GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, on a point of order. I will ensure that Mrs Banotti gets that information. I will also be pressuring her to have Irish television here too. I rise on a slightly more serious matter although, of course, I welcome the extension of all the media to our proceedings. Madam President, you will be aware that since we met here last the Northern Ireland Assembly has been reconstituted. Could I, through you, on our behalf, request that our sincere good wishes be sent to all concerned and all parties? Let us hope that we are on the road to something extremely successful in the north of Ireland. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, we are very keen to make the conclusion and adoption of this Agreement dependent on the quest for solutions as to how this area can be stabilised. Lebanon, which was once known as the ‘Switzerland of the Middle East’, has for many years sustained great blows, both internally and externally. As a European Union, we should be making a proportionate contribution to restoring stability to this country and hence to the achievement of stability in general, and I believe this Agreement to be a means towards that end. That this should be done in relation to agriculture and agricultural products, to free trade in industrially produced goods, to legislation on trade, and also in relation to issues concerning the rules on the determination of origin, constitutes important progress, and we also welcome the way in which it has proved possible, by means of a separate exchange of letters, to incorporate cooperation in counter-terrorism in this project as a whole. As my predecessors on the floor have said, however, there are a number of points to which we are keen to give further attention, such as the issue of the Syrian military presence. There is no doubt that this problem has to be resolved, both in order to promote stability by making full use of the country's authorities' capacity for change, and also in order to help bring peace to the region as a whole. I believe that it is also important that we who belong to the European Parliament, being desirous of building up still further our cooperation with the Lebanese Parliament, should indicate that the abolition of the death penalty, the ratification of the United Nations Convention against Torture, as well as the signing of the ICC's Rome Statute, will have a major part to play in moving this development further forward. As it will do again tomorrow, this Parliament has expressly welcomed Lebanon's efforts at participation in the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1373 by freezing the assets of terrorist groups. We would request the Council and the Commission to cause an anti-terrorist clause with similar content to be included in all future agreements, as decided at the Seville European Council. Ladies and gentlemen, we see the position of the Palestinian refugees as being a most particularly serious problem. We have to be clear in our own minds about how great a burden they are on Lebanon. I believe that this is where we have to work closely with Lebanon in order to enable this problem – which is not just about their living conditions, but also has to do with the possibilities for bringing peace to the whole area – to be resolved in a reasonable way, in order to establish proper relations between Palestine and Israel and to secure a lasting peace between them. There are also many other associated problems. Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Mr President of the Commission, it is our wish that the transitional period of twelve years should not be exceeded until we have established a free trade area with Lebanon, and we hope that this Agreement can be implemented accordingly.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, throughout almost 6 000 years of human history and 10 000 wars, we have always encouraged the production of weapons. A certain degree of conscience, however, now seems to be dawning upon us. In 1972, we banned biological weapons. In 1993, we banned chemical weapons, and in 1997, we banned land mines. Nuclear proliferation is more or less under control, although we have been going through a very difficult phase since the signing of the Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1968, which then came into force in 1970. Nowadays, however, the weapons that take most lives are light weapons. There are estimated to be five hundred thousand million light weapons on this planet. They kill 200 000 people a year, which is twenty times more than land mines. More than half of victims are in Africa. So it comes as no surprise that the Secretary General of the United Nations, who is himself a great African, has put on the agenda of the UN General Assembly, which is due to meet next July in New York, the debate on a convention to try to limit this dangerous and terrible proliferation. The idea is to identify weapons so that they can be monitored, to keep a register of weapons, to encourage all States to strengthen their controls and their domestic legislation on exporting and re-exporting weapons, to organise the prosecution and punishment of traffickers and, finally, to finance and push forward national weapons’ collection and destruction programmes. Against such a backdrop, the European Union, which adopted a moratorium on the sale of weapons three years ago at the behest of Great Britain, would do itself credit by having an effective common policy and playing its full part. I welcome the fact that six political groups were able to table a motion for a resolution which is an excellent and timely compromise. I will not say any more. We must support it. It is totally in keeping with our code of conduct and with what has already been decided by the OSCE, and falls fairly and squarely within the scope of the next UN Convention. During voting time, Mr President, I will ask to table two oral amendments, which I know have already received general approval. The first is in the recitals. When the time comes, I will say where to add a citation to the Bamako Declaration of last month – a great historical first – in which 52 African nations took up a single position which was in perfect harmony with our code of conduct. The second addition would simply be a reference to the marking of weapons in the proposals of our compromise resolution. I know they have your backing and I will support them at the appropriate time.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I too should like to endorse the statement made by my fellow Member from the , Mrs Flesch. I would like to add something further. It is a fact that very few Members of the House are present here in Strasbourg on Friday mornings. Nevertheless, I think it is scandalous that some Members want to prevent others from working on Friday mornings. What I find even more scandalous is that these Members think – and I have here an e-mail to this effect from Mrs van Hulten to other Members – that when the Friday sitting is removed, it would still be possible, in spite of everything, to register on Fridays, in order to receive one’s salary, even without having worked. I urge the Bureau to be consistent and to also remove the possibility of MEPs’ receiving money for Fridays on which they have not worked!

