GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
I voted against the Garcia-Margallo y Marfil report because it is an ultraliberal document which ultimately takes the view that the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines do not come up to expectations. Some of the proposals it contains are, moreover, quite absurd, such as the proposal for a budgetary reserve, which makes absolutely no sense at all considering the rise in government debt. This is the result of low taxation rates for the wealthy, which the report does not, of course, question. Quite the opposite: it stresses the rapporteur’s desire to [further] reduce high effective tax rates, to further cut the tax burden on labour and social contributions. As regards pensioners, the rapporteur wishes to increase the effective retirement age and increase funding – those are exactly the kind of plans against which the French and Austrian workers are protesting in the streets. The report is full of hypocritical expressions couched in wearisome, waffling language. For example, it proposes to ensure a coherent policy mix of monetary policy, budgetary policy and wage growth, but in a way that is compatible with price stability. It is blatantly obvious that the intention is to establish a long-term rule of wage austerity which will ensure a high level of financial profits but which is also very likely to ensure a long-term slide into recession and unemployment.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, after congratulating our colleagues Mrs Zabell and Mr Mennea on their reports and the suggestions they contain, of which I very largely approve, I shall make do with two observations. Firstly, I should like to stress the need for Community participation in the World Anti-Doping Agency, which would enable the European Union to make a vigorous and coherent contribution to the struggle against doping. Secondly, as I did yesterday, I plead again today for the inclusion in the Treaty of a legal basis relating specifically to sport. I am thinking here of a compatibility clause of the sort that exists in the cultural and environmental domains, a clause that would make it possible to take due account – and I stress the word ‘due’ – of the specific nature of sport in the formulation of the general policy or specific policies of the Community.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, on a point of order, in relation to the point that has just been made I would like to thank President Cox on behalf of my group. As soon as that suspension took place, he wrote on behalf of Parliament, having received representations in relation to this issue from the leaders of the three largest groups from the UK. The work that is now being undertaken by the Strasbourg authorities, and also by the French authorities, has been prompted by the very swift action taken by the President. My point, however, is that we are meeting on a day when there is a national air strike in France. I look around the Chamber and see that many Members are absent. Our democratic legitimacy, in terms of the votes that we take on important issues, is bound to be diminished if Members are prevented from participating in the democratic process because of action of that sort. I ask you, therefore, to convey to the President a request from the House that an analysis be undertaken of attendance here in part-sessions, on the occasions when, with alarmingly increased frequency, industrial action has been taken, which has made our job as representatives of the people of Europe infinitely more difficult. (Mixed reaction)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on a point of order, I hope I may be forgiven for raising two relatively domestic matters. Firstly, when I arrived I found my office was furnace-like in its heat: this is not the first time this has happened, but it is particularly acute today. It is really not appropriate to ask MEPs or their assistants to work in these conditions. The air conditioning system does not appear to be working properly. We set standards all the time which we expect other people to live up to, but the standards in these premises are not adequate. It is not fair to ask our colleagues and employees to work in conditions like that. Could we not get something done to improve it? Secondly, I cannot be the only one who is increasingly distressed by the amount of often off-colour or even obscene unsolicited email that keeps pouring through the system. Again, it adds an awful lot of work to colleagues who have to delete it every day. I hope we can get something done to make the email system work as it is intended to do – for effective communication and not for that sort of fearful junk!

