GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I welcome the fact that at last, we are discussing this report. I would condemn the other groups for not allowing us to discuss this in November: That was a wrong decision. It was outrageous that we did not allow the Court to have a press conference. We lost the opportunity of an important public platform. I was also extremely disappointed that the President of the Court of Auditors did not remain in Brussels earlier this month. The report proves beyond all doubt that the reform process is long overdue. We need radical reforms if we are to see improvement of a very serious situation. This is the fifth time the Commission has not given a statement of assurance and it is clear that the Commission needs to understand that it is engaged in reform and it will be judged not by its words and its reports, but by its actions. It is clear that in efforts to reform itself, the Commission needs to concentrate not on where the money is spent but the extent to which policy goals are met, and that with a minimum cost. As Mr Karlsson said, we need to tackle the spending culture. That means we need clear, precise and measurable goals from the Commission. In my own country of Wales we receive significant money from the structural funds, but the line between creating a job and safeguarding a job is unclear and therefore it is difficult for us to assess how effective those structural funds have been. The Commission needs to make fundamental improvements to its own internal control mechanisms. One of the main problems, highlighted again, is that of passing the buck. Nobody is taking responsibility and the responsibility for spending money well is shared between too many people. That clearly needs to be reformed. We expect to see rigorous new management and control systems in the forthcoming reform. In particular, we need to see a reform of the Financial Regulation. But let us not forget that over 85% of the money that comes from the EU budget is spent within the Member States and they need to put their own house in order. Human resources is also an issue which clearly needs to be addressed. This report has vindicated the forced resignation of a sloppy, slapdash Commission and revealed a catalogue of irresponsibility by Member States who are prepared to criticise but not act on fraud and irregularities. The new Commission is heading in the right direction and we hope that we will see an end to these kinds of reports. We can put them behind us once we see an improvement in terms of the reform process. I should like to finish by putting a clear question to Mr Karlsson: does he personally think there is anything specific in the 1998 report which should stop Parliament from granting discharge?

Political group: PSE
Madam President, the adoption of Community action in the field of public health is greatly welcome. The new public health strategy will determine the EU's focus on health for the next five years. That is why having clear priorities is so important: firstly, improving information and knowledge concerning health issues; secondly, strengthening rapid reaction to health threats; and, finally, tackling health determinants. However, as many of my colleagues have mentioned, the budget remains an issue. The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy would like EUR 300 million. This is an EUR 80 million increase which would correspond to the amount already in the existing programmes. As many have mentioned, this is EUR 100 million more than the Council asked for in the common position. This is necessary in order for the programme to work effectively, and it is more than fair. I would like to take this opportunity, in light of 11 September, to ask the Commissioner if any new action to combat bioterrorism will be funded by a new budgetary proposal and not from the framework programme? Finally, I would like to emphasise the importance of working with NGOs. I am alarmed that the Conservatives in this House have called for a split vote on the issue of NGO networks. I fear that this will undermine the partnership which has been built up under the previous programme where the Community relied on NGO networks to deliver messages such as the 'Europe Against Cancer Week'. The new health programme is about protecting the health of all EU citizens, not just the privileged few. This will not be achieved without working with the EU citizens who are most interested and knowledgeable about public health. Health is what matters to the majority of EU citizens. We should make sure that this programme matters.

