GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, food and consumer protection have become vexatious topics. They also involve a great deal of uncertainty. This report should achieve greater clarity, and Mr Lannoye has evidently put a great deal of effort into it. I believe, however, that too much exactitude and too many details can also be dangerous, and with this in mind I can only support what was said by Mrs Thyssen: here, and also in our work generally, we should distinguish more and more between political statements and technical considerations. We are also overstretched in many respects, not through our average IQ being so low, but simply because the specialised technical knowledge cannot be present, because simply too much is presupposed and we then also have difficulty at some point in deciding what is lobbying and what is meaningful activity. I also believe that we should be careful when deciding on the details of labels, so that we do not, through the sheer compulsion to regulate – as for example with fruit juices, where, however, we have now reached a compromise – end up leading the consumer astray with duplicated explanations and elucidations. If we carry on that way, even wines will soon have to carry their chemical composition on the label, and then the marketing of wine will no doubt be far less straightforward. I am glad to be able to thank all those who have contributed to reaching compromises – in the field of fruit juices, on the subjects of fungicides, water adulteration and the juice and concentrate issue, as well as on aromas – and hope that, in the problematic area of honey, it is impossible to conceal the product's origin. I would ask you, ladies and gentlemen, when voting, to pay careful attention to this as well.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, gender mainstreaming was put on the European Union’s agenda and through the European Union on that of the UN around ten years ago by a joint action of Swedish and Dutch feminist policymakers. I know this so well because I was involved myself. The basic thought behind this approach, that is that women’s problems are cross-cutting problems, goes back much further however and was applied in policy far earlier. In the Netherlands we spoke of facet policy and policy integration, in Germany we said that women’s policy was a ‘cross-sectional problem’, Mrs Gröner, and in French it was simply called le mainstreaming. The experience acquired varied somewhat. We can now fill quite a bookshelf with the successes and also the problems. Unfortunately we also find misunderstandings on this bookshelf and perhaps even wilful distortions. Some false guides in fact try to sell what is actually specific policy under the guise of gender mainstreaming and that gets us nowhere. Fortunately, in her more than outstanding report, our rapporteur, Mrs Gröner, has erected a dam against such misuse of this term in the European Parliament. The report makes clear once and for all that gender mainstreaming is not a matter of ‘add women and stir’. No, that is not how it is. The idea of gender mainstreaming is to strip so-called general policy of its generality, to shatter this myth and to see how it has a different effect on men and women. Let us realise that we still have a long way to go before this is really understood. Many men after all find the idea that their picture of reality is not relevant for women unbearable. Hidden behind these definitions of reality are positions of power which, as feminists know, will never be given up without a struggle. The political question behind this report is therefore the following: are the men who rule the roost in this Parliament really prepared to step aside a little and to share the power with us? As long as we cannot answer that question with a heartfelt yes, we must stay on the path we are following, despite all the pessimistic noises that I hear. We must keep on beating the drum.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we can fully endorse two remarks about the draft Constitution and the Intergovernmental Conference made by the President-in-Office of the Council. You spoke, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, of the excellent work done by the Convention. Mr Cohn-Bendit mocked your comments. I will take them seriously and at face value. Your words indicate that you will not allow your colleagues at the IGC to destroy that excellent work and again leave it in tatters. We know that the IGC will not adopt the draft text exactly as it stands. Nevertheless, the draft Constitution is more than just a starting point – it is balanced, fair, and contains all the key elements for a solution. In a Union of states and citizens, Mr Poettering, the double majority system forms part of that essential factor: balance. That is why it is included in the draft Constitution, and not to give any Member State an edge. Your second comment, Mr President-in-Office, was that you want to move ahead swiftly. You want to report back in March and we fully support that aim. On this point, Mr Poettering, I agree with you for once. The rumours and prognostications about a two-tier or two-speed system, about centres of gravity and so forth must stop, and the best way to do that is by providing a European Constitution, and fast. (Applause) Mr President-in-Office, you expressed your conviction that the European Union needs a Constitution. Obviously, we share that view. However, we do not need any old Constitution; we need the Convention’s proposed text. What is more, we need it now, not just in two or three years’ time. The world and the new challenges it brings is not going to wait for Europe. If I may, I would also like to address Mr Poettering. Mr Poettering, you called for the results of the elections to be taken into account when the next President of the Commission is appointed. I am very happy to hear you speak out so clearly in favour of a Commission President from the ranks of the social democrats. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, this report does not reflect the political reality of the sub-state situation. That is why we have presented amendments: because the sub-state situation does not appear in this report and it is important that they, the constitutional regions, participate in this preliminary debate and participate in the convention. This is the desire of many people in Europe. For this reason, not only are we presenting these amendments, but also the highest representatives of the important European regions – Catalonia, Bavaria, Scotland, Rhineland North Westphalia, Salzburg, Wallonia and Flanders – met on Monday with the Belgian Prime Minister, Mr Verhofstadt, in order to raise exactly the same issue with him. If these amendments are approved, it will show that the reality has been positively recognised and that the principle of subsidiarity is functioning properly. Mr Méndez de Vigo, this report gives hope to many of us. Let us hope that it represents a road and not an inn. I congratulate you and Mr Seguro on the work you have done.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Commissioner, I must firstly congratulate our rapporteur, Mrs Miguélez Ramos, on her excellent report. The strengthening of dialogue between the Commission and the industry affected by the common fisheries policy is very important and has many social repercussions. Like the rapporteur, I must underline how curious it is that the Commission is consulting Parliament on aspects which we might regard as being secondary in the organisation of this dialogue. Yet it did not ask this House about the composition, organisation and functions of the Advisory Committee on Fisheries which is the key body in this dialogue. As the direct and democratic representative of the people, the European Parliament should have been consulted on this body and on the representativeness of the various sectors involved. Having said this, we will have to wait for the new committee to start work in order to assess its activity. This is why I regard as positive the contributions made by the Miguélez Ramos report on the aspects of financial control of the costs and greater transparency in management. In this way, the maximum amount of information will be provided, both to Parliament and the Council, so that the strengthening of the dialogue intended by the Commission can be monitored by everyone. I hope that the Commission will take note of our comments and concerns as we will be watching the development and operation of the new committee very closely. We hope that the links between the Committee on Fisheries of this House and the Advisory Committee will be effective in order to encourage a real strengthening of the social and industrial dialogue on fishing.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, as the rapporteur has told us, the number of declarations, resolutions and undertakings on equal opportunities for men and women is pretty respectable. The Treaty of Amsterdam is ultimately the legal basis and it defines equal opportunities between men and women as one of the main priorities of European policy. However, although there has been some modest progress, there are still some conspicuous shortcomings. There is a marked imbalance in the involvement of men and women in the decision-making process, and there are alarming differences between individual Member States. Throughout Europe, there are especially few women in leading positions in administration and in political decision making. This means that everyone involved in the economic and social world has to play a part if responsibility is to be distributed evenly across the public and private sectors, in business, politics and family life. Above all, we need to recognise that the equal opportunities deficit in the labour market is partly attributable to the low proportion of women in Europe's businesses, in its trade unions and in its public sector, and partly attributable to an inadequate social infrastructure, distorted stereotypes and low pay. One important area we need to tackle is education and training. Amongst other things, women have to learn to lay claim to a role in leadership and decision making. You cannot talk about balance when women account for just 40% of all those involved in politics at European or national level. Quotas are therefore an important instrument if we are to approach this target. But it is not just a question of increasing the number of women, but also about enhancing their role in society and recognising the quality of their work. Party and government structures need to be examined and where they are found to be lacking we need to jointly create binding requirements, such as ministries for equal opportunities. Greater involvement of women in public life needs to be regularly monitored using up-to-date statistics. This would also clearly demonstrate that not only have we reached targets but that we have also regressed in certain areas. This means that we have to promote equal opportunities while, at the same time, defending what has already been achieved.

