GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Overall, I am happy with the text adopted. It groups together all the players (public authorities, agriculture sector, citizens) and involves them early on in the debate, in particular with regard to the establishing of early warning systems. These early warning systems, once set up by the Commission, should benefit visibly from monitoring and increased control of their operation. Information on the risks and appropriate measures must be distributed and included. All the Member States must also, as we are requesting, carry out regular farm inspections in order to ensure that the general rules on sanitary control and biosecurity are effectively understood and applied. Failure to do so will incur penalties which are in proportion with the breaches observed. Although farmers are given substantial responsibility in the measure, all too often increases in the amount of livestock for income are perceived as an essential factor in the risk of an epidemic. International trade, however, is also a factor that should be taken into account. I am also pleased that my fellow Members reacted favourably to my proposal seeking to prohibit the introduction of products destined for tax-free warehouses or the provisioning of ships from countries not authorised to export to the EU. Today, this meat that could carry a risk of foot and mouth disease can be taken to these warehouses within the Union itself. (Explanation of vote abbreviated in accordance with Rule 137(1) of the Rules of Procedure)

Political group: PPE-DE
Production aid in the olive oil, tobacco and cotton sector must be maintained if we are to prevent many producers from abandoning the sector, and if the specific characteristics of Mediterranean products are not to fall by the wayside. The Commission’s proposal for decoupling production aid, which has now also been approved by Parliament, is unacceptable and does not augur well for the discussions at the Council of Agriculture Ministers. This proposal will have a devastating socio-economic impact and will lead to desertification, particularly in the poorest regions of EU Member States, such as in Portugal. This proposal particularly affects Portugal. In the case of cotton, the threshold for aid is set at a preposterous 360 hectares, in spite of the potential benefits of the Alqueva project and of the conversion of barren areas into irrigated land. In the case of olive oil, the financial package and methodology that have been established undermine both the modernisation of Portuguese olive groves and the new plantation rights set at 30 000 hectares, which were agreed in 1998; this despite the intended savings of EUR 113 million. The proposal would entail increasing the financial envelope for Portugal by some EUR 20 million. Yet the most worrying consequence of this proposal would be the number of producers leaving the sector in Portugal, which would happen, according to various studies. Hence our vote against.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I should like to express my disappointment that on a matter on which I have had a written question before the Commission for more than six weeks, and which I raised in the debate, I have had no acknowledgement, far less a reply.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President-in-Office of the Council, to be frank, I believe Mr Sharon only wants military, not political options. He has once again used disproportionate force. It is true that the Palestinian suicide attacks are despicable – we all know that – but what did Mr Sharon do during the periods in which there were no attacks? Let us remember his requirement in June 2001 that seven days should pass without violence before he would make any political concessions. In December 2001, there were three weeks of peace; in 2002, six weeks. Did Mr Sharon make the slightest political gesture? No, but during those six weeks of peace the Tsahal killed dozens of Palestinians. I ask the Council, here and now, is this not a bad sign? Mr Sharon carried out military attacks at key moments with the intention of invalidating periods in which there were no suicide attacks. The last time, when all the Palestinian groups, under pressure from Mr Arafat, were considering the possibility of putting an end to suicide attacks against civilians in Israel, Mr Sharon’s political response was to bomb an entire building in the Gaza strip, killing dozens of people, including eleven children. Mr Sharon – let us be clear about this – has never made, nor will he ever make, any political concessions, except those imposed upon him, because he is not interested in peace. Mr Sharon is interested in pacification, humiliation, the capitulation of the Palestinians, but not in a genuine, fair peace. The situation, Mr President, is extremely serious with regard to Mr Arafat’s physical safety, the Palestine identity, which has been crushed by Israel – and more specifically by Mr Sharon – and the area, because Mr Sharon will continue on the warpath until there is an invasion of Iraq, unilaterally decided on by the United States, at which point Mr Sharon will take advantage of the situation to definitively destroy any remaining fragment of the Oslo process, of the 'peace of the brave'. Will the EU continue to limit itself to expressing its deep concern over what is going on? (Applause from the left)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, my feeling is that the conservation of tropical forests should certainly be brought about through funding, contributions etc., but above all – and this is why the report appealed to me – it should involve the participation of the local peoples, providing them with ideas for a future for the forest and genuinely sustainable forest management. A few years ago, the magazine ‘Nature’ featured a study into a Peruvian forest and the best way to exploit it. This forest, like all tropical forests, boasted remarkable biodiversity: it contained a good 270 plant species in a single hectare, whereas a European forest can have as few as six or seven species per hectare. Now, this rich biodiversity – which, moreover, is not confined to plant species – has a financial consequence which is in itself truly impressive. However, there are different ways of accessing this potential source of revenue: for example, it is possible to cut down all the trees and sell the wood, which would bring in FF 5 000 plus another FF 15 000 from using the land as pastureland – which is what usually happens – or for crops. In this scenario, the land becomes poor in humus and desertification soon follows. On the other hand, another approach could be to exploit the produce of the land, such as fruit and the produce of the underwood, and to operate a system of controlled tree felling, which would produce an annual income of FF 2 000. In this case, the income would be regular, practically perennial. This is just one example to illustrate that I am a firm believer in the principle of providing services, technical information and advice on a modus operandi to these peoples, so that they can sustain their forests themselves, for I am sure that it is in their interest to operate in this way rather than conducting mass tree-felling operations and laying waste to vast numbers of these areas which are so valuable for our planet’s atmosphere. I would like to end by quoting an aphorism from Chairman Mao’s Little Red Book – which, although it is no longer popular can still be useful on occasions. It reads: “Do not give a fisherman fish; teach him how to fish better”.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Regarding the Eriksson report (A5-0294/2000) on the proposal for a Council Decision on the Programme relating to the Community framework strategy on gender equality (2001-2005), I totally support gender equality but on examination of the related commission document, COM(2000) 335, it would appear that the financial statement includes 'core funding of running costs of the European Women's Lobby (EWL) currently financed under budget line A-3037'. As you are aware, the Committee on Budgets has identified this NGO as a monopoly. It would appear, according to correspondence from various European women's groups, that this monopoly does not ideologically represent a very substantial number of European women's organisations. As this NGO plays an integral role in the formation and implementation of this programme, I believe the integrity of this Community framework strategy on gender equality is in question, and therefore unsupportable. Furthermore, is it appropriate to fund a monopoly from a budget line intended to promote equality? Indeed, are we justified in funding a monopoly from any EU budget line? Regretfully therefore, I have voted against. - González Álvarez Report (A5-0309/2000)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I shall not have the last word; that is the Commissioner's prerogative. I wish to subscribe to the thanks that have been expressed to the rapporteur and to emphasise that I have heard from insiders that the programme has so far been an unqualified success. I believe that one reason for this has been the way in which the support has been accompanied by intensive consultancy and local networking. This needs to be re-emphasised. The MEDIA desk and the local MEDIA branches have proved to be very useful instruments. It is vital for these accompanying institutional measures to be retained. The MEDIA branch offices help to minimise the obstacles to European cooperation, for example. On the one hand, MEDIA is about culture and common European cultural traditions in the audiovisual domain. This is still a rather tender sapling which needs our undivided attention. Moreover, as other speakers have already pointed out, it is also an economic asset that is judged by its success. One key criterion of the success of the new MEDIA programme will be its support for the development, marketing and promotion of films that the public wants to see. I make no attempt to conceal my own personal view on this matter. Hollywood cannot be beaten, in my opinion, by money and quotas but only by quality. Recent years have shown that people are interested in many different types of film. Europe must not shy away from this window of opportunity. We must continue to foster this encouraging development, and to that end the budgetary increase requested in Mrs Hieronymi's report is a logical move. Finally, I should like to mention that many of the roots of our European culture lie in Central and Eastern Europe. A higher budget will also make it possible to involve the Central and Eastern European countries to a greater extent in these programmes. The last word on an increased budget may not yet have been spoken, and we shall perhaps be discussing further increases over the next few years.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like first like to congratulate the rapporteur on taking the Commission proposal, which was a good one, and making it even better. I also, of course, welcome Commissioner De Palacio to the House. I nevertheless believe that some of us, myself included, were right to table a number of amendments. The plethora of often diverse rules and regulations certainly means that the lot of HGV drivers – mainly men and rarely women – can hardly be called an easy one. It must not, though, be forgotten that it is at the weekends that many members of the public want to have a bit more peace and quiet, and that it is at that same time that drivers want to go on trips. Hence this conflict. I therefore think that there should be mutual solidarity between the population in general, including the haulage business, and the overwhelming majority of the public involved. The rapporteur took the view that such solidarity could be better organised. He was right, but planning for it is often difficult. In my opinion, the transport industry