GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should first like to remind the House that we have been waiting a long time for this directive. The point has already been made that the directive to combat racism and discrimination based on ethnic origin was approved in the year 2000 – some four years ago. It could be that nobody is interested in this issue; it could also be that this is simply an extremely tricky one. It also appears to me that the Commission had a great deal of difficulty in reaching this agreement. The programme should have been much broader and should have encompassed education and the media, yet all of this is absent from the final draft. I regret this, given that we are not satisfied with the replies given regarding the media and discrimination in the media, which consisted of saying that self-regulation is sufficient, and that we have been told so by those who work in the sector. I feel that all of us here can confirm, with regard to our own countries, that self-regulation is not sufficient. The ‘Television without frontiers’ directive also contains provisions to combat sexism in the media. The reality of the situation, however, leaves something to be desired. The area before us – that of housing, insurance, goods and services – is important; having listened this evening and read this report and draft, we realise how difficult it is to combat these forms of discrimination. Against this backdrop, I do not wish to complain, but rather to take satisfaction from the fact that Europe is achieving more than each of our countries in terms of addressing an extremely tricky issue, namely, fighting against stereotypes in the criteria used to calculate premiums or in types of insurance. I think it is tremendous that Europe is able to devote its attention to problems such as these. Some speakers have suggested that, in actual fact, we are far from achieving our goal, that stereotypes still prevail, that we are content to use stereotypes rather than, as has been said time and again, to consider a range of contributory factors that would enable us to address more appropriately the difficulties that people have in the area of insurance. This is all too true. I feel that it is imperative that we combat stereotypes in the area of insurance underwriting and risk assessment. It has been said that women are the ones who lose out. Men might say, from their point of view, that they do not all wish to be seen as road hogs and bad drivers. It is, consequently, both men and women who will be affected if we manage to achieve equal representation in the area of insurance.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, allow me to start with the conquest of Kosovo. It is obvious since the NATO bombing stopped eight months ago that the purpose of the bombing was not to stop ethnic cleansing, not to promote peace and order but to drive a wedge even further into Yugoslavia, to change the borders and to promote the New Order. Today, we are turning a blind eye to the involvement of NATO occupation forces in the savage ethnic cleansing of the Serbs and non-Albanian speaking minorities. All the signs point towards a second round of attacks on Yugoslavia and this is confirmed by the KLA attacks on Serbs in Mitrovica, the attempt to annex three towns in southern Serbia to Kosovo, the promotion of the independence of Kosovo, the fact that two thousand men have been channelled into Kosovo via Greece, despite the objections of the Greek people and, at the same time, intense efforts by NATO and the European Union to overturn the legitimate government of Yugoslavia. On the other hand, despite his declarations on humanity and peace, it is clear from what Mr Solana has told us that, according to the Helsinki resolutions, we intend to set up a terrorist army, starting with 60 000 men, in order to strike at anyone who raises their head above the parapet. Mr Solana has confirmed our view that, in a militarised European Union, NATO will have the upper hand. That is why this job went to Mr Solana, the Secretary-General of NATO, who is also guilty of the crimes committed against Yugoslavia; the right man for the right job, against whom charges have been filed, calling for him to be tried as a war criminal.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, we support the development of a trans-European transport network which will favour rail transport over road transport, on the condition, however, that the development of the great trans-European lines does not prejudice suburban transport or so-called district lines. Rail transport, the main lines as well as the district ones, should be a public service, which aims to meet the needs of the population, not to generate private profit. The participation of private capital will necessarily result in a quest for profit, to the detriment both of users and of those who work in the sector. Far too many recent disasters, particularly the one at Paddington station in Great Britain, illustrate the incompatibility between the quest for profit and safety. As stipulated in the explanatory statement of the report, public investment is continually decreasing and in less than twenty years, has fallen from 1.5% of the European Union’s GNP to 0.9%. This has resulted in falling standards in rail transport as a whole as well as staff reductions, which has contributed to keeping unemployment levels high. If the Member States of the European Union do not adopt a new policy, or, in other words, if they do not prioritise investment in public services rather than endless subsidies to the bosses, any decision on a genuine public transport service operating on a European scale under the best safety conditions will remain nothing but empty rhetoric.