GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in transport policy we still do not pay intermodal transport the attention it deserves. Hitherto, in fact, only 8% of European freight transport is intermodal, as my colleague just said. That is why this kind of transport is often not taken seriously enough yet. But intermodal goods transport is both the expression and the measure of the European integration strategy, which seeks to integrate not only the individual, national transport markets but also the various transport modes. Following the liberalisation strategy that is not quite completed yet and the harmonisation that has begun, the single market needs this integration strategy if it is to have a viable future. That is why the reports on the progress in implementing the action programme for intermodal transport also reflects the progress made in European transport policy. The communication from the Commission and the report have raised many, indeed all the important issues: the reviews of the trans-European networks aimed at establishing a genuinely intermodal network, measures to create value-added logistical systems, the measures that are still needed to harmonise load units and so forth, genuinely intermodal information, standardised transport messages and documents, the development of a uniform intermodal liability regime and many others. Here, as we all know, we need a whole range of regulatory, political measures to ensure that intermodal transport really has a viable future. Because the framework conditions are so complex and because the development of intermodal transport is still far from being a self-sustaining process, we need a great number of successful pilot projects. So I hope we will get a well-funded new PACT programme, that will be usable by the candidate countries even at this stage, for it is there that many of the decisions are taken that concern our future. The signals are not all set wrong there yet. I also hope that we will give intermodal transport due importance in the Sixth Framework Research Programme. In our view, in future pilot projects should look more at strategic aspects, i.e. at linking up the existing intermodal part-networks. Another aspect that has not really been addressed is this: perhaps we could look into the conditions for creating new European, intermodal operators. For we do not yet have any real operators in this area. Perhaps, theoretically at least, and as a kind of precedent, an international company could manage Alpine transit transport on an intermodal basis. Of course we are also in favour of the European Reference Centre for Intermodalism that keeps being announced and hope it will soon become a reality.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I should also like to add my support to what has already been said on the concept of regional advisory councils. They are essential to provide a dialogue with all interested sectors. However, I would like to concentrate on what is now called the 'Stevenson report'. I would like to thank Mr Ó Neachtain for all his work on what was originally his report. I regret that he had to move his name from the report but I also understand that he was left with no option. The proposal from the Council seeks to put in place a new regime for fishing effort in Atlantic waters and a system of fishing effort management, concerning certain Community fishing areas and resources. However, on the one hand it would appear that the proposal looks for a management instrument to ensure no increase in fishing efforts, but on the other hand the issue of access of Spanish vessels into what is known as the 'Irish Box' becomes a matter of real concern. The whole issue rests on the question of access to the Irish Box – water within 50 miles of the Irish coast. This area is an important spawning ground, rich in juvenile fish. This sensitive biological area deserves protection. Thus it is vital that the EU restricts the fishing effort in the Irish Box in order that future generations can enjoy a sustainable fisheries. The Irish Box was specially recognised as an area of biological sensitivity. However, this report as it stands, instead of applying the policy of sustainable development, would open up this area of sensitivity to over-exploitation. As reports in the Irish Examiner note, fishermen are primarily concerned that fish stocks will be decimated if the Spanish fleet gains unlimited access to the Irish Box. Even the Irish Marine Minister expressed his frustration that he could not get the European Commission to give its opinion on the legal status of the Irish Box. I understand that there has now been some communication in this matter and that there is tentative compromise on the table, although the Irish and Spanish ministers are diametrically opposed. I too share my Irish colleagues' concerns that, as Mr Ó Neachtain stated in the Irish Examiner, we could find these waters completely fished-out in no time at all. I would therefore like to ask colleagues to recognise the importance of boxes in scientifically sensitive areas. I understand that this is not just a north versus south issue. My colleagues from Portugal also value the sensitivity of boxes, especially concerning the Azores. If we are truly serious about a common fisheries policy, I believe that boxes are an important management tool, in recognition of biologically sensitive areas. This is not about discrimination. Far from it. This is about ensuring a sustainable fishery for future generations. I hope that colleagues will support the amendments tabled, especially Amendment No 20, and make sure that the vision Mr Ó Neachtain had is seen through in this report. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
