GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Commissioner, Mr President, I have good news and bad news about the MEDIA Plus programme. The good news is that Mrs Hieronymi has, of course, carried out sterling work and the cooperation which culminated in unanimity within the committee which handled this report was more than excellent. The plan is indeed sound. In fact, projects which preceded this plan have already proved that this type of plan meets a real need. We of the Group of the have called for attention to be given to the smaller countries, to the difficulties which smaller producers encounter in smaller countries or in countries which belong to a smaller linguistic group, and we particularly appreciated this being taken into account in the adopted amendments. Needless to say, we fully back what the rapporteur has stated with regard to the need for a legal basis. Unfortunately I have to give you the bad news too. This is not so much related to the Media Plan as it is to the media policy as a whole, as proposed by the European Union. Indeed, we may well ask ourselves what Europe’s ambition is. I do wonder. I was interested to hear Mr Andreasen’s criticism on the budgetary aspect here, but I read in the press that Europe spends EUR 1 billion per annum on helping and encouraging tobacco growers. I cannot help but ask myself questions then or, as Mr Perry rightly pointed out: why is it seemingly easier to obtain EU funding in Europe if you manufacture olive oil? This is hardly ever discussed. The huge EU budgets which are channelled into agriculture are not really discussed much, rightly so, in fact. But I do wonder why it is so difficult to adopt European policy or industrial policy which can match Hollywood. In my opinion, all Hollywood wants is a worthy opponent. Unfortunately, we are forced to note that this programme cannot even start to offer anything that remotely resembles an opponent. This programme does not even take production into account. It mentions very important areas, such as distribution or the preliminary stages of production, but when it comes to production, mum is the word. Naturally, the intention is not to squander subsidies. Indeed not. As the rapporteur rightly stated, it is vital for the European Union to set up a Guarantee Fund at long last, in tandem with the European Investment Bank, and to offer European producers who dare compete with Hollywood the necessary guarantees, so that we can offer those people who really want to invest in European cinema the opportunity to do this. And I would like to ask the Commissioner to roll up her sleeves and get stuck in. This is not just to safeguard our culture, but it is also an enormous challenge for this new century, because everyone knows that this will be the age of the content industry, and it would be extremely regrettable if we at European level were to hand this over completely to the American content industry.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, giving Europeans the best training for the future, from their earliest youth, whatever their origin and level of education, above all means giving them the ability to speak languages other than their mother tongue. Haute-Normandie has one of the youngest populations in France, but also one of the highest levels of youth unemployment. Speaking another European language can clearly be a key to success for those young people. Making 2001 European Year of Languages will make Europeans aware of the linguistic diversity of the European Union. It is an excellent decision and has my full support. But I do not think we should only devote one year to this aim. Lasting commitment is needed. Indeed, it is our duty to be ambitious and to demand that all our young people are able to speak another language fluently, offering them bilingual education whenever possible. In this respect, IBIS (Institut Bilingue Interuniversitaire de la Seine), which first saw the light of day in Haute-Normandie, is most exemplary. I am convinced that other operations of a similar nature should be massively encouraged and financially supported by the European Union. - Dary report (A5-0093/2000) Maes . – (NL) Mr President, we not only voted with enthusiasm for this report, but also for the amendments that the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development tabled. We are sure that in our partner countries of the ACP, substantial investments are being made in order to be able to compete with regard to quality on the world market. The problem, however, is the price. Many of these countries are still battling with excessively high costs and I believe that a long transitional period, which I would insist on, is very important for these countries. I think our ACP partners will also be pleased with the outcome of this vote.

