GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I cannot share the opinion of Mr Väyrynen that this Parliament does not have enough credibility. Two months ago we took up a clear position as a single international institution, albeit not every individual in the House. I am pleased that everyone has now come on board and that the Council and Commission also now support what we in this House clearly declared on this matter with a small majority two months ago. However, we have now moved on considerably, having come to realise that it is not enough to direct threatening words at the Russians. Rather, we must reach conclusions. We must stop financing this war, which is a bloody, colonial war for oil and an especially bloody form of electoral campaigning. This means, Commissioner, that we must stop financial payments, including TACIS funds. On the other hand, we must clearly say to our partner that, as far as we are concerned, a partner is no longer a partner when he becomes a murderer. This should also be obvious between states. I would also like to clear up a few myths. No mention is ever made of the democratically elected government of Chechnya. This is not another internal affair for Russia. This government was elected under the supervision of the OSCE on the basis of a cease-fire agreement which the OSCE brokered. We must resolutely support this government against the breach of this agreement by Moscow, which is a contravention of international law and which has come about as a result of the fact that Moscow has restored a KGB puppet parliament, which was in place in Moscow before the agreement, in order to have a comfortable negotiating partner. We must also clear up the myth that this is a response to terrorism. Mr Cohn-Bendit is right: we do not know who carried out the bomb attacks in Moscow, which we condemn. Much points to bogus machinations. We must state quite clearly that anyone dropping bombs on civilians is not fighting terrorists; rather he is inciting terrorists by traumatising whole generations which will suffer the consequences of this particularly brutal form of colonialism. We therefore need a wholly clear and energetic policy and not the assertions of alibis which we have had in recent months, including from our governments. I would like to urge the Council and the Commission to use the same clear language at tomorrow’s OSCE Summit as the European Parliament has used in its resolution.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, it was a privilege for me over the past three legislative periods, from the liberation of eastern Europe to the accession of the new Member States, to take part in the accession process as policy coordinator for the Group of the European People’s Party , and, initially, also as strategy rapporteur. It involved letting the Union be what the peoples who were once so oppressed hoped it was: a federation of democratic constitutional states contributing to international peace. The acceding states expected to come home to a community of values, one that also fulfils their deepest desires. We are not primarily a market: ‘It's not the economy, stupid!’ The Council is possibly less bothered by it, but we, as representatives of the European citizens, insist that not the bureaucratic or power-political arguments carry the weight, but the political-moral arguments. I would echo the Commissioner's words about Turkey and the need to give political criteria priority over the more technical policy problems. I noticed recently that this Turkish Government increasingly understands and appreciates this. In the same way, political values should also be given priority where Romania is concerned. I therefore hope that the Commission and the Council will not disregard Parliament's warning and carry on business as usual. The accession of the ten is a very festive event, marred only by the off-key note of the Cypriot referendum, on the basis of which, quite remarkably, the no-voters are being rewarded with two seats taken from the yes-voters. In fact, I wonder whether that is indeed the intention and whether something will yet be done about this. This shows how much we need to continue to insist on the sustainability of the political changes before a candidate becomes a member. A crucial factor in this context is the way in which the Members of this Parliament view their term in office. We are European representatives of the people, elected in different countries. That means that we stand up for general European well-being, in accordance with the old biblical duty that we should not only look after our own interests, but also that of others. In that light, I hope that Europe is becoming increasingly Christian. The mood of solidarity creates the confidence that is essential to us, and on which the EU's future will depend.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on a point of order. Michel Rocard is quite right. What is happening here is that a very few people are trying to take the opportunity yet again to put forward their interests, which they did not manage to get through in committee. They then see to it that we have to hold roll-call votes, which in fact are no longer really roll-call votes. This is a deliberate attempt by a very few people to raise their profile at the expense of others. So, first of all, we need a sensible system for roll-call votes. Secondly, we cannot accept the fact that after what I regard as a classic mistaken decision by Parliament to abolish Friday sittings, the very same people who once said they no longer wanted Friday sittings are now protesting! My question is: have there meanwhile been objections to Parliament's decision to scrap Friday? Have there been any legal objections? What will things look like next year? In future we might even end up in the same situation as now, where we keep having to postpone reports to the Brussels part-session instead of dealing with them here in Strasbourg. Can you give us any information on the matter?