GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, as the first Member so far to actually refer to the Rules can I raise a point of order under Rule 137(1) which relates to explanations of vote. I requested from the services an explanation of vote on Mr Cappato's proposal for a suspension of the session. I would like to know why you have not given it to me and given me the opportunity of explaining that while I agree with Mr Duhamel that the building is as safe as is reasonable, it is as stupid and expensive as always to meet here. That is why I voted in favour of suspending the session.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, there is no doubt that the European Passport for issues of securities will, in future, make it easier to raise capital. This proposal is one of our contributions to the removal of bureaucracy and of the other barriers that mean that a financial internal market is still not yet feasible. I have to say that there has been very constructive cooperation between the institutions, and this has been made easier by the rapporteur’s willingness to compromise; we have all had to agree on formulations in order to produce a watertight piece of legislation. I think it was a great stroke of genius for us to draw a distinction between equity and non-equity securities. That was a smart move, for which I am sure that, one day, both investors and issuers will be grateful to us. When we do actually adopt a directive, it will be important for us always to attempt to balance the interests of the issuers and those of investors. In this directive, this House has again attached great value to the protection of small investors, who have in recent years been particularly unsettled, and we are obliged to restore small investors’ confidence if we really do want to have a properly-functioning internal financial market from which everyone can benefit. The three things that are important are, firstly, that every investor will in future be able to rely on the prospectus underlying an issue complying with high standards of quality, without regard to the issuer’s home country and also without reference to the country in which the security is offered. This will become a selling point. The second is that, in the course of negotiations, we were able to make it a requirement that the summary prospectus, which is the main source of information for small investors, should comply with high standards and form part of the prospectus. If the summary is false, misleading or inconsistent, it must be possible, in consequence of this, for those responsible to be brought to account. Thirdly, the investor is protected against misleading advertising, in that it is ensured that issuers, when describing their product in the media, cannot promise more than the security can hold in accordance with the prospectus. In conclusion, I would like to mention one concern that again became very apparent when this directive was under discussion, and that is the question of whether Parliament’s rights have actually been safeguarded. If I consider the Interinstitutional Agreement in the light of better regulation, I have my doubts about this, so you can be sure that we will consider very carefully whether the work that you and CESAR do on this particular directive meets our expectations and is within the framework we have set. If you were to fully meet Parliament’s expectations, that would build confidence in the legislation to be derived from this in future, and in secondary legislation.

Political group: PSE
As the Commissioner knows, this latest problem coming in the wake of the BSE crisis threatens to destroy agriculture and indeed unravel the entire CAP. There have been lots of rumours about people knowingly withholding information about outbreaks, or indeed movements of livestock. Is it possible for the Commissioner to talk to Member State governments to see whether it is possible under their own legal systems to take criminal prosecutions against those who act in such an irresponsible way? Secondly, does the Commissioner welcome the voluntary action by many responsible people in sporting and other fields to curtail the movement of people. In that regard, in my own country, would he particularly acknowledge the responsible and unselfish act of the new leader of Fine Gael in scaling down its Àrd Fheis to a Dublin conference to contribute to ensuring that there is no major problem in Ireland? (Laughter)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, anyone who visited Uzbekistan during the Soviet era was enchanted by its glorious Islamic heritage, its thriving markets – especially compared with the markets elsewhere in the Soviet Union – and its lively atmosphere. We are therefore especially concerned about the situation in Uzbekistan today, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. This is no longer a booming country; it is a country in a difficult political situation, scarred by hunger and environmental devastation. Intensive cotton farming with excessive use of fertilisers has undoubtedly contributed to this environmental disaster. Furthermore, as the previous speaker has just pointed out, Uzbekistan is now in a situation in which we must fear the worst over the coming weeks and months, especially in light of