GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, over recent months, a series of accidents involving buses, some of them serious, has led to public disquiet and to many bodies now giving their close attention to the question of whether the present rules on bus safety are adequate or whether they have to be made more extensive. In so doing, they have shed light on the position as regards the law, organisational issues, and the technical state of the art. To sum all this up, there is a strong common interest in not damaging the buses’ image as a basically very safe means of transport, with buses and coaches accounting for only 0.2 deaths per thousand million passenger-kilometres, compared with 6.8 for private cars and 0.6 for railways. I would not want to let this opportunity go by without expressing my gratitude and appreciation to the many reputable bus companies and their drivers. It would appear that the consensual view is that what is lacking is primarily attributable to the human factor on the one hand and to the way laws are implemented on the other. Does the Commission think it possible that the situation may be improved, above all by influencing how people behave in road traffic and within enterprises, but also by the exchange of information? Secondly, is it not the case that greater use should be made of the opportunities for monitoring vehicles and their drivers, in order to be able to identify those we call the black sheep and make them take responsibility for their actions? I take the view that, thirdly, checks should be carried out to see whether the standards for testing currently in force are sufficient to ensure that the main examinations and safety tests on buses are carried out to a qualitatively high standard. As the use of electronic components to ensure the stability and safety of vehicles increases, all the more necessary, I believe, does the regular inspection of this electronic equipment become. Fourthly, I expect the Commission to give priority to the safety of buses and coaches when it submits its proposal on the Third Action Programme on Road Safety.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Madam President-in-Office, Commissioner, the transatlantic dialogue must be extended to encompass global transport policy because both the USA and we Europeans bear a special responsibility for greater safety in the air and at sea, better environmental protection and fair competition and fair trade practices. Our primary objective must be to adopt reasonable harmonised provisions in order to develop a transatlantic transport market – be it in air or sea transport – and to work towards global regulations based on harmonised regulations between the USA and Europe, for example in the area of air traffic noise. We do not want to end up at loggerheads with the Americans again over hushkitted aeroplanes; on the contrary, we must endeavour to regulate environmental protection and safety standards in advance, jointly and proactively. This is not just a task for the Commission and the US Administration. We must try, as part of the transatlantic parliamentary dialogue, to organise specialist debates between transport experts in the American congress and the European Parliament so as to avoid political pressure between the administrations or, as the result of pressure from lobbyists, by the administrations. We must fight together for greater environmental protection and greater safety. This will greatly benefit our people, avoid conflicts between the USA and Europe and could form the basis for an overall joint solution. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
First of all, I would like to say that this is not anti-communism. It would be good if communism could co-exist with religious beliefs, and people should have the right to express their religious beliefs if they live in a communist country. It is quite clear that in Vietnam that is not the situation. In the resolution, reference is made to two very old Buddhist monks who spent two decades in detention under house arrest for their peaceful support for human rights, democracy and religious freedom. This is completely unacceptable. The problem in Vietnam is also that domestic human rights monitoring is not allowed, and that independent human rights monitors continue to be prevented from visiting the country. We have to put pressure on Vietnam to release all prisoners who are being imprisoned or detained for peacefully expressing their religious and political beliefs. We should also ask the Vietnamese to stop harassment of prisoners and surveillance of prisoners who have actually been released. Furthermore, they need to look at their criminal code sections on crimes against national security to ensure that these laws cannot be applied against those merely exercising their right to freedom of expression, as well as at the administrative detention directive which allows for the detaining of individuals for up to two years. This is completely unacceptable. One of the things I am disappointed with is that there was no reference to the recent decision of the Vietnam National Assembly backing the concept of a dam in the northern province, which might become Southeast Asia's largest hydro-power project, possibly involving the relocation of more than 100 000 people. I wish that they would take into consideration the international aspects of this in relation to the immense social and environmental problems that will be caused.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the only thing I wanted to say in response to that is that the Conference of Presidents, which met this morning, is already discussing this topic and that there is to be an official statement by Parliament. We have to put a stop to the way in which rumours are constantly undermining the hard work done in this House. Let us have the names out in the open. If we have the names, we must also take action against the persons concerned. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
I should like to thank the Presidency for the somewhat brusque reply. However, the Spanish Government must reasonably have an opinion if, for example, restrictions are placed upon Spanish citizens’ right to live in another EU country. Or does the Spanish Government have no opinion on this?

