GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, the violation of the Lomé peace agreement by the Revolutionary United Front in Sierra Leone is not only a human tragedy for the civilian populations, especially for children, but is also a political tragedy for the whole international community. The impunity enjoyed by the rebels in Sierra Leone and the weakness of the peace-keeping forces, who can neither leave the country, for political and humanitarian reasons, nor effectively confront the armed rebels, are a threat to any future United Nations peace mission. At the same time, this would be the third failure, after Somalia and Angola, of the Blue Helmets and the United Nations in Africa. Africa, where the cruellest conflicts are taking place, is also, as far as peace is concerned, a forgotten territory. The mandate of the United Nations mission in Sierra Leone is, by any reckoning, insufficient to achieve its objectives. Its reinforcement, requested by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, depends on a decision by the Security Council, the same Security Council which gave the Blue Helmets the resources they required in East Timor and Bosnia, but which is much more reluctant to do the same in Sierra Leone at the moment. The United States and Great Britain have only sent forces to the United Nations mission in order to guarantee the safety of the evacuation. The only solution to the difficulties of the United Nations mission, in terms of achieving compliance with the peace agreement, is to entrust the political negotiation to the leaders of Liberia and Libya, whose record in seeking peace is very doubtful and also very worrying. The liberation of some of the hostages and the arrest yesterday of Sankoh do not put an end to this conflict, but rather they may be a cause for even greater concern. Only clear and decisive action by the international community as a whole can put an end to it: the arms embargo; the control of diamond trafficking; the deployment of a rapid intervention force, under the mandate of the United Nations; and the prosecution of the perpetrators of crimes against humanity, the savage attacks against civilians, against international peace and security as well as against the United Nations forces. The European Union must therefore support all these types of measures, within the framework of the CFSP.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I should like to thank Mr Méndez de Vigo and Mr Seguro. Nice was in many ways a failure and, in my view, the IGC method is obsolete. Nevertheless, we will be voting in favour of the resolution, for Nice has created the minimum conditions for enlargement. Those who have suffered under that dictatorship for too long should not suffer under our lack of sufficient internal reforms. Another reason for casting a positive vote is because what seemed inconceivable until six months ago, even in this House, is now increasingly becoming a possibility in Laeken, namely a true convention of the European Parliament, the national parliaments, the governments, the European Commission, together with the social organisations and the citizens. The citizen’s input is crucial to ensure that the convention does not degenerate into a technical debate for experts which is unintelligible to the citizen. Mr President, that convention may not turn into a no-strings-attached talk shop: practical compromises must be reached which only in the final stage are rounded off formally by the IGC. Prior to that convention, we, as European Parliament, will this autumn have to put our own specific ideas about Europe’s future on the table, and the resolution is right to point this out. I would like the following: a European government whose prime minister is elected with a mandate on all matters which are best dealt with jointly, for example agriculture. This would lead to more political integration and a new European federation. I also want more subsidiarity, however, for that means that we will be better able to meet the local and regional needs. More than anything, I want more democracy. A valuable, powerful, democratic European Parliament, elected by the European citizens, with codecision in all areas of policy, and with a European constitution founded on the Fundamental Rights Charter. Mr President, we have a fine future ahead of us, and I believe that we did some sterling work in this resolution. I therefore hope that we as a group will be achieving a decent majority for a better approach.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, I would also like to thank you for your Communication and congratulate the rapporteur on his excellent work concerning this fundamental issue of education and training in the context of reducing poverty. This is not the first time Parliament has addressed this matter and I do not think it will be the last, and not only because for many of us – and for me, of course – achieving obligatory, free, high-quality universal education for all is the absolute priority of development cooperation. I said that we will continue to talk about it because we are far from being able to achieve the objectives set in Dakar within the anticipated timescale, and we must therefore continue to be vigilant so that there are no further delays and, if possible, to ensure that at least the European Union and the Member States turn the commitments they have made into reality, into practical action, and that they decide not just to give the appearance of making education the priority in development, but really make it a priority, if we genuinely want a fairer society, in which each individual has the same choices and opportunities. In a moment we shall discuss the report for which I am rapporteur, on capacity-building and its key role in improving the effectiveness of development aid. How, though, can we think of capacity-building if 113 million children have never been to school and 150 million have not completed primary education, as the rapporteur points out in his report? For this reason, I can but agree with the measures proposed to give education its rightful place in development cooperation policy and overcome the obstacles that prevent so many boys and girls from having access to education and, with it, the right to a better life. In conclusion, I would like to ask the rapporteur to accept the amendment I tabled together with Mr Corrie, on behalf of the , requesting recognition for the State’s obligation to guarantee the right to education and the role that the private sector can play in making the universal right to education, which sadly is currently the most violated right, a reality.