Political group: PSE
At first sight, we could ask ourselves why we need to be particularly concerned about the promotion of women’s rights in Mediterranean countries. Equal opportunities policy is the same throughout the European Union. We do not for one moment think, for example, that due to the particular circumstances or the mentality of men in Mediterranean Member States, implementing equal opportunities policy, a policy which is now firmly grounded in the Treaty of Amsterdam, would be any more difficult there. We would not even call the men from these countries ‘macho’. They are certainly no more or less macho than men from Northern States. But it is clear that, in Mediterranean countries that are not, or not yet, members of the European Union, the situation of women is more worrying in many regards, and that we need, and this is perfectly legitimate, to devote more attention to trying to remedy incidences of unacceptable discrimination. I am therefore in favour of this report, with two reservations. I believe that positive actions such as those laid down in paragraph 5b of the resolution and the creation of infrastructure should permit not only women but men as well to combine working and family life. Paragraph 14 advocates the possibility of creating a Euro-Mediterranean Development Bank. Do we really need to create a new bank, when we already have the European Investment Bank, which is quite capable of granting loans within the framework of the Barcelona process? We need to be wary of creating precedents. If we create a Euro-Mediterranean Development Bank, why not create one for the Baltic Sea, the North Sea, or anywhere else for that matter? (Intervention cut short pursuant to Article 137 of the Rules of Procedure) - Hermange report (A5-0009/2002)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, the Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities considers that the implementation results of the budget-lines covering the promotion of equal opportunities between men and women were in general satisfactory. However, we have no line for the horizontal policy of gender mainstreaming, i.e. incorporating equal opportunities for women and men into all Community policies and activities. We therefore call upon you to continue to give high priority to this policy area and invite you to carry out a gender impact assessment of expenditure, especially as regards the Structural Funds, the research programme, and all investments in the information society. I think it is important for us to obtain precise data on how the resource outflows are taking place, and so the Committee on Women's Rights calls upon the Court of Auditors to produce a special report on the financial implementation of gender mainstreaming. This was done once before, in 1998, and the policy measures were clearly defined in the report. This would enable us to target our policies more strongly on this area.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Mr Antonione has already pointed out that the Assembly which is to take place in Naples is extremely important in terms of the decision to turn the Parliamentary Forum into a genuine Assembly, the Euro-Mediterranean Bank and the Euro-Mediterranean Foundation for Dialogue between Cultures. I believe that, alongside our work on these goals, we must reassess the Euro-Mediterranean policy in the context of the more general neighbourhood policy, which, at last, places the eastern dimension on the same level as the southern dimension. This is the signal we must send to our consultative partners and we want the regional dimension of the Barcelona Process to be strengthened in the action plans to address cultural and human relations, economic and trade aspects, social aspects, rights and security. I believe that we should preserve the complex nature of the Partnership, which has become very condensed and one-dimensional, focusing purely on free trade. As regards human rights and democracy, I feel we must stress that these are not just options; these dimensions must be integrated into the strategy and, above all, incorporated into our approach to combating terrorism, for, in order to combat terrorism, we have to break not just the vicious circle of terrorism and war but the vicious circle of terrorism and consolidation of authoritarian regimes as well. In doing this, I believe it is possible to launch democratisation processes with due regard for human rights in these countries too, as called for by the fundamental United Nations development agency report, which we should take as our guide in relations with these countries.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, it is a tragedy that we are discussing here. A rich country that has almost become bankrupt, State employees who do not receive their salaries, civil rights violations, attempted coups and oppression, armed conflict and hundreds killed. We condemn the violence against the lawfully elected government, we demand lawful conditions and peaceful dialogue, and we would ask the Commission and the Council to help with humanitarian aid and to contribute to the dialogue, if that is possible. I believe we can all agree about that here in Parliament. However, your initial difficulties in finding someone who was here to speak about this point are highlighted by the fact that there are only about 10 Members here, and I am afraid that there will scarcely be hundreds of us here when, in a couple of hours’ time, we vote on these resolutions. I hope that you will take the matter up in the Bureau so that we can have these very important matters properly discussed at a time when both the Council and a fair number of MEPs are also present, for this way of proceeding is not good enough.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, my question is quite specific and is, I believe, of direct concern to the EU. Is the Council aware that the Serbian government is planning to sell mines and mineral resources in Kosovo to EU companies and to portray this as privatisation? Does the Council know that there are problems here associated with ethnic cleansing in one part of Kosovo, in that Serbs are being settled in one area, which is the area that is richest in raw materials, and there is a risk of the area being partitioned in order to safeguard these raw materials?