GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, we are facing a problem which is very likely to become explosive. Although draconian measures have been adopted in the various Member States, we must recognise the risk that the disease will spread. We are facing an extremely virulent strain and the environmental conditions lead us to fear the worst. The problem of foot-and-mouth disease can be approached from three angles: the actions which must be taken immediately or in the short term, the establishment of responsibility and the prevention of these problems in the future. Allow me to make three observations. Firstly, in the short term, the economic effects of implementing a vaccination campaign would be just as bad as not implementing one and the consequences would be extremely hard to bear. Now, if we reject vaccination, we would have to respond in a tough manner to the measures adopted by Canada. The European Union cannot suffer in silence in the face of generalised and unjustified embargoes such as Canada’s or the deviousness of the United States’ behaviour towards us. Secondly, Commissioner, is there going to be compensation for farmers as a result of this horrendous crisis? Where will the money come from? According to my calculations, only EUR 50 million is available in compensation to livestock farmers, after the latest proposed budgetary review, for foot-and-mouth disease and also for BSE. A third and final observation. With regard to the prevention of this and other diseases we should consider the repercussions of the quest for competitiveness, resulting from a reduction in aid from the CAP. We should also consider the risks of Community livestock farming based on the transportation of live animals and high concentrations of animals. The crisis surrounding us should lead us to draw up a CAP aimed at serving the consumer and the producer rather than commerce. Therefore, we should direct aid so as to guarantee the viability of farms which present fewer environmental risks and risks to the consumer and which are necessary for maintaining the social fabric of rural life, rather than reducing aid or eliminating it altogether.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Mr President of the Commission, when we debated the Iraqi crisis in Strasbourg a fortnight ago, there was still an albeit faint hope that it would in the end prove possible to avoid violence and to exhaust every means for a peaceful settlement of the problems, as set out in the relevant Security Council resolutions, especially Resolution 1441. Unfortunately, this hope was dashed by the so-called new strategic dogma, and global public opinion is witnessing a military conflict which, over and above its uniformed and civilian casualties, to all of whom we pay our respects, has inflicted collateral damage on basic institutions and parameters of international life such as the UN, the guardian of the fundamental prerogatives of the international system of law, transatlantic relations, which are indispensable to international equilibrium and, finally, the cohesion of the European Union, at least in the foreign policy sector, which is vital if it is to have a decisive presence on the international stage. All these institutional factors have been seriously damaged and are being severely tested, in such a way that their future, or at least their ability to play their particular role in international events efficiently, still hangs in the balance; they have to face up to a great many unpleasant truths both now and in the long term, the most important of which, of course, is the fact that the authority and the very essence of the UN have been undermined and those who favour unilateralism and high-handedness over logic and legality when acting to resolve what are doubtless very real problems have left its principles and rules in tatters. It is no use confining ourselves to a diagnosis of the current tragic situation and a prognosis of its inauspicious prospects, however. On the contrary, we need to turn our attention to the future and support the overwhelming majority of nations and governments by trying, even before the war ends – which we all hope will be sooner rather than later – to restore the prestige of the United Nations, which will undertake to restore normal conditions in Iraq, strengthen the transatlantic relationship within a framework of cooperation and on an absolutely equal footing and consolidate European unity, so that the sad events we have witnessed over the last few days never act as a future precedent and are consigned to history as an example to be avoided.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we, too, welcome the Commission proposal and the report that Mrs Prets has produced on behalf of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities, even though we do find it very much to be regretted that both fall far short of what had been expected, in that such important areas as education, the media and advertising have been left out. We nevertheless believe that this proposal puts plenty of wind in the sails of equality for women and men in the EU. The removal of these inequalities in services was long overdue, and, with this report, we have set up a landmark for equality policy. It is hypocritical and unfair for the private insurance sector to make threatening gestures; it is merely trying to promote panic among consumers and its customers. As has already been said, it is far better to include other risk factors in calculations. It is lifestyle that is crucial to life expectancy. We know from studies in the USA