GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, I am surprised that in this debate we are talking only about the Pact. The problem is not so much the Pact. The problem is that we are in a monetary union and we do not have an economic union. Some people have called the Pact stupid. I believe nonetheless that the Commission has demonstrated a certain degree of intelligence in its ability to interpret it. I am surprised, however, that some people are talking about referring the matter to the Court of Justice and that no one has ever considered referring to the Court of Justice other violations of the Treaty committed on an ongoing basis by practically all of the members of the euro zone, when they did not consider their economic policy to be an issue of common interest, as the Treaty suggests. That is the root of the problem before us. The Stability Pact is only the rule at the end of the process that allows the points to be counted. The Stability Pact never describes how to play the game, and the game can only be a team game. The Stability Pact is called stupid or rigid. It is much less so than the competitive devaluations that prevailed before the transition to the euro. However, it is not enough on its own. Thus, I believe that we must look at three aspects. From the point of view of the economic policies, we have the strategic tool we need to ensure new growth in Europe: the Lisbon strategy. We do not have the tool for its implementation and it is certainly not the Stability Pact that will be used to implement this strategy. This is what we must consider. Some people have proposed a strategy for major work. However, the ministers for the economy and finance have yet to decide to finance it. Everyone is talking about coordination but it only comes to the forefront when it enables France and Germany to unite against the Commission. That is not ex ante coordination, which is the coordination that should enable the maximum benefit to be derived from the euro zone. The second aspect relates to the dialogue with the Central Bank. When the Central Bank talks, over and over again, about structural reforms, the governments do not listen to it; another form of dialogue with the governments must be found. Finally, we must look to the work of the Convention in order to make progress in relation to the results in the IGC and consolidate the Commission’s power as regards the implementation of an economic union.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, following the terrible accident involving the Prestige and its repercussions for people and for the environment, we wish to suggest that a Community coastguard service be created, which would be responsible for preventing vessels that are not in a fit condition to sail from doing so. With regard to this point, I wish to ask the Council a question: is this matter that we are now addressing not precisely one more reason for creating this European coastguard service, not aimed specifically at suppressing what you defined as the ‘fight against illegal immigration’, but which would also save the lives of many individuals who, on rafts or by other means, attempt to reach Europe's coasts and who often fail?

Political group: Verts-ALE
May I begin by congratulating Mr Schwaiger on an excellent report. The Seattle round is being called the ‘development round’ for the millennium. I represent the south-east of England, one of the richest parts of the European Union, having been born in a developing country in Asia, one of the poorest parts of the world. I hope I can therefore span, understand and recognise the aspirations of the developed world, and of the developing world, recognising the enormous benefits of global free trade whilst also recognising the imperative need to manage the transition, to enable and empower the developing world to be an equal partner in globalisation. The multilateral trading system was born in Havana in 1948 as the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs. Eight rounds of trade globalisation have helped to promote global prosperity. Since 1951, world trade has grown 17-fold, world production more than quadrupled, world per capita income doubled, average tariffs dropped from 40% to 4% in industrialised countries. Today, a further cut of 50% in border protection, including agricultural subsidies, would add over USD 370 billion to global annual welfare gains. Sixty per cent of this would accrue to developing countries. However, globalisation must be a win-win situation. There should not be winners and losers. Everyone should win. It can be made to happen. How can it be made to happen? The multilateral system should be fair, transparent, accountable and link trade to development. It should look at the impact of liberalisation on investments, competition rules, unfair subsidies, poor labour standards, environmental protection, intellectual property rights, trade facilitation, government procurement, improved access to agricultural markets, improved access to commercial markets including services, consumer protection and capacity building. The European Union is unique in terms of the history of its relationships with countries around the world – Britain with the Commonwealth, France with its French francophone countries. We can send a clear message to Seattle that this is the single contribution that this House and its Members can make to world global trade.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, as others have done, I should also like to congratulate Mr Andersson for the report he has produced. He has done a great deal of work on behalf of Parliament in producing a wide-ranging consensus on what is, by any definition, a thorny issue, not just in this Parliament but in virtually every Member State. I also welcome the Commission's communication. It was slow in coming but well worth waiting for. It could be a landmark in the development of a social Europe, providing we take it seriously and do not allow individual Member States to baulk at the steps that must be taken to implement it. We can, and must, take the unique European social model we have and reform it to fit the twenty-first century, a century which is globalising fast. I am afraid the proposals that are being put forward by Mr Herman Schmid will not deal with that globalising world. To be successful we have to ensure that our economic policy, our employment policy and our social protection policy in its broadest sense, are integrated