could certainly plan convoys better if it knew about the weekend bans so that the result would not, as is often at present the case, be these periods waiting at borders, which are admittedly unpleasant. So better information would make that improvement possible – and the Commission also has a few things planned, which the rapporteur supports. Railways, too, certainly offer a possible alternative to some degree. To sum up, I think there is a lot to be said in favour of leaving the status quo as it is. There is also much to be said for doing so without coming up with a specific rule on the subject. That is also the thinking behind some of the amendments that have been tabled. I would nonetheless like to take this opportunity of reiterating in the clearest possible terms that the Group on whose behalf I am now speaking supports the rapporteur's basic line wholesale. What results we achieve are a matter for democracy and for tomorrow's vote. In any case, the rapporteur has done a good job.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, for many years now we have constantly been receiving new reports describing the depletion of the vital ozone layer. At first, the hole in the ozone layer started getting bigger over the southern hemisphere, i.e. a long way away, and for some time now we have had to face the fact that the ozone layer is also changing over Europe. Since 1976, the ozone layer over Europe has been contracting continuously, and is now depleted by 15%. The Commission only informed us about this recently and warned against a rise in skin cancer ailments, allergies and eye disease. People knew as early as the eighties which substances led to depletion of the ozone layer and continue to do so. According to estimates, for every one per cent less of ozone, the earth is exposed to 2% more UV, which means that people are at greater risk of contracting skin cancer. I am therefore delighted that a decision has at last been reached on such an urgent matter, which we will use to transpose the Montreal Protocol at Community level and to go even further in some respects than the demands that were raised there. Although I endorse the outcome of the conciliation procedure, I make no bones about the fact that I am not satisfied. I am referring to the issues that have been controversial to the last, concerning the ban on partially halogenated hydrochlorofluorocarbons, which are mainly used in refrigeration and air conditioning plants. If we are going to opt for a ban on the use of these substances on the basis of definite findings pointing to the damaging effect they have on the ozone layer, then I would have hoped for a more consistent approach on the part of the Council as regards transitional periods and exemptions, particularly as ecofriendly alternative substances are available for all types of application. I would remind you that the ban on using virgin HCFCs in refrigeration and air conditioning plants will not take effect until the year 2010, whereas the European Parliament had called for it to be 2005. And in the case of recycled HCFCs, the full ban will not take effect until 2015, rather than 2007, which is what the European Parliament wanted. But cleverly, a transitional clause was incorporated which allows for a modification of the phase-out date of recycled HCFCs. I believe that reports on further damage to the ozone layer and also new scientific findings as regards alternative substances will soon show the present compromise up as having fallen too short. Time will tell, and if my prognosis is right then the European Parliament will soon be raising the issue of the phase-out dates for partially halogenated HCFCs again, and will be in a position to deal with this matter in the interests of the environment and public health.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, this morning, the President of the European Parliament received employees from the Strasbourg branch of Marks [amp] Spencer. They are seated in the gallery and I should like to welcome them. My fellow Members and I thought this morning that we would be able to reassure them that the dossier of the works councils and the information of workers was finally back under discussion. I hope that this evening’s debate clearly demonstrates our will to produce a piece of work that is consistent and which will lead to the directives in this field being updated. As you pointed out, Commissioner, we can no longer wait a new crisis to be announced to reassure ourselves that the legal instruments from which employees should benefit are at last appropriate, effective and provide for penalties in the event that European-level regulations are not respected. The Marks [amp] Spencer employees, like those from the other companies mentioned by Harlem Désir, demand, as European citizens, that Europe establishes frameworks for protection and for organising collective action, which as we all know is the only guarantee of individual rights in the field of employment law. They are demanding that these frameworks be established, recognised and protected and they are placing great hope in your words, Commissioner. The Commission and Parliament should also, however, demonstrate their political will by making any further development of economic union and of any new regulations conditional on the implementation of social provisions that stipulate new forms of regulation such as those that we are expecting today with the revision of the directives that has been announced. The workers of the European Union, Commissioner, must not suffer as a result of European integration. They must instead be the main beneficiaries of it. Respect for workers’ rights and the building of a social Europe are the pillars which, unless strengthened, could dash all our hopes for building democracy in our Union.