Political group: PSE
Mr President, an extraordinary 21 year-old Afghan girl, who miraculously escaped from Taliban inhumanity and is now a refugee, together with hundreds of other women, told me when I was in Islamabad: 'Now you are at the European Parliament, talk about us! Here, take this, it is my burka. Show it to them, show the world this symbol and the reality of our denied existence, our imprisonment, our violated, dead and stoned bodies.” This is why today, speaking in this Parliament, I will wear this burka just for a moment. This is a gesture on behalf of all the women who have been killed, raped and denied their rights in Afghanistan and the world. (Applause) The rights of women in Afghanistan are continually being violated. Women in Afghanistan and their cause need our solidarity and commitment. So we are asking Parliament, the Council, the Commission and the United Nations not to recognise the Taliban regime and to promote an action plan on behalf of the NGOs working in Afghanistan for the fundamental rights of Afghan women and their economic and social emancipation, and on behalf of the NGOs which help female Afghan refugees. However, there is something else we must do together: grant the right to asylum and aid to women who are forced to flee from Afghanistan. (Applause)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, I shall not waste your time explaining why I voted for the Guy-Quint report, but I really must say that for the elderly and pensioners it is very important to know how European Union funds are spent, how in concrete terms they are used by the administrative offices of the Commission. This is because pensioners have had first-hand experience throughout Europe of what bad administration means. They have given their pension contributions to the various national governments, which have quickly made them vanish like clever magicians. I should not want President Prodi too, like a clever magician, like a modern European Houdini, to succeed in making the funds at the disposal of all European citizens vanish. It is just a fear: I am sure he will not do so, but I should like to emphasise this anyway on behalf of pensioners.

Political group: PPE-DE
In the digital age it is important that copyright and intellectual property problems do not prevent broadcasters using their archives. In the UK we do not have this problem, but understand it may be a difficulty elsewhere. Based on UK experience we see no reason why that need be so, which is why the British Conservatives are now voting against Amendment No 11. If, however, this matter cannot satisfactorily be dealt with without legislation, we believe it should be reviewed as part of the review of the directive in 18 months time.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I wanted to make the following suggestion. A number of amendments have been tabled which were, in fact, already in the text when the vote was taken in committee. With your help, I would like to try to tidy up the report a little and remove a number of redundant items. In addition, I have an oral amendment to paragraphs L, M, N and O which I have distributed to the different coordinators who assented to it.

Political group: ELDR
It will be no surprise to anyone that the will vote against this agreement, as we do with all third-country fisheries agreements. I have one specific question for Commissioner Fischler. The agreement with Equatorial Guinea concerns tuna, but Equatorial Guinea is a well-known flag of convenience country. Members of ICAT, including the EU, have agreed to prohibit the importation of big-eye and blue fin tuna from Equatorial Guinea. I presume that negotiations are already proceeding for the next agreement, as this one expires in June. Could the EU not use its influence to encourage Equatorial Guinea to cease allowing vessels to use its flag to fish illegally. The EU is concerned about the growing use of flags of convenience. This would seem to be a very good opportunity to get one state at least to be more cooperative with international legal norms.