developments in Afghanistan. The European Union is called upon to help the region as a whole – for in a situation of economic privation, environmental devastation, and a permanent threat from Islamic fundamentalist or terrorist groups, it would be an even greater disaster if the European Union failed to help the people in this region by supporting them in their efforts to overcome the catastrophic environmental and health situation and assisting them to achieve a modicum of economic prosperity, and above all by providing basic foodstuffs. I am sure that Commissioner Nielson, who is the appropriate person to participate in this debate today, is already giving thought to these issues and making preparations with his staff for what has to be done today, but above all, what must be done in the event of further disasters, e.g. in response to refugee flows from Afghanistan. Our task is not simply to deliver great sermons. This is not a clash of civilisations; it is not a campaign against Islam. What we must do is to take practical action during the coming weeks and months and show the people that we genuinely wish to express our solidarity and support with more than just words. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, today's second reading on serious acute respiratory syndrome comes, I think, at exactly the right time once again because, as we see, there are new cases every day and people are dying from SARS. What is important, as the Minister said, are the immediate measures that need to be taken to protect the public. He mentioned some of these immediate measures, but the main point is what the next steps will be to deal with these diseases, which have significant social and economic repercussions, because with current levels of mobility, with millions of people travelling all over the planet, tremendous potential has been given to communicable diseases. SARS is a typical example, with cases occurring from China, where the disease originated, to places a very long way from the original source. The second important issue is that we are seeing sudden epidemics of new diseases. Thirty new infectious diseases or variations on old diseases due to mutating viruses have been reported over the last twenty years. Even old diseases, such as tuberculosis, are reoccurring. There is also talk of an imminent pandemic, an outbreak of influenza. We therefore need constant vigilance and monitoring and to find a coordinated response to health threats. The Minister quite rightly stressed that there is the network set up under Decision 2119 in 1998, for the surveillance of communicable diseases but unfortunately, Minister, this network is inadequate for an organised and coordinated response to these health threats. I agree with you that you need to push for a monitoring centre to be set up in accordance with the Commission proposal, like the one in the United States. We need a monitoring centre at European Union level to coordinate the various national centres, because it is of course the Member States' responsibility, but also to coordinate reference laboratories, so that we can have a fast, coordinated response to communicable diseases and even to bio-terrorism, which is what threats with viruses or bacteria spores are. You also quite rightly said that public health must take its proper place in the new Treaties for Europe. I am sorry to say that, so far, the constitutional Convention has not sent us this message or this position. As you quite rightly said. Just as the environment has an eminent position in the Treaties, so should public health. Health services are one thing – there is the question of subsidiarity – and public health protection is another because, as you know, viruses and various diseases and bio-terrorism do not recognise borders and can pass from country to country, from Member State to Member State and we must be able to respond in a coordinated manner. If we are to be able to do so, we need public health to have an eminent position in the Treaty of the European Union. So I agree with you and I would ask for you to persuade the other ministers to agree to set up this communicable diseases monitoring and control centre at European level and for us to persuade the constitutional Convention and the Council to give public health an eminent position in the new constitution of Europe.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on a point of order: I would like to request the assistance of my colleagues in Parliament, and indeed of the Commission, following the disaster that struck Dublin in particular last week when it was inundated with serious floods, rendering homeless many frightened people, some elderly. The scenes in Dublin were more reminiscent of other countries, where there are greater extremes of climate. When I returned from Parliament I found my neighbours – I shall declare an interest, I live in that part of the city – were bobbing around in boats, carrying their pets. That is something I never expected to see in my country. I know some of your constituents, Mr President, suffered the same experience. I would like to express my admiration for those who responded to the tragedy but also, if possible, to request some help with re-housing many of those who lost their homes in this tragedy.

