GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
I voted against the report when item 15 was voted down by the political (with 266 votes in favour of doing so and 237 votes against). Item 15 ‘calls for the Stability and Growth Pact to be scrupulously adhered to, and for all attempts to soften the Pact, thereby jeopardising the long-term stability of the European currency, to be resisted’. The fact that item 15 has been removed makes room for laxity in the Stability and Growth Pact. Instead, strict compliance with objective and measurable criteria should be required. The removal of item 15 opens the way for European finance ministers to increase public expenditure in times of recession and in situations in which there are budget deficits. There is a danger of this leading to increased inflation, a loss of confidence and a less stable EU currency. - Olle Schmidt report (A5-0037/2003)

Political group: PPE-DE
I am opposed to aid whose only objective is to re-establish a market economy, an economy of exploitation, which means that not one cent will go to the population who will continue to live in the same poverty. And just because Parliament hypocritically adds the word “social” to the expression “market economy”, this does not mean anything will be fundamentally changed. Besides, the precedent of Russia in the matter of aid under the aegis of the IMF can only make us more distrustful as to what becomes of the money in this sort of aid. – Conference on AIDS

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, throughout the years in which we in this House busied ourselves with resolutions on the enlargement process, I sometimes found it disconcerting when we made quite detailed and precise demands of the countries concerned, imposing on them requirements with which we ourselves did not comply and telling them that this, this and that had to be utterly changed. So I found Commissioner Verheugen’s comment on agricultural policy this morning very helpful. Perhaps we ought really to be considering whether, if the accession countries’ administrations cannot implement these things quite that fast, the problem might not lie with us rather than with the countries of which we demand these things. After they have joined us, I would like to see a lot of our dead weight subjected to scrutiny, as we in Germany had to do after reunification, in order to take a look at all the red tape that had accumulated over the years and to consider whether the new Member States might not perhaps be able to provide us with more flexible and quicker solutions. All this is by way of general comment. I am the shadow rapporteur for Hungary, which has, of course, always been the model country, the country that, as long ago as August 1989, helped to cut through the Iron Curtain, to break down the Wall. With the pan-European picnic in August 1989, when everything was hanging in the balance, Hungary sent Europe a vital signal, and they have always done very well in fulfilling the criteria, so that they could actually be an example to the others. I am therefore particularly amazed that the Hungarian prime minister has come up with this curious proposal that candidates should stand on a sort of Unity List, with seats shared out between the government and the opposition, and that this would be the way to enter the new Europe. That really is an old way of thinking. Not a few Heads of State or Government would like to have things split half and half between government and opposition; perhaps the German Chancellor would in his present situation. The only thing is that democracy is about competition; it is about grappling with problems in order to find the right solutions, and so I wish that Péter Medgyessy, the Hungarian prime minister, would drop this idea and get back to our way of conducting parliamentary debate and, in his internal affairs policies, to competition between parties.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Madam Vice-President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, both the White Paper and Mr Izquierdo Collado's report show very clearly that there is still a very great deal that needs to be done in the transport sector. Nevertheless, it is appropriate at this stage to pay tribute to the work done by the current Commissioner for transport. In a short time she has got things moving. We can confidently expect them to keep moving smoothly and quickly. In an earlier intervention, the rapporteur said that the European Union's transport policy was still lacking in one respect: he thought that we had lost the battle for sustainability. I should like to consider this issue by referring to one specific aspect of transport policy. Charges and funding instruments are, quite rightly, addressed specifically in paragraph 75 and those following it in Mr Izquierdo Collado's report. Where transport is concerned, the key question is always what the transport service costs. That is why the true costs and the cost advantages of the individual modes of transport need to be compared properly and in detail. This afternoon we have been debating the Austrian transit system. I must repeat and underline now what we already heard earlier: for as long as it is cheaper to travel through the Alps and other sensitive areas by lorry, however good the alternative infrastructures on offer are, it will be to no avail. Even a tunnel under Austria would not help if it were cheaper to travel through the country above ground. My request to you is therefore for some serious proposals on transport in particularly sensitive areas, and as soon as possible.