Political group: Verts-ALE
When the European Parliament today stated its position on the Intergovernmental Conference, I advocated solutions which also provide for the interests of the small Member States. The trend within Parliament towards less understanding of smaller countries’ needs will increase the antagonism between Parliament and the Council of Ministers. I am concerned that there is no desire to find a balanced solution regarding the weighting of votes within the Council of Ministers and regarding the number of Commissioners who should provide for the interests of both large and small Member States. Through my Group, I have tabled an amendment aimed at guaranteeing that all of a particular country’s nationalities and regions are represented in Parliament. I also supported the proposal which emphasised the right of regional ministers to participate in meetings of the Council of Ministers on matters which fall within the scope of their autonomy. However, I would express my satisfaction at the fact that so much attention has been devoted to the way in which the EC Court of Justice operates. The Intergovernmental Conference must now give consideration to Parliament’s constructive proposals. I am extremely surprised at the proposals which would give Members of the European Parliament the right to participate in the appointment of the judges. Finland supports the proposal that the Commission might be given a mandate to conduct trade negotiations in regard to services and immaterial rights following decisions in the Council with a qualified majority. When the Council in this way reaches a decision about a negotiation mandate, Parliament’s consent ought to be requested. Otherwise, there will be a loss of democratic and parliamentary control over the trade negotiations. Since I do not consider the report to be in earnest with regard to the demands for decision making in the Council, to the way in which judges are to be appointed and to the number of Members of Parliament, I voted against the report in the final vote (238 votes in favour, 147 votes against and 73 abstentions). Because the report is far-reaching in its scope and because there is considerable disagreement about it, Parliament’s point of view will be of little significance.

Political group: ELDR
The harsh reality of the huge social problems which plague workers, both male and female, not only shows up every pronouncement about equality and prosperity for what it is in practice, and in the harshest possible manner, it also makes them look provocative and derisory. The first and the main victims of this miserable market- and competitiveness-based policy are women. Unemployment hits women. Women are bountifully offered flexible forms of employment, with the result that they provide cheap labour, receive less money for the same job and face worse problems of job insecurity and unequal access to the labour market. It is still mainly women who fill the more menial, unskilled jobs and who rarely hold responsible, higher management jobs in economic, social and political life. The severe blows raining down on social rights and social gains will become even more severe with the planned changes to the social security system, putting an even greater burden on women, who have to carry out many duties and fill two or even three roles. There can be so such thing as equal opportunities for women within an exploitative society, an underemployed society with no equivalent social prospects and no state welfare. We need to provide equal access for women, we need to strengthen and extend legislation to protect unhealthy professions and maternity and we need to introduce measures to safeguard all atypical forms of work. Only the workers' struggle can overturn the anti-grass roots polices being promoted and improve women's lot. Only the worker's struggle will really improve the position of women in society. And we are by their side in this struggle. Report Andersson (A5-0283/2001)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I have accepted both Amendment No 2 and Amendment No 3 tabled by Mr Pronk, in which he calls for the text to be amended and insists on the concept of development of the population rather than ageing of the population. The problem is that, insofar as we as the European Union are concerned, we cannot talk about development because we do not have genuine population development: the birth-rate is extremely low while the proportion of elderly people is increasing. Therefore, the proposal – which I think Mr Pronk has accepted – is to talk about a rise in the average age of the population, as this will avoid a concept which might appear negative and describe the notion in the most precise and most appropriate terms. (Parliament adopted the resolution) EXPLANATION OF VOTE

Political group: ELDR
I would like to take up the matter raised by Mr Posselt. The President's phrasing – and I will take the liberty of checking the Minutes from this morning – did not imply that the President endorsed the proposer's concern. The phrasing was this: ‘Does the House have any objectives?’ That means that the precise case described in the Rules of Procedure did not apply. As a Member of Parliament, I refuse to be passed around this House like a surplus tomato in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development. I have groups to attend, we have invitations, and we have meetings. Votes and other matters are constantly being postponed, especially on a Thursday. I do not think that we should simply rely on decisions by the Administration which are ultimately whispered in the President's ear. We even have votes – every Member from every group has been affected by this – where there is an asterisk and a note saying ‘This proposal is out of order under paragraph so and so’, so no vote is taken. Who is making the decisions here? We – the people looking at you – are the European Union's elected representatives. Apart from you, distinguished President at the front, the people looking at us are supposed to be reporting to us. ‘Reporting to’ does not mean making decisions for us. I therefore fully support Mr Posselt on this issue.