The D66 [Dutch Democrats ‘66] party in the European Parliament is delighted that the European Parliament has opted in favour of the consumer and has agreed to a European ban on unsolicited e-mail. It hopes that this Europe-wide ban will help establish a ban on spam outside Europe too, especially in the United States. After all, the Internet is a worldwide phenomenon, and its improper use is best tackled worldwide. – Recommendation for second reading, Korhola report (A5-0136/2002)

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank Mr Robert Evans for his report. He has addressed a very important issue, and the activities of the criminal gangs engaged in the trafficking of human organs are one of the worst examples of organised crime. The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy supports the Greek initiative, and we have raised a number of additional points, the majority of which have been accepted by the lead committee. Our primary concern is to make the impacts on public health even clearer than in the proposal by the Greek Presidency. Secondly, in this context, we also see a connection with legislation which we are currently negotiating with the Commission and the Council, and which deals with the issue of quality and safety of cells and tissues. Here too, Parliament voted by a large majority to reject any trade in unmodified cells and tissues. Unlike the Commission and the Council, we believe that there is a legal basis here too so that we can discuss this issue, in part, in the codecision procedure. The committee made this very clear once again. I agree with the rapporteur and do not share the opinion of the Commissioner as regards the exceptions. We should not allow for any exceptions in this text. As a matter of principle, all types of trade in cells and tissues should be punishable by law. However, we need more precise provisions here, and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy submitted a motion, which, unfortunately, the lead committee rejected. Nonetheless, we will table it on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party again tomorrow for a vote. We would like to make a clear distinction. We believe that whenever financial gain is involved, the trade in organs and unmodified cells and tissues should be banned. However, I emphasise the phrase ‘unmodified cells and tissues’, because if drugs are produced from cells and tissues, then of course the investments made by industry in these drugs have to be refinanced, and for this reason, we need to provide for the opportunity for these products to be sold. I would therefore ask you to support Amendment No 49 tabled by the Group of the European People’s Party for the purposes of clarification.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Mr President of the Commission, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, I turn to you, Mr President, in your capacity as chairman of the Conference of Presidents. As you know, the parliamentary committees have been fully involved in preparing the legislative and work programme that Mr Prodi has just presented. It is thanks to this interinstitutional dialogue that today we have a programme for 2004 that largely reflects the shared priorities of our institutions. Nevertheless, there is certainly still room for improvement. Although the Commission has not taken account of all the requests made by the parliamentary committees, experience shows that the reliability of the timetables could be further improved. By way of an example, seventeen of the twenty-two proposals for codecision in the 2004 programme have already appeared in previous annual programmes and ought therefore to have been tabled long ago. It is therefore essential for both parties to monitor this programme carefully. In this context I would remind you that last year Parliament put forward the idea of having policy papers for each legislative area. These would form the basis for more detailed programming and would also be entirely in keeping with the objectives of the interinstitutional agreement on ‘Better Law-Making’, which requires the three institutions to both better coordinate and better synchronise their legislative work. I would stress the three institutions because the Council is not currently involved in the structured dialogue. At the next Brussels meeting of the European Council, the Council’s first multiannual programme will be presented. It would be helpful if the European Parliament could be informed of the programme in good time precisely so as to establish a constructive dialogue between the three institutions concerned. I will also take the liberty of drawing your attention to the need to agree a procedure for an ad hoc dialogue with the Commission for the year 2004. We will be addressing this issue this afternoon in the Conference of Presidents. But in my opinion it is essential that every effort be made to ensure that all of the stakeholders, including national parliaments and advisory bodies and, at the end of the day, the European public, have a legislative programme for the year 2005 in good time. If it is true that the current Commission really will be able to present its political strategy and budget for 2005 to the Union before October of next year then it should also be able to present its legislative programme during the course of that same month of October. Last year, I said here that I was convinced that, thanks to the structured dialogue, we were seeing the establishment of a genuine culture of planning and interinstitutional programming. The experiences of these last few months and the prospects for the future are in line with the interinstitutional agreement on ‘Better Law-Making’ and fully confirm my optimism. It is up to all of us to work on this together in the interests of our fellow citizens.

Political group: PPE-DE
Could I, too, say to Mr Jarzembowski: all is well that ends well? The fact that we eventually ended up singing from the same hymn sheet has given me enormous pleasure. Mr President, noise pollution around airports is always an emotive subject for the citizens who live near them, and Mr Jarzembowski who lives in Hamburg, knows this all too well. What can be done about this? There are two types of measures. One, you can develop aircraft which emit low noise levels; you can regulate daytime and night-time operating; noise levels can be measured – measurements are hard facts – and certain types of aircraft can be banned. This is precisely what we have done: we have banned the noisy aircraft, the hushkits, and I was all for it. However, when all these measures have been taken, something else can be done, namely insulating and zoning. They are incredibly costly, very expensive indeed, not only to the government, for what the government spends is ultimately the expense of the citizens. This meant, therefore, that when the ban on aircraft created problems, we had to consider new measures. The Hushkits Regulation had to be scrapped. The Commissioner had no other choice. She started to negotiate with the Member States and a new idea was born, an idea which, at the moment, I am giving the benefit of the doubt. And why the benefit of the doubt? If we consider the effects which the new measures that were agreed in ICAO context worldwide have had, not only on the European population but also on the populations in all other cities across the world, then I believe it was a useful exercise. I would like to thank Mr Blokland who managed to tighten a few aspects, and I am well-supported in this by the section of our group in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy. Adaptations have been made and refined, and, Mr President, I have to tell you that, if I could end each issue on this note, I would continue to be on very good terms with Mr Jarzembowski. And I wish you, Commissioner, every success.

Political group: PPE-DE
I would like to discuss three things. Firstly, I noticed that the emphasis at this summit was on industrial policy and entrepreneurship, which I believe to be justified in today’s adverse political and economic conditions. We must place the emphasis on the real economy. I believe, however, that this should also filter through to other files that were mentioned in the summit conclusions. This is called ‘coherence of policy’. I would in particular like to mention the takeover directive, the new merger regime and public procurement procedures. It would also be appropriate to place greater emphasis on the effects these have on the economy. I would like to invite the Council and the Commission to tell us how they assess these effects. Secondly, the Council has decided to set up a European employment task force, and in the debate in the plenary session held in preparation for this summit this plan, which was the bright idea of Blair, Chirac and Schroeder, took me by surprise because these self-same governments are making impending concrete policy plans more difficult. I was referring to the temporary employment directive on which the Council of Ministers has still not taken a common position, even though the directive is a key example of the kind of flexibility and security we must have in the labour market. It is particularly disappointing that it is taking so long for the position to be taken. I myself was very surprised that the Council’s conclusions are now mentioning December 2003, whereas on 6 March the Council of Ministers was talking about efforts to arrive at a common position by the June session. I would therefore like clarification on this point. As far as the task force is concerned, new ideas are always welcome, but it is actions that are most important. The third point concerns pensions. The summit brought to a conclusion the first open coordination cycle on pensions. It is a good thing that a second cycle has been agreed and that the accession countries will also be specifically involved in this one. I am assuming – and I would also appreciate confirmation of this – that the interim evaluation that was scheduled for 2004 is still in the planning stage, and I would in particular like to see the Commission and the Council put forward concrete proposals to solve the labour mobility problems and fiscal problems surrounding pensions.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would have liked to have voted for the Haarder report, in spite of certain passages in it, and certain statements, including some to the House, to the effect that there are no rights for the family and that to grant special rights to the family would be a discriminatory, not to say racist, measure. The supporters of that theory should get their act together. If there are no specific family rights as such – as the Committee on Women’s Rights decided, very much against my wishes – then such rights do not exist for the other heterosexual or same-sex communities either and the section on “Lifestyles and types of relationship” has no place in this report. I myself was lucky enough to grow up in an entirely normal family, consisting of a mother and a father who were not divorced, and I still regard this model of a happy and united family as one of the foundations of our society. It always deserves to be recognised and to enjoy a special status, despite what some people might feel; but, given the result of the votes on the amendments, in the end I really could not vote for this report, in particular because paragraph 18 was adopted.