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I am new to this Parliament. Allow me to make a comment: debates about cultural policy – a handful of people are present who are, however, by and large like-minded. I believe we have an almighty struggle ahead of us. And because there are so few of us, we must also stick together here. Turning now to the Observatory. As rapporteur for the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy that was asked for an opinion, I naturally speak in favour of the Community’s participating in the European Audiovisual Observatory. I also concur with the Commission’s proposal that the period of this involvement should be set at five years. As already mentioned, the Observatory counts 34 European countries as members and therefore almost anticipates the forthcoming enlargement of the EU as well. It does not just confine itself to market research and to gathering statistics and does not therefore only juggle with figures. Instead, it offers qualitative analyses and goes so far as to provide legal information. It is, above all, especially important to have information about the resources available to particular branches of industry. Information of this kind is of course important when overseeing, evaluating and formulating Community programmes in the audiovisual sector, and it is of decisive importance to industry itself and especially to small and medium-sized businesses. This is where my only criticism comes in. According to my researches, it is, in many Member States, precisely the small and medium-sized businesses which know anything from not enough to nothing at all about the Observatory. And yet it is they which would find using this service of great importance. Respective contacts were challenged and questioned about this matter at various levels, and I am pleased that, at my suggestion, the Commission has made a really good proposal, namely to include a clearly visible link on its home page. I hope that this proposal is also soon translated into action. In view of the forthcoming negotiations with the World Trade Organisation, during which the audiovisual sector will also be discussed, it is becoming ever clearer how important it is for reliable information about markets in Europe to be available not only to political decision-makers such as the Community bodies, the governments of the Member States and the social and economic decision-makers of the Member States and regions, but also to researchers, universities and the media. (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, it would, to say the least, be naïve to maintain that the food industry is in a parlous state due to a lack of updated directives, given that what directives exist are blatantly disregarded. Before any legislative intervention or questions of a technical nature, we need to identify why not just food products but the entire food chain has been downgraded, distorted and adulterated. It is mainly because the food chain is managed solely on the basis of the laws of profit and speculation that the quality of food is so poor. The more intensively we farm, the more the food chain is run and controlled by the huge multinationals in the industry, which decide the method of production and the quality of our food, the less chance we have of any effective consumer health guarantees. This problem is first and foremost a political problem. Only by wiping out capitalist profit as the ultimate purpose of the production process will we be able to stop illegal and dangerous production, processing and marketing methods. Otherwise, we shall strain at a gnat and swallow a camel and public health will suffer as a result.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, as representative of the Pensioners' Party, I would like to extend my hearty congratulations to the town of Piacenza, which has inserted Articles 25 and 26 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights of the elderly and persons with disabilities into its own bye-laws. I would also like to comment on Mrs Oomen-Ruijten's report. I endorse the content of the report, particularly the part which calls for an analysis of the impact of changes to the laws of the Member States on Regulation 1408, relating to people who have worked in more than one State, and especially that part of the regulation which concerns rules for the payment of the pensions of people who have worked in more than one State. We are discussing the problems of cross-border workers: of course we refer to European Union workers but also, indirectly, to relations between the States which have associated themselves with Regulation 1408, that is with the EEA – the European Economic Area – in other words Italy and Switzerland. I regret to say that the Italy-Switzerland Convention and the ensuing regulation have been misinterpreted by the Italian Government, which has hitherto paid the pensions of people who have worked in both Italy and Switzerland according to the scale of half of half the amount, that is a quarter of the amount owed, as laid down by Italian magistrates, judges and courts. I call upon the European Parliament to intervene to stop workers being forced always to institute legal proceedings to obtain their rights.