GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, we have already discussed Chechnya on a number of occasions in this House, and it is important to mention this. At the same time, I should like to underline how right the two-track policy is with regard to Russia. After all, we are dealing with entirely different cooperation possibilities, which may, in turn, have an effect on Russia's political culture. It is precisely in this political culture of Russia that Chechnya fits in as an area where indeed, a failed state was created at one time – a kind of black hole in the Russian federation, where Russia had no choice but to act. The way in which this is done, however, fills us with disgust. We should consider whether it would not be possible for us – maybe in the person of Mr Solana – to criticise Russia's military intervention in that country to such a degree that Russia would feel forced to change its strategy. The military training, the system of that military apparatus and the strategy used in Chechnya all fit into the old pattern of ruling with a rod of iron. This only breeds terrorism and results in desperate suicide acts. These are events that we have witnessed from relatively close-by in Chechnya. If we ask the acting commanding officer whether there is an alternative to this guerrilla warfare and whether there is any knowledge about this alternative method, his response is that this knowledge is available at the ministry, but he questions what good that is to them on the ground. This shows that the Russians cannot appreciate why we in Europe make such a fuss about Chechnya. Despite this, it is extremely important for us to keep an eye on this aspect, because one of the areas that has been mentioned by the President-in-Office of the Council, namely that of internal security, is, of course, directly connected to it. We must not, therefore, forget Chechnya. I share the view of the others who say: Mr President-in-Office of the Council, with all due respect for you when you draw attention to the case of Arjan Erkel – in respect of whom it would be fantastic if you were able to solve it during your presidency – but you have to remember that Chechnya is more tragic than you have depicted it. Mr Patten is right: the security situation over there is abominable; even aid workers will certainly not be able to operate in safety. That is why it is of vital importance that we pull out all the stops to see whether we can persuade the military, and hence the politicians, in Russia, to change the way it behaves in Chechnya.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, Commissioner, Mr President, I am happy to be closing this discussion. I would just like to say to my good friend Philippe Morillon, ‘Philippe, you are wrong. All your amendments are misguided. And I believe that you should think about them tonight and withdraw these amendments as soon as you wake up tomorrow. Most of them have already been withdrawn? Well then, withdraw the rest! We will all be happy!’ Why? Because it is obvious that we must exercise our right to intervene. The Algerians exercise this right to interfere in our affairs when they say that our immigration policy is not right, that they do not have enough visas, etc. They have the right to participate in European discussions. If there is an association agreement, then we have not only the right but also the duty to intervene when massacres are committed. We must condemn massacres, whether they are committed by Islamic terrorists, paramilitary terrorists or other terrorists linked to some armed service. We do not have the right to allow the Algerian embassy to dictate resolutions or amendments to us. That is not our role. Here our role is to establish an association agreement, on the one hand, and on the other, to intervene politically in discussions in Algeria, so that Algeria can emerge as a democracy. And this is not just the fault of colonialism, though colonialism does have its faults. Algeria has a single party tradition. Algeria has a tradition of military power where the military stands above society and it is the military that commits both good and evil acts. This has to change and it is exactly what we are trying to say in the resolution tabled by your colleague Mr Brok, and which many Members voted for. And I ask that tomorrow we change nothing in this resolution of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy which is not a resolution of the left, but a resolution by Mr Brok, a member of the . Let us adopt this resolution. Let us vote for it as it stands and we will all be happy. (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, to term these on-going brutalities in Sierra Leone as bestial is an insult to animals. After eight years of civil war, the road to peace seemed finally clear but the abhorrent brutalities, in particular those against women and children, carry on relentlessly. Child soldiers are abused on a large scale to pander to the malafide interests of adults. It is impossible to stabilise and reconstruct the country as long as citizens continue to be slaughtered. Europe should make a financial contribution to implement the DDR Programme. Diamond smuggling must be addressed efficiently. European support for rehabilitation programmes is also essential. Indeed, good mental and physical guidance of the victims is urgently required. It is also vitally important for enduring peace that the guilty parties are brought to justice rather than being appointed to ministers. When are the animals returning to their cages?