Political group: Verts-ALE
I congratulate Niels Busk on his report. Mr Busk is a very sensible member of the Fisheries Committee and I think that Parliament can have confidence in his report. While I have no hesitation in supporting this important legislation and recommending that it should be improved by Parliament without delay, I nevertheless have two brief comments I would like to make. First of all the Fisheries Committee was presented with a fait accompli by the Commission in respect of this proposal. These regulations actually came into force on 1 July this year, although the Commission tabled the proposals before this Parliament on 12 July. We were therefore left in a position where we had no alternative but to support the proposals. I find this behaviour extraordinary. I recall Commissioner Fischler stating during his hearing before the Fisheries Committee on 30 August that he wished to cooperate closely with Parliament and the standing committees of Parliament in a working partnership. I hope that such a working partnership will indeed manifest itself in future and that we will not again be treated in such a cavalier fashion by the Commission. We are the democratically elected representatives of the people of the European Community and we are not here simply to act as a rubber stamp for regulations that have already been implemented by the Commission in advance of consultation. Secondly, although I do not intend to recommend that we vote against Mr Busk's report, I feel it is worth sounding a note of caution that the rapporteur has called for more Community financial involvement in inspection and control of fisheries. Such involvement implies additional budget resources and, as my colleagues on the Committee on Budgets never cease to point out, the cake is limited in size so that every time we cut off another slice it means less for some other equally important sector. Only last week, in the context of the report by Carmen Fraga Estévez on the common organisation of the market in fisheries and aquaculture products, this House voted to allocate subsidies to the aquaculture industry for the first time, once again eating into the limited fisheries budget. We must be financially realistic and prudent and I trust that the House will note my concern at this latest threatened raid on the fisheries budget.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, the liberal group is delighted that scientific and technological cooperation between the European Union and China is being stepped up. Collaboration between scientists promotes mutual understanding of each other’s cultures. This could serve as a catalyst to intensify the dialogue with China and, in time, to improve democracy and the human rights situation. Since the People’s Republic of China accounts for a quarter of the global population and has great economic potential, its involvement in European research and technological projects is of huge importance. I agree with Rolf Linkohr, both sides can benefit. But a lot can be gained in the field of environment and energy too. Technical support for the promotion of energy efficiency, saving energy and clean and renewable energy sources will enable China to reduce the production of CO2. If there is transfer of expertise then the European Union may be able to achieve part of its own CO2 objectives over there. My second point concerns cooperation in the field of information and communication technology. The problem in this context is access to the Internet. The Internet is the first medium which enables worldwide, interactive communication. But the Chinese government wants to monitor the free flow of information and the freedom of speech via the Internet. This will not benefit the development of information and communication technology. In order to continue to grant the Chinese access to the worldwide web, it is essential to cooperate with China in this field. An honest dialogue will keep the door open for new developments, such as e-commerce, where China also forms a large potential market.

Political group: ELDR
Like Danone, major European companies are currently making colossal profits. In their competition with major firms in America or Japan, they seek to achieve profitability equivalent to that of the stock exchange. The sectors making a mere seven to eight per cent profits per annum are implacably restructured by means of reducing wages and, more especially, massive layoffs. There is no justification for still making employees work 35, 40, 45 hours a week at oppressive rates while their fellow workers are shown the door even though profit margins are increasing. These tens of thousands of redundancies for the benefit of a few dozen shareholders should be prohibited. Democracy dictates that the lives of millions of people should not be subjected to the dictates of a handful of industrial magnates. These layoffs must therefore be banned. When as much, and even more, can be produced while reducing the required work and time input necessary, there is no reason for the gains of such modernisation to be appropriated by employers and for millions of people to lose their jobs. We should look at the system the other way round, the millions of hours which have been gained should be redistributed, by cutting working hours drastically, to 32 hours in the first instance, without a concomitant drop in wages and without introducing flexibility, and by recruiting personnel as appropriate, financed through the profits made.