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I believe there have been many statements here condemning the recent comments of the Israeli Government and recent events. It is very easy to say to other people, to the Israelis and the Palestinians, what they must do, but perhaps we should consider what Europe is doing, what we are doing, because we can do something about that, because it is in our hands. In this regard, I did not like the comments of the Council, which has taken the bait, which has become embroiled in the current media war. Europe cannot depend on the media war, on statements and threats. We must work on what Europe is doing. In this regard, European policy has been rather ambiguous in recent months, because, if Europe played an important role in creating the figure of Abu Mazen, what has it done to support him? I would like to put this question to the Council, and also, and above all, to the Commission. What have we done to ensure that the Palestinians do their duties, such as to support Abu Mazen so that he may have a single police force or to demand that Arafat concede some of his powers to a minister who he himself had supported? What have we done in order to build a country able to accept its responsibilities as an independent and democratic state? What have we done to exchange our very nice NGO programmes, peace declarations, human rights groups, doves in schools, for a system and health services which are not managed by the Church or by a terrorist system like Hamas, which is paying doctors and teachers? There are more than 1 200 000 children lacking a proper education system. The question we should be asking is: what has Europe done to strengthen the system of security and justice? We condemn the wall, because it runs counter to any democratic system and is a physical and moral aggression, but we must also build the country and support the victims of terrorism. Europe must open a line of support for these victims. It must take a position and combat the prevailing ambiguity. Let us have a clear and effective policy in Europe, and not a policy of making statements.

Political group: PPE-DE
This time last year I visited Belgrade, a rather bleak city, veering from despair to hope on a daily basis. I went to see the NGOs working in humanitarian and free media fields, financed by the European Union, and the picture was not a particularly happy one. The aspiration was there but the actuality was not. The promise was there but the performance was not, because the money was not coming through and there was an administrative bungle. I want to ask the Commissioner if he will confirm that he will thank the staff of the Commission both in Brussels, and in particular in the Belgrade office under Michael Graham, the head of the delegation, who throughout this time have gone through enormous change and have actually wrought a major difference in the process of moving towards democracy. Despite the difficulties, they have achieved something rather remarkable. I would like the Commissioner to confirm that he will thank not only those people but also the NGOs working in the field. More particularly I hope he will accept the thanks of this House, because he has demonstrated that democratic activism not only works in Hong Kong but also in Serbia. IN THE CHAIR: MR WIEBENGAVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, unfortunately I am forced to reiterate the observation I made last year to the effect that the European Union has no clear plan for the future. I do not say this as a rebuke to President Prodi or the Commission, because the Commission is most certainly working or, should I say, making itself busy. Indeed it is almost making itself busy with too many matters. No one could possibly keep up with all the Green Papers, White Papers, communications and reports that the Commission and the Commissioners keep presenting, and it is impossible, more particularly, to find in all this a main theme, or a clear plan for the future. Hence, my first conclusion is that we should do less and we should do it better. As President Prodi quite rightly said this morning, we should not be expending our energy on measuring the size of cucumbers and gherkins. As a matter of urgency, we should be defining who is responsible for doing what within the European Union, in other words defining the principle of subsidiarity. And the Commission, even with good legal reasons to do so, cannot obstruct the decision of a national parliament to have a motorway built, a regional parliament decision to have a new railway built or a town council decision to build a golf course: that is what subsidiarity is. The Commission President appreciated as much this morning, he asked good questions, but his role is not to ask questions. The Commission has the right of initiative and must present proposals. I do not have time to go into matters in greater detail, but I have to say that if we wish to build the new House of Europe, then we do not just need joiners and plumbers, what we need as well, and more importantly, is an architect. My hope, Mr Prodi, is that, as President of the Commission, you will be this architect. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I want sincerely to thank Mr Mann for the work he has put into this report and for all the compromise amendments through which considerable agreement was brought about in the relevant committee. For ourselves as , it is extremely important that an employment strategy and a strategy for social welfare in Europe should combine fixed, stable values, built upon the ethical and moral basis that is European cultural history, with a social, market-oriented economy. I would emphasise that, in this context, we are concerned with both social and economic values and not, therefore, with a free-market economy devoid of ethical, moral and social values. I would particularly draw the Commission’s attention to item 37, which emphasises the importance of making it easier to combine family and professional life by creating greater opportunity for parents to spend more time with their children, by extending childcare facilities, by enabling parents to take parental leave and by providing tax concessions for childminders and foster parents and care and assistance facilities for the elderly. This item is also about allocating greater resources to programmes for combating female unemployment. I want really to focus upon what is in actual fact the biggest issue for Europe, namely the demographic challenge. I know that we have a Commissioner with a strong personal commitment to finding ways of solving the issue of obtaining a large enough European workforce and population in the future. Item 37 indicates the value of combining working life and family life and of giving more time to children. This report is therefore about seeing the Stockholm European Council’s decision of March 2001 on the demographic challenge as one of the absolutely most important issues for Europe. Item 37 emphasises this extremely clearly. IN THE CHAIR: MR COLOM I NAVALVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, as is well known, Belarus is to become the EU’s new neighbour, and it is therefore incredibly important that we should begin to concern ourselves with what is happening there and to take the country seriously. That is why it is also an important report that my fellow group member has written, making it apparent to anyone who still needed to be informed, how critical and difficult the situation is and how much is awry in terms of human rights, democracy and so on. I wish to thank Mr Marset Campos very much for an incredibly good report on a very important topic. Now, the fact is that my group is confederal in nature, and we do not therefore praise each other as a matter of course, but I am nonetheless able to say, on behalf of the , that we fully support what Mr Marset Campos has written in his report. Our confederal nature also means that the group has come up with amendments with which we do not agree and, like the rapporteur, I do not support these. It is apparent from this report that many things are required if, as I hope it one day will, Belarus is ever to reach the point at which it can become a member of the EU. First and foremost, democratic developments are required, and I think that, if it wishes to do so, the EU can play a decisive role in this area. As good democrats, it should be our task to support those activities, inside and outside Belarus, that are aimed at changing how things stand for ordinary people and for the democratic movements. The Church has been mentioned, but I am also thinking of the trade unions and a number of journalists who really are doing a sterling job in moving the country in the right direction.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, in the light of the excellent vote of support for this report and given the Commission's response this morning, it is obvious – if you look at all the parts we have voted on – that under Rule 69(2) we should postpone the vote on the draft legislative resolution in order to allow us to enter into fruitful negotiations with the Commission and the Council. I hope the House will support that proposal. (Parliament decided to postpone the vote) ***

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we are in no position, here in the European Parliament, to state that one type of chocolate is better or worse than another. Nor can we say that one kind tastes better and another worse. Rather, we shall leave it to the individual consumer to judge which kind tastes best and is of the highest quality. Consumer choice is the basic principle of the market economy and, as politicians, we should not be instrumental in running a kind of nanny State. Malta’s former prime minister, Dom Mintoff, attempted during the 1970s to reduce chocolate imports and to alter the way in which chocolate was consumed by tourists and by his own people. With Chinese help, a chocolate factory was built on the island, but consumers did not like the locally produced chocolate and chocolate consumption fell. If we direct developments in such a way as to create a situation in which there is only the one tradition of chocolate manufacture within the EU, cocoa-producing countries will be in danger of losing out since there would be a great risk of total chocolate consumption within the EU appreciably decreasing. Let us not, therefore, make the same mistake as Dom Mintoff. The proposal that information about the contents of certain forms of chocolate should be provided on the front of the packaging is discriminatory and completely unjustified. It would be more like the kind of warning you find on cigarette packets. The chocolate war has been raging within the EU for 25 years. It has made ourselves as politicians and the EU as an institution look faintly ridiculous. In the future EU, too, and within a society characterised by diversity, there must be room for two traditions of chocolate manufacture. We now have the opportunity to bring the 25 year-old European chocolate war to an honourable end for all the parties concerned. We ought therefore to adhere precisely to the common position.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, could the same correction be made to the Spanish version, as it is different from the original?

Political group: PSE