GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, following on from the last comment, it is obvious that the Irish made their decision in a very democratic way, as did, alas, the British people, because they voted in this wonderful Labour government. But as we are trying to change what the Irish said in their referendum, maybe we should look at the British vote. Surely this House would have wanted to see a Conservative government returned, and on the basis of fact and realistic policy, people would have wanted to vote Conservative on Thursday last. That is the result that we would all have liked.

Political group: PPE-DE
Every year, between 700 000 and 2 million people, mostly women and children, are the victims of trafficking in human beings. Worldwide, trafficking in human beings is the third biggest source of illegal income, after arms trafficking and drugs trafficking. It generates profits of between USD 5 and 7 billion dollars a year. The current rate of trafficking in children is now ten times higher than that of the transatlantic slave trade at its peak. This particular form of trafficking is forced labour, and it is the one that is growing most rapidly. Trafficking in human beings is a scourge which affects every part of the globe, and it is taking on alarming proportions in the wake of globalisation. Organised crime very quickly achieved the huge profits that could be made from taking advantage of the distress of would-be immigrants. The proposal for a directive on the short-term residence permit issued to victims of action to facilitate illegal immigration or trafficking in human beings who cooperate with the competent authorities, a proposal that Members are due to vote on today, is one of the instruments which will enable us to combat this scourge.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I would like to extend my warmest thanks to the Commissioner this evening for her promise. 1 January 2000 is very close indeed, and a certain strategy has already been put in place by her predecessor for keeping an eye on what is happening as regards the European plc. It is clear that something needs to be done about this. I am delighted that the Commissioner has taken this so well. Indeed, I think, as far as this is concerned, that we must go further from 1 January onwards. I should also add that with this strategy, it has been the case before that we have lost sight of the fact that the European plc has to be voted on with unanimity, whilst this is a directive requiring majority voting. We may well speed up in the long run by putting this directive back on track, rather than continuing endlessly with the European plc. This may be an unnecessary consideration but I do think that we achieved our purpose tonight. We have made some progress. Mr President, of course it is not the Commissioner who is keeping a low profile – although they tried to play down the fact that nothing has been submitted yet, but that has now been addressed as far as I am concerned – rather it is the Council itself. Then we have to shift our attention to the somewhat mysterious Prime Minister of Great Britain, Mr Blair. Mr Blair who would very much like to join forces with Europe, yet is trying to stop Europe from bringing this issue to a satisfactory conclusion. This is the problem we are facing, Mr President. In all manner of ways, using traditional politburo tactics, attempts are even being made to thwart debate on this directive, that is people expressing their opinions as to the content. Surely, this is not something we should expect to happen. I can only say, Mr President, that the Blair administration and some other governments are so frightened to admit how little they are prepared to do for the employee, that they cannot cope with this in debate, as they used to, but have to resort to all kinds of underhand politburo tactics. This must end and I am really pleased that this has been highlighted this evening in this debate in one way or another.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I would like to raise a matter which, although not as sensitive, is still important. During the first part-session of this Parliament I asked you if you could do something about the television channels. We had a Dutch TV channel for five years at a stretch in the other building and suddenly we find that we no longer have one. I asked you about this during the first part-session and you assured me at the time that you would spare no effort in putting matters right again. We are now three part-sessions and three months on. I do not doubt your good intentions but the point is that nothing has been done yet. I would ask you again to see to it that we get a Dutch channel on the television again, just as we used to in the old building next door.

