GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, I was just about to impress the Commissioner, Mr Fischler, but unfortunately, he is absent at the moment. However, if all goes to plan, we can land a very big fish at the end of the year, which makes a change. In fact, the fisheries sector is ahead of agriculture in the enlargement process, which also makes a change. The fisheries chapter has already been closed with all candidates, albeit with some restrictions in the case of Poland and Malta. Nonetheless, here too, some positive developments are emerging now that Poland has withdrawn its demand for special rights of access, for example. As a result of enlargement, the coastline will increase significantly in length and the number of actors in the fisheries sector will increase. On a day-to-day basis, we do not anticipate any major problems, but there may be some difficulties which we will have to take on board. In particular, there is a lack of more effective administrative structures, a standard register, effective controls, genuinely harmonised hygiene and environmental standards, and measures to tackle flags of convenience. However, we should be able to deal with these. I am confident, therefore, that we can resolve these problems and set a course towards an enlarged European fishing industry.

Political group: PPE-DE
The UN peace missions in East Timor, Sierra Leone and Liberia, together with the reconstruction of Afghanistan, as well as the humanitarian work for children and the fight against hunger and diseases all indicate that the UN continues to play an essential role in establishing peace and security. I therefore join Kofi Annan in his call for a radical reform of the UN. At present, this organisation is far too bureaucratic and not in tune with the geopolitical realities of the 21st century. The EU which, together with its Member States, accounts for nearly 50% of the UN budget, should take the lead in this reform. It is essential in this respect that the EU should be able to speak with one voice in the Security Council. All credit to the EU for continuing to encourage the UN to face up to its responsibilities with regard to conflict prevention and maintaining the peace. It should not, however, be mere lip service. For hazardous operations in Africa, we are forced to call upon badly equipped and unmotivated troops from Bangladesh, Pakistan or India. Sometimes, this creates more problems than it solves. Why can the EU as such not deploy more troops under the UN flag with a UN mandate? I therefore call for a European Union which decisively takes the lead in the reform of the United Nations, not only with fine declarations and symbolic contributions, but, above all, with concrete commitments and actual solidarity at the coalface.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, this, as Mrs Theato said, is a critical report. It is a report that has been proposed by the Committee on Budgetary Control and it is an own-initiative report. One of the reasons why we were very keen to bring this forward was because, whether we like it or not, the European Union has a reputation for fraud and mismanagement. It is sometimes exaggerated but there it is. We need to do something about it. Some of the measures we have put in place in the past have not been honoured by some of the Member States – and let us not forget that the Member States are responsible for implementing about 80% of the EU budget. A lot of them have not signed up to or not ratified the Convention on the Protection of Financial Interests, and therefore it was clear that something more radical needed to be done. We need to take this responsibility seriously. We need to be able to prosecute people who commit fraud against the European Union. The question is: who prosecutes? That is where we really get into difficulty. Whose responsibility is it when you are dealing with a body that crosses so many frontiers? We need also to be sensitive to the concerns of Member States. The proposal to set up a European public prosecutor service is a very sensitive one. We are all aware that an all-out federal approach and a situation where a European judicial authority takes precedence over the national judicial authorities is a step too far for some people. But the discussion needs to begin and we are therefore calling on the IGC to start discussions. Of most importance to Parliament, as the guardian of the budget of the European Union, is how to deal with people who work within the European Union institutions. At a time when we are looking at the whole reform process it is critical that we send the right signal. People need to understand that if they commit fraud they will be prosecuted, and that is not the case at the moment. The whole question as to whether we have the legal authority to do this has been outlined by Mrs Palacio. I should like to make clear that my group is going to propose an amendment deleting the detail of how the Commission should tackle this question. We are aware that it is a delicate debate. We know that the Commission may perhaps need the scope to negotiate a situation which would be acceptable to all parties. Can I just make it clear that we have no commitment to a corpus juris here, no commitment to a federal European public prosecutor. But there is a definite commitment to change the status quo which is totally unacceptable.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, my question is supplementary to that of Mr Bayona. I agree entirely with his arguments and I would like to ask the Commissioner whether he would be prepared to adopt the following five measures: firstly, to show the utmost commitment to anti-dumping cases, bearing in mind that Chinese companies are subjected to much less stringent parameters and levels than European ones in the fields of employment and the environment; secondly, whether he is also prepared to show that utmost commitment to anti-fraud measures, bearing in mind that, at this moment, it is possible to import without a mark, in any European port, Chinese goods which have a label in that port; thirdly, to strengthen research and development so that European companies can face up to Chinese competition; fourthly, to promote the entry and establishment of European companies in China, in view of the fact that, as the Commissioner knows, despite the fact that there has been a tariff restriction, entry tariffs in China depend on the port and the importer; and finally, whether he is prepared to set up an observatory to provide better knowledge of the practices which discriminate against and harm European industry.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the proposal for the Sixth Research Framework Programme is an ethical minefield. Amendment No 22, providing for Community funds for embryo research, is utterly unacceptable, being a flagrant offence against human dignity. Embryos must not be degraded to the level of being research material. Embryo research is banned in four Member States, including Germany. We must not permit the use of Community funds to finance something that is punishable in these Member States. Even research on embryo stem cells would offer an incentive to create even more surplus embryos, and we decisively reject it for that reason. The proposal even offers support to germline therapy. This would mean the European Parliament distancing itself, politically and scientifically, from the rest of the world, for nobody in the scientific community is demanding or promoting germline therapy, far from it, they are calling for it to be outlawed. So I ask you to let us clear these ethical mines from the research framework programme and make the programme we adopt a responsible one.