and that we deal with them as a whole. We have to ensure that our ECOFIN ministers and our employment ministers acknowledge that social affairs ministers have a contribution to make to the establishment of a society in Europe which is creative, has initiative and which will provide a high quality of life for all of our citizens. This is not an option for us any more. It is an imperative. European citizens will not settle for any less than a quality of life which befits them as human beings. We do not want the US model – a model which has spectacularly failed to create the employment that is necessary to provide a decent quality of life. What it has done is increase dramatically the number of working poor in the United States. That is not what we want to do in Europe. We have the traditions of solidarity in Europe and we have the experience of a better way of doing things. But we have to grasp the tools to do that. I therefore urge that we not only implement the high-level group as proposed by the Commission but also go further and have a Luxembourg-type process so that we have an integrated approach to this issue of social protection.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, firstly, from a conceptual point of view, we legitimately wish the new nomenclature for the Budget to be a technical instrument which rationalises it, and not a cunning way to modify the political orientations of Community action. The Committee on Development and Cooperation is therefore, under the heading ‘Development’, restoring the cooperation lines with Asia and Latin America, which had been diverted to the external relations heading. Development policy is not only directed towards the ACP countries, but towards all developing countries with a view to eradicating poverty. Furthermore, Commissioner, we thank you and we congratulate and support you, as well as Mr Nielson, in relation to the budgeting of the EDF. Secondly, our policy for assisting certain groups such as the Saharan people, who for years have been objectively in a situation of humanitarian need, should not be called into question for administrative reasons. And finally, the integration of the gender perspective into the Budget is one of our objectives. With regard to the figures, our priorities are the funding of actions to promote children's rights, funds for combating AIDS and malaria, increasing funds for Latin America and the Mediterranean: between the 2000 Budget and the draft 2004 Budget the funds intended for cooperation with these regions have plummeted; they have been reduced by 10.8% for Latin America (EUR 37.2 million) and 16% for MEDA in real terms (EUR 193.9 million), despite the new priorities for these two regions and the summit which is going to take place. Their reflection in the Budget should not conflict with the ceiling corresponding to us, provided that there is no intention to fund any other new action or initiative through development funds. And it is for this reason that we are also concerned about the reconstruction of Iraq or any other issue which may arise.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, implementation of the flora-fauna-habitats directive is causing quite a stir in many regions and also running into major difficulties. Vaguely formulated application criteria are also the cause of the nine-year plus delay in implementation. In my home region, a dialogue was begun prior to identification of the FFH sites. The process brought the following problems to light in particular. Small and medium-sized agricultural enterprises are experiencing a restriction in the utilisation and cultivation of arable and grazing land as a result of the directive. This means indirectly a reduction in the value of this land. In municipal areas the directive in its current form is leading to the obstruction of important infrastructure measures. The threat of withholding Structural Funds in the event of non-implementation is an attempt by the Commission to put pressure on the Member States and is undoubtedly the wrong approach since stopping the payment of Structural Funds due to non-implementation also carries the risk that on-going projects may be jeopardised, thereby stopping or jeopardising the economic development of a region in general. Without any doubt, this cannot be in the interests of the Commission. It would be sensible to re-examine and revise Directive 9243 to provide more certainty and clarity. Citizens have the right to know the consequences which they can expect. Before notifying a site an owner must know which conservation objectives will be achieved using which measures. For this reason, I ask that you support the amendment which I have tabled jointly with Mr Schnellhardt.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, in my view, at present this is not a matter of confidence in the safety of food alone: it is very important that we also look to the near future. We must put our own house, our own part of the world, in order. The EU is expanding eastward, and we all know the capacity and volume of meat and beef production there, for example. This should also alert them to the fact that they must now start to put their own affairs in order, so that they can adapt to the model that exists here. If we are not ready, how can we expect others to be? For this reason, labelling must be kept very simple: the labels must show the country of origin, and, if one wishes, the region of production. But a label showing the country of origin of a product is very important to us, particularly if we want consumers to have confidence in food safety in the future.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, with just one minute, I must be absolutely specific. I shall use my one minute to congratulate Mrs van der Laan on her report and mention CEDEFOP, which is headquartered in Thessaloniki. I want to get the message across that, in voting in favour of this report tomorrow, we acknowledge that CEDEFOP is now operating as we would like it to operate, we acknowledge the positive aspects of how it is operating and performing and we confirm the fast job done in completing the CEDEFOP building, which was finished ahead of schedule and with savings of EUR 2 million. I also want to point out that we must make ensure that the people working so hard at CEDEFOP can rest assured that there is no risk of their being moved from Thessaloniki somewhere else, just as they were recently moved from Berlin to Thessaloniki.

