GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I was asked: why are we so keen on short sea shipping at European level? The answer is: we have a vision. We see large quantities of goods transported round our continent on safe, environmentally-friendly ships. The goods are unloaded at the point where they can reach their destination via the shortest possible overland route. That takes the burden off overland transport by adding another link to the chain of intermodal transport. Of course we are still many sea miles away from making this vision come true, although some progress has been made over the past two years, as the report shows. Mrs Peijs’ good report describes the existing obstacles and the strategies for realising our visions. There was broad agreement in committee. What can we do internally for short sea shipping? I just want to mention a few things. In the technical field we can introduce more environmentally-friendly technology for ships’ engines and specific terminals for express transhipment. In the organisational field, and especially for cross-frontier transport, we can introduce uniform shipping documentation, simplified administrative procedures and fewer pilot services in cases where they are not absolutely necessary. What can we do for short sea shipping as a link in the intermodal chain? First, we can improve the interfaces with other modes of transport by introducing modern systems of transhipment – especially to inland shipping – standardising containers, promoting transport logistics services for the entire transport chain and by many other means mentioned in the report. I think we should also consider all these matters with a view to our pre-accession strategies. Meanwhile we have the activity of the round tables. The report says that an exchange of best practice would be useful. That is true, for why have we been calling for some time now for a reference centre for intermodal transport. It would be sensible to engage in more research and above all to set up demonstration projects in the field of intermodal transport. All in all the report offers a whole package of sensible proposals. I hope that the next progress report in two years’ time will tell us that we have moved a little closer to our vision, our vision of a successful intermodal transport system in Europe.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I wish to begin by congratulating the Commissioner for bringing forward this proposal and our rapporteur, Mr Liese, for bringing forward this report. I could also thank Mr Jarzembowski for saying many of the things I was going to say, which is a rare thing indeed. I agree with him completely, for example, that it is a nonsense to say that the airlines will not cope. Let us be honest: air travel will double in Europe in the next 30 years, so it is not as if the airlines cannot afford to provide a glass of water and a biscuit if there is a delay. That is the sort of basic standard we should expect in the future, if this goes through. I welcome many of the features. For example, for too long passengers have suffered when airlines have cancelled or delayed flights for purely commercial reasons. I hope that will end. At last airlines will be forced to provide passengers with the food and refreshments they deserve, with the dignity and respect they deserve. I hope that all this will mean that the days of commercial cancellations and lengthy delays will be over. This is a great breakthrough for all airline passengers and also for the airlines, because it will not affect good airlines which look after their passengers. In conclusion, this deal could have been even better had colleagues on that side of the House stood firmer in conciliation. That was not to be. To misquote Neil Armstrong: it may not be a giant leap for mankind, but it is an important first step. Finally, I want to remind the Commissioner that we look forward to receiving similar rules for international rail, ferry and coach journeys very soon.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I should like to go one step further than Mr Posselt. I should like to protest against the fact that the vote is being held now. According to the agenda, we should be voting at 4.30 p.m. and I can assure you that you cannot hear the bell upstairs in the offices. I do not know where your office is and whether or not you can hear the bell from there. We have arranged to vote at 4.30 p.m. and it is wrong to hold the vote now because not everyone in the building has arrived in the Chamber yet.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the report we are currently considering, which I must commend for its quality, clearly emphasises the importance of the European Investment Bank as a crucial instrument for the funding of projects throughout the European Union. It also, however, highlights the decisive role that this bank plays in the economies of the candidate countries for which it proposes, as a matter of fact, to create a special social policy programme. For this reason, the increase in social capital recently decided on can be considered to be in line and consistent with these structural objectives, which are so important to achieving a global European economy that is prosperous and fully sustainable. The European Investment Bank is already responsible for more than 5% of all investments made in the Union, which has enabled more than 400 000 jobs to be created, specifically through the support that the bank gives to small and medium-sized enterprises. It should be remembered that the European Union has recently taken on increased responsibility for the funding of venture capital, in particular for small and medium-sized enterprises, through the EIB. Unfortunately, as the rapporteur also points out, the work of the European Investment Bank is sometimes limited by the orthodox and rigid rules for the consolidation of public finances, which must be complied with under the growth and stability pact. We must remember that a large part of the EIB’s remit is geared towards investments of a structural nature, such as infrastructures or venture capital for small and medium-sized enterprises, and that the success of these investments is often dependent on the possibility of mobilisation in partnership with public spending. The understanding that has just been reached, therefore, is not indifferent, in the framework of the current budgetary rules, to the flexibility that is crucial to the correct implementation of the growth and stability pact. Today it is increasingly clear that Europe has an aim which is also an undeniable need: that of becoming a highly competitive area and therefore, of creating wealth and of harmonising its distribution. This aim can only be achieved, however, through support for structural investments and is, consequently, unfettered by restrictions that could endanger these investments. The quality of expenditure, whether public or private, must be the guiding framework for investment policy and the European Investment Bank has an irreplaceable role in this framework. I congratulate the rapporteur on the content of her report and on having been able to interpret these aspirations.