that 86% of us live for the same length of time. Just as nobody thinks in terms of discriminating on the grounds of ethnic origin, there must be no discrimination on the grounds of gender. Now of all times, when the adoption of a European constitution is about to be adopted, it would be a mockery for us to fail to push forward the equality that it – as has already been said – has as one of its core values. Although I see the Commission’s proposal for the progressive removal of discrimination as something of an admission of its inadequacy – we would have liked more than that – I do believe that, when we vote, we have to send a clear and unambiguous message in support of equality policy and against discrimination. The principle of equality must count for more; after all, even private insurance companies are bound by it, and it is intolerable that these should use unacceptable forms of discrimination as a means of securing themselves a competitive advantage over statutory insurance schemes. I would like us to be seen by the whole world as a beacon for equality policy; I want the EU, being such a great economic area, to set up a landmark, and our vote to carry a clear message.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, first of all, I should like to congratulate the rapporteur on the work he has done, for it cannot have been an easy task. There is, as I have always said, an element missing from the Roadmap. The events of last weekend and this week have once again illustrated that the Roadmap cannot lead to peace without any foreign help. The idea is being mooted that NATO should intervene in the area. I am not a NATO fan, but anything is better than standing by idly. Even medical personnel are now being numbered among the victims. The mutual violence defies all imagination. What is happening in Haifa is terrible to my mind. We visited the area with the delegation and what is happening there is absolutely dreadful. An intervention force is needed to organise the disarmament of all resistance groups, as was done in Bosnia. However, Prime Minister Sharon will only accept this under American pressure, which is absent. The only alternative is a change in policy or in the government of Israel, which the new Geneva peace plan can bring about. Discussion of this in Israel is gathering pace. The plan requires major sacrifices on both sides, as well as courage. However, we need to skip certain steps of the Roadmap; otherwise, we will never reach our goal. As Vice-Chairman of this House’s Israel delegation, I support this new peace plan, and so I would be glad to be present when it is signed. Our group is asking for Parliament’s support in Article 13(b), on which we will vote tomorrow. This afternoon, Parliament welcomed as its guests two initiators, and the interest was overwhelming. These people are bearers of hope in these anxious days. Next month, a delegation of the Knesset will be paying us a visit, and it would be good if we were to organise a joint debate on this. I should like to conclude with the words of Naomi Chazan, who stated this afternoon: to be pro-Israel, you need to be pro-Palestine and vice versa. Only the creation of a viable Palestinian state can bring about peace.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, in Kotka, in Finland, there is currently a vessel carrying chemicals, which is sailing under a flag of convenience. The vessel is anchored outside the port, as the condition it is in is a safety hazard for the port and the surrounding areas, and because it cannot be inspected properly, as there is no one who will pay. Would it be possible for the EU to create a standardised inspection system that would also guarantee payment, out of Community funds, for the inspection of ships that fly a flag of convenience and cannot themselves pay the cost?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Madam President-in-Office of the Council, Mr President of the Commission, I would like to confine myself to two comments regarding the Helsinki Summit. The first concerns the Intergovernmental Conference. It seems clear from what the Minister has said that the Cologne conclusions will not be the only three items on the agenda of the Intergovernmental Conference. In my opinion, it is only right that issues relating to common foreign policy, defence and the economy should be discussed. However, it would be wrong just to stick to these few issues and ignore matters relating to the future structure and legal identity of the European Union, or social and cultural issues. I should like, at this juncture, to point out that the Charter of Fundamental Rights is of the utmost importance, and we should ensure that it evolves into a binding text and does not just remain a simple declaration of intent. My second comment concerns the position of Turkey. We must tread very carefully on this issue at the Helsinki Summit, because this ties in closely with the fact that Turkey has yet to demonstrate in its policies that it has understood that close relations with Europe depend on its fulfilling certain conditions, as laid down in EU texts and decisions. The question which arises here concerns the extension of the borders of Europe, especially with enlargement in the offing, and of whether or not the borders are to be extended to include Turkey. These are, in my view, important issues which we must bear in mind.