GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Mr van den Berg is optimistic. So are we, although we are aware that things are not going too well with development cooperation in the world, including European cooperation. For that reason we actually consider it a good idea that a new policy is being constructed. In statistical terms aid from European countries is considerable, but the number of poor people in the world has increased in the last ten years. So there has definitely not been a success in combating poverty. That is why it is a good thing that that priority should be established, with the proviso that we are prepared to acknowledge why we have failed hitherto, that we intend to do things differently in future, that a plan of action is agreed and that we are prepared to incorporate benchmarking in that plan. The fact is that we are absolutely unconvinced that liberalisation of world trade leads to the abolition of poverty, though world trade can of course increase prosperity. But if corruption continues unchecked, if governments are not prepared to redistribute even the new wealth, then not much will be achieved. However, we must be prepared to cooperate fully with those partners that want to. Our lack of coherence has already been pointed out and I add my voice to those calling for coherence. I wonder if we can talk of coordination and complementarity if countries go on thinking that they must continue to pursue a strictly personal cultural, economic, and geopolitical approach. We are prepared, though, to give credit to the reform of European development policy, since reform is a must after so many years of inefficiency. However, I should like to ask a few questions. Why is aid not concentrated to a greater extent on the poorest countries? How much will the poor in those countries really benefit? And a question to which Mr van den Berg devoted a great deal of attention: are people prepared for true partnership? Actually we have the impression that out texts still emanate to a large extent a feeling of one-way traffic, a feeling that we know so much better. Will we have any say in the expenditure of the European Development Fund? Is the Council prepared to stop intervening in concrete implementation plans? I could go on asking questions. I shall not do so, Mr President, but they are questions that preoccupy all of us here.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the following assessment is of great and special importance for us, as bankruptcies have gone up over the past year by an average of 19% in the European Union, and in Germany by 32%. As regards the impact assessment, Commissioner, will you now have it worked out in the planned Green Paper on entrepreneurship, what European legislation has contributed to it and what can be done so that there are fewer bankruptcies in future?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this agreement appears to me to be very problematic, given the current conflict in Chechnya. What is the situation in Chechnya? On the one hand, we have a people who are fighting for their freedom, and on the other we have a colonial power which is using every available means of oppression and repression on a continual basis. The article that has just been read to us demonstrates the state of mind of the Russian leaders. Furthermore, while the Council and the Commission state that human rights in Chechnya have been discussed, I think this is far from the case. Let us not mince our words. What is going on now in Chechnya is genocide. Entering into negotiations with the Russians when this genocide is being committed is questionable, even if legitimate interests in the Baltic States and elsewhere should be protected. The assertion that we have to come to an agreement on the fight against terrorism is also open to question. The terrorism of despair of the Chechen fighters is in no way comparable with the State terrorism practised by Russia. This is the reason why this agreement truly poses a problem.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, my congratulations to the Commission and to the rapporteur. I agree with what many honourable Members have said and so will limit myself to a few points. When I look at my own country – since I believe everyone is exploring what the impact will be on their own country – I see three crucial points. Firstly, the annual report on the equal treatment of men and women that is required from companies in this directive. I introduced that in my own country. It is encountering huge resistance and has never been complied with, although it is compulsory. Secondly, positive action. That also remains a very difficult matter, even with women. Thirdly, equal pay. Numerous ways have been found of getting round equal pay. What I am actually trying to say with these three examples is that if we want to succeed in implementation in the area of this directive, which I think is a good one, we may perhaps have to talk more with the social partners than we have done in the past. Only if they support things on the ground and cooperate in trying to carry them out, will anything change at grass-roots level. Take the example of equal pay. At a time of recession, the response is: ‘We can’t have completely equal pay, that’s too expensive’. But it does not happen in boom times either. I believe that more pressure should be applied on them, particularly since we all accept they are primarily responsible for the labour market. Then I would like to say something briefly about sexual harassment. Some fifteen years ago, I launched a campaign in Belgium under the title “Sex colleague, ex-colleague”. Since then legislation has been devised, confidants have been assigned, a network of confidants has been set up, and those confidants have been trained. I must say that it actually works quite well and is also supported by the social partners. IN THE CHAIR: MR PODESTÀVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE
During this past century, Europe has experienced two terrible wars, immeasurable tragedies, but, at the same time, it has witnessed unrestrainable civil, cultural and social progress. The working masses fought, and achieved and consolidated positive results which protected their rights, and which, at the same time, played a decisive role in the development of democracy. It is a bitter surprise to find that there is no specific, explicit reference in this document to those social rights which are, in actual fact, the most important part of the immense democratic process which became established in Europe during the course of the century. I am referring to essential rights, without which democracy is not true democracy: freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and of association and so on are the basic framework of democracy, but within that framework and from that framework must emerge a healthy, solid structure which is a perfect combination of freedom and justice. First and foremost, a document such as this cannot fail to include a specific, indisputable reference to the right to work. It cannot and must not be without this reference. Yes, social rights are mentioned, but they should be clearly and practically defined: the right to work, the right to health, the right to education, the right to housing, to a pension, the right, that is, to life, to a life where all have equal opportunities, according to those principles of liberté [freedom] and égalité [equality] which have played such a major part in our extensive history. For this reason, therefore, I ask Parliament to approve the small number of explicit amendments tabled by Mr Kaufmann and myself on this subject.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Question No 2 has not been dealt with today. Kosovo has got nothing at all to do with Macedonia and Iraq. I have now been sitting here for half an hour, and I have waited from 5.30 p.m. to 6 p.m. until Question Time ... (The President cut off the speaker)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, there are two things I must say by way of introduction. Firstly, I was the rapporteur for Parliament's report on the proposal for a directive referred to by Commissioner Monti. Secondly, a great deal of alarm has been caused in Europe, and particularly in my own country, by the Commissioner's various initiatives in terms of a series of research studies, of statistical data on charging structures and behavioural methodologies. Let us talk about the professions then. I believe that we all need to consider just what the word ‘profession’ means and its impact on the public. Generally speaking, professionals – of which there are several million in Europe – have daily contact with almost everyone in the world. In some ways, they safeguard safety, health and freedom. There is a great deal of confusion in general between different types of professionals: intellectual professionals are quite a different kettle of fish from professionals in general. As regards competition – and I am afraid that I do not have time to go into the detail I would like in some areas – competition in general means arguing about a price. When it comes to issues like safety, freedom and health, however, professional services mean having qualifications and levels of education that are certainly out of the ordinary and, in any case, not within everyone's grasp. Certainly, when we talk about competition we cannot talk in terms of prices but we should talk in terms of quality. Quality is something altogether different, because it is quality that ensures health, freedom and safety. This does not mean, as I see it, that we can disregard the question of competition, but we simply need to consider what kind of competition we are talking about. For example, there is absolutely no way that you can compare two different items of handcraft with two different operations by thoracic surgeons. By way of conclusion, Mr President, I do not believe that one should make sweeping generalisations. Professional associations are by no means simply closed shops; they have a function as regards training and lifelong learning, which provides consumers with certainty. Poor, badly functioning legislation that often forces professional associations to act in undesirable ways should not be used as an excuse to abolish the associations themselves.

Political group: PPE-DE
The President-in-Office made an extremely interesting remark in passing in the first half of his first answer when he referred to the President of the Commission having been a former Member of the European Council. So it is in order for people who have been members of other EU institutions to express an opinion in their present position. The President-in-Office was a very distinguished Member of this Parliament so he is therefore able to express an opinion, by his own words, on the state of the Council now. Would you agree Mr President-in-Office of the Council, based on your experience in the Parliament, that we do need separation of the powers and will you be urging the Danish presidency to put this forward at the Convention?

