid, concerted and joint action, which effectively coordinates all efforts to combat and prevent crime throughout the territory of the Member States. One of the most effective instruments with which to combat organised crime is the seizure and confiscation of the proceeds of crime. Difficulties arise, however, as a result of the disparities between the various Member State legislations. The Union must make efforts to approximate criminal law and procedures on money laundering and the confiscation of goods. The adoption of the framework decision on money laundering has enabled us to make progress but has proven to be inadequate, because there remains a considerable margin for criminal impunity insofar as this decision only established sanctions for serious crimes. This matter has come to be regulated by two acts of differing legal value, because Joint Action 98/699/JHA has not been revoked. This proposal for a framework decision is a step in the right direction, because it aims to ensure that all the Member States have in place effective rules providing for confiscation when an offence is punished by deprivation of liberty for a period of more than one year. I agree with the rapporteur’s position on the proposals by the Danish Presidency on the possibility of ‘more extensive’ confiscation and the inversion of the onus of proof. Any legislative initiative must respect the individual rights and fundamental freedoms of our citizens.

Political group: PPE-DE
The European Union must use its development cooperation policy to strengthen the objectives designed for cooperation with developing countries in the fisheries sector by means of more programmes, technical resources and budgets under the various frameworks for priority action. This will enable us to help the economic and social development of these countries, specifically in the fields of rural development, transport, health, education and the fight against poverty. The European Union must promote scientific research into resources and could support the implementation of an effective programme for monitoring the exclusive economic zones (EEZs) of developing countries.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, to follow on from the point that Mr Lannoye made: Mrs Lucas was arrested just outside Glasgow for protesting against the Trident base at Faslane. I have a lot of sympathy with that protest. I have, however, no sympathy for Mrs Lucas trying to hide behind her Parliamentary immunity. I have also been arrested for protesting at Faslane. I did not hide behind any immunity. I took the punishment that came to me. Mrs Lucas should do the same.

Political group: PSE
There have, since 1957, been dramatic developments in the ways in which independent European nation states collaborate with each other. Just as a planet’s gravitational pull captures everything that draws close to it, the courage of six states has resulted in a process of cooperation that has been spreading and becoming more profound right up to the present day. No end to this development is in sight, even though we have started to think about where Europe’s boundaries lie. In business, there is the rule that ‘to stand still is to go backwards’, which, metaphorically speaking, is also true in politics. Thank God we did not stand still as Europe developed politically in the second half of the previous century. All our efforts were and still are rewarded by the reunification of Europe in peace and freedom. Despite many and varied economic problems, Europe still has the power of a planet to attract others, and many fine words have been said about this already today. By means of the Constitutional Treaty, Europe is meant to – indeed it has to – make a qualitative leap if it is to be able to get the better of the challenges that lie ahead. This House was right to denounce the outcomes of Nice for failing to do that, as they were entangled in national egoisms. The Convention was rightly described as ‘constitutional’, for its work shows the way ahead, over and above economic cooperation. It is on this basis that the Member States’ governments can and must show, at the Intergovernmental Conference, whether they are working with the future in mind or are trapped in the behaviour patterns of the past in clinging to national egoisms and national patronage. The present text of the Constitutional Treaty points the way to the future. It should be changed only to improve what already exists. Many of us are concerned that what came out of Nice will not be enough to cope with the imminent enlargement, and that is why – whilst being obliged to the Presidency of the Council for what it has said – I urge the governments to do everything in their power to facilitate the new Treaty’s speedy entry into force, so that not too much time elapses between the governments giving their consent and the Treaty’s final ratification. It is now for you, Europe’s Heads of State or Government, to decide whether you want to take Europe forward or stand in its way for your own egoistic and nationalistic reasons.

Political group: PPE-DE
As we are talking about blood-alcohol levels I wonder if the Commissioner, in her recommendation is also going to be looking at the broader issue of drugs? This is an important issue that is often left out when we are talking about driving. Will this ever be put into the recommendation?