Political group: ELDR
Behind a presentation that is supposed to be optimistic, the description the reports give of the Eastern European states forming the majority of European Union candidate countries is gloomy. ‘Worrying levels of corruption’, ‘overpopulation of prisons’, ‘enormous traffic in women and children for the purposes of prostitution and sexual exploitation’, ‘high level of unemployment’, ‘poverty’, ‘seriously damaged environment’, ‘unpromising economic outlook’, ‘acceleration in the spread of the HIV virus’, ‘oppression of minorities’, ‘discrimination against the Roma’, these are some of the expressions used in relation to one Eastern European country or another, or, in some extreme cases, to all. Despite this, the report expresses satisfaction with the fact that privatisations are going ahead, even in the health sector, denying healthcare to a significant proportion of the population, and with the fact that foreign investments and exports are on the increase in these countries. The return of these states to brutal capitalism and the increasing stranglehold of powerful investors from the west are already causing a considerable rise in social inequalities. However, despite a few sanctimonious warnings given by the reports to the governments of these countries, what they are mainly asking for is for the remaining obstacles to the penetration of foreign capital to be lifted and for ‘the flexibility and mobility of work’ to be increased, that is to say, for their working classes to be submitted to a higher level of exploitation. Being supporters of a completely unified Europe from one end of the continent to the other, we have not voted against enlargement. Our abstention expresses our opposition to the master and slave relationship that the European Union is seeking to impose on these countries in collaboration with their privileged classes, in addition to the anti-worker policy imposed under the pretext of enlargement.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, we feel the Commission Communication is highly relevant and Mr van den Berg’s report adds certain contributions that enrich the original text. He has shown flexibility by accepting the majority of the amendments tabled, and, on behalf of my parliamentary group, I would like to say that we shall vote for the report. In fact, many fora and macroconferences have already been held in relation to the need to increase efforts to eradicate poverty, which is undoubtedly the most serious problem we face. It is something of a coincidence that, with the resources now available, it will not be possible to achieve the objectives set for 2015. It is good, however, that, within our limited means, we are focusing our attention on health and education, which are so closely linked and interdependent. It has been clearly shown that health and education, education and health, are the best policies for development, that they enable millions of human beings to escape poverty. It is true that some progress is being made, as stated by the rapporteur. In Africa, for example, 60% of children today attend school, which means that 40% are still not attending. In other words, 45 million children are condemned to illiteracy and poverty, probably for life. New difficulties have arisen in some countries. The tragedy of child soldiers means that, in some West African countries, mothers prevent their sons from attending school for fear that they will be kidnapped and not return home, as we have seen recently, last week, in Ivory Coast, in a report by various agencies and other NGOs present on the ground. The problems of gender segregation are still causing an unsustainable situation in some Asian and Middle Eastern countries. In Latin America investment in education has dropped alarmingly over the past few years of crisis throughout the region, and this affects ethnic minorities in particular, as the Commissioner has pointed out today, in Brazil, Ecuador, Guatemala, but also in countries such as Argentina, which until now had an excellent education system but is now moving backwards. By attending school, both boys and girls can and should receive a basic education that contributes to improving health, not just in relation to HIV and the ways in which it is transmitted – as the rapporteur reminds us – which, although it is a serious problem, is no more serious than other problems that could be alleviated more cheaply. This is the case of food hygiene, to cite just one example. I feel it is particularly necessary for international financial organisations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, to review their criteria and make them more flexible in order to promote free, universal education. That is now one of the priorities we must address and try to achieve some progress in this specific area.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I should firstly like to thank Mr Hughes for carrying out this difficult task and for the way in which he has done that. I believe that his amendments are largely based on, and are in line with, the Commission proposals, except for the two which Mrs Smet mentioned a moment ago. But I should also like to thank the Commissioner in particular for the courage she has shown in bringing this common position about, for that was a very complicated task. Many governments were opposed to it, and the fact that we are here at all is thanks to her tenacity. In that respect, she has achieved more than her predecessor. I hope we will bear this in mind when we deal with other matters too. I should also like to thank Mrs Sanders-ten Holte. She has given a truly brilliant, nineteenth-century, liberal account, which would not look out of place as an annexe to Dickens’ Christmas Carol. I believe that his novel was also about whether one should work on Christmas Day. This is now given fresh relevance. I believe it is important that a common position has been reached. It is also vital for us to negotiate on a few points in the common position which are inadequate, particularly the issue of the self-employed. In my view, we have not found the ultimate solution, but we are at least opening up the path for negotiations. Those who claim that we should adopt the common position without question are disempowering this Parliament. Surely they can understand that. Those who claim that current legislation is good enough, should read up on the accidents, especially accidents involving buses. Anyone opposed to those amendments should, next time there is a major accident involving a bus, be very aware of the damage they cause with such opinions to the effect that absolutely nothing should be done on this score. It is not acceptable that this rather dangerous sector should be the only sector to be excluded from the Working Times Directive. That is the reason for my group to at least support sound amendments.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the citizens of the applicant countries now have the chance to participate in the Union’s most important multiannual programmes, and, in fact, many states have started participating in the Socrates, Leonardo and YOUTH programmes. Some of them are also involved in the Culture 2000 and Media Plus programmes. This development should be wholeheartedly encouraged. It is leading to genuine cooperation and feelings of solidarity between the citizens of the applicant countries and those of the old Member States. The programmes offer young people in the applicant countries the chance to boost their human capital with language skills and cultural know-how. Relations and contact between the citizens of the old and future Member States are also necessary when providing information on membership. Although the main responsibility for information rests with the governments of the applicant countries and the EU institutions, it would be good if civil society could be involved in letting others know about their experiences. The discussions that preceded the referenda in Finland, Sweden and Austria are still fresh in the memories of people there. Perhaps that would help in approaching the aims for 2004.