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I understand it is not possible to request a change, but may one protest against a change made by the Conference of Presidents? Today we should have been debating the Napolitano report on the role of regional and local authorities in European integration. It is a vitally important issue, and Parliament should have been ready to give its opinion on this to the Convention before the end of this year. For example, this week the Fisheries Council is debating cod stocks and the common fisheries policy. Scotland, which is hugely interested in that, at the moment has a walk-on role. The role of the regions in Europe matters deeply to people all over Europe and this Parliament has, by a stitch-up between the big parties, declined to debate it, although we have had it before us since July. It is outrageous that this has been taken off the agenda.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, in recent decades the per capita GDP in Europe has been reduced in comparison with that of America, increasing the gap or distance between our prosperity and development and that of the United States, while our levels of employment are also worsening. The conclusion is drawn from this that the Americans do not hinder the activities of private companies through taxation as much as Europeans do and, in accordance with low levels of public expenditure, they have not, like us, promoted action plans, introduced bureaucratic systems or tried to guide their economic operators, who have therefore been able to dedicate themselves purely to working and generating wealth. It seems to me that this analysis does not take account of the very important fact that, over the last 30 years, levels of public investment in the European Union have been reduced to 2% of our GDP in 2000, while in the United States they have maintained a sustainable level and represent 3% of their GDP. If we add to this the fact that our per capita GDP stands at 65% of American GDP, it turns out that their average investment per citizen each year is 2.3 times greater than ours, and this is a more than notable difference which explains the differing developments of our respective economies. I believe that the short-term solution for Europe is not to reduce taxes, but rather, while achieving balanced budgets and no deficit, we must adjust our current public expenditure and increase public investment in viable projects, modernising our infrastructures, supporting technological research and development, involving research institutes and universities in private initiative and promoting training and knowledge in our society. What is completely unacceptable is the policy of the Spanish central government of Mr Aznar, which covers up its real budgetary deficit by financing it with revenue, with the monthly contributions of workers integrated into the state social security system, which compromises even further the uncertain future of pensions, and the workers who are currently contributing do not know whether they will receive those pensions on retirement. This is unacceptable and must be condemned.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I think that we were all shocked when both in the Balkans and in Africa rape was used as yet another weapon of war. However, I must confess my surprise that an organisation respected across the world should have hidden for so many years what happened to the women that were working for it. I am therefore completely in agreement with the resolution that we are going to put forward here today and that those responsible should be tried and punished like any other citizens who infringe people’s dignity. I think that we all, both men and women, are sorry for what happened, but I also think that as women we understand the degree of pain, humiliation, powerlessness and indignity involved in being forced to keep quiet in the face of such an attack on human dignity. Therefore, Mr President, I think that this resolution is necessary and that we should send it to all the bodies mentioned at the end of it.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I am delighted to be given the floor after Mr Brok because what he said was music to my ears. His intervention was factual and not polemical and was the first such intervention that we have heard this morning from the German section of the Group. I have heard several times that Mr Haarder was a good colleague. This can only be a reference to his private life. Politically he was many things, but he was not good; I know, because for many years I had to work with him in the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs. If the policy that Mr Haarder advocated there for years, the line of Danish liberalism, actually becomes the asylum and immigration policy of the European Union, then it will have very little to do with being good and much to do with being harsh. I should like to say one thing to you, Mr Rasmussen: your position as President-in-Office of the Council does not give you the right to ask Parliament not to concern itself with the domestic politics of Member States, in particular when in his own country, in an area that the Seville Council has said is a priority for the European Union, namely asylum and immigration, the President—in-Office is actually