Political group: PPE-DE
For a long time we have adopted a foreign policy which we allege is based on moral rules. And not just that. We have come to believe it ourselves and we claim to represent the world-wide moral conscience. Already, however, we have reached an impasse, and not just in Turkey. You see, morality must be applied towards everyone equally, regardless of risks and interests. But that cannot happen. You see, Belgrade can be bombed, but not Moscow, Beijing or Ankara. Let us therefore acknowledge the obvious and return to tried and tested prescriptions. In other words, let us speak of interests, the balance of powers and policy as the art of the possible. If we do that we will certainly not be more moral, we will be more sincere and in that case we can all put our time to better use instead of play-acting as we are all doing now.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I am speaking on behalf of the Spanish delegation to the Group of the European People’s Party to explain why we abstained in the vote. Abstention does not normally mean taking a clear position but in this case it does. We abstained because, on the one hand, we support the symbolism and principles of the fight against racism and xenophobia, and some of the points in this report contain important statements, for example, paragraph 8, on the functions of the European Racism and Xenophobia Information Network and paragraph 24, which invites the Member States to prioritise some very specific issues in this fight, to mention only two. But, on the other hand, by contrast with the Haarder report which we voted for this morning, this report is long on radical demagoguery and short on legal rigour. Now this Parliament, as co-legislator, should know that any statement it makes has either legal value or, as in this case, quasi-legal value, and that is why greater care must be taken. Let me give you just one example of this: paragraph 22, which seeks to give substance to European citizenship, by granting rights to vote in European and local elections to third country nationals resident in the Community. That obviously violates the Treaty right away. It is badly drafted. And I could give further examples of this kind of thing to justify our abstention.

Political group: PPE-DE
This question interests me very much and is quite appropriate in the middle of November, in the run-up to Christmas. Many parents would be very supportive of Mr Papayannakis' question. I would like to ask the Commissioner what comparisons have been made of the different advertising used in different countries at this time of year? I would like to hear her opinion on the fact that, certainly in my own country, this advertising begins just after August, well before the immediate run-up to Christmas and can be very aggressive. What kind of measures can you suggest be put in place to protect minors from this aggressive advertising?

Political group: PSE
Mr President, as an aside, I should like to inform you that the Irish have just won the first race at the Cheltenham festival. I thought you might be interested. My views on the present hushkit legislation are on the record. It was very questionably driven by design criteria and not performance criteria. So I welcome this adoption of an ICAO balanced approach to air traffic noise reduction as it amounts to a fundamental system change for the European Union. However, I have many reservations. This Commission proposal states that noise reduction efforts are now to be assessed on the basis of individual airports, with a view to imposing operating restrictions on aircraft. It has opted for the airport-based approach along the lines of ICAO Resolution A337. I support a package of measures for our larger and busier airports covering aspects such as land-use planning and management, operational restrictions and a ban on the noisier Chapter 3 aircraft. However, as others have said, the effectiveness or otherwise of this proposal as a means of reducing air traffic noise will only be known after the Commission has submitted its report on its findings in over five years' time. I would particularly like to congratulate our rapporteur, Mr Jarzembowski, for his hard work and the close contact he has maintained with both the Presidency-in-Office and the Commission in an effort to find a way forward and – given the critical deadline of 1 April – to prevent a legislative vacuum from occurring. It is imperative for all of us in this House, if possible, to avoid a second reading. That said, it is extremely unsatisfactory for us, as legislators to have been asked to rush through such a technical piece of legislation. I am not happy about the whole procedure. I would, however, like to sound a note of caution. Although these proposals are very necessary and overdue in the context of the hushkits regulation and the US complaint and, indeed, the recent opinion of the Advocate General, the UK Government's position points out some flaws in the Commission's approach. So the 1 April deadline still looks rather ambitious.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this report is written from the point of view of defending the interests of the pharmaceutical industry. Yet, the quest for profits cannot be reconciled with the defence of public health. When one claims to protect public health, one must put the interests of the community first and one must take into account the health of all human beings, whether or not they can afford to pay. As for the pharmaceutical industry, well, it is only interested in those who can pay. This is the reason why it wants to work quickly, in order to release medicinal products which yield a high return. In other words, in their jargon, they want ‘blockbusters’ which earn more than one billion dollars per year. Spending insufficient time, however, on research and trials in order to rake in profits more quickly will certainly have a detrimental effect on the safety and health of patients, not to mention those working in these industries. I would also like to condemn the other consequence of the quest for profit, namely job losses, including within the research sector. This is what is happening at the moment at the pharmaceutical company, Aventis, which is cutting 10 000 jobs world-wide and closing factories and research centres in several countries. You speak about transparency, but the pharmaceutical industry has always kept its margins under wraps, which are amongst some of the highest in industry, due to the very fact that they are guaranteed by the national health systems. We are told that it would be awful if terrorists were to contaminate populations with smallpox, since we would not have the necessary medicinal products to treat people. Whilst that may be true, this disastrous scenario is already happening. Every day, thousands of children die from diseases that we know how to treat, such as measles, and for which medicinal products exist. It is the thirst for profit of large pharmaceutical companies that is responsible for this, and they enjoy the compelling support of the governments.