Political group: PPE-DE
I am delighted, not only with the content of the European Commission’s new policy on chemicals, but also with the importance it is attaching to this policy, as clearly demonstrated in the strategy approved by the European Union for the ‘Rio+10’ Conference, which is due to take place in 2002. I welcome, in particular, the following points: 1) A complete ban, within a generation, in other words by 2020, of discharges and emissions into the environment of all dangerous substances. 2) The creation of a single system for the registration, evaluation and authorisation of chemicals (REACH), replacing the current system that treats new substances and existing ones differently. 3) The adoption of the precautionary principle, through reversing the burden of proof for substances that cause great concern. It will now fall to the manufacturer to prove that a product is not dangerous. I welcome the Schörling report but prefer, where the tonnage threshold is concerned, the position of the European Commission. This system, if it proves feasible, will protect Europe’s citizens. Using the same system to evaluate substances produced in volumes below and above one tonne per year will make the system too cumbersome and, therefore, contrary to objectives that have been defined.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, violent conflicts are always man-made, however bestial in nature; they are never unavoidable like natural disasters; the leaders who cause them bear immense responsibility. That is always the case, but especially so in extremely poor countries, where the population suffers twice as much; development grinds to a halt and years of external effort and aid are nullified. And what is it about: gaining or refusing to relinquish power? Accumulating minerals, massacring other ethnic groups, establishing independence or occupying part of the desert? Africa, in particular, is an unusually belligerent part of the world. One in five Africans live in a country which is embroiled in serious conflict and, to make matters worse, the conflicts are increasing, both in number and in intensity. The big question is: why is this? It is the European Union’s political and moral duty to do everything in its power to prevent or stop conflicts in ACP countries. The report by Mr Van Hecke is very close to my heart. We need to be much stricter vis-à-vis irresponsible ACP regimes; criteria for suspending aid must be clear, and sanctions need to be tailored to each country individually. We must target the rulers and not the population, however difficult this is, and our Parliament must be directly involved in the decision to suspend aid. It would be a complete outrage if European development aid were used to fund arms deals. EU Member States which provide weapons to warring parties are partly to blame for the profound human suffering and the obliteration of their own development aid. The Cotonou Convention is right in laying the foundation for further development, participation in world trade and political dialogue, but ACP countries which slip into violence destroy this cooperation and tear the Treaty to shreds. (Applause)

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, I rise under Rule 174, the right to petition the European Parliament. You may be aware of a number of petitions concerning Lloyd's of London, as well as complaints to the European Commission. One of the names of Lloyd's of London received a letter from Lloyd's criticising him for daring to raise this matter with the Commission, and a rather threatening letter saying that it was a clear breach of the terms of an agreement. Lloyd's therefore requested written confirmation within seven days that this citizen would desist from taking any further action in breach of the settlement agreement. I have written to the President of the Commission, Mr Prodi, saying that this not only dealt with complaints but also the right to petition Parliament. The President is looking into the question of complaints to the Commission, but he said clearly this is an issue that Parliament would itself want to address. I will certainly give you full details of this later but it is such a serious matter that I thought it should be raised in the House now.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I just wanted to make a few general points in connection with cultural matters. Although everyone appears to agree that culture is important in theory, in practice the situation is often quite different in Europe. Europe seems to be more interested in agriculture than culture. They only differ by four letters but that certainly makes a very big difference at the budgetary level. Any MEP with cultural sensitivities is still moved to read the European Council’s declarations of love when it comes to cultural matters. But this emotion soon gives way to disillusionment when the words are not followed by deeds, particularly where budgets are concerned. For there is nothing that the European Union spends so little on as culture and savings even have to be made in the little that we do spend, notwithstanding the fact that everyone always agrees that promoting culture is probably the only way to make the EU popular with its citizens. I therefore think that it would be particularly misguided of this Parliament not to follow the rapporteur’s recommendations, for you cannot keep saying that you think it is a shame that an ever-decreasing number of people vote in European elections, or that you regret that every inquiry shows that the EU appears to be ever more distant from the people of Europe, only to go making cutbacks in projects whose precise intention it is to bring the EU closer to the people. We certainly feel that we ought not to finance large-scale, expensive projects, but rather small-scale projects that the people of Europe can identify with and which could make a tremendous contribution at the socio-economic level in terms of job opportunities. Now that we are talking about the Europe of the next century, a new, wider Europe, an enlarged Europe, would it not perhaps be useful to pursue a bold cultural policy at long last, for culture is not something that should be talked about in the way that all the other “important” matters are discussed. Now that everything appears to be discussed in economic terms, perhaps it is time for us to start showing more interest in what are, after all, the origins of Europe, notably our culture.