Political group: PPE-DE
We are critical of Mr Cuhna’s report on leaf tobacco. In our view, the amendments tabled represent, in general, an out-of-date agricultural policy which does not meet the conditions and needs of modern global society. In the light of this, and with a view to the impending general review of the EU’s agricultural policy, we have chosen to vote against the report in its entirety.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, it is not difficult to get up again when you have fallen down, so, as Commissioner Barnier was saying, we need to remobilise public opinion and our national politicians. This is the aim of the resolution that we are putting forward, which should be seen as an extremely strong political signal. Imagine that in our respective national parliaments the four main parties in our countries tabled a joint resolution. That would cause a stir. Why is there this level of consensus? It is because we all agree that we need to bring the enlargement and the deepening of the Union into step with each other. The number of players is going to change, the playing field is changing, therefore the rules have to change. Therefore, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, this resolution should be seen as something helpful, an encouragement, a stimulus. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that it is extremely moderate. On the one hand, it proposes that you use the Convention draft as a basis – in this respect, we hope that you will not move too far away from it – and on the other hand, it proposes, significantly, the date of 1 May and not 9 May. After that we will have a last sitting in Parliament from 3 to 6 May. We should not be politically forced to be a constituent assembly to compensate for the irresponsibility of the governments.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I have, of course, voted for Mr Langen’s excellent report, and I congratulate him on his work and also on his report. Both the public and ourselves are obviously pleased with the simplifications he has explained so clearly. I would like for this to be the case in other areas as well. You know that I am a great advocate of Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg and I have also regretted all the fuss again made this morning by those who wanted to prevent us from voting today, because they simply want to ruin the Friday sittings in Strasbourg and for everything to be concentrated in Brussels. And these centralists are also, of course, setting their sights on Luxembourg – as a by-product so to speak – for Parliament’s Secretariat. Certainly, I must also say that this does not always make things easy for France to defend Strasbourg as a parliamentary seat. One of my groups of visitors found this out again on their way here this morning. Their bus was stopped by the French police under the pretext that the driver would not have a French driving licence. This particular company has transported thousands of my visitors here in the past ten years. What is going on here then? I must say that these visitors wonder, naturally, whether this is what Europe is all about. Moreover, the French police do not seem to have heard of credit cards yet. The visitors had to pool their French francs together to pay the horrendous FRF 5 000 fine. This cannot be right, Mr President! I will, of course, check ... (The President cut the speaker off)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the problem we have when we talk about tobacco is that we in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy speak from the point of view of public health and not from the point of view of the possible disadvantages of banning tobacco advertising for the internal market. We therefore prefer the directive which was approved in 1998. As the Commissioner has already said, five million people die each year from diseases related to smoking. Other Members have said thousands of young people start smoking every year, with all the consequences that addiction has in store for them. Several studies have demonstrated very clearly the effects of this advertising and the sponsorship of certain sporting events in terms of young people starting to smoke earlier. In fact, 60% of smokers, according to the statistics, begin before they reach 13 years of age and around 90% before 18 years. We therefore much preferred the 1998 Directive, which unfortunately was rescinded by the European Court. In the case in hand, various Members in the Environment Committee have decided that they are not going to present amendments to the Commission’s proposal because it is better to have a limited directive than no directive at all. We are therefore only presenting one amendment, which proposes that, in accordance with the Treaty, the Member States should retain competences and be able to regulate this type of issue and even go further. Furthermore, the draftsperson of the opinion of the Committee on the Environment points out very clearly that this is one step and that surely, in the future, the European Commission will be able to present proposals on indirect advertising, on the control of expenditure on advertising and on tobacco vending machines. In short, Mr President, it is better to have a limited directive in this area than no directive at all.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I would also like to begin by thanking our rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs for their work on this very detailed and complex report, which, of course, applies to upper air space. Further to the last Council common position – which my Delegation broadly supported – and the subsequent conciliation procedure, we are now able to fully support this regulation. During the process, one of our key objections concerned the inclusion of military operations and training. I am delighted that this sovereign competence is now excluded. Had it not been excluded there could have been an adverse impact on NATO operations, so I am also delighted that this is no longer the case. However, care needs to be taken during implementation that the newly-created bodies – i.e. the single sky committee and the industry consultation body – do not duplicate their efforts, thereby causing unnecessary confusion. It is quite clear that the aviation industry cannot continue to sustain the loss of USD 4 billion per year due to airspace congestion across Europe, and I believe that this regulation will go some way towards addressing this. Eurocontrol should also be congratulated for its initiative, put in place in January 2002, which introduced reduced vertical separation. I understand that we have increased capacity by some 30% and reduced delays to the levels we saw in 1998-1999. However, it does behove certain countries and areas, such as France, Italy, Spain, southern Germany and Switzerland, which are responsible for 44% of the delays, to make radical improvements nationally if this regulation is going to succeed. Another area which needs to be addressed urgently is the shortage of air-traffic controllers across Europe. In conclusion, with this regulation we should improve safety, efficiency and the economics of air traffic management, which, as air traffic across Europe continues to grow, is good news for the industry, for business and for the consumer.