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, last night, like many of us, by invitation of the mayor of Strasbourg, I attended the usual annual asparagus festival, and this was an extremely successful event for which I would like to thank the mayor and the Strasbourg municipal council. Well then, during this very enjoyable event, I wondered to myself how I should vote on Mr Lamassoure’s important report on competences. An excellent idea came to me: I should say that I consider the matter extremely important and so I have decided to vote for the motion, not least as a call for the European Parliament to be given sole competence on some issues, at least.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I have been waiting patiently – or even impatiently – for quite a long time now because I wanted to raise this point before the vote on the Ombudsman. Could you explain why, when we have a very expensive and sophisticated system of electronic voting, we had to go through – and I choose my words carefully – the organised chaos of the previous vote. We have a system here which has three buttons to vote for candidate A or candidate B or abstain; this affords the perfect opportunity for secrecy, and I know we have used it before in similar circumstances. It would be less time-consuming and less expensive surely to have used that rather than go through the procedure we have just gone through. Could you explain why that decision was taken. Whilst I am on my feet, Madam President, I would like to refer back to earlier this morning when you were in the chair. You will be aware – because I noticed a distinctly presidential frown – that a Member’s mobile phone went off during the speech of, I think it was, the Prime Minister of Finland. This was a gross discourtesy to the Prime Minister of Finland, and I felt the discourtesy was exacerbated by the fact that the Member then proceeded to answer the phone and continue with the conversation. What action can we take to eliminate this in future? Thirdly, as I am on my feet and I have your ear, can you do anything about the fact that the some of the huissiers at the entrance are smoking on duty. I think it gives an extraordinarily poor impression of this Parliament.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in actual fact, we are discussing two subjects which are quite distinct although closely connected. Indeed, a joint debate on immigration is taking place on two fronts: the first concerns the recognition of the status of long-term legally resident third-country nationals; the second concerns the regulation of the stay in a Member State and the freedom to travel for fixed periods and for specific reasons. Certainly, the first proposal would appear to be more important in that it seeks to establish the conditions under which citizens of third countries who are long-term residents in a Member State, within the meaning of the directive, can also travel to a different Member State of the Union from that in which they have been granted residence. The debate on the directive within the Council is encountering obvious difficulties because the matter is so broad and sensitive. Many States are still striving to define a clear position on the various provisions of the directive, taking into account the different situations and dispositions too. Moreover, the extent to which States are affected varies as well: for example, in certain geographical areas, such as Italy, the problem of immigration is clearly more acute, and it is more severe and more urgent than in others. It must be pointed out once again that there are other factors related to the main issue, including, for example, family reunion projects and other asylum projects, not to mention the complex issue of refugees. In general, we would advocate the approach of those governments which are attempting to establish a direct link – a dialogue, we might say – between the directive and national legislation. This is what we are doing in Italy: striving, as I said, to move ahead with this proposal. However, once we have laid down certain minimum criteria, it is still necessary to leave each Member State to decide how best to implement its own legislation.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I want to address the President of free Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe, personally, together with his government and -oriented party, Zanu-PF. Hatred, President Mugabe, is not something upon which a society can be built. Threats can never create confidence and social harmony. Lawlessness can never create security and human solidarity. Violence and murder can never be reconciled with the Christian view of human beings which I know that you, President Mugabe, have grown up with and embraced. The churches of Zimbabwe, the Lutheran World Federation and the World Council of Churches appeal to your conscience. My home country of Sweden has supported Zimbabwe very persistently and in very concrete ways, both in developing its economy and in its struggle to be a free and democratic country founded upon the equal, unique and inviolable value of human life, irrespective of the colour of a person’s skin. Since independence in 1980, Sweden has provided a total of SEK 2 billion in aid, corresponding to USD 220 million. Twenty years ago, the Church of Sweden’s youth movement, which I myself was active in, embarked upon a special venture which we called ‘Be a Friend of Zimbabwe’. Enthusiastic young people from our two countries met. We believed in you, President Mugabe, and in your country’s future because you wanted to uphold the Christian view of human beings in Zimbabwe. We want to believe in you again, even though a lot of bad things have happened. Put away hatred. Do it for the sake of your own reputation, both now and in the future. Do it for the sake of Zimbabwe’s citizens, and do it for the sake of Africa.