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, the Valencia Summit is most likely to be remembered just for having been held. Obviously, as both the rapporteur and the Commission stated, the Barcelona Process must not be confused with the Middle East peace process. It is also obvious however that there can be no Barcelona Process without peace in the Middle East. I should therefore like to congratulate the Spanish Presidency on its efforts to bring about peace. To my knowledge, the Barcelona declaration is the most strongly worded declaration in existence on this issue. The presence of the President of the Council at the Arab League Summit was a first. The mission to the Middle East did take place. That was a success in itself. Further, it succeeded in retaining its dignity. There was no meeting with Mr Arafat, but none with Mr Sharon either. I should also like to say how pleased I am that the EU-Israel Association Council has been convened, as well as the Madrid meeting. This process has to guarantee the security and viability of two states, the Palestinian State and the State of Israel. Having clarified the relationship between the peace process and the Barcelona Process, I have to say that in my view the Commission is being unduly self-congratulatory. True, progress has been made regarding the Association Agreement, the Agadir Process has been launched and a development process tentatively put in train. As I understand it, however, all this is simply a drop in the ocean. A single statistic suffices to indicate the gap between what is required and the current situation. The Commission has correctly stated that 45 million new jobs need to be created in the coming decade just to retain the present levels of poverty and unemployment. If this is not achieved, the growth of fundamentalism will threaten the security of our southern borders, as Mr Morillon and other speakers pointed out. Our internal security will also be compromised, due to the increased flow of illegal immigration. I therefore believe that Mr Esteve has chosen the points to highlight in his report wisely. I also believe that if we are to move on from words to action we must set up a Euro-Mediterranean Assembly. This would serve as a spearhead, breathing new life into the process and speeding it up, which is urgently required. I am glad more speakers from non-Mediterranean countries have taken the floor. This has not often been the case when we have dealt with these issues in the past. It suggests that the European Union is starting to understand that it needs to look South as well as East if it is to ensure its own survival.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, as you will be aware, two days ago, an Italian missionary, Annalena Tonelli, was barbarically killed in Somalia in Africa. This woman had, for 30 years, dedicated her life to helping the sick, for which she received praise and support from the entire population and from the Islamic community itself. This barbaric murder has had an enormous impact in my country, particularly because of the extraordinary humanitarian work done by the victim. I would like to ask you, Mr President, if you would convey the condolences of this House both to the family and to Italy’s institutions on this tragic, sudden death.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I am able to dispel an illusion that certain MEPs have. During the vote, which is the subject of the dispute, I voted against by mistake; I actually wanted to vote in favour. I have already notified the Registry. There was therefore more than one surplus vote.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, I would like to congratulate the Presidency of the Council on the ambitious programme for the Asia Summit in Copenhagen. It is, in my view, particularly gratifying that there is a specific focus on dialogue on culture and civilisation, for it is particularly in these times that mutual understanding in this area is particularly important. All too often, there is still great misunderstanding despite the progress made in relations between Europe and Asia, which are distant rather than close, in contrast to relations with the ACP States or Latin America. We have to come to understand that the Asian states are not merely in economic or trading competition with us, but that they are genuinely important partners. Both Mr Maaten's report and also the communication from the Commission make it very clear that the strategic framework also has to highlight priority areas for political and strategic cooperation, in which area the strengthening of the United Nations will, on the one hand, certainly be a point of view that will carry weight, as will without any doubt, on the other hand, the bilateral and, as far as possible, joint efforts at tying the USA into a multilateral relationship. In this time of conflict, when we are faced with problems and challenges, it cannot be too often emphasised that it is most important that Asia and Europe should support a multipolar world. This is where we, as Europe's Parliament, can certainly play an important role with these reports and these debates, and the ASEP Summits could emphasise this. I really do consider that important. I would also like to emphatically underline the role to be played by the principle of detente and change through rapprochement in giving human rights and democracy issues priority. What have we achieved in Europe by means of this policy? Why can it not used to give us leverage in Asia? That we should be cooperating with the Asians in this way in the ASEAN Regional Forum, and in other areas affecting stability, is something I consider right and proper. I would like to take this opportunity to make another appeal. Another issue here is certainly cooperation between non-governmental organisations, as is the new relationship on the basis of equal rights, partnership and mutual understanding. What, though, will we have achieved if this remains confined to the heads of government, to the business world, or even to the parliaments? We have to include the young people of these continents of ours. With that in mind, I would like to encourage the Danish Presidency of the Council to do even more for the European-Asian summer schools and even more for mutual understanding between the young people of Asia and Europe.