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I have an extremely urgent and quite unusual question for you. I have invited Mr Akhmed Zakayev, who, as you know, is Deputy Prime Minister in the Maskhadov Government, to a meeting to be held this evening and tomorrow morning right here. Akhmed Zakayev, as you also know, lives in London, and I have asked the French Minister of Foreign Affairs to speed up the visa procedure. Mr Zakayev has been refused a visa on the grounds that he is facing a request for extradition. Now, you know that the extradition request has already been rejected by the Danish and British Governments and that Mr Zakayev was also recently able to visit the Bundestag in Germany. I am therefore asking you please to intercede with Mr Michel Barnier, our Minister of Foreign Affairs, so that Mr Zakayev and his son, who acts as interpreter for him, can attend the meetings this evening or tomorrow morning, or both, which would be ideal. (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, first of all I should like to point out to the House that the text which is proposed in this recommendation is one which we have voted for on several occasions in exactly the same words and, moreover, also conforms to a possibility provided by the Treaty, whereby if the Member States cannot unanimously agree on any other method of financing, the operational costs will be borne by the Union’s budget. I should also like to draw the following fact to the attention of my friends on the Committee on Budgets: the text which I am proposing will have no impact on the budget for the year 2003 and probably on those of subsequent years. I say this because, in order to reject a convention, it is necessary to go through the same procedure as the one which created it. In other words, there will have to be a process of ratification by all Member States. Therefore there will be no costs borne by the Union’s budget before the end of the financial perspective. Having said that, however, since we are now in this position, I have no objection to accepting the oral amendment that has been tabled. I therefore recommend that the House adopt it.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I speak on behalf of my friend, Mr Van Orden, and the British Conservatives. I also speak on behalf of the oppressed people of Zimbabwe who are crying out for justice. Yet again we find ourselves having to discuss Zimbabwe. Why, one might ask, are we doing so now? The situation in Zimbabwe has gone from bad to worse, with enforced starvation and continuing human rights abuses and political oppression. However, the most urgent issue at this moment relates to action to be taken by the EU itself. It is unbelievable that there was a need for a lengthy Council discussion on the renewal of sanctions, which must take effect by 18 February. Who would believe that their renewal would depend upon the Council's agreement to Mugabe visiting Paris! Mugabe is the prime instigator of the oppression and misery of the Zimbabwean people and the supposed main target of EU action. The problem with EU sanctions has been their lack of rigorous enforcement. Now the plan is to allow Mugabe and his entourage to travel to Paris. No wonder that the EU is not taken seriously. After all, we should not be trying to find ways of helping Mugabe to evade our own sanctions. Instead we should be trying to make sanctions more effective. If anything, they need to be widened in their scope! We should not be surprised if African leaders are half-hearted in their support for international measures when the EU is seen to lack resolve. The EU's weakness is in marked contrast to the brave stand taken by the Zimbabwean cricketers, Henry Olonga and Andy Flower. Prior to taking the field for Zimbabwe's opening match of the World Cricket Cup, they said: ‘we cannot in good conscience take to the field and ignore the fact that millions of our compatriots are (...) oppressed. (...) we are making a silent plea to those responsible to stop the abuse of human rights in Zimbabwe. In so doing, we pray that our small action may help restore sanity and dignity to our nation.’ They have put their lives and their livelihoods at risk by their courage. They deserve all the support we can give to them and to the suffering people of Zimbabwe. I call upon Members to support the resolution without amendment.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, my fellow Member has just said that she really does not want us in future to have to add our tears to the waters that regularly devastate our regions. Unfortunately, I am much less optimistic than she is. Much less optimistic because I know very well that you were making a wish, Mrs Grossetête. However, wishes are not enough when we see the climate change that is taking place on our planet. I was in my region of Languedoc a few days ago and people told me that what we are seeing now did not used to happen once in a hundred years. We have now seen it three times in two years. It is therefore clear to see that there is a change of frequency, magnitude and scale. I am always surprised to see the authorities, not just in my country, that would be too easy, but in all the countries affected, running a little bit behind the disaster. This summer, in the regions that were affected in south eastern France, the locals were already piling up sandbags. How was it that the local people knew, but the authorities did not act until disaster happened? There is clearly a gap between those who are on the ground and suffer the destruction and the decision makers, who are obviously still far away from it. With heat waves, storms and sudden floods, the climate is changing. I do not have the impression that public policies are changing at the same rate. I think a whole arsenal of measures need to be taken to deal with it, taxation in particular. How many times have we, the and regionalists, said in this House that the tax weapon really should be used to change behaviour that poses a threat to the climate? And we are still waiting for that tax on pollution, that tax on discharges that change the atmosphere of our planet and which, in the end, are destroying entire regions. Aids are in the process of changing. I do understand, Commissioner, that we have indeed little by little, disaster after disaster, deployed finance for repairs and prevention. Repairs are good, prevention is better, my fellow Members have said. However, and I agree with them entirely on this point, prevention is inconceivable without a far-reaching reform of the Structural Funds. So long as there is zoning it will be ineffective. You must understand that storms and floods often care nothing for the zones we have so cleverly drawn on a map far away in Brussels or elsewhere. So these funds definitely need to be reformed and perhaps all those Structural Funds that do not find any use on the ground but are paid back into Community and then national budgets could be better employed in prevention to meet this climate change. In conclusion, I was saying that these problems have obviously changed in frequency and scale. Even if European public policies are changing, which I note and welcome, I do not have the impression that they are changing at the same speed and to the same extent, and I regret that.

Political group: Verts-ALE