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, first of all I would like to thank Mrs Figueiredo for her report. Secondly, I would like to say how delighted I am that a compromise has indeed been reached on this important report, which means that the first reading can be brought to a successful conclusion. I am very pleased to be able to tell you that all the amendments tabled by the Committee on Budgets have been adopted. In fact there are three points I would like to make. Firstly, the Committee on Budgets took the view that, in comparison with other programmes, Parliament did not have enough input to the programme and the Council had too much, in other words, it was slanted too much in the favour of the Council for our liking. The second point, and this in fact is the most important point, is that of comitology. This is heavily biased towards the Member States on some points. Setting up a committee alone will lead to a six month delay in the establishment of the programme. It will take six months to set up the committee and then call a meeting, and the Member States will not even need to use their usual blocking tactics, because all that will take at least a year. Comitology really is a huge liability, as it is to this programme. I would like to ask the Commission, following the example of what Mr Patten did, to reconsider whether it would not be possible to do something similar with regard to the Member States. Finally, the question of technical support. The Committee on Budgets insists that technical support be included in the programme. The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs allocated EUR 100 million in the end. A suitable amount of this must be set aside for technical support so as to be sure that the programme is properly supported. Any complaints about this from the Commission are therefore unfounded as far as Parliament is concerned, if this technical support is to be included in the programme itself.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would first like to congratulate Mr Karas on his excellent report, but at the same time to say that we are not at present satisfied with the European Commission’s information policy. We wish to remind the House that the euro information programme is also, as defined in the budget, a joint European Commission and European Parliament programme. During the last parliamentary term there was a committee led by Mr Anastassopoulos which laid down the essential features of information policy in this area. It was very successful at that point. We also managed at that time to secure a full and key role for Members of the European Parliament in this information campaign, via the political foundations. This has not happened during this new parliamentary term. This body, which consisted of the Commissioner responsible and the relevant committee chairs, has not yet been convened. Some of the procedures dating from the last parliamentary term have still not been discharged to this day. We therefore have to ask in the clearest possible terms what should happen next. For this reason, my first request is that a meeting of this body should be called as quickly as possible. That is my first point. The second point that I would briefly like to touch upon relates to an observation regarding the substance of the information campaign. If you compare prices in the Eleven, that is in Euroland, with prices in other countries which have remained outside the Eleven, including the United Kingdom but also Switzerland and Norway, where this is particularly apparent, you will see that price levels in Euroland, even in the ‘rich’ countries, are generally speaking lower than in the other countries. This means that the European single currency is already leading to greater competition in this area, and that in turn this competition is leading to the public getting goods and services on more favourable terms. A study should be carried out on this, something which is also called for in the Karas report.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I did not receive a clear answer from the Council. Are not Article 98 agreements in line with the spirit and letter of the Rome Treaty?

Political group: PSE
The European Parliamentary Labour Party has abstained on the final vote on the Leinen Dimitrakopoulos Report. The text is overambitious, and Britain’s Labour MEPs believe that the IGC should primarily deal with the “Amsterdam left-overs” in order to prepare for enlargement, and not expand far beyond these. There is currently a great deal of work under way in terms of reform and this must be the priority for the moment to allow consolidation and strengthening of the EU institutions. Expansion of the agenda and drastic revision of the treaties would bring with it a risk of de-stabilisation. The key factor in this text as it has been amended, is the call for a Charter of Fundamental Rights to be incorporated into the treaties. In our view, this would bring with it a complex legislative burden, and it would be preferable to have a political and declaratory charter which explains to citizens what their existing rights are. Our priorities (i.e. the “left-overs”) must be:

Political group: PSE
draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy. – Mr President, while there are certainly elements worthy of praise in the Green Paper, overall we are left with the impression of a lost political opportunity. The Commission has strong institutional powers, which it could use to actively drive the IPP process. Too often we are left with the impression of a Commission that is a spectator rather than a powerful actor. We also need more joined-up thinking, more explicit connections between the IPP project, the Sixth Environmental Action Programme and the Strategy for Sustainable Development. We would like to see those links made much more explicit. To summarise a number of the other concerns raised by the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, we believe that the strategy tends to rely too heavily on voluntary agreements. They clearly have a role to play, but they are not a substitute for regulation; they should be seen as complementary to it. At the very least we need very clear benchmarks, objectives and timetables for any voluntary agreements so that we can ensure that they are working. The Green Paper also focuses almost exclusively on products rather than services and therefore misses another whole raft of