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Belgian system of port services is functioning to everyone’s satisfaction. Neither the port authorities, nor the employers, nor the dockers are looking to change this system. It was achieved via social dialogue and, if necessary, is adapted via social dialogue to the situation of the various other Belgian ports. This social dialogue offers employers a guarantee that their requirements, too – as regards employment, social services, safety and quality – will be included in a social agreement. One result of this system is that the port of Antwerp is number one in conventional loading, and that is the most labour-intensive loading activity. Antwerp has earned that ranking despite the fact that its dock work is perhaps a little more expensive than in other ports, but, on the other hand, this dock work is very productive, very safe and of excellent quality. The shipowners are not demanding a different system. How is the EU’s involvement perceived by the Belgian port authorities, the dockers and the Belgian politicians? In the first place, they do not see in it any improvement for them. The reverse is true. They are seeking in the Directive possibilities of preserving the present system as far as possible via Belgian legislation. Secondly, they find that all of this is being arranged a long way from their home territory. They are accustomed to proceeding via social dialogue. Thirdly, they believe that the Directive was based on the ports where the regime is least strict, where poorly organised, poor-quality dock work is carried out. Commissioner, the correct procedure would have been to subject European port activities to compulsory authorisations regulating the most important elements in the field of the social framework, safety, training, organisation of work and environment. A compulsory system such as this would have not only made self-handling possible, but also offered guarantees of a stricter operating procedure in all the European ports. The ports that already have effective regulations and a safe system are actually being penalised in favour of the much laxer attitude of other ports. We should have gone in the opposite direction. For all of these reasons, I shall be voting against the Directive: out of conviction. I am a confirmed European, but, in this dossier, European intervention is moving in the wrong direction. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this amendment to the directive is part of the process of tidying up the loose ends not covered by the Auto/Oil Programme. I cannot wait for the other directives coming along on small pleasure craft and the small spark ignition engine which will complete the story. Motorcycles constitute a very small percentage of traffic volume. Advances in engine technology for cars and trucks coupled with a 6% rise in motorcycle mileage in the 1990s have meant that the proportion of pollution from bikes is increasing. I therefore welcome this proposal but with certain reservations. My major concern is the short time between 2003 when the new standards will apply to new models and the date when that is extended to all new motorcycles. This will put tremendous pressure on the smaller European manufacturers, like Triumph and CCM in the United Kingdom. Although these modifications are technically feasible, small companies do not have the resources to do the work in only 12 months and the development costs would have to be recovered from a smaller volume of vehicles. This would put European manufacturers at a competitive disadvantage as compared with the big boys from the Far East. I am pleased, therefore, that the rapporteur has recognised this by extending this transition phase to two years. I should also like to congratulate the rapporteur by leading by example by converting his own classic Harley Davidson motorcycle with a retro-fitted catalytic converter. It is not a case of saying one thing and doing another from that side of the House. I have some reservations regarding on-board diagnostics and in-service testing. Regarding on-board diagnostics, a motorcycle is often the first vehicle that a young person buys with limited resources and therefore this will make the vehicle more expensive. Secondly, I am rather cynical about what the owner of the bike will do when that little green light comes on saying that the exhaust system is not performing to standard. I suspect he may be tempted just to take the bulb out. Maybe at this stage of the game we should keep these two balls in play and see how the game progresses towards second reading and possible conciliation. Lastly, on the subject of fiscal measures. Whilst I support market solutions like tax incentives, these should be applied by Member States according to national criteria if they so wish. This proposal is to be made under Article 95, that is to say qualified majority voting, and despite the 28 vetoes given up by Tony Blair at Nice, the UK has not yet given up its right to determine its own taxes, and therefore this should not be within the scope of this directive. Subsidiarity is something that should be protected.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I have not had much sleep over the last few nights because of the Italian elections and because I was trying to follow the results, but I did, however, manage to dream that I was in a Western. The two cowboys facing each other were Mr Maaten and Mr Blokland. Like heroes such as John Wayne or Pecos Bill, they had challenged each other to a duel. At midday – of course – they drew their guns, but, just as they were about to fire, the scene was interrupted by someone telling Mr Maaten to take his cigarette out of his mouth before firing. Mr Maaten took his cigarette out of his mouth and said: ‘You are right, for I am tabling a document which seeks to make European citizens smoke less’. That convinced me to vote for the Maaten report.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this is a first for me, being the first time I have taken the floor during a vote, and I also want to keep it brief. I am grateful for the signal that Parliament is sending out to the Council, and hope that the Council will give equally definite agreement to this project in March so that we can get things moving at last! (Applause) *** Joint motion for a resolution(1) on the situation of the lorry drivers stranded in Luxembourg Regarding paragraph 9