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, a great deal still needs to be done for Afghanistan, and this resolution is a good political contribution. I would, however, just like to focus on three points. Firstly, we must restore the role, responsibility and visibility of the United Nations. In terms of assessing the outcome of the intervention, in terms of analyses which would justify any further action, we note that the United Nations is absent, often considered to be an intruder, and is, in effect, excluded. This unilateralist approach does not further the cause of Afghanistan, not least in that we are legitimately and frankly concerned at the way we are blindly placing all our trust in President Bush, whose approach to foreign policy is quite inconsistent and has, moreover, even been questioned by his Executive. Secondly, we reject double standards in matters of human rights. We call for guarantees of fair trials for all accused persons, whatever the offence they are being charged with. We call for respect for international conventions. It may be that some of them need to be reworked and revised, and they must genuinely be revised, not set aside. We call for these guarantees to be applied to all accused persons because it is a fundamental rule, a fundamental principle that there is no room for compromise in human rights, particularly if it is designed to make things easier for ourselves. I would stress: whoever the accused person is. Lastly, Mr President, through this resolution, we call upon the Afghan authorities to make the greatest possible endeavours to obtain justice for the journalists killed in Afghanistan and to expose the truth behind their murders – I reiterate, to obtain justice and to reveal the truth: as well as justice, we demand to be informed of the reasons why many journalists have been killed. If we have had the opportunity to find out about what has happened in Afghanistan, it is partly thanks to the journalists who decided to go and report on this war on the spot. To call for justice for those who fell doing their duty, Mr President, and for the truth behind their deaths to be revealed, is the least that Parliament can do now.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would firstly like to thank and congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Izquierdo, on his excellent work. Secondly, I would like to apologise to the Commissioner, because this is the first time in this legislature that this Member will refer expressly to his region, Andalusia. Andalusia – as you know – is one of the most extensive territories of the European Union, with almost 8 million inhabitants and in 2002 it received 21 million visitors who generated EUR 13 200 million. As you know, it is one of the Union’s Objective 1 regions, with one of the lowest levels of income, but it survives thanks to agriculture and tourism. The report itself talks of the substantial impact of transport on European tourism and the need to create north-south corridors in order to facilitate the free trade area between Europe and the Mediterranean, as well as the development of the outermost regions. Well, what do you make, ladies and gentlemen, of the fact that Algeciras, which is the European Union’s largest Mediterranean container port, has just one connection, by rail, with the interior, which follows a route which is more than a century old and which allows an average of no greater than 17 km/h? Did you know that the only Mediterranean coastal area in the whole of the European Union which does not have a motorway is between the provinces of Malaga and Almeria? Well, between them is located the province of Granada, which has the lowest income in Spain and in Europe. If infrastructures do not get there, how are we going to develop? These are examples of the infrastructure deficit of the peripheral regions of the Union. While the different Community policies allow these bottlenecks, there is little or nothing we can do to create cohesive transport and intermodality from social and environmental points of view. I am glad that this report has not forgotten users of two-wheeled vehicles, who are extremely important in terms of individual transport and its sustainability in cities, which, thanks to them, are more human places to be. We must continue to work to increase safety standards in transport and its infrastructures, pinpointing black spots and protecting them. Ladies and gentlemen, if only for money, let us work, let us invest more in safety. One death costs us EUR 1 million and we have 40 000 deaths a year on the roads. The report does not mention non-transport. We must work on an innovative aspect, which is the pedestrianisation of the cities.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I wish to add my voice to that of Mrs Junker and those of all my fellow Members who have spoken here today and express my deep sadness and concern at this detention of Aung San Suu Kyi, who embodies freedom and democracy in Burma and throughout the world, and at the wave of repression that has been unleashed on that country. The issues that have been raised need to be reiterated: for how long is the Burmese regime going to be able to act with impunity? Does it make sense for us to engage in a process of reconciliation under these conditions? And lastly, why does the Council not immediately apply the sanctions that it adopted in its common position of 28 April? In conclusion, this is the request I wish to reiterate.

Political group: PSE