Political group: PPE-DE
Commissioner Verheugen, thank you very much for your statement. Following on from your comments about all the problems faced in Bosnia-Herzegovina, I should just like to ask whether it is true that Bosnia-Herzegovina is scheduled to join the Council of Europe at that body's next or subsequent meeting. I should like to ask whether this really is true, and whether all 15 of our Member States can shake hands on it before all the conditions which you have described are fulfilled.

Political group: PPE-DE
Thank you for your answer. Mr Vitorino’s reply made no mention of the sixteen Afghans brought before the courts and accused of having converted from Islam to Christianity. These people are threatened with the death penalty under Islamic law. My question to Mr Vitorino is: have we in the European Union, in our fight against the death penalty and in support of religious freedom, in any way acted on behalf of these people who are in actual fact threatened by the death penalty? In what way is the European Union taking action against all those Arab and Muslim countries – in practice, almost all of them – in which converting from Islam to Christianity is in actual fact punishable by death? Irrespective of what happened in the United States on 11 September, we must be tireless in our campaign against the death penalty. My question is: What has happened to these sixteen Afghans who are in danger?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the Convention has made progress in many issues of political content. Of particular importance is the fact that the fundamental rights of EU citizens are to be determined as a binding component of the work of the Union. There are still shortcomings, however, in the organisation of the division of duties and responsibilities among the institutions. It was the task of the Convention to put forward proposals to make decision-making more effective, clearer, more democratic and more transparent than before. This mandate cannot include the setting up of new institutions. The work of the Council does indeed need reforming, decisions must be taken openly and its work must have continuity. This cannot happen, however, with a permanent president who is beyond democratic control, or by reducing the Commission’s power of initiative and its executive power. Public support is absolutely essential for the future of the EU. One very conspicuous institution in all Member States is the Commission. In the name of equality, therefore, there must also be a Commissioner from all the Member States in the future. The work of the Convention has gone in the right direction with regard to the development of EU legislation. I support the appeal made today by President of the European Commission, Romano Prodi, that the right of veto should be relinquished when the EU is making a decision. Using the right of veto does not achieve anything worthwhile as it only hampers and prolongs the decision-making process. One EU priority this term has been food safety. We have not succeeded in deciding where to locate the Food Agency, however, because the right of veto has been used. At Thessaloniki it will be necessary to sort this out and decide that the permanent home for the Food Safety Agency should be Helsinki. Helsinki is already totally equipped for the Agency to be able to start its work immediately after the decision has been taken. Finally, I wish to say a special thank you to Greece, the country to hold the presidency, for the way it has helped the progress of matters to do with safety at sea.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, it is somewhat regrettable that the European Union does not have the competences in the area of culture and education that we might wish. Mrs De Sarnez's report is for that reason a slight and modest start at getting appropriate steps underway in the international education market. I hope that this initiative will be followed by many others. One of the items listed is the inventory of student mobility, the obvious problem with which is that many students are already not taking the road abroad because they will later have substantial difficulties with recognition. My own region, which is bilingual and at home in both Italian and German language areas, is also affected by this, but gets into difficulties simply because of the lack of recognition. We hope that our young people, and many others from elsewhere, will be able to avoid these difficulties in the future.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to inform you that last week, the intergroup for friendship and solidarity with the Cuban people visited Cuba, and the visit was very positive for relations between this Parliament and Cuba, as well as between the European Union and Cuba. This intergroup, made up of seven Members of Parliament, four from the Group of the European Socialist Party, two from the Group and one from the Group, had a mandate from President Cox to try to secure Oswaldo Payá's exit from Cuba and thereby present him with the award in one hour’s time. I would like to say to you that, as I said to Mr Cox’s secretary on the telephone, on returning from Cuba on Saturday at 1 p.m., Mrs Isabel Allende, Cuban Ambassador in Spain, was waiting for us; the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Felipe Roque, called us personally to say that, thanks to the efforts of the intergroup, they would allow Mr Payá to leave, in view of the friendly relations they have and wish to have with Parliament. As you know, the attempts by the Council had not been successful, and nor had those of the President of the Christian Democrat and People’s Parties International. I would therefore like you to personally communicate to Mr Cox that our efforts yielded positive results.

Political group: PSE