Political group: PSE
I would like to warmly welcome Mr Bodrato's report and the very clear presentation he gave. This is an important step that matches the regulatory regime with the realities of a global car industry. I just want to insert a word of caution. Europe has to negotiate from a position of strength in this global regime. In the United States the market is moving in the opposite direction from the rest of the world. American consumers are in love with larger, heavier and more thirsty vehicles. The European model of lighter, economical cars is becoming more and more significant in the rest of the world apart from the United States. We have to make sure that global regulation does not compromise Europe's market strength in the type of vehicles that most world consumers want to buy. I would like to take the opportunity to raise another issue about the global competitive environment in the car industry apart from regulation. The reality of today's industry is that every operation – every factory – has to compete for long-term investment globally. In Eastern Europe, in South America, in the United States, aids are being given to encourage local investment. In that context, I particularly want to ask Mr Liikanen tonight to take up the question of the uncertainty facing thousands of my constituents who work at the BMW-Rover factory at Longbridge in Birmingham, where major investment is planned to produce new small cars for the global market. I declare with pride a personal interest in this, because I began my career in the car industry 32 years ago working at that factory. We heard last week that a decision from the Commission on an aid package from the British Government which responds to that need for the plant to be global has been delayed yet again, and that this delay is affecting consumer confidence and the future of the plant. So in asking you, Mr Liikanen, if you can get that quickly resolved with your colleague Mr Monti, can I also ask the Commission to set up a fast and fair mechanism to deal with these future issues; because until we have that, Europe's global car industry's competitiveness will be affected and we will not be able to take full advantage of the regime that Mr Bodrato proposed.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the attitude of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market towards this matter is quite different from that of the responsible committee, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy. We believe that a whole raft of amendments to this proposal for a directive are necessary, and regret that the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy has not adopted these. I am therefore deeply grateful to the Group for having adopted these amendments here today and tabling them for further debate here in this Chamber. I would like to comment on just two aspects. First, we believe it is wrong that the possible liability of suppliers of services is addressed under this directive on general product safety, because we quite simply consider that issues relating to potential liability of suppliers of services have no place in this directive on general product safety, but should, if necessary, be dealt with in parallel elsewhere. My second point is about export bans, which have previously been so highly praised. A majority of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market is of the view that there is no legal basis for these. In light of recent experience, notably the European Court of Justice ruling on tobacco advertising, I can really only urge this House to heed the recommendations to plenary of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, as the committee responsible for such matters. Otherwise, I regard it as quite possible that the European Court of Justice will make another embarrassing ruling on this issue. For this simple reason we have expressed a different viewpoint, and we can only advise this Chamber, on behalf of a majority of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, to accept Amendments Nos 38 or 41 in particular, as these relate to a weakening of export bans. On behalf of my group, I would like to say that if neither of these amendments is adopted, the PPE Group believes that the entire report should be rejected, because we really have had enough of adopting illegal proposals in this place! (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, that we support the anti-terrorist measures announced by the presidency, both these measures and any others needed, goes without saying. We stand shoulder to shoulder with the United States in the global coalition against terrorism, although we have little advice to offer about the technical, policing or military measures which will need to be applied. What we can do, however, is to speak with perhaps greater authority about the political preconditions to success. No campaign of this sort and no war, at least no war in which democracies have taken part, has ever been able to create the necessary alliance of nations – because that is the alliance which counts, not the alliance of governments – without offering a vision of a better world at the end of the campaign. Politically, we need to point out yet again that we support all the democratic regimes and, more to the point, that we reject any tyrannical regimes which may promise to help fight specific terrorist organisations but which, in the long term, work with secret services which collaborate with them like terrorist recruiting offices. Socially, we need to recognise that environmental catastrophes, epidemics, poverty and misery threaten the security of the world and need to be dealt with as threats which are every bit as serious as terrorism. We need to state that, in a globalised society, our wealth and our military power do not offer the man in the street any security. The only realistic solution is to find ways of taking the tension out of social and ethnic fights, of reconciling all men of good faith, irrespective of nationality, religion, social position or ideology, in fact everyone who is determined to put an end to the scourges which inflict mankind and which, even if they do not result in terrorism, prepare the ground for terrorism and we need to remove this ground if we are to guarantee the security of our citizens.