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of my group I would like to thank Mr Brie for the wonderful work he has done, providing us with a clear and accurate picture of the reconstruction work that Afghanistan has to undertake and the challenges it must face in the coming years. Above all, though, I would like to thank him for the particular attention he has paid to respect for women’s rights, for the vigilance he has asked us to show because of the fragility of what has been gained. A great deal of progress has indeed been made, at least in the constitutional text: political power exercised by constitutional representatives, representation of women, equality between men and women written in black and white, respect for linguistic diversity considered as an asset and not as a threat and, finally, respect for the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Even if an Islamic state is declared, I believe it would be remarkable for that part of the world. This challenge is, however, a shared one, faced by both the international community and the European Union. We must respect our own commitments to ensure this democratic transition and it is essential that we are clearly present in order to support all the processes to put in place the necessary structures for civil and economic reform in Afghanistan. In fact, the climate of insecurity must not destabilise the efforts made, and hence the unquestionable need for a multiannual framework programme which would allow both the structuring of the judicial system and the establishment of specific reconciliation regulations as well as an education system. It also seems to me to be essential that the whole process of pacification should go hand-in-hand with the process of economic and social reconstruction. Having said that, we are wary of the slow pace of this reconstruction, since it could jeopardise the stability necessary for the development of the country. We have made many commitments, we must fulfil them quickly and, above all, understand that the least delay on our part risks being exploited by others to establish their hold on fragile structures, with the help of funds originating from drug trafficking. We must also work on making the progress made in favour of the population visible so that the people do not sink into despair after 25 years of war. If we fail to meet this challenge, we could lose not only our credibility, but also an area of peace on which stability in the region depends.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Community development policy must make it possible to establish a framework for discussion with the European Union’s partners, to coordinate European action with other donors, particularly the Member States and to increase consistency with other Community policies, especially commercial policy and common agricultural policy. The Commission’s current approach, however, will not give rise to a fair policy because it is still dependent on the market’s operation and the rules specified by the WTO, the IMF and the World Bank, which are still unfavourable for developing countries. Liberal globalisation to promote development has admittedly been a failure. Mr Gemelli’s report quite rightly denounces the deterioration in the economic, social and environmental situation of developing countries, the worsening of poverty and the negative impact of globalisation on these countries. It advocates a review of the WTO rules so that account is taken of developing countries. We should reiterate, however, the basic principle of a sustainable development policy. The beneficiaries of the aid should set out their development strategy themselves, with their own needs in mind. Here, however, we have exactly the reverse – the European Union gives itself the right to dictate to its partners how to use the aid in the six areas that it considers to be priorities. We must take away this fundamental ambiguity. Are we acting in the interests of the countries that we apparently want to help, or in the interests of the European Union and its Member States? Where does the European Union stop having a direct interest and where does its development policy begin? Developing countries are obviously experiencing difficulties in protecting their interests within the international community. For example, in terms of health care, a court case was brought against South Africa by pharmaceutical multinationals. Brazil was condemned by the United States because it manufactured or imported cheap generic drugs for combating AIDS, a disease which is killing millions of Brazilians. The European Community must make its voice heard in the international courts in order to defend the principle of potentially granting free licences to developing countries that have pressing health care problems. I am asking my fellow Members to do this by adopting an amendment that has, moreover, already been adopted by the Joint Parliamentary Assembly. The continued reduction of the Community budget for development, which is 1.1% smaller in the draft budget for 2002, is also incomprehensible, whereas development cooperation is one of the priorities of the Commission’s Work Programme for 2001. There is a long list of deviations from the development policy that the Commission has, up to now, been conducting. We shall therefore vote in favour of this report, since it highlights the gulf between political statements and the progress that has actually been made, even if it does not always follow our logic to the letter.

Political group: Verts-ALE