Political group: Verts-ALE
I would just like to make a brief point on the vote. We have the opportunity to conclude this report at first reading, that is, during the current legislative term. Let me comment briefly on the vote itself: I would ask you to support my amendments, which I have tabled on behalf of my group. I would like to reject the amendments on the internalisation of external costs because they have nothing to do with this report. This is a technical report, and the internalisation of external costs will be regulated next year when we deal with infrastructure-charging systems. The two issues must be kept separate. Amendments which relate to the protection of the London system, that is, Amendment Nos 22 and 44, but also 41 and 45, are completely redundant as the draft directive has nothing to do with urban systems or other island solutions, and by island, I do not necessarily mean the British isles. Let me make a comment on Galileo. Amendment Nos 43 and 48 are identical. They both aim to achieve the same thing. Amendment No 48, which I tabled, is in the more appropriate place, in my view. I would therefore ask you to support it. Please, ladies and gentlemen, take heart. Vote with my group, and then we can do the right thing and conclude the matter during this parliamentary term. (Applause) Before the vote on Amendment No 37:

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I will be very brief. This convention is the first global instrument on combating criminal networks to contain universal definitions of fundamental notions of criminal law in the field of the fight against organised crime. The international community now has a comprehensive instrument with which to fight in a concerted way against the rise in organised crime. I therefore call on those Member States of the European Union that have not yet ratified this convention to do so quickly. (Applause) (Parliament approved the proposals) *** Report (A5-0373/2003) by Mr Di Lello Finuoli, on behalf of the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs, on the proposal for a Council framework decision to strengthen the criminal law framework for the enforcement of the law against ship-source pollution (COM(2003) 227 – C5-0244/2003 – 2003/0088(CNS)) (Parliament approved the proposal) *** Report (A5-0388/2003) by Mr Pex, on behalf of the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism, on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of sanctions, including criminal sanctions, for pollution offences ([COM(2003) 92 – C5-0076/2003 – 2003/0037(COD)) (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Report (A5-0413/2003) by Mr Poignant, on behalf of the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism, on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council regulation on the transfer of cargo and passenger ships between registers within the Community(COM(2003) 478 – C5-0366/2003 – 2003/0180(COD)) (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Report (A5-0442/2003) by Mr Vidal-Quadras Roca, on behalf of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, on the proposal for a Council Directive (Euratom) on the management of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste [COM(2003) 32 – C5-0229/2003 – 2003/0022(CNS)) (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Report (A5-0441/2003) by Mr Seppänen, on behalf of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, on the proposal for a Council (Euratom) directive on setting out basic obligations and general principles on the safety of nuclear installations (COM(2003) 32 – C5-0228/2003 – 2003/0021(CNS) (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Report (A5-0443/2003) by Mrs Breyer, on behalf of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, on the proposal for a Council decision amending Decision 77/270/Euratom empowering the Commission to issue Euratom loans for the purpose of contributing to the financing of nuclear power stations (COM(2002)456 –- C5-0570/2002 –- 2002/0246(CNS)) (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Report (A5-0463/2003) by Mr Pesälä, on behalf of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, on Arctic agriculture (2003/2051(INI)) Before the vote