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, on a point of order. I am not sure whether it is too late to raise this point, but there is a point concerning translation, given that Italian is the original version of the Di Lello Finuoli report. Throughout the text, the word ‘execution’ is used, meaning, of course, execution simply in the sense of carrying out a penalty. However, in relation to criminal matters, in ordinary English ‘execution’ has a very particular meaning and one which attracts considerable hostility in this House and goes against our views on human rights. I think an equally good English translation of the Italian would be ‘implementation’ rather than ‘execution’, and that it would be wise to use the word ‘implementation’ rather than ‘execution’ throughout. (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I would sincerely like to acknowledge all those who have been involved in creating this compromise, which we will vote on tomorrow. It has been said several times here that after the first reading it was difficult to believe that we would get this far, that we would have a directive on emissions trading available to us whose content is sensible and rational in a way that makes it possible to be accepted from very different points of view. We obviously have to remember that this is just one of the many ways we have to aim for a reduction in greenhouse gases. If this way were not available to us, we would have to find another, but it has been seen and shown that this is a cost-effective scheme and in this sense it is good that it is to be introduced. I wish to stress, however, that these last minute discussions and negotiations resulted in the unreasonable proposals that seemed to be included, such as a ceiling on national emission allowances, being taken out. Moreover, the fact that auctioning is to be voluntary is excellent. This way companies that have opted in will not be under strain. In conclusion, my congratulations go to the rapporteur and all the others involved. We still have a long road ahead of us in our endeavours to reach the Kyoto targets, but the compromises this report and this directive have achieved mean that we are a step further along the way.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, perhaps Mrs McKenna will be worried if I say that as my name is Fatuzzo I cannot help mentioning the austromerluzzo, the toothfish, which is the victim of illegal fishing under flags of convenience in the seas of Patagonia. To save her from worrying I shall say that I voted in favour. I think, however, it is time the Galileo project was approved, through which it will be possible to see from satellites where the illegal fishing vessels are, when they increase in weight from their cargo, and therefore when and where they carried out the illegal fishing. In this way it really will be possible to control the phenomenon. – Gallagher report (A5-0426/2001)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Europe is to lead the world in the coming decade where use of the Internet is concerned. This was proposed at the Lisbon Summit last spring. It is both an excellent and necessary ambition. If, within the EU, we want to be competitive and stand on the front line, then this is a highly reasonable objective. Therefore, we Liberals share the Commission's ambitions, but we find it very hard to understand the specific proposals put forward by the Commission. If Europe is to be the world's most dynamic continent and able to surpass the Americans when it comes to attracting the companies of the new economy, we need to provide good e-commerce opportunities. VAT-free e-commerce is what e-Europe needs – not bureaucracy and new taxes. According to the current rules, companies within the EU which sell music, computer games, software and services distributed electronically are taxed within the EU if these are bought by consumers within the EU. Companies from countries which are not members of the EU are not taxed at all. These rules lead to a distortion of competition which obviously needs to be remedied, but the Commission's proposal is a step in the wrong direction. Companies from countries outside the EU are forced to register a subsidiary company in at least one EU country to be able to carry on business within the Union. The report makes certain adjustments, as stated also by the rapporteur, but as we have heard, it shares the Commission's basic position. This is not a good solution for Europe. It is an old-fashioned way of thinking which does not fit in with the new economy. The proposal will put the EU behind in the game and would also be very difficult to control. In order to give e-Europe a kick-start, the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party proposes that the Commission's proposal be rejected and that the Member States be given the opportunity to introduce zero rate VAT on e-commerce. This zero rate VAT should apply until the VAT rules for non-electronic goods and services have been thoroughly examined and an agreement has been reached within OECD or another international forum on a common position on the taxation of e-commerce. Mr President, let the experiences from the taxation package serve as an example. A global view is required. Many are in fact asking themselves, Commissioner, why Europeans are always so quick to introduce taxes and new rules? We do not need higher taxes in the EU, instead we need lower taxes.