Political group: PSE
Mr President, on a point of order, I endorse the remarks that have just been made, but could I also suggest that, if there is any question of this Joint Parliamentary Assembly going ahead somewhere else and the banned Zimbabwean ministers still being there, it should be recommended that Members of this House do not join in that Assembly for as long as those ministers are present.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, whichever way we view the Balkans, in the light of recent atrocities or future events in terms of the Stability Pact, we always seem to come up against this horrifying character of Milosevic and his cronies, people who have a string of crimes against humanity to answer for and who should urgently be taken to the Court of Justice in The Hague. This crook, this old communist crook, is able to remain in power on account of his virtual monopoly of radio and TV and his oppression of any critical independent alternative, among other factors. Various actions have been undertaken on the part of the European Union, such as providing independent stations with equipment. But now that one station after the other is being closed down, the EU will need to act again in consultation with the affected parties. We just heard that Mr Wiersma was denied a visa to visit the opposition in Belgrade. It is most peculiar that the European Union is not really aware that we too have this tool at our disposal and that, for example, we should, in fact, deny entry to the EU to the Serbian football hooligans in return, because they are people who take advantage of the Milosevic regime in the most shocking manner. Now that the Stability Pact will be coming into its own, the help of the neighbouring states will provide a new and sound alternative, especially now that Croatia has experienced a political U-turn. Alternative reports can be directly provided via stations in Croatia and also in Montenegro. The Stability Pact can only succeed if Serbia is a democratic constitutional state, not before, and once the criminals have been brought to justice. As long as Milosevic and his friends can introduce laws which undermine the traditional human rights and human freedoms, as long as this is the case, the outlook for Serbia remains bleak. It is unfortunate that the internal opposition is so weak and so divided nationally. The European Union will need to look for powers in Serbia which are not driven by this blinkered nationalism but by values whose observance has also proved to benefit humanity in the European Union. Mr President, we will gladly support our compromise resolution, especially once the has pulled out.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like first to thank my friend, Karla Peijs, for her excellent report, in which she aptly describes the vital importance structural reform measures have for the prosperity of our societies. Rarely does one see such excellent reports. I wish to focus on two matters. The public finances of a State in the euro area are no longer the private affairs of that State. Any budgetary imbalances in an individual State, particularly a large one, may have an impact on the stability of the entire euro area. For this reason, recent attempts to water down measures to reform state economies are worrying. Many governments in recent years have relaxed their budgetary efforts, relying mainly on cyclical receipts, such as the proceeds from mobile telecommunications system auctions. The consolidation process is still far from being complete, however. The future objective is for a ‘close to balance’ or ‘in surplus’ budgetary position. Member States must honour the commitments of the stability and convergence programmes unconditionally. It will take perseverance and determination to balance public finances. It will make us susceptible to populist criticisms of thinking of the economy like an accountant or balancing the economy one-sidedly. Nevertheless, this is what we have to focus on. Politicians have to take a few blows after all, but our economy will not be able to take a left hook. Secondly, the rise in public expenditure in the last few decades has caused the governments of several of the Member States to increase taxation and social welfare contributions, which were already at an unendurably high level in Europe. Simultaneously, the potential for economic growth has been weakening throughout this period. That Last Mohican of orthodox communism, my colleague Mrs Bordes, could also stop talking about class war in this, the third millennium, and admit that the contribution of each and every European to the economy is important. For that reason, work must be financially motivating and the benefits of different social welfare schemes at such a level that they safeguard the basic necessities of a normal, decent life, but provide an incentive for becoming active in all situations. Only in this way can we achieve the ambitious aims of Lisbon.