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, my honourable friend Mr Patakis raised what is, in my opinion, a serious matter a short while ago. He had already called at the last session of Parliament for the House to observe one minute's silence in memory of the 16 children killed by the American invaders in Afghanistan at the beginning of December and in memory of the thousands of other civilian victims of the interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. The President in the chair assured him that he would notify you. Today my honourable friend Mr Patakis reiterated this request. From time to time, Parliament observes a minute's silence for various victims, even victims between invaders. I think that basic compassion, Mr President, demands that my honourable friend's request be accepted.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, honourable members, for reasons of security in Europe and in order to safeguard the security of others outside the Union who may need our support, Europe requires an independent military presence which differs from the presence which it has by reason of its membership of NATO. Events in Kosovo and the whole tragic break up of the former Yugoslavia are proof most painful of Europe’s failings within NATO. One might even say that Europe has entrusted the task of a military presence to the NATO leadership and, at the same time, relaxed its efforts over the years, to the point at which it is now more or less incapable of properly honouring its obligations within NATO. There is a psychological explanation for this. If someone, be it a person, a country or a group of countries, considers that it has no initiative to act, it loses interest, neglects its duties or goes through the motions of performing its duties, but there is no substance to them and they are performed perfunctorily. Perhaps the most important outcome of the resolutions of the Cologne, Helsinki and Lisbon summits is precisely the fact that they have restored Europe’s sense of initiative, giving it the motivation needed in order to accept responsibility, make an effort and honour its obligations. From this point of view, the draft which we are debating does not constitute a threat to the cohesion of ΝΑΤΟ. On the contrary, a Europe with its own military initiative will take its NATO obligations more seriously. It is the only way in which it can take its NATO obligations seriously and reassure the political forces in the United States which object to American armed forces and American resources being tied up in the defence of Europe. Consequently, Mr President, we must ensure that our immediate decisions are geared towards European unity and the defence of a common border and, sooner or later, that is the point we must reach.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the proposal for a directive upon which we are about to vote is a substantial step forward in the Union's intention to pursue ambitious goals in the field of the restriction of air pollution. We are currently in a paradoxical situation: although motorcycles represent only 2-3 % of the total volume of transport, motorcycle emissions account for an increasingly high proportion of the total emissions. The amendments tabled by Mr Lange, like almost all those adopted by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, enhance the Commission's proposal. In particular, the insistence on the development of Europe-wide test cycles specifically for motor vehicles, but also the call to make type approval subject to confirmation of the effectiveness of the anti-pollution measures are indications of the European Parliament's will to take firm action in such a sensitive area as this. In this regard, it would appear important to stress that the majority of these objectives are widely endorsed by the sector's businesses. This means both that Mr Lange's negotiations with them have been successful and that awareness is growing among producers too of the need to contribute to improving our environmental conditions. Therefore, the decision to fix, as of now, not only the date for revising the initial limits set – 2006 – but also the limits for the second stage, is an indication of Parliament's decision to apply continual pressure to industry to make progress. Moreover, the introduction of the opportunity to revise these limits in line with the hoped-for technological developments is evidence of the will to continue the dialogue with manufacturers in the future as well.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I would suggest that this will give us the opportunity to adopt a short resolution on Ethiopia.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, on the night of 27 June 1980, off the coast of Ustica, 81 innocent European citizens who were flying from Bologna to Palermo, lost their lives in the course of a military operation which involved the civilian airliner in which they were travelling. A few minutes after the disaster, the military and secret service machinery of the countries concerned – with the Italians leading the way – were already putting in place a huge and disgraceful operation to conceal, if not destroy, the evidence to prevent the legal authorities ascertaining what really happened in the skies over Ustica. The European Union and its Parliament have the institutional duty to protect the interests of the European citizens and not those of individual governments, NATO or the United States. The European citizens, including the 81 European families of the victims of Ustica, have the right to demand all our help in bringing justice to bear. And so it is our duty to ask for the States involved in the disaster to be put under pressure to say all they know. This is also of the greatest interest to us because this is the only way to prevent something similar happening again in European skies, and not only in European skies. Over the next five years, we are committed to creating a common area of freedom, security and justice. Ascertaining the truth on the Ustica disaster would be a major first step along this path.

Political group: GUE-NGL