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, it has already become evident here that three groups have proposed a joint motion for a resolution, and, in my opinion, it is very important that the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party, the Confederal Group of the and the Group of the have now united in a common campaign, because it is time we obtained some concrete results. We want a statute to be achieved and all these matters that annoy our citizens so much to be resolved. We cannot approve of a statute that contains possible elements in the form of concealed pay. We want all the money paid to us in the form of salary and expenses to be as transparent as possible and justifiable in the eyes of the public. Neither can we agree to any privileges for ourselves that we cannot extend to our citizens. As my colleague, Mr Lehne, attacked the Chairmen of the three groups here, I might remark that both the Group of the European People’s Party and the Group of the have themselves provided the reason why the three groups have had to form an alliance. The means the two largest groups have employed to prevent you, Mr President, from holding discussions with the Council have been totally unacceptable. On behalf of my own group, I want to thank you for the efforts you have made, and I believe that you have already achieved more with regard to this statute issue than your predecessor did throughout her entire term. In the letter you sent us you have stated that, given certain preconditions, we really do have the chance now to achieve a solution and we must accept that matters regarding Members’ immunity, for example, will have to be resolved in another context. Tomorrow everyone can decide which side they are on. If we want a statute we must continue to explore the various possibilities in the way begun by the President, and in this manner we will at last remove this issue from the agenda. (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, firstly I want to offer my warmest congratulations to Mr Mulder and Mrs Gill for their excellent reports, and also to Commissioner Schreyer for the very constructive approach she has shown in the preparation of the budget. My special thanks, however, go to the President of the Commission, Romano Prodi, for the important work he has done so far in building the European Union and bringing nations closer to one another in a joint project that we now call enlargement to the east. The budget before us will be the first to be drafted for a Community of 25 Member States. This is a very challenging undertaking technically speaking, as the budget will apply to 15 Member States for the first four months and 25 Member States for the rest of the year. For this reason the important role of the rapporteurs in drafting this budget must be emphasised. Fortunately, we have activity-based budgeting, which is now being implemented in earnest for the first time. It will improve the transparency of the budget and give a better picture of the work that is done within the framework of the European Union. Activity-based budgeting provides a straight answer to the question of what each activity actually costs. Eastward enlargement is a challenge for everyone, and has to be taken into consideration throughout the entire budget preparation process. That starts with administration. We must continue to have respect for the individual languages of the Member States and hold multilingualism in esteem. The greatest challenge, however, concerns the Structural Funds. Enlargement to the east will be an enormous rebuilding project, the largest that Western Europe has embarked on since the Second World War. For it to succeed, the administration of the Structural Funds must be simplified and dealt with more efficiently. Only in this way can the results we are striving for be achieved.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, what the investigations into this incident show is what can best be described as a culture of management incompetence and one of complacency. The report by the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate in February of this year into the safety records found that these records had been systematically falsified. The processing of spent fuel from 34 plants in 9 different countries was thrown into doubt and, indeed, Japan, Germany and Switzerland stopped sending material – and quite rightly so – to Sellafield. This whole sorry tale has added to the UK's reputation, as sordid as it is often inaccurate, as the 'dirty man of Europe'. I believe that all at Sellafield must accept collective responsibility for the things that have gone wrong and must act to improve them. A number of improvements have been made: the new chairman of BNFL has undertaken a fundamental review; a number of people have been dismissed. There is undoubtedly progress. However, there is a lot yet to be achieved and there is a long way for the UK to go, and for BNFL to go to re-establish its reputation. I would ally myself with the concerns of Mrs McNally, when she asked the Commissioner to look again at these matters. The fact is that the Commissioner telling us that the rules of individual Member States are more specific is