Political group: PPE-DE
I welcome this report which represents a big step towards making the EU the most dynamic and competitive economy in the world by 2010. Without endorsement of this Programme, Europe could never hope to become a world player in the field of research and technology, where we are lagging seriously behind the US. The Sixth Framework Programme will also respect ethical principles held across Europe; in particular research activity into human cloning for reproduction will be banned. I feel that the European institutions can congratulate themselves for coming to a reasonable and effective agreement on this issue. The global advantages of the Sixth Framework Programme need to be fully translated to our citizens: all sections of society, from young scientists to disabled and elderly people are set to gain from its contents. Indeed, if ever there was a case for European co-operation, the research programme makes it strongly. I am delighted that European scientists in Europe's regions will get financial reward for their intelligence. All in all, this will make us more competitive and will help in the fight against serious illness and environmental problems.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to point out, in addition to this, that we want to submit a second report. We hope that the Commission is also of the opinion that there should be a compromise with the position taken by Parliament, whose Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs is well known to have voted the first proposal down, but which is now prepared to draw up a new proposal in the Katiforis report, one which we are keen to present to the whole House in February. In February, the Council of Finance Ministers will still have enough time to come to a decision about it. Accordingly, I have also written to the Spanish Presidency of the Council on the Committee's behalf, and have also informed the President-in-Office of the Council, Mr Rato of it during last week's meeting of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. That being so, I do not think that the request for urgent procedure should be agreed to.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, first of all, I should like to express my sincere thanks to the rapporteur for his report, which I see, moreover, as a courageous one. For the first time, some new ideas are raised, ideas which have not always come up in recent years and which also tie in somewhat with the new reality that we are now faced with, in the context of a less favourable economic situation than we have seen in recent times. That is why I find it a courageous report, and, moreover, it is not very politically correct on a number of points. I think that that is a good thing too, because if there is to be a genuine debate on employment, it cannot just be politically correct, and that is something I believe applies to this aspect as much as it does to others. As I said, we are faced with a kind of economic slump. That is always bad news for employment, with unemployment rising, as a rule. In that case, we generally see unemployment among young people increasing more sharply than unemployment as a whole. That is because it is harder for young people to find a job than it has been in the past. The minute the situation suddenly improves, young people are the first to find a job. The minute the situation is less good, however, they are left standing. In order to prevent that happening, and precisely because we can see it coming, we should be focusing on this in particular. That does not mean that we should completely forget about the other groups we have indicated – that is, women and older people. On the contrary, you take the view that we should also continue with this, but I believe that young people need extra attention that they have not received in recent years. I should now like to turn to the matter of comparisons. At present, unemployment in the European Union is approximately 2.5% higher than in the United States and Japan, but the differences are not as great as they seem at first glance. Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Ireland, Denmark, Great Britain and Sweden are doing better than the United States. The other countries are therefore doing somewhat worse. If, however, we look at the differences, that is very alarming. It is precisely for that reason that this policy and these ideas are so important. One cannot help but see that if a country has very high unemployment and this unemployment does not go down, something is not right. There are countries that have historically had high unemployment, whose unemployment is going down. On the other hand, there are other countries that have historically had low unemployment, whose unemployment is rising. This is especially the case if one part of such a country is doing well and another part is not. In Germany, for example, which is of course our greatest concern at the moment, there are states that are simply at the European level. How is that possible? That is a very interesting question. It is not a valid approach to only look at the countries, but also at the regions. That is the way to bring it together.

Political group: PPE-DE
We Swedish Social Democrats wish to account for our reasons for voting against the draft decision in the report on the Statute for Members of the European Parliament. We cannot support the draft Statute, since our Amendment No 30 on national taxation has been rejected. For ourselves as Swedish Social Democrats, it is extremely important for us to be able to retain national tax, since that is the system to which we adhere and of which we make use. Joint funding via income tax is required for funding our common welfare policy. We therefore believe that Members of the European Parliament should pay national tax in their own countries. Elected political representatives should follow the same rules as everyone else. Another key issue has been the way in which travel allowances are accounted for. We have demanded that the new rules be based upon open accounts that are easily accessible to public scrutiny. That is why we have worked for an open and fair system where allowances are concerned. At present, travel and other expenses are paid out on a flat-rate basis. We want to see a system in which refunds are made on the basis of actual costs. We believe that salary levels too cause offence, since the new levels are very high.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, the setting up of the International Criminal Court is of course a quantum leap in the struggle for human rights. On the other hand, the United States’ rejection of the ICC is another attempt to weaken the entire authority of the UN. It is clear, in my view, that the United States is trying to make use of its position as a superpower merely to take care of its own narrow interests. In relation to the ICC, I should like to warn the Council and the Commission against devising a cosmetic compromise in which real immunity for American citizens who have committed war crimes is wrapped up in every conceivable kind of complicated legal hair-splitting. An International Criminal Court without American participation is naturally a weakened court. An ICC with formal American participation but in which American war criminals remain, in actual fact, immune from prosecution would, however, totally undermine the Court’s authority. A legal system neither can nor should be set up in that way.

Political group: PSE