Political group: PSE
I personally endorse, as does my Group, the Commission’s aim in introducing this regulatory measure, which, in any event, we support. We have to say, however, that it has been a long time in coming, since we have already endured the Prestige disaster, which happened when the ship should no longer have been at sea according to the terms of the Commission’s initial proposals. The measure is overdue and falls well short of what is required. The Union should adopt political and legislative measures to ban single hull ships carrying dangerous goods such as petroleum derivatives from sailing anywhere in waters under European Union economic control, and not just ban such ships from entering Community ports and using Community anchorages, as the Regulation does. We would like, furthermore, to see ‘sensitive coastal areas’ defined in this Regulation, and entry to them restricted for oil tankers posing a particular risk. In any case, we must be aware – and the blame lies with certain Member States of the European Union and with this House – that, over and above the proposals for double hulls, which we support, there are no political and legislative measures either in place or envisaged capable of preventing a fresh disaster if a new Prestige case were to occur. We Galicians are vividly and painfully aware of this fact. After this Regulation, and even in spite of it, a new Prestige may once again sail off the shores of Galicia and other affected countries; there is no law to prevent it.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, in the vast majority of cases I am prepared to support a compromise for the common good of the EU and to listen and form impressions, but definitely not today. Ladies and gentlemen, you need to know that there are two clear policies in the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party. There is a limit to compromise, and one that Mrs Buitenweg has grossly exceeded. There is no reason whatsoever for demanding changes or a review of the UN conventions on drugs. It is not the conventions that are at fault. Instead, it is unwillingness on the part of the Member States to get to grips with increasing drug problems. To those fellow MEPs – and there are some even in my own group – who say that I am inflexible and do not appreciate the importance of changes, I would say that, inflexible I may be, but I am also aware of what is behind this resolution. This is, of course, emphatically about politics, Mr Evans. You do not need to be Einstein to appreciate that. A visit the other day to the red-light district in Amsterdam convinced me even more, for it is a fact, Mr Evans, that those who are keen to review the UN conventions are the same persons who want to legalise and liberalise drugs policy. Mr Cappato’s rhetoric does not therefore ring in the least bit true. We know what he is after. We also know what Mrs Buitenweg wants, namely to legalise both soft and hard drugs. Do not forget that those of us here in this Chamber are the representatives of millions of Europeans. More than a million people have signed what is termed the Vienna Declaration, rejecting any undermining of the UN conventions. Ladies and gentlemen, the signals we must send to Vienna and to all the young people of Europe, including those sitting here and applauding, are: no, we do not want legalisation; no, we do not want liberalisation. No we have not given up the fight for a drugs-free Europe. You should reject the resolution.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Commissioner, the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism believes that Parliament, as the budgetary authority, must be regularly informed about the execution underway for structural actions so that the alarm can be raised in terms of the application of the sunset clause. With regard to the application of the additionality principle, which is an extremely important issue, the Commission must establish the means for its verification and control on the ground. Halfway through the period of application of the funds, the Commission should inform Parliament about the evaluation of its compliance on the basis of objective criteria. Furthermore, we ask the Commission, by means of appropriate solutions, to support the idea that the structural allocation should be considered a spending objective. In relation to the budget line for the trans-European transport network we note that the level of budgetary implementation over recent years is satisfactory and we recommend giving priority to projects with a clear European added value, stressing the importance of the funding of projects which provide a rebalance between modes of transport. We in the European Parliament also urge the Member States to use the Structural Funds while paying more attention to transport infrastructures, in particular intermodal transport and less polluting forms of transport. Naturally, in the case of land transport, they must pay particular attention to the railways, from the point of view of respect for the environment. Commissioner, at this decisive point for the European Union, prior to enlargement, the Member States, with the support of the Commission, will have to achieve greater efficiency in the application of the Structural Funds with the cooperation of the regions and local groups they are destined for. Only in this way will we come closer to the economic and social cohesion which, together with political union, is the great objective of the European institutions and citizens.