Political group: PSE
Commissioner, please allow me to be a little forward. Do you know where Barbate is, or Isla Cristina? Do you know where Ayamonte, Almería or Motril are? Do you know anything about Andalusia other than the bitterness of its green olives? Without wanting to be harsh, Commissioner, you have set a new record in terms of proposals to destroy employment which will be difficult to break. Have you or anyone from your team considered that your proposals for reforming the CFP only add to the effect of the failure of the disastrous negotiation with Morocco to renew a traditional fisheries agreement that would prevent the destruction of thousands of small-scale fishing jobs? Commissioner, you globalised fishing in the south of Europe, and ensured that the place occupied by a small-scale fleet, under an agreement between Morocco and the European Union, which respected biological rest periods and maintained very close control of nets and meshes, should now be taken in these fishing grounds by a fleet which does not respect rest periods, and whose nets are not controlled at all. A proportion of their catches is not landed and they do not generate local employment, as the Community fleet did. Commissioner, you have presented a proposed CFP which perfectly quantifies the scrappings and the job losses, but leaves it completely unclear what the solutions to alleviating the social and economic problems caused by your proposal are to be. Do you know where the money we need is going to come from? The intention is that we now incorporate unemployed fishermen into the tourism sector. More hotels, more golf courses, Commissioner? Is this what you call sustainable development? Is this what diversifying the economies of the regions means? Do you realise that when you prohibit modernisation you also prohibit the sustainability of fishing, a form of fishing that is more respectful of the environment, of those fishing grounds that fishermen have most interest in respecting? Through your proposals you are destroying the only fleet that generates employment and also respects the environment; the small-scale fleet. They also prohibit the creation of mixed undertakings, the only solution which allowed us to resolve the problems resulting from cases such as Morocco. Although we are going to make the scrap merchants richer, I suppose! Finally, your proposal will not only affect the traditional employment and culture of peoples you do not know, but it will also considerably increase the cost to consumers of one of the essential ingredients of the Mediterranean diet, a healthy and balanced diet, without cholesterol, which as a result of your proposals we will lose in favour of the junk food which is so popular in the North of Europe.

Political group: Verts-ALE
I should like to thank Mr Byrne for his very comprehensive and thoughtful reply. This is an important issue, which is affecting more and more people. It is a chronic health issue and has considerable effects on the quality of life of those who acquire this disease. There is increasing evidence – though I agree, for the moment at least, with Commissioner Byrne that it is not conclusive – that there is a link between the presence of these bacteria in pasteurised milk and the incidence of Crohn's disease. I would ask the Commission to consider all the evidence, when the studies are completed, and perhaps hold a seminar or a wider discussion on what measures might be taken, as this is a disease which is increasingly of concern and it is spreading. The most obvious step would be for the Commission to extend the period of pasteurisation from 15 seconds at the appropriate temperature to 25 seconds. This may be the most simple and effective method. I wonder whether the Commission would agree that those steps might be taken at the end of the studies?