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, before we vote on paragraph 45, I would like the rapporteur to hear what I have to say. The Italian version of the second part of the paragraph refers firstly to physical, psychological and sexual abuse of children, and then the final part reads “urges them not to imprison child abusers, except as a last resort”. I would like to know whether this clause has the same meaning in his language. Would the rapporteur be so kind as to inform us whether his version is the authentic version, for, if so, the meaning is the complete opposite to the Italian.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it is not just transparency in the transitional stage which is needed for accession, Mrs Smet; flexibility and imagination are also needed. But one thing is certain: the remarkable efforts and absolute determination of the candidate countries to join the European Union must be incentive enough for us to get ready and able to enlarge. Thus, any measures which help to improve the process of rapprochement must be taken much more energetically and with better coordination management now in the pre-accession stage. The Commission should not be left to fend for itself here. This comment is addressed to the Council and of course to us, the Member States, precisely because the rates of growth in the candidate countries are in fact far lower than those forecast in 1997, when we first debated this question. We should therefore be more conservative, Commissioner, in our future forecasts. Far better to err on the side of caution. However, we should all be clear on one thing: continuous economic growth is the basis for social development. And, in turn, social development is needed if we are to stabilise the European social model and ensure that this model is not jeopardised. However, we live in the real political world and are therefore bound to make provision for transitional arrangements in various political sectors in order to prevent negative frictional losses during the accession process. In doing so, we help both the candidate countries and the Member States themselves. For the job market and employment policy, that means that Member States bordering candidate countries need flexible, intelligent transitional arrangements in the first stage for the free movement of workers, especially border commuters, but only until such time as the difference in the standard of living in the candidate countries has improved to the point at which no migrationary movements or unrest are expected. Border regions need stability. That means that we must use the first stage following accession to jointly iron out social differences, especially if we are to be able to jointly build up confidence-inspiring relations in border regions. Our opportunity lies in the fact that a successful socialisation process can prevent protectionism and nationalism. This is especially important in border regions, where several cultures clash.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Mr Markus Ferber has produced an excellent report, on which I wish to congratulate him. The Parliament Budget is essentially an administrative budget, since wage costs constitute the largest item of expenditure. We are currently experiencing a significant period of change in administration, as we are aiming to introduce activity-based budgeting, to emphasise greater personal accountability and to improve the reallocation of resources. This is why, last year, Parliament approved an appropriation of EUR 300 000 for this year’s budget for the investigation of the efficiency and improvement needs of parliamentary administration. Mr President, this is why it is somewhat surprising that already at this early stage, i.e. before the investigation has even started, important decisions are being made on administrative development. In the Budget, appropriations for wages are being increased by an enormous 12.2 %. This increase is so huge that no other institution could even contemplate an increase of administrative costs of this magnitude. Already, at this early stage, the intention is to spend this increase on the creation of 33 new posts and, apparently, 12 more will be created as a result of the amendment by the Bureau. For the sake of comparison, I would like to refer to the 1995-1999 period, during which Parliament established a total of only 11 new official posts. It is worthy of special mention that in this proposal, a new post is even being created for the Financial Control Department, despite the intention to abandon prior inspection altogether. In addition, the Budget contains a significant number of new staff promotions. Such being the case, I cannot agree with those who claim that a policy of budgetary discipline has been observed in the drafting of this Budget. On the contrary, this Budget is uncommonly slack, and this will make it difficult to gain the approval of the general public. Mr President, it is necessary in this context to address the issue of the policy of the European Parliament in its capacity as an employer. Administrative reform, activity-based budgeting and downward delegation of accountability require consultation with the staff. Reallocation of resources is necessary, and consequently also reform of staffing regulations. Thus it would have been proper to save for the future such tools and opportunities for negotiation, with which these reforms are supposed to be furthered, and to refrain from granting new benefits before there has even been an opportunity to negotiate comparable administrative reforms with the staff.