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, AIDS is one of the gravest tragedies in the world. The fight against AIDS in Africa must therefore be given the highest priority. Essential drugs for AIDS and other serious diseases, such as malaria and tuberculosis, must be made available in developing countries free or at very low, and hence affordable, prices. For that reason I wholeheartedly support the resolution. Consequently, we must lend our urgent and unambiguous support to the South African government in its battle for cheap drugs. But we cannot combat AIDS with cheap medicines alone, I agree completely with the previous speaker on that point. Medical infrastructure is required, so that drugs can be dispensed in controlled conditions. Many more laboratories with competent staff must be set up. In addition, simple things like refrigerators are needed. But that is still not enough. The social infrastructure must also be called upon: women’s organisations, trade unions, schools; we must involve these much more in the battle against life-threatening diseases. So a great deal of money is needed, and also a new initiative. I propose the setting up of a European partnership, financed with European and national funds made up of public and private contributions, a combination of research money and funds for development aid. The research money must be used for scientific research, the development aid money on the construction of social and medical infrastructure. This concerted effort will make it possible to take decisive steps forward. This topic will remain on our agenda for some months to come. I look forward to broadly based cooperation in this Parliament.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, we are indebted to Mr Leinen for reminding us about this incident. However, I would expressly like to thank you for taking the stance you did, in your own name as our President. I would like you to know that you have our full and unequivocal support, and that we owe you a debt of gratitude. Incidentally, we should refrain from entering into debate on this issue at present. ***

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to thank all the Members of this House who have signed this declaration. We are dealing here with three separate aspects: cruelty, consumer fraud and recently we discovered that these pelts are toxic as well. The majority of Council Ministers at the meeting in November agreed to a ban. The majority of Members of this House have agreed to a ban. The majority of the citizens of the European Union want a ban. It is now up to the Commission to impose a ban. I hope that the willingness of the House to support this is being listened to by the Commission. For any other Members who wish to join in this success story, the declaration will remain open for 20 minutes after this sitting!

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I want to congratulate the rapporteur on an exceptional piece of work. She has managed to piece together a sustainable compromise against all the odds. At present, the stock exchanges within the EU have a near monopoly on dealing in securities, especially in certain national markets. Now, we are obtaining competition and freedom of choice and, Mr Katiforis, sound protection of investors. I want briefly to comment on the two sensitive articles, namely Articles 18 and 25. Where Article 18 is concerned, we think it important that the suitability test be reserved for services where advice is given and not, for example, Internet-based dealing in securities. These clients have consciously chosen a brokerage service in which they will have no need to pay for professional advice. That would just be more expensive. We shall therefore vote in favour of the committee’s Amendments Nos 53, 54 and 55. The most discussed article in the proposal is Article 25, which deals with the internalisation of trade and the publication of price information prior to transactions that take place outside the regulated markets or MTF platform. We view this as rather risky. It would reduce liquidity on the market and increase costs. There has not been sufficient political support for the removal of this article, but we think that the committee’s Amendments Nos 33, 86, 87, 88 and 89 should remove the negative effects that the proposed rules on the publication of prices would have on the market. Finally, I should like to ask why we are debating as important a proposal as this so late in the evening.

Political group: ELDR