simply not good enough. We need high minimum standards and, in particular, we need those standards in the light of the accession of candidate countries, many of which are more reliant on nuclear technology than existing members of the Union and have much older generating capacity. The importance of European Union action in this matter is that it will be a confidence-building measure, and what the public want are confidence-building measures. I recognise and feel deeply the concern expressed by colleagues in the Republic of Ireland and Denmark. The fact is that we need legislation to implement what is called for in the motion put forward by the three main political groups tonight: high minimum standards for the safe and reliable design, construction and operation of nuclear and nuclear-related installations, as well as for nuclear-safety management systems. My group cannot support the Green motion here tonight. We feel that it treats the matter in too gargantuan terms. It raises the perfectly legitimate question of whether nuclear reprocessing should continue at Sellafield. But one cannot conduct this debate in the terms employed by the tabloid newspapers. We support the motion put forward by the three major political groups because we believe that improvements need to be made, improvements are being made, but that those improvements will be encouraged by an EU-wide approach to this whole matter. We recognise too the great significance of this plant for employment in west Cumbria and we believe that should the future of the plant be thrown into jeopardy then the European Commission must come forward with special measures to help regenerate other employment in the area. This is a saga in which nobody, least of all Sellafield, comes out well. But it is an area where action at European-Union level really can make a difference.

Political group: ELDR
With this report, Parliament grants discharge to the Commission for the financial management of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) for the financial year ended 23 July 2002. We have no objections to this. Following the demise of the ECSC Treaty, the ECSC’s legal system and procedures disappeared straightaway and its Advisory Board was dissolved. In 2002, however, the ECSC continued to finance, from its operating budget, redeployment aid for workers, at a cost of EUR 35 million, research grants, EUR 72 million, and the RECHAR Programme of social measures, EUR 21 million. In light of the crisis in the coal and steel sector and the social and economic costs of the restructuring that has taken place over recent decades, the liquidation of the ECSC – irrespective of criticisms that one might level at it – has left a void that must be filled, also at Community level, which the new Research Fund for Coal and Steel does not fill. Bearing in mind the importance of investment in research in these sectors, it is essential that we consider the measures that might be taken at Community level to support these sectors, inter alia retaining some of the social measures of the old ECSC Treaty for a time period to be established.

Political group: GUE-NGL
The Whitehead report constitutes a crucial initiative in the European strategy for consumer protection policy. It is significant that this report focuses on the tourism sector – so important for the survival of the Algarve region, which I represent here – a sector in which consumer protection is synonymous with quality. In this context of promoting high-quality tourism, the report calls above all for a high common level of consumer protection and for more effective compliance with existing rules. Although these priorities are important, taken on their own, they are relatively unambitious. I therefore agree fully with the rapporteur’s emphasis on the need for the EU to adopt legislative initiatives that are crucial to the protection of human life, specifically in the field of tourism. In particular, to rapidly adopt a Directive on Fire Safety in hotels, a review of the current timeshare system and even to extend consumer protection in the air transport sector. I also welcome the initiatives on informing consumers about their rights. Currently, only a meagre 52% of consumers feel that they are well informed. To this end, I support greater participation of consumer’s organisations in developing awareness-raising and information campaigns.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, last Friday, Parliament was closed on account of the holiday celebrating the day in 1950 when Robert Schuman made his declaration on the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community. This is only right, but the fact passes unnoticed in the Union, especially in my country, and I think that something should be done about this. The best way of increasing citizens’ sense of belonging to the Union is to introduce a paid public holiday on that day throughout the Union. I think that we should make a commitment to a genuine Europe-wide public holiday. It would be good if this were in place as early as next year, including in the new countries set to join. Perhaps Parliament – and you, Mr President – could take the initiative on this, by pointing out to the Council that this is an important example of how to get citizens closely involved in the Union.

Political group: Verts-ALE