Political group: PSE
Mr President, as some speakers have already said, the timing of this debate is critical, not just for the parties involved but for the European Union too. It is critical, first of all, because the election of the Israeli prime minister is imminent. This week, all sense of time has been suspended, pending the election results. The talks at Taba were also suspended, at least officially, even though they did manage to make progress in terms of setting up committees on matters such as borders, Jerusalem, and Palestinian refugees. Finally, although I picked up on Mr Solana’s optimism, the possibility of holding a summit this week in Stockholm has been put off too, following Mr Arafat’s statement made at Davos on Sunday, which was aggressive, or to put it more diplomatically, was unhelpful, to say the very least. It is a critical time too, as I was saying, because of the transition in the United States. Bill Clinton is no longer in office. President Clinton had made the peace process one of the priorities on his agenda. Only time will tell how George Bush and Colin Powell now see their role in the Middle East. At any rate, this is the first time for years, as Mr Danielsson said, that high level talks have taken place, as they did most recently at Taba, without American officials present, but with Mr Moratinos, our EU peace envoy. This may be Europe’s opportunity to make progress and to play a more prominent political role in this matter, to gain recognition for its voice and its know-how, since we are keen to do more than just bankroll the region. We know that our aid is vitally necessary for the Palestinians whose economic situation is desperate, but we would like to export much more than just euros. We would like to export our values, such as democracy, respect for human rights, education and tolerance. At this point, I welcome Mr Patten’s commitment to transparency in the use of European aid. In the words of Albert Einstein, “Peace cannot be kept by force but can be achieved by understanding.” Let us work together from now on so that the European Union can be a factor in spreading this understanding.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, on behalf of Mrs van der Laan and myself I want to register that we voted against Amendment No 15 in the Morillon report. We want to be registered as voting in favour of the release of Leyla Zana and the other Kurdish prisoners.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we are agreed on one thing: policy on trans-European networks is in urgent need of reform! The trans-European transport networks, and the 14 specific projects in particular, have not succeeded in any of the aims they were in fact intended to achieve, even though a great deal of money has already been invested. But two of these aims really are vital to the European Union. One is the key aim of economic and social cohesion, which holds the European Union together. These TENs were designed to prevent the drifting apart, or the risk of a drift apart, between poor and affluent regions. They have not done so. On the contrary, the 14 selected projects have, in fact, driven the regions further apart, and have encouraged a trend towards increased economic activity in the prosperous economic regions, because transport links have been constructed between them, while the poorer regions have become increasingly isolated. Secondly, it is still a mistake to think that the trans-European networks help reduce mass unemployment. On the contrary, unemployment has risen: even in 1995, in the ten poorest regions, unemployment was seven times higher than in the richest regions, while today it is eight times higher, and rising. So I really wonder whether we can afford to continue putting European taxpayers’ money in concrete without this having a significant impact on employment. Is there really any point in investing more money and calling for more money in this case? Is that not an incorrect response in structural terms, because we could do far more sensible things with the money in order to regenerate employment. I also wonder whether the value of these projects has not been offset by the environmental destruction they cause. In fact, they have achieved nothing. They have destroyed much of the living space of the people of Europe and we should take the mass protest movements against motorways seriously, for they often point the way to more sensible and less destructive options. Perhaps the people who are protesting are actually right. Europe needs a considerably more intelligent and sustained transport policy, based on a modern approach that thinks ahead to the next generation, realising that resources are finite. As regards the 14 projects, the European Parliament’s call for a cost-benefit analysis was not heeded, whilst its call for environmental compatibility checks for all the projects was also ignored; only partial checks were carried out, which conflicts with the relevant directive. I think we really need to improve goods transport, which must be facilitated by rail in order to be sustainable. We must revise the TENs policy with a view to combining mobility with sustainability.