Political group: ELDR
The Commission has proposed an amended directive on health and safety at work. This report suggests it should be longer and more detailed. UK Conservatives believe that we should vote against it for that very reason. This is not a question of whether or not health and safety at work is an important issue. Of course it is. It is not a question of whether or not the recommendations in the report are sound. Many of them are and Peter Skinner has put a lot of thought into his work. It is a question of how the European Parliament should be spending its time and be seen to be spending its time. It is a question of what Parliament should be looking at as its priorities. It is a question of whether it should be for the Commission and for the European Parliament to prescribe the fine detail of people’s working and waking lives. There is a problem in the UK, but not confined to the UK. The EU is seen to be interfering. The European Parliament is often seen to be interfering even more. It is not seen as focusing on the big issues. Our constituents ask us why they should vote for anybody at the European elections. They ask: what are you doing for us? What shall we answer? We have the opportunity to tell our people that we do care about the big issues that they care about, that we can help deliver a better peace, security, prosperity, environment and quality of life – issues that can genuinely be helped best at a European level. Or we can answer that the EU, through the Commission and Parliament, is about deciding whether or not it should be legal for one person to stand at the bottom of a ladder holding on to it while another person climbs up it. This is the issue that we are discussing today. Let us oppose this latest example of red tape from the top. At some time or other, Parliament must give a clear signal as to its true sense of purpose, its true priorities. I say: Let it be now.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to begin by saying that the initiative presented by the European Commission on 11 March last is the best response the European Union could give to some of the fears inspired by enlargement. This proposal is based on an overall view of the place of the new Europe in its surroundings, but from an individual viewpoint for each country, without affecting the European aspirations of these countries. That should be clear. This area of new neighbours should be built on compliance with shared values, which we must continue to establish. That way, the EU strategy with regard to the southern border, in terms of democratisation and human development, cannot be limited to the democratic clause. The United States are currently implementing a global strategy on this subject with increased budgetary resources and the European Union cannot lose sight of the overwhelming need to foster democratisation along its closest cultural and strategic border. This should take place gradually and realistically, but with strict requirements. The European Union should provide what our Mediterranean partners are always asking for: an area of shared prosperity. This, however, should also be an area of shared responsibility, above all with regard to the subject of immigration, which is of particular concern to this House. In order to accomplish this, the Commission’s proposals on the free movement of persons should be studied carefully and debated in depth, and Parliament must be heard. The global and regional strategy represented by this initiative for new neighbours must act as a spur for regional integration and strengthen cross-border cooperation between the southern and eastern Mediterranean countries, which is currently almost non-existent. It must also break down, once and for all, the walls that make many borders between Mediterranean countries impenetrable. The initiative we are discussing today must be credible and offer tangible results. This will require sufficient budgetary resources and certain proposals will need to be reviewed, such as the Euro-Mediterranean Development Bank. Lastly, we must also explore the possibility of a ‘conference of neighbours’ involving the Heads of State and Government of these countries to address matters of common interest, including the Middle East, in the presence of the two parties and two members of the Quartet.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to emphasise what Mr Sakellariou said regarding the Speaker of the Taiwanese Parliament and the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Common Security and Defence Policy. Mr President, I urge you to take up with the French authorities the fact that Parliament here in Strasbourg should be able to work on the same terms as in Brussels. If the Speaker of the democratically elected Taiwanese Parliament and the Committee on Foreign Affairs had visited Brussels and not Strasbourg, the delegation would have been allowed to stay for longer than 24 hours and would not have been forced to break off under the dishonourable circumstances which prevailed yesterday.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I support this report wholeheartedly, but I wonder, Commissioner, if we do not manage to do what you so rightly say, and if we do not manage to do what this report says, whether we will be part of the problem or part of the solution? Our wealth means that we ought to be part of the solution. When I read in the report that investment in rural economies has almost halved over the last ten years, then we should not be surprised that the income of the rural population has also dropped. When I toured Africa I was ashamed; throughout the rural areas of any country, people living in remote rural areas have nothing, they scarcely have a chance of survival. For this reason, I want to ask that we set priorities. That from now on we should declare that we will stop selling products from our markets that will cause problems for local producers. We should set honest prices. I agree with what has been said about the price of coffee. I would like to propose that we now start by abolishing unnecessary subsidies on exports; that we set up a phased plan in which we demonstrate that we want to help rural economies, rural culture, the men and women – as you correctly stressed – who live there, to produce their own food by their own efforts, with our specific help, using environmentally-friendly methods and new forms of energy without being dragged into a system of agricultural production which has proved disadvantageous for our own countries.