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, may I explain? I should like the expression “national of a third country” to remain in the text. We had it just now in a paragraph. I should nevertheless like the opportunity of voting in one paragraph on the age limit. Because we have declared that we support the age of 14, but there are other opinions, namely to retain the age of 18. That is to say, I therefore request a separate vote. (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) IN THE CHAIR: MR MARINHOVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on a point of order. I have just heard the news that one of the assistants from my office in Brussels has been robbed at knifepoint, at the edge of the woods which are only yards away from the Parliament building. Apart from that incident, I have also had reports from my staff that they have been threatened on previous occasions near the building, both on that side and on the section between the building and the railway station, particularly in the early evening. I would like investigations to take place to improve the security for Members of the European Parliament and their staff in the area around our building in Brussels.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Mrs Diamantopoulou, ladies and gentlemen, first of all, I would like to thank Mrs Hautala for her unstinting effort, prior to the summer and also today, in wanting to give the Commission’s proposal some structure, whilst reiterating the need for specific directives, such as equal pay, protection during pregnancy and motherhood, and now the recognition of types of harassment, and that of the reconciliation of family and working life. Thank you, Mrs Hautala, for having done so much work, which was not easy. I would now like to explain why the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party and I support the amendment by Mrs Hautala. The Commission is certainly willing to recognise the right of fathers to look after their children. We have the recommendation on the protection of workers who look after their children. Why stop, though, when things are going so well? We now need, and this is the purpose of our amendment, to acknowledge that inequality, or discrimination in other words, can exist, with regard to fathers, when they want to look after their children. Why did the Committee on Women’s Rights not go this far? Personally, I do not understand this and I would hope that we are a little more reasonable in the future. What will happen if we are? Not only more quibbling, as Mrs Lulling believes, but, quite simply, better recognition of what is needed – not only by women, but by men as well – in order to be able to have both a family and a career. If we do not do both, we are not living in the twenty-first century, as Mrs van der Laan said. That is why I believe that this amendment simply provides the possibility of extending the right of fathers, something that we also hope for and want to acknowledge. That is why I think it is important to support this amendment. In addition, I would now like to highlight several points that are new in these proposals for amendments. On the one hand, the introduction of adoption is very important, this is something new, which we must weigh up. Next, I must say that my group supports the need to set out some positive measures. We must not be satisfied with dealing with this at arm's length, we must clearly define these measures and this is what has been done, as a solid legal instrument will be the result. I feel that we must also support the possibility of associations and organisations commencing proceedings. In doing this, we recognise that there will not just be individuals faced with a law or faced with proceedings, but also bodies which can support these individuals. This may be the reason that, whilst it is worthwhile, and whilst we can welcome the protection of workers’ representatives who support complainants against discrimination, on the other hand, we have done away with the protection of possible witnesses, or of individuals who witness the harassment or discrimination that some individuals experience, and I think this is a real pity. I personally deplore this, even though we did not table an amendment on this for tomorrow. Mr President, Mrs Diamantopoulou, ladies and gentlemen, these are the points that I wanted to make, on behalf of my group.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I thank the rapporteur for his work in this area. It is clear that the capacity of the EU fishing fleet is greater than available resources and that therefore firm action is needed to allow many fish stocks to recover to sustainable levels. Reductions in the fleet are thus essential. The overall fishing effort must be controlled as well as fleet size so as to correspond to the resources available. The Commission should better assess the impact of so-called exploited capacity by certain Member States who, at least on paper, claim to have met their MEGP target. The Commission should also ensure stricter enforcement of existing penalties on certain Member States so that the Member States themselves are penalised and not the fishermen. I hope the House will support the amendment which was originally tabled in committee by my group colleague, Mr Nogueira because it is very important. Fisheries in certain areas of the European Union, including Scotland, are a devolved responsibility and it is important that direct communication between ourselves and devolved parliaments should be standard practice.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, just a brief word. I should like to have a very clear explanation from the Commissioner on the third part of Amendment No 25, in other words on the point about renewable contracts. I have discussed the matter with your staff, and I wanted a precise undertaking from you. I have not had it. This is an issue of fundamental importance to us. If we do not have a clear undertaking on this point by tomorrow, I shall make arrangements to submit to this House a motion to postpone the vote. I have made it very clear to your staff that we want the people who work for this agency to be subject to contracts which can be renewed. Obviously the renewal does not have to be obligatory, but it is something that I have been insisting on ever since I became aware of the proposed regulation which had been submitted to the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market. I should also like to say, by the way, that the proposed regulation in question had not been notified, for reasons of which I am unaware, either to the Committee on Budgetary Control or to the Committee on Budgets. I therefore made it very clear to those who were responsible that I would be expecting an undertaking from the Commission this evening. I have not received it. I would like to think that perhaps the message was not passed on. You have until tomorrow to think about it, but I shall expect an undertaking from you before the vote takes place.

Political group: PPE-DE