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, although it is consumer protection that interests people most when we talk about Europe, it has to be said that little has been done here, and that this framework directive too will fail to provide any guarantees that the food scandals of recent years will be a thing of the past. Unfortunately, food controls are still a farce. This directive is indeed successful in many areas, and we are particularly pleased that animal welfare has finally been incorporated into food controls. The intensity of controls has also been improved, so that national control reports are now also required. Nevertheless, an investigation carried out in Germany has just highlighted the fundamental problem, which is that not enough controls are carried out in practice. We need much more funding for food controls, so that controls can be carried out more frequently, and so that anyone breaching food regulations runs a genuine risk of punitive action. That remains the weak point in all the Member States. We would also like to have seen laboratory methods brought in line, with some harmonisation of how controls are implemented in the Member States. What we also urgently need – and I have not given up hope, Commissioner, and would be pleased if you could say something about this – is for a consumer information directive to be brought in at last, mirroring the environmental information directive. That would mean that just as consumers, the public, have the right to know what is happening in the environmental world, they would also have the right to know what is happening in the food sector. My very last point is this: I hope that the Council will stop playing hide-and-seek and tell us today in the clearest possible terms what the position is on fees and fines, so that this is clear when we come to vote, because we cannot demand more food controls and improved animal welfare if the Council is secretive about this point and there is a lack of transparency towards this House. That is all we want. Because what we need is food controls ... (The President cut off the speaker)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, Commissioner Busquin, ladies and gentlemen, my fellow fans of communication, since, as was just mentioned, we are by and large among friends in this house, there is actually a whole range of dangers that Mr Herzog has just highlighted and that I will not go over again. I will, therefore, endeavour to be positive by saying that the three reports, despite everything, form part of a policy intended to prevent the digital divide and, from this point of view, I will not just thank the two rapporteurs for their work, but the Group of the will also support these three reports. I will go back over Mrs Read’s proposals in a little more detail because as regards these very technical subjects, which are, however, of financial interest to the European territorial authorities – and I am speaking as someone from the Auvergne, moreover – these proposals help to ensure that the information society is not left in the hands of one or two monopolies. There is not just Bill Gates in the age of computers, and that is just as well. I will, therefore, make every effort to concentrate more specifically on thanking all those who told us beforehand what they were doing, so that we could clearly follow the amendments that were being prepared. The eTEN programme is a decisive implementation tool alongside the general rules for granting Community financial aid in the area of trans-European networks. This is provided for until 2005. The objective is to raise the aid ceiling to projects in the telecommunication sector from 10% to 30% and this proposal is not insignificant because it will probably enable the Lisbon objectives to be backed up and therefore eEurope to be developed in the area of services of general interest. This is precisely what we are interested in; that this is known as universal services or services of general interest, and that this service will in any case ultimately apply to all citizens and will be a tool that is strengthened for the good of all. This concept of services of general interest is perhaps even truer, moreover, with the IDABC programme for the period 2005-2009. Indeed, we the Group of the are as you know pro free software and have found that it is backed up because it is included in the idea of interoperable delivery of pan-European eGovernment services to administrations. We therefore support these projects. I will say, to conclude – because it is interesting news – that the town of Munich for example, apart from the example that was set with IDA, has switched to LINUX, to free software, and I hope that other administrations will take up the same challenges.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, like many others, I want to thank Mr Katiforis for an interesting report. When I read the report and see the picture of the EU’s economy that is described there, I think it is quite a worrying picture. Investment levels are too low, unemployment is still too high and there is insufficient growth. It is not, therefore, perhaps so strange that the euro is continuing to lose ground to other currencies, in spite of rumours to the effect that the European Central Bank is purchasing the euro on the quiet in order to support it. The rapporteur observes that stability is not an end in itself, which is something I agree with. There is far too much talk about stability, convergence and coordination and far too little about the factors which give rise to innovation and development. As far as I am concerned, EMU cooperation looms ponderously large as a colossus which will have difficulty keeping afloat in the present swelling economy. My conclusions about this differ completely, however, from those of the previous speaker. I believe we have to place our confidence in human resources, partly through a macro-economic policy which creates demand and potential new jobs and partly – and perhaps above all – by relying upon measures in the workplace such as training, democratisation and good social conditions. In this context, I can, in fact, see the EMU project’s main weakness, for it is true that you cannot act like Superman and raise the European economies from above. Instead, you have to mobilise working people and the people out there in the Member States.