Political group: PSE
Madam President, what needs to be done to make the Tampere Summit a success? European policy in the field of justice is in a state ranging from bad to useless, a point I want to make to my newly arrived Finnish colleagues too. Two examples: massive numbers of people were driven out of Kosovo and, prior to that, out of Bosnia. The European Union did not and still does not have any arrangements in place for the temporary protection and reception of these groups of people. The relevant proposal was put forward by the European Commission two years ago, and was adopted by the European Parliament last year. The national governments have refused up until now to enact the proposal. The second example is European fraud; it takes so long to get improved co-operation in the field of justice off the ground. The question of a European Public Ministry has been raised. This House voted on that in April and was in favour of it. The Committee of Wise Men is too, and now it is the Council’s move. Madam President, the one thing the Tampere Summit needs above all else is the political will of the Member States. We have no need for new plans of action, nor do we have any need for “soft law”. We want the national governments to abolish the unanimity requirement in decision-making, for it is this that paralyses the process, and we want steps to be taken towards achieving this end in Tampere. May I ask you another question Madam President-in-Office of the Council? Give us here in the European Parliament full control and the final say over legislation. Madam President, on a final note: more plans of action, more fancy press releases, they are no use to us. Decision-making by majority voting, full parliamentary control, it really would not be all that difficult to bring this about. It is a matter of having the political will.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Commissioner, at this point in the debate I am going to insist on certain aspects which, from an agronomic point of view, and since I come from a southern country, I consider to be absolutely essential to this directive. These include, for example, costs and transfers. With regard to costs, I would like clarification of what costs we are talking about. Are we talking about the distribution and sourcing of water? Are we talking about the quality of the distribution networks? Are we talking about the nature of the works required to provide water services? Or are we talking about large-scale hydraulic works and reservoirs? All these costs added together would be horrendous and would have repercussions for the agricultural sector. Transfers are defined as the transfer of surface water between different territorial areas. Is the Commissioner aware that our country has one of the oldest systems of transfers in Europe? They already existed in ancient times: they had them in Roman times, although on a smaller scale. One of the most significant transfers – the Tajo-Segura transfer – which has been in use for many years, almost 30 years, has an allowance of 658 hm3 per year. The largest volume transferred in one year has been 453 and the average volume over twenty years has been over 200. We cannot be accused of bad management. Is the Commissioner aware that, of this 263 hm3, we used 25 for irrigation on the left bank of the Levante, 30 for water supplies in the area of the Júcar, 7 for supplies in the southern area of the Júcar and the rest in the Segura, equally divided between supplies and irrigation? We are not doing a bad job of management. We cannot be prohibited from carrying out transfers when our economy and the development of our regions depend on it. I will not tackle the issue of quality and the best available technologies, because I believe that we will return to a discussion of this directive. Take good note: in this diverse Europe, which we are building in a spirit of mutual cooperation, we have to find diverse solutions, not single solutions. I therefore appeal to the common sense of the Commission, the Council and this House so that, when voting, they do not impose uniformity on the different countries of Europe in areas where subsidiarity is required. Commissioner, Andalusia is not Lapland.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, today no one disputes, and of course I am not going to do so, the fact that state aid alters the conditions for competition and is a damaging element that encourages inefficiency in undertakings. This is certain, but if each and every one of us is honest, we have to admit that in our public life we have often defended state aid when an undertaking has required it in order to establish itself, for example, in our constituency, or in order to prevent it from closing. I began by saying this in order to highlight what is associated with some positions and to point out that when we are trying to issue a European Parliament opinion on the annual report on state aid, the Group of the Europe People’s Party tries to conduct an ideological debate in this House on state aid in which it aims to go further than anyone and to demonise all types of aid. This happened last year with the Jonckheer report, and this year, despite the more flexible position adopted by Mr Evans, it has continued to arise, perhaps in order to present the Socialists as some sort of outdated interventionists who use measures that are as damaging for the market as state aid. I have already had the opportunity to express that state aid is a transfer of public money to private companies and, therefore, that as Socialists we should also be against it. However, we cannot deny the obvious and we should recall that the Treaty does not forbid all types of aid, so some types that are aimed at objectives such as social cohesion, regional cohesion, the environment, etc. should be permitted. If that is the case, and it is, why does the Group of the Europe People’s Party refuse to accept amendments that cover that point? The same occurs when the report insists, following the Commission’s line, that aid for coal did not serve to secure the future of the industry, but in the same paragraph they refuse to accept a sentence, also from the Commission, saying that this aid was necessary in order to mitigate the social and regional impact of the restructuring of the sector. In this respect, it is difficult for us to agree with a report which, although it reflects part of the truth, refuses to include another part of the truth.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would first of all like to mention the Council’s absence from this debate, which our committee chairperson, Mrs Theato, has pointed out very effectively. It is unacceptable that in this debate, in which we are going to talk about the Council, that that very Council is not represented. Here we have our Secretary-General of Parliament, and here we have the Commissioner, who represents the Commission, but where is the Council? I understand that this debate is taking place in parallel with a budgetary debate in Sweden and perhaps the Swedish Presidency has little to do with the exercise in question, but I believe that the Council also has a Secretary-General. Mr Solana always tells us that he is not only Mr CFSP but also the Secretary-General of the Council. Then he should come. Or he should appoint a Mr CFSP so that he can be here and listen to what we have to say. His absence is unacceptable and I would ask you, Mr President, to communicate to Mr Solana, Secretary-General of the Council, that somebody should be here representing the Council, whether or not that duty falls to the Swedish Presidency. Secondly, I would like to congratulate all the rapporteurs and also Mr Blak – our good friend Freddy Blak – because he, as a good cyclist and an admirer of the five-times champion Induráin – my compatriot – has been able to produce a successful report and employ great teamwork, given that his report has received a broad consensus in committee. I agree with the report, which is serious, demanding and tough, and I also agree with the final section in which it discharges the budget, because, as has been said here from many different quarters, the Commission is making great efforts to improve things. And also, in this 1999 financial year which, as Mr Heaton-Harris pointed out, has been rather unusual, an interregnum, the facts demonstrate that it is making improvements in the supervision of financial management and also in personnel policy. However, I must say that, in my humble opinion, it is doing so very slowly and this creates insecurities and examples of improvisation and also creates a lack of motivation amongst staff. I believe that you should move up a gear and carry out this very promising reform more quickly and more ambitiously because I very much fear that the reform is turning out, in almost all respects, to be unambitious and not the type of reform that was initially intended.

Political group: PPE-DE
The directive we are examining today allows every type of software to be patented. The aim is obvious: to strengthen and consolidate the economic/political centres of control and the monopoly of information and information processing by the multinational companies active in the software centre. The result is easy to foresee: small and medium-sized enterprises and independent programmers will be throttled. Adopting it signals the de jure acceptance of the demands of the widespread ‘patent industry’ in the USA, will discourage research and development and will result in a huge waste of resources on legal protection proceedings which could have been invested in technological innovation. The procedure for safeguarding software patents will have painful consequences for consumers/end users, who will be called on to pay the increased profits of the monopolies while, at the same time, their options will be limited, as will the facility to use improved software. It is for these reasons that we members of the Communist Party of Greece voted against the directive and the corresponding report by the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market and we stand by those demanding free and open software.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, let us not beat about the bush. The possibility of this happening was known to anyone who has followed the situation in Kosovo over the past year. From the huge mountain of reports and media reports, the same old image emerges: no real prospects, increasing hopelessness, growing social-economic problems and the UNMIK, which is considered increasingly less as a liberator and more as an occupier, being part of the problem and not part of the solution. I too find it far too easy only to point at the extremists. Of course, they are behind the attacks – which are also in my opinion sickening – on Serbs, their villages and their churches, but feelings of disappointment and distrust, but also aggression, are widely spread among the population. That is why I would like to repeat here the appeal Parliament made in its last report on this region, and addressed to the Commission and Council: give an outline of what the options for the future are and make it clear what, according to the European Union, the different scenarios are, but do not take too long about it. I have to admit that I myself am in favour of the proposals of the so-called independent Kosovo Committee of more than two years ago, in which a case was made for conditional independence. In that respect, the Kosovars who are behind those attacks have done their people a huge disservice. If the Kosovars themselves are unable to keep their own extremists under control, there is no hope of fulfilling the most important condition for independence, which is respect for minorities. I am sorry to have to say this, Mr Roche, but what you are saying is more of the same and the policy you advocate has led to these problems. As I see it, the status quo – doing what we are doing now – is no longer an option at present. However, the message of this Parliament to the Kosovars and the Kosovan authorities should also be clear: let your people not be taken hostage by a few criminal troublemakers. Be brave in your rejection; say much more clearly than you have done to date that this is unacceptable, but also take this one brave message to your people: Kosovo must be tolerant, or else Kosovo will cease to be.

Political group: Verts-ALE