pursuing a policy which he even says himself should become the model for European Union policy. Of course we will be concerning ourselves with Danish domestic policy! The most important speech from your point of view was that given by Mr Camre. Mr Camre is of course the representative of Pia Kjærsgaard's party, the Danish People's Party, by whose silk thread your government dangles. What this party says is very close to the views put forward here by Mr Gollnisch. If I were you, I would give some thought to whether it is right for a Council presidency to seek to pursue a policy that has the full agreement of the Front National. The fact is that the message you are trying to get across has nothing to do with tolerance or well-ordered immigration, but everything to do with impenetrable borders and the exclusion of minorities. In the European Union we need a combination of two things: for as long as there is no well-ordered immigration, illegal immigration will flourish. (Applause) That is why we need to restore order to immigration. In addition to this, however, we need to recognise that immigration happens. Nevertheless, we cannot have immigration at any price. The European Union and the Member States have the right to shape immigration and asylum policy. In exercising this right they are obliged to uphold humane principles. If you are going to refer to Jean Monnet, Mr Rasmussen, then I have to tell you to apply Monnet's method. Your government's philosophy is very distant from that of Monnet. And Spinelli, to whom you also referred, was a Communist politician in Italy who was persecuted there. Whether he would have been granted asylum in your country under the present conditions is something that would require a very detailed examination. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, years ago when the international campaigns for landmine-clearance began, it used to be said that landmines were the poor countries’ atomic bomb. Despite the time that has passed, this apparent exaggeration may still unfortunately serve to describe the situation. There can be no development without safe roads, without suitable land for cultivation and without places where children can play freely. That is why the European Union joined and has come to play a leading role in the international campaign started by the United Nations, as has already been mentioned by the previous speakers. We can now clearly see the merit of the proposal put before us, upon which Mrs Bonino has based her report. I support this report and any other initiative to restate the role of the European Union in this objective. I must stress that for this to occur the effort of the European Union must be more cohesive, bringing in Finland and Greece; the European Union must coordinate all its power to exert international pressure on those countries that have not yet accepted the Ottawa Convention; and the European effort must become more effective, for example through an increase in funding, taking into account the need for safe mine clearance, the systematic destruction of existing stockpiles and the further development of advanced mine detection and clearance technologies. This effort must also be made more effective through coordination and monitoring of the processes, giving NGOs a more extensive role to play. Lastly, I hope that among the future tasks of the European common military force will be the training of technicians, particularly of people with a local interest in the eradication of landmines.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I too wish to thank Mr Grosch for the purposeful, excellent work he has done in preparing this important report. The directive will serve to improve the professional skills of drivers as well as road safety, as has been said here. Harmonised regulations concerning initial professional qualifications will raise the social status of drivers and furthermore heighten the esteem the profession is held in. Improved basic training will also enable the Member States to reduce the minimum age limit for drivers of many classes of vehicle, which will make the profession more attractive and improve the supply of labour in the transport sector. As the Council has taken the committee’s amendments very much into consideration in the common position, we should proceed without conciliation and swiftly move this issue forward. In my opinion, we should still think carefully about the aim to bring forward by one year the deadline for the transposition of the measures into national law. The Member States have highlighted the problems arising from a tighter timetable, since the directive will mean a great deal of reorganisation with regard to training. The Member States therefore need time to implement this.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, wars, the Soviet presence and the Taliban have left a State without institutions or industry and with its agriculture struggling to survive. It has left a State with levels of poverty and illiteracy, including returning illiteracy, in men as well as women, which are truly incredible. Furthermore, the lack of integration between the different cultural, social, religious and ethnic identities making up Afghan society increases the complexity of the problem with which the transitional government has to deal on a daily basis. As has been said, governing this country means not just carrying out essential institutional reforms, starting with the Constitution, but creating a basic banking system from scratch with all speed, disseminating education and promoting respect between the citizens and ethnic groups, rebuilding cities and infrastructure, separating military and civil affairs and creating anew industry and agriculture which will be able to survive in a globalised world. The challenge facing the transitional government is not inconsiderable, for it is a question of doing everything at once with all possible speed, as cheaply as possible and with the widest possible