Political group: PSE
I have just a minor question to add to what Mr Daul and Mrs Lienemann have already said. What is to be done? Would it not be sensible also to eliminate the animals taken to the abattoir at the last minute, which are often likely to be infected? Surely it is better to take them out of the food chain?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the Community of Europe was born out of a desire to achieve peace and prosperity, a wise and two-fold objective, as it is not possible to achieve one without the other. One of its fundamental pillars is social and territorial cohesion, in other words, making all citizens genuinely equal by combating imbalances and inequalities in existing wealth and opportunities. In two months’ time the Union is going to be enlarged with the accession of 10 new Member States and some 75 million citizens. Its wealth will be far below the current average of the Europe of Fifteen and if we hope to continue to maintain our two-fold Community objective, if we hope to overcome the inequalities suffered by these new Europeans, we cannot contemplate allocating fewer public resources to this end; rather, we should step up our efforts to help. In this respect, I must condemn the fact that in recent years there has been a reduction in actual Community expenditure, payment appropriations in relation to the gross national income, while the latter is decreasing in constant terms due to inflation. In other words, we are allocating fewer resources to developing the Community, and yet there are some, such as the signatories to the well-known ‘letter of the six’, who want to reduce them even further. I support the Commission’s proposal that there should be no reductions in future.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, I think it is useful for Parliament to issue an opinion today on the report by Mr Langen, since the report is rather topical. I think it is useful for us to issue an opinion prior to the Laeken European Council, as we are expecting this Council to give a great impetus to the redrafting of the notorious framework directive, the principle of which the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs is proposing that you adopt. Furthermore, as regards the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, day after day I see judgments being passed, which show just how far ahead case law is on this issue, in comparison to our legislation. In a judgment dated 25 October 2001, this case law again justified certain restrictions on competition where these are necessary for carrying out the task in question in order to achieve economic and social balance. So, when you consider the timeliness of this framework directive, you must also consider the organisation of services of general interest. And, from that point of view, this would mean knowing which authority is responsible for services of general interest. In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, we are calling for all levels of the European Union to be involved, whether at European or local level, both in defining the scope of services of general interest as well as in the ways that they are organised. Our concern relates to consistency between the general approach towards services of general interest and the sectoral approach. This is because there is no point defining the framework if there is a lack of cohesion between one sector and another. Our group will therefore oppose a number of paragraphs which fall within a sectoral approach that we will not support. I would lastly like to touch on the issue of funding. The Commission recently proposed a new text which deals with an exemption regime in the sector of services of general interest. We shall support this proposal which we believe must be supplemented by an approach that enables cross-funding, without which adjustments are not possible, and that threatens, over the long term, the functioning of general interest services.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I regard the proposal for a regulation on the establishment of a common classification of Territorial Units for Statistics, NUTS, as being sensible and clear in terms of both statistics and administration. However, we must ensure that any amendment to the classification also requires the prior approval of the Member States. We must also ensure that the definition of employment market regions under the ‘shared-task’ mechanism can also deviate from NUTS level III in future. The two-year period provided for between an amendment to NUTS being accepted and coming into force should either be significantly reduced or else totally dropped, as Commission financial support for the Member States can depend on the regional structure. Otherwise, I am completely satisfied with the Commission proposal, and would in fact be happier without the rapporteur's amendments that were adopted by a majority of the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism. Although I said ‘by a majority’, they were in fact adopted unanimously with one abstention, and that abstention was mine. I voted against certain amendments in committee. This was because the report repeatedly referred to the adoption of additional criteria for the definition of regions as an objective. I regard that as a problem, as taking account of, say, economic, geographical and social criteria in the case of non-administrative units will lead to a blurring of these clear criteria. I believe that a key criterion for the definition of regions should be the number of people living in a region, as in the final analysis they are affected by any decisions regarding the NUTS classification. When the rapporteur says in one recital that there should be at least three hierarchical levels, the use of that little phrase ‘at least’ implies that further levels ought to be created for classifying territorial units. However, it needs to be borne in mind that the introduction of new statistics for the areas affected would involve a significant additional administrative burden, something that I believe should if anything be limited.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to thank the rapporteur for some excellent work in drafting this important directive. The second reading of the framework directive on the issue of water is most timely; the shocking news of the environmental catastrophe in Romania must feature in today’s discussions and also more generally when we ponder the environmental dimension of Union enlargement. First of all we have to find and call to account those who are guilty of the act. The cyanide and heavy metals in the rivers are gruesome examples of how environmental negligence may ruin the waterways for decades to come. The event proves that in some countries applying for EU membership the environmental norms and environmental thinking are still light years behind the EU. The Union ought to reassess how aid for environmental projects can be allocated in a better way in support of a sustainable policy on water. With regard to the proposal for the directive it is worrying that the amendments tabled by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy do not take sufficient account of the importance of unpolluted surface waters to increase the occurrence of clean, natural groundwater. In Finland surface waters are very clean. The production of so-called artificial groundwater is an ecological means of filtering a clean supply of fresh surface water through to the groundwater reserves. The process does not require a chemical sewage plant. The directive must not be allowed to endanger this work. Deviating from the Council’s common position, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy is also attempting to restrict further the facilities for the transfer of water. This would cause problems for those countries where reserves of water are unevenly distributed. The ecologically sustainable transfer of water must not be restricted by Union acts. The work should, of course, be regulated and subject to license in the future too, but the same rules cannot apply to, for example, Finland and Greece, which suffers from drought.