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to make a brief comment concerning Sweden. Sweden joined the European Union without an opt-out, certainly not in respect of monetary union. Only on points such as legislation, which is in Sweden’s remit, does the country not meet the criteria. There is talk of a referendum coming up. I would like to know when exactly that will be as I am sure there is not a date for this yet. How long will it be before the Commission does its duty and reminds Sweden’s Social Democratic government of its signature under a very important contract? The Swedish government sets an extremely bad example for the candidate countries which are, at this moment, waiting to join. Mr President, I would now like to move on to Greece. I have a problem with that country. The Greeks have produced a fantastic achievement. I only wonder how long the effects of that achievement will last. But I am acutely aware that by punishing Greece for achieving something positive, we will let the actual guilty party off the hook. Greece probably does not meet the criteria any more or less than other countries did. The euro zone should be able to carry a relatively small economy such as the Greek one quite easily. At the moment, however, this sends out the wrong psychological message to the markets and citizens who, to use an appropriate metaphor, look upon the euro descending Mount Olympus with sadness in their eyes. This is why Parliament, on behalf of the citizen, has to send out a signal to the Union’s large Member States. But the Central Bank, for example, is not concerned with the euro’s external value. The true culprits are the governments of Germany, France, Belgium and especially Italy. These countries, however, are making a mess of their own responsibilities vis-à-vis the currency and vis-à-vis the European citizen, let alone their own citizens. They do not introduce the required structural reform within their own markets. Governments are far too accommodating when agreements are not met, under the motto: you meet the agreements today, I might meet them tomorrow. Why is Italy not called to task when it makes a shambles of its good intentions? The large Member States and Belgium are trifling with the interests of all European citizens. It is said time and again that the European citizens are not adversely affected as long as they stay in Europe. But surely, Mr President, we should not make that decision for them? In the Netherlands, many farmers are emigrating to North America. A weak euro lets them down badly. Businesses within the European Union have become 25% cheaper for the United States to buy. I think it is time for some changes. I will be abstaining from the votes today.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, contrary to the priorities for Feira, the European Union must strengthen the civil conflict prevention dimension of its policy. That means, as far as weighting instruments is concerned, that the financial and material focus must be on an effective conflict prevention policy. The main lines of conflict today are to be found in domestic conflicts and this proves that the rich countries lack the will to do enough to foster sustainable and socially-balanced development in the crisis regions. The opportunity was missed in Helsinki to give concrete expression to an active prevention policy and efficient and prompt crisis management and we urgently need to make up lost ground here. I congratulate Mr Patten on his activities in this direction, which I should like to support and help develop further. In building up conflict prevention and after-care instruments, the focus needs to be on combining a reduction in the production and sale of arms and stricter controls. One more point: the importance of Parliament. There is a risk in the numerous informal circles of totally inadequate democratic control of a European security policy, which is why the European Parliament needs to take the lead. Its position must be strengthened and this point needs to be entered on the agenda for Feira.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, first of all I should like to congratulate Mr Busk, because he has done an excellent job. Our group is going to support this report from the first line to the last. I also thank him for the collaboration which we have had with him at all times in the work we have carried out. The report echoes yet again the request by this Parliament that the European Commission should make an example of and apply truly dissuasive penalties to those Member States that repeatedly fail to comply with the fleet objectives they have been assigned, so as to avoid once and for all that the general objectives for the Community fleet should be forever jeopardised, despite the very high social and economic sacrifices made in some regions of the Member States that have traditionally complied. This lack of compliance with the MAGPs has led the European Commission to present its proposal to extend MAGP IV until the end of 2002, unfortunately setting out a number of conditions which are absolutely unacceptable. In a further attempt to adapt the fleet to the resources, the Commission has again forgotten that there are countries that have broadly complied with their objectives, and is presenting a global proposal which will punish everybody with the threat of new cuts in fleet size and the intention of withholding aid for the modernisation of the fleet. As I have said so many times (the last time was right here, during the last part-session), the structural aid for modernisation is the only guarantee to maintain a competitive fleet and to ensure the best conditions for the quality of Community fisheries products and the quality of life and safety of our crews. Far from understanding it in this way, the Commission shows it has completely lost touch with reality by persisting in suppressing such aid, and in real terms the new MAGP proposal literally says that it will suppress the article that allows fleets to seek modernisation, for safety reasons. With the review of the common fisheries policy, the Commission talks a lot about listening to those involved and consulting the industry and the administrations. Time and time again, they have all made it perfectly clear – and they are unanimous in this – that they consider the modernisation budget to be indispensable. Because of all this, I ask the Commissioner to explain to me the reasoning behind this proposal