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, as a Member from a newly acceding country, I urge you to accept the Constitutional Agreement before the European elections. Primarily because this constitutional agreement would establish a model that is equally attractive to the existing and the new Member States alike. In fact, by recognising this, a number of countries wanted to hold the European election jointly with the national elections in respect of the constitutional agreement. The values and objectives stated in the Constitution will extend and strengthen the foundations of the European social model. Equal rights, as a core value, had been placed, for the first time, in this document, alongside freedom, democracy and the principles of a constitutional state. The aim to achieve a high level of employment is replaced by the plan to achieve full employment. The establishment of peace and security is coupled with the fight against poverty and the protection of human rights. On that basis, a vision is outlined of a new Europe with greater welfare and solidarity. The inclusion of the charter of fundamental rights will further enrich the European catalogue of human rights. We Hungarians are delighted that as a result of our efforts the rights of minorities will be included in the Constitution. On the basis of the Constitutional Agreement, the European Union will operate on a more democratic basis and its activities will be more transparent. The importance of the European Parliament and the role of national parliaments will further increase. Ongoing dialogue with civil organisations, churches and religious institutions will be opened. The Constitution will provide an opportunity for direct civil initiatives too. The legal foundations and forms of cooperation for the struggle against international organised crime and terrorism will be expanded and strengthened. Ladies and gentlemen, people everywhere expect the European Union to make their life easier and better. Discussions on institutional reforms often seem quite complex for the citizens. These issues cannot make the democratic constitutionalisation process fail. I greatly appreciate the effective work of the Irish Presidency, and I trust that with the support of European public opinion and as a result of the efforts of the European Parliament, we shall successfully complete the second phase of the constitutionalisation process.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Mrs Damião has drafted a very good report and taken good account in it of my opinion for the Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities. It is most important to everyone to improve the health and safety protection at the workplace for women who are pregnant, have recently given birth or are breastfeeding, both to protect the woman and to protect the unborn child. This is a general social issue and must be treated with the greatest care. The Commission’s report on the 1992 directive is only concerned with the technical transposition of the directive and does not look at the situation at the workplace, which has to some extent changed, or at the changed role of women in society. The number of single parents has risen and women are more concerned with achieving economic independence. The Commission must submit a proposal for revision of the directive that takes account of all these changes, and it must do so as quickly as possible, this very year. There is a considerable need to improve the legislation. That applies to preventive health protection measures at the workplace for the mother and for the unborn child. Here we must avoid any risks. Any activity that puts their health at risk should without exception be prohibited. Periods allowed for breastfeeding should be regulated and there should be facilities for breastfeeding at the workplace. Maternity leave after the birth of the child should be at least eight weeks. There must be clear rules on financial support, both for the period of pregnancy leave and for maternity leave. The question of reinstatement also needs to be clarified. None of these necessary provisions must lead to discrimination against women or to a reduction of their chances of access to the workplace.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would be grateful if Commissioner Vitorino could respond to this question personally, orally and in plenary session since on this issue the European Union is clearly opening up the way. Proof of this is that just this morning, in this House, the European Parliament approved a motion for a resolution in favour of homosexual refugee partners having the right to family regrouping. Does the Commissioner then think that we could apply this position to the case we are dealing with now? The Commissioner knows that we are referring to a current demand and I would ask him to respond so that we may know what we should do in order to contribute to obtaining positive results.

Political group: PSE