Political group: PPE-DE
Cancer is a terrible disease that affects millions of Europeans and other human beings on the planet. I have always said, and I repeat, that, in terms of research funds and of methods of treating patients and supporting the terminally ill, society makes insufficient efforts to combat this disease, given its scale and seriousness. Screening is part of what is required, and I therefore support this, but it does not solve all the problems. Once the disease has been diagnosed, it has to be treated so as to cure the patient.

Political group: GUE-NGL
We abstained from voting on this report. The only reason we did not vote against is because the introduction of ‘uniform driver certification’ for professional drivers carrying goods or passengers working in Europe, whether nationals of the European Union or a third country, could help to improve road safety. However, the report is still rather vague about the details on how to obtain certification, as well as on who bears the cost of training leave. Furthermore, there is no mention of the salary increases that it will bring about. And this is not surprising, as the rapporteur acknowledges the fact that he does not stipulate any measure that runs counter to the interests of employers. Whilst acknowledging the urgent nature of road safety, this report exonerates employers from their responsibilities in this area. Although it states that working conditions for drivers are unacceptable, it endorses their meagre salaries. The report blames the ‘current economic climate’. As if this ‘climate’ came out of nowhere! As if, above all, we did not know that the only ones to benefit are road transport employers and the parent companies! But, the rapporteur does not feel the need to question them, nor ascribe to them the insecurity to which they subject all road users by imposing disgraceful working conditions on professional drivers.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, every time we debate the problem of the Middle East following a statement by the High Representative, Mr Solana, I get the feeling that he is switching between the ordeals of Tantalus and Sisyphus, or even that his efforts are throwing water into the Danaids' jar on the one hand and on optimism on the other, an optimism that moves either in the realm of Utopia or in the realm of realism. What is for sure, in all events, is that a lot of work is needed in order for the sun to revolve. Ladies and gentlemen, the Middle East crisis is escalating. Crises which we thought were over are returning to both Lebanon and Syria, unfortunately on the responsibility of the very person who today is the prime minister of Israel. In all events, terrorism of any form is unacceptable and condemnable. However, it cannot be used as a pretext for new escalations. I should underline here the clear positions taken by Commissioner Monti and the very rare unanimity among the speakers. The picture is clear. The European Union must take decisive initiatives in order to prevent any danger of expansion and must propose specific solutions and ways of applying them. It must intervene decisively and with the force of a third agent. The role of umpire between the Israelis and the Palestinians is not enough. The role of umpire leads to neutrality and neutrality in crises is not the best option. We are not historical journalists. We are politicians. Now we must decide. Now the road map, the Rabin/Arafat agreements must acquire substance through application, even with the presence of UN forces. Let me remind you of the popular proverb, ‘you cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs’.