Political group: Verts-ALE
The report is entitled ‘promoting prosperity and intergenerational solidarity’, an aim we can only endorse. Unfortunately, apart from affirming a number of good intentions, for which we shall vote, there are several convoluted phrases which suggest that the elderly must attain this prosperity by working past the normal retirement age. Now then, it is not up to the workers to work for longer so that their contributions might compensate for the miserliness of the bosses who wish to stop the employer’s share of old-age pension contributions. We are absolutely opposed to anything that postpones retirement age, as we particularly have in mind the factory workers, many of whom are worn out well before the legal retirement age, even in countries where this age is relatively low. Indeed, how is it possible to promise the elderly prosperity and solidarity without affirming the right of every worker to have a decent retirement pension, and what I mean by a decent pension is their full wage? We shall therefore abstain from the vote on this report.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the Charter gives visible form to existing rights, at the same time as historical steps are being taken on behalf of Europe. Ultimately, the debate is about whether the EU is to be founded upon normal constitutional principles. The Charter fills a gap in EC law and strengthens the individual’s protection against infringements by European police, by authorities which combat fraud and by authorities which regulate competition. In spite of the fact that, in practice, we now already impose penalties, there are no normal opportunities for investigating infringements of human rights, and such opportunities are necessary in a society governed by law. Every individual – woman, man, employee and entrepreneur – must be protected against possible political and administrative injustices perpetrated by the EU. There are no respectable arguments for opposing this particular requirement. Anyone who unlawfully suffers prejudice due to the European Union’s legal remedies must be entitled to have the matter legally examined. If it is going to be possible to develop a competitive, enlarged Europe, the latter must be founded upon constitutional principles. Broad political support is required for the individual’s right to have injustices legally investigated. How, otherwise, will a legal area of 500 million people be able to operate? The Charter constitutes a balanced and solid basis for enlargement. There are many misunderstandings concerning its material content and consequences. These misunderstandings must be cleared up. For those who feel the need to do so, I recommend reading the explanations in Convention 49 and also studying that case law from both courts which is bound up with the Treaty. The Charter will influence the development of law in the EU and, gradually, it will probably acquire more and more support. I believe the court should particularly allow itself to be influenced by those paragraphs concerning freedom of trade, entrepreneurship and copyright. Finally, I want to say a warm thank-you to our skilled delegation leader, Mr Méndez de Vigo.

Political group: PPE-DE
Every year, the European Union produces more than 60 million tonnes of waste packaging. And, despite the objective of stabilisation in the Fifth Environment Action Programme, despite the fact that waste prevention is the first priority of European environmental policy, the situation is more or less the same: the amount of packaging continues to increase in the European Union. In the light of this growing mountain of waste, it is high time that we developed an ambitious strategy. This strategy must involve enhancing the Commission’s modest proposal; in other words, by introducing prevention and producer responsibility. The European Parliament has already expressed itself in favour of raising recycling targets and improving prevention by introducing producer responsibility. The Commission’s proposal has not taken this on board. Yet, prevention is a genuine priority in the area of waste management, and could even become the cornerstone of the European environmental policy. We have before us a real opportunity to move forward in terms of an integrated product policy and the thematic strategy of the Sixth Environmental Action Programme. I shall support the report, which also emphasises two concepts that are key to a successful environmental policy: cooperation, which we need from everyone, and the fact that the impact we have on the environment should always, in future, guide our action.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, in the killing fields of Cambodia the Khmer Rouge murdered millions of their own people, and now the country is struggling to find stability and equilibrium. It is balanced between the King and the political parties, there is a degree of balance between the parties – sometimes more, sometimes less – and the country is also trying to maintain a balance between various outside influences. A constant balancing act is, however, no recipe for long-term stability, which cannot be achieved unless the rule of law is firmly established. This is why paragraphs 4 and 6 of the resolution are of paramount importance. Straightforward prosecution, by due process, of the murderers and assassins who are threatening the very existence of democracy, and above all the long-overdue creation, together with the United Nations, of a special criminal court with a view to enabling Cambodian and international lawyers to work together in order to ensure that those who have committed crimes against humanity can finally be brought to justice and duly punished: in this way, after a bloody and turbulent past, the country can at long last find stability, underpinned by the rule of law, which will enable it to become an important partner of our European Union. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE