GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I do not know whether it was Talleyrand who said that opposition is the art of being against something, but in such a way that later you can be in favour of it. I wanted to say this, Mr President, because in this type of debate the problems of a situation like this can be dealt with from different perspectives, and all of them are valid, except that of those who out of a lack of moral fibre do not speak out to condemn the murder of innocent victims, which is an insult to their memory and makes a mockery of Parliament’s position. He said that criticism is a healthy exercise, but that it must be levelled under certain premises. I think that it is much easier to criticise than to act and it is obvious that someone who acts always deserves greater consideration, even if they do not achieve 100% success, than a bad critic. Criticism, Mr President, is also a little like wills, in that only the most recent one is valid. I am frankly shocked that some of what has been said here seem to clearly contradict more than thirty paragraphs approved in the resolutions that Parliament adopted for the Seville, Madrid and Barcelona summits, which definitely had the support and the vote of the Parliamentary Socialist Group. Also, in my opinion, Mr President, there is also a question of personal style. Everyone has their own style, just as they have their own nose, and bringing domestic issues and debates to this Parliament clearly means that citizens will take note of this type of attitude, which is not in the general interest, but rather aimed in vain at compromising the image of the Spanish Government. Mr President, this type of debate is purely about knowing whether the European Union, without exaggerating the good points or disguising the bad points, is progressing. I think that, although some prefer to see things as they would like them to be and not as they are, it is obvious that in the past six months a lot of things have been done. Some serious work has been done, and we have satisfactorily reached the end of a road filled with internal problems, due to the electoral processes in some Member States and external problems arising from the international situation. But it is clear that in the short six-month period the President-in-Office cannot magically resolve all the problems afflicting the European Union, as if he had the philosopher’s stone, the yellow ointment or the balm of Fierabrás. What is true is that the fourteen other Member States also count and in this type of situation, Mr President, one thing is very clear: those in the worst situations, those who have failed to resolve the problem of employment and convergence in order to join monetary union, are always those who give the best advice. I regret that Mr Barón is not in the House at the moment, because he, having been a Transport Minister, is here giving us lessons in how to sail, when his boat is taking in water left right and centre.

Political group: PPE-DE
The integration of immigrants, be they economic migrants or refugees in search of asylum, is a major challenge for our societies. Indeed, the success of our immigration policies will depend on the success of our integration policies. We must frame a contract of values between our societies and the ethnic communities that they take in. This is an issue that affects all of us. We must welcome immigrants and respect the diversity of their cultures, religions and traditions. At the same time, immigrants themselves must accept our traditional values as set out in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights: respect for democracy, freedom, human rights, equality between men and women, and religious freedom. These values must under no circumstances be called into question. The watchword is ‘diversity in unity’. In the interest of strengthening integration policies, discussion should take place regarding the concept of civic citizenship that could be developed for nationals from third countries. This would include a set of rights and responsibilities, such as equality of social, economic and political treatment, in areas such as working conditions and voting rights in local and European elections. - Pirker Report (A5-0419/2003)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I think that the Commission proposal has, in fact, come just at the right time, better late than never, and makes it clear that the currency union is not only being completed in the interests of the markets and business, but also in the interests of consumers. I should like to recall that we have been working on this issue for over 10 years, as the rapporteur rightly said, and that we have always supported self-regulation and voluntary agreements, but that in this sector it has, in the end, always been necessary to adopt legislation, in order for example to bring about quicker, more reliable and above all cheaper transfers. Here I am, of course, also thinking of the double charges which both those who made transfers and those who received them had to pay. Happily, this is now in the past, but this experience in the European Parliament taught us precisely that it is necessary to enact legislation. That is why I welcome both the tone and form of the regulation. It does not dictate prices, but it does state quite clearly that domestic and cross-border credit transfers must be treated on the same footing because we are in an internal market. This internal market requires a European payment system, and not just for large payments, like TARGET, but also for retail payments, for the transfer of small amounts. Everyone is affected by this: mothers or fathers who have children studying or undergoing training abroad; those of us who order books or wish to pay for a journey or a hotel in another European country. Those who have a holiday flat or even a holiday home are affected by this. All of them suffer as a result of this situation, including migrant workers who receive their wages in one country and want to send them home to their families. We need to think of them. An average of EUR 24 to transfer EUR 100 is quite simply too much and unacceptable. I strongly reject Mr Maaten's proposal. We have tried everything; now we need to make decisions. I must also say that I do not understand Mr Karas's plea. Why should a proposal be forthcoming now, in the next two or three weeks, when it has been overdue for over 15 years? I have to say also that the proposals to postpone all of this to 2005 are really unacceptable in my view. The rapporteur's argument is as far as I am prepared to go, and I therefore think that we need to secure a broad majority in favour of this long-awaited project here in Parliament, because a European payment system would have been a reality long ago if the banks and building societies had wanted it.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I am surprised that the MEP who asked the question has come out in support of the people arrested and tried, because they were demonstrably cooperating, in return for payment, with the representative of the United Nations in Havana against their country, against Cuba, which is a beacon, a shining example for the peoples of America and which, despite forty years of criminal embargo by the United States, manages to provide its people with the highest standard of living and education in the whole of Central and South America. This is, in fact, what the American imperialists cannot forgive the Cuban revolution and they are striving to overturn it by every possible means, including assassinating its leaders. I should like to ask the President-in-Office of the Council who, from what I have heard, agrees with everything the previous speakers have said: What would the government of his country do if it were discovered that Greek citizens had agreed to be recruited and paid by a foreign power hostile to Greece in order to act against their country? Perhaps it would have awarded them a prize? How does this activity stand in relation to the exercise of human rights? What comments does he have on the fact that the conspiratorial meetings organised by the US representative in Havana are also attended by Greece's diplomatic representative? How does he justify the silence of the European Union about the Cubans being held in the United States because they uncovered plans to assassinate Fidel Castro and other Cuban leaders, and the failure to extradite to Cuba the Cuban hijackers who are now circulating freely in the United States? For the rest, we are fighting to combat terrorism.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the challenge facing the European Union in the 1980s was to complete the Single Market. The challenge in 1990 was to achieve a single currency. The challenge in the first year of this millennium is to enlarge the European Union in a way that enhances the peace and stability and prosperity of the continent and does not undermine that stability. To that end enlargement now has to be the absolute priority. We should not miss the window of opportunity that Commissioner Verheugen has referred to. That does not mean that we should proceed blindly. No country has an absolutely guaranteed right to join. They have to be ready. That is why many of us were concerned about the criticisms made by the Commission of the efforts made by the Czech Republic in their last report, which indicated a certain slackening of effort. We only hope that the tremendous efforts made by the government of late will be reflected in the next Commission report. At the same time we should recognise the efforts made by countries like Lithuania to, as it were, make up for lost time. That was reflected in the last Commission report and hopefully will also be this time. We must make sure that the countries are ready to join and in particular that they have the administrative capacity to deal with the acquis communautaire. That is why some of us were concerned that the Czech Republic has delayed implementation of its civil service law and has slowed down its judicial reform whilst, on the other hand, Lithuania has made tremendous strides in that area, recognising the importance of administrative capacity. Member States could do more in their twinning arrangements to assist the applicant countries in developing their administrative capacity. Finally, it is crucial that we sell the applicant countries to the electorate of the European Union. Too many people have a view of the applicant countries that is 10 years out of date. They are now much more modern economies, in many ways ready to take up the challenge of European Union membership, and we have to sell that idea to our citizens if they are to support enlargement in the future.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I shall come straight to the point. We must quite simply cancel the debts of highly indebted poor countries and put in place an arbitration procedure for intermediary countries that are in crisis, such as Argentina. Most of these debts are illegitimate, as they were arranged by corrupt, even dictatorial governments, and have, in fact, never been used to benefit the population. The total amount of third-world debt has already been repaid six times over in interest. What a paradox this is! Today, the debt repayments made by the countries of the south are higher than the development aid provided by the north. Having pillaged the raw materials of the south at the lowest possible price, the north is now benefiting from this financial flux and is maintaining its de facto domination, which consequently makes the problem of poverty worse. We must, therefore, cancel this debt. However, the money that is saved from doing this must be reinvested, not in arms or in anything else, but in social budgets that will first and foremost improve public services, health and education. Unfortunately, the Monterrey conference did not tackle this issue in any depth, nor that of introducing a tax on financial transactions. As for setting the official development aid target of 0.39% of GDP, this is no victory. We still have a long way to go before we reach 0.7%. In ten years’ time, will we be satisfied with the 0.22% that we have formally committed? No, I think that we must take action now. We must cancel the debt now. We must grant a great deal more than 0.39% of GDP for aid, and I personally think that the Monterrey conference was a failure. It was a failure for the European Union, but, more importantly, it was a failure for the countries of the south.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I would also like to congratulate Mr Blokland on this report which will set Europe-wide standards for incineration, including for the first time emission standards for dioxins and furanes; this should lead to more competition between different methods of waste disposal, and as a result help bring to an end the transport of hazardous waste across Europe in search of the cheapest waste operators. With the predicted increase in incineration, it is vital that overall EU legislation on waste disposal and on air quality is consistent and comprehensive. We must look at the whole hierarchy. Incineration may increase as stricter controls are put on landfill, but it does not go hand in hand with recycling and environmentally friendly waste-disposal methods. Building new incinerators is a costly and long-term venture which in turn has to have a long-term return for the investors, so it would be in their interests for waste to continue to be burned. This means that there is a danger of over capacity which will lead to encouraging incineration for reasons of profit, rather than encouraging the reduction, recycling and safe treatment of waste, which is our goal. This Parliament must protect the health and quality of life of the people that we represent. There is no safe threshold for dioxin emissions and more research is being done on the effects of micro-particles on human health and the environment. So we have to ensure that there is frequent testing and monitoring, that regular and detailed information is made available to the public, and that real action is taken against breaches of the rules. Measuring emissions twice a year may give an early indication of what is happening in an incineration plant and in the air that the local community is breathing. Measuring once every two years would not do that. So we must set the highest possible standards and not make exceptions which will weaken this very important legislation.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Commissioner, with a view to achieving the greatest transparency and clarity in the opening of these proceedings, I would like you to tell us whether you have opened them simply as a result of these innocent questions – because they really were innocent questions seeking information – or whether there are really sufficient reasons, because it contravenes Community directives for a regional government to subsidise what it must not subsidise and in the least appropriate way. If that is the case, I would like you to respond because, as Mr Berenguer told you earlier, there is information in the media which seems to give prominence to the person who is simply asking questions and to the genuinely guilty party, i.e. the Valencian government.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, our rapporteur did an excellent job. It was a difficult topic to deal with in the middle of this crisis which has struck the vegetable and fruit sector in certain parts of Europe. I subscribe to that analysis, and we must also use that analysis in the forthcoming WTO negotiations so that we can adopt a firm stance in favour of those products which do not enjoy market protection. These, too, must be protected. The second point I would like to highlight is the position of the producers. I subscribe to the rapporteur’s plea to intensify support for the producers and to strengthen their position, and I consider these initiatives to be essential. For in the present commotion caused by buying-in organisations which operate on behalf of supermarkets, the question could gradually arise of whether there might not be too much merging and amalgamating on the part of these organisations, and of whether the latter might not slowly but surely be securing monopoly positions for themselves. There is only one possible answer to this: the producer organisations need to adopt a more powerful stance and improve the way in which they are organised. In my view, this would be more effective than injecting more money into the sector. The sector must secure a stronger market position. And I must also say that, in my view, this is more effective, especially with regard to vegetables and fruit, as well as delicate products which need to be sold quickly. I would like to make a number of observations with regard to the distribution of processing and threshold quotas across the countries. I have noticed that these are not evenly distributed on a number of counts. And I am also expecting the rapporteur to produce an oral amendment tomorrow with regard to at least one of the countries involved in the processing of pears. But if you consider the distribution across the Southern countries, for example the position of Portugal compared to other countries, one can ask oneself whether this distribution is even in every respect. In principle, I would like to say, and in that sense I would also like to follow the line adopted by our spokesperson, Mrs Rodondo, that it is essential to strengthen the position of producers and for producer organisations to become stronger, because I can tell you, this is necessary; they must secure a firmer foothold in the market, and the policy will need to be drafted to that effect. While we have a common organisation of the market and claim, on the one hand, that we do not want more money injected into it, this will only be effective if we, on the other hand, also consider the production side and possibly a certain level of control of this. But in this report, I am precisely in favour of strengthening producer organisations, also by way of responding to this report.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, in our Group we view Eurodac as a drastic departure from the Dublin Convention. It is now being proposed that illegal immigrants as young as 14 years of age should also be covered by the arrangements in question, while the Dublin Convention is concerned only with asylum-seekers. In our view, Eurodac is not a prerequisite for enabling the Dublin Convention to function. It just gives the authorities increased opportunities for exercising control and, in any state based on the rule of law, very serious attention must necessarily be given to the balance between control measures and the rights of the individual. This is absolutely crucial. So let it be stated immediately that our Group is opposed to Eurodac. We hope that Parliament will again dig in its heels over this frontal assault on the UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as on the legal rights of third-country nationals within the borders of the European Union. Taking fingerprints from people, just because they are not citizens of a Member State, is tantamount to wholesale criminalisation of foreign nationals. To mix immigrants and asylum-seekers together in a fingerprint register is a departure from the basic idea of the UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Asylum-seekers are entitled to ask for protection. It is not a criminal offence to request asylum. And the Dublin Convention in fact relates only to the first country of refuge. If a fingerprint register is to be established, we do not under any circumstances want asylum-seekers to be mixed together with either legal or illegal immigrants, and we want to propose that, under such a system, fingerprints are taken only from people who have been sentenced for having committed criminal acts. It is proposed that 14 year-olds should have their fingerprints taken and stored in a register. We think that this is a departure from the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which requires that we protect children and which recommends 18 years as the age at which, generally, a child is deemed to become an adult. If a register is to be established, we want it to be possible to take fingerprints only from people of 18 years of age and over. Fingerprints are something which you take from criminals, and even criminals are entitled to protection. The rules on the erasure of records and the disclosure of information are far too vague in the Council’s proposal. If a register is to be established, we propose that it should be possible for a person’s records to be erased as soon as that person has received a residence permit from a Member State. Let me repeat this once more: we are opposed to Eurodac. We consider this proposal to be a huge boulder in the wall around Fortress Europe, a wall we want to see broken down.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the Commission’s report under discussion illustrates how extensively EU resources are divided up. At the same time, it shows how large a part the Member States play in administering the EU budget, as they use up 80% of all expenditure. Mr Bösch has drafted a creditable report and I would like to thank him for it. The report also shows clearly how important it was to establish OLAF in 1999. In my opinion, it would be important in the fight against fraud to bear in mind certain principles. Firstly, let us speak of the principle of legality. It is vital to comply with the law when using funds and investigating irregularities, and the final outcome should not be anticipated before a legal decision comes into effect. Administration has to be simplified; there is an end to how much increased bureaucracy and supervision will improve the way funds are spent. Personal responsibility has to be increased – in this respect, the Commission’s reform has been vital – and cooperation between the European Union and the Member States must be improved: that, too, will be vital in the future.

Political group: ELDR