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, you are trying, Mr Gama, to create a more positive attitude towards the European Parliament. You accept the voice of European citizens as a part of the European decision-making process, which is something we appreciate. We hope, and take into account the fact, that this positive attitude will be maintained throughout the six-month period. In the legal sphere, measures need to be taken by Europe. You emphasise the question of victims of crime. This is a question which symbolises the citizens’ legal situation from a great many perspectives. It is a question of no longer discriminating against those citizens who make use of their freedom of movement. I have fought for a long time specifically to strengthen the protection afforded to victims of crime. If states are not prepared to defend individuals and to mitigate the consequences of violence, then we shall never be able to create the type of security about which everyone is talking in such splendid terms. Without individual citizens’ rights, established by treaty, and adequate resources for the police and judicial system, we shall not obtain that freedom and security which Europe’s citizens expect. You can urge on the process by openly making use of the results table and showing that we need to see progress. Time limits for the measures could increase the pace of progress. You must set necessary priorities in your ambitious programme. In this context, I would emphasise victims of crime, organised crime and the use of a scoreboard. I hope that you wish to confirm that it is these questions and the question of citizens’ rights which are at the very top of your list of priorities. At the same time, I want to wish you luck and every success.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Madam Commissioner, congratulations, Mrs Lienemann on an excellent piece of work. Water and air surround us everywhere. We share them with everyone on this earth. Water is a prerequisite for human life. And there are more and more of us in the world. Mrs Schleicher intimated earlier today that clean water was an unrealistic goal. Nothing could be further from the truth! It is unrealistic to go on causing the quality of our water to deteriorate and so, too, the conditions for life. It is especially unrealistic in regard to agriculture which is most dependent upon a clean natural environment and unpolluted resources. I would therefore appeal to Members of Parliament to appreciate that tough demands for a clean environment are a sign of long-term realism of the highest order.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Commissioner, the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party is very satisfied with the outcome of this conciliation. When we consider the outcome and what we were aiming for, our assessment is that we wish in every respect to recommend what has emerged. Firstly, we succeeded, at the previous readings, in averting an increase in the threshold values that would have significantly limited the scope of this directive. That is something we are really pleased about. Secondly, we think we have achieved secure and modern tendering methods. I believe that, as previous speakers have said, we can now go in both for providing more information to businesses on the Internet and for enabling small businesses more easily to find out which rules apply. This will play a part in our successfully helping the administrations to modernise. I believe that this is very important now that we are talking about a competitive Europe. Our objective is to increase the number of cross-border tenders. When we began the debate, we were sometimes concerned about the reports we received at the time to the effect that there were so extremely few cross-border tenders. Our rapporteur in the Conciliation Committee, Mrs Cederschiöld, whom I had wanted to thank for her constructive work, mentioned that transparency had increased significantly. I believe that what the Conciliation Committee has arrived at, and which really is closer to the Liberal idea, is what the majority signed up to at second reading. It is important for competitors also to be able to see the final outcome of a tendering procedure and to be able to judge whether any errors have been made. That is what is most important in the fight against corruption and in the interests of greater value for money. As we all know, the issue of the social and environmental criteria has been much to the fore in this debate. We can now observe that the Commission has also prepared an action plan for modern environmental engineering. I really do believe that the final outcome we arrived at is a tool in this context too. We must not be afraid of modern environmental technology. Finally, I want to say that, following our last conciliation meeting, the Finnish press said that the case of Concordia Bus Finland, brought before the EC Court of Justice and relating to bus traffic in Helsinki, had led to a sound directive on public procurement. I was somewhat irritated about this, because no buses operate without drivers. I want to thank all the drivers who contributed to this end result, and I note that we have steered the matter into a safe harbour. My special thanks are due both to the Commissioner and his colleagues, who said just the right words at the right time, and to the Conciliation Committee’s secretariat for its quite excellent work. We have worked on this matter for many years, and it feels as though we have reached a conclusion. I hope it will help our administrations get greater value for money.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I wish to thank everyone for their speeches and support. I would like to inform all those who were of the opinion that this was solely the responsibility of the Member States that I have been in contact with the health ministers for all the Member States and in a sense they have already committed themselves in quite a different way to this report, having allowed themselves to be involved in producing it.

Political group: Verts-ALE