Political group: PSE
We have voted in favour of giving Parliament’s consent to amending the Act concerning the election of representatives of the European Parliament. It is good that these changes are coming about, establishing common principles governing the election procedure. There are also very good reasons for indicating in Parliament’s legislative resolution the importance of the principle of equality between men and women in order to guarantee a balanced representation of both sexes. We do not, however, consider it unfortunate that the Council chose not to propose a common European constituency for 10% of the mandates to the European Parliament. We do not believe that a common constituency of that kind would add anything of great importance at this stage.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, further to a statement by Mr Gorostiaga last Monday, I wish to make one point clear. Mr Gorostiaga referred to a report by the United Nations Committee Against Torture, and subsequently sent an e-mail to all Members of the House. I shall forward the aforementioned committee’s full report to Members of the House so they can read for themselves the positive comments on action taken in Spain in recent years. A number of adjustments have been made to legislation in order to prevent torture. I should also like to emphasise that in my view it is somewhat surprising that Mr Gorostiaga himself should be condemning torture when he has failed to condemn the sustained attack on human rights we are enduring in the Basque Country. This is particularly true for those of us holding elected office. The most significant torture is actually that perpetrated by ETA terrorists as they murder, blackmail and kidnap. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, congratulations to my colleague on her report. In my part of Europe 3 million people are on illegal drugs, that includes 28% of 16-29 year-olds and 14% of 14-15 year-olds. 12,000 new, notified addict cases come each year; we have 70,000 drug offenders a year and we lose 1,200 people through drug-related deaths per year. This is a battle which we may not be winning now, but which we must not lose. We need a multi-pronged policy, we need to act together to stop the growers and the traders and the pushers, but we also need policies on education and health and we need to encourage research. If we simply cut the supply and not the demand, then we will end up with a higher price for the drugs on the street and with more crime being committed to pay for people's habits. Many of the amendments to this report before us are therefore right. We need to educate young people. We need role models from music and fashion and film to get the message across to young people: not just by saying 'no', that does not work, but by telling them the truth. The truth is that drugs can bring pleasure but also the truth is that they can damage health. Damage in the form of cancer and heart disease, in memory and concentration loss, testicular problems and so on, and young people need to understand that, too. Drug-taking is wrong, but we need to help those who are willing to accept help. I shall never forget, as a minister responsible for fighting drugs, going and meeting a young man who had lost his health and his friends and his relationships, his family, his jobs, his prospects and his self-respect. He was being helped to help himself come out of that deep black hole of addiction. I stupidly asked him 'Do you feel you are beating it yet?' and he said to me 'I have a lifetime struggle ahead of me – if I ever think that I have beaten it, then I am lost'. He deserves our support. He needs the research to make sure that we have effective treatments and we need to give him that help and that confidence. But how much better if we could destroy this evil by persuading future generations of young people that it is simply not for them; it is simply not worth taking the risk.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on behalf of the Socialist Group, I would like to join previous speakers in congratulating the Commission – because the Commission has made an effort to reach a consensus – and the rapporteur, Mr Dary, for his efforts to reconcile the differing positions. From the point of view of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, the situation is clear. The committee is in favour of the Commission’s proposal of maintaining the quota system by means of what is known as the “regatta” or the ‘first come, first served’ system, although, of course, it is not in agreement with the proposals aimed at the automatic transfer of the current quota system to a ‘tariff only’ system. This conforms to the general philosophy adopted by this Parliament’s Agriculture Committee, which is that agriculture is not a normal industrial product and it is not therefore appropriate to apply generalised rules which are valid for industrial products. The recent ‘mad cow’ crisis, which is going to cost the European Community, its producers and consumers dearly, is an example of how agriculture cannot be reduced to the level of industrial production and marketing. In this regard, I would like to remind you that banana production is not alien to the Community. It is a form of production which takes place in a range of special Community regions, the outermost regions, which suffer a range of difficulties in competing in the markets and one of whose few products is precisely this one – the banana. As Mr Fernández Martín pointed out, Commissioner Fischler has recently been able to observe at first hand the state of the agricultural economy in these regions, which are so distant from the continental Community context. Therefore, the proposals in the Dary report, approved unanimously in the Agriculture Committee, refer to the need to take account of the structural problems of these outermost regions, which furthermore have a new legal basis in Article 299(2) of the European Community Treaty, introduced by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and which is currently awaiting the adoption of the relevant proposals by the Commission. The Socialist Group is therefore in favour of Mr Dary’s report and, of course, against Amendment No 36, presented by Mr Vatanen and other Members.

Political group: PSE