Political group: Verts-ALE
In 1955, I saw for myself the abject poverty and inequality in South America. This turned me into a supporter of Fidel Castro even before he took over state power at the end of 1958. I still think that the alternative society that has been created since then in Cuba, which has managed to assert itself surprisingly well in the face of American attempts to starve and destroy this alternative, is valuable. It is neither money nor economic power play the lead in that country, but solidarity and the equality of all people. This solidarity and equality cannot, however, justify the long-term prison sentences and death penalties that are meted out to silence those who, in the eyes of the regime’s supporters, do not display solidarity or who threaten equality. Even if the present Cuba were some kind of paradise, which it is not, paradise cannot be defended in that way. Such violations of human rights do not convince anyone, but only lead to bitterness among those who they wish to eliminate. They are the wrong answer to the undermining campaign organised from within the USA. Serious violations of human rights cannot be condoned, not even if they are perpetrated by people who originally had similar political objectives. I have already voted for condemnation during an earlier debate on urgent subjects. It is a pity that Cuba should unnecessarily isolate itself from its friends in Europe.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Just to confirm, President, that it is on the agenda this week and we will no doubt communicate directly with Mrs Gebhardt.

Political group: PPE-DE
Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are talking about the “Television without Frontiers” Directive. At the same time, we know that the transition to digital TV involves a risk of its being precisely TV with frontiers that we end up with. It will not be possible to watch the BBC in the Irish Republic. It may no longer be possible to watch Swedish television as easily in Finland. It has in the past been possible to watch television across national borders. It is difficult to buy digital cards for existing pay TV. I appeal to the Commissioner to bear in mind the urgent request made unanimously by the groups in Parliament in conjunction with the reading of the technical directive on digital TV and really to examine this issue which has a very great deal to do with the fact that the copyright organisations have not agreed upon sensible conditions for selling TV rights. I would therefore urge the Commissioner to bear this in mind. At the same time, I want to support a good deal of what Mrs Iivari said about minority language areas. Those of us who are interested in defining public service on a national basis must be watchful. We must be careful that, for example, competitive aspects do not have the unfortunate effect of undermining our national right to define the kind of public service we want to provide. Not all languages are in fact equal in the EU in this respect.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I realise that this is rather out of the ordinary, but might I not be permitted to take over Mr Lage's question? I would be happy to do so. I wanted to put a supplementary question in any case.

Political group: PPE-DE
The proposal for a directive on environmental liability entails considerable progress in the environmental sphere in Europe and will hopefully be able to prevent many accidents in the future. The proposal is very welcome, but we believed that it needed to be strengthened in some areas. The definition of the biodiversity in connection with which liability for damages might arise was too narrow. In our opinion, species and environments protected by national legislation should also be covered by the directive. In our opinion, the proposal to remove strict environmental liability from activities tested for their compliance with permits comprised too sweeping an exception and is not in keeping with national legislation. This should, however, be a factor of which account is taken when establishing the amount of the damages.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I have to say that I am not very happy about the Commissioner’s remark that there is no violation of Regulation 95/46. Paragraph 4 of the agreement itself states that all data of European passengers will be processed according to US constitutional requirements. One of the laws in the United States that should apply is the Privacy Act, but this Act does not apply to people from third countries, to name but one example. Article 6 of the agreement states that there will be reciprocity insofar as feasible and that it shall be strictly applied. I do not want to have the debate now, but I can easily give you another ten examples of things that are not right and are, in my view, a violation of our privacy legislation. For that reason alone, we should put this matter to the Court. In the previous debate, the Commissioner said, with regard to the passing on of data to third parties, that ‘we are still in negotiation with the United States’. I heard this correctly last time and also this time round. It is surely too crazy for words that I as rapporteur have to submit to this House a report on adequacy finding, while the Commission itself still holds the view that the whole matter was inadequate. This is something I really do want to bring in to the debate. I should like to thank all those Members who have spoken out in favour of recourse to the Court. I think that the question to the Court, as to whether we can conclude international agreements in which both Parliament and the American Congress are placed offside, is a very interesting one indeed. In consultations with members of the Congress, I have been given to understand that, should such an agreement be put to the American Congress, it would never agree to it. We in this House should now also demonstrate that we know how to stand up for our citizens and not be put under pressure by anybody. We are alone in being able to do this. I am therefore hopeful that Parliament will follow the line taken by the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I do apologise, but I would ask you to ring very loudly, for most Members of the House are assuming that the vote will take place in an hour’s time at the earliest, and it will take some time for them to get here. Last time, many people missed the vote because the bell was rung too late.

Political group: PPE-DE