GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it might appear somewhat strange that someone who does not live in the area concerned should be taking an interest in this problem. In the Group, however, we have had an extensive discussion on the ability of this industry to compete and in particular on the level playing field within which this sector of industry is supposed to move. I was therefore a little disappointed with your input with regard to what the European Union could do. After all, we must realise that the level playing field has not always existed throughout Europe – far from it – and indeed still does not exist in some places. In particular, the World Trade Organisation and the OECD still offer great opportunities. For the people in the region, whether we are talking about this industry, which is in difficulties or another region, it will be of great importance that much is done in the field of innovation and research. We have funds in Europe that we can work with. It is not as if the Commission is incapable of doing anything at all. I would like to remind you that when the European Union realised that we had fallen behind in the area of the information society, your predecessor Mr Bangemann brought into being a platform that encouraged European Member States to catch up. In this area too – in view of our imminent enlargement to include Eastern Europe – we should not be saying that companies must not relocate; we should be saying that we must try to retain control of innovation, and that means that the research funds can certainly have a part to play and that the European Commission can also be a source of encouragement. Finally I would like to draw your attention to the European social funds. It seems to me to be logical that wherever there is a good social charter and where companies make efforts themselves, an additional input should come via the European Social Fund so that if redundancies are in fact unavoidable, people are offered prospects for the future via retraining and are not left out in the cold. The question that we will be faced with in the future is whether we can work together to give Europe a different aspect from that currently presented to the world by the USA. I am very much in favour of a liberal Europe, but it must be a social liberal Europe. I also find that your speech gives too little indication of the incentives there could be both at European and at national level .

Political group: ELDR
Throughout the EU we have a problem with young people drinking too much. We are not talking about adult drinking here, let us stress that. Some of my colleagues have raised the issue of subsidiarity. We are not dealing with a regulation or a directive here. We are simply talking about a recommendation. To try to deal with young people binge drinking and drinking to excess. It is a way for other countries to learn from each other. It is important, for instance, that school nurses and doctors are trained to spot the problems of excessive drinking by young people. We must realise that peer pressure is a problem, lack of self-esteem, parents drinking: those are all problems we should take into account. We should also make sure that we consult the NGOs, which have a great deal of experience in this field already, and make sure that producers and retailers are held responsible for their actions. I personally would like to see alcohol advertising banned at young people's sporting events, not at adult events but at young people's sporting events, and I believe very strongly that we should support this recommendation. The WHO is supporting measures in this field, the NSPCC is and I certainly hope my colleagues will vote for it.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, Mr Prodi, ladies and gentlemen, at the time of our vote on your appointment we invited you to come here today. The serious business is therefore now going to start as we are to vote on your programme. From your speech I will concentrate on what you have called the new governance, which you will use as a tool for reconciliation with our fellow citizens. Yet this new governance simply means how the institutions and our public authorities operate, if we agree that the European Union must be a public authority. The interlinking of the EU institutions, the responsibilities of the Member States and the local and regional authorities is all very well. Yet is this really how we will reconcile the people and European construction? Is this really how we will answer the fundamental questions which are not so much about ‘who does what’ but more ‘what are we doing together’? It is these questions which cause concern among our fellow citizens. In your speech you mentioned the challenges of globalisation and enlargement which await us. I would add to these the future of our social model. This is why I and my group are so firmly insisting on the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The reason our timetable includes the drafting of this Charter is because we are at a key point in our history. Our Union needs to redefine the values on which it is based, both within its current borders and also with a view to the imminent enlargements which we earnestly desire, but not under just any conditions. Our people expect more Europe, but not just any Europe. They are expecting us not to fall in with globalisation but rather, on the basis of our social model, to be able to organise globalisation. In this respect I must say that, in terms of your commitment to a political union, to which we are favourable, this cannot be achieved unless it is based on our social model, on our originality and our capacity to better regulate the business of this world.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I do not believe that the current situation in Chechnya is very tense, as the compromise text says it is, but I believe that it is in point of fact extremely serious. There are, on the one hand, several generations of Chechens who, to date, have known only war and violence and who may at any moment be led by the most extremist fringe groups to commit thoughtless acts of terrorism. On the other hand, there is a veritable colonial war, conducted by the Russian army, which finds expression in systematic searches on a huge scale, human rights violations, assassinations, abductions and, above all, the scandalous acquittal on 31 December 2002 of Colonel Yuri Budanov, charged with the rape and murder of an 18–year–old Chechen girl. In this context, it is pretty scandalous that a humanitarian worker should continue to be held prisoner. I believe that double standards should be avoided. If we receive President Putin, we must do something for the minister of health who has returned to Baku and whose visa has been taken away, for Ahmed Zakayev, to whom I spoke yesterday on the telephone and who is still under house arrest in the United Kingdom or, again, for the foreign affairs minister held without a visa in the United States. These people must also be given the benefit of visas, for it takes two to make peace.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the Accession Partnership sets out a series of important and challenging priorities for Turkey to address as part of its preparations for European Union membership. It will certainly test the resolve of Turkey to carry out much-needed reforms in the area of human rights. A very topical aspect of this relates to freedom of expression, the functioning of the judicial system and the conditions in Turkish prisons. This has been mentioned by previous speakers this morning and I spoke on this subject during our debate last month. Following the adoption of a resolution by this House on the situation in Turkish prisons, I wrote to the Turkish authorities drawing particular attention to the request that Members of this Parliament should visit Turkish prisons to see the situation for themselves. On 5 February, I received a reply from the Turkish Ambassador informing me that the Turkish Ministry of Justice was willing to allow a delegation of MEPs to visit F-type prisons in order to see some of the problems and the steps being taken to overcome them. To my mind, this confirms the willingness of the Turkish authorities to engage with us in a positive and open manner. It also demonstrates that some understanding for the Turkish situation, some balance rather than a constant barrage of politically motivated reproach, is more likely to lead to improvement in those areas where we have justified criticisms. Constant references to events which took place generations ago in different circumstances should be avoided. These merely serve to sustain generalised, stereotypical, negative images of Turkey and the Turkish peoples. In this context, Parliament's facilities should not be used for exhibitions designed to whip up hatred and I hope that this sentiment will be conveyed by the President to the Quaestors. Let us look forward rather than constantly harking back. We support the Swoboda report and the sensible amendments tabled by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I do not represent any region; as you know, I represent the pensioners of Italy and Europe. Before tabling my question, however, I would like to express my admiration at the President-in-Office of the Council’s willingness to answer so thoroughly all the questions she has been asked. I paid close attention to the Swedish presidency and I was practically frozen stiff by the coldness with which the Swedes habitually responded ‘This is not my responsibility’. I am therefore genuinely satisfied, having listened to the Belgian President-in-Office speak this morning, by his openness to pensioners’ affairs, and I am truly satisfied to have seen the practical undertaking by the Belgian presidency to respond to every question, even the most difficult ones. I have exhausted the time available to me and so I will not be able to table my supplementary question. I will do so on another occasion.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would ask you in future to intervene should such a situation arise as that which occurred while Mr Andreasen was speaking. This circus in which Members stand around holding private conversations, quite unconcerned, whilst someone is speaking is disgraceful. In my view, these Members are behaving outrageously and downright stupidly and unintelligently when they show no respect for others when they are speaking. Consequently, I would ask you to intervene in future and remove from the Chamber those Members who cannot work this out.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I would, of course, like to congratulate the rapporteur on the initiative and conviction with which she has drawn up this report. Moreover, the first joint report on social inclusion, drawn up on the basis of national action plans combating poverty and social exclusion, highlighted the need for a joint analysis of the different situations in the European Union. In this regard, the national plans identify a number of risk factors which combine to underscore the multidimensional importance of the issue, and, in some cases, these factors are consequences as well as causes, which highlights the need to break the cycle of ongoing and intergenerational poverty represented by social exclusion. Lastly, as happened at the Luxembourg Summit with regard to employment, a similar process of open cooperation and coordination to reach the objectives is starting in the area of social exclusion. Therefore, in order to contain and resolve the issue of social exclusion, specific actions have been proposed based on the four specific Nice objectives, which include the action to help the vulnerable, people with disabilities and elderly people who are not self-sufficient. It is important that these objectives are met, not so that we can give gold stars to the different European States but so that genuine added value for the basic objective of social integration can be achieved.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, to pick up on the points that Mrs Lucas has raised, I support the sentiments which she has outlined. However, I would ask if she could prevail upon her colleagues to desist from claiming some sort of parliamentary immunity every time she gets arrested at Faslane. Long before Mrs Lucas became involved, I had been involved in Faslane for many years and have been arrested there. I have never once called for parliamentary immunity. I had my day in court and I had my trial. I will not go down the road to parliamentary immunity because I want my day in court and I want to make my point and not hide behind some smokescreen.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the cultural diversity of Europe is reflected in, among other things, the political systems of the Member States. Taking responsibility in Europe means mutual recognition of the Member States' constitutional arrangements, which are many and varied. I am from a Member State with a federal constitution and see this as a great advantage, especially in terms of the greater proximity of politics to the citizen. This makes me particularly grateful to our rapporteur, Mr Lamassoure, for taking up the topic of the regions, especially of those that possess legislative powers. Some of these regions are larger, in terms of surface area and population, than the small Member States. This disparity in political arrangements will be made greater by the accession of more Member States. Item 34 and the compromise set out in item 39 are very important, as they highlight a new way of having recourse to law in disputes concerning subsidiarity and the principle of proportionality. Let me draw my colleagues' attention to one thing, namely that, in its judgment dated 3 May 2002 in the Jégo Quéré case, the European Court of First Instance declared itself to be a constitutional court. The clear delimitation of competences is of the greatest significance as regards the public's consent to further internal integration and to enlargement. What Europe's citizens want is for the Convention, when working out its proposals for a European constitutional treaty, to be guided by transparently clarifying the tasks to be performed by the EU and by the Member States respectively. The latest Eurobarometer surveys indicate that 60% of the EU's citizens take pride in describing themselves as Europeans, and that two-thirds of the current population of the EU – as many as 80% in Italy – want a European constitution. Mr Lamassoure's fine report is an important contribution by Parliament to the arduous process of attaining that goal. So, I thank everybody and hope that we will be successful in the Convention!

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I am actually astonished to hear the Commission state that there is no cartel operating in the sugar sector. Commissioner, we do not need studies, surveys or investigations. I would simply ask you to pick up the telephone and claim to be the owner of a supermarket in your country, telephone another Member State, such as France, Germany or the United Kingdom, and say that you want to buy sugar. Do this and see what answer you are given. You will be told that there is no sugar, because the market is completely sewn up by a cartel, with the blessing of the Commission, which fiercely defends this cartel whenever it is under attack, as in the Autonomous Region of the Azores. These are the facts. None of your justifications appeared in the report by the Court of Auditors when it stated the same thing and in fact the Commission said only that this situation was due to the nature of the sector.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the will of the Commission in response to the orientations of the European Council to establish a global and integrated policy of migrations is very laudable, but the police and Interior Ministry approach, which can be gathered from the communication, clashes directly with this Parliament’s view of the relations the European Union must maintain with the developing countries, whose immigrants, by the way – and according to the Commission itself – are not a problem from a quantitative point of view. As the Commission itself points out, more than 90% of the world’s immigrants live and work outside the European Union, close to their countries of origin. At the time of the Seville European Council, we warned of the danger of making cooperation for development conditional upon the control of immigration on the part of the countries in which it is generated. Development cooperation is not an instrument for resolving the internal problems of the donors of aid, but a tool for fighting poverty. The origins of migration, whether legal or not, lie in poverty, political repression and armed conflicts. These are the causes which must be combated through development cooperation, rather than using it to repress their effects. This Commission's desire to integrate European immigration policy is a wonderful opportunity to ensure that, instead of spending development funds on monitoring borders and the forced repatriation of immigrants, they are assigned to more constructive activities in accordance with the principle of combating poverty which governs European cooperation policy. It is a question of co-development or, in other words, contributing to the development of the areas of origin of immigrants, so that they can return with hope for the future. In this way, the Commission would be acting coherently with itself, since it states, in the communication we are debating today, that it is aware that the European Union’s relations with the developing countries must be based on solidarity. Article 13 of the Cotonou Agreement on readmission led to problems and protests. Therefore, we say yes to negotiated readmission within the framework of global development programmes, but no to forced repatriation, especially when this is paid for from development funds. We will be vigilant in order to prevent, by means of the reallocation of the scant resources in category 4, any modification of the development priorities established by this Parliament, especially given that the Commission’s report demonstrates the concern at the lack of money available for resolving this problem. IN THE CHAIR: MR PUERTAVice-President President. – As you know, ladies and gentlemen, we are running considerably late, and I would expressly ask that you conform to the time allowed. I know this is very difficult, but we will make the effort.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I fully support the motion for a resolution being discussed by this House. The repression of both Angolan and foreign journalists in Angola is scandalous and so serious that we cannot let it pass without comment. However, this motion is inadequate as it actually starts from the principle that Angola enjoys rule of law and is only imposing certain restrictions on journalists and restraining them. Yet this is not the situation. Angola does not enjoy rule of law. It is a repressive dictatorship. It is at war, and a bloody war at that, which is dragging on and on. The prevalent theory that the enemy must be crushed and physically eliminated to achieve peace is not one which we can accept. The repeated appeals made by the Angolan church and, for example, by Mr Mandela and Mr Mbeki, for new negotiations to try and achieve peace must be supported by this House. As another Member said, we must have a general debate on Angola and not just on the situation of certain journalists suffering repression in this country. For example, I have today received information directly from Rafael Marques, whose situation we are discussing, according to which two correspondents from Portuguese television have been imprisoned in Angola. These cases keep occurring. Yet the worst part is that there is no way out of the situation in Angola. The silence of the major powers and our own silence are questionable and are benefiting a regime of corruption, violence and war. I must draw attention to the fact that the war in Angola is spreading to other parts of Africa. It is impacting on the war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and on the situations in Namibia and Zambia. It is now also affecting the situation in Zimbabwe where Robert Mugabe has just lost the referendum precisely because he has sent troops to the Congo to prop up Laurent Kabila who is beyond salvation. There are two sides in Angola or rather two armed groups. The first is the MPLA, which controls the oil profits. The second is the armed band of Mr Savimbi, which controls the diamond profits. It is oil and diamonds which are financing the continuation of the war which, as has been said, is terrible. It has displaced millions of people and caused them to go hungry. It has led to a critical and tragic situation in Angola. This war must be stopped. The authority of this House could play an important part if we were to have a major debate on the Angolan situation and also on the whole of southern Africa.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to talk about Mr Fava’s report on the creation of the Single European Sky. My colleague and right-hand man, Giuseppe Italia, from Cremona, an elderly pensioner, said to me as I was preparing to come here to Strasbourg, 'I advise you to vote for the report on the Single European Sky. I am an elderly pensioner, and I will not take offence, Mr Fatuzzo, if you say in your explanation of vote that we pensioners are nearer to the sky than the other citizens. Would it not be appropriate, given that we are already near the sky, for us to be eligible for discounted aeroplane tickets and for pensioners to be encouraged to travel by air with less expensive tickets in this way?'.

Political group: PPE-DE
Commissioner, a sine qua non for the end of international terrorism, and thereby a more peaceful world order, is the cessation of hostilities between the Israelis and Palestinians. The deadly cycle of attack and reprisal has to be broken. The two protagonists and their international supporters can argue interminably, and sometimes even convincingly, to justify their sides' violence. But this is a sterile debate and I do not propose to get into it. The two sides have to be kept apart, but the normal constraints of morality, self-discipline and the rule of law have been drowned in a seething reservoir of hatred and revenge. As things now stand, neither side will stand back for long enough to allow these intense emotions to abate. They fear and distrust each other too much. It is clear that an international force must be interposed between them, because there is literally no other way of keeping them apart. This force must command the confidence of the two sides. To achieve this it has to include United States and EU components. The American presence will reassure the Israelis, who rightly see the US as their unquestioning and loyal ally. The Palestinians see the EU as an honest and trustworthy broker. A realistic appeal can then be made to both sides for restraint while the force is being organised and deployed. Simultaneously, the peace process can be reactivated on the basis of the so-called roadmap, which has been accepted by the two sides. It can work, if it gets time. It will get time if there is no violence, and I believe the international force could break the cycle of violence. The EU can now vindicate its claim to a place on the world stage by brokering this strategy. There is nothing else in sight. It is exceedingly urgent. The prize is much more than peace in the Middle East: it is world peace, because continued violence in the Middle East is a poisonous backcloth to a lot of the terrorism which continues to happen in all parts of the world.

Political group: PPE-DE
Commissioner, as a doctor specialising in sports medicine, the issue of drug taking worries me enormously. But I would like to ask you one thing. Is the Commission aware of the powerful influence of the links between sport, the media and those with large financial and advertising interests, which induce elite sportsmen to use drugs? Has the Commission established, with the International Olympic Committee, a timetable with regard to the issue of drug taking in sport?

Political group: Verts-ALE