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, the rapporteurs Mrs Haug and Mr Ferber have drafted their first report on next year’s EU budget. I wish them both luck in the task facing them. Drafting the budget means spending taxpayers’ money. For that reason the work is important and calls for stringent budgetary discipline. There are many areas that call for financing, but there are only a few vital ones. Only the vital areas can receive public funding. In addition to stringent budgetary discipline we wish to stress the following: our Group gives its full support to the package of reforms as proposed by Mr Kinnock. Activity-Based Budgeting and management will be the cornerstones of these reforms. They will emphasise the importance of personal responsibility, diminish the bureaucratic load and enhance efficiency. But the reforms will require cooperation with the staff. That is why we have to prepare carefully for the forthcoming talks regarding the reform of staff regulations. The current staffing structure has to be clarified and made more flexible, so as to facilitate the reallocation of funds, for example. The work of reform might also demand additional budgetary proposals, which we urge the Commission to be prepared for. Mrs Haug’s report stresses the importance of culture as a means of creating jobs. Culture as such falls within the competence of the Member States. However, culture as a means of livelihood is an area which is rapidly growing in importance. For that reason we support the report insofar as it emphasises the importance of developing this within the framework of structural action. In a later debate on the budget we wish to draw attention to the matter of sufficient appropriations for science and research and financing the fight against exclusion in all its forms, within the meaning of Article 13 of the Treaty. Our group also believes that Category 1 of the financial perspective – agricultural expenditure – should not be used as a primary source of financing in response to needs that become manifest in external policy. With regard to Mr Ferber’s report, we would like to remark that we are disinclined to take a position on the details as yet, including the establishment of posts. Nevertheless, we consider it vital that reforms concerning members’ rules be established promptly, in accordance with earlier agreements.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Mr Prodi, I should like to describe your statement in Le Monde as economically understandable and fair, but politically not very astute. We only have to look at today's debate to know what I mean. It appears to be a debate between the people who create the impression that they want to do away with the Stability and Growth Pact altogether, on the one hand, and, on the other, those who have apparently accorded the present Stability and Growth Pact the status of holy writ. This should not be what the discussion is about. What should it be about? In my view, it should be about striking the right balance between the need, recognised also by my own group, to reach a structural credit balance in the medium term and the equally important need to take into account the economic reality and cyclical movements. Is this now a licence, as some fellow MEPs call it, for every country to do as they like? No, indeed not. It is, however, an incentive to further refine the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact by, for example, drawing a distinction between necessary investments, infrastructure and by showing concern on the one hand, and – we might as well give all the details – irresponsible election promises, on the other. It is right in my view that countries experiencing an economic downturn, such as Germany for example, are given more time to get their budgetary position on track. However, in my view, countries that are intent on a structural deterioration of their deficit by, for example, making out bad cheques, like France, should, in my view, be given a yellow card in future, with good reason. Mr Prodi, if it was your intention to stir up a discussion about a reform of the Stability and Growth Pact, then you can count on my support. I admire your courage when you say that you do not want to remain deaf and blind to the changing economy. If that is the case, I can forgive you for your bad timing. I can assure you: intelligent agitators invariably do well in the end.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, without verifiable, up-to-date independent scientific advice it is impossible to establish a TAC regime. How, then, could the Commission support such a regime? How could the Council endorse such a scheme in June 2002 without proper consultation with the industry and the North East Atlantic Fisheries Council being left out of the picture? The Commission has a lot to answer for in this, but the main appeal that I make at this stage is not for recrimination but for the proposal to be reconsidered. If conservation of stocks is to be achieved, we must regulate deep-sea fisheries under a regime based on effort limitation. We must take into account firstly that TACs will increase mortality through discards of the species most in the need of protection, and secondly, that safety could be put at risk as vessels with inadequate quota but a deficit in fishing days would be pressurised to fish under perilous conditions. I urge this House and also the Commission to support the amendments in the name of the Group and those in my name which are signed by various members of the four largest groups in this House. Finally, the social and economic implications of any final proposal must be fully assessed and measured for compensation provided where appropriate and without discrimination between fishermen in different Member States.

Political group: Verts-ALE