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, creating an area of lifelong learning means taking active steps to guarantee equality of opportunity for all population groups. The European Union cannot realistically achieve that alone, considering that 1% of the total budget is invested in culture and education. Something would need to change there too. What is more, there is often a narrow-minded anxiety in the Member States, in Germany's Länder for example, as regards cultural sovereignty. They feel that their cultural sovereignty is being threatened when the EU makes pronouncements about education policy. The results of the Pisa Study should have opened people's eyes. Finland has achieved excellent results in practising lifelong learning, beating Germany with its achievement principle in the first phase of education, which often blocks people's path to further education. So we can learn from each other. We should draw up training plans for new developments relating to the electronic revolution, in industry as well. We should extend education centres. The rapporteur has proposed individual learning accounts. The key issues here are exchanges of information and experience. We need to have recognised, guaranteed systems for mutual recognition of final examinations. That needs to be developed. We need to gear what is on offer towards specific groups, for example mothers returning to work, for single parents who need childcare arrangements, for migrant workers, and for people in rural areas. The Commission and the Member States should focus on this in a coordinated way, and particularly careful attention needs to be paid to the gender mainstreaming approach for lifelong learning. We also need to take advantage of all possible instruments, such as loans from the EIB, in order to extend our educational systems so as to create a modern and efficient educational system. We need to involve the informal sector and accelerate the political process of adult education, we need a new learning culture to secure sustainable development of the most precious resource at our disposal – people and their minds.

Political group: PSE
I wish to draw our fellow MEPs’ attention to a demonstration which is leaving Brussels today for Paris and to ask them to exercise the utmost vigilance where this is concerned. The demonstration has been organised by scientologists and is supposed to be a marathon against the religious intolerance practised in France. I think this is an extremely dangerous demonstration, given that France is a country in which the fight against religious cults has had some very significant successes. Europe still needs to be inspired by such successes, informed as they are by the values of secularism and tolerance, by which I mean true tolerance and not that practised by religious cults. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I am sorry, but something seems to have got lost in translation. My question was very precise. I wanted to know why, out of the three Commissioners who were scheduled to participate in Question Time with the Commission, two have been cancelled and all the questions addressed specifically to these Commissioners, such as Mrs Schreyer, have been bundled together under ‘General Matters’, where they have no chance of being answered. That was my question.

Political group: PPE-DE
I should like to thank the Commissioner for her extensive and fairly detailed reply. If possible, could she perhaps be more specific on the forecasts and the specific funds incorporated into the third Community Support Framework? It is clear both from the Commissioner’s reply and from our knowledge of the facts of the matter that there is a great deal of ambiguity surrounding the number and status of pensioners in Greece and that is no basis for national or Community policy on matters such as insurance, pensions etc.

Political group: GUE-NGL
We have chosen to vote against the report on reforming the European Central Bank and the European System of Central Banks. We have also voted against the ECB’s proposal. We believe there should be no hurry in tabling a proposal on how the ECB work might be reformed. Not until 2007 at the earliest will EMU be enlarged by more than 15 members. There is therefore no reason to put a move on and table a proposal at this early stage. We think it is better to analyse this issue in greater depth and to give the new Member States opportunities to express their opinions on the matter. In any future proposal, it will be important to emphasise the need for improved transparency within the ECB. Transparency is an aspect that, unfortunately, is conspicuous by its absence in the proposals presented.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur. We have long argued for the development of research in clinical methods in the fight against HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis in developing countries. Much of the hope of the impoverished third world – currently the portion of the globe suffering under the heaviest burdens of death and misery from HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB – is vested in our ability to offer funding for research and medicines that are effective, easy to use and affordable. I particularly welcome the fact that up to EUR 600 million will be made available for the fight against these diseases, of which the EU will contribute up to EUR 200 million. It is important to recognise, however, that while this is a very welcome step, it is a small amount compared with the cost to the world if these diseases are left unchecked.

Political group: Verts-ALE