Political group: GUE-NGL
I, too, would like to congratulate the Danish presidency, particularly as far as the decision on Turkey is concerned. I think that this decision has succeeded very well in striking a balance between, on the one hand, recognition of the reforms that have already been adopted and those already announced, and the new government’s willingness to go even further if necessary, and, on the other, the ongoing need to stress that the European Union sees legislative changes as very important but that what actually happens with these legislative changes in practice is even more important. Consideration of this will take time, and I think that it is right to look at precisely what has taken place by the end of 2004. Let there be no misunderstanding; it is now up to Turkey to act. The EU, however, must not sit on its hands. Where Turkey is concerned, it is no longer enough to simply refer to the Copenhagen political criteria, which are somewhat abstract. On the other hand, there is also no point in producing a whole stack of details without any form of prioritisation. I would therefore like to underscore the call made by the president of my group, Mr Cohn-Bendit, to the European Commission, and to Mr Verheugen, for it to be made absolutely clear once and for all what the changes are that we expect Turkey to make. To cite one example: the role of the army. Yes, this must change – lots of things must change – but what exactly does the European Union want to happen before negotiations begin? What must then happen while negotiations are in progress? Will the constitution have to be changed, for example? Will the National Security Council have to be abolished? These are all specific examples of areas in which the EU will have to be much, much more specific. If we are not, I am convinced that we will end up in a disastrous discussion about the interpretation of the political criteria, one that will be dominated by prejudices rather than by objective assessment. If we are more specific, however, this will give Turkey a chance – not by exerting pressure but by demonstrating that European values and standards are normative, in Turkey as elsewhere.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I am speaking on behalf of my colleague, Mr Wiersma. Mr President, the decision taken by the Council of Ministers to lift the arms embargo against Indonesia is short-sighted and premature. Indonesia has meanwhile made the first few steps towards a democratic society. But as the American UN ambassador, Mr Holbrooke, underlined again this week, warning us of the Indonesian army, the transition to a fully-fledged democratic system is certainly not a foregone conclusion. The role which the Indonesian army played in the riots on East Timor has still not been cleared up. Tension in Indonesia is mounting. Djakarta has not got the situation in the Moluccas under control. MEP Maat has just made this point as well. Large groups of citizens no longer feel safe. With a premature lifting of the arms embargo, Europe threatens to be an accessory to the escalating violence. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Council needs to reconsider its decision. We strongly urge the Member States, pending a new decision, not to resume arms supplies. We would ask the Commission and Council to take four steps. First of all, the European Union needs to send a mission to Djakarta to discuss with the Wahid government a way out of the crisis. Secondly, the EU needs to conclude agreements with the Indonesian government about permitting independent observes in the Moluccas. Thirdly, more humanitarian aid is needed for all sections of the population. Lastly, more aid via the UN and NGOs is needed for refugees and the homeless. By way of conclusion, could I just say how disappointed we, the Dutch delegation, are at the attitude of our Foreign Minister who, like a weathervane, cannot stick to any one position. At first, he supported the arms embargo but changed his mind after his visit to Djakarta. The European Union has to act now before it is too late. I would strongly urge the Portuguese Presidency of the European Union to take the lead in this.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, there has been a change over to electronic capitalism, both in Europe and worldwide. On the stock markets, there is a ‘gold rush’ for the shares of IT companies – IT shares are a present-day Klondyke. The reports by Mr Paasilinna and Mr Alyssandrakis emphasise the necessity of rules even for gold prospecting: if the common and public interest is not secured, the richest, largest and fastest players will take all, and they will reap all the fruits of the new technological developments. A rapid concentration of the information industry is in progress – at the consumers’ expense. The battle over market shares for next generation mobile phone frequencies, for example, will raise consumer prices sky high. As we know, the profit from these shares will ultimately always be generated through the prices of telephone calls. We must now ensure that public interest is secured – as proposed by Mr Alyssandrakis – and ensure the availability of sufficient frequency bands for use by public broadcasting. This will not be possible if such a restricted natural resource as the radio spectrum is auctioned off for the monopolised use of the highest bidding major companies.