potential opportunities to green an increasingly large area of our economies. Perhaps one of the major shortcomings of the Paper is its insufficient awareness of the broader international trade context, under which, unfortunately, some of its proposals would have questionable legality. The effectiveness of the IPP strategy will be severely curtailed unless the Commission explicitly recognises the reforms that would be needed to the World Trade Organisation in particular, to enable its measures to be set out. Similarly, with respect to public procurement, greening public procurement is vitally important but there are currently obstacles in achieving that which should have been acknowledged more explicitly in the Paper, along with strategies to address the problem. It is very significant that in its opinion the Committee of the Regions specifically refers to the restricted scope of local and regional authorities for action when it comes to green procurement and notes that legal action has already been taken against a number of towns and cities which have tried to implement a green procurement policy. Those are the kinds of areas that need to be changed. We look forward to an ambitious new White Paper in the near future.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, today we are awarding the Sakharov prize to Mr Kofi Annan as a sign of our total support of the UN. This rare occasion also gives me the opportunity to draw attention to neglected issues or lost causes. One of these lost causes is respect for international law, in defence of which Mr Annan has, despite the American bulldozer, brought all his personal qualities and the full dignity of his position to bear. The war took place, admittedly, but, from the outset, it was tainted with illegitimacy and discredited by its motives. The subsequent, after-the-event revelations as to the bogus and false nature of the charges against Iraq must give solace to those who more readily denounce the environmental dangers to our planet than arms stocks conspicuous by their apparent absence. Another voice that has been continually hushed and drowned out is that of indigenous peoples who, although being the last survivors of ancient civilisations attach fundamental importance to environmental values and have a better understanding than ourselves of interdependency. In this world of ours that has become materialistic and superficial, people who have nothing left to defend but their fundamental rights are virtuous and authentic out of all proportion. Let us refute this marginalisation of indigenous peoples’ rights and let us make the Union and the UN promise to maintain the working group on indigenous peoples in the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the report we are debating this afternoon in Parliament is important, because it relates to something we have always defended in this House: the principle of transparency, which means citizens’ right to access documents and also the principles of openness and proximity to these very citizens. For this reason, we are debating Article 255 of the Treaty as reformulated in Amsterdam, and also an important article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 42. After the agreement reached by the Council and Parliament, we need to incorporate the principles promoted by the aforementioned Articles of the Treaty and the Charter of Fundamental Rights respectively into the Rules of Procedure of this House. I would like to congratulate Mrs Maij-Weggen most sincerely on her excellent work; her report, in addition to the amendments she tabled, was adopted in committee with 25 votes in favour to one against. I would also like to congratulate Mr Cashman. I think that a good relationship was maintained between all those involved, and I also believe that all of the proposals tabled by the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs have been taken into consideration by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs. Therefore, Mr President, in the vote that is going to take place tomorrow we shall be transposing a political principle of fundamental importance and incorporating it into our Rules of Procedure. In doing so, we will be including a fundamental principle in the interests of the aforementioned transparency and openness into the set of rules that regulates our relations. Mr President, my group is going to support an amendment it has itself tabled, not by pure chance, but because it is a good amendment. Furthermore, we will support Mrs Maij-Weggen’s proposals. I trust that the result of the vote will be sufficient, that is to say, more than 314 votes, for these proposals to be incorporated into the Rules of Procedure of this House. On behalf of the European People’s Party, I would like to once again congratulate the two rapporteurs for the great work they have done.

Political group: PPE-DE
I would like to ask whether the European Union, in the light of the information conveyed to us, can make representations to the United Nations to at least respond in a constructive manner as to the future status of the Saharan people. Since the 60s they have been promised a referendum and there has been deliberation and an impasse which is creating a very difficult situation for a large population of people living in refugee camps. Would it be possible for the European Union, through you, President, to make representations, even by letter, to the United Nations expressing our concern about this very important issue?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, this is a very acceptable suggestion, but there is a risk that, yet again, the Members' general opportunity to question the Commission at question time will be curtailed. Will question time be extended by a compensatory period please?

Political group: Verts-ALE