participation. Clearly, these tasks are not easy, particularly if they have to be carried out within a relatively short space of time. Moreover, Mr Karzai has explicitly undertaken to achieve a stable peace between the citizens, between ethnic groups and between the sexes, to establish the bases for democratisation of the country in the transitional government’s two years of office. However, as Commissioner Patten said, the path is still very tortuous. There has been no real, practical improvement in the situation of women, in particular, despite Mr Karzai’s statements. The level of illiteracy among women is incredible – six or seven percent compared to 39% previously. Even the new government has deteriorated from this point of view, with some warlords assuming a political role not just in the decentralised administrations but in the Kabul government too. Censorship has increased, as has been mentioned, and women continue to wear the burka and are marginalised, particularly in the southern and south-eastern regions. The Union must multiply its endeavours to ensure that the hopes which were raised at Bonn are not completely dashed and that the present situation of far-reaching inequality, discrimination and failure to respect human rights does not become established in the long-term.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, once again, we have before us a report which has now become rather a routine event. We should therefore all be sitting here calmly, but, as you can see, it is a report which still provokes heated debate after four years. Moreover, we are discussing principles which distinguish a civilised society from a tribal community, and, in this respect, the Charter of Fundamental Rights would seem to be the most appropriate, most equitable, most reliable reference when it comes to principles and values. I endorse the broad lines taken by the report: no to terrorism, protection of prisoners, combating the trafficking of human beings, data protection and protection of privacy, provision of accurate information, immigration, asylum and many other issues like, once again, combating all forms of discrimination. It is a shame that all these issues, these principles, are jeopardised somewhat, adulterated by invasive ideological and political views when they warrant greater respect. Consider, for example, the safeguarding of Christian roots and the traditional family unit – a man and a woman united by the common goal of procreation. Once again, we are attempting to impose on 15 Member States a model which is only accepted by three countries in Europe, and we are doing so, ladies and gentlemen, with force which, although purely verbal, is, nonetheless, violence. It is a shame where the information sector is concerned too, where a serious issue such as this has been defiled by pure political propaganda such as the contribution of the draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport – whom I will not name so as not to give them the right to reply – who has defiled an extremely serious subject with the tone and content of a vulgar party propaganda leaflet, behaviour which, moreover, condemns itself. I am glad to say, ladies and gentlemen, that this is only an opinion, or rather a set of opinions, which has no legal effect.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the situation in Peru worries us. President Fujimori took power with dangerous plans: to give absolute priority to supposed economic efficiency, claiming that a strong hold on power was required to manage it, and to overcome what he called ‘party-ocracy’, subliminally blaming all the previous problems on the institutions of the democratic state. Our fears were confirmed throughout Fujimori’s terms in office, and clear signs of authoritarianism were observed, which saw outrageous propaganda and systematic manipulation of the media. Furthermore, the President’s disregard for the rule of law became evident. It was under those circumstances that the elections of April and May were held and, as we feared, they turned out to be a farce, and were recognised and denounced as such by anyone looking on. In summary, that is what our resolution says, and it is good and appropriate that the European Parliament’s voice should be heard in this respect, for our own dignity, and in order to demonstrate our interest in the democratic process in Latin America, but also in order to demonstrate our support, which the Peruvian democrats need and deserve. While we are voting in favour of the resolution in question, I would like to point out two issues relating to its text. Firstly, not just the mere fact that one of the candidates decided not to stand in the second round of the elections, but rather that that candidate was Alejandro Toledo, who is supported by all the opposition, and who in free elections would stand an extremely good chance of toppling Fujimori. My second point is that I regret the fact that the resolution does not refer to the disappointing role played by the Organisation of American States throughout this process. In fact, having denounced the irregularities of the campaign, demanded the postponement of the second round and withdrawn its observers, it does not seem consistent that it should remain silent with no further reaction or sanctions, contenting itself in reality with merely condemning the situation. By taking this attitude, I believe that the OAS has discredited itself considerably. I will end by expressing our solidarity with Alejandro Toledo, with the democrats and people of Peru, denouncing Fujimori as a sinister and autocratic personality, rejecting the position of those people who have reacted with silence and even at times with a certain complacency – which has been well publicised by the President to justify his tattered legitimacy – and reaffirming our commitment to rejecting this farce and to closely monitoring the events in Peru for the sake of the respect for democracy.

Political group: PSE