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, needless to say, I am pleased to hear from the Commissioner that the article contains factual inaccuracies. I would simply like to ask the Commissioner if he could expand on the detail of those factual inaccuracies in that article, given that this is important. I think we all share the Commissioner's view that reinforcing local agricultural markets in any developing country is, of course, what matters most. Does the Commissioner, however, dare to stand up here and confirm that in Congo, in the region mentioned in the article, there is no wholesale import of European agricultural products that are dumped there? Although the Commissioner confirmed that we support local NGOs and that we purchase maize there, does he have the nerve to state loudly and clearly that there has not been any import on a massive scale, apart from the purchases that the Commissioner himself mentioned?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I would also like to thank Mr Deprez, and indeed the Belgian State, for this excellent report and excellent initiative. It is true that the scourge of violence, often organised violence, has plagued international sport, particularly international football, for too long. We wholeheartedly support initiatives that are aimed at increasing cooperation between authorities in different Member States. They are a vital tool in the battle to keep sport clean and to keep it as it should be. We like you to consider one small, but important, textual amendment. The proposed decision is flawed in one respect: it appears to assume that each Member State is represented by just one single national team. This is not so, as you well know. My own country, for example, is represented by an independent Scotland team, despite the fact that Scotland is, for the time being anyway, not an independent Member State. We have a long footballing pedigree and indeed the first international football match ever played was the game between Scotland and England in 1872. Scottish supporters – the so-called 'Tartan Army' which is tartan, but not an army – have for quite a few years now had an unparalleled reputation for good behaviour and good humour. It is for this reason that I and my EFA colleagues have tabled three amendments to the Council text. They will not change the substance but they will give recognition to the distinctive footballing and indeed legal histories of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England. Do not speak about the national team, but about national teams. I see Mr Deprez accepts the point and I am most grateful to him for that.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, when we talk about drugs, we clearly mean out-and-out war. We cannot just be content with a few short battles. The battles we are talking about today are preventing and reducing the damage but, clearly, all these measures are, in any case, dependent upon the success of other measures such as combating drug trafficking and consumption. It must be pointed out that we need to start by addressing a human condition, the condition of drug addicts. We need to change our approach: drug addicts must be treated as people who are ill rather than criminals, and so we need to take lines which are consistent with this view and, therefore, employ treatments which bring about the recovery of drug addicts rather than social exclusion. That is why, out of the two kinds of treatment still being debated, many of us still prefer the more human approach of rehabilitation communities, therapeutic communities, to the administration of chemical substances which are alternatives to or substitutes for drugs. We do not endorse the use of substances such as methadone, except in extreme clinical cases. In addition to medical and pharmaceutical care, we need to provide drug addicts with psychological help too. First and foremost, we need to step up the fight against the network of traffickers who continue, I regret to say, to be on the scene. Turning briefly to methadone, I would say that it is a substitution substance which does not resolve the problem of drug dependence and, worst of all, does not bring about the recovery of the drug addict: it is a bit like drugging up someone who is ill and administering pain killers without ever giving them an operation. Mr Blokland and other Members have also mentioned the unsuccessful results of attempts at liberalisation and legalisation in this field: these kinds of approach must be abandoned. That is why, therefore, I too have taken the liberty of tabling some amendments, which Mr Bowis is kindly going to illustrate during the vote, presenting them to our rapporteur not as replacing but as supplementing the contents of the report. They are amendments which relate, above all, to prevention. Amendment No 60 proposes some ideas for freeing addicts from their dependence, striking at the root of the evil. Amendment No 61 relates to treatments which are not based on drugs but which include a great deal of psychological help for the ill drug addict. Amendment No 62 recommends great caution in providing access to needles, condoms and syringes. Amendments Nos 63 and 64 are on the subject of preventive and preparatory measures, first and foremost, for the people responsible for implementing these measures. Lastly, the other amendments propose measures to combat drugs in prisons, to encourage data collection on prevention and, once again, to discourage substitution treatment, which